Cleric vs. Undead

[Deltin]

recently I've need in zones with alot of undead, so naturally I used eradicate undead as far as I can tell it's only slightly better than full harm. Does this damage compare to the damage done by an invoker using a cold spell vs fire creature? It would seem the offensive abilities of a cleric vs. undead is greatly lacking. Clerics are typically undead killers, well good clerics anyway but I think you can see what I mean.

[Daz]

Good aligned clerics currently provide undead with tanning alternatives.

------------------
-Daz "<^> (*¿*) <^>" Proudwolf

[Kifle]

Undead - 1
Clerics - 0

------------------
Kifle "It Slipped I swear!" ButteryFingers

[rylan]

I've spent -a lot- of time getting my spellcast necromancy up to 89.. gave up trying to notch it from there since I'm not sure it effects damage.

Anyway, eradicate seems to do a marginally higher amount of damage than full harm. Its nothing special, but is noticable. Definately nothing close to the extra damage of fire against cold as you mentioned tho.

[Zellin]

Unless you are a lich and a mob casts it on you. Ouch!

------------------
Zellin group says 'I'm still here buddy =)'
Zellin has left the group.

[Deltin]

the ease at which demons shrug cleric spells is rather disappointing too, it clerics had better battle skills against the undead/demons it would give them some character depth that is sorely missing, and not make them so one dimentional

[kiryan]

yea gonna echo that,

my cleric has like 0 luck landing spells on big shruggers. My shaman seems to be marginally better.

[Joth]

I made a number of post about eradicate and full harm damage, in the past. I also state that destory undead should be area effect, seems wierd, that out of the anti-undead not one is area effect. In addition, I also state in those post that clerics are basicly the nemesis of undead. In some case basicly after an invoker a cleric should do the most damage to undead mob types. It makes sense right P-)?

Nevertheless, I seriously doubt there will be changes made, so gotta live it with it.


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

[Mishre]

oh i see the problem, DOwngrade full harm so erradicate undead will be used more and seem more useful (nod me)

------------------
Mishri }-Sentinel-{ Shades of Twilight

[Deltin]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Joth:
<B>I made a number of post about eradicate and full harm damage, in the past. I also state that destory undead should be area effect, seems wierd, that out of the anti-undead not one is area effect. In addition, I also state in those post that clerics are basicly the nemesis of undead. In some case basicly after an invoker a cleric should do the most damage to undead mob types. It makes sense right P-)?

Nevertheless, I seriously doubt there will be changes made, so gotta live it with it.


</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

guess I didn't see those messages, I tried to do a search before starting this thread (shrug) It would be nice to hear people say we need a cleric because of all the damange they do against undead/demons. I totally agree there should be an anti undead area spell, I guess holy word might be considered that, but having it in the same circle as full heal is really pretty worthless.

[kiryan]

i remember some threads on clerics vs undead. I think most of them started out on a different upgrade cleric subject.

Full harm is not that weak. It just has a wide range, like rolling a 1d100 vs rolling 50d1. Every once in a while your gonna roll consecutive 3's heh.

The anti-undead line was really lack luster. Its undead specific, don't ya think that the spells could hit for respectable damage? and not respectable as in compared to full harm. I wanna see clerics begging to do CC for exp. I wanna see clerics doing undead exp.