Shard's Shard (20DD 18brd 2pal)

[MightyKhan]

my definitions:
immunity (%) -> stacks
resistance (X/-) -> best applies (examples: dire buckler grants 25/- physical resistances. energy buffer grants 60/- resistances)
reduction (X/-) -> stacks (examples: DD, barbarian, epic DR feats, epic energy resistance feats*)
soak (X/+y) -> best applies (examples: stoneskin, CoT wrath)

all of the 4 categories above are applied seperately and roughly in that order (% first, not sure about the rest) and therefore 'stack' with eachother.

Note that X/- means not even +20 can penetrate. Which is why you dont see any X/+y elemental soaking.

the energy resistance feats are a weird case, because the epic versions do not stack with the pre-epic versions)

the description says physical DR, which would put it in the 3rd category, if the same definitions are used.

[shardelay]

Approximately a 6 minute buff of stacking 29/- and 9% phy immu -vs- effectively permanant 4ac.

I think I would rather have the AC in general, but depending on relative ab -vs- ac and other situational issues (other phys damage) I can see situations where the DR would be better. In general, however, I think I prefer the AC.

[bort]

If Khan's right and that's 29/- resist that stacks with DD + barb reduction and EDR feats it is much better than i had imagined.

I would probably still lean towards Girding if you wanted to max AC though. More phys would be great for HC or (in theory) to make your chanter a soak tank, but without class based crit immunity it might be too squishy, especially in terms of exotic damage.

[bort]

Can any DM confirm if what Khan is saying is correct about Chant of Warding stacking with DD's innate resist and x/- from gear please?

[shardelay]

Apr 23, 2010 13:49:27 GMT bort said:

Why? It was never an issue for dex staffmasters - if the DMs had a problem with it, they would have put limitations in place to prevent it. What's the most overpowering thing you could do anyway? Dual dwarven waraxes?

Why? Because why have a weapon restriction on a quasi and then allow it to use other weapons. It goes against the quasi idea.

As to staffmasters specifically... I was under the impression that you couldn't cast blackstaff on a non-staff, so it would self-regulate itself. A warchanter has no such self regulating feature and therefore it's just a 1 feat sink potentially (so i guess it's not nothing). I just saw, however, that dexer build you must have been referring too and asked if he's able to use blackstaff there.

But really... a staffmaster that doesn't use a staff? That's not a staffmaster... that's a notstaffmaster.

[bort]

You can't cast blackstaff on anything other than a qstaff - but there were several builds that qualified for staffmaster status and didn't use staffs.
Were limitations put in place to prevent them from benefitting from better buffs that a SM gets? No. Probably because not using a staff makes them less powerful, not more powerful, as it decreases their damage output (or at least it's a trade off of offense for defense, and as the DMs are all for promoting build diversity, presumably that's a good thing).

There's no limitation preventing a WC from using non warchanter weapons, but unlike threaders and staffmasters there's no logical reason they should be tied to a certain weapon, and they don't get benefits linked to those weapons either. Perhaps if there was some advantage to using WC weapons over other weapons there would a reason to choose them (besides saving a feat) but at the moment there isn't one.

[shardelay]

Can't argue with your logic at all. However, none of that addresses the fact that it's just silly to have a STAFFmaster not using a staff. But this is a warchanter thread, so that's my last word on it here. I derailed my own thread, and now im yelling at myself for doing it.

[bort]

Well perhaps it's a bit metagamey to ignore the supposed 'restrictions', but for WCs it seems more like a restriction designed to balance the benefits of the quasi with a feat cost than anything else.

If you can sidestep the supposed restrictions and come up with an interesting alternative build i think that's a good thing and offers more diversity, so long as it's not overpowered in some way compared to builds which comply with the restriction (which i don't think it is in the case of WCs).

In cases where players have used quasi-class benefits to produce more powerful builds than intended (like the AAs with staffmaster conceal and full bow damage) the DMs have adjusted things to maintain balance, and I think they're pretty good at that. I think WCs are finally coming to a point of balance though and despite inevitable metagaming by min/maxers they don't seem overpowered either way imo.

[shardelay]

This build has turned out much better than I anticipated. He's not a damage machine. No illusions there. He performs modestly at best but still contributes. His ab is just plain too low. However, he is inordinately sturdy. 137ac, 77% conceal, and 50%+ phys immunes with a shield for extra immunities makes him really quite solid. He's a great puller. He's very sturdy when he pulls and he can bring all the mobs cursed. At 1x demi w/out GR's he died much much less frequently than other tanks I've played. (often not dying at all on a run)

He was 100% sufficient solo bard on tia and dis. He would have been fine as the only bard on min (he did fine while the real bard was in limbo). If it wasn't for a lack of UUU I'd be comfortable with him through Cania. Lack of UUU makes him not really sufficient for most groups in phleg, mala, and cania. He'd definitely not cut it in nessus w/otu a real bard.

He acts as a nice bonus bard if you configure his song/curse nicely to maximize effects.

The only real annoying part is the limited number of songs (22 so don't be cursing the 1 or 2 mobs you miss on a big spawn... it's not worth it) and the short duration of his song.

I've been having problems with his stone stance adn his DoM - I need to fully test it before I make any solid statements, but it appears that they are not working correctly.

All in all, if you are happy doing less damage than most str tanks, he's a nice solid alternative. I was marginally surprised.

[dragonledak]

Some questions.

Is splashing paladin still recommended without the disease immune? Maybe blackguard for saves while evil and gift of undeath.

As for shields and the DWC super displacement/ev spell, do you need a shield that does not affect ev or does any old shield work?

How much conceal is lost be splashing? Mostly curious.

Would splashing Dragon disciple be a good Idea for +2 Str?

Thanks in advance for your responses.

P.S. Love the build, think you picked the right epics.

[shardelay]

Id still do pally 2 for sleep immune. it's great in the abyss. You could splash RDD, but i'd much rather have saves and sleep immune.

My regular shields work just fine.

I'd have to go back and look at the conceal formula to find how much is lost - it's on the forums somewhere, dig around =P

I've demid him now. He's still a great tank, but his damage is very sub par - just generic low lvl str tank. Hopefully warchanter gimicks will prove sufficient to let him replace a bard even more in the future.

[dragonledak]

Thanks

Conceal documentation is not hard to find, should have looked instead of asking lol. If I remember correctly max conceal on ev is 80% for non staffmaster's so only minus 3%.

I did not know Pallys got sleep immune, becuase in that case it sounds like the best splash.

As to the low damage I think I am going to forsake the damage route all together and focus on tanking using the new draw foes ability. Can supply buffs, cast some spells, curse/sing and most importantly of all... TANK! Sounds like fun.

Just noticed something, would be ok to splash a 3rd paladin level for the disease immune?

P.S. Thanks for the quick reply.

[shardelay]

Looks like 19dd, 18brd, 3 pal will work when i check the quasi requirements. I built this before dis was moved to lvl 3. That's probably a good change. You are still CC DD, and you still get the same epics as long as you have 18/18.

You would be loosing one more Chanter level for purposes of spells and songs, though that's not a huge issue.