New CMAN (Cunning Defense) - Updated CMAN (Combat Movement/Focus)

[Lucos]

A new CMAN, Cunning Defense, has been released. Training in Cunning Defense will raise your defense against all CMANs from the Combat Maneuver List (CML). Mastery in Cunning Defense is equivalent to having one additional rank (for defensive purposes) in all offensive CMANs.

Skill Name: Cunning Defense
Mnemonic: cdefense
Hostile: No
Stamina Cost: None.
Other Requirements: None
Available to: Warriors, Rogues, Wizards, Clerics, Empaths, Sorcerers, Rangers, Bards, Savants, Monks, Paladins.
Prerequisites:
None
CMP Cost:
Rank 1: (Squares) 2 (Semis) 3 (Pures) 4
Rank 2: (Squares) 3 (Semis) 4 (Pures) 6
Rank 3: (Squares) 4 (Semis) 6 (Pures) 8
Rank 4: (Squares) 5 (Semis) 7 (Pures) 10
Rank 5: (Squares) 6 (Semis) 9 (Pures) 12
Description: +3 per rank to CML defense.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team




The CMANs Combat Movement and Combat Focus are now passive abilities, meaning they are always on. They no longer need to be activated to grant their bonuses to DS and TD.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

[mgoddess]

Excellent addition and excellent change.

[nub]

That's awesome, people requested, and it happened. Nothing wrong with that!

[Latrinsorm]

It's almost suspicious that they're doing all these things that people have wanted for so long.

[Silvanostar]

oh i dunno maybe it has something to do with someone leaving

[Ugotfaced]

So.. Is this like. A step in the right direction? What? Did I say that? No can't be. Good add I think. Will test it out.

[Makkah]

The change to Movement and Focus is top top top.


Props.


Cunning Defense is cool, but that's a terrible effing name.

[Fallen]

It's almost suspicious that they're doing all these things that people have wanted for so long.

Nah. Oscuro only recently took over Rogues/CMANs, and I think he just now got around to playing with those systems. There was talk of the CMAN Divert maneuver for rogues, which was likely him getting familiar with the mechanics. He then likely had to wait around for approval of all these buttfuckingly fantasticular changes/updates.

[Ormr]

So who left?

[AestheticLife]

Warden.

[Drunken Durfin]

Yeah, I am beginning to come over to the "Warden left and now things happen" camp. Way too much good stuff going on all at once.

[Traelin]

Yeah, I am beginning to come over to the "Warden left and now things happen" camp. Way too much good stuff going on all at once.

^

[Morph]

so does this provide defense against all CMANS or just the ones in your profession's list? For example, if a sorcerer types CMAN List this is what shows up:

cman list
Morphias, the following Combat Maneuvers are available for you to train in:

Combat Movement (cmovement), Rank 1 (CM points needed: 4)
Combat Mastery (cmastery), Rank 1 (CM points needed: 4)
Dirtkick (dirtkick), Rank 1 (CM points needed: 4)
Feint (feint), Rank 5 (CM points needed: 20)
Precision (precision), Rank 1 (CM points needed: 8)
Subdual Strike (sstrike), Rank 1 (CM points needed: 4)
Multi-Fire (mfire), Rank 1 (CM points needed: 4)
Trip (trip), Rank 1 (CM points needed: 4)
Cunning Defense (cdefense), Rank 1 (CM points needed: 4)

So would training Cunning Defense just provide additional defense against these CMANs or against all CMANs?

[Izzy]

so does this provide defense against all CMANS or just the ones in your profession's list? For example, if a sorcerer types CMAN List this is what shows up:

cman list
Morphias, the following Combat Maneuvers are available for you to train in:

Combat Movement (cmovement), Rank 1 (CM points needed: 4)
Combat Mastery (cmastery), Rank 1 (CM points needed: 4)
Dirtkick (dirtkick), Rank 1 (CM points needed: 4)
Feint (feint), Rank 5 (CM points needed: 20)
Precision (precision), Rank 1 (CM points needed: 8)
Subdual Strike (sstrike), Rank 1 (CM points needed: 4)
Multi-Fire (mfire), Rank 1 (CM points needed: 4)
Trip (trip), Rank 1 (CM points needed: 4)
Cunning Defense (cdefense), Rank 1 (CM points needed: 4)

So would training Cunning Defense just provide additional defense against these CMANs or against all CMANs?

Training in Cunning Defense will raise your defense against all CMANs from the Combat Maneuver List (CML).

The whole CML, not your professional list.

[caelric]

But, as was said, not as much as training in an individual CM. I believe training in an individual CM provides +10 defense against that CM(per level), whereas training in Cunning Defense provides +3 defense/level.

So, if you want to be completely secure against disarm, train in Disarm and Cunning Defense

[Celephais]

But, as was said, not as much as training in an individual CM. I believe training in an individual CM provides +10 defense against that CM(per level), whereas training in Cunning Defense provides +3 defense/level.

So, if you want to be completely secure against disarm, train in Disarm and Cunning Defense
They say that 5 ranks = 1 rank in a skill... 15 ≠ 10

The conclusion that training in both Cunning defense and disarm still holds as the best way to defend against disarm.

[ElvenFury]

I don't know what the hold up about Combat Focus was. People have been bitching for that to be passive for ages. It's only +10 TD at mastery. Nothing to sneeze at, surely, but also nothing to begrudge someone who feels like spending all of those CM points. And for only 5 stamina, it was really just an exercise in tedium to keep it active.

On a slightly related note, does someone know where I can find the racial TD modifiers listed? I can never find them when I'm looking for them.

[graysun]

They say that 5 ranks = 1 rank in a skill... 15 ≠ 10.
There are two things going on here - one in bold (below) and one underlined. I read them to be separate things.

It could have been written more clearly, in any case.


A new CMAN, Cunning Defense, has been released. Training in Cunning Defense will raise your defense against all CMANs from the Combat Maneuver List (CML).

Mastery in Cunning Defense is equivalent to having one additional rank (for defensive purposes) in all offensive CMANs.

CMP Cost:
Rank 1: (Squares) 2 (Semis) 3 (Pures) 4
Rank 2: (Squares) 3 (Semis) 4 (Pures) 6
Rank 3: (Squares) 4 (Semis) 6 (Pures) 8
Rank 4: (Squares) 5 (Semis) 7 (Pures) 10
Rank 5: (Squares) 6 (Semis) 9 (Pures) 12

Description: +3 per rank to CML defense.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

[droit]

They say that 5 ranks = 1 rank in a skill... 15 ≠ 10

The conclusion that training in both Cunning defense and disarm still holds as the best way to defend against disarm.

Cele nailed it. They couldn't have said any clearer that 1 rank of a CMAN provides +15 to the defense roll. If you have 5 ranks of disarm, you'll get +75 to your defense. With 5 ranks of CDEF, that bonus will be increased to +90. Training in both is the best way to defend against disarm.

[StrayRogue]

Too...many...CMs...to....train!

Anyway, awesome new changes. Things are looking mighty positive these days...

[Loyrl]

Too...many...CMs...to....train!

Anyway, awesome new changes. Things are looking mighty positive these days...

I agree, now i get to decide what to spend my 22 free cman points in now.

[faloon]

This looks like a great choice for my warmage.

[TheWitch]

I'm about to ask what is probably a very stupid question.....

Cunning defense is always on, right? Is that what "passive" refers to, in re: the other one that was changed? If you train the skill, the bonus is automatically added?

[Kitsun]

Right. Passive means you don't have to actively keep it refreshed/on.

[Drew]

I had 10 extra cman points, got 2 ranks of cdefense and 1 rank of focus. Points well spent I'd say!

[droit]

Basically, it's worth it to take 1 rank off of every defensive maneuver you have until you master CDEF. At 5 ranks, you'll have the exact same defense against all the maneuvers you untrained, plus you'll have better defense against every other maneuver.

[RevenantG]

I've got to go against the grain and say it seems like more caster favoritism to me..rogues have a lot of work ahead for them

Edited: Funny that you can't even express an opinion here without getting negative repped. FUNNY. Kinda sad actually guys. Go ahead and "negative rep" me har har cause I won't kiss your ass all day. I could care less =D

[Fallen]

How does Cunning Defense HINDER rogues?

[Drew]

How does Cunning Defense HINDER rogues?

I guess it hurts them in CvC? Sort of?

[RevenantG]

It would hurt them in CvC and it gives them less of an advantage that they already don't have against other professions..it's been inferred that combat maneuevers were ushered in to balance out pures, but the mostly broken system hasn't provided any sort of balance. Mechanic wise, you get screwed more in heavy armor with numerous skills as a semi or square than you would as a pure in light armor with little to no training. The recent changes just lend even more mechnical advantages to pures and take away balance that was supposedly intended

[Fallen]

It gives you at rank five 1 rank for defense against a skill. If you cant land a cman against a like level pure with or without the skill, you're doing it wrong. Beyond that, nothing was taken away from rogues, if anything they've gotten better.

[Delias]

So... monks?

[Endlin]

I think he's just saying that it makes pures less prone to their biggest weakness. I just don't think it protects them enough to really give a shit about it. The concept that a pure (or semi) class can defend any cman as well as a square, is a little dumb though...

The fact that pures needed to get this before focus became passive is complete bullshit too. But... this is gemstone and we'll take the dev where we can get it.

[Fallen]

I think he's just saying that it makes pures less prone to their biggest weakness. I just don't think it protects them enough to really give a shit about it. The concept that a pure (or semi) class can defend any cman as well as a square, is a little dumb though...

The fact that pures needed to get this before focus became passive is complete bullshit too. But... this is gemstone and we'll take the dev where we can get it.

Honestly, the vast majority of pures train only in Disarm, if they bother with CM at all before cap. Now there is actually a reason to go all the way to their cap of 1x CM, which is insanely expensive. Hell, at 13+ exp I haven't even bothered with going 1x CM. You can probably count on one hand for each profession how many pures are 1xed in CM. I think you guys are really stressing out over nothing.

One of the main complaints I hear from Squares/Semi's is that even in their supposed "realm of dominance", they are still vulnerable to CMAN attacks. This maneuver is there to address that. I just dont get how the first thing going through people's heads is, "FUCKING PURES!"

[thefarmer]

One of the main complaints I hear from Squares/Semi's is that even in their supposed "realm of dominance", they are still vulnerable to CMAN attacks. This maneuver is there to address that. I just dont get how the first thing going through people's heads is, "FUCKING PURES!"

I would guess that while there was a need for a Square/Semi boost, the same couldn't be said for Pures. Cman defense is still basically the same for both, with no real advantage for the ones who should have it.

[Fallen]

I would guess that while there was a need for a Square/Semi boost, the same couldn't be said for Pures. Cman defense is still basically the same for both, with no real advantage for the ones who should have it.

Except for, you know, the much much lower cost.

[mgoddess]

The recent changes just lend even more mechnical advantages to pures and take away balance that was supposedly intended
I'd say this were true.... if pures started paying less TP's for each CMan rank, and less CMan ranks for each level of CMan maneuver.

However, pures still have that problem: they pay out the ass for each rank of CMan (12/8, except clerics who get them for 10/6), and on top of that, they have the most expensive cost for each maneuver they have access to. For Cunning Defense alone, pures have to use 40 ranks of CMan (so, TP-wise, that's 480/320 TPs) to get to rank 5. Semi's only need 29 CMan ranks to get to level 5, and squares only need 20 ranks... at varying TP costs, though all are much less than what pures have to pay.

In the end, pures still have to spend a hell of a lot more to get to rank 5 of Cunning Defense (or any other maneuver they have access to) compared to semi's and squares. I don't see any mechanical "advantages" for pures in this.

[thefarmer]

I don't see any mechanical "advantages" for pures in this.

So you'd be OK not having the ability to learn it at all?


Except for, you know, the much much lower cost.

Even with the lower cost, I still don't think Squares (and to a lesser extent Semi's) are anywhere close to being the dominate force I think they should be when it comes to Cmans.

Edit:

Question:

Did Squares/Semis need the update?
Did Pures need the update?

[Fallen]

No, no to your question. It just adds options. Crazy crazy expensive options for pures. For the record, I agree with you that squares should have more dominance over CMAN use. The good news is Oscuro agrees with you.

[caelric]

Edit:

Question:

Did Squares/Semis need the update?
Did Pures need the update?

In my opinion, no, and yes.

No, squares didn't need more defense against CMANS since they can train in so many of them, which helps their CMAN defense.

Yes, pures, since they can trina in only a few (and only a limited number due to the cost, not the selection), they needed something that helps wth their defense against a wide variety of CMAN's. Certainly it does not make them immune, given that 5 ranks of CD is equivelnt to 1 rank for defense in every other CMAN, but it helps. Squares will still manage to crush pures with CMANs, and pures will crush squares with spells, which is as it should be.

[thefarmer]

No, no to your question. It just adds options. Crazy crazy expensive options for pures. For the record, I agree with you that squares should have more dominance over CMAN use. The good news is Oscuro agrees with you.

If Squares/Semi's didn't need the update, what do you think could be done to give them more of a Cman edge?

I thought it was a pretty good starting point.


In my opinion, no, and yes.

No, squares didn't need more defense against CMANS since they can train in so many of them, which helps their CMAN defense.

Squares will still manage to crush pures with CMANs, and pures will crush squares with spells, which is as it should be.

You realize that..

A) Squares are still vulnerable to Cmans, despite being able to "train so many of them"?

B) We're not talking about CvC?


Honestly, I think that Pures should have lower training costs for Cunning Defense, have it provide more defensive benefit, and not allow for training in any other Cman (with the exception of SbS). Probably not a popular opinion, I know.

[Stanley Burrell]

Cdefense has been working really well on my capped empath who is maxed in CMs and dodge. And fights war griffins barehanded.

[StrayRogue]

Pures are complaining about this awesome addition...? Sad.

[caelric]

No, I think someone is complaining that pures are even able to have this.

As a pure, I am perfectly happy with it.

[Latrinsorm]

it gives them less of an advantage that they already don't have against other professionsI thought this was interesting wording.

[Fallen]

Pures are complaining about this awesome addition...? Sad.

Pures are wondering why squares are upset about Cdefense. Apparently, it was a rogue nerf.

[Drunken Durfin]

Okay, since this little thing has been released I have noticed that I am now more prone to disarm/tackle/charge than I was before. I can't remember the last time I got disarmed before this, it has happened three times today. WTF?

[TheLastShamurai]

Okay, since this little thing has been released I have noticed that I am now more prone to disarm/tackle/charge than I was before. I can't remember the last time I got disarmed before this, it has happened three times today. WTF?

No one told you the creatures learned Cunning Offense!?

[Fallen]

No one told you the creatures learned Cunning Offense!?

Hah!

[TheWitch]

Just to point out the margins we're dealing with here as far as pures becoming "immune" :lolwave:

It finally crossed my mind to see what rolls were needed to hit me with a CMAN - sweep specifically. A base level scout, genning at level 89, only needs to roll a 63 to put me on my arse. This is self spelled - no mobs, no blurs, no cube, etc.

So, if I max out Cunning Defense (5 ranks) they'll need a 78. That's hardly "immune" - especially considering an 11 level gap, that I'm 1x PF, a brawl/shield build (I really don't know if that has anything to do with it or not)and never encumbered.

Then consider, to train up to 5 ranks of cdef requires 40 ranks, at a cost of 12/8 TP's per - 480/320. I'm 100% physical TP's at this point, so 1,120 total.

Just for comparison, a warrior could train up 7 MnS and 20 ranks of HP for 1,040 mental TPs - and achieve +25 to their TD, their weak spot - AND have 103 for +10 DS - AND put themselves in a better spot for spell burst. I don't know what the typical square's TP conversion looks like at cap, but it seems fairly equitable TP expenditure for MORE defense against a weak spot - and some additional benefits as well.

And in reality? A rogue would have to spend even less, since their spell cost is about half and their HP cost is lower.

THEN, consider that both rogues and warriors have guild skills that augment those CMAN TP's with additional skills that don't cost ANY TP's, just time spent?

Do you guys really think pures got some sort of gimme here? It's an honest question.

[thefarmer]

Do you guys really think pures got some sort of gimme here? It's an honest question.

Gimmie in the sense that pures got some huge mechanical advantage?

No, not at all. It's useful for most, with some builds getting a bit more of an advantage, but neither getting a huge leg-up (and certainly not becoming immune).

Gimmie in the sense that pures got something useful that they didn't really need, just so squares/semis could get it too?

Yes. It kind of seems like pures got the option just to stave off any possible bitching from pure folks.

[Fallen]

Are you saying this provides more benefit to pures than it does to squares and semis? That doesn't make any sense. Time and again I hear the two groups swear up and down that they are hit with maneuver attacks. They release a cman that helps everyone, but for varying costs, and the people with the least to pay got the least out of it? Again, nonsense.

I still don't get the complaining.

[thefarmer]

Are you saying this provides more benefit to pures than it does to squares and semis?

Not at all. Sorry I'm not doing a good job explaining myself.

What I'm trying to say that Squares/Semis needed something to better show their superiority when it comes to Cmans. While there's no doubt that while pures are also susceptible to Cmans, the difference between Square/Semi vs. Pure isn't enough. IMO, Squares/Semis should be more successful in Cman Defending/Attacking then they are currently.

Trying to put this another way, if the difference in success between Square/Semi vs. Pure is 50%, even factoring in the different training costs, with both groups getting the Cman update, the difference in success is still 50% between the two. Had Square/Semi just got the update, then the success difference would instead be 60%, giving the Square/Semi a more distinct advantage.


Also, I wouldn't consider myself in the camp of complainers. I just think it could have been done better (as I said in an earlier post).


edit: The % numbers were just picked at random, before anyone has a hissy.

[Fallen]

I don't see how limiting pures improves upon squares/Semi's. I see this as a net gain for Squares/Semi's. I don't think the performance of a profession over a facet of mechanics should be measured against how well, or how poorly another profession does. Just my opinion, though.

[StrayRogue]

Pures definately got a gimme. Everyone did. Pures didn't get shafted. Everyone got something, pretty much for nothing.

Look at it this way: Rogues have no way of generating spell defenses beyond getting outside spells or spell training (costly). Pures can now train this (costly) or get the cube/stay unencumbered in an effort to avoid CMs.

Regardless of the fact that pures can become WHOLEY immune to spells (something rogues/warriors/anybody cannot do to CMs), the age-old dynamic of the game has been: Pures - immune to spells and direct offense, prone to maneuvers. Squares - better capable of taking direct offense and maneuvers, prone to spells. Semi's fit somewhere in the middle of both.

So your choices are as a pure to avoid CMs: Train in CM. Get CmDefense. It's costly. But it's just as costly as a square to train in spells.

Why fucking pures whine on and on and on about the cost of CM's is absurd. Be grateful you fucking GET ANY. Where is my super catchall skill that greatly boosts defenses against spells? OH WAIT.

[Fallen]

Why fucking pures whine on and on and on about the cost of CM's is absurd. Be grateful you fucking GET ANY. Where is my super catchall skill that greatly boosts defenses against spells? OH WAIT.

I imagine the benefits derived from 401 and 406 combined are more than the benefits of Cdefense at what has to be a comparable cost.

[StrayRogue]

401 and 406 help me against the spells cast in the skull temple?

If you don't want the skill, if you don't want to have a higher chance of avoiding a CM, don't train in it. For the people who do, they can weigh up the risk vs. reward, and decide whether or not it's WORTH IT.

Ultimately it's one more option. Which is a good thing. God, why is it that everyone who posts on the sorcerer boards are just whiney fucks...

[Fallen]

Glancing at the numbers, it takes non cleric pures 480/320 points to get rank 5 of Cdefense. It takes rogues 0/402 to get to 406. I would say they're getting the better end of the deal.

[Fallen]

401 and 406 help me against the spells cast in the skull temple?

If you don't want the skill, if you don't want to have a higher chance of avoiding a CM, don't train in it. For the people who do, they can weigh up the risk vs. reward, and decide whether or not it's WORTH IT.

Ultimately it's one more option. Which is a good thing. God, why is it that everyone who posts on the sorcerer boards are just whiney fucks...

I know you're very upset and jaded about sorcerers..and life, and well, just about everything. That's cool and all, but i'm not whining about the skill. In fact, I think the only pure whining going on here is you, and now me whining about your whining. Give it a rest, Stray. No one is even arguing what you're saying is wrong. It is just one more option.

[StrayRogue]

401/406 helps me shit in the skull temple. They are also super easy to get from 75% of the player populace. So you think they should be weighted the same in cost that is an intregal/defining part to only two professions? Are you mental?

How many TP's would it cost a warrior then?

If you think the tp costs should be equal for everything, well sorc insanity just went up a notch.

[BigWorm]

Glancing at the numbers, it takes non cleric pures 480/320 points to get rank 5 of Cdefense. It takes rogues 0/402 to get to 406. I would say they're getting the better end of the deal.

401/406/414/101/107 are really bad examples because they are so easy to get and IMHO it seems that by cap, critters are balanced with the expectation that you will have those spells. A better comparison would be the cost of 120, at 0/1340.

[StrayRogue]

I know you're very upset and jaded about sorcerers..and life, and well, just about everything. That's cool and all, but i'm not whining about the skill. In fact, I think the only pure whining going on here is you, and now me whining about your whining. Give it a rest, Stray. No one is even arguing what you're saying is wrong. It is just one more option.

Hurrah for pulling the pussy V tactic. I'm not the one who posts endless treatise on how to improve every aspect of the game through sorcery. I don't endlessly whine on the officials then complain when my mildly imflammatory and highly annoying remarks get clipped.

Seriously, you fucking losers have been whining FOREVER. GET. THE. FUCK. OVER. IT.

You're never going to get the old MD. You're not going to get DC back. You're not going to be able to pulverize every monsters and player while remaining utterly invulnerable. Not like you used to.

You cannot have your faggot, emo goth Twilight cake, and eat it.

[Fallen]

I'm not even sure the point you're trying to get across anymore, other than the fact that you get butt raped in Skull temple. My apologies that there isn't a "suck less" skill to train in.

[Fallen]

Hurrah for pulling the pussy V tactic. I'm not the one who posts endless treatise on how to improve every aspect of the game through sorcery. I don't endlessly whine on the officials then complain when my mildly imflammatory and highly annoying remarks get clipped.

Seriously, you fucking losers have been whining FOREVER. GET. THE. FUCK. OVER. IT.

You're never going to get the old MD. You're not going to get DC back. You're not going to be able to pulverize every monsters and player while remaining utterly invulnerable. Not like you used to.

You cannot have your faggot, emo goth Twilight cake, and eat it.

Thought I would get this one up in quotes. It is one of the better freak outs I have seen in a long time.

[StrayRogue]

I'm not even sure the point you're trying to get across anymore, other than the fact that you get butt raped in Skull temple. My apologies that there isn't a "suck less" skill to train in.

Again, fine Virilneusing. No actual point to the post, just trolling.

I do fine in the skull temple, without outside help, without people helping me. Unlike some.

The point is that 401/406 helps me squat. So saying it's as worthwhile to me as CMDef is not an argument.

As bigworm mentioned, 101-107, 401-414 are common spells. Most of the professions can train them inately. Most of the professions DO NOT make us of the offensive CM's, however.

[Fallen]

401/406/414/101/107 are really bad examples because they are so easy to get and IMHO it seems that by cap, critters are balanced with the expectation that you will have those spells. A better comparison would be the cost of 120, at 0/1340.

I would say that that the spells leading up to 120, along with the ability to cast that spell itself equates to a hell of a lot more than the training of 1x CM for a pure. I'm not saying it is worth it, especially for a warrior, but there is definitely a ton of benefit derived from those spell ranks. Especially including the Spell Burst benefits.

I would also point out the Rift is a self-cast environment, and as squares have the "ability" to learn the 100's and the 400's, being able to get those spells from outside options is a very large bonus for the two classes. It is all apples and oranges, though. Pures dont need the level of defense against CMANS that squares need against spells, as CMANs aren't usually deadly at very low endrolls. That is why there are far more options for getting spell defense than for Maneuver defense. Ultimately, I think this maneuver did a great job in bringing everything to a proper balance without going overboard. Hopefully, the lower CMAN costs for squares coming down the road will make things even more balanced.

[TheWitch]

The point is that 401/406 helps me squat. So saying it's as worthwhile to me as CMDef is not an argument.

As bigworm mentioned, 101-107, 401-414 are common spells. Most of the professions can train them inately. Most of the professions DO NOT make us of the offensive CM's, however.

So what you're saying is, you can have the advantage of the spells and not have to bother to train them. Which is fine, no objection at all to that.

What I'm still not clear on is the objection to a CMAN existing that pures - and everyone else - can train for general defense against CMANs, when spell systems exist that can give a rogue/warrior defense against spells - and they don't even have to train them as has been pointed out.

If CDef was sorcerer only, maybe your rant would make sense. It's not.

As to most professions NOT making use of offensive CMANs, I'm not getting the point you're trying to make. CDef isn't offensive .....

Just informationationally, Stray, the 400s might not do you much good in Skull Temple but the 100s would and rogues can train either/both which is why I used them in my post, not the 400s. They're more useful, overall, not just in the Temple, against spells. Or you can get them by other means.

[Latrinsorm]

Just for comparison, a warrior could train up 7 MnS and 20 ranks of HP for 1,040 mental TPs - and achieve +25 to their TD, their weak spot - AND have 103 for +10 DS - AND put themselves in a better spot for spell burst. I don't know what the typical square's TP conversion looks like at cap, but it seems fairly equitable TP expenditure for MORE defense against a weak spot - and some additional benefits as well.Except you've cut your chance of being maneuvered from 37% to 22%, while a warrior probably cuts their chance of being spelled from around 120% to 95%. 25 being a bigger number than 15 doesn't matter if the 25 is against 500 and the 15 is against 200.

[Bobrobertbobson]

Sorry to derail the inter-profession hatefest, but does CMDef do anything against maneuvers not on the list? Will it help me defend against a roa'ter or a griffin?

[B2]

No, Bobbobbob. CMLs only, no creature maneuvers.

[caelric]

Get max PF to protect against creature maneuvers. More specifically, PF>Per>Dodge? So, max out PF, get good perception, and work on dodge, although, I might be remembering incorrectly about the dodge.

[Kitsun]

It is PF > CM > Perception.

[droit]

PF>CM>Perception

[caelric]

Ok, I remembered wrong.

The only caveat to that is that Perception is usually much cheaper than CMan, so it might be wise/easier to invest in Perception at the expense of CMan

[caelric]

You're a fucking idiot. Dodge doesn't help against maneuvers. Dumbass.


Gotta love that neg rep. People are idiots, and you, anonymous neg repper, have certainly shown yourself to be one of those idiots.

[Bobrobertbobson]

Thanks for the info. My sniping rogue is tripled in perception, but just singled in PF and CM. Any opinions on whether it's worth the cost to double either of those, given his profession and hunting style?

[caelric]

Is he GoS? Then work on your PF.

Otherwise, CM is better bang for the buck, considering what else it gives you (AS, CMan defense, and CMan usage)

[mgoddess]

Thanks for the info. My sniping rogue is tripled in perception, but just singled in PF and CM. Any opinions on whether it's worth the cost to double either of those, given his profession and hunting style?
3x'ing perception is not worth the cost of only 1x'ing both PF and CM. Drop some perception and get more of either of the other two.

[caelric]

He is probably 3xing perception for other reason (archery comes to mind)

[mgoddess]

He is probably 3xing perception for other reason (archery comes to mind)
Most likely, yeah.

Personally, though, that extra 25 AS (at cap) isn't worth the extra redux, maneuver defense, stamina, CM points, etc. etc. that more training in PF and/or CM would provide.

(Oh, where's that neg repper that keeps saying I suck and shouldn't be giving out advice! More fodder for your h8!)

[Drew]

Actually 3x perception doesn't give you more AS, just better aim. Personally I'd drop it to 2x and put the points into PF.

[mgoddess]

Actually 3x perception doesn't give you more AS, just better aim. Personally I'd drop it to 2x and put the points into PF.
I was wondering about that, actually. I couldn't recall where, but I thought I remembered reading/hearing somewhere that anything over 200 (202?) ranks of perception doesn't get you extra AS...

[StrayRogue]

3xing makes no difference. It's so rogues get no additionally AS boost over other ranged users.

[Bobrobertbobson]

Nope, not in GoS. I guess my answer is CM. Thanks for that.

I wasn't really asking about whether to drop perception, which I have no plan to do. Hitting my eyeshots as often as possible is a high priority, so it's worth the cost to me.