Who has better defense?

[Sypher]

Who has overall better defense with DS and redux factored in, a Paladin or Warrior? Lets say its a THW user.

[Drisco]

:: Shields Sypher From Others Insults Regarding His Stupid, But Fair Question ::

[Sypher]

I do something wrong?

[TheEschaton]

his question is actually in contention amongst paladins and warriors, it's not some stupid ass question everyone has already done to death.

As for an answer - I know pallys have the highest AS, but for DS, I don't know.

[Stretch]

Like almost any question, the answer is, "It depends."

It depends on what training paths look like.

It depends on what level you are, and how much redux you have.

It depends on what stage of the game/hunting area you are at, and how important having an unhittable DS is (flares) vs. taking low damage (high DF critter weapons).

EDIT: Just as an aside, to give you an idea of how overpowered redux used to be, here's a brief log of my level 63 rogue (GS III) getting hit with a claidhmore.

A Jantalarian marchlord swings a massive steel claidhmore at you!
AS: +635 vs DS: +131 with AvD: +19 + d100 roll: +60 = +583
... and hits for 54 points of damage!
Quick flick slashes your forehead!
You are stunned for 6 rounds!

[Ardwen]

That the best ya had fro redux? Old redux was idiotically overpowered, Took a +700 claid hit to the head in the red armor back then for 1 point and a 1 round stun, saw Berr take a +600 ambush to the eye in his plate for 3 points and no stun in the original redux testing setup. Of course now damage padding is comical and redux is nuetered.

Since I believe the best defensive is a good offense, the paladin is likely better heh, dead mobs dont often hurt ya after all.

[Sean]

That the best ya had fro redux? Old redux was idiotically overpowered, Took a +700 claid hit to the head in the red armor back then for 1 point and a 1 round stun, saw Berr take a +600 ambush to the eye in his plate for 3 points and no stun in the original redux testing setup. Of course now damage padding is comical and redux is nuetered.

Since I believe the best defensive is a good offense, the paladin is likely better heh, dead mobs dont often hurt ya after all.

When should we expect you to convert then?

[Stretch]

Dude, I was a level 63 lockpicking rogue =P

[Anebriated]

Im actually interested in this answer as well. I really like my warrior and dont plan on switching to a pally. But I wonder about it since the option is there.

Lets say both were trained similarly(except the pally has spells) THW, same level. Im guessing the warrior would have better redux while the pally would have better DS. I would guess the AS would come out around even or slightly favoring the pally, but im not familiar with their chants yet so its all speculation.

[mgoddess]

I'll agree with the fact that it depends on build/level/stats/etc.

I do have to say though, paladins don't have the guild skills that warriors do, and they have to spend more TP's on cman's, moc, and some other skills. For example, I can't convert my warrior over to a paladin and have the same setup she currently uses, because paladin's can't 2x moc. (There's also the fact that she'd lose all her guild skills, she'd have to lose most/all of her tertiary skills that define her to gain any spells, and she wouldn't be able to get to my cap-goal-skills as a paladin.)

[Sean of the Thread]

Feral drood with 415 spec'd defense.

[Ignot]

Just give an answer, Paladin. There, end of thread.

[Mistomeer]

As for an answer - I know pallys have the highest AS, but for DS, I don't know.

Not sure where you get that from unless you just mean between the warrior and paladin. A bard can fairly easily get +70 AS (425 and 1007) while the highest a Paladin can get is +59 and that includes the 190 lore ranks it takes to max out Zealot. That's not counting the bonus from Surge (nerfed) and sanctify, but the 190 ranks of lore needed to max out Zealot makes it nearly impossible to do anyway plus you're taking a DS hit with Zealot and getting forced into offensive.

DS has to go to the Paladin because of spells. You can pretty much take a warrior and a paladin and train them in the same physical spells, but the Paladin will jump ahead with the spells

[AestheticDeath]

Perhaps I misread but lookin at play.net I got 68 AS on paladins rather than 59.

paladin = 68 from spells + 16 from surge, or 84
warrior = 50 from spells + 16 from surge, or 66 (but who is stupid enough to get 74 spells on a warrior?)
bard = 77 from spells, no surge

If you counted 117 paladins would still be ahead.

plus paladins have more defensive stuff, and the weapon bonding thing


1606 - 10 AS
1611 - 13 CM ranks, with 12 blessing ranks, 7 AS if it rounds up
1617 - 49 AS, with 190 religion ranks
1625 - gives some sort of AS bonus, +10 to CML attack/defense, and +5 STR (assuming rank 5 bond.) not sure what the CML thing is, does it add to AS too?

[Anebriated]

Im thinking guild skills > pally spells. Yeah a pally can get them as well through Cman's but there are more useful things a warrior can get to help balance it more. The utility is nice though.

[Fallen]

Warriors have access to better defensive CMs than paladins, and can still have a more rounded character even if defensive oriented. Paladins DO have Beseech, though, which must be calculated into any comparison of defensive merit.

[thefarmer]

Warriors have access to better defensive CMs than paladins, and can still have a more rounded character even if defensive oriented. Paladins DO have Beseech, though, which must be calculated into any comparison of defensive merit.

I agree. Beseech can unstun me for 30 mana with no chance of failure like beserk.

As for guild skills being better than paladin spells, have you actually looked at the paladin spell list?

I can increase my DS/TD for a base +10, plus an increase in lore traing.
I can make multiple targets receive a slow effect for extremely little mana.
Reduce spell hinderance by a large amount.
Increase the blesses by 50% given by Volners or clerics.
I can increase the damage factor to my weapon to a minimum of 10%,more with lore training, as well as my group.
Increase my AS by a minimum of +10, with increase with lore training.
Restore health and Stamina with mana.
Create a double plasma flaring weapon (a blessable one).
I can increase the % chance to block with a shield a mininum of 10% with increase with lores, as well as my group.
Increase my own DS.
I can increase my AS through the phantom CM ranks given. Basically it adds fake CM for swing AS, just not for CMan skills. This also includes defense against attacks that require CM training to defend against, but not cman skills like disarm.
Increase my CS attack strength.
Decrease the DS of multiple target a minium of 10% based on the targets stance.
I can target single or multiple targets with a CS based attack. It causes damage, rt and has upto a 50% chance to kneel all or some of them.
Increase my max Health and stamina.
Zealot applies to both myself and the group if I lead.
Give myself and the group, if leader, a base +15 DS with more with lore.
Give myself +50 TD for 30 seconds a shot. More with lore.
I can transport dead people to a holy place of my choosing.
I can bond to a weapon while loosing only the warrior double strikes, (At the moment I believe this is the only difference) thereby making a sanctified blade out of anything (weighted, flared) and get double flares if it's blessable.

Oh, did I mention I can unstun myself for 35mana? "Such effects include, but are not limited to web, stun, bind, poison, disease, and curse. Because the deity is removing the effect and not the Paladin, there is no spell hindrance", no RT, no chance of failure and can be used multiple times to remove multiple effects.
I can raise the dead a maximum of 3 times a day.

In my opinion, these beat guild skills hollow.

[thefarmer]

I realize some of the things I mentioned aren't DS related which is the main topic of the thread, but I was replying to the comment of warrior guild skills>paladin spells.

[Drew]

Not sure where you get that from unless you just mean between the warrior and paladin. A bard can fairly easily get +70 AS (425 and 1007) while the highest a Paladin can get is +59 and that includes the 190 lore ranks it takes to max out Zealot. That's not counting the bonus from Surge (nerfed) and sanctify, but the 190 ranks of lore needed to max out Zealot makes it nearly impossible to do anyway plus you're taking a DS hit with Zealot and getting forced into offensive.

DS has to go to the Paladin because of spells. You can pretty much take a warrior and a paladin and train them in the same physical spells, but the Paladin will jump ahead with the spells


Paladins can wspec and bond. Not to mention paladins can 2x CM fairly easily and bards don't do more than 1x which is an extra 50 AS at cap right there.

[Latrinsorm]

You can pretty much take a warrior and a paladin and train them in the same physical spells, but the Paladin will jump ahead with the spellsMy warrior's core plan:
3x shield, PF
2.5x armor (eventually going to 1.4x)
2x CM, Edged
.5x MOC, dodge

Paladins can't triple PF or shield at all, but let's just see what the costs are anyway for 2x in those:
9/0 + 9/0 + 15/0 + 15/12 + 9/3 + 2.5/1 + 2.5/1.5 = 62/16.5. Even with 50/40 that's impossible. You can work around it a *little* with 1611, but you're still significantly behind on shield and PF.

It's hard to do a comprehensive review of paladin vs. warrior and say who "wins", given that there are a plethora of training plans available and professions are balanced anyway, but there are quite a few warrior plans that paladins simply cannot attain (and vice versa).
Beseech can unstun me for 30 mana with no chance of failure like beserk.Berserk's "chance" of failure is pretty negligible once a character gets enough ranks, plus you don't have to go crying to mommy Arkati.

The only edge paladins have on warriors is TD and in very isolated instances DS. For the overwhelming majority of the game, warrior DS is irrelevant. Throughout the game, warriors have more than enough AS to get the job done; same goes for stamina and health. That paladins can increase their CS and decrease their spell hindrance is great... for paladins. CS and spell hindrance are absolutely, unequivocally unnecessary and irrelevant for warriors.

I haven't seen a lot of paladins participate in redux testing, so it's hard for me to say where they'd fall. I would guess singled in spells at 50 would be a -.100 penalty to RF, which isn't really negligible by any stretch, especially when a paladin is going to be lagging behind in redux points anyway.

The nice thing about warrior guild skills is that warriors have a variety of RT-inducing maneuvers. A slow effect doesn't help you until the creature makes a move, which is a little late.

[Latrinsorm]

To be completely clear: paladins will usually win at DS, warriors will always win at redux and usually at maneuvers. It's not possible to say whose is better without getting into specific training plans and hunting areas.

[Anebriated]

Warriors win because I say so.

[Jayvn]

I wish I hadn't converted my cleric... I'd probably still have him turned on, on the account... fucking paladins.

[Sypher]

Heres my take on it.

Redux: Warriors get it faster and more of it but a thoughtfully trained paladin could get near the same redux because all redux plateaus at a certain point. So if you train in spells every 3 levels, at cap you essentially have the same redux as a warrior.

Get out of jail free cards: Beseech is incredible and in my opinion better then berserk. Berserk can fail but this isn't likely at higher levels, however, once you type in berserk you need to wait a moment for you to attempt a stun break, plus after you break the stun another moment is needed albeit very quick moment to come out of berserk. With Beseech it's almost instaneous after you cast.

Paladin arm of Arkati spell: I have reasoned that this spell can become insanely powerful a 16% increase to DF to your weapon with a perfect weapon which is another 6 % with a high DF weapon, say pike or lance can make an insanely hard hitting paladin.

High AS equals a high DS: Because you can change stances, a high AS effectively means you have a high DS. So in this regard a paladin has a leg up, although with warcries up a warrior is very close to a paladin's AS. However, remember arm of arkati, this means you need lower end rolls to make crits to the eye neck etc. So thus you can afford to switch down your AS and thereby up your DS. Again, I think paladins have an advantage here.

Weapon Bonding: If you hunt Undead Paladin WB all the way, otherwise Warrior bonding all the way.

Training: Heres where it is exceptionally skewed toward in favor of the warrior. The warrior has a far more favorable training regime in terms of points then the paladin. In fact, as a paladin you are limited to a certain specialized thing, say hitting hard or getting your AS or DS as high as possible. Plus you're pretty much going to be a shield and sword user or twohanded user.

Conclusion: From 1-100 the warrior is better in both offense and defense mainly because a paladin cannot train 1-100 with the above specified benefits. However, postcap the paladin is by far better then the warrior, especially after all the lore training. He can if he maxes out all his lores and weapon training, be nearly unstoppable since he'll have redux like a warrior, TD like a cleric, all with probably the greatest melee offensive capability in the game. In other words, all the strengths of a warrior with none of it's weaknesses.

[Ignot]

Who has overall better defense with DS and redux factored in, a Paladin or Warrior? Lets say its a THW user.

I hope all this has answered your q's.

[Sypher]

Yes it has, thanks much. :)

[Latrinsorm]

Heres my take on it.The trouble is that with only 35 or so spells you really have to go all into paladin. The best (and perhaps only) selling point I've found for a paladin is being as close as you can get to the durability of a warrior with decent TD, but to get that I would think you'd absolutely want to get to 107. 25 TD with stackable durations is really outstandingly useful.

I'd also be very careful (and feel I have been very careful) making proclamations about redux at cap. My research certainly indicated a sharp decrease in redux factor per redux points after about .500 RF, but I didn't have any nearcap or higher data to work with. There's really no telling how high redux can get. I can make estimates, but it's hard to really be certain beyond what people can't get (.80 redux is impossible, for instance).

Just as a quick for instance, let's look at my previously cited plan, which gets 7 redux points a level (700 at cap). My ballpark guess for that would be .64 RF. We already know paladins can't 3x PF or shield, and generally they slack off on the CM as well. Giving the paladin 1.5x CM, let's say, another 10 armor ranks, and only .5x MOC/dodge versus the 1x my warrior would have at cap, that drops the ppl to 5. I'd ballpark that at .60 before spells, .50 after (for 50 spells). It doesn't look like much, but versus a broadsword (for instance) that's a difference of 35 for the crit rank 1 threshold. A paladin can certainly generate 35 DS with spells (right?) but the thing is the paladin is already behind due to lower skills to the tune of 100 shield ranks and 50 dodge ranks.

Anyway, my point is that warriors have (IMO) just as much postcap potential as paladins, if not more. A 3x/3x shield/dodge warrior would blow any paladin defense away. The advantage (over a paladin's max of 2x/2x) would be like having WoF up all the time, only it never costs any mana AND the EBP would be through the roof.

[Sypher]

Thats another thing, I read another post in here about shield training. Really does it do any good? 3x dodge will give more DS then a 3x shield 2x dodge using a tower shield, which in my frank opinion is nuts. And how much of a EBP gain will a 3x shield + tower really do percentages wise?...not much in my opinion. Plus throw in the one shot killing capacity of a twohander and it's no contest... Unless, the 3x shield + 3x dodge route gives another 100+ DS over a 3x dodge + No shield route. Then it's worthwhile.

[Latrinsorm]

3x dodge will give more DS then a 3x shield 2x dodge using a tower shield, which in my frank opinion is nuts.It's mostly nuts because it's not true. :D As the previous thread demonstrated, even granting the THW bonus doesn't put the dodger far enough ahead where stats (and shield enchant) won't make up the gap.
Plus throw in the one shot killing capacity of a twohander and it's no contest... The only way to reliably get OSKs with a twohander is to aim a maul (against anything more durable than a sea nymph, anyway). I don't know if or how much paladin bonding affects aiming, but I very much doubt it's more than warrior bonding. Even with bonding, significant ambush training is required to reliably aim a maul, and ambush is another skill where warriors have a TP advantage over paladins.
And how much of a EBP gain will a 3x shield + tower really do percentages wise?...not much in my opinion.Nobody has exact percentages. It'll be around 10% (before block mastery, obviously).

This is getting a bit afield from the thread topic, though. Paladins can neither 3x dodge nor 3x shield. Warriors can do both, and if 3x/2x s/d keeps pace with 0x/3x, you can probably deduce which side the comparison between 3x/3x and 0x/2x favors.

[Mistomeer]

Perhaps I misread but lookin at play.net I got 68 AS on paladins rather than 59.

paladin = 68 from spells + 16 from surge, or 84
warrior = 50 from spells + 16 from surge, or 66 (but who is stupid enough to get 74 spells on a warrior?)
bard = 77 from spells, no surge

If you counted 117 paladins would still be ahead.

plus paladins have more defensive stuff, and the weapon bonding thing


1606 - 10 AS
1611 - 13 CM ranks, with 12 blessing ranks, 7 AS if it rounds up
1617 - 49 AS, with 190 religion ranks
1625 - gives some sort of AS bonus, +10 to CML attack/defense, and +5 STR (assuming rank 5 bond.) not sure what the CML thing is, does it add to AS too?


Forgot about 1611 and Wspec, but the 190 ranks needed to max 1617 makes it pretty unattainable. With a bard you can 2x CM, and more or less max out 425 and Kai's at 75 for the full bonus (95 spell ranks at 75, if I remember correctly). When I think of Max AS I really think of max sustainable AS as you can do all sorts of neat tricks like madness and 117 to get it up for a short time, but a bard can get that AS boost with 2 spells at level 75 and keep it up almost forever.

At higher levels, the main weakness for both warriors and paladins is going to be TD and the Paladin is going to have a better TD. Either way though, it's nearly impossible to get a TD high enough to completely negate being warded by elemental or hybrid spells at a higher levels.

[Sypher]

Wait, don't you get a flat +20 or +30 DS for just picking up a shield. I remember picking up a wooden shield from kobolds and giving me a DS even though I my stats sucked and had no shield skills.

[AestheticDeath]

Shield itself will give you 20 DS. Plus whatever the enchant is, and then you tack on what you get from your skill bonus.

[Davenshire]

Better defensively I'd have to give it to paladins hands down.

Yeah a super trained warrior will have a slightly higher DS/redux (and a paladin trained comprable will have about the same)

TD paladin is going to stomp a warriors tuckus in. Major help there.

Divine intervention is rediculous in its applications. I duo with a high level paladin in the rift with my wizard. (I currently play a 58th train warrior also.) Beseech has to be one of the most useful attractive spells in the game.

35 mana get out of jail free card. **Such effects include, but are not limited to web, stun, bind, poison, disease, and curse.**

Makes me wanna cry when I throw on my 540 temporal reversion which lasts a paltry 10 minutes and if I get stunned I NEED divine intervention for it to proc enough for me to survive. (I can probably count the times on one hand)

I dont know how many times my warrior has berserked only to have the stun wear off, and him stuck for 9 rounds (or tell he is dead) Not to mention if it is needed more then once you have a good shot at blowing yer muscles because it is so expensive. granted berserk is A LOT better then its predecessor and very useful, but compared to beseech, naw.

Now rememebr this was asking which is better defensively. Id easily go with a paladin over a warrior. Warriors do have a lot of choices in CMAN's and what not, but I htink the ability for paladins to single in spells make them extremely powerful defesivewise later on in regards to DS/warding.

Especially in area with spell burst/ no outside learnable spells Id go with paladin defensively stronger always.

[thefarmer]

This is getting a bit afield from the thread topic, though. Paladins can neither 3x dodge nor 3x shield. Warriors can do both, and if 3x/2x s/d keeps pace with 0x/3x, you can probably deduce which side the comparison between 3x/3x and 0x/2x favors.

Yes, warriors CAN do this, but to be fair, I don't think a majority of warriors 3x in shields and dodge and PF as a core plan. 2x in PF is probably pretty standard, maybe even up to 3x, but dodge and shield not so standard.. Looking at your own training plan I see you at .5x in dodge. A far cry from 3x.

Like most people you're also interested in secondary skills, which is why you don't waste the TP's on going 3x in dodge. I would think that the original poster is looking for a good choice between generalized 2hw plans, without going the skewed-toward-a-particular-skillset mutant route. I could be wrong though and he's looking to min/max his way to uberDS at cap with a claid.

[Hakonne]

Hmm, I 2.5x shield, 1x dodge with a tower shield and 3 ranks of block mastery. I find that I block very often, especially with stance perfection at 5%. Now to find a 1609 item...

If I am forced to turtle there isn't much, physically, that can hit me.

Also being able to GUARD others in places like Nelemar's Temple or during invasions is very handy.

Hak

[Sypher]

Out of curiosity Hakonne what would you say a safe estimate in terms of percentage would you block shots with your tower shield against like leveld foes in stance O?

[Latrinsorm]

I dont know how many times my warrior has berserked only to have the stun wear off, and him stuck for 9 rounds (or tell he is dead) Not to mention if it is needed more then once you have a good shot at blowing yer muscles because it is so expensive.The first problem is a question of tactics. The second is much more applicable to paladins than warriors, as stamina regenerates far faster than mana. Maybe a dark elf who only 1xs in PF would have trouble, but what kind of warrior only 1xs in PF?
Yeah a super trained warrior will have a slightly higher DS/redux (and a paladin trained comprable will have about the same)
A paladin simply cannot be trained comparably to a warrior once we start talking about super training. It's just not possible. The way redux works, the difference between .64 and .50 redux is (conservatively speaking) a bajillion times more significant than .24 and .10 redux. "Slightly" doesn't really do the mechanics justice when against anything with less oomph than a lance it's better than turning 4x armor into 9x (or having a 5x DB item or etc.).
TD paladin is going to stomp a warriors tuckus in. Major help there.The only way for paladins pre-cap to have a major TD advantage is with a (relative) ton of magical training, which severely decreases available TPs for warriorly skills. Postcap, the warrior can grab up to 107 and 406 fairly easily with only a medium redux penalty, or just 401 and 101 for no redux penalty at all.
Yes, warriors CAN do this, but to be fair, I don't think a majority of warriors 3x in shields and dodge and PF as a core plan. 2x in PF is probably pretty standard, maybe even up to 3x, but dodge and shield not so standard.. Looking at your own training plan I see you at .5x in dodge. A far cry from 3x.See, we're talking about two different things now. Nobody core trains that way, but part of the allure of paladins is all this postcap potential they have. My point was that warriors (postcap) can get some seriously ridiculous physical skills, so ridiculous that even with spells paladins are noticeably outclassed in the physical defense realm (as they should be). Paladins will always maintain a TD advantage at least vs. the spiritual, but people often claim that super paladins will have "all the strengths of a warrior". I'm quoting Sypher specifically, but this claim is by no means limited to him.
I would think that the original poster is looking for a good choice between generalized 2hw plans, without going the skewed-toward-a-particular-skillset mutant route. I could be wrong though and he's looking to min/max his way to uberDS at cap with a claid.His analysis appears to have a broader scope than that. Take this statement, for instance: "From 1-100 the warrior is better in both offense and defense mainly because a paladin cannot train 1-100 with the above specified benefits. However, postcap the paladin is by far better then the warrior, especially after all the lore training."

[Hakonne]

Out of curiosity Hakonne what would you say a safe estimate in terms of percentage would you block shots with your tower shield against like leveld foes in stance O?

1 in 2.5-3, against most of the stuff in Nelemar which is uphunting, 1 in 3-4. Always amusing to see executioners pop out of hiding and whiff. Same with scouts in OTF with their crystal weapons.

Hak

[thefarmer]

The only way for paladins pre-cap to have a major TD advantage is with a (relative) ton of magical training, which severely decreases available TPs for warriorly skills. Postcap, the warrior can grab up to 107 and 406 fairly easily with only a medium redux penalty, or just 401 and 101 for no redux penalty at all.

Define relative? I'm not understanding how you're comparing a paladin with spells to a warrior without spells and saying there's no TD advantage. Even at the .75x a spell that paladins are built for (see website if you disagree) that's still more than the warrior can muster.

Spells=Bonus to TD
No Spells=No Bonus to TD
Clearly one wins here in the TD equation.

You also use an example of a post-cap warrior without comparing them to the post-cap paladin who can use those post-cap TP's for 'warriorly skills'


See, we're talking about two different things now. Nobody core trains that way, but part of the allure of paladins is all this postcap potential they have. My point was that warriors (postcap) can get some seriously ridiculous physical skills, so ridiculous that even with spells paladins are noticeably outclassed in the physical defense realm (as they should be). Paladins will always maintain a TD advantage at least vs. the spiritual, but people often claim that super paladins will have "all the strengths of a warrior". I'm quoting Sypher specifically, but this claim is by no means limited to him.

You agree that nobody, paladin or warrior, core trains to maximize all combat skills. So even at cap both professions will be playing catch-up just to get all the extra ranks they missed earlier. The paladin will have a spell advantage, the warrior will have an advantage of any existing triple ranks in a skill, as well as the redux one.


I don't think paladins have all the strengths of a warrior. They're not supposed to. However I do think a general* paladin build has more advantages overall than a general* warrior build before and after cap.

*General meaning 2x'ing basic core skills with room for secondary skill growth and not maxing out all combat skills alone, mutant-style, which again, I don't believe a large majority of warriors do, even post cap.

[Latrinsorm]

Define relative? I'm not understanding how you're comparing a paladin with spells to a warrior without spells and saying there's no TD advantage. Even at the .75x a spell that paladins are built for (see website if you disagree) that's still more than the warrior can musterWhat I said was no major TD advantage. At only .75x, the paladin won't get to beseech until level 56 if he or she gets up to 107. If the paladin focuses entirely on the paladin circle, the only TD is +5, which while certainly something is far from major. At .5x lore that's still only +10 at level 50.

Relatively heavy would be 1x/1x spells and lores.
You also use an example of a post-cap warrior without comparing them to the post-cap paladin who can use those post-cap TP's for 'warriorly skills'Once we get to post-cap, the only thing that matters are the rank per level limits, and the warrior is going to obliterate the paladin (shield, dodge, PF). A postcap paladin can certainly get fairly close to the warrior skills of some freshly capped warriors, but that's a pretty pointless comparison.
However I do think a general* paladin build has more advantages overall than a general* warrior build before and after cap.I don't know enough about paladins to talk about overall advantages. I know plenty enough about physical defensive capabilities to know that the paladin isn't doing so hot. In terms of general warrior builds, I'm betting there aren't any warriors who haven't gotten a significant advantage over 2xing the core by cap, as will become clear shortly.

Comparing the cores is going to favor the warrior every time. 2x THW, 2x CM (1x for the paladin), 2x armor, dodge, and PF:
45/18 vs. 50/19. The paladin has to add spells (and the harness power to cast them) just to keep up, whereas the warrior can do whatever and has a substantial maneuver advantage: guild + twice as many CML points.

The great thing about training a warrior is it's impossible to run out of TPs with just the core (and frankly, 2x dodge is probably higher than average for warriors). Paladins don't have anywhere near as many luxury points. The warrior above could go MIU/AS, MOC, grab a spell every six levels, crank up dodge (though I doubt any would), get a secondary combat style, get some ambush to pump up aiming. I'm not saying any of these are substantial improvements, but when the paladin doesn't have enough points to do anything, it adds up.

[Anebriated]

Dont warriors have the option of learning the 100's spell line? Might not be common but still possible to get 101 and 107 out of that and not really lose much redux(7 spells as opposed to 7+pally spells).

[Sypher]

I never had a problem with my warrior's physical defense especially in crit padded plate, unless it was a flaring crystal weapon. It was always that TD that stung.

[Sylvan Dreams]

Ultimately, wouldn't a warrior have better DS simply because a warrior can triple both shield use and dodge whereas a paladin can only 2x both? While a Paladin does have spells, a warrior can train up in MIU and Symbols and easily make up the difference with imbeds and scrolls. I don't think there is anything that a Paladin can do that can make up for 101 ranks of both Shield Use and Dodge at cap.

[Sean]

a paladin can use the exact same scrolls/imbeds as a warrior can't they?

[Ignot]

The question never mentioned anything about a shield anyways!

[Latrinsorm]

Dont warriors have the option of learning the 100's spell line? Might not be common but still possible to get 101 and 107 out of that and not really lose much redux(7 spells as opposed to 7+pally spells).Both paladins and warriors have access to the 100 circle; warriors also have access to the 400 circle.
I don't think there is anything that a Paladin can do that can make up for 101 ranks of both Shield Use and Dodge at cap.It would be pretty dang difficult from a DS perspective and of course impossible from an EBP perspective.
The question never mentioned anything about a shield anyways!SHIELDS RULE THWS DRULE O'DOYLE RULEZ

[Sean]

O'DOYLE RULEZ

now drive off a cliff.

[Sypher]

It would be pretty dang difficult from a DS perspective and of course impossible from an EBP

This isn't entirely true, a paladin can use divine shield and have a shield block percentage slightly higher then a 3x tower shield using warrior. Further, he can make up for the lack of DS from the -1x to shield use by using his many DS boosting spells and get a higher DS then a warrior, this is even if the warrior decideds to 3x dodge.

Finally, if a paladin only concetrates on paladin circle and goes no further then 35 or beseech it is possible for him to have redux approaching that of a capped warriors. Further, post cap training a paladin can get very close to a warriors Redux levels although he will always fall short. But I believe the greater paladin DS probably makes up for this redux derth.

Further, a paladin's offensive capability is far greater then a warriors, especially with arm of arkati ..a +16% to Damage Factor?! Couple that with close to highest AS in the game and you pretty much have a winner.

*Note: This is all massively post cap, in no way shape or form can a paladin do this in between the 1-100 levels. Only with a ton of after cap experience.

[thefarmer]

What I said was no major TD advantage. At only .75x, the paladin won't get to beseech until level 56 if he or she gets up to 107. If the paladin focuses entirely on the paladin circle, the only TD is +5, which while certainly something is far from major. At .5x lore that's still only +10 at level 50..

Beseech doesn't affect TD. So there's no point in addressing this. When it only takes a few points to cause massive damage with CS spells, +10 is alot. Again, TD+ beats no TD+ hollow. And since your warrior example tends to get spells after cap, that's 100 levels of extra TD the warrior will not have.




Once we get to post-cap, the only thing that matters are the rank per level limits, and the warrior is going to obliterate the paladin (shield, dodge, PF).

Limits are a good point. But you're not taking into account skills that most warriors don't train in the the extreme, even at post-cap. Regardless of how many ranks they can have per level, it still doesn't make up for the fact that they are still catching up ranks to reach those limits. Reaching the maximum on all the skills possible require an immense effort in post-cap exp gain. Yes, it's possible, but at what level of exp does it take to cap every single combat skill while getting those spells ranks you seem to suggest that the warrior do, as well as the MIU/Reading on top?


Comparing the cores is going to favor the warrior every time. 2x THW, 2x CM (1x for the paladin), 2x armor, dodge, and PF:
45/18 vs. 50/19... The great thing about training a warrior is it's impossible to run out of TPs with just the core (and frankly, 2x dodge is probably higher than average for warriors). .

Find me a warrior that has only core skills pre-cap and post-cap. Then compare that number to the total number of warriors around. I think you'll find that the few you'll possibly find are the exception to the rule.



I don't know enough about paladins to talk about overall advantages.
I rest my case.

[Sypher]

However, paladins really do suck pre-cap no matter how many ways I work the numbers they got a couple of rigid training plans all of them far inferior to a guild mastered warrior.

Paladins only really shine post cap with a ton of after cap exp, and I think when Simu made this class they had this in mind.

[Latrinsorm]

This isn't entirely true, a paladin can use divine shield and have a shield block percentage slightly higher then a 3x tower shield using warrior.I had forgotten about the lore benefits, which are substantial. Paladins can get ahead on EBP.
Further, he can make up for the lack of DS from the -1x to shield use by using his many DS boosting spells and get a higher DS then a warrior, this is even if the warrior decideds to 3x dodge.I'm not so sure. 23 + 20 (no lores for this one) + 20 is only 63. 100 dodge ranks in stance o full plate is a good 33, 100 shield ranks is another 43 for a total of 76. Getting that close makes things like stats important (spit!), but shield and dodge have the advantage of being impossible to dispel. The only other relevant and feasible spell for a paladin to have and not a warrior is 120, but at that point we're talking palpable redux loss and even then it's only 15 more, putting the paladin at best a snoodge ahead.
Finally, if a paladin only concetrates on paladin circle and goes no further then 35 or beseech it is possible for him to have redux approaching that of a capped warriors.If he or she does that, he or she will only get the TD from 1601, which even with lore is 23. The warrior (with only the slighest redux penalty) can get 25 from 101 and 107 and throw in 5 for ETD from 401. Why would you want sorta-warrior redux, comparable TD, and comparable DS while giving up all sorts of maneuver defense benefits from knowing more maneuvers?
Further, a paladin's offensive capability is far greater then a warriors, especially with arm of arkati ..a +16% to Damage Factor?! Couple that with close to highest AS in the game and you pretty much have a winner. I've been focusing on the defensive side as that was the focus of the thread, but I want to say two things about this. First, Arm of the Arkati uses a different lore (Summon) than most of the defensive spells (Bless). Even with 20 billion postcap experience, a paladin can only train 200 ranks of lores, so no paladin can ever have both +16% DF and +27% Block from spells. This is also why I left out the lores for Higher Vision (Religion), as Bless provides more defensive benefits.

Second, (as Tea and Strumpets can inform you, nyuk nyuk nyuk) I don't hunt at the cap. However, I do know that after a certain point both more AS and more DF are simply irrelevant. From the isolated logs I've seen, warriors don't have problems killing things. The main warrior problem seems to be warding things (big shocker there) and being electrocuted.

[Latrinsorm]

Beseech doesn't affect TD. So there's no point in addressing this.My point was that most paladins (with good reason) shoot for beseech. To have a major TD boost inherently means going without beseech for a good long time.
When it only takes a few points to cause massive damage with CS spells, +10 is alot. Again, TD+ beats no TD+ hollow. And since your warrior example tends to get spells after cap, that's 100 levels of extra TD the warrior will not have.Paladins are going to be behind warriors on redux and EBP for most of the game as well, and by a lot more than 10 TD's relative worth.
But you're not taking into account skills that most warriors don't train in the the extreme, even at post-cap.We're talking about super mutant builds on both sides. I'm pretty certain most paladins don't get 200 ranks of lores all that quickly either.
Find me a warrior that has only core skills pre-cap and post-cap....what? That's exactly what I was saying: warriors have so much room that eventually they pretty much have to train in a core skill beyond 2x.
I rest my case.For a guy who doesn't know a ton about paladins, I'm doing a pretty good job of numerically proving their inadequacy, eh?

[Gigantuous]

I'd participate in redux testing if anyone knew or had a very good ballpark idea of the new formula. I wouldn't mind at all, I'm curious where my redux is since I converted.

[thefarmer]

However, paladins really do suck pre-cap no matter how many ways I work the numbers they got a couple of rigid training plans all of them far inferior to a guild mastered warrior.

Paladins only really shine post cap with a ton of after cap exp, and I think when Simu made this class they had this in mind.

Since I haven't been in the warrior guild for a long time, what exactly makes you believe that a like-level guild mastered warrior is better than a like-leveled paladin?

I haven't had any problems as a paladin. I'm sure most folks that play paladins would agree that the profession certainly doesn't 'suck' pre-cap. They certainly don't suck anymore than any other profession does.


My point was that most paladins (with good reason) shoot for beseech. To have a major TD boost inherently means going without beseech for a good long time.Paladins are going to be behind warriors on redux and EBP for most of the game as well, and by a lot more than 10 TD's relative worth.

Your point about beseech has not real purpose in discussing what kind of TD benefits a paladin will or won't have. The focus is possible TD, not a spell that paladins shoot for that does nothing for TD.

Redux and EBP play no part in TD. Again, there is no reason to bring it up.




....what? That's exactly what I was saying: warriors have so much room that eventually they pretty much have to train in a core skill beyond 2x.

You're right but at what level of exp do they 'pretty much have to'? And putting the paladin at the same level of exp, what kind of skills are they able to get?


For a guy who doesn't know a ton about paladins, I'm doing a pretty good job of numerically proving their inadequacy, eh?

You're doing a good job of discussing tangents like warriors having more redux and EBP when compared to paladin TD bonuses and beseech having to do with paladin TD. You're also using a super-mutant warrior with what appears to be limitless exp gain to train, while also ignoring a super-mutant paladin with the same amount of limitless exp gain to train with.

I see a few advantages to a (super-mutant) warrior post-cap: 1 extra rank in shield, dodge and PF, resulting in DS, EBP and redux gain. A (normal) paladin has spells to increase AS, DS, TD, DF%, CS and EBP.

You haven't proven your case to me.

[FinisWolf]

Finiswolf will participate in redux testing as well if needed. PM and we can work something out.

And, it's just my observation (opinion) that my level 40 warrior (Finiswolf at the time of conversion) had a hell-uva-lot more DS then my level 62 paladin (Finiswolf now). Of course there is also the GS3 to GS4 conversion numbers mixed in with my memories, but as I recall it, Finis rocked DS and AS after GS4 rolled in, and now his AS rocks, and his TD is way way way better. Not to mention the added bonus of being able to sit in guarded and cast CS spells.

Finis

[Sypher]

Again, Paladin = Most Powerful after Massive post cap exp. Warrior = Powerful 1-100.

Why? It's more of a business move then anything else. Simu realizes that most people will have nothing to do at post cap , especially warriors, and thus made the paladin gain it's true power with massive post cap exp.

P.S. What can a warrior train post cap that really makes him that much more powerful? My opinion, nothing too much short of minutes amount of more redux, and a couple of spells he could've just used items to cast.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Latrinsorm
I'm not so sure. 23 + 20 (no lores for this one) + 20 is only 63. 100 dodge ranks in stance o full plate is a good 33, 100 shield ranks is another 43 for a total of 76. Getting that close makes things like stats important (spit!), but shield and dodge have the advantage of being impossible to dispel. The only other relevant and feasible spell for a paladin to have and not a warrior is 120, but at that point we're talking palpable redux loss and even then it's only 15 more, putting the paladin at best a snoodge ahead.

Out of curiousity is this with or without 102?

[Latrinsorm]

I'd participate in redux testing if anyone knew or had a very good ballpark idea of the new formula. I wouldn't mind at all, I'm curious where my redux is since I converted.I have a very good ballpark idea if you're level 66 without spells, otherwise not so much. Go get hit a few times by a PC (in the leg), but don't get healed by an empath. Finis, I'll send you a pm after this.
Your point about beseech has not real purpose in discussing what kind of TD benefits a paladin will or won't have. The focus is possible TD, not a spell that paladins shoot for that does nothing for TD.Possible TD for a precap paladin absolutely requires discussion of beseech. Opportunity costs, etc.
Redux and EBP play no part in TD. Again, there is no reason to bring it up.If we're talking about overall defense (which we are), redux and ebp are essential components. Precap paladins are going to be way behind warriors on redux and ebp and potentially ahead in TD.
You're also using a super-mutant warrior with what appears to be limitless exp gain to train, while also ignoring a super-mutant paladin with the same amount of limitless exp gain to train with.This is completely inaccurate. As I've addressed in at least one previous post, even super-mutant paladins must balance: spells to redux and one lore to another come to mind. I'm looking directly at super-mutant paladins (2x in dodge, shield, PF, lores) and they're at best equal and usually lacking.
A (normal) paladin has spells to increase AS, DS, TD, DF%, CS and EBP. As my post to Sypher demonstrated, they can't close the DS gap from being 100 ranks behind in shield and dodge.
You're right but at what level of exp do they 'pretty much have to'? And putting the paladin at the same level of exp, what kind of skills are they able to get?As I demonstrated, the same core skills cost paladins more. By definition, the paladin has significantly less room to work with. This doesn't mean it's impossible for any one paladin to surpass any one warrior in certain combat skills, but for some reason you want to talk about the general case. The general case will always (regardless of level) favor the class with more TPs to spend willy-nilly; that class is the warrior class.

If 76 > 63 doesn't prove anything to you, there's nothing more I can say.
What can a warrior train post cap that really makes him that much more powerful?The fact remains that the extra 1x/1x a warrior can get will give more DS than paladin spells. If we're talking about defense, paladins can't claim the same physical defense in the end limit, period. A paladin has a choice between [slightly inferior redux, same TD] and [significantly inferior redux, better TD]; no super paladin can have both.

It's hard to really say the warrior is much more powerful, as even half-decently warriors are already pretty much physically invulnerable at cap. The only real chinks are weapon flares (which DS and more importantly EBP are good for defeating) and maneuvers.
Out of curiousity is this with or without 102?Without 102 and without Zealot.

[Sean]

if the goal is maximum defense why would you include zealot?

[Latrinsorm]

I didn't include Zealot. Without Zealot. I didn't include 102 because I don't think even paladins are such nancies that they would use 102.

[Sean]

I know you said without. From your post I assumed you were indicating that you didn't include 102 because you didn't include zealot. It appears I was mistaken. I consider 102 a pretty strategic spell for people who have the excess AS to trade for DS.

[Latrinsorm]

Nah, I threw in the w/o Zealot because it was the only other relevant spell I could think of that affected DS. Even if we assume 102 is usable, I again contend that everyone has excess AS by cap and warriors can just as easily snag 102. Still, though, it's a huge nancy move, like rolling up a pure or something.

[Sean]

But they can't as easily generate the same bonuses by training up the 100s. Well they can but its not nearly as efficient TP wise.

[Latrinsorm]

This is the balance thing I was talking about, though. Once a paladin starts flying up the 100s, redux gets frittered away. It's difficult to say whether the DS gained makes up for the redux lost without testing it versus every weapon base (and understanding the spell penalty progression a little better), but it is a balancing act that getting 3x/3x doesn't really entail.

[Sean]

I'm a round about way I agree with you Latrin. I'm not a fan of paladins and would pick a warrior over one in almost every situation that i can think of. You're the number cruncher out of the two of us though. How bad of an impact would 55 spells have on semi/redux? Is knowing 1635 (beseech seems to be the hooray paladin savior! spell of this thread) and 120 really that detrimental to your redux? Seems paladin spells don't really increase based on spell ranks like most circles but instead on lores.

[Latrinsorm]

Just 35 will do about .06. 35 and 20 will do .10, at which point (in addition to being behind on redux skills in general) the redux factors really aren't comparable anymore.

I want to note again that my work on spell penalty was incomplete, but there's really no reason to believe these findings are qualitatively inaccurate beyond Humean jerkheadedness. (Close enough for jazz, so to speak.)

[AestheticDeath]

You kinda overlooking the DS vs redux thing. Warriors might have more redux, but if paladins arent even getting hit, having 70% redux instead of 80% wont mean crap.

Im not sure what kind of DS a post cap paladin can actually muster - but I would assume it is more than a warrior. Did someone actually put out the total numbers for max DS in offensive/defensive somewhere in here?

[Sypher]

It's not by much, if you add up all the numbers and even IF you assume max lores which is like 3,000 mental TPs, the DS difference isn't much overall, especially with 3x/3x dodge shield.

[Latrinsorm]

You kinda overlooking the DS vs redux thing. ... Im not sure what kind of DS a post cap paladin can actually muster - but I would assume it is more than a warrior.This is what I'm talking about when I say 76 > 63 (76 in stance o, by the way. It's considerably more in stance d). It turns out super paladins can't get more DS than super warriors without pwning redux pretty hard.

[AestheticDeath]

I guess I didn't realize what the 76 and 63 are representing? Is that DS from spells only? Don't forget the offensive capability to turn into defense. 600 AS could be dropped to 540 and net you 60 more DS.

[thefarmer]

Possible TD for a precap paladin absolutely requires discussion of beseech. Opportunity costs, etc.If we're talking about overall defense (which we are), redux and ebp are essential components. Precap paladins are going to be way behind warriors on redux and ebp and potentially ahead in TD.

We were actually specifically discussing TD in that particular exchange. Not overall DS.



As I demonstrated, the same core skills cost paladins more. By definition, the paladin has significantly less room to work with. This doesn't mean it's impossible for any one paladin to surpass any one warrior in certain combat skills, but for some reason you want to talk about the general case. The general case will always (regardless of level) favor the class with more TPs to spend willy-nilly; that class is the warrior class.

Ok. So a level 50 paladin is going to be outclassed DS wise than a warrior, always? Honest question.


If 76 > 63 doesn't prove anything to you, there's nothing more I can say.The fact remains that the extra 1x/1x a warrior can get will give more DS than paladin spells. If we're talking about defense, paladins can't claim the same physical defense in the end limit, period. A paladin has a choice between [slightly inferior redux, same TD] and [significantly inferior redux, better TD]; no super paladin can have both.

So my question is this: Can you put up the skill ranks for a mutant warrior and mutant paladin at something pre-cap and a few post-cap? (50, 100,150, 200-equivilants) I'm having a hard time seeing just you think that the warrior is going to be that much farther ahead.

I understand the ability to train more in certain skills, I just can't see how the warrior is having enough TP's to be that much beyond the paladin. At least so far surpassing that the paladin's spells can't make up most of the difference, if not all in certain instances. Clearly, you're the math wiz on the boards, I'm sure it'll take you virtually no time.

[Sean]

Admitting I don't know much about training a paladin but it would seem that if a warrior 3x/3x to cap their defense doesn't really have anywhere to go (unless they pick up spell training) and all their post cap TPs are being spent on ancillary skills where as from what i can gather in this thread the paladin will need to keep training post cap to develop their DS and fill in the gap.

[Aphyd]

I'd love to see a warrior actually train 3x dodge/3x shield and still have enough points to get the rest of their training plan done too.

3x dodge TP cost is going to buttfuck any warrior's training regime.

[Sypher]

For level 100 Elf Warrior w/ Optimized stats.

Doing 3x/2.5x shield dodge + OHE/OHB

6/0 x 70 - armor
16/0 x 100 - shield
4/2
8/4 x 100
16/8 x 50- dodge
4/3
8/6 x 100- cm
2/1
4/2 x100-edge/blunt
6/0 x100 -phys
--------------------


6420/2200

5890/4214 - Elf Warrior Optimized for 100

-530/+2200

Total remaining: 1140 MPs

Accessory Skills
-----------------
Climbing - 3/0 x 30 = 90
Swimming - 2/0 x 30 = 60
MIU? - 0/8 x 30 = 240

Remainder -510 MPs
-----------------

Ambush for flavor - 3/4 x 50 = 150/200

10 MPs remaining for whatever.


My opinion, that .5x dodge doesn't really do much for DS (less then 15 DS maybe?), especially with a tower shield and in plate armor.

[Jessaril]

I have a paladin right now and my biggest problem is the limited availablility and CMAN point cost of alot of CMANS. They're supposed to be more physical then other semis, why do they share the heightened cman point costs?

I do like my paladin though, pretty much unkillable in many regards.

[Sthrockmorton]

What's the cman cost for a paladin?

[Jessaril]

it's not so much the training point cost as the points required for each rank. Frankly I have always had a problem with the fact that X class pays more for CMAN ranks training point wise AND has to pay more per rank.

[Latrinsorm]

I guess I didn't realize what the 76 and 63 are representing? Is that DS from spells only? Don't forget the offensive capability to turn into defense. 600 AS could be dropped to 540 and net you 60 more DS.The 76 is the amount of DS gained from an extra 100 ranks in shield and dodge in stance offensive (with a tower shield, which I just realized now isn't the best DS for that arrangement. It won't be much higher, though). The 63 is the DS granted by the paladin circle with 200 ranks of Blessings lore.
Ok. So a level 50 paladin is going to be outclassed DS wise than a warrior, always? Honest question.No. There are plenty of characters in every class who are trained without regard for mechanics as well as characters trained for mechanics purposes that do not address DS (such as Kenhinds weaponmaster). The general case is a core plan, and that core plan is more expensive for paladins.
Can you put up the skill ranks for a mutant warrior and mutant paladin at something pre-cap and a few post-cap?The super warrior I envision has:
3x Dodge, PF, Shield
2x CM, Weapon
140 Armor
1x MOC
4 spells (401, 101-103)
4 ranks of harness

For just the x ones, that works out to 78/29, so:
7878/2929
+360/0
+0/480
+0/40
=
8238/3449
-5890/4214
=
2348/-765 TPs needed.
1965.5 PTPs at 1.5 per 2500 experience = 3.28m post-cap exp.

There's more he or she could get, obviously, but this feels pretty respectable. I'm leaving out Climb, Swim, and Perception because they have the same cost for both.

For a paladin:
2x PF, Weapon, Dodge, Shield
150 armor ranks
184 CM ranks (due to the 1611 bonus)
42 spells (35 paladin, 7 MnS)
50 ranks harness seems about right, I'm not married to that number though
200 ranks of Bless lore
1x MOC

47/14 for the x:
4747/1414
+600/0
+1340/1072
+0/1134
+0/250
+0/1400
=
6687/5270
-5224/4875 (also elven)
=
1463/395
.99m to get the MTPs to 0, leaving us with
1068/0 which takes 1.78m for a total of 2.77m.

A difference of 510k experience, roughly the experience needed to go from 0-21 or 340 hours (23 weeks of just using up XXX). All told, a difference of just under 5% in total exp required.
I'd love to see a warrior actually train 3x dodge/3x shield and still have enough points to get the rest of their training plan done too.

3x dodge TP cost is going to buttfuck any warrior's training regime.I don't think it'll happen. GS is such an offense-focused game that the superior defense isn't really worth the offensive penalties for the overwhelming majority of the game.

Sypher, the GS4 trainer recalibrates costs to give you the cheapest possible at each level. 6/0 * 70 isn't what will actually be spent at cap for 140 armor ranks, but 2/0 * 100 + 4/0 * 40 = 360.

[Anebriated]

Is there any reason to be over like 55 ranks of MOC?

[Latrinsorm]

FoF mechs. To be completely accurate I probably should have put 95 ranks, but obviously it's not going to be a huge difference.

[thefarmer]

No. There are plenty of characters in every class who are trained without regard for mechanics as well as characters trained for mechanics purposes that do not address DS (such as Kenhinds weaponmaster). The general case is a core plan, and that core plan is more expensive for paladins.

I was actually refering to the super warrior and super paladin at level 50. Not the general core plans.


...(numbers)..
A difference of 510k experience, roughly the experience needed to go from 0-21 or 340 hours (23 weeks of just using up XXX). All told, a difference of just under 5% in total exp required.


Thanks for crunching numbers. I can see better where you're going, but I just can't see many warriors going that super route. I guess my ultimate point is that yes, a warrior can outdo a paladin when trained the super route, but I still feel that most folks train a more generic warrior plan than what you've suggested, and that a generically trained paladin can compete with a generic warrior.



Sypher, the GS4 trainer recalibrates costs to give you the cheapest possible at each level. 6/0 * 70 isn't what will actually be spent at cap for 140 armor ranks, but 2/0 * 100 + 4/0 * 40 = 360.

I knew his original numbers were off, I just couldn't mathematically post why. Heh.

[Latrinsorm]

I was actually refering to the super warrior and super paladin at level 50. Not the general core plans.I don't know what you're talking about, really. Neither the warrior nor the paladin can engage in the super plans until way post-cap.
I guess my ultimate point is that yes, a warrior can outdo a paladin when trained the super route, but I still feel that most folks train a more generic warrior plan than what you've suggested, and that a generically trained paladin can compete with a generic warrior.Ok.

[Fallen]

Is there any reason to be over like 55 ranks of MOC?

If you have a smaller weapon, there most certainly is. Hell, I know a warrior that has a falchion and still M-strikes with 80+ ranks.

[Latrinsorm]

Finiswolf will participate in redux testing as well if needed. PM and we can work something out.Alright, I'll refrain from posting the actual redux # here, but it is significantly lower than I had expected. (Thanks for the help!) The easiest explanation would be that paladins have different spell penalties than rangers, but that sort of profession specificity was supposed to be removed from the redux formula in the switch, so I doubt it. The possibility I'm leaning towards is that instead of simply subtracting RF, the spell penalty is a multiplicative factor. Playing around with the numbers a little, it looks like 1/13 for each step as previously determined with the trunc(level/20) +2 seeding rule gives the correct results.

This profoundly alters the prediction of a paladin's redux at cap. Using my previous pre-spells value of .60, a paladin with 35 spells at cap would only have a redux factor of .44. The gap between CR1 thresholds grows from 35 to 44; put another way, against any broadsword that doesn't flare a warrior effectively has 44 higher DS from redux alone. It needs to be reiterated that these are estimates for values at cap rather than far post-cap, but the gap due to skills alone isn't really the killer here, it's the spell training. (Also worth pointing out is that the super paladin will always be behind the super warrior in redux skills as has been previously demonstrated.)

Anyway, I thought it was worth mentioning. :)

[thefarmer]

put another way, against any broadsword that doesn't flare a warrior effectively has 44 higher DS from redux alone....
It needs to be reiterated that these are estimates for values at cap rather than far post-cap, but the gap due to skills alone isn't really the killer here, it's the spell training. (Also worth pointing out is that the super paladin will always be behind the super warrior in redux skills as has been previously demonstrated.)

These are the only things I actually understood out of all that math. So the only thing I can say is I wish everything swung broadsword-based weapons...

[FinisWolf]

I could be wrong, but I think he is saying that warriors rule and paladins drool when it comes to DS.

I could be wrong.

Finis

[Cademus]

Paladins are better in both DS and TD. DS due to their spells, and TD because of that +74 due to 1619. Paladins at super post cap is hands down better in almost very regard short of redux. But then, they can just cast DS spells to counter this.

[Latrinsorm]

Look at the numbers, man. Paladin DS just doesn't cut it, and while 1619 is a handy spell, the benchmarks we were using before make it last 38 seconds. That means you need to get back 60 mana a pulse (off-node) to keep it up indefinitely without even taking failures into account. Also, you can't have 1619 maxed out with lores as well as most of the other defensive spells, as was talked about earlier in the thread.

[Celephais]

Paladins are better in both DS and TD. DS due to their spells, and TD because of that +74 due to 1619. Paladins at super post cap is hands down better in almost very regard short of redux. But then, they can just cast DS spells to counter this.

Wow, you're great at making claims without knowing anything about them aren't you?

[FinisWolf]

I didn't need Latrinsom to tell me a paladins DS blows, or anyone else to tell me this. The redux info was good information to me and I appreciate it.

I have been saying for years Finiswolf's DS blows ass, but his AS / TD / and CS in my opinion make up for that. I simply figure it's a trade off. I am willing to accept this, well accept it and buy nice armor.

Heck, I even virtually quit playing Fini for a couple years because of this. I finally decided to grit my teeth, locate THEE right hunting ground and deal with it, and it is working out. Fini trained for the first time yesterday in at least 18 months.

Finis

[Stunseed]

< The easiest explanation would be that paladins have different spell penalties than rangers, but that sort of profession specificity was supposed to be removed from the redux formula in the switch, so I doubt it. >

Not that it helps this arguement in any way, shape, or form...If you want to work with Stun to give another semi version, all you gotta do is ask. Being in EN helps, too.

[Fallen]

Heck, I even virtually quit playing Fini for a couple years because of this. I finally decided to grit my teeth, locate THEE right hunting ground and deal with it, and it is working out. Fini trained for the first time yesterday in at least 18 months.

Finis >>

Why not train in MIU or Arcane Symbols and spell tank? You can get 50+ easy from either skill.

[FinisWolf]

That is the plan later on Fallen, but right now I have to stick to my core. It's not outlandish, but I do have a core to maintain, and not enough tp's to really diversify.

Hopefully within five levels I will be able to start snatching up MIU and AS.

Finis

[Fallen]

I know I push this site hard sometimes, but I think it is an excellent resource:

http://www.gsauctions.com/portous.asp

He can make 40 rods, anklets, bracelets, or amulets charged any spell a wizard can come up with. 503 from a raised rod that holds 80 mana's worth of the spell can REALLY come in handy.

503, 507, and 905 and you're set. Heck, you can tack on 401-414 as a Paladin too. If you need more, check out Merjinia's and my shop in Ta'Illistim (Merjinia owns it) for some infused scrolls with defensive spells you can't get imbedded.

[Cademus]

Paladin defense versus Warrior.

The reason why the numbers don't work out Latrinsorm is because you're going about it the wrong way.

Let me show you. The difference between the extra 1x dodge/shield and paladin 2x/2x is about 70 or so DS + the extra EBP gained. Ok.

Although there are a ton of defense spells, lets work the other route.

At post cap

Religion-171, Blessing -20, Summoning-11

1601: +10 DS/ +10 TD
1605: +12% to weapon DF
1606: +10 AS
1610: +34 DS
1611: 24 CM ranks or +12 AS
1614: -15% DS to Opponent
1617: +48 AS/-12 DS
1618: +18 DS
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Now at Cap, the like level'd foes you'll be fighting has DS's from 300-500, depending upon. Lets just say for sake of arguement that the DS is 400.

This experiment depends on what armor type you're attacking and what weapon you're attacking with. Lets say both characters are using a perfect morning star. For plate the difference due to that +12 % is HUGE.

(.238-24)/11=9(for sake of arguement)= 516

(.266-27)/11=9=473

A difference of 43 AS, or you can try and hit a rank 1 a difference of 8 AS. These numbers also vary wildly with different armors. But all in all, you're getting about an additional +30 to AS for the average attack.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

So the total AS = +100
Since, critter DS averages 400 at cap. We're looking at -60 DS due to 1614.
Total DS = +50
Altogether that simulates a AS +160 more then the warrior.
and +50 DS for the paladin.

70 DS extra for 3x/3x shield dodge warrior (-) +50 DS = 20 DS more for warrior.
However,

160 AS Translate that into DS by stancing, which will effectively put you in stance defense. SO!

You'll have 140 MORE DS as a paladin while having the same AS. PLUS, heres the kicker, since you're in stance D you'll actually have MORE EBP then the warrior. +10 TD to boot and you throw up 1619 once in a while (if you're swarmed or whatever) and thats another +74 TD... you've pretty much got the warrior beat in everything by a large margin.

Again however, the redux the warrior has will be better. But really, whats the point if you can't get hit in the first place?

[Celephais]

I'm not going to look into your math, but I'm sure it's wrong (not adding something a warrior has), I'll let latreen do that.


160 AS Translate that into DS by stancing, which will effectively put you in stance defense. SO!

You'll have 140 MORE DS as a paladin while having the same AS.

So you're going to admit you know nothing about how stance and AS/DS works? (GS3 that might have been the case, it is not anymore).


Again however, the redux the warrior has will be better. But really, whats the point if you can't get hit in the first place?

And now you're going to admit you know nothing about either warriors or paladins end game...

[Cademus]

STANCE OFFENSIVE puts your character in a the most aggressive stance, applying 100% of your of your weapon skill toward AS, with only a bare minimum left for parrying an attack. All bonuses to your DS still apply, such as shield training, armor bonuses, defensive spells, and stats.


STANCE ADVANCE puts 90% of your weapon skill toward AS

STANCE FORWARD puts 80% of your weapons skill toward AS

STANCE NEUTRAL puts 70% of your weapon skill toward AS

STANCE GUARDED puts 60% of your weapon skill toward AS

STANCE DEFENSE puts 50% of your weapon skill toward AS

This also effects signs supposedly.

Thus, weapon rank is 200 or so couple that with CoL signs thats 35. Halve that, and you get 117 or so that can be used to go into DS. So the extra +23 can remain in AS, a small change. The paladin still wins in defense.


No actually you're right, I didn't add Coup De Grace bonus for warrior. This bonus I have heard goes from 10-40ish depending upon success of the endroll coup. So say it's 30 AS that the warrior can consistently keep up. Your still looking at a 110 deficit for the warrior. I also remind you Coup isn't a spell you can just prep/cast. You need to get a mob into prone position/stunned and hope you have enough time to get coup off. Further you have to repeat this every minute and a half.

[Cademus]

I would further like to add that the +74 to TD if you train up your spells to the 60 second marker is possible to keep up indefinetly along with the aura of arkati, if you use a +10 mana enhancive in the process. Thats going to be +84 more TD then the warrior.

[Celephais]

STANCE DEFENSE puts 50% of your weapon skill toward AS

Try actually playing the game. This does not mean that if your AS drops 50 points your DS goes up 50 points.

[Cademus]

Hrm, so your saying even at level 100 and doubled in shield dodge weapon and CM, I can't raise my DS by 100 going from stance O -> stance D. Thats hard to believe since I just did that with my capped pole armer.

[Celephais]

Hrm, so your saying even at level 100 and doubled in shield dodge weapon and CM, I can't raise my DS by 100 going from stance O -> stance D. Thats hard to believe since I just did that with my capped pole armer.

I'm not saying that at all, I'm saying you seem to be pulling numbers out of the air that have no corelation. If you go from Stance O to Stance D and your DS went up 100 points, your AS went down way more than 100 points.

Parry DS is rank based, AS is skill based. Changing your stance does not 1 for 1 move AS and DS. Infact if you had zero ranks of weapon use, but had 200 ranks of dodge, your DS would still go up in more defensive stances.

If you want to compare a paladin in advanced stance against a warrior in offensive stance, actually do the math out, don't just say "it's better!" And don't forget that extra defense you get out of a non-offensive stance is much easier to take away than a lot of other DS (between things like call wind, feint, footstomp, curse, that empath spell)

[Cademus]

I'll glady work out the math for each stances, but someone needs to give me an accurate formula or do some experimenting with a super post cap paladin/warrior.

[Celephais]

I'll glady work out the math for each stances, but someone needs to give me an accurate formula or do some experimenting with a super post cap paladin/warrior.

The forumlas for DS on play.net are pretty accurate under combat factors (you will add up three different formulas, and they each have stance factors)

If you're going to say that redux doesn't matter, "because you don't get hit" then you have to consider that EVP percents don't matter, and then you have to allow for the "super post cap warrior" to have 425 and 430... Just saying.

[Cademus]

I took a quick glance at the formula and I'll do a full calculation later when I come back home. But something to chew on.

Parry Defense Strength (DS)bonus:
(Weapon Ranks + (STR bonus/4) + (DEX Bonus/4)) = Base Value

Base Value * Stance Modifier * 2H weapon modifier + Stance/2 = DS bonus

Stance Modifier = 20%+(Stance/2)

Say Giantman around 215 base value right?

Stance D = 215 * .70 +50 = DS bonus = 200.

Stance O = 215 * .20 + 0 = DS bonus. = 43

Looking at 157 DS difference with parry alone, according to these equations.

[Celephais]

I took a quick glance at the formula and I'll do a full calculation later when I come back home. But something to chew on.

Parry Defense Strength (DS)bonus:
(Weapon Ranks + (STR bonus/4) + (DEX Bonus/4)) = Base Value

Base Value * Stance Modifier * 2H weapon modifier + Stance/2 = DS bonus

Stance Modifier = 20%+(Stance/2)

Say Giantman around 215 base value right?

Stance D = 215 * .70 +50 = DS bonus = 200.

Stance O = 215 * .20 + 0 = DS bonus. = 43

Looking at 157 DS difference with parry alone, according to these equations.

Weapon enchant also comes into play... And I'm not saying you can't get 200 DS from going stance defensive, I'm just saying you're going to lose a hell of a lot of AS... If you're saying a paladin has 100 more AS, they're only going to be able to go into stance neutral or advanced to keep that edge...

[Cademus]

I know what you're saying however we both need more accurate formulas. Official formulas claim it's "50% of weapon skill" which I understand it as 200 ranks divided by 2. Some people in another thread confirm this, including Latrin. You say it's different...what we need is some fella to post his skills and go from stance O to stance D and see the change in AS. I would do it right now if I weren't going to work, which I should do right now...

[Celephais]

I know what you're saying however we both need more accurate formulas. Official formulas claim it's "50% of weapon skill" which I understand it as 200 ranks divided by 2. Some people in another thread confirm this, including Latrin. You say it's different...what we need is some fella to post his skills and go from stance O to stance D and see the change in AS. I would do it right now if I weren't going to work, which I should do right now...

Oh, I guess I miscommunicated it, I thought you were infering that since 50% of your weapon skill went to your AS that the other 50% that wasn't going towards AS was going towards DS.

So in stance defensive you can expect to see only half of your weapon skill, and I'm pretty sure it halves a lot of the other bonuses (like signs or spells and stats and such). I don't know the formula for offensive AS across stances (and I'm at work or I'd just log in any character to find out :( )

[GS-Phoenix]

Is there really a definitive answer to this? With so many variables like stats, training plans, spell ups, DBs, enchancts and so on it just seems like a futile effort to argue it.

[Latrinsorm]

Not that it helps this arguement in any way, shape, or form...If you want to work with Stun to give another semi version, all you gotta do is ask. Being in EN helps, too.Unfortunately, the last time I tried to do extended redux testing there was some GM unpleasantness involved. The only permissible way of doing it now is with herbs, and I can't honestly ask anyone to go through that (just ask Chiv how long it took doing it the fast way).

That said, now that I have a general hypothesis I can use isolated data points. I'll be sending my guy to EN in a little while, I'll shoot you a PM then.

Cademus, the first flaw in your analysis is you use 1614 for the paladin but don't take into consideration the fact that warriors use maneuvers (which have similar debilitating effects). Second, in order to ward anything the paladin is going to need significantly more than 35 ranks of paladin, which must be taken into account in the redux section. Third, your DF analysis looks at unattainable endrolls. What paladin has a sustainable AS knocking on 900? Fourth, if you use Zealot you have to stay in stance offensive, rendering your "stance down to defensive" plan impossible. Fifth, even if it could work, AS signs (and 117, for instance) aren't translated into DS; they just have decreased AS bonuses (like CM ranks). Weapon stuff is the only thing that switches.

Finally, exactly how much mana do you think paladins have to keep all this stuff running?

The only sensible way to talk about stancing down as a paladin is to look at what the AS difference actually is at cap (including DF effects) as well as taking into account maneuvering losses.
Is there really a definitive answer to this?Yes. DBs and enchants are assumed equal; there's no reason a paladin has better access to merchants than a warrior. Stats are dismissed; they don't really do that much anyway. Spell ups from external sources are dismissed; only nancies hunt like that. Training plan is the key variable, and at this point we're generally discussing the massive post-cap plan for each.

[MaxConners]

Wait, who said you can't change stances when using zealot?

[FinisWolf]

Lat, if you use the challenge verb, then you can use an empath. This was explained to me by the PTB when I needed to get rid of some temp padding.

Finis

[Cademus]

Didn't know you couldn't change stances. Lat, if you still go the Bless lore route, you lose 39 AS but gain 20 DS. Although, this is a loss in DS you still have 90 AS more then a warrior to play around with 160-30(warrior coup)-47 +7 (from extra CM gain). You can still go to guarded stance and attack and have the same AS as a warrior. But let us not forget the massive +26% in shield block increase.

[Latrinsorm]

Lat, if you use the challenge verb, then you can use an empath. This was explained to me by the PTB when I needed to get rid of some temp padding.This isn't always true, depending on which PTB is watching the situation. We were in fact using the challenge verb religiously, but as the challenge verb isn't perfect this wasn't good enough.
Wait, who said you can't change stances when using zealot?Yeah, I was thinking of the cleric spell Zealot, which doesn't exist in PC form anymore. The drawback to pally Zealot is 1609 can't be used. I might as well do the rest of the analysis myself now:

Warrior gets +76 DS from dodge/shield. Using Cademus' lore plan, the paladin gets 62 of that back before Zealot (14 short). Then they get 16 AS from 1611 (using 35 spell ranks), 10 from 1606, and the DF bonus.

At this point we can choose to use Zealot or Divine Shield; given that the paladin is already behind 25% on EBP, it only makes sense to grab the 14% from 1609 and hope stancing down closes the gap a little.

Benchmarking warrior AS at 520 at cap and using your cited value of 400 DS, that offers a success margin of 140 or so. The paladin gets another 26 as above, so for any DF the paladin has an advantage of 166 * DF * 1.12 - 140 * DF = 46 * DF. Even with big weapons that's only 14 or so effective AS, leaving the paladin with a total AS advantage of 40. The important thing to note about stancing down is that there's a compounding effect: each drop in AS results in a drop in the effective AS granted by 1605. Let's say the paladin sperfs to 95% and see what happens:
1) Pure AS drops to 519. This makes the DF advantage 9 * DF. Obviously, that's going to [just] make up the difference.
2) The shield DS modifier grows to 52.5%. That results in another 3 or so shield DS (using a medium to keep calculations simple) from ranks and not a heck of a lot more from stats/enchant.
3) The dodge DS modifer grows to 76.3%. Before armor this is only going to get you 3 or so rank DS.
4) I don't know how much EBP % the 5% stance change grants. I'm pretty confident it's not 12% though.

The paladin is behind on redux, EBP, and pretty much equal on AS and DS. The only thing left is TD, but if you're going to claim that 1619 can be run constantly then I don't think we're talking about the actual game anymore.

[Celephais]

... aaaaaand pwned.

Thank you for the math backing Latrin.

[Drew]

The paladin is behind on redux, EBP, and pretty much equal on AS and DS. The only thing left is TD, but if you're going to claim that 1619 can be run constantly then I don't think we're talking about the actual game anymore.


Oh it's running all the time, just like our post-cap warrior is running wall of force all the time too... :yes:

[Drew]

http://windom.mpls.k12.mn.us/sites/5aae6276-8f01-40d6-8971-d6a5b366b9bd/uploads/math_sum_fun_2.jpg

[Celephais]

leaving the paladin with a total AS advantage of 40.

I think you forgot the +50 AS a warrior can get for 425 massively post cap... :club:

[Drew]

I think you forgot the +50 AS a warrior can get for 425 massively post cap... :club:


I had a friend with a warrior who had spirit strike and 302 ranks of armour training so he could cast it with minimum interference in full plate. Pretty crazy what you can do with a warrior with a lot of post cap exp.

[GS-Phoenix]

Who has overall better defense with DS and redux factored in, a Paladin or Warrior? Lets say its a THW user.

The OP did not specify levels.

If you took two humans with the same stats, weapons and armor, and trained specifically for DS, you could do a level by level comparison.

Post cap is muddy.

And lets be realistic... who the fuck is going to train that way?

[Latrinsorm]

I'd personally only get 103 and 401 spell-wise, but I've got to admit the spellwarrior route really does pique my interest. 120 and 474 would just catch the tail edge of the 7th redux penalty too (it's still 43% though, ouch, .7 goes to .4). 67 eTD and 45 sTD would really put a dent in the ol' CS pwnage though, plus you could bust out the 119/417 trick and make sorcies jealous.

[Latrinsorm]

The OP did not specify levels.That's why I said "at this point we're generally discussing the massive post-cap plan for each". :D
who the fuck is going to train that way?It's not even that much post-cap exp, really, so the question is why hasn't anyone done it yet?

[GS-Phoenix]

It's not even that much post-cap exp, really, so the question is why hasn't anyone done it yet?

Because its not realistic? Playable?

[Drew]

I'd personally only get 103 and 401 spell-wise, but I've got to admit the spellwarrior route really does pique my interest. 120 and 474 would just catch the tail edge of the 7th redux penalty too (it's still 43% though, ouch, .7 goes to .4). 67 eTD and 45 sTD would really put a dent in the ol' CS pwnage though, plus you could bust out the 119/417 trick and make
sorcies jealous.



This was that warrior's training plan as of about two years ago


Armor Use..........................| 403 303
Combat Maneuvers...................| 302 202
Two-Handed Weapons.................| 302 202
Brawling...........................| 302 202
Multi Opponent Combat..............| 170 70
Physical Fitness...................| 324 224
Dodging............................| 201 101
Harness Power......................| 160 60
Elemental Mana Control.............| 25 5
Survival...........................| 50 10
Perception.........................| 120 30
Climbing...........................| 120 30
Swimming...........................| 120 30
First Aid..........................| 124 32

Spell Lists
Minor Spirit.......................| 17


I'm not saying this was a good training plan, the dodge is crazy low but I just loved the spirit strike. He had 8.5 or 9 mil exp at the time.

[Cademus]

Latrin,

I know you're the mechanics guru so I'm not going to bother arguing just tell me how this line of thought is incorrect?

Religion-171, Blessing -20, Summoning-11

1601: +10 DS/ +10 TD
1605: +12% to weapon DF
1606: +10 AS
1610: +34 DS
1611: 24 CM ranks or +12 AS/+12 DS
1614: -15% DS to Opponent
1617: +48 AS/-12 DS
1618: +18 DS

Total: 70 AS / 62 DS

1614: 400 average critter DS (at cap), thats -60 to all their DS's.

Total: Virtual AS: 130 AS/62 DS

DF: I use a perfect Javelin with my warrior, but if I converted to paladin and tapped on 1605, then my threshold to eye kill stuff would be significantly lower.

My warrior: (.265x-27)/7=7=286 for a guaranteed eye crit kill.

If I convert: (.296x-30)/7=7= 266 for a guaranteed eye crit kill.

and sometimes I hunt things in leather too so just to be more accurate.

(.344 - 35)/5=7 =203

(.385 - 39)/5=7 =192

We'll take the averages of both so about 15.

So, total virtual AS 145/62 DS.

Now my warrior will attempt to keep up Coup for as long as possible, although, it's never guaranteed and I need to get critters into a certain position for this to happen. But lets say he does. On average I get +30 to my AS for minute and a half. Sometimes more, sometimes a lot less but 30 is about right. So the final accounting comes out as.

Paladin: 145 AS/ 62 DS

Warrior: 30 AS/ 76 DS

Final gains
made by
Paladin: 115 AS/-14 DS

Up to this point I'm fairly sure this is all correct.

The only problem is stancing, because from what I've heard from other paladins is actually AS spells scale down accordingly with weapon skills (so the Simu site is incorrect).

If stancing takes into account only weapons skill then easily I can get into stance neutral or guarded in which case I think as a paladin my EBP total will be greater then my stance O shield mastered warrior. Plus obviously my DS will be significantly higher.

If stancing scales down ALL my AS boosting spells then the story will change dramatically. Since I can only go down to advance at best, and my DS will be higher by 20 points my EBP probably lower, although not by much, then my warrior. But then I lose tons of redux, so being a paladin is really not going to benefit me.

Only way to find out, is for some paladin to cast zealot when he's in stance D and see if he gets the full AS bonus when attacking from that position. Any paladins out there?

[Latrinsorm]

1611: 24 CM ranks or +12 AS/+12 DSCM only applies to AS, not DS. The bonus stances down, but it is not transferred to DS.
1614: -15% DS to OpponentLike I said before, it doesn't make sense to include this but not CMANs. Warriors can prone, force stance, even cut directly through stance. Also, your analysis only posits 30ish paladin ranks (judging by the 1610 bonus). I don't have paladin TDs handy, but it seems pretty unlikely for a .3x character to be able to ward for beans.
1617: +48 AS/-12 DSI think we agree that not being hit at all is better than being hit but made of granite, so I chose to go for 1609 instead of 1617. The paladin is going to be behind 10% EBP from the extra 1/1 and 15% from Block Mastery, which really makes it imperative to make up whatever ground he or she can. With your lore plan 1609 is only worth 12%, but that cuts the gap nearly in half so it's hard to pass up on. The total DS is still 62 because the -12 and +12 each no longer exist.

The main difference is 1614 and 1617. We can do the analysis with enough ranks in paladin to make warding fairly reliable, but that's really going to butcher redux. I should also probably go through the aforementioned spellwarrior routes and see where they end up at some point.
Because its not realistic? Playable?I'm not really sure what you mean here. Nobody's suggesting that these training plans take place from 0-cap.