>- Old YS, or similar to reduce armor hindrance.

I'm with you on everything else but this. An armor tertiary guild should not be the second-best armor guild in the game because of one spell.

>I can see that argument. What if it only worked on armor below a certain weight or removed a raw number rather than % amount of hindrance? The hindrance would already be fairly low, and this would give a moderate buff without being over powered? In other words, balance it in a way that a warmie in plate or brig is less penalized, but they still wouldn't be at the level of paladin, barbarian, trader, or ranger, especially on the top-end of heavy armors. It also wouldn't reduce stealth hindrance.


Difficult to find a decent balance with the reduction of hindrance as a concept, where the spell has appeal and isn't an issue. Most armor secondaries don't use full-body plate anyways, because the added protection doesn't make up for the hindrance penalties, to say nothing of stealth being useful.

There's not really any wiggle room: too low and it's useless because evasion/shield penalties are especially punishing to Warmies, too high and we go right back to plate being the de facto choice for Warmies.

I think it's current form, a straight buff to armor ranks, is probably more practical. It's useful at all skill levels given how hindrance scales now.

Minimum armor hindrance is affected by armor ranks relative to your defensive skills, so if you're using an evasion booster (or some such) an armor booster is also useful.

The parry hindrance reduction sounds like a good idea.

> This is completely untrue per Kodius post

While that is true, I think you're missing several extenuating factors that reduce the value overall.

1. Most people aren't having their armor contested. Armor is only contested if you fail to parry/dodge/block.

2. When armor is contested, armor quality reduces the damage blocked. If you, like most people, underhunt with medicore armor quality then you're negating this spell's benefits. Even with great armor.

3. The differences in damage reduction aren't that great: https://elanthipedia.play.net/Post:Armor_Food_for_Thought_-_09/29/2012_-_16:27

4. This only helps increase protection (reduce scuffs), not absorption (reduce big hits to light hits).

5. Everyone is already backtraining all armors so that they're roughly on par with shield. That means you don't need a buff when jumping up between areas. Maybe that changes on boss mobs and PvP, but normal hunting doesn't seem to matter.

6. A lot of debuffs and AOE TMs and creature control and defending also mean you really don't get hit a lot.

7. At the upper end, even with pristine and well-maintained armor, when you get hit, having 1-2 more points of protection won't help much.

8. Where the spell gives the most benefit, that benefit is negated by the additional hindrance and being armor tert. So it really doesn't matter that the armor protects slightly better in an over/under sort of way, if you're taking more or bigger hits due to hindrance or armor type. https://elanthipedia.play.net/Post:Armor_--_Neglect_Training_at_your_Peril_-_12/23/2009_-_19:20:37

9. Minimum hindrances are reached at a static point, not on a sliding scale based on what you're fighting. https://elanthipedia.play.net/Post:Armor_Food_for_Thought_-_10/01/2012_-_21:50

10. Even when it does apply, the scaling is very poor. https://elanthipedia.play.net/Post:Combat_3.0_Overview_-_7/14/2010_-_22:28:18

And I can go on and on and on. I may be wrong, but I think overall armor skill still has little to no value once you get to the point that you've reached your guild's minimum hindrance. Other than for TDPs, of course, but that isn't helped by a skill buff.

>>When armor is contested, armor quality reduces the damage blocked. If you, like most people, underhunt with medicore armor quality then you're negating this spell's benefits. Even with great armor.

...so repair your armor, because that's the entire reasoning behind repairing your armor?

>>And I can go on and on and on. I may be wrong, but I think overall armor skill still has little to no value once you get to the point that you've reached your guild's minimum hindrance

I wouldn't personally make a "here is why armor sucks" point by point list in an argument that is intended to be pro "here's why it would be so cool if this armor spell came back," because it looks like the big conclusion being reached is "we need a spell that reduces combat hindrance on armor because even though armor sucks there are TDPs to be gained for wearing all sorts of more hindering armor and this would make that more palatable."

For what it's worth, I'm in the "armor skill could use some love" camp as well.

---

Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.

> Cloth - 18.5% damage reduction - Cloth - 32.8% damage reduction
> Leather - 22.5% damage reduction - Leather - 37.8% damage reduction
> I don't agree with most of your statements, but this one really got me. If an almost 80% improvement in protection "isn't that great", I'd hate to see what you consider okay.

Re-read the GM's post. The 18.5% is 0 in armor skill. 32.8% damage reduction is armor skill greater than the target's offenses.

The bolded portion was the point of me linking that post. With the way people under hunt, most are already near the top-end because their armor skills will be greater than the offensive skills of their opponent, especially when you add in debilitation spells, buffs, and primary defenses reducing that offensive power. My understanding (and a GM - please correct me if this is wrong) is that you're really only seeing a difference of 14.3% damage reduction of an already reduced reduced hit, and only if that reduced offensive power is still greater than your armor ranks. I can't see the numbers, so there is guesswork here, but that's likely not an issue knowing how people underhunt. Unless you aren't using your buffs or debuffs, but then you wouldn't be using this one either.

> I also suspect the barrier review will go a long way to helping the less over-the-top style benefits to feel more impactful.

Potentially, but we just don't know.

> ...so repair your armor, because that's the entire reasoning behind repairing your armor?

My point was that people don't for a reason. They can survive just fine since they aren't being hit all that often. When they do get that random crit, the vitality barrier shields them from any real damage even if they had 0 armor thanks to damage. With that in mind, armor ranks are more or less pointless. I know that changes at the top of the top level, but people will likely have way better armor by that point too.

> This is very relevant to 3.0 combat. After hunting a few hours I need an Empath

Hunting what? Are you intentionally choosing something at the edge of your skill?

> I'm not sure it's normal to underhunt. People hunt stuff that teaches their defenses,

Right. We're talking about a warrior mage, not a paladin. Evasion and Shield, two very important defenses, are going to move very slowly.

> Armor buffs might not be as universally useful as an evasion buff but they're meaningful nonetheless.

I think we're going to go round and round on this because it's personal observation and napkin math. GMs can anyone put this disagreement to bed? How effective are armor ranks for a warrior mage?

>My point was that people don't for a reason. They can survive just fine since they aren't being hit all that often. When they do get that random crit, the vitality barrier shields them from any real damage even if they had 0 armor thanks to damage. With that in mind, armor ranks are more or less pointless. I know that changes at the top of the top level, but people will likely have way better armor by that point too.

>The bolded portion was the point of me linking that post. With the way people under hunt, most are already near the top-end because their armor skills will be greater than the offensive skills of their opponent, especially when you add in debilitation spells, buffs, and primary defenses reducing that offensive power. My understanding (and a GM - please correct me if this is wrong) is that you're really only seeing a difference of 14.3% damage reduction of an already reduced reduced hit, and only if that reduced offensive power is still greater than your armor ranks. I can't see the numbers, so there is guesswork here, but that's likely not an issue knowing how people underhunt. Unless you aren't using your buffs or debuffs, but then you wouldn't be using this one either.

Armor reduction's calculated on a critter's base offensive factor, you're not penalized for debilitating the monster's offense. Also, creatures do not have fixed offensive values, there is some random element of strength within a variable range, so unless you're right at the edge of a critter's soft cap, armor buffs are going to be universally useful, especially if you're mixing armor types and the additional hindrance of such is going to be penalizing base defenses.

Thirdly, the vitality barrier reduction is negligible compared to the defensive bonuses provided by armor, even at high stamina. This is, again, easily verifiable by removing your armor and watching any successful hit suddenly quadruple in strength, and this statement is true at all skill levels. Go take a few punches without armor; you'll soon come to realize how much work even a set of cloth leathers is putting in.


>With the way people under hunt

>Hunting what? Are you intentionally choosing something at the edge of your skill?

Hunting Xalashar right in the middle of their teaching range, +evasion buff, + parry buff, + shield buff, + armor ranks buff, damage mitigation meditation. Minor scuffing is a reality of combat in 3.0 for any guild that needs to sit at melee for extended periods of time letting critters whack at them to learn . Go sit in the Empath guild for five minutes: all these people needing healing are not "Over-hunting at the edge of their skill."

Scuffing being a reality isn't just about your skill relative to a critter's. Go sit in field goblins for an hour back-training sling (or whatever). If you have an autologger, skim through and you'll see a couple points where the goblins got through your defenses and their negligible damage was deflected by your armor.

>>Because people care about hindrance, not armor ranks.

Two solutions, neither of which involve bringing back a spell that broke skillset tier rules.

1) If you don't care about the protective nature of armor, and care more about hindrance, wear light armors like cloth. Cloth armor exists as the least-hindering option explicitly for this reason. Creating/reviving a spell that makes heavier/more protective armor gain the primary benefit of cloth armor devalues those less protective options.
2) If you want plate armor to have more value to it, create ways for it to become more appealing, as opposed to bringing back one spell that helps one guild offset the downside of the system as a whole.

---

Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.

Moon Mages

- Old shadow web. - is currently part of necro book they just sniped it and changed messaging.

- Clarify gem, but let it be cast (once) on a tied gem pouch or contract, maybe as a trader spell using the heavy TM timer.

- Crystal spike - Is slated to be brought back in a new form...cannot wait.

- Darkness - Super fun and cool Stealth spell

- Seal of Deflection - was slated to come back

- Ripple - A single target version of this would be awesome if it only worked on extra planar beings.

- Steelstar - Just was too cool...would give so much for this spell to return



"An' I'm learnin' 'ere in London what the ten-year soldier tells; If you've 'eard the East a-callin', you won't never 'eed naught else. No! you won't 'eed nothin' else"

>>I think that's a bit of a stretch, given that VS is a single-shot AoE (I wish it pulsed multiple times). It's also immobilization, not webbing (I prefer immobilization).

Shadow Web was immobilization. Which is better than stun for lowering a targets defense. Would be nice if moon mages could get this scroll spell back. There really was no good reason to take it away.

>>I wish it pulsed multiple times

My mistake. I thought they both pulsed as well. If it did pulse, it would be the same spell nearly with new messages.



"An' I'm learnin' 'ere in London what the ten-year soldier tells; If you've 'eard the East a-callin', you won't never 'eed naught else. No! you won't 'eed nothin' else"

>>It's possible shadow web was tweaked at some point, but I distinctly remember shadow web "webbed" people,

Try casting a spell, or doing any action while "webbed". That state is immobilized. There is no status in game that is "webbed". As far as what immobilized is doing there is this reference to it compared to being stunned.

(https://elanthipedia.play.net/Post:Halt_v._Stun_Foe_-_9/9/2009_-_15:53:45)

"An' I'm learnin' 'ere in London what the ten-year soldier tells; If you've 'eard the East a-callin', you won't never 'eed naught else. No! you won't 'eed nothin' else"

>>Yes, there is a status called "webbed".

Hmm damn I for sure thought you couldn't cast while in shadow web. I was wrong.




"An' I'm learnin' 'ere in London what the ten-year soldier tells; If you've 'eard the East a-callin', you won't never 'eed naught else. No! you won't 'eed nothin' else"

Webbing is like a weaker immobilization. It's easier to land and generally has a longer duration at similar success levels, but it doesn't prevent casting, it contests athletics (i.e. you can escape automatically with a sufficient success), and there are a number of abilities that allow possible escape from webbing (like barbarian whirlwind).

Also, things I thought I'd never hear, rank SS: "I miss Steelstar."