The Official Warchanter Lamannia Feedback Thread

[legendkilleroll]

Sure the DC may need some tinkering but seems like some people just want bards to be weak, people saying they should just be party buffers yet alot of these people solo stuff

Not like fighters didnt get anything before, what about during enhancement pass which allowed centered kensai, now bards get a better tactical ability and the complaints begin

[Dagolar]

Then comes the PDK cha to tactics ability which can result in rather funny numbers considering the DC stat also is charisma.

"In addition, as long as your Charisma remains higher than your Strength and you are wielding one of the above weapons, you receive a bonus to the DCs of your Tactical Feats equal to 1/3 your Charisma modifier."

It's not quite Cha->DC. You're still having to not dump strength if you want your DCs high, which can be costly in its own right.
Is the feat- which also adds cha to attack and damage- probably (situationally) overpowered in comparison to other racial tactical DC boosts?

Probably.

In the end, though, it'll probably come out to a DC for a charisma character roughly comparable to that of a full-strength character.

So it's less a massive boost, and more a 'PDKs can have comparable tactical DCs regardless of which stat they favor'.

It's a flavor thing. As far as balance goes..
:shrug:
It's a pretty darn great enhancement [*for basically only bard tactical feat users], eh?

Now if only we had a reason to play non-undead, non-robot wizards, mm?

Racial preferences pop up now and then, time'll have to see what comes of it.

[Scrabbler]

It had not a single thing to do with bards in any sense whatsoever.

Oops, I should've known that "fighters need the most love, by far [post-bard changes]" had nothing to do with post-bard changes.

For comparison, barbarians have great trees

Absolutely not: Barbarian trees are terrible, minus 3-4 good icons at the top and 3-4 obligatory ones at the bottom. Ravager capstone is terrible, Frenzy capstone is terrible. Ravager cores are all terrible except for the first, Occult's Weapon Bond is a badly designed system... And look at tier5 like Toughness and Sundering Spin.

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

{snip} And fighters being better at control- using control in the most universal sense- than bards is ridiculous. {snip}

Most of this post I like, seems to be spot on. However I'd argue that Pallies, Barbarians, and ranged Rangers prolly need some love before fighters.

This however is the bard's time to shine. And the devs are doing a bang up job from my vantage point. NOTHING the bard is getting is making me feel like I don't want to play any other character I have. It is making me (and clearly many others) want to build all kinds of bards, and bard splashed multi-class varieties.

[Takllin]

Sure the DC may need some tinkering but seems like some people just want bards to be weak, people saying they should just be party buffers yet alot of these people solo stuff

Not like fighters didnt get anything before, what about during enhancement pass which allowed centered kensai, now bards get a better tactical ability and the complaints begin

We don't want Bards to be weak, what we want is balance.

A lot of us have commented previously, and continue to that the Kensai/Monk synergy is ridiculously overpowered and never should have seen the light of day.

[Dagolar]

Oops, I should've known that "fighters need the most love, by far [post-bard changes]" had nothing to do with post-bard changes.

This seems to be an issue with your understanding of use of the English language differing from mine. Regardless, you should be able to divine the intended meaning with the most minimal of effort.

Need a hint? The only correlation indicated is chronological.

Absolutely not: Barbarian trees are terrible, minus 3-4 good icons at the top and 3-4 obligatory ones at the bottom. Ravager capstone is terrible, Frenzy capstone is terrible. Ravager cores are all terrible except for the first, Occult's Weapon Bond is a badly designed system... And look at tier5 like Toughness and Sundering Spin.

You're right- I have a very nasty habit of using overemphatic words to convey points. I meant to indicate that barbarian trees were far more functional than fighter ones- though yes, with the inferior core abilities, flawed abilities like Storm's Eye, and various other issues, that's more a subjective view than an overwhelmingly objective one.

The T5 toughness is technically fine, though, if a bit unusual- at least from a standard game design perspective. Its reasoning is reduced cost compared to other abilities of the same type. Unfortunately, with max HP escalating so high in the recent game, you're probably right.

I can't argue about Occult Weapon having its issues in implementation..

No, I'll fully yield this entire topic over to you, it was an unsuitable point of contrast for me to use.

I nevertheless still favor the trees, and here's the thing, _as a whole_, over fighter ones. They just seem to have more to offer the class than fighter ones do.

Well, regardless, non-bard trees definitely need work, and it's not in any way BECAUSE bard trees had work done, but rather, for the same reasons bard trees needed work in the first place.

Well, except Warchanter. That needed work because it was literally released in MotU beta 1 day before release and none of the suggestions regarding it were implemented at all.
I'm still a bit bewildered by that affair.

[legendkilleroll]

We don't want Bards to be weak, what we want is balance.

A lot of us have commented previously, and continue to that the Kensai/Monk synergy is ridiculously overpowered and never should have seen the light of day.

I agree it shouldnt have been implemented but thats not only OP thing the centered kensai builds use

Divine Grace getting nerf, you say you want balance, i read that thread and see complaining

Similar to SWF/THF argument thats going on, you guys just not happy that these bard tactics have better DC than your stunning blow

[Takllin]

I agree it shouldnt have been implemented but thats not only OP thing the centered kensai builds use

Divine Grace getting nerf, you say you want balance, i read that thread and see complaining

Similar to SWF/THF argument thats going on, you guys just not happy that these bard tactics have better DC than your stunning blow

What else is there? You remove Monk synergy enhancements from it, and Kensai becomes lackluster, it needs improvements. Only after they remove One with the Blade and the other monk stuff from it.

I haven;t complained in that thread, I honestly think it is a good change.

Your **** right were upset about it. Do you know how much effort goes into trying to get a workable Stunning Blow DC? Now they are just handing an AoE Stunning Blow affect on a silver platter to Bards.

[Dagolar]

We don't want Bards to be weak, what we want is balance.

A lot of us have commented previously, and continue to that the Kensai/Monk synergy is ridiculously overpowered and never should have seen the light of day.

It's awesome for build versatility, and I favor it [but I also don't see a "ridiculously overpowered" element to it; and even if that exists, it's still separate from how engaging the enhanced build design of the concept is.].
But hey, just think, it could be worse- they could implement things like Sacred Fist from pnp.
Y'know, which lets you be centered while wearing light armor..

However I'd argue that Pallies, Barbarians, and ranged Rangers prolly need some love before fighters.

Mm, I'd say Ranger PREs as a whole are a bit lacking. My pure class tempest suffers from not having anything notably useful to put into in Deepwood- nevermind AA.
Deepwood itself suffers- Core20 Horizon Shot? With only the core sneak attack dice? Not REALLY feeling it, at least, not in comparison to Arcane Archer's Core20. The rest of Deepwood is a fun engagement of favored enemy mechanics, but balances poorly to the current scaling.
Arcane Archer, well, if you wanted to take 3 levels of ranger for three tiers of AA, you'd basically have all the fundamental components of the tree.
It's not a bad tree, but it's not a particularly engaging one. Nevermind the nonsense of spending 4AP to unlock the level-staggered racial version. That part should follow the theme of most MMOs, and simply be an auto-unlock at X points spent in the racial tree. Note I'm arguing not any costs or balances to gaining the tree, but having to spend 4 AP on 'potential gain' rather than actual gain.

And yeah- all sources of Barbarian DR need to be doubled [total possible maximum of 14/- to 28/-, compared to the 30/epic to 60/epic of Shadow Plate, for a LOT more investment (maxing Occult Slayer, being a pure class barbarian, and utilizing FotW)], with barbarian level 20 and occult core 20 offering additional bonuses to it, perhaps.
Barbarians should also be able to get MRR [but not PRR, that doesn't fit their image at all].
Heck, in first edition, barbarians ATE [literally, and I refuse to believe otherwise!] magical items to level up, and couldn't use- and could severely resist- magic of all forms.

I'd like to see more of that anti-magic plus physical soak element, while still not limiting them from being vulnerable to 'the big hits' that PRR-builds can resist.

Well, that's my take! Either way, their defensive abilities are sorely lacking to the current damage/defense system, and I've found my barbarians really unfun to play of late because of it [I mean, sure, I can do 6,500 to 8,000 crits; but against 300,000 HP mobs that can take down a 900HP low-PRR low-AC barbarian in two to three hits, high POTENTIAL damage isn't really functional enough to make a barbarian worthwhile.]

I think Paladins get too much of a low profile, because they're front-loaded and lack meaningful general damage types or notable high-tier core enhancements.
Paladins aren't actually BAD [comparative to the others we've discussed, anyway], just poorly structured.

But adding massive light damage to them was a cheap, and poorly conceived way out.

I'd rather their natural abilities- eg, lay on hands, smite, self-buffing/healing spell-casting, and mostly notable auras- be emphasized.
Make playing a paladin feel distinct.. well, distinctly paladin.

Still, regardless of our views, it does look like the devs intend to start giving the classes and prestiges a decent workthrough, so that's promising.

In fact, the only thing I see unfortunate about that is that gnomes and kobolds probably'll keep being pushed out of the realm of probable implementation.

Alas.

[legendkilleroll]

What else is there? You remove Monk synergy enhancements from it, and Kensai becomes lackluster, it needs improvements. Only after they remove One with the Blade and the other monk stuff from it.

I haven;t complained in that thread, I honestly think it is a good change.

Your **** right were upset about it. Do you know how much effort goes into trying to get a workable Stunning Blow DC? Now they are just handing an AoE Stunning Blow affect on a silver platter to Bards.

Yeh and warchanter was lackluster before, something good has to be added or whats the point, swashbuckler showed this as there are now lots of bards running about

Like i said before, i agree the DC could use some tinkering but just adding stuff to warchanter and still having it be weaker than all other trees is stupid

You think centered kensai is OP yet you all still play it, now go play a bard! :P

[Shinjiteru]

Getting enhancements from multiple trees to get your build to work is not uncommon so I have to disagree with that. I suggested in original Bard thread that DC should be based on a physical stat. Depending on if ranks allow for full bard level or not this CHA DC version might still be viable for lower CHA builds but then it would be one of the highest DC abilities on full CHA invested bards.

Getting your build to work is fine. Having Enhancements in a tree that won't work until you get enhancements of another tree is a design mistake in my opinion. Enhancements of a tree should be usefull without AP spend in other trees. Buffing them with enhancements of other trees is fine, but making them a pre requisit to be usefull is pushing you into heavy AP investments for only one enhancement/ability, then it better be overpowered if I have to spend 20+ AP just to be able to use it. (14 AP to get to the freeze AoE and another 15+ in the swashbuckler tree)


But yeah, seems we won't get this DC balancing discussion to a point where warchanter bards and other tactical feat builds/classes agree it's balanced. One of various reasons why I never understood or liked the cha based DC of this ability.


So to solve this problem we should think about adding an enhancement to the warchanter tree that gives attack AND damage of cha mod with one weapon type which you have to choose?
Would be fine if this is going to be T5 or Capstone(DC problems with current lammania build start with hitting 20 anyways and not before). But I guess we need to pass on the already designed warmaster buff to get this perk as part of the capstone(capstone would be too powerfull otherwise), so this probably won't happen. Although I would prefer this idea, would force you to go either pure bard or pdk to use cha for atk/dmg and would only work for one type of weapons. If the ability to choose the weapon type would be considered overpowered, maybe just use the weapon types of the pdk enhancement?
I mean... come on... it's a T1 racial enhancement of PDK and the PDK version also gives a boost to tactical DCs.
I can see that it's the number one selling argument of the PDK iconic, but if it's only a tier 1 racial ability it can't be too strong to be a T5 of other enhancement trees or even be part of the capstone. And as already mentioned it would only be a minor version of the pdk racial enhancement.

And since my bard likes to use momentum swing, I still need at least some str for power attack to be able to get cleave(and great cleave). Leading me nearly half way to Overwhelming critical(feat wise), so might think about still trying to get 21str. So would still be hard to get to the max charisma of a pure spellsinger caster bard(which is going to be used for DC balancing discussions).
A DC based on bard levels + 1/2perform + X should make it easier to balance the DC between several bard builds. +20 cha difference would only result in a +5 DC. But would also mean that it might fall prone to future level cap increases or item power increases ( higher stats on items) which would only slightly increase the DC compared to other tactical feats.

[Takllin]

Yeh and warchanter was lackluster before, something good has to be added or whats the point, swashbuckler showed this as there are now lots of bards running about

Like i said before, i agree the DC could use some tinkering but just adding stuff to warchanter and still having it be weaker than all other trees is stupid

You think centered kensai is OP yet you all still play it, now go play a bard! :P

There is a difference between something good, and something overpowered and does not fit the tree.

I'd love to see Improved Power Attack added to Warchanter as a lower tier enhancement btw.

I have played, and continue to play bards, despite the centered kensai builds. No one said anything about not playing a build or using an ability because it is overpowered...

[maddmatt70]

There is a difference between something good, and something overpowered and does not fit the tree.

I'd love to see Improved Power Attack added to Warchanter as a lower tier enhancement btw.

I have played, and continue to play bards, despite the centered kensai builds. No one said anything about not playing a build or using an ability because it is overpowered...

You have not really given any real rationale why a melee bard should not have a potent cc ability. Fighters, Paladins, and Barbarians all likely will see a dps increase as they get improvements and changes and do more dps then bards so bards should have potent cc whether they are a spellcaster or melee to make them at least competitive. It is just sour grapes on your part. Now the DC might very well be too high, but hey the devs got that feedback.

[Scrabbler]

A DC based on bard levels + 1/2perform + X should make it easier to balance the DC between several bard builds.

If you want to balance DC between Bards, then you can take Perform out entirely and do it strictly by Bard level. Even something like Bard level * 2 would be better than using Perform, because it is better balanced against other player characters.

No other classes use a Skill DC, and before this round of changes Bards didn't use Skill DC for abilities which were powerful and had many uses. There are lots of ways to buff skills, so skill DCs get up much higher than other DCs can. It's just not fair to use Skill on some important DCs... imagine if those mobs with 140 Perform started hitting us with those freezing stuns...

You have not really given any real rationale why a melee bard should not have a potent cc ability.

Melee Bards should have potent CC abilities; they are called Frozen Fury and Fancy Footwork (FF FF). What's not clear is why melee Bards should have two more potent CCs, called Northwind and Spinning Ice. Can't they get some other effects there?

[Takllin]

You have not really given any real rationale why a melee bard should not have a potent cc ability. Fighters, Paladins, and Barbarians all likely will see a dps increase as they get improvements and changes and do more dps then bards so bards should have potent cc whether they are a spellcaster or melee to make them at least competitive. It is just sour grapes on your part. Now the DC might very well be too high, but hey the devs got that feedback.

It appears yet again you have proven that you are not adept at reading...

I am not going to repeat myself, or what any other posters have said in this thread. Bards have so many other options that are very viable, and potent abilities to use for CC. Even Warchanters. This just screams power creep, and it is unnecessary.

This is not about CC and DPS. This is purely about tactical abilities that melee toons have. Not every class has to be able to solo every quest, or do the same amount of CC, or DPS, etc. This is why we have different roles in a party.

[maddmatt70]

It appears yet again you have proven that you are not adept at reading...

I am not going to repeat myself, or what any other posters have said in this thread. Bards have so many other options that are very viable, and potent abilities to use for CC. Even Warchanters. This just screams power creep, and it is unnecessary.

This is not about CC and DPS. This is purely about tactical abilities that melee toons have. Not every class has to be able to solo every quest, or do the same amount of CC, or DPS, etc. This is why we have different roles in a party.

It is exactly about cc and dps. You all want to keep bards third rate and not give bards a seat at the table. The table in DDO is about dps and DDO has become a soloist game even in a full party optimally all characters play a soloist style. Warchanters need abilities to be competitive and that is why there is a mass stunning ability.

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

If you want to balance DC between Bards, then you can take Perform out entirely and do it strictly by Bard level. Even something like Bard level * 2 would be better than using Perform, because it is better balanced against other player characters.

No other classes use a Skill DC, and before this round of changes Bards didn't use Skill DC for abilities which were powerful and had many uses. There are lots of ways to buff skills, so skill DCs get up much higher than other DCs can. It's just not fair to use Skill on some important DCs... imagine if those mobs with 140 Perform started hitting us with those freezing stuns...


Melee Bards should have potent CC abilities; they are called Frozen Fury and Fancy Footwork (FF FF). What's not clear is why melee Bards should have two more potent CCs, called Northwind and Spinning Ice. Can't they get some other effects there?

I am really not reading this. I'm not... I'm wiping my monitor screen and gosh darn it, I AM reading it! Want some Rye?

Bards absolutely should have been benefiting more from perform from Day One, and kudos to the devs for realizing this. Perform is core to what Bards DO. Perform was always meant to increase the performance of well, the performance! Hence why they call the performance skill, well... perform! No other class has it, hence the uniqueness of the skill.

And for your information most bards are thrilled we got more CC. Bards are ALL about control, all bards are. Someway multitasking some combination of control, buff, debuff, heal and damage. The DDO bard has long been the most exciting, most customizable class in MMOs to play for many that made the decision to play one. In my opinion, it had lost that luster in recent years. This recent update changes things. Makes it true again. Did exactly what I stated would happen, that you'd see many take their bards out of mothballs, and rock and roll their way back to some old school DDO fun.

Moar CC. Moar spells, Moar enhancements, Moar damage. Moar effective party. All in a way where the large majority playing each class are perfectly fine. I play every class in the game, I know Im fine with the rest of my builds. Let them finish bard and get on to other things.

Everyone will never be perfectly happy in DDO. That's ok, there is no such thing as balance in D&D. There are choices, and you make them, and they have consequences.

[songswrath]

There is a difference between something good, and something overpowered and does not fit the tree.

I'd love to see Improved Power Attack added to Warchanter as a lower tier enhancement btw.

I have played, and continue to play bards, despite the centered kensai builds. No one said anything about not playing a build or using an ability because it is overpowered...

/signed improved power attack whould be a nice add. like to see some of the enhancements droped from 3tiers or buffed major . 3 points for 1d6 cold damage come on even is was 1d6, icey Brust, icey blast is still lacking for 3points. my main point is not only is warchanters melee buffers but melee them selfsame they need self melee dps help too

[Cetus]

As long as we're in agreement that the real melee classes are in need of some attention, I'm satisfied. This was really the overarching point as far as I'm concerned. As I've said, I don't want nerfs, I just want fair representation without having to carve out a new bard based build to remain maxed out.

[Aelonwy]

No other classes use a Skill DC, and before this round of changes Bards didn't use Skill DC for abilities which were powerful and had many uses.

Hmmm, I didn't think of that, but you are right before Swashbuckler no enhancement used a skill in the DC formula. And while perform is often used to measure bard abilities in PnP that doesn't always translate well for DDO. Okay, so Perform is out. So what else is there?

Bard Levels - Only goes up to 20, not particularly good enough alone to be useful in epics.

Charisma - Not going to be very high on the typical Warchanter build which would usually be Strength based, so to be optimal forces you either to choose the PDK race or go SWF and spend a good deal of points in Swashbuckler or both. This makes me feel very restricted, even forced to build a character a certain way just to use a particular enhancement. If its not in a Racial Enhancement tree, you shouldn't feel compelled to be a certain race to use a class enhancement.

Stunning Blow Tactical DC bonuses - Anyone can build for, and are strength based. But has opened up this whole can of worms of fighter VS bards the tactical showdown.


Honestly, I can't think of a way for the devs to make everyone happy on this issue. I know giving Warchanters an option for charisma to damage would be an improvement for me but it wouldn't fix the whole issue.