Fulls vs. Doubles

[Versin]

Getting super tired of the [unavoidable creature maneuver] -> [neck death crit] sequence, on both my sorcerer and wizard. Have others reached the same conclusion, and eat the spell hindrance in return for the head protection?

[drauz]

Getting super tired of the [unavoidable creature maneuver] -> [neck death crit] sequence, on both my sorcerer and wizard. Have others reached the same conclusion, and eat the spell hindrance in return for the head protection?

I actually have been playing with the idea of using HCP full leathers but covering the rest with temp MCP helm and greaves. Which would give you double leather coverage, but wouldn't reduce the padding for your helm and arms/legs.

[Whirlin]

I'm an strong advocate of double leathers on pures. But I can understand not wanting hindrance if you rely heavily on rapid fire or something. I realize that's not sorc... but even so.

[Versin]

Do people think crit padding is essential, or will just the head/neck coverage from doubles be a step in the right direction?

[Whirlin]

Do people think crit padding is essential, or will just the head/neck coverage from doubles be a step in the right direction?
It'll never hurt to add padding, but it will depend on your playstyle.
If your DS is fine, and you think that 7x armor's DS contribution is overkill, and even when you're on the ground, stunned, critters can't hit you, then definitely consider a lower enchant with padding.
If you have tons of money, good armor is always a good investment.

While CMANs don't follow conventional AS/DS critical stuff, if we utilize the AS/DS resolved attack format to evaluate fulls versus doubles, we're basically adding 20% crit padding to head/neck just by going to doubles. (5 crit divisor versus 6). But hey, this is gemstone... more is always better?

[Whirlin]

Before investing though, I recommend just picking up a cheap set of 4x and making sure you're personally ok with the spell hindrance. It really comes down to a preference on whether or not you can manage around the spell hindrance.

[Maerit]

I've been in DCP doubles for about the last year, and they do work fine. There are times when you curse the 2% failures because it feels like they're happening back-to-back with fumbles (and have even caused my death due to failure to land a disabling spell). However --- a great solution is to get a crit padded greathelm (head / neck) coverage to wear in those trouble areas. It will give you the same spell hindrance as wearing doubles, but you can simply remove the helm to remove the hindrance. Of course, you will not get the bonus to CvA, but as a sorcerer that shouldn't be a big deal.

If you're going to spend a lot of money on armor, it may be a better investment to go with full leathers and accessorize since the accessories can be very inexpensive but extremely advantageous (like nature resist leg greaves for spike thorn, crit padding on greathelm to avoid the most common death crits).

[mgoddess]

Another option, if you want to wear doubles, is to find a local paladin who can ARMOR FLUIDITY your leathers, which reduces spell hindrance (https://gswiki.play.net/mediawiki/index.php/Spell_hindrance).

[Malisai]

I would follow the suggestion to get a pair for doubles and wear that for a while.

For the most part I dont think it matters that much. Even doubles doesnt give that much protection and overall, attacks that killed me in fulls would basically have killed me in doubles.

I would get the best pair of either that you can find. Generally, its rather easy to switch and afford a comparable set to what you have if you decide to switch (for the most part, if you have a really high end set its more difficult, but if you have something like that its not likely you need to).

[Furryrat]

All my pures wear crit-padded full leather for no spell hindrance and have 10 ranks of Combat Maneuvers, I find the benefit for the cost, especially vs creature maneuvers, is well worth the points. Case in point, in the Rift vs naisircs, tangleweed would hit me every time with 0 ranks, but with 10 I dodge 8 of 10, same level. Ask me to prove it out, I will.