PDA

View Full Version : Sereg's Abyran'ra Research



Fallen
02-12-2008, 09:24 PM
X-posted from the Officials. Good stuff.
----
http://www.play.net/images/transparent.gifhttp://www.play.net/images/transparent.gifI have previously noticed that there was speculation amongst demonologists concerning the specific number of required demonology ranks needed to successfully use the lorae?tyr-abyran?sa rune without the risk of failure. I have seen unofficial estimates of both 150 and of somewhere between 150 and 175 as the required number of ranks. Recently, I was able to do a bit of testing and it seems 150 ranks will allow one to do successfully use the lorae?tyr-abyran?sa rune without fail.

First, a bit of rune background for any who might not be aware. The documentation for 725 indicates that a Sorcerer shall have no chance of failure with a valence specific Tier 1 rune at 50 ranks (lorae?tyr). At 100 ranks, she shall have no chance of failure for an archetype specific Tier II rune (lorae?tyr-verlok). What is not mentioned in the documentation are the demon subtype specific Tier III runes (lorae?tyr-verlok?cina) which require an undisclosed amount of training beyond 100 ranks, and speculation has always been that the lorae'tyr-abyran?sa is the most difficult of all of the uncommon runes to use.

As for the test, my recorded test sample consisted of 110 casts at the lorae?tyr-abyran?sa rune with 150 demonology ranks resulting in zero failed attempts. All casts were done outside of a summoning chamber, and without any applicable death?s sting. I do recognize that there may be a failure rate and I simply had a lucky sample, however, my results seem to indicate a tiny failure rate, if any at all. And note, there is a chance that the threshold is lower than 150. I did not do recorded testing, but I think the last failed cast I had was around 143 ranks or so.

So, this test seems to confirm know the upper limit for uncommon runes and demonology training. As applied, this means that 125 ranks will allow a Sorcerer using a summoning chamber to successfully use any known rune without a chance for failure. It will still be up to the individual to apply the cost/benefit analysis to see how far she should train.

Also, during testing I noticed that with the lorae?tyr-abyran?sa rune, using an alchemist sourced runestone would provide 14 uses per stone while an aish?vrak treated smooth stone would give 13 uses per stone.

And finally, I would like to thank Desorceri and Querthose for their assistance in drawing the required runes for the test. This test would have been impossible without their help.

Sereg?s puppeteer

StJimmy
02-12-2008, 11:03 PM
Nice to know. I get fucked over about 30% of the time on average trying to summon an Abyran'Sa with 108 ranks in demonology.

Decided to see if I do better in the Summoning Chamber and still got fucked over.

You gesture at a pale white jade runestone.
You trace an arcane sigil over your runestone, in an attempt to summon a demon from Lorae'tyr but something goes wrong resulting in the explosion of forces beyond your control over your runestone.
... 23 points of damage!
Strike to lower back stuns you.
You are knocked to the ground!
You are stunned for 6 rounds!
Cast Roundtime 3 Seconds.

Venom
02-15-2008, 12:41 PM
So.. excuse the ignorance, but why was this post pulled from the officials?

Nauriel
02-15-2008, 05:08 PM
So.. excuse the ignorance, but why was this post pulled from the officials?

Because Evarin is a forum whore, I mean...crap! um..because he is trying to be helpful? :heart:

Aaysia
02-15-2008, 08:01 PM
Plus there are some people that frequent PC that don't bother to read the officials at all. This is a nice way to keep those people 'in the know' about some of the latest discoveries/changes.

Fallen
02-15-2008, 09:32 PM
So.. excuse the ignorance, but why was this post pulled from the officials?

The post was not removed from the officials, if that is what you were asking. I simply posted it for the reasons others have listed. Many do not keep up with the official boards, especially non-GM posts.

Venom
02-15-2008, 10:55 PM
Ahh ok. I thought the "X-Post" meant "Ex post" as in no longer exists there.

Now that you say that.. "Cross" Post makes a little more sense. Thanks for the clarification.:thanx: