|
Post by desocupado on Mar 25, 2015 3:09:46 GMT
Overview:- Weak criticals (no OC/DC) // Go straight for critical immune targets, while caster clerics use heartbane on critables.
- Good damage bonus but wield one handed weapon - PWSpec + divine might +2 bonus attacks
- Party support: 2 PSK (Abjuration and Divination) + 1 ESF (IoF) or (Guird) and huge Battletide with -4 and SP 66 //I'd leave Guird for caster clerics
- Listen skill - almost ok AB (94 -the huge battletide helps)
- Good AC potential - can use low AC heavy armor (Mandate of Heavens) and tower shields (One Thousand Curses / Solar Arc) and fix their AC with magic vestment
- Incredible damage soak with gate and the gear above and greater restoration
- Passable dex (base 14) // Can compliment with foundation of stone
Half-elf = +1 skill & enables LSA listen Pharlan Str+4 Wis+4 Cha+4 - G.str+2 & divine might Str 14+4 +20/lvl +6/feat = 44 Dex 14 Con 10 Int 14 Wis 14+4 +2/feat Cha 12+4 Saves at 60/+12 F 10 + 3 +2 = 15 +9/cha +6/con +35/regular = 65 R 05 + 1 +0 = 06 +9/cha +8/dex +35/regular = 58 //The Paladin splash fix this post 60W 10 + 1 +0 = 11 +9/cha +11/wis+35/regular = 66 Pre-epic: Cleric 1 -> Paladin 1 -> Cleric 14 -> Fighter 1 -> Cleric 16 -> Fighter 2 1 Blooded 3 WF Morningstar 6 SF Div* 9 GSF Div* 12 Extend Spell 15 SF Trans 17 IC 18 GSF Trans 20 GWF --------------- Epic Cleric 34 -> Fighter 4 -> cleric 35 21 EWF 24 EP 27 Str+1 ESF Div 30 Str+1 AS 33 Str+1 Great Wis 36 Str+1 Great Wis 39 Weapon spec & Epic Weapon Spec *! Fighter level 40 ESF Trans ---------- Legendary (Read Abjuration tome) 42 LSa Tumble 45 LSF Div 48 LWF 51 LWSpec 54 LSF Abj 57 LSA Listen 60 ESF DisciplineArtifact options - Strength provides extra ab and damage and stun immunity + "greater ruin touch" active
- Dexterity helps with dex checks and give immunity to blindness on top of darkness spell active
- Constitution provides hps and poison immunity, but this immunity can probably be covered with neutralize poison spell
- Speed grants slow immunity, movement speed and the useful mass blind active
--- Paragon PWF PWS 4 PSF+PSK x2 (Divination and Abjuration) ---- AB 16 + 10 +15 +23/str +8/feat +20/mag +2/CW = 94 (kinda meh, but BT helps) ---- Skills 2 + 2/int +1/elf Discipline 43 //Make sure to save up points to dump it at 40Concentration 43 CA 40* (put it last) CW 63 Listen 63 Tumble 60 --- Variant ideas: 1 - Drop 2 cha, increase Wisdom by 1, pick a fourth scholl as SF at 18 then increase both schools to GSF at 33-36, then swap the last feat out to get it to ESF. 2 - Drop 4 cha (-3 damage and -2 saves) for +2 base dex (checks)
|
|
|
Post by Torin on Mar 25, 2015 17:33:24 GMT
Nice. With Pharlan and WS is exactly how I would build a Battle Cleric too. Is it on paper or did you played it already (how far? how are the experience?)
What domains did you take?
Mishs BC has div, enchantment, and abjuration. You took Trans instead of enchantment. That is +16 buff over 15 buff & Girdling. Nearly the same choice.
I think you can drop one Great Wis feat and get another Epic feat because 19 wis is enough. My choice would be EMA for Epic Dodge (and skill buff).
Imho, 20 concentration is fine. But the rest better in CA or spellcraft for EMA requirements).
|
|
|
Post by desocupado on Mar 25, 2015 21:02:25 GMT
Nice. With Pharlan and WS is exactly how I would build a Battle Cleric too. Is it on paper or did you played it already (how far? how are the experience?) What domains did you take? Mishs BC has div, enchantment, and abjuration. You took Trans instead of enchantment. That is +16 buff over 15 buff & Girdling. Nearly the same choice. I think you can drop one Great Wis feat and get another Epic feat because 19 wis is enough. My choice would be EMA for Epic Dodge (and skill buff). Imho, 20 concentration is fine. But the rest better in CA or spellcraft for EMA requirements). Concept. However it's quite similar to other clerics in this board (AB, saves), but features the Fighter splash they didn't. I might to reincarnate my slinger, into this, then as turner at x2 (tough this build is quite strong in higher levels). Domains - picking one for energy buffer might seem nice (Earth Fire or Protection), but gate cover that enough i think. Trickery offers Improved invisibility for minor concealment boost. School reasoning: PSK div is obviously too good to pass up PSK ABJ - Aegis tend to end before a party rests, so 2 castings is welcome - Permanency might be popular in some layers (cast it when a elite paragon slagging mob shows up) The leaves ESF Trans vs ESF Enchant (+13) - well, real clerics always pick the later, as do chanters, so a IoF provides additional utility. Since this cleric theme is "bash critical immune targets, having +16 achieves that better) - Yeah, EMA seems good.
|
|
|
Post by Twilight Semner on Mar 26, 2015 5:49:20 GMT
Enchant is far superior to trans, especially in conjunction with abjuration. You need both in order to get +20 AC on your mandate and shield. Breaking 140+ AC on a strength soak tank is huge. Relying on your caster cleric for girding just isn't enough of a guarantee when it's a difference of 4 AC.
|
|
|
Post by Yojimbo on Mar 26, 2015 18:07:06 GMT
I think there is absolutely no reason any cleric outside of Battle Clerics should take Trans foci and IoF will greatly benefit the BC and the rest of the party while the BC will have solid AC w/o GotF and potential for good AC when in a party where GotF is present. If a BC should not take Trans foci who should because I think any argument for casters or turners to take it at this time make less sense than it does for the BC which to me at least make a reasonable amount of sense.
|
|
|
Post by desocupado on Mar 26, 2015 21:09:44 GMT
I think there is absolutely no reason any cleric outside of Battle Clerics should take Trans foci and IoF will greatly benefit the BC and the rest of the party while the BC will have solid AC w/o GotF and potential for good AC when in a party where GotF is present. If a BC should not take Trans foci who should because I think any argument for casters or turners to take it at this time make less sense than it does for the BC which to me at least make a reasonable amount of sense. I agree with you. Also, with magic vestment at +18 ac, you already have +4 ac on most tower shields, thus having more ac than a regular Str tank. IoF has no place on turners, who are quite feat hungry as it is: (they also require spell penetration, and abjuration and enchant are very good on them) But nothing stops someone from picking guird.
|
|
|
Post by Twilight Semner on Mar 27, 2015 2:17:33 GMT
It depends. If your purpose for playing a battle cleric is to be truly invincible, you take girding. Against certain enemies, having girding will make you 25% as likely to get hit versus not having it. If your purpose is to deal damage then either 1) don't play a battle cleric or 2) go 2H. Who cares if you have +16 GMW if you're doing lackluster damage anyway? Your role as a sword/board battle cleric is to be the last one standing when everyone else is dropping like flies, even against the most terrifying enemies in the mod. Gird works towards that purpose. Trans doesn't. You can say it's a matter of preference, but objectively speaking, based on the overall intention of the build, girding is superior. Now, if you're going to go 2H, it doesn't matter as much and you can more easily fit trans - and the +16 GMW will only bolster your already considerable damage. But even then, girding is still useful if you want to use mandate - in this case the choices are about on par.
|
|
|
Post by chirality on Mar 27, 2015 2:42:36 GMT
even against the most terrifying enemies in the mod. no, for those we use immute and if it's still alive by the time that ends, we use 2nd immute!
|
|
|
Post by Twilight Semner on Mar 27, 2015 3:26:33 GMT
My bad, big oversight on my part. I also forgot about everyone running 2x Greater Ruin and Eradicate.
|
|
|
Post by desocupado on Mar 27, 2015 3:42:49 GMT
I know how guirding is good (your look on % effect of +5 AC is simplified and technically incorrect - this isn't concealment) but, like yojimbo, I believe someone else will supply it. If you don't feel free to pick up enchantment. Because whenever the battle cleric or the caster cleric casts guird it'll add up on magic vestment and reach +20.
---
Regardless of using shield or not, this cleric attacks and get attacked, whenever or not he deals 80+ physical like a two hander, both will happen. So improving either attack or defense is a gain as a tank.
So, if he can attack 7 times with piercing/bludgeoning (60+ physical & other damages) can't he get IoF to do more damage? IoF is a party spell. The 2-handed Blackguard with 130 physical damage in the party will benefit from it as will the rogue with 30d6 sneak attack.
-----
The thing you just described is a dwarf defender under a cleric's GR or even a druid's font of restoration. The Dex 14 and Con 10 will never get me anywhere near invincible. He's still male bait. He will be KD. He will be instaed.
While gate is pretty strong, it can be overwhelmed (if it couldn't be overwhelmed, the ac wouldn't matter). And this guy doesn't even have any bonus to physical immunity (he does heal vulnerability and avoid layer penalty - but he can give those advantages to others too). In fact he loses a bit due SH.
--- I'd say my role, as a battle cleric, is being a team player. I give unique buffs, I can cast emergency spells, I can debuff with battletide, I cast gr / life grace when someone is resurrected, I can resurrect, I can prevent slag. I can buff everyone to +16. I bash kroaches and pit fiends.
---
ac 10 - base 20 - natural (strongheart) 8+18 - armor modifier (armor bonus + base armor type) 3 - dex modifier (may be limited by armor type) 20 - deflection 20 - dodge + haste 12 - tumble (depends on skill level) 2 - armor skin 3+18 - shield modifier 2 - skill modifier (craft armor provides +1 to ac per 40 fully modified ranks) 136 Guird adds +4
|
|
|
Post by Twilight Semner on Mar 27, 2015 4:03:51 GMT
I know how guirding is good (your look on % effect of +5 AC is simplified and technically incorrect - this isn't concealment) How's it technically incorrect? Let's take Asmodeus who has 119 AB on his best attacks. Against your 136 AC he's going to hit you on a 17, 18, 19, 20, which is a 20% chance of hitting your AC. You have a 140 AC, he only hits you on a 20, or a 5% chance. 5% is 1/4 of 20%.... ie. you'd be hit by that AB 25% as often. So.... not sure exactly how I'm "technically incorrect."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2015 6:35:13 GMT
I know how guirding is good (your look on % effect of +5 AC is simplified and technically incorrect - this isn't concealment) How's it technically incorrect? Let's take Asmodeus who has 119 AB on his best attacks. Against your 136 AC he's going to hit you on a 17, 18, 19, 20, which is a 20% chance of hitting your AC. You have a 140 AC, he only hits you on a 20, or a 5% chance. 5% is 1/4 of 20%.... ie. you'd be hit by that AB 25% as often. So.... not sure exactly how I'm "technically incorrect." I think he just means that after factoring in all other attacks (made at lower AB obviously), the true benefit of +4 AC is significantly less than 'getting hit 25% as often' which your post suggests. --> Most simple example: Against an opponent with four attacks per round @ AB: 100/95/90/85 With 120 AC, all four attacks have a 5% chance of landing (on a 20), so after 100 rounds we expect to be hit 20 times With 116 AC, the first attack has a 25% chance of landing and the next three have a 5% chance, so after 100 rounds we expect to be hit 40 times IE: +4 AC reduced the number of hits taken by 50%; NOT 75%, which only accounts for the first attack. Of course this varies depending on AB/AB progression/attacks per round.
|
|
|
Post by desocupado on Mar 27, 2015 10:32:25 GMT
How's it technically incorrect? Let's take Asmodeus who has 119 AB on his best attacks. Against your 136 AC he's going to hit you on a 17, 18, 19, 20, which is a 20% chance of hitting your AC. You have a 140 AC, he only hits you on a 20, or a 5% chance. 5% is 1/4 of 20%.... ie. you'd be hit by that AB 25% as often. So.... not sure exactly how I'm "technically incorrect." I think he just means that after factoring in all other attacks (made at lower AB obviously), the true benefit of +4 AC is significantly less than 'getting hit 25% as often' which your post suggests. --> Most simple example: Against an opponent with four attacks per round @ AB: 100/95/90/85 With 120 AC, all four attacks have a 5% chance of landing (on a 20), so after 100 rounds we expect to be hit 20 times With 116 AC, the first attack has a 25% chance of landing and the next three have a 5% chance, so after 100 rounds we expect to be hit 40 times IE: +4 AC reduced the number of hits taken by 50%; NOT 75%, which only accounts for the first attack. Of course this varies depending on AB/AB progression/attacks per round. Yes, a simple way to go around is analyze a round. Just look at percent chance of not being hit every round (i'll add haste to the example, as it makes a huge difference): B 0,95 * 0,95 * 0,95 * 0,95 * 0,95 = 77% chance of not being hit in a round A 0,80 * 0,95 * 0,95 * 0,95 * 0,80 = 55% chance of not being hit in a round So without guird, in this example your chance of being hit increase by ~41% // (1 - (0,77/0,55)) This simpler model doesn't discriminate whenever it's 1 hit or 5 hits hits in. I'd quote magicalmaster for another way to analyze this: As you probably know, the absolute value of AB and AC does not matter, only the difference between the two numbers due to the d20 system. In other words, an AB of 30 versus AC of 40 is the same as an AB of 80 versus an AC of 90. So, a person with four attacks plus haste with an AB of 30 versus an AC of 40 would have the following chances to hit... 0.55/0.30/0.05/0.05/0.55 = 1.5 hits per round Concealment obviously reduces this number, but it applies equally to every attack, so you can just multiply the 1.5 result by the concealment (30% concealment would mean 1.5 0.7 = 1.05). Also, I'm assuming critical hits are not a factor (and in fact make this problem worse). Using this logic we would get an expectation of: A 0,05 + 0,05 + 0,05 + 0,05 + 0,05 = 0,25 received attacks per round A 0,20 + 0,05 + 0,05 + 0,05 + 0,20 = 0,55 received attacks per round So the expectation of being hit increases by 2,2 times (110%)! However, between soak and gr, that damage is nulled even with lower ac.
|
|
|
Post by woqued on Mar 27, 2015 17:54:05 GMT
Did you consider dropping two points from Cha to Wis (15+4 = 19, enough to cast 9s) to free two feats? Your saves are fine excluding Reflex - and putting the wis feats into dex feats would help with checks / undo the downsides of dropping cha, excluding a very minor dmg drop in Div Might.
Also , with just 14 dex starting out, you will end up at 28 at 60 with +14, 32 at doubledemi, 34 with +16 at doubledemi - as you chose +8 BAC armor this will put -regular- malebs at 40+4, you cant tank them reliably even with UUU at doubledemi and +16 stat item.. Even with asmo belt and UUU you can't reliably tank paragon Malebs or deal dmg when there are any around and they're one of your primary targets too. If you put two points into dex (from the free feats we got from new stat allocation with cha/wis) at least the "final product" with doubledemi and +16 and paragon stats allow you to be immune to regular Erinyes / Advespa / Narzugon, as well as with UUU regular malebranches (36+8 = 44! -> no need for +2 dex from paragon levels to be immune to regulars without stat check item).
Making a tank that is eaten for breakfast by common trash mobs (erinyes, narzugon, advespa) and your main course (malebranches) even at doubledemi is a questionable idea from Hells pov anyway. Regarding the iof/ench spellschool choice plan, I think its a matter of taste. I'd personally drop iof and the lsf/psf/psk abjuration, instead pick up psf: enh and paragon balance. -> This would put you at: +15 gmw / girding for party / +20 ac on shield/armor, dex check capability in Hells vs. IOF for party/yourself, +18 ac on shield/armor, 50 > 100% EI and antislag (useful in basically one map in Hells and Shed in Abyss), tho the improved GMW kicks in rather late compared to IOF.
|
|
|
Post by desocupado on Mar 27, 2015 20:46:30 GMT
Did you consider dropping two points from Cha to Wis (15+4 = 19, enough to cast 9s) to free two feats? Your saves are fine excluding Reflex - and putting the wis feats into dex feats would help with checks / undo the downsides of dropping cha, excluding a very minor dmg drop in Div Might. The saves are good, cha mod will kick in later. fyk Epic cleric bonus feats list: That being said, it's possible to fit another epic, if you take 2 Sf instead of SF and GSF in pre-epic, and drop 2 Cha, and use the lvl 60 feat. IoF + Guird would suit what you'd like, I think (tough it drops EMA). - BTW EMA grants +20 armor ac. Also , with just 14 dex starting out, you will end up at 28 at 60 with +14, 32 at doubledemi, 34 with +16 at doubledemi - as you chose +8 BAC armor this will put -regular- malebs at 40+4, you cant tank them reliably even with UUU at doubledemi and +16 stat item. It's a cleric, can't be helped. Any investment beyond base dex 14 would conflict with spell schools or need for base wisdom 19 or AB. Swap wis with dex, and subrace to half-guardinal, then change base class to CoT. That way you'd achieve a more uni-like tank.
|
|