Ruminate

So I should do what you did on page 2? Take a lone combat log with 2 interrupts, then tell everyone how important interrupts are because you assume the spider would have gotten a hit if you didn't interrupt?

How can you extrapolate that i will die in scenario 2 when I already gave you a scenario above where I killed the bear with 19 might and 0 interrupts? You're not making any sense. Thats gonna be difficult to test, especially since a string of crits, even at 3 might, will floor the bear. But I'll try to think of something.

I have 3 might, 18 constitution, 100 perception, 100 resolve on one screenshot. I have 3 might, 18 constitution, 3 perception, and 100 resolve in the other. If I normalized my stats, I wouldn't be interrupting 100% of the time. Not even half the time, or even a quarter of the time. A normalized stat spread wouldn't show the difference between 0% interrupts and 100% interrupts. But if it makes you happy, here is a test using "normalized" stats. This first screenshot shows a stat spread of 19 might, 19 dexterity, and 10s in everything else: 5 hits and 4 grazes from the morning star. 9 attacks until the bear dies. This next screenshot shows a stat spread of 19 dexterity, 19 perception, and 10s in everything else: 5 hits, 6 grazes, and 2 misses from the morning star. 13 total attacks, but it wasn't enough to kill the bear. The only thing you can extrapolate is the effect might has on grazes. Might lessens the impact of grazing hits because a graze does not multiply your damage by 0.5. Grazes subtract 50% from your damage bonus. Going from 100% to 50% is a 50% reduction, but going from 150% to 100% is only a 33% reduction. Throw in some DR and its why I was grazing for 6 damage in one screenshot, but grazing for 11 in the other. 11 is almost double of 6, even though 19 might only adds 27% bonus damage. But this thread isnt about how important might may or may not be. Its about how important interrupt may or may not be.

Why would a long enough timeline matter? Interrupts in Pillars of Eternity are not the same as interrupts in other games. An interrupt in PoE does not reset the attack, it only delays it. Here is the same test with a morning star, naked, with +27% attack speed: 11 hits inbetween 4 bear hits at 100% interrupt chance. 7 hits inbetween 4 bear hits at 0% interrupt chance. 11 hits vs. 7 hits inbetween 4 bear hits. I'll ask again: does that sound good to you? What would you sacrifice in order to go from 0 interrupt chance to 100%?

I'm not sure why you're paying attention to the graze. The only thing relevant is the number of hits inbetween the bear's attacks. If I set it up so that the bear has a 100% chance to miss, the same relevant scenario will occur: 6 hits without interrupts vs. 8 hits with full interrupts

Take note of the following combat log: I managed to get 8 hits off inbetween each bear hit when all of my interrupts are 100%. I attack approximately twice per second. Now, take a look at this combat log: I managed to get 6 hits off inbetween each bear hit when my interrupt chance is 0. Does that sound good to anyone? If yes, then what would you be sacrificing to go from 0 interrupt chance to 100 interrupt chance?

Not true, they have similar base stats and fighters have pure defensive skills and cc that are probably better Defender doesn't stack with deflection buffs, like Shields of the Faithful. Virtuous Defense doesn't stack with all defense buffs, like Circle of Protection.

A heavy armored cipher wielding an estoc, without draining whip, and without retaliation, can generate focus faster than a naked cipher wielding a blunderbuss with draining whip. (keyword: can, not will) Estocs deal much more DPS compared to a blunderbuss against low/medium DR targets, and much more DPS against higher DR targets. The higher your DPS, the higher your focus generation. Since draining whip is a static +12 focus per blunderbuss volley(12 focus is equivalent to 48 damage... keyword: damage, not DPS), there is a threshold where a certain amount of damage bonus will allow the heavy armored estoc to eclipse the naked blunderbuss. Naked Ciphers with dual stilettos and draining whip can probably generate focus the fastest of them all, though.

Please quote me where I stated the Cipher's Paralyze is more unreliable. I think you'll find I stated Cipher's Paralyze can sometimes paralyze multiple targets, but unreliably so. How is this not reasonable and accurate? Perhaps you misunderstood. And if you're also implying I at some point stated Chanters get an accuracy bonus for casting their AOE paralyze, please quote that as well. As for the only other example, please cite where Lay On Hands heals for more than 30 endurance. The only pool of knowledge about the game that we have lists the basic Lay On Hands as healing for 30 endurance. Might can increase that amount, but the base amount is 30, at least according to the wiki. If you've got some other source that shows otherwise, by all means. If you're claiming my thread is "misinformation," again this sounds absurd and I'd like to hear concrete examples. To imply I am "blatantly spreading misinformation" is nothing short of absurd. You've cited two examples that I'd love to see a quote on and a third where I simply want to hear a source or reason as to why you're so sure. If you want to know why I'm accusing you of having some emotional investment in Paladins for some reason, this is it. You're accusing me of having some agenda against Paladins for some reason, to the degree to which I'm running around purposefully lying about them in some strange scheme to...what? Keep people from playing them? Ask yourself how absurd that sounds. Furthermore I'm familiar with this tactic: it's called an ad hominem. Where you attack the person behind the argument when you find difficulty attacking the argument itself. Listen, I don't sit here accusing you of lying about things to further some strange agenda. All I said was I'm getting the sense you're a bit too emotionally invested in Paladin....which still seems to be the case for me. All that was meant is just look at the numbers, compare them by classes, and focus purely on the numbers and I think you'll find Paladin difficult to defend. So I'll ask again: 1) Please name a class that has such amazingly superior paralyze/petrify ability to Chanter. Please do not name Cipher as I already addressed that and how the two synergize quite well together. 2) Please quote me where I've "spread misinformation" in regards to Ciphers or anything really. You said, and I quote, "Cipher's is more single-target with a small chance of hitting more targets, but it's unreliable. I have no idea where you're getting that Chanter's invocation is unreliable." If you call the Ciphers version unreliable, yet; have no idea how the Chanter's invocation is unreliable, then it stands to reason that you believe the Cipher's version is more unreliable than the Chanter's version. If not, then your thoughts are irrational. I never said you were running around lying about Paladins in some grand scheme to do whatever. I said, "you have an irrational hate for Paladins and have been spreading misinformation about how their abilities work.". Are you spreading misinformation because you want to "keep people from playing them"? No. I'm not irrational, like you, to think you'd do that. Are you spreading misinformation because you're ignorant about how the game works? Probably. On the other hand, before I accused you of irrational hate, you said that I "seem to have some irrational love of Paladins that's driving (me) to be hostile towards (you) simply for suggesting they're not God's gift to man in Pillars of Eternity.". Correcting your misinformation does not mean I want you to believe they're "God's gift to man." You were being irrational when you said that. I've already named three classes that have superior petrification or paralysis. You simply refuse to listen. I've already explained how Lay on Hands heals for more than 30 endurance in your own thread about Paladins. I'm tired of repeating myself.

Which class does this? Exactly. Whereas I've named examples of things Paladins do and things other classes do better, you're just saying "why isn't Chanter even better than it already is" without naming examples of superior performance. The only classes that provide a paralyze like Chanter are Cipher and Wizard. Cipher's is more single-target with a small chance of hitting more targets, but it's unreliable. I have no idea where you're getting that Chanter's invocation is unreliable. Show me where it says "this has low accuracy" or the like on that skill, because it doesn't; it can be expected to work as frequently as any other ailment attempt. It may miss some, but it's a freaking AOE. You can expect it to hit AT LEAST 60% of it's targets, usually 80%, which would be far too many for a Cipher to keep under control. Coincidentally, a Cipher's paralyze ability will dwindle as the battle carries on and his focus lowers, making it so Chanter and Cipher synergize perfectly in this regard, with both buying time for the other to get their paralyze off. Wizard? His is legit learned at level 10 or 11. Hardly something to rely on for the full game, though very very strong once you get it, though by that same time you'll have replaced the Cipher's paralyze (or rather found something better to focus on) as well. And what "misinformation" have I spread? That you even suspect I have some irrational hatred of Paladins? That kinda just reinforces my point you love them. I posted constructive criticism about clear flaws I see. Unless you can cite a list of me providing misinformation or something, then I don't think your claim carries much weight. My first class I went to make when I got the game was actually Paladin, but I quickly rerolled into another class because it felt underwhelming. As time went on, it not only felt underwhelming, but it became clear that Paladin had underperfomed compared to every other class I'd tried, and the forums were ripe with threads pointing out said fact. All I did was take common knowledge about the Paladin class and attempt a concise list of problems the class had that made it weaker than others, while suggesting ways to fix it. I'd also be curious how a Darcozzi Paladin would be tweaked for defenses vs. PoTD. Darcozzi gives a flame shield. That's it. 5 DT vs. Freeze is the difference between a Paladin being pro for PotD and Chanter (and presumably several others) being a no-go...? Invocations do not have an accuracy bonus. They use the chanter's base 25 accuracy. Cipher spells have a bonus accuracy of 5-10 and their base accuracy is 25. Wizard spells have a bonus accuracy of 10 and their base accuracy is 20. Druid spells have a bonus accuracy of 10 and their base accuracy is 20. Priest spells have a bonus accuracy of 10-15 and their base accuracy is 20. The exception are their traps, but those have even better accuracy due to the mechanics skill. Cipher's version casts faster, you don't need to wait 20+ seconds, its more accurate, and you can cast it more often. They can also charm and stun enemies. Wizard can also paralyze. You don't need to wait 20+ seconds, its more accurate, and you can cast it more often. They can also confuse, petrify, and knockdown enemies. Druids can't paralyze, but they can knockdown, petrify, and stun enemies without waiting 20+ seconds. They're also more accurate and apply their spells more often. Priests can't paralyze, but they can knockdown enemies. They don't need to wait 20+ seconds either. A high mechanics skill makes their knockdown so accurate that they can crit most enemies on PotD and have them on the floor for 20+ seconds. You're spreading the misinformation that the Cipher's version is more unreliable than the Chanter's version. You also started this thread claiming Paladins suck: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/77333-paladins-why-the-suck-and-how-to-un-suck-them/ In that very thread, on the first page, I pointed out that Lay on Hands heals for a lot more than 30 endurance. On the third page, you were telling someone that Lay on Hands heals for 30 endurance. Later on the third page, I correct you again by saying Lay on Hands actually heals for a lot more than 30 endurance.

Then don't get it? That's the beauty of it. Chanter has like 20-30 buffs and you can choose the ones your squad needs the most. On the other hand, you can legitimately build a squad around a Chanter and make a pure firearms team thanks to that chant. The same cannot be said for Paladin. Do you realize Paralyze means -40 deflection and -40 reflex? That's why you would bring a Chanter: because in the same way a Priest can reliably provide +20 accuracy to a Wizard for help with critting, a Chanter indirectly provides +40% chance of critting for the whole team. 8 Seconds of -40 deflection and -40 reflex is huge. Stupidly so. That's more than enough time to wipe out the entire enemy team. I've also had multiple fights where my Chanter was responsible for a successful getaway, either via distracting the enemy with a summon or stunning so everyone could bail out. Neither the Priest nor the Chanter checkmate one another because they provide similar benefits via seperate methods. For example, a squad that can provide Chanter time to get invocations has little reason not to bring one. Likewise, a Rogue will prefer the Chanter's Paralyze to a Priest's direct accuracy buff because he also gets Sneak attack from Paralyze. The Chanter is also more durable, able to continue casting invocations infinitely without a need to rest. The Priest on the other hand can use his spells more directly and urgently when neccesary, even if they are limited and not always as strong. Same for resurrection: both classes can do it, but the Chanter's is infinite whereas the Priest's is finite. Having both of them side by side is nice because it means the Priest can save some casts for his most powerful spells for something else, OR vice versa (the Chanter can save his invocations for a summon or the like, which btw, the summons definitely live long enough to survive until another invocation is ready, basically making a summon a permanent ally for the battle so long as you protect the Chanter). The same can only minimally be said for Paladin, who gets ONE resurrect to cover for the Priest, and then he cannot do it again and the Priest is going to need to immediately heal the res'ed person because Paladin's res sucks **** and almost kills them again if they don't heal back up. The "why take a Chanter instead of a ____" argument doesn't work the same way it does with Paladin. Whereas Paladin is providing 6 accuracy while the other two provide 20+, the other classes all have numbers that can compete. Whereas Paladin has his two +50% Fire attacks per fight, Chanter can provide the entire team with a semi-permanent +25% as long as he's up. He can also provide a Frighten effect without specific conditions needing the be met. You can directly spec a Chanter however you like. Personally, if I were to make my ideal squad, it would be Fighter, Monk, Cipher, Chanter, Priest and Wizard. Druid could possibly replace Wizard but I'm far more familiar and experienced with Wizards, nor would I cry a river if Rogue came in place of Cipher or Chanter; I simply prefer Cipher and Chanter because they have more control skills to help keep the battle in order, whereas a Rogue merely brings solid damage. I would never even contemplate replacing any class with a Paladin. Paladin would be the very last pick, for a multitude of reasons. I gotta be blunt, I'm getting rather sick of this. Why? Because if I'm blunt, you seem to have some irrational love of Paladins that's driving you to be hostile towards me simply for suggesting they're not God's gift to man in Pillars of Eternity. They're not. Just look at the numbers, look at what they're capable of, look at how other classes have their exact same skills, except more powerful, with more range and with more variety amongst the other classes in general. A Paladin gets a +50% burn damage skill twice a fight? A Monk has a +50% crush damage skill that can be spammed twice a second. A Paladin has a single target heal spell? A Priest and Druid both have multiple AOE heals. A Paladin can temporarily disable status ailments that eventually come back? A Priest can permanently remove them with an AOE that hits multiple people. A Paladin can provide the team with accuracy or defense buffs with limited range? A Priest can do this without the range problems, as can a Chanter. A Paladin can resurrect singular targets that'll quickly die again if not healed soon after? A Priest and Chanter can AOE res with no problems whatsoever. A Paladin can, under very specific circumstances, Frighten enemies? A Wizard, Chanter, Priest or Cipher can do this on command, while a Barbarian can provide Sickened just by....existing. A Paladin can increase his damage and attack speed vs. a specific foe 3 times per rest? A Barb can do this universally for every fight and every enemy, a Priest can buff a specific target to up it's damage. The list goes on. Hell, I challenge you to find something Paladin has that's universally superior to anything any other class has. Aside from it's superior defenses which fall flat due to it's inferior control skills to Fighter (and Fighter being able to temporarily get superior defenses aswell, plus the passive regen which definitely helps) so allow those defenses to be best utilized, there's nothing. I can make a squad built around a Darcozzi Paladin that specifically tackles PotD's increased defenses. Paralyze Invocation has to hit first. Not only does it have to hit first, but Invocations also have lower spell accuracy than the typical spell. It also requires a long ramp up time. We are talking about effectiveness on PotD and not on hard, right? Again, why not just replace the Chanter with someone else that can provide paralysis... or even better: petriy? I'm just using the exact same logic that you use on the Paladin. So if you think that kind of logic is irrational, well... I don't have an irrational love for Paladins. Ive been explaining their strengths and weaknesses throughout the thread. You, on the otherhand, have an irrational hate for Paladins and have been spreading misinformation about how their abilities work. When i'm using same exact logic as you against the Chanter, you get even more irrational and spread even more misinformation.

Chants have the same action economy as Zealous Auras. You can't have more than 1 aura up, but you can't have more than 1 chant up without eating the duration of another chant. Invocations have the same action economy as other Paladin abilities. You only notice the action speed economy on the Chanter because their invocations are rarely used. Rarely being able to utilize one of their defining class features is not an advantage. Some Chanter buffs do interfere with Priest buffs. For example, their +stat invocations are completely suppressed by the priest's +stat spells. On the otherhand, a Darcozzi Paladin's +10 accuracy stacks with everything. Zealous Focus also stacks with Inspiring Radiance and Devotions of the Faithful. Blessing is suppressed by Zealous Focus. Both are suppressed by Eldritch Aim. I've repeated this multiple times throughout the thread.

This right here sums up an absolute blind bias you're showing: You are comparing a single target, per rest ability that Paladin gets at level 11 to an AOE ability Chanter gets at level 5 or so that does the exact same thing with any ranged weapons, with demand for guns being especially high. You cannot possibly be this blind so as to think these two are even remotely similar or that the Paladin wins that out. It's the same all over, such as with here: And here: The difference is the same thing I've been talking about to the point that I'm becoming a broken record: Paladin is too specialized. Everything it does or procs demands a very specific setup, whereas Chanters and Priests can just effect everyone with no hassle whatsoever and they can do so on command. A Paladin meanwhile only hits one target at a time and/or their skills demand a death at the right moment or the like to proc. Why would I micromanage a Paladin to death in order to achieve the exact same thing I can achieve with a Chanter with minimal effort on my part? And to call Chanter invocations "niche" is absurd. Chanter is there to catch you if **** is hitting the fan. If something's going terribly wrong (big battle where some ranged guys picked off your wiz immediately, or maybe you approached a battle out of formation) and the battle isn't ending quickly as you would like, Chanter can single-handedly turn that around. The summons it gets aswell as some of the spells it gets (AOE Petrify) can singlehandedly turn a battle around. I never said they're similar to the Paladin's buff or that the Paladin wins out either. Don't make wild assumptions to the contrary just so you can hold an argument. Like I said in the same post you're arguing with, I'm not saying the Chanter is terrible, but they do have a different set of advantages and disadvantages compared to other classes. A firearms buff to a character that isn't using firearms, or is quick switching multiple firearms, is not an advantage. A 3x per rest attack speed buff on melee DPS or casters is a different kind of advantage. A +10 deflection buff to a character that is not getting hit is not an advantage. A +15 deflection buff to a character that is getting hit is a different kind of advantage. You think a Chanter isn't too specialized? You think a buff that only benefits ranged weapons isn't too specialized? You think a class that is built more for soloing and not for groups is not too specialized? Their 90 degree cone paralyze lasts 8 seconds at base. It takes 20 seconds minimum before you can cast it, provided that your chanter is using an insignificant chant to speed it up. It also has lower accuracy than cipher, druid, and wizard spells. Why would you take a chanter instead of a wizard, druid, or cipher? Heck, why would you take a chanter over a priest? Even priests have an AoE knockdown that lasts longer and has higher accuracy because its affected by the mechanics skill. Funny how that kind of logic can be thrown back at you, huh?

When you look at my logs, what you aren't taking into account is that the pierce damage is calculating damage bonuses from superb enchant(45%), might(39%), crits(40%), and sworn enemy(15%). The additional +100% burn damage isn't additive with the 45, 39, 40, and 15. Its multiplying the total damage by 2. Crits are additive and not multiplicative. If you have +200% damage and you crit for another 50%, then your total bonus damage is 250%. Lashes are multiplicative and not additive. If you have +200% damage and you deal another +100% lash damage, then your total damage is +400%. Sigh if you want to split hairs, fine. Quality enchants, The Might Attribute and Sworn Enemy are Total Damage Modifiers, not additional effects, no. They specifically state x total damage, same with critical strikes (I quote from the ingame cyclopedia: "increases the total damage done by 50%"), and not +% damage like effect. If it wasn't, if it was additive, other additional damage effects wouldn't be affected other than weapon damage (unless they would make another exception). Additional critical damage is also additive from that regard, just like Torment's Reach (+50% Crush damage) will be additive with any other ability that adds additional Crush damage. Like I said, there are a small amount of specific traits, like scion of flame, that state "Adds +20% damage to burn damage" while being multiplicative with Burn Damage and not additive, but generally this is not the case. Flames of Devotion adds +50% fire damage and Intense Flames add +25% damage to FoD, to end up with +75% additional fire damage, not 62.5%. If you add your Flame Lash from the enchant to that, that's another additive +25% fire damage. If you add another extra damage effect type to that, it's added to the pile of damage, not multiplied in any way. And before you might go 'that's not true, it multiplies with your weapon damage!', that's true, but again, I'm talking about (generally) additional effects from the same damage type. Having to specify that total burn damage is multiplicative with your weapon damage is the same as saying it's additive to your weapon damage, so no, I didn't specify that nor should you expect it to be specified. Crit damage does not multiply total damage by 1.5. Test it out yourself. Give a character 1000 might. Watch how much damage you do with a crit vs. not a crit. Grazes work the same way. The penalty is subtracted by your damage bonus, rather than multiplying your total by 0.5 At 1000 might, and due to the damage range of weapons, grazes can actually deal more damage than crits.

You serious here? This is exactly the problem: you can quicker justify any class besides Paladin. Paladin can res, Chanter can AOE res ad infinium, or use the chant points to do something else amazing. While Paladin gets the one res that provides that weird endurance debuff, Chanter can continue to res with enough time and can res AOE multiple people. Chanter constantly provides buffs that other classes cannot, such as faster reload speed and a burning weapon effect similar to Flames of Devotion, except for the whole squad. Why bring a Paladin over a Chanter is the real question. Ask around dude, Chanter is going to be in most people's top three or top four favorite classes. Please, seriously, go look at the list of all the buffs a Chanter can provide and then come here and tell me with a straight face that a Paladin's buffs are better. And Devotions of the Faithful definitely does buff spell accuracy. Saw a guy whose entire strategy for PoTD was to buff the hell out of his Wizard's accuracy, specifically by combining Eldrich Aim and Devotions of the Faithful alongside one more buff iirc (probably the Priest's crit buff). Just AOE crit everything that way thanks to the +35 accuracy total, alongside the Might bonus for extra damage. Even if, for the sake of argument, this were not the case, that would not change that the range on Paladin buff zones is horrendous and you can hardly guarentee to be within range of the Wiz all the time. +10 reflex and +move speed. Great for soloing. -4 enemy endurance every 6 seconds. Great if you're in a party with 6 Chanters. +10 fort and +10 will buff to the party. Paladins have access to a buckler that provides +5 to all defenses to the party. -10 enemy concentration.Yea... no. Enemies deal 10% less slashing and piercing damage. Nope. +10 defense against freigned and terrify. Nope. -10 enemy disengagement accuracy. .... A frost trap appears when the Chanter starts moving. Great for soloing. Freigtened debuff. Bleak Walkers can do that when they kill an enemy. 1.2x ranged attack speed and 1.2x reload speed. Paladins can increase spell speed, melee speed, ranged speed, and reload speed by 1.2x +10 deflection for all allies. Paladins can increase deflection by +15 on the targets that are actually tanking. +40 fire and +40 slash damage every 12 seconds. Its a great chant if you're soloing.... or if you're abusing a certain bug. +25% burn lash for all allies. A great chant. Probably their best one if you're in a team. Too bad you can only pick it at level 9. The most important thing to keep in mind is that you can't have more than 1 chant up without cutting into the duration of another chant. Intellect has no effect on the duration of chants either, despite the description. If we're going to talk about invocations, they're even more niche than Paladin buffs. If you're using a level 1 chant, it would still require 24 seconds to use a level 3 invocation. If you're using the level 3 burn lash aura, it would take 48 seconds before you can use a level 3 invocation. Their summons are nice, but you can only have one of them up at a time. I'm not saying the Chanter is terrible, but they do have a different set of advantages and disadvantages compared to other classes. Finally, even if Devotions of the Faithful does buff spell accuracy(it doesn't say so in the description, but im going to give you the benefit of the doubt), it still stacks with Zealous Focus. Like I said, there is no reason to run 2 priests when you can have a priest and a paladin. Also, Boots of Zealous Command and high intellect is enough to allow Distant Advantage to overlap with Zealous Focus. Although, I wouldn't mind if the base radius was increased.

There are 6 party slots. The question isn't "why take a paladin over a priest". Its "why take 2 priests instead of a paladin and a priest". Better yet, why take a chanter over a paladin? Also, please stop giving incorrect examples of things you've never tested. Devotions of the Faithful does not buff spell accuracy. It also stacks with Zealous Focus.

Yeah, that seems to comply with what I mean. I think it's just a mixed messages that we're sending each other, while meaning the same thing. I have noticed that you have the same anomaly when it comes to Flame of Devotion damage, though. No. I understand what you mean. The problem is the following line: When you look at my logs, what you aren't taking into account is that the pierce damage is calculating damage bonuses from superb enchant(45%), might(39%), crits(40%), and sworn enemy(15%). The additional +100% burn damage isn't additive with the 45, 39, 40, and 15. Its multiplying the total damage by 2. Crits are additive and not multiplicative. If you have +200% damage and you crit for another 50%, then your total bonus damage is 250%. Lashes are multiplicative and not additive. If you have +200% damage and you deal another +100% lash damage, then your total damage is +400%.

And again, Monk can spam the ever living hell out of his. You can't use it with an arquebus. But yes, yes, I get it. You don't care about the Paladin's support abilities at all. You won't rest until the Paladin is equal to other strikers, or equal to a tank, thereby obsoleting other strikers and tanks by virtue of also having better support. No... What I'm saying is that while it's great Paladin can use a very specific setup of Flames + Arquebus to get a free kill or two, that alone is not enough to carry Paladin's weight as a viable option. This would be quite helpful for the boss like encounters, but very very poor in larger encounters with multiple enemies, where 176 damage is absolute overkill and the Monk or Rogue or Cipher's ability to consistently hit for 40-50 damage is going to help the team out more. The Paladin would overkill a mob, then spend the rest of the fight reloading while the other three drop everything and everyone they touch without pause. It's very nice that Paladin can do that, don't get me wrong, but it's still somewhat specialized in both the way it needs to happen (Arquebus is specifically named, which I believe it's accuracy is not so great. I can name at least one boss aside from the adra dragon and endgame boss I'd expect misses on) and in when it really shines. What I'm saying is that alone will not carry Paladin's weight in a squad. That comparison feels similar to Wizard. Why? Wizard is an often criticized class, and yet it or Druid is considered a fundamental part of any team. Why? Because if you get into a huge battle with tons of little moblets running around, Wizard or Druid practically feels like a requirement to come out of there alive. These two will do clean up duty like no one else, and you'll feel your team overwhelmed without them. Outside of such fights though? You expect Cipher to outperform the Wizard for the smaller-scale fights, with Wizard being an ace in the hole limited to two per encounter spells for normal fights. Paladin now has this same effect but with bosses, the problem being that Paladin would be a luxury for bosses rather than a neccesity. It needs more in order to step past that, namely it needs a boost to either it's abilities as a tank or it's abilities as a support. Who said Flames of Devotion alone is enough to carry a Paladin's weight in a team? Like I said, you don't care about the Paladin's support abilities at all. Zealous Focus, Critical Focus Reinforcing Exortation, Hastening Exortation, Inspiring Triumph, The Bleak Path... the monk has none of that. And yes, you can take all of those abilities and still snipe enemies with Flames of Devotion. Of course, you made it perfectly clear that you don't care about the support abilities. Also, if accuracy was a problem with a bleak walker sniper, itd be an even bigger problem on the monk. If the character I tested on was a wood elf and took marksman instead of fast runner, the character would have 102 self-buffed accuracy. 107 accuracy with the right gloves. 116 accuracy with an eldritch aim potion. That number includes the penalty from using firearms. The monk tops out at 81 self-buffed accuracy. 86 accuracy with the right gloves. 101 accuracy with an eldritch aim potion.

And again, Monk can spam the ever living hell out of his. You can't use it with an arquebus. But yes, yes, I get it. You don't care about the Paladin's support abilities at all. You won't rest until the Paladin is equal to other strikers, or equal to a tank, thereby obsoleting other strikers and tanks by virtue of also having better support.

All extra damage is additive. Flames of Devotion deals +50% damage as burn. If you have Burning Lash enchanted on a weapon and picked up the Intense Flames talent, you deal +50% burn +25% burn +25% burn damage (for a total of +100% burn damage). Not 50% * 1.25 * 1.25 (+78% total). This was done because additive damage modifiers were deemed too difficult to balance. The only exceptions to this rule are Critical Strikes and talents like Scion of Flame, which increases certain specific damage types (although it is currently bugged and does not affect abilities like Flames of Devotion or weapon enchants). peddroelm is correct. Critical strike damage bonuses are additive. Elemental damage bonuses are multiplicative, then further reduced by DR. Bleak Walker Flames of Devotion(+75% fire, +25% corrode) with a Superb Arquebus, enchanted with Burning Lash, with Azalin's Helmet, and 23 might can crit for over 200 damage against a Sworn Enemy with low DR. This was a simple test I did, too. There was a lot more buffs I could've had to increase the damage. Depending on how Petrify's damage bonus works, i wouldn't be surprised if they could one shot the Adra Dragon.... on PotD.

Buffs: Eldritch Aim (+15) Inspiring Radiance (+5) Inspiring Liberation (+10) Tactical Meld (+20, single enemy, self only) Weapon with Marking (+10, single enemy) Zealous Focus (+6, suppressed by Eldritch Aim) Blessing (+5, suppressed by Eldritch Aim and Zealous Focus) Debuffs: Weapon with Disorientating (-5 all defense, targets deflection, or fortitude as a barbarian) Barbs of Condemnation (-5 all defenses, targets fortitude) Arkemyr's Dazzling Lights (-10 will, targets reflex) Miasma of Dull-Mindedness (-10 intellect, -10 perception, -10 resolve, targets will) Arkemyr's Wondrous Torment (-10 resolve, -10 intellect, targets will) Nature's Mark (-10 reflex, targets will) Stag Horn (-20 reflex, targets deflection) Psychovampiric Shield (-10 resolve, targets will) Borrowed Instinct (-8 perception, -8 intellect, targets will) I didn't list afflictions, but the druid version of Spreading Plague targets fortitude. The item version is an automatic hit.

I know people like to think Paladins lose value on PotD, but I find them to be more valuable on that difficulty. It is precisely because of the increase in monster resistances that a Paladin, particularly a Darcozzi Paladin, finds the most value in a group. Having an always on +6 accuracy buff and another +10 accuracy buff(stacks with everything) should not be underestimated on PotD. On hard or below, you will hit or crit most of the time. On PotD, you will miss or graze. Turning confusion from a hit to a crit doesn't do much except extend the duration. The enemy will be confused either way. But turning a confusion from a miss to a graze is the difference between not confusing at all vs. actually confusing them.

I didn't suggest a buff to the wizard/cleric/druid. What I proposed was a CHOICE to reduce their ceiling for an increase to their floor. If you don't choose the talent, then what I proposed is a straight up nerf to their ceiling. Baking the Cipher's starting focus into a talent isn't a "huge" nerf either. Theres an opportunity cost associated with it. You either choose to take the talent for a one time burst of focus at the start, or choose to take a damage talent that not only improves your DPS, but also increases your focus gain per second. Its still a nerf, but its not "huge".

The weapon needs to graze, hit, or crit before the game rolls again to check whether the knockdown occurs. So, there are two rolls if the weapon hits(the weapon check and the knockdown check), but only one roll if the weapon misses(the weapon check).