FinalHavenLarp.com

Altearez Oh yea Alt wears heavy armor to
Path Master Warrior

Fortitude
Parry
C.R.
+1 weapon

Disciplens

First
Knight up to lv.4

second
Capitan up to level


Seth
Jack of all trades
No combat skills
Disciplens

First
Seer up to lv 4



DID I GET SCREWED BY THE RULE CHANGES OR WHAT?

No...you get a re-write.

What he said.


I used to have starfire touch.

I never had it and I miss starfire touch.

still sucks the only characters I have had their main strong points taken away I just find it really really funny.

Try playing and alchemist or arcane for a long time. At least it was only one or two skills that got changed. You get a re-write. Quit whining.

Didn't mean to post that twice. That's what I get for trying to post using my phone.

Fionna wrote: Quit whining.

thats what we do here in the rules forums, so please dont call out other people in a negative way. its one of the reasons i keep my brother off this forum

it may look like were all mad at each other here and dont like one another, but i PM some of my strongest rivals on here to make sure they know that even though we dont see eye to eye, and disagree on stuff, were still good. all were doing is having debates, arguements, conversations, etc. about the rules, if we didnt, things would not get better, fixed, broken, etc.

just ironic that that semmed to bee most of the changes anyway.

He built a Character with a history to have strong strikes, "4's". Now i understand 3's was the way we used to do it, but to raise it to 4, in my opinion balanced warriors up to Rogues in DPS.

When his armor got changed with Captain, he lost the ability to use his Quality heavy armor with the write up, now its back down to Med. if he keeps his Charactor what he was as Captain. So from 16 to 8 for armor, 4 to 3 in base damage as well as no more dualing 2's if he drops knight because it doesn't work with warrior. Umm....

That doesn't even make sense to me BTW, why are Knights no longer considered a warrior synergistic Disipline? wasn't it origanally made to make warriors better?

I'd also like to point out that how many PC's do you see who sacrific the points to start swinging 4's thats 240pt.'s worth of character.

So in order for him to gain 4's as it was, he could only get a lvl 2 discipline or 3 lvl 1's. I think he's trading ALOT away for what made a warrior BOSS with the Hero's and Villans expansion.

NOTE: I play a Rogue and I feel like Warriors are getting too weak for me. It's not ok when I think its possible for me to walk face to face with a warrior, and ballzy go toe to toe with him for a win. Roguse should cower a bit when this happens.

As well as they don't have the best switch outs, Are they being Nerf'd for the rite reasons? I guess is what im asking.

Also Note, in the H & E expansion Rogues got brought to power, they no longer feel like their skills are worthless and i love that, but looking over the Warrior skills i would never take them.

I'm sorry if anything i've said anyone disagrees with it but its what it seems like.

How does knight not work with warrior?


you can change out the WS for something else.

As far as DPS, barring skill of the fighter,

warrior has VASTLY higher DPS. no question not even a little. warrior + WS or WF is 2 hits a second average.(not machine gunning.) that means he will be hitting for 6 dps and can not be interrupted.


rogue and empath have high BURST DAMAGE. not DPS. their DPS is very low actually lower than normal person swinging ones. this is not an accident.

Now , the better fighter wins. this means that the rogue will try to step and charge and the warrior will try to stay on him. He who is better and faster wins.

the warrior gets the MOST soak in game and the some of the best combat skills hands down. what they don't get is variety and burst damage.

my view on the change is well known, so i wont recap here.

this warrior discusion is my titanic, at first it was just sinking so i figured i could try and save it, but then it split in half with the rule updates so now im just swimming as far away from it as i can so it doesnt suck me down with it. . . .

dont like the ruleing but its a lost cause.

options?
altearez stay a captain knight, you can duel weild and swing 2, get a little soak, etc. and change your path to empath or rouge, if you change to rouge drop captain and take rouge duel weild.

I really hate the whole DPS argument anyway because you are all assuming everyone is an extremely good fighter and we all can hit every time, and the ratio of hits per character skill's and damage blah blah blah......... NO ONE FIGHTS THE SAME AND OUR NPC'S KICK ASS.... so the whole dps argument to me means nothing, the rogue is more accurate and the warrior doesn't score as many hits in, there are many angels to what makes things better or not.


Warriors don't do a damn thing, How many full warriors swinging 4's to you see anyone listening to, or that are extremely powerful in game? A very useful synergistic effect has been thrown out for warriors it out. How people came to the idea it was overpower full is beyond me seeing that Me and maybe 2 other PC's ever really played a warrior swinging 4's. If it is so OP wouldn't it be like Seer and everyone would have it.

Now most the warrior switch outs from advanced up to master now kind of suck, by the way why is noble reputation a warrior skill, this gives only the political leaders or war type characters a skill advantage in the game no one else, same thing goes for battle tactics in the advanced switch outs.


THE GAME IS NOW OUT OF BALANCE-Now anyone can swing 3's if they are a master warrior therefore making warriors as a whole stronger.
no reason to take any of the LV.4 +1 discipline skills at all now. also you can swing 3's with any type of weapon.


the seer is change understandable, but captain should be able to keep unrestricted dual wield because they have such a weak Lv.1 skill, the old bureaucrat lv.1 allegiance, yet again I say how many fighting character have people giving them allegiance.


I think people are bickering about 4's because it sounds strong, but in truth changing the skill in that way is not really balancing the game, it would have been better to get rid of it and give warriors a different master skill, like armor utilization of something of the sort, make it defensive.

I really understand your frustration. When ever a character concept gets nerfed it is natural to be upset. I assure you we have had numerous discussions for a year on these subjects and it wasnt something we changed lightly.

Duel wield since the beginning of the game has had an armor restrction so normalizing captain is a correction of an oversight.

As for the swinging 4 thing I am actually one of the GM's which supports 4's, but only if it carried with it the armor restriction of "No Armor". Basically creating a offensive warrior without much defense.

As I said though I understand your frustration, we value your oppinion and we love having you at the game. My suggestion is if you do not like the feel of the warrior or captain then please discuss with us and we will give you a rewrite to rogue.

Let us know if you have any other concerns or Questions.

How people came to the idea it was overpower full is beyond me seeing that Me and maybe 2 other PC's ever really played a warrior swinging 4's.

The reason it is being judged as overpower is because in 6 seconds a warrior swinging 4 can dish out 48 points of damage. Arguments of player skill over DPS are moot, as no two people are perfectly matched. Based on this knowledge, an average DPS of two hits per second is a logical starting point for judging balance issues. If you doubt the system, try it. Take a boffer and swing it at a chair as fast as you can while still calling damage clearly and concisely. It'll average about two hits per second.

Now, using this newfound knowledge, calculate the difference between a warrior/knight swinging 4 twice per second versus a rogue/avyana swinging 15 (the maximum a rogue can swing without any items) every 20 seconds (the fastest a rogue can charge without an item or potion). Lets see damage if both are attacking 'training dummies' (to take out personal skill) for one minute:

Warrior/Knight: 480 damage
Rogue/Avyana: 45 damage from critical strike

The warrior does over ten times the damage of a rogue. Now, we can do the same experiment, but add a curved blade, a balanced blade, and a skill mastery potion to the rogue, leaving the warrior at baseline. This puts the warrior at 4 damage twice per second, and the rogue at 9 every 5 seconds (the average is better using basic critical strike rather than master). Once again, attacking 'training dummies' for one minute:

Warrior/Knight: 480 damage
Rogue/Avyana: 108 damage from critical strike

With two exotic items and a master level potion, the rogue still falls quite short from a naked warrior with a stick.

If it is so OP wouldn't it be like Seer and everyone would have it.

The reason many people took Seer was that it only required a Discipline, not both Path and Discipline. It's easier to come up with 90 points than 210.

THE GAME IS NOW OUT OF BALANCE-Now anyone can swing 3's if they are a master warrior therefore making warriors as a whole stronger.
no reason to take any of the LV.4 +1 discipline skills at all now. also you can swing 3's with any type of weapon.

The game is out of balance now that warriors can only swing three, but not when they could swing 4? I'm not sure I understand your point.

the seer is change understandable, but captain should be able to keep unrestricted dual wield because they have such a weak Lv.1 skill, the old bureaucrat lv.1 allegiance, yet again I say how many fighting character have people giving them allegiance.

Allegiance is the only skill in game that gets better as the character gains levels. And if we're talking game balance, a warrior/knight swinging paired threes without a hero point in full heavy armor is completely overpowered. If you want to use paired weapons in heavy armor, play a brawler. That way, you also have undisarmable and unshatterable weapons.

I think people are bickering about 4's because it sounds strong, but in truth changing the skill in that way is not really balancing the game, it would have been better to get rid of it and give warriors a different master skill, like armor utilization of something of the sort, make it defensive.

Warriors already have two defensive skills (one being parry, arguably the best defensive ability in the game), and two skills that allow them to raise their base damage by one each. Personally, I think Noble Reputation was the best skill to give the warrior that wouldn't make them more overpowered than they are.