Paladin Spell and Lore Review

[Fallen]

My take on the Paladin Circle. Have at it.
----

Pious Trial (1602) – When this spell in infused into the Paladin’s sanctified weapon, it will persist for multiple activations. The amount of activations will be determined by Spiritual lore: Blessings based on (seed chart).

Faith’s Clarity (1603) – From the spell description it seems sorcerer and empath spells are left off the list of reduced hindrance. As the Sorcerer/Empath circles are just as spiritual in nature as the ranger circle, I believe it should be included in the spell’s abilities. A possible lore tie in would be an added bonus to a Paladin’s attempt to activate scrolls and Magical items with sufficient training in Blessing’s lore.

Purify (1604) – “Furthermore, it can be cast upon weapons that are normally unblessable to make them blessed for one swing or one minute, whichever is expended first.” Is this true? Does this actually apply to weighted and flaring weapons? If not, the ability to make ANY weapon blessed for one swing should be added to the spell.

Guiding Light (1608) – This spell should grant Sanctified armor and armor accessories reactive (defensive) flares. The number of flares would be the same as those provided in the offensive form of the spell.

Higher Vision (1610) – This spell should provide slight maneuver defense to the Paladin by means of a high seed Spiritual Lore: Religion training regimen. If you have a divinely inspire glimpse of the future, you should be better prepared against all forms of physical attacks.

Champion’s Might (1612) – Training in Religion lore would provide the caster a percent chance of a CS boost flare. Based on an obviously high Seed chart, the flare would be the same as the bonus received by the Paladin by the spell’s primary effects.

Divine Vengeance (1613) – Needs serious revision.

Divine Strike (1615) – This spell’s damage should increase with spell training. Not just a higher damage due to a higher end roll, but the overall damage this spell does should continue to rise as the Paladin gains more spells.

Guard of the Meek (1618) – This spell is about guarding the meek. So, when guarding the meek it should work better. DS bonuses should be provided for each person grouped with the Paladin when this spell is in effect. Somewhere around an additional +2 DS per person grouped, capped at 8 people.

Faith’s Shield (1619) – Training in Spiritual Lore: Blessings should give this spell an additional +1 second per (seed rank 1 or 2). The spell’s duration should be capped at 120 seconds.

Aid of the Fallen – (1620) – At 20 ranks of Spiritual Lore: Blessings a Paladin may anchor this spell at any non-specific Deity location which is considered holy ground (Resurrection point). At 50 ranks of Spiritual lore: Blessings a Paladin may anchor this spell to any permanent sanctuary (must be in a locatable area that allows for fogging in/out) in the name of their chosen Deity. An additional mana cost of +10 to send a corpse to a non-specific deity location point, and +20 for a blessed area of the Paladin’s choosing is added to the spell. Further, should a Corpse decay after the use of this spell the Paladin will receive the displeasure of their Patron in the form of a strong spiritual backlash (Damage, loss of spirit, and a spirit recovery penalty), and loss of this spell for 24 hours. (It should also send a screamer to GMs)

[Danical]

Guard of the Meek (1618) – This spell is about guarding the meek. So, when guarding the meek it should work better. DS bonuses should be provided for each person grouped with the Paladin when this spell is in effect. Somewhere between +2-+5 per person, capped at 8 people.


I'm not sure I understand. It already provides 15 (up to 20) DS to the group. You're saying you want an additional 2-5 DS per person to every person in the group? Like a side-by-side sort of thing?

[Fallen]

I'm not sure I understand. It already provides 15 (up to 20) DS to the group. You're saying you want an additional 2-5 DS per person to every person in the group? Like a side-by-side sort of thing?

Yes. The spell is already a part of A Paladin's DS. Anyone else that is getting it is already receiving an additional +20 DS outside of the norm. That is the whole point of grouping up. To make the game easier. I think for a level 18 spell in a closed, profession circle it could stand to use a bit more of a kick. How often do people group up with more than one or two people? An additional +4 isn't that big of a deal. Granted +5 per person might be a bit much. +2? I don't think so.

[Fallen]

How about this, instead of the effect doubling each time, it starts at +3 for one person, then +5 total bonus for 2, then it just grows by increments of +1 for a total of +11 for 8 people.

[Danical]

How about this, instead of the effect doubling each time, it starts at +3 for one person, then +5 total bonus for 2, then it just grows by increments of +1 for a total of +11 for 8 people.

Here's what I would do. I suggested a spell for 1050 that uses a similar mechanic.

You could use Summation Seed 1.

1 other person grouped = +5 more group DS.
3 other persons grouped = +10 more group DS.
6 other persons grouped = +15 more group DS.
10 other persons grouped = +20 more group DS.
15 other persons grouped = +25 more group DS.
etc.

Blessing Lore: Seed 5 increases your effective group size by 1 per seed rank obtained. E.g., 45 blessing lore means you have an effective group size of 7 (yourself and 6 others).

Personally, I would much Much MUCH rather see a Lore increase the ability of the paladin to step in an take the attack (spell, physical, maneuver, etc) instead of the originally targeted member of the group. It makes a lot more sense if you're actually taking fire for your group members if you stand in the way of the attack instead of some stupid nebulous physical DS boost.

[Fallen]

>>Personally, I would much Much MUCH rather see a Lore increase the ability of the paladin to step in an take the attack (spell, physical, maneuver, etc) instead of the originally targeted member of the group. It makes a lot more sense if you're actually taking fire for your group members if you stand in the way of the attack instead of some stupid nebulous physical DS boost. >>

Warriors would QQ until there wasn't any more Q to Q.

[Danical]

>>Personally, I would much Much MUCH rather see a Lore increase the ability of the paladin to step in an take the attack (spell, physical, maneuver, etc) instead of the originally targeted member of the group. It makes a lot more sense if you're actually taking fire for your group members if you stand in the way of the attack instead of some stupid nebulous physical DS boost. >>

Warriors would QQ until there wasn't any more Q to Q.

I think warriors should get the same mechanic and be able to do it better than paladins. If warriors really are front-line combatants, they should be taking the blows for their comparatively less sturdy counterparts. At least it would somewhat simulate a real combat environment.

[Fallen]

I think warriors should get the same mechanic and be able to do it better than paladins. If warriors really are front-line combatants, they should be taking the blows for their comparatively less sturdy counterparts. At least it would somewhat simulate a real combat environment.

Agreed, but who the heck is left coding for warriors? Ildran?

[pabstblueribbon]

I've been playing a paladin as my main for the last year or so. More often than not I solo and I dont MA. Here's my take:


Pious Trial (1602) – When this spell in infused into the Paladin’s sanctified weapon, it will persist for multiple activations. The amount of activations will be determined by Spiritual lore: Blessings based on (seed chart).

Great idea. I would further suggest that when the spell does activate that it doesnt cost mana for ALL infusions. I mean, whats the point of that? It costs mana to infuse it, why make it cost it again when it is enabled? Never understood that.


Guiding Light (1608) – This spell should grant Sanctified armor and armor accessories reactive (defensive) flares. The number of flares would be the same as those provided in the offensive form of the spell.

I also wish this was so. In addendum i've noticed that plasma flares are WEAK, at least the guiding light ones. I would like to see some lore training ability to upgrade the flare itself. Almost more than I would rather see it armor reactive.



Divine Strike (1615) – This spell’s damage should increase with spell training. Not just a higher damage due to a higher end roll, but the overall damage this spell does should continue to rise as the Paladin gains more spells.

Absofuckinglutely. In addendum I would like to point out that there is a serious bug with 1615/1630. I play a dwarf, and when I get giants to kneel, I still can't reach the head. Perhaps that parts intentional, but here's the problem: When they are kneeling, and I do leg them and they DO fall or they simply fall to the ground due to 1615 knockdown, I STILL cannot reach the head for an ambush. I've bug reported it...

Everything else I pretty much agree with. I think the Divine shield/Arm of Akarti spell upkeep is pretty much rediculous compared to the benefits. They should be stackable like every other professions spells or at least increase their duration quite a bit. 1619 - 30 seconds, plus 1 second per spell rank - Really? Why such a low duration, other than minor spirit we dont have alot of TD buffs and.. fighting the undead.. i've noticed my TD is WEAKsauce. I'd be all for lowering it a bit and making it stackable. 30 seconds makes it damn near worthless to me.

[Fallen]

>>>I also wish this was so. In addendum i've noticed that plasma flares are WEAK, at least the guiding light ones. I would like to see some lore training ability to upgrade the flare itself. Almost more than I would rather see it armor reactive.>>>

Again, Paladins have *0* means to increase the damage of their spells, or even their procs. I definitely think that is wrong.

[pabstblueribbon]

Well, technically we do. The lore training that allows for double plasma flares.

The problem is the flare is just weak. I dont know how many times i've double flared for 30 points each, and all they get are burns. When I get hit with a flare for 30, I die, get stunned forever, or get knocked down.

I have yet to see a flare crit death and im fighting shit in icemule for christ sakes.

I'd rather see more effects / higher flare / more crits rather than double flares IMO.

[Fallen]

Well, technically we do. The lore training that allows for double plasma flares.

The problem is the flare is just weak. I dont know how many times i've double flared for 30 points each, and all they get are burns. When I get hit with a flare for 30, I die, get stunned forever, or get knocked down.

I have yet to see a flare crit death and im fighting shit in icemule for christ sakes.

I'd rather see more effects / higher flare / more crits rather than double flares IMO.

Yeah, and technically if you train in spell research you will do more damage with your spells. That's not what I mean.

[pabstblueribbon]

Yeah, and technically if you train in spell research you will do more damage with your spells. That's not what I mean.

Touche.

[Danical]

I'm fairly certain 1608 flares are exactly like all the other weapon flares out there with respect to their crit rank distribution.

As far as I know, the plasma table is a fairly standard and comparable crit table as well.

[Fallen]

I'm fairly certain 1608 flares are exactly like all the other weapon flares out there with respect to their crit rank distribution.

As far as I know, the plasma table is a fairly standard and comparable crit table as well.

Every other flare..except for bard flares. Don't they grow in power?

[Danical]

Every other flare..except for bard flares. Don't they grow in power?

No. It's a completely random distribution of crit ranks. So far as I know. I could test this out but that would take time I don't have.

[pabstblueribbon]

As far as I know, the plasma table is a fairly standard and comparable crit table as well.

I honestly do not believe this is true. If it is meant to be, then my 33 levels as a paladin do not confirm it.

I've seen flares from other things that hit for 15 points of damage that totally fuck me/critters up.

[Danical]

I honestly do not believe this is true. If it is meant to be, then my 33 levels as a paladin do not confirm it.

I've seen flares from other things that hit for 15 points of damage that totally fuck me/critters up.

Stop focusing on damage and start focusing on location and Wound Rank. Saying it "hit me for X damage" doesn't really help.

Until you actually provide any evidence to the contrary, it's safe to assume the null hypothesis that plasma flares are the same as every other standard flares from weapons out there.

[pabstblueribbon]

Fine. I'm logging the flares now and you SHALL SEE!

Or possibly something to the contrary.

Using flarecalc in the lich repository and creating a log of flares I see.

[TheLastShamurai]

I mean, whats the point of that? It costs mana to infuse it, why make it cost it again when it is enabled? Never understood that.

It does not cost mana to infuse a spell into your weapon, it only costs mana when it activates.

[thefarmer]

Just glanced at it when I got home to check my email. I'll look over it closer in a little bit.

Glancing thoughts..

I use CoS a good bit, and it appears to work with Clarity. I have a macro for purify, and sometimes it's left up when I try CoS when I think a room is sanct and it's not.

Divine strike/Judgement should cause HARD rt. Even when you have maxed lore and cause the target to kneel, they can pop right back up.

I've tried purify/voln bless combo on a weighted weapon and no go. I have no idea what that portion means, and have never seen/heard it in use.

[TheLastShamurai]

Divine strike/Judgement should cause HARD rt. Even when you have maxed lore and cause the target to kneel, they can pop right back up.

They do cause hard RT, but only when a target is forced to kneel. If you get a good crit from either spell and the target falls instead of kneels, then there is no RT.

If you've come across a creature that doesn't incur RT when forced to kneel then the creature itself might be buggy/immune for some reason.

[pabstblueribbon]

It does not cost mana to infuse a spell into your weapon, it only costs mana when it activates.

Huh. I always thought it did. I'll be honest I havent really used infuse too much because its a one shot deal and I might as well cast it anyways.

Either way, I think its lame as it stands.

[Danical]

Fine. I'm logging the flares now and you SHALL SEE!

Or possibly something to the contrary.

Using flarecalc in the lich repository and creating a log of flares I see.

I'm really interested to see what you think calc flares is going to do for you in so far as gathering a crit rank distribution.

[TheLastShamurai]

Huh. I always thought it did. I'll be honest I havent really used infuse too much because its a one shot deal and I might as well cast it anyways.

Either way, I think its lame as it stands.

It definitely doesn't do what it is suppost to do very well, which is give Paladins a reliable avenue of casting MsS spells during combat (atleast thats what a GM said its intended purpose is, it's not my opinion on it).

For one, you cannot infuse mass spells in it, so that withers away at the MnS spells you can put in it anyways. Then after a little lore training you lose Web because it becomes Bolt based. So basically you're left with Unbalance, Spirit Dispel and maybe Call Lightning. And with our crappy MnS CS it doesn't really do us any good to use Unbalance.

Really what they need to do is, with Lore training, increase the mana capacity of our weapons, allow for mass spells and have the mana come out at the time of infusing, not when it activates; with the max being like 2 casts of 1630 in your weapon.

[pabstblueribbon]

I'm really interested to see what you think calc flares is going to do for you in so far as gathering a crit rank distribution.

Wow. You really are a shit stick.

I said I'd be using it in conjunction with logging them. I know what calc flares does. It calculates the percentage of it happening and the damage. I just thought it would be interesting information to have in conjunction with logging it.

I know it takes a large sampling for calcflares to be accurate, but I figured its better than nothing.


Really what they need to do is, with Lore training, increase the mana capacity of our weapons, allow for mass spells and have the mana come out at the time of infusing, not when it activates; with the max being like 2 casts of 1630 in your weapon.

I agree completely.

[Danical]

It definitely doesn't do what it is suppost to do very well, which is give Paladins a reliable avenue of casting MsS spells during combat (atleast thats what a GM said its intended purpose is, it's not my opinion on it).

For one, you cannot infuse mass spells in it, so that withers away at the MnS spells you can put in it anyways. Then after a little lore training you lose Web because it becomes Bolt based. So basically you're left with Unbalance, Spirit Dispel and maybe Call Lightning. And with our crappy MnS CS it doesn't really do us any good to use Unbalance.

Really what they need to do is, with Lore training, increase the mana capacity of our weapons, allow for mass spells and have the mana come out at the time of infusing, not when it activates; with the max being like 2 casts of 1630 in your weapon.

If I played a paladin, I'd want the following:

1) Web able to be infused even with lore training
2) TD Pushdown for spells cast via weapon infusion.
3) . . .
4) PROFIT!

[Danical]

Wow. You really are a shit stick. I said I'd be using it in conjunction with logging them. I know what calc flares does. It calculates the percentage of it happening and the damage. I just thought it would be interesting information to have in conjunction with logging it.

The only argument we've had is whether or not the crit rank distribution is like every other standard flare out there. Calcflares.lic won't help you getting this; it's extraneous. That's what I'm getting at.

If you had your logs, I could just simply grep them and find out. Zip something like 20MBs of logs and send them my way.

[TheLastShamurai]

If I played a paladin, I'd want the following:

1) Web able to be infused even with lore training
2) TD Pushdown for spells cast via weapon infusion.
3) . . .
4) PROFIT!

You can still infuse Web, it just pops off as a bolt spell.

But weighted MnS spells via your weapon would be sweetness.

[Danical]

You can still infuse Web, it just pops off as a bolt spell.

But weighted MnS spells via your weapon would be sweetness.

I figured it would come off as a bolt spell. :(

How about the bolt AS is the same as your weapon! OVERPOWERED!!!!!!!!!!

[TheLastShamurai]

I figured it would come off as a bolt spell. :(

How about the bolt AS is the same as your weapon! OVERPOWERED!!!!!!!!!!

How do you calculate Bolt AS anywho?

[Danical]

spell aim + dex + spell modifiers.

[TheLastShamurai]

Divine Strike (1615) – This spell’s damage should increase with spell training. Not just a higher damage due to a higher end roll, but the overall damage this spell does should continue to rise as the Paladin gains more spells.

I would like to see more damage cycles for 1615/1630. That would be te shiznit.