Cleric haste item

[kiryan]

i forgot bless. 46 hitroll.

not to mention self vit at higher levels somewhat offsets the need for hp eq. whats a nekkid vited 50 cleric, 500 - 600? greys and drow are probably 450.

[rylan]

If you can get that high hitroll as a cleric, then you got way too much warrior eq :P

I haven't really bothered going for hit/dam eq since other people usually need it more, and I needed the +hp stuffs.

I think most ppl will agree that the the vast majority of clerics out there don't have, or ever will have a hitroll that high. Hell, I doubt you'll see any others with hitroll over 15... I'm 7/8 when in hp mode and wielding misty.. also don't forget that as a human I don't have access to those spanky hammers :P

[kiryan]

you cant wield skullsmasher? Even if not, fiery mace hits pretty damn hard for a 1h.

Im just trying to point out how broken a haste item could be. No all people will gather the hitter gear to do it, but most of the hitter gear im including is soloable or cheap. None of its rare (well cept possibly the weapon), and again, thats just my knowledge which is not very extensive. If you want to include rare eq and prolly some stuff i dont know, im sure you could prolly hit 55 hitroll on a cleric and still have 500 hps.

It just wouldnt be right to have a cleric running around doing 80 pts of melee damage a round + skill solo. If a haste item were to be introduced, i think weapons they can wield need to be looked at as well as hit/dam eq they can wear. Right now, it would just be wrong.

[rylan]

Yeah, I can't use skullsmasher *sniff*

I do agree that a perm haste item even for clerics would probably be too powerful.

But I think we can agree that clerics could use something to spice them up a bit... we don't have to heal all the time, so it gets dull standing around. :P

[Zrax]

This whole clerics need more to spice them up arguement is really lame. This can be applied to about any class on the mud. Every class has specific roles they need to fill and can be argued as boring. I never thought I would see the day that clerics complained that they were healers.

[rylan]

If you actually read through the posts, you wouldn't se ethat we are complaining at all about being healers.. thats our job.
However, we don't need to heal all the time, and would like to have some fun with the class by doing other things inbetween healing.

Other classes have thier roles, and are doing them constantly in fights.. invokers nuke, warriors bash/rescue, rogues trip/circle, etc.
What we're saying is that it would be cool to be able to do something useful while not having to heal. The only other class I can think of that may feel the same way is enchanters.. they don't have to stone all the time.. but at least they get a few offensive spells that do something.

[Zrax]

Enchanter offense is arguably worse than cleric offense. What zones are you doing that you have time to play with little fun spells in between heals???

Invokers are pretty much strictly offense, warriors are relegated to stunning mobs(bash or shieldp), or rescuing, all the core classes are very specialized in their primary task.

Shamans, Necros, rangers, rogues, druids, psis and the like are more broad based classes but they are not as strong in anything as the specific classes are in their catagory.

Paladins and antis no comment.

Clerics are one of the last classes that needs an upgrade in my opinion, let alone double attack, perm haste, or new flashy offense spells.

That being said I do still like the concept of this thread but really think it would overpower an already overpowered class.

[kiryan]

agree zrax

they could get an undead only line of offensive spells. i wouldnt mind that at all. Enchanters do have pris, thats a pretty fun spell, so is major paralysis so i can understand where rylan is coming from and i might disagree with you that enchanters have the worst offensive. Full harm is pretty laughable, and holy word never gets cast.

But on that note, while clerics might have the worst offensive spells in the game, they can melee decently. I think clerics need to realize if they want more offensive they need to give up more melee and tank ability (thats what mages do). Clerics 1hb maxes at 80 i think the former posts said. Mages max out at 50 (thats a guess). Not to mention their dodge maxes at around 25 while clerics get 50? They dont even have an offense skill. I think a lot of you dont realize how much melee capability you already have. its rather significant.

clerics arent robe walkin foos on sojourn, they wear platemail and carry maces which they can use. Mages cant do anything cept run away and throw spells. You already have damage dishing capability that you take for granted or were ignorant of.

Id still support an undead line of damage spells. and/or some clericable weapons that proc on undead/demons.

[azzixxenae]

i thought a hitter/healer was a paladin and that a cleric was a walking band-aid.

[moritheil]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by azzixxenae:
i thought a hitter/healer was a paladin and that a cleric was a walking band-aid.</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Heh... Clerics shouldn't be able to compete with a real hitter, that would be just wrong.

Does noone have comments on the proposed cleric spells, like 'liquidate undead'?

[kiryan]

i support a damage line of spells for clerics against undead. I dont give a hoot what you call it.

[Jorus]

What's this about enchanter offensive spells sucking?

Give me a break. Enchanters have more than enough offense to help out between stones (when we rarely have time). Witness a recent invasion run where maybe 7 of the mobs were major para'd, and that's not counting the incidental pris para (there were a few of those).

Blacklight burst: some damage (think area cone of cold and then some :P), slows enemies quite reliably (not all of them, but some). This spell is now spellcast enchantment.

Constriction: need I say more? Git them casters! This spell is now spellcast enchantment, so it works underwater (it did before) and gets the spec enchant bonus.

Prismatic spray: I've seen fights against three 50+ mobs where two of them miss the fight due to pris para (with two enchanters in group).

Those three all break through globe handily. Clerics have earthquake and full-harm that can do that (fharm does about as much as a baby-heal can fix, I believe).

That said, enchanter stoning/hasting/blurring/globing-on-the-fly is nowhere as monotonous as hitting "group" every round and watching for lines that change to "red" based on a trigger, even if we had zero nukes. There is no super-reliable way for an enchanter to check the status of all of their spells with a single command, so "glance a" "glance b" "glance c" is the tune we play.

(just my bit to say how much enchanters rule!)

Regards,
Jorus

[kiryan]

Blacklight burst: some damage (think area cone of cold and then some :P), slows enemies quite reliably (not all of them, but some). This spell is now spellcast enchantment.

I want to qualify your statement "slows enemies quite reliably." On ship, it seems to slow less than 25% of the casts on Navigator/First/Waterdeep at level 40 enchanter. The damage is pitiful.

Constriction: need I say more? Git them casters! This spell is now spellcast enchantment, so it works underwater (it did before) and gets the spec enchant bonus.

What I would consider enchanter only dam spell. You often go 3 pris without hitting a dam ray. Ive never thought LB was a dam spell and MM outlives its usefulness at 21. Its a decent dam spell. Prolly comparable to something invokers have in their mid 20s.

Prismatic spray: I've seen fights against three 50+ mobs where two of them miss the fight due to pris para (with two enchanters in group).

It happens. On ship ive seen several times where bmage/cyrite get para'd 3 times in the same fight out of 6 or 7 pris. Seemed excessive, then we went 30 or 40 casts without a para. And it always seems to be bmage or cyrite that get triple parad. I thought that was wierd. Also seen fights where 2 or 3 pris went off on 10-15 mobs mid-low level mobs with no para. Also seen gythka proc para 3 or 4 fights in a row.

Those three all break through globe handily. Clerics have earthquake and full-harm that can do that (fharm does about as much as a baby-heal can fix, I believe).

Clerics can melee and tank far better as well as get more hps. You left out your utility offense spells like blind, curse, silence.

That said, enchanter stoning/hasting/blurring/globing-on-the-fly is nowhere as monotonous as hitting "group" every round and watching for lines that change to "red" based on a trigger, even if we had zero nukes. There is no super-reliable way for an enchanter to check the status of all of their spells with a single command, so "glance a" "glance b" "glance c" is the tune we play.

Don't sensationalize enchanters job. Its difficult and annoying to try and keep more than one person stoned. If you wanted a more difficult go at things as a cleric, dont use group command and glance or roll a new class. Also, If theyre a good enchanter, they prolly not throwing a whole lot of offensive spells since though it may be fun and have great psycholigcal impact, invokers, lichs, squids, rogues, and warriors are where your dam comes from and casting area spell garners great risk of death.

Its good to know what your job is in a group. people who break out of their roles had better know what they are doing. A uncast stone can make the difference between a spank and a success (yea so can a lucky para, ill vote on the stone every time). Two types of enchanters throw offense, great ones who know when, and bad ones where your left wondering how you got spanked.

Having defended Enchanters, the reality is that they are almost undeniably more fun to play than clerics. Ress = spam, though taxi spam is bad too its shared amongst invokers/squids/druids/illusionist/enc. They are great twinks due to MP, PWB, feeb, and stone/scale. Clerics are mediocre twinks. To clerics credit, its impossible to replace a cleric in any real zone. Enchanters are tough to replace but you can in most zones since you can get stone displace globe haste from other sources.

The biggest thing I think clerics overlook is they can melee and tank. If that plus fheal plus ress doesnt float your boat, then you picked the wrong class.

[This message has been edited by kiryan (edited 11-29-2001).]

[Jorus]

Kiryan,

Obviously, you are speaking from a "doing xp" perspective, which, imo, is meaningless.

Enchanter nukes are good in a zone context, where blacklight burst _will_ slow people in a crowded room, where it is most useful, thus preserving stones. Pris WILL blind/para/feeb people in a crowded room, thus saving switches/stones/areas.

As for "sensationalizing", I really think you need to look at your posting attitude in general. ALMOST every post I have seen from you has been oppositional or hostile. Try expressing your opinions without trying to pick a fight, you'll find it interesting.

It IS difficult trying to keep more than one person stoned, though doable. Hell, you can keep 4 people stoned if you really feel like a challenge. Of course, stoning takes priority, but we are talking about what to do between stones when they aren't dropping like flies. That's part of what makes enchanters fun.

Clerics simply don't have the option to do much between checking the group's health other than pounding on things (even rangers find _that_ boring *g*).

Anyways, more in defense of enchanters, seeing their offense being negatively compared to clerics, than for clerics getting a melee upgrade (imo, that wouldn't make them more fun like some spell changes could)

Regards,
Jorus

[Zrax]

Your claims are tottaly baseless Jorus. For every nice non specific spell that enchanters have, clerics have one to match. You failed to mention silence, darkness, curse, which are some of the more useful spells in the game. Earthquake and the Holy/unholy word spells are far from useless, and while the harm spells are not powerful, they are not useless.

[Jorus]

Zrax,

If you want to compare spells on a spell-by-spell-one-for-one basis, NOBODY compares to enchanters. I am fairly confident that we have the longest spell-list in the game (counting by spell-levels, here, not by pure count of spells, as I havn't tallied anyone else's). My enchanter's spellbooks have ~268 pages worth of spells in them. On top of those 268 pages I have my quest spells (potentially 37 more "pages" if you will)

Sure, clerics have silence and curse which are OFTEN useful (though generally only used against mage mobs, and then only at the start of the fight), which can be compared to (lets say) an enchanter's feeblemind (essentially a long duration low reliabilty silence) and an enchanter's blur, which is pretty much the reverse of curse, but cast on allies. If you want an offensive spell to compare to, look at fumble, stumble, enervate, or ray, or even faerie fire.

As for darkness, I have never seen that spell in use in goodie zoning, except during attempts to kill a mob that is too powerful for the group present. Darkness sees about as much use as an enchanter's single-target slow spell, on the good side.

Blindness we can equivocate that with PWB if we really want to (a bit of a stretch and an insult to PWB, but hey, who cares?)

Holy word/unholy word? Tell me, honestly, when was the last time you saw a cleric in a real zone group risk a 2-round lag with this spell? I've seen paladin's do it, but a fhealer doing it is much riskier imo. Equate that one with pris if you like, for the variety of effects and risk-factor in an area. Not to mention that U/HW can only target certain mobs AND require a certain alignment of the caster, a limitation that no enchanter spells have.

Fharm can be equated to constriction (though again, that is making a huge disparagement towards constriction, as fharm DOENS'T get cast in zones, and constriction does), baby-harm to cone (neither worth casting). Smaller nukes can count off fine. Fheal to stone, baby-heal to haste. Smaller healing spells are about as valuable, in a zone group, as enchanter's small utility spells (perks if needed, but not vital).

Earthquake is a good spell, though it has drawbacks, and again, is used VERY selectively. I don't think there is an enchanter spell that I would line up with earthquake at all.

All that still leaves enchanters with dscales, blacklight burst and the other stat-draining spells that an enchanter can cast, for "variety" of things to do in combat.

What people are saying, and I agree, is that in a typical group, being a cleric is not only boring, but tedious and downright monotonous. I see no way to compare what a cleric has available to throw at mobs or their grroup during combat to what an enchanter has. Sure, there are areas where clerics excel (silencing !bash casters, though those _are_ relatively rare), and healing tanks, but against a room of warriors, all the cleric gets to do is check for wounded.

Again, all this is more by way of indicating that enchanters do have a solid base of spells, though restraint is needed to keep mem-times down, that a way of indicating clerics need melee upgrades. Clerics are the strongest melee pure-casting class as is. But some of their spells could use a looking at.

IMO, an area-anti-undead spell would be nice. If holy-word were made safely usable it might suit, but a pure damage spell en lieu might fit too.

I'm not saying that there aren't fights where clerics are the life of the party, or where they are casting spells like mad-men, and I don't think anyone else is. I am saying that there are huge stretches in zones (which are _supposed_ to be fun) where clerics just sit and glance, avoiding assisting due to assist-lag.

As for my "claims" being totally baseless, would you care to be a bit more specific? Are you serious in saying that a cleric's offensive repetoire is superior to an enchanter's? I would be interested to test that out in the arena, forgeoing my defensive spells vs a cleric foregoing their "healing" spells (we could go pure damage compared, or try effect-inducing spells as well, either way). If you mean my "claims" wrt clerics perhaps being boring being baseless, I don't think you have a leg to stand on. There are high level clerics here saying similar things.

If you mean my claim that clerics generally have less to do in a zone group, between heals, than an enchanter has to do between stones (etc), I think perhaps you are mistakenly concluding that because the spell is there it is going to get cast often.

Regards,
Jorus

[This message has been edited by Jorus (edited 11-29-2001).]

[kiryan]

Jorus

I wont argue with you that a enchanter has more fun and varied offensive spells. I would say that as a trade off for not having as many offensive spells clerics can melee.

If clerics want to tank and hit as well as mages and have the same eq restrictions, then Id support them having more offensive/stat spells. You may not like cleric melee, but its what clerics got.

and from your earlier post...
>Obviously, you are speaking from a "doing xp" perspective, which, imo, is meaningless.

yes exp is not the same as zoning, but to say that observations made while exping are not valid is invalid.

>Enchanter nukes are good in a zone context, where blacklight burst _will_ slow people in a crowded room, where it is most useful, thus preserving stones. Pris WILL blind/para/feeb people in a crowded room, thus saving switches/stones/areas.

yes, enc pris is very good and can have drastic outcomes on a fight, blacklight burst id debate its usefulness considering its hit rate. If it was a 50% hit rate, i think it would be a good spell to cast in many zone fights... its nothing near that common.

Im of the opinion that until you are a very experienced enchanter you should not be casting dam spells. Being late on a stone can get you spanked rather handidly. Casting a pris rarely prevents a spank. May make a certain fight easier, but would you go into a fight counting on the enchanter to major para? Dont think so. Yes good observation, blind/major para saves a hell of a lot of heals and stones when the correct effects land.

>As for "sensationalizing", I really think you need to look at your posting attitude in general. ALMOST every post I have seen from you has been oppositional or hostile. Try expressing your opinions without trying to pick a fight, you'll find it interesting.

I have strong opinions and I am not afraid of confrontation. I challenge any of you to refute my statements and positions. Its the only way I can increase my understanding is when someone points out my errors. As for being oppositional, I tend to think the game is pretty good, having been refined over 6-7 years. It takes all sorts of opinions and positions to make a good environment. Pro change and Con change. I tend to oppose a lot of new ideas because I dont see the value added, but I see alot of potential risk and problems. Im definitely not anti change, but i enjoy the game so think that major change is perhaps unwarranted.

I very rarely make any personal attacks. Ill call you on something that I think doesnt make sense or misconstrues reality as perceived by me. Perhaps you ought to read my posts as someone who is passionate about having a good game rather than a hostile dork. But thank you for the belittling personal attack. For your information, I have often been credited for comprehending situations and subjects and providing good advice. I also have often been criticized for delivering my analysis rather bluntly. Im sure plenty of people hear me and my analysis, some of you focus in on the confrontational stance and turn it into a personal attack. Occasionaly it is a personal attack.

>It IS difficult trying to keep more than one person stoned, though doable. Hell, you can keep 4 people stoned if you really feel like a challenge. Of course, stoning takes priority, but we are talking about what to do between stones when they aren't dropping like flies. That's part of what makes enchanters fun.

And what clerics get to do in between heals is melee. It may not be as glamourous as casting offensive spells to you, but its what they got. Lots of folks hated their monks because all they did was type assist. If melee isnt your thing, perhaps cleric isnt the right class for you. You got to weigh the skills, no class is probably going to fit you to a T. Clerics also get to live when the tanks die.

>Clerics simply don't have the option to do much between checking the group's health other than pounding on things (even rangers find _that_ boring *g*).

Again, boring, but its what you got. If clerics get mage eq restricts, hps, and melee/tank ability, id feel fine about you having offensive spells on par with enchanters (not that they get to cast those outside of exp).

>Anyways, more in defense of enchanters, seeing their offense being negatively compared to clerics, than for clerics getting a melee upgrade (imo, that wouldn't make them more fun like some spell changes could)

Again, you prefer casting spells, some probably prefer melee. IF all the clerics wanted to go more towards casting spells, id hear them out before arguing that you should stay where your at with melee / spell ability in order to maintain some diversity in classes.

An undead line of damage spells would be interesting for clerics. Id support that up to a point where clerics could solo too effectively with it.

[Tuga]

>Enchanter nukes are good in a zone context, where blacklight burst _will_ slow people in a crowded room, where it is most useful, thus preserving stones. Pris WILL blind/para/feeb people in a crowded room, thus saving switches/stones/areas.

>yes, enc pris is very good and can have drastic outcomes on a fight, blacklight burst id debate its usefulness considering its hit rate. If it was a 50% hit rate, i think it would be a good spell to cast in many zone fights... its nothing near that common.


When I'm zoning i never cast blacklight burts and havent seen a chanter do it as often as you guys are saying.
For one simple reason, same circle as globe which is cast at spellups. Sometimes i may have a slot available which i use for major para which may rock in zones if it hits. the other offensive spells i cast in zones are constriction and prism, and only in between stoning, blur and hastes. prism is cool spell but has the side effect of dispelling silence/blind of a mob which i had the experience of killing 1/2 the group coz of it once. i felt so sorry bout that episode

black burst is nice but doesnt get cast that often. slowness from it is nice coz it prelongs stones and stuff but if the mob dont move it prelongs even further

my winge for the week
Tuga the Sunless Troll
Tilsen

[Backar]

I see a lot of posts about how clerics have melee so they should melee. Well let's see.. I ALWAYS assist in zones except for when we're getting nailed so hard that the only thing I can do is run in fheal a couple times run out mem. HOWEVER, with our 1 attack we don't exactly do much to aid the group and those that say ask for a haste, well most times the tanks don't even get hasted to save the hastes for the rogues/rangers. Moreover, a lot of mobs are shielded in zones and I have yet to be in a zone group where the enchanter could spare a globe for the cleric.

As was stated some prefer melee others spellcast. I prefer melee just for RP sake, but at the same time I'd be very happy with offensive spells too just cause that'd be an improvement over what we've got now. However, I am against an undead only type of spell, just because it woudn't help in much in most zones. I'd rather have something a little less damaging, but with a broader target range.

As for all those advocating the power of holy/Unholy word. So far I have only used the spell once in a group where we actually were relying on it to do something. Every other instance of the spells usage was for fun on my part when I had nothing better to do solo than just go and unholy mobs that I can EASILY beat b/c the lagg after it is just an invitation to get spanked, compared to the damage it deals.

[zipalodok]

ummm i can bump my hit/dam to 29/16, but in full hit-point eq i get 1/8 but i then get 884hps without a vit , but yea haste item big whup, you get a lvl 50 cleric go solo some mobs with just melee its laughable, let alone be able to kill a lvl 50 mob with all the high lvl nukes ya can mem in 1 run, but i do feel the goodie side of the world is way more polished than the evil side in home towns zones and only goodie classes, i'm just talking about little nick nacks nothign big that would unbalance anything but just more polished like more time put into....

[Ebgar]

As far as Holy/Unholy word are concerned, I don't care about the lag, I'd love to be able to cast it!!! It's in our full heal circle, so is never memmed. If it were moved to our useless in combat 9th circle, i'd use it all the time!!

[Baikalisan]

I cant believe yall are still aruging about this.. Give it up, its lame.

Enjoy.

[kiryan]

>When I'm zoning i never cast blacklight burts and havent seen a chanter do it as often as you guys are saying.
>prism is cool spell but has the side effect of dispelling silence/blind of a mob which i had the experience of killing 1/2 the group coz of it once. i felt so sorry bout that episode

Agree, BLB doesnt get cast all that often, especially because its same circle as globe and because pris paras and blinds. ALso, the hit rate on blb is low. Why cast blb in a 5 mob fight and maybe slow 2 folks when you can pris and probably blind at least 1, with possibly blinding a couple and a para if your lucky. Blind is way more powerful than slow, with rare exception when zoning. And pris blind seems to land at least at the same rate that BLB hits. Good point on the pris. It can spank the group with dispels, which is why enc really should just stick to stoning when zoning. BLB does have a good chant time though 3 stars, it really should get cast a little more often.

>the other offensive spells i cast in zones are constriction and prism, and only in between stoning, blur and hastes.

This is no slam, just a question. Do you really feel that constriction adds anything to the outcome? Kinda like cleric melee. You can do it, but it doesnt really add anything. Its diverting. Pris is a lot more fun, but imo the hastes add up to more damage than your constr or pris ever will. It also provides a measure of safety that dam will continue even if due to unfortunate circumstances the mages die.

Good post tuga, I think it was very accurate.


>I see a lot of posts about how clerics have melee so they should melee. Well let's see.. I ALWAYS assist in zones except for when we're getting nailed so hard that the only thing I can do is run in fheal a couple times run out mem. HOWEVER, with our 1 attack we don't exactly do much to aid the group and those that say ask for a haste, well most times the tanks don't even get hasted to save the hastes for the rogues/rangers. Moreover, a lot of mobs are shielded in zones and I have yet to be in a zone group where the enchanter could spare a globe for the cleric.

Good point on globe. Not much to do about globe, since a lot of times enc have to do 2 sets of globe. Good point on haste. Why dont clerics, and often warriors, get haste? Chant time, most enchanters can mem enough hastes to haste all the melee and the clerics but dont bother casting because its like about 7 stars on a failed chant, enc have long spellups, especially if you have to globe and prestone, there just not enough time to cast haste, even in battle. I think haste needs to get cast more often for player enjoyment, reduce the worst case chant to 2 *s please.

Agree that clerics dont provide much damage, do you really think enchanters provide much in terms of direct damage? More than clerics, I will give you that, but Id like to point out that you can get stone from shaman and displace from illusionists, but you can only get full heal from a cleric. Your more specialized than an enchanter is in defense therefore you do less dam. As for utility spells, clerics have some great ones. Silence obviously is awesome in !bash caster fights. Curse I think is undercast especially since it supposedly increases the mobs susceptibility to para, not to mention reduce the mobs hitroll. You guys get blind too, but i never see you cast it in zone.

If we wanted to do something to Clerics, I might support an improved blind/silence for them in 8/9/10 circle. I dont know what the hit rate is on their blind/silence, but I know enc can usually get feeb off in under 6 attempts, warriors wielding ebony wins in blinding races, and you really cant compare blind to PWB.

>However, I am against an undead only type of spell, just because it woudn't help in much in most zones. I'd rather have something a little less damaging, but with a broader target range.

How about earthquake. Ok that was a bit sarcastic, but how about the dam on black light burst (btw its pitiful, I dont think it kills a level 8 mob). How much dam would be enough? But thats besides the point, I would not support a general targeted or area dam spell for clerics, a very specific niche, like against undead i could support. I think clerics is the most specialized class since Full heal is required in most groups and Clerics are the only source. If you want to diversify with dam/effects, other classes need to heal better. I dont think its fair or balanced to compare your dam ability to others until you can compare your heal ability with others. There was a design principle in sojourn 2 secondary healers equal one full time healer. I dont necessarily agree with that, but i definitely dont think 2 shaman/druid heal anywhere close to as effectively or are anywhere near as reliable as 1 cleric on sojourn. Food for thought.

>As for all those advocating the power of holy/Unholy word. So far I have only used the spell once in a group where we actually were relying on it to do something. Every other instance of the spells usage was for fun on my part when I had nothing better to do solo than just go and unholy mobs that I can EASILY beat b/c the lagg after it is just an invitation to get spanked, compared to the damage it deals.

The great holyword/unholy word debate. Upgrade holy words, goody groups get spanked because mobs will own joo (and soon evil groups i hear alot more good aligned zones coming). Downgrade holy word, clerics complain that they have nothing to do cept heal. I suppose gods could probably help players out a bit and handicap mobs a bit to make holyword/unholy useful for clerics. But this brings me back to my statement of possibly supporting improved blind/silence for clerics in higher circles. You going to bitch if high level cleric mobs start blinding and silencing your -20 asses quite effectively, or is it only cool if player clerics get it?

[Jorus]

Hi Guys,

Regarding blacklight burst:

It does only get cast in zones in very select locations. Some areas where it is useful are jot gatehouses and UE, where a mem worth of blacklight bursts will slow most of the mobs.

When you're talking huge !bash warrior mobs that crit for 200+ hps, that can be a life-saver, and applied en-masse it is reliable, just not for any _single_ target. (law of averages). Other than that, in any place globe isn't needed to be kept memmed, blacklights can help (or are just fun to cast!)

As to pris dispels getting people killed, one just has to be fairly confident when NOT to use pris. Like places where nobody is allowed to set a wimpy and certain mobs are REQUIRED to be spelled down. There are plenty of places, though, where everybody is just racing around trying to reduce how _much_ mobs in the room cast, such as loki, thrym, or crypts. Para rocks for that, blind will delay a clerical mob for a round or more depending on if they get knocked outta cure blind, and feeb rules for that type of fight too. It's three beneficial rays (discounting damage here) vs one un-beneficial ray. Law of averages again.

I think we are discussing what is fun, though, less than what is mathematically "best" for the zone group, but hey, that's just me.

As to things getting "personal", I really don't think I was saying I thought you were attacking me personally, Kir, nor do I think I attacked you (belittling? *shrug*). If you were thinking my post was a personal "attack", perhaps a deep breath could be well applied. *g*

I guess I could refine my comment a little more, or actually target the _specific_ tactic I see you using oftentimes. What I see you doing is applying a negative label to people's positions in passing, but without justifying it. Personally, I think that is a poor argument tactic which will lead to needless confrontation more often than not (though I think everyone does it from time to time).

Anyhow, peace out, this dead horse smells worse than the other one over there, so I'll go play on that one a bit.

Regards,
Jorus