Interrupt Build?

[mazeltov]

wizard for blast interrupts, Druid for insects, and a 2 handed Barb for Big interrupts (1 second interrupt)

 

The nice thing about mixing Wizard and Barb Interrupters is that the Wizard can bully low Reflex mobs while the Barb bullies low Fortitude ones. Both classes also have inherent attack speed steroids.

[Infares]

 

wizard for blast interrupts, Druid for insects, and a 2 handed Barb for Big interrupts (1 second interrupt)

 

The nice thing about mixing Wizard and Barb Interrupters is that the Wizard can bully low Reflex mobs while the Barb bullies low Fortitude ones. Both classes also have inherent attack speed steroids.

This is a lot of why 2 barbs, 2 wizards, Chanter/Druid would be my default for testing an interrupt party once they fix all of the concentration debuffs.

 

It seems to me you wouldn't even need any tanks for this. CC the spellcasters, debuff the melee clump, the interrupts prevent as much or more damage than good mitigation/avoidance + heals over time. Have one barbarian be a Moonie with dual stilettos (one of which is the Jolting Touch one) and the other be a Flamer with a Morning Star. 

[Guest]

Add +25 to typical Interrupt ratings if and when bug fixes go through. Not to be a Debbie Downer here, but it might be overkill.

I'm not sure where you're getting this number.

 

The description says +15%. This can mean lots of things, and until it's fixed, all we can do is speculate. What seems to make the most sense though, is that it would be applied to the total roll, i.e. (50+15)*1.15 (assuming a roll of 50 and Perception of 15). This means 65 vs 75 without Interrupting Blows or 75 vs 75 with Interrupting Blows (all other thing being equal).

 

...for fun though, a crit would be (50+25+15)*1.15 or 104 vs 75

[mazeltov]

 

I'm not sure where you're getting this number.

 

The description says +15%. This can mean lots of things, and until it's fixed, all we can do is speculate. What seems to make the most sense though, is that it would be applied to the total roll, 

 

Maybe. I don't know how the fixed talent would work either, but I guessed that it would add a flat +15 to the Interrupt roll, in the way Accuracy increases to-hit rolls. Then I "converted" the -10 applied from a typical Concentration reducer spell into a bonus to the Interrupt roll, on the understanding that +10 on one side or -10 on the other side is basically the same thing, since the results are compared directly.

 

I wonder who wins ties?

[b0rsuk]

Ranger, Swift Aim, Morningstar. You get the most interrupting weapon at 1.5x attack rate, plus companion attacks.

[Guest]

 

 

I'm not sure where you're getting this number.

 

The description says +15%. This can mean lots of things, and until it's fixed, all we can do is speculate. What seems to make the most sense though, is that it would be applied to the total roll, 

 

Maybe. I don't know how the fixed talent would work either, but I guessed that it would add a flat +15 to the Interrupt roll, in the way Accuracy increases to-hit rolls. Then I "converted" the -10 applied from a typical Concentration reducer spell into a bonus to the Interrupt roll, on the understanding that +10 on one side or -10 on the other side is basically the same thing, since the results are compared directly.

 

I wonder who wins ties?

Flat 15 is the equivalent of giving a character 5 point in Perception.

 

....which does seem overpowered to me, hence why I think that won't be the case. But hey, maybe I'm wrong.

[Daemonjax]

They'd have to double all weapon interrupt times for it to have a noticeable impact.

[b0rsuk]

Helloooo ? Ranger with Swift Aim wielding a Morningstar ? Base attack speed equal to Barbarian's with Frenzy AND Bloodlust ?

[Kelstrom]

Yeah but the ranger only attacks 1 monster (1.5 if you count the semi-joke called pet)

[Daemonjax]

Flat 15 is the equivalent of giving a character 5 point in Perception.

 

....which does seem overpowered to me, hence why I think that won't be the case. But hey, maybe I'm wrong.

 

 

Some talents add 15% damage and that's the equivalent of how many strength?

[Stahlbart]

Wow, you're really diigging into the topic. Love that!

 

It's a shame that the debuffs do not work.

Would definitely try this out, but the game seems still too broken. Sad.

So MAYBE I'm looking into it again in several months.... or not... IF the issues are fixed by then... we'll see.

[Guest]

Daemonjax, the perception interrupt stat isn't a percentage, it's an integer. The might damage star isn't an integer, it's a percentage. You're question assumes an apple-to-apples comparison where there isn't one.

 

Adding 5 points to Perception can add several hundred percent to your base interrupt value (which is way OP). Best case scenario is that you have 15 points in Perception, in which case it's only doubled.

 

Adding 5 points to Might means your 20 damage roll becomes 23.

 

We can agree that this isn't the same thing now, right?

[cctobias]

What is the interrupt mechanic meant to accomplish in the overall design of the game?

 

Is it a minor feature meant to add some extra dimension to mitigation?

 

As far as I can tell it would require an entire extremely focused build to make decent and even then it not particularly good.  It can't even shutdown one guy and that for an entire very focused build.

 

 

It seems like a vastly inferior form of CC that is ridiculously expensive.  In comparison to other things that do similar stuff and have other useful side effects as well it fails miserably.

 

In general I would say it needs a serious re-examination by the devs.  Except for a barbarian it purely signle-target and it ability to shutdown is pretty much not attainable.  At best maybe you cut one thing's DPS by 50%?  And all this for an entire build that would need to take a tanking stat to max interrupt and is therefore probably not maxed for damage.

 

Is interrupt just some extra little thing tanks are meant to have?  Or is it meant to be a full on mature mechanic.  If its the latter I think it has failed.  If its just a sideshow minor benefit for tanks that are gonna take Per anyway then I guess it does ok although its barely noticeable in that case and therefore was not worth the time to put into the game.

[knownastherat]

Interrupts  do not shutdown anyone but that is not what they are for. Stunlock is the mechanic for shutting down. Interrupts however provide small window of opportunity and work with auto-attacks. Not sure what is the difference between minor benefit and mature mechanics so cant comment but it works.

Edited April 17, 2015 by knownastherat

[forgottenlor]

Interrupts slow attacks and on slow attacking monsters it can be devestating. On monsters with fast attack speed, interrupt rarely are useful. I'm sad that my main character took a broken talent, but what the heck, I'll probably be still be playing this in May.

Edited April 17, 2015 by forgottenlor

[Guest]

@cctobias some percentages of grazes, hits, and (especially) crits are going to cause interruptions anyway, so I don't think "extremely dedicated builds" are required. Case in point, Durance has a base interrupt of -3 and I'd say 5-10% of his hits results in interrupts anyway.

 

What does make sense is to take classes or builds that lean toward high interrupt and emphasize that.

 

Interrupts are useful everywhere, but where they shine are against powerful opponents (barbarians who can't swing, wizards who can't cast, priests who can't heal, etc). If you can get 2 or more high interrupt party members on a boss, you can completely lock him down until he is dead. Neither Kana nor Pallegina are exceptionally tanky on their own, however if you team them up (especially with one flanking), then they can lockdown whatever you put them on.

 

Where I realize the power of the interrupt was trying to solo "the bear". The first character I rolled just happened to have to have a fairly high Perception. It took a few tries but he eventually beat the bear and walked out of the cave alive. I got to gilded vale, decided I didn't like the character and rerolled a fighter. Ended up back in the bear cave but had a very different experience the second time. Whereas the first fight was pretty close, I was unequivocally getting my ass kicked this time. Couldn't figure out why (I was better armored and had a shield). Sometimes the bear was one-shotting me, sometimes I was staying alive long enough to swing at it a few times. I started paying close attention to the combat log. You'll never guess what I noticed...

 

Interrupt will literally save your life against powerful opponents.

[cctobias]

@cctobias some percentages of grazes, hits, and (especially) crits are going to cause interruptions anyway, so I don't think "extremely dedicated builds" are required. Case in point, Durance has a base interrupt of -3 and I'd say 5-10% of his hits results in interrupts anyway.

 

What does make sense is to take classes or builds that lean toward high interrupt and emphasize that.

 

Interrupts are useful everywhere, but where they shine are against powerful opponents (barbarians who can't swing, wizards who can't cast, priests who can't heal, etc). If you can get 2 or more high interrupt party members on a boss, you can completely lock him down until he is dead. Neither Kana nor Pallegina are exceptionally tanky on their own, however if you team them up (especially with one flanking), then they can lockdown whatever you put them on.

 

Where I realize the power of the interrupt was trying to solo "the bear". The first character I rolled just happened to have to have a fairly high Perception. It took a few tries but he eventually beat the bear and walked out of the cave alive. I got to gilded vale, decided I didn't like the character and rerolled a fighter. Ended up back in the bear cave but had a very different experience the second time. Whereas the first fight was pretty close, I was unequivocally getting my ass kicked this time. Couldn't figure out why (I was better armored and had a shield). Sometimes the bear was one-shotting me, sometimes I was staying alive long enough to swing at it a few times. I started paying close attention to the combat log. You'll never guess what I noticed...

 

Interrupt will literally save your life against powerful opponents.

 

So the question is really why would I try to interrupt instead instead of using Slicken or some other similarly extremely useful CC?

 

Is the answer get multiple people with high intterupt on a a Boss that usually resists most of those type things and you can get some CC you would not other wise get?

 

Interrupt is just another form of CC.  Its mechanics are different than spells but its effects is to slow/shutdown, this is a CC.

 

I mean CC exists throughout the game and is pretty robust and quite available.  If having 3 guys with decent interrupt being able to seriously mitigate a bosses damage/effects that seems ok but only when nothing else is working.

 

There is a profusion of spell effects that will do exactly what interrupt can do (stop attacks or impair damage ).  These spell effects are more reliable, usable on demand/plannable, and often more powerful in effect and duration.

 

Given all the other CC effects what is the niche of Interrupt?  Why would I try to interrupt instead of proning or blinding something.  Interrupt is countered by concentration.  And concentration is essentially a defense like any other and is directly related to stats; resolve.  So things with high will saves will probably have high concentration and vice versa.  Ogre have low concentration, do they also have low Will saves?  Maybe they don't I dunno I have not checked.  But if they do have low will saves you can use some AOE Will based CC and be more effective than trying to randomly interrupt with single target weapon.

 

To take that bear example.  That thing hits really hard, sure interrupt will save your life.  No one says it does nothing.  Or randomly you will just die if you miss a couple rolls.  Or you can use some other CC smartly and win every time with good accuracy.  

 

 

Maybe a party of 6 guys with good interrupts winds up being very powerful.  I dunno.  That is the point of my question.  What is the point of it?  The game didn't need more CC.  Melee classes often have CC (prone, blinds, hobbles, etc) so its not like its the melee version of ability-based CC.  There are strong single target and AOE CC as spells/abilities.  

 

 

I would guess it is meant to represent/create some sort of extra advantage for auto-attack versus ability users.  Meaning its meant to apply some measure of pressure on spellcasters when they are under fire.

 

But in the greater context of the meta-game; so what?  If there is something that is dangerous enough you don't want it doing something you make damn sure its dependably not doing something by being dead or chain stunnned etc.

 

And if it takes 3 people to make the same thing happen as a couple stuns this seems like a pretty hefty investment.  Now if it is the case that you simply can't chain stun or chain prone certain bosses and ONLY interrupt works.  That is different.  Or perhaps having a party of say 4 guys with good interrupt let's you run a party that is extremely light on casters and still have a good amount of "shutdown" CC perhaps that is another.

 

But from the context of analyzing the effects of a single character focused on interrrupted it seems to be terrible when compared to other options that do similar things.  Due to the nature of it (constant chance and always going) perhaps when you make it extremely redundant it can become very OP.  If you have a three person team that can basically highly probably keep getting interrupt on anything they attack and still have a pair of caster AOE CC the trash, maybe you don't even need a tank.  I dunno.

 

Maybe interrupt should be though of as an overall party based stat.  Perhaps it should be thought of as "pressure" and to be very effectie you probably need multiple sources of pressure. 

[Guest]

There is no "try to interrupt". Interrupt occurs randomly as part of your normal attack. You can either try to increase your chances or opt to shift your focus elsewhere. Throughout your post you refer to "trying to interrupt" when there is no such thing. Furthermore, you seem to think that interrupt occurs at the expense of something else. It doesn't. I'm not going to be able to address a lot of your post because interrupt doesn't work the way you seem to think that it does. Apologies in advance.

 

With that said, as I've stated elsewhere in this thread, I don't think it makes a lot of sense to pursue the former if your build doesn't favor Perception anyway. By the same token, it doesn't make a lot of sense to me not to make some effort here if your build leans that direction anyway (i.e. Pallegina, Kana, a Tank-Fighter with Weapon Focus: Knight, etc). With this in mind, the rest of your first question doesn't make a lot of sense. Yes, your Wizard could use something like Slicken to temporarily make an enemy prone, but your other party members are going to be attacking (and potentially Interrupting anyway). Are you using Slicken in every encounter? I can tell you that Aloth doesn't typically get Slicken in my playthoughs until much later in the game, after he finds it in a grimoire. Maybe Binding Web is a better example? Your melee characters still have to get within striking range to attack. The enemy can't change location, but he can still hit you. Interrupts would prevent him from even being able to do that.

 

Not every wizard spell is going to fully paralyze the target. Even those that do are going to occasionally graze for decreased duration or miss entirely. And always the wizard is casting this at the expense of something else (either a more appropriate spell for the encounter happening now or a spell that could've been used in the next one). If you're asking, "would you rather have a paralyzed enemy or an interrupted one", then I would always take the former. However, I don't know why I would assume that the former is always going to be available to you. You seem quite open to making this assumption, as most of your argument hinges on full paralysis spells that always hit because that's the only thing your wizard ever does.

 

Your counterpoint to the bear example (again) assumes that some sort of total disable spell is 1) going to be available and 2) not be saved against. All over the place you make this assumption. What disable spell is a non-caster going to take into that cave with them? What paralyze option is available to a non-caster if an Archmage get's a lucky shot against Aloth in Raedric's Keep? Maybe you think a high-lore off-tank will stop what the are doing to use a scroll or something, but they will do so at the risk of getting killed when then could be attacking and potentially keeping their target from doing anything because of interrupts.

 

Moving on...

 

You don't need a full party of people built for interrupt in order for it to be useful. You seem to have completely ignored the first part of my previous post. I really don't feel like repeating it here. The point of Interrupt is that it is a low cost, maintenance free means of causing an opponent to "lose a turn". You don't even have to do anything to make it happen. In fact, you can give someone negative Perception and it will still happen occasionally.

 

As for the rest of your "cost/benefit analysis", please see the first part of this post where I point out that interrupt doesn't work the way you think it does. I can't address your points because they don't make any sense within the context of how interrupt does work.

[Kaigen42]

@cctobias

 

I think the appeal of Interrupt is that it is something that happens in addition to doing damage, as opposed to instead of doing something else. If my Cipher is applying CC with Mental Binding, that happens instead of setting up Ectopsychic Echo. If my Wizard is casting Slicken for hard CC, that's happening instead of using Chill Fog (which only provides soft CC) or Fan of Flames. Whereas a class that spends most of its time autoattacking (or casting damage spells) can apply Interrupts while doing what it normally does. And a Fighter who only gets two Knockdowns can still keep applying Interrupts once they've used those up.

 

I do think that it's likely to be something that gets a lot more useful if it's spread across your party rather then focused on one person. At the moment it looks like a lot of Interrupt stuff isn't working to begin with, so the ability to optimize a given character for it is pretty limited anyway. It's mostly a question of how much it costs you to move a few more points into Perception and switch to a weapon that's better for interrupting, and whether the few buff/debuffs that actually have an impact on it are useful enough apart from that. Once they fix Interrupting Blows, you'll add in the factor of whether a given character spends enough time attacking and can spare a talent for it. I know my Druid already gets some good use out of Insect Swarm and Plague of Insects, so if the Concentration debuff part of that starts working, even better.

[Guest]

@Kaigen I agree that fixing Interrupting Blows is definitely going to be helpful, but even once it's fixed, I'm still probably only going to give it to Pallegina. With high perception, zealous focus, critical focus, and weapon focus with strong interrupt weapon, it sure does seem like that talent belongs to her.

 

Regarding the cost: I think it the two biggest sacrifices are 1) enchanting her armor for +2 perception over some other attribute and/or 2) taking interrupting blows over some other talent. This applies to any other build that is expressly trying to maximize the potential for interrupts.

[Daemonjax]

Daemonjax, the perception interrupt stat isn't a percentage, it's an integer. The might damage star isn't an integer, it's a percentage. You're question assumes an apple-to-apples comparison where there isn't one.

 

Adding 5 points to Perception can add several hundred percent to your base interrupt value (which is way OP). Best case scenario is that you have 15 points in Perception, in which case it's only doubled.

 

Adding 5 points to Might means your 20 damage roll becomes 23.

 

We can agree that this isn't the same thing now, right?

 

The integer increase for perception's interrupt works within a d100 system, so it works exactly like a percentage in that sense.

 

Besides, the effects of interrupts are weak enough to be ignored.  A talent that adds another +15 to the roll would still be a sub-optimal investment.

Edited April 17, 2015 by Daemonjax

[cctobias]

 

There is no "try to interrupt". Interrupt occurs randomly as part of your normal attack. You can either try to increase your chances or opt to shift your focus elsewhere. Throughout your post you refer to "trying to interrupt" when there is no such thing. Furthermore, you seem to think that interrupt occurs at the expense of something else. It doesn't. I'm not going to be able to address a lot of your post because interrupt doesn't work the way you seem to think that it does. Apologies in advance.

With that said, as I've stated elsewhere in this thread, I don't think it makes a lot of sense to pursue the former if your build doesn't favor Perception anyway. By the same token, it doesn't make a lot of sense to me not to make some effort here if your build leans that direction anyway (i.e. Pallegina, Kana, a Tank-Fighter with Weapon Focus: Knight, etc). With this in mind, the rest of your first question doesn't make a lot of sense. Yes, your Wizard could use something like Slicken to temporarily make an enemy prone, but your other party members are going to be attacking (and potentially Interrupting anyway). Are you using Slicken in every encounter? I can tell you that Aloth doesn't typically get Slicken in my playthoughs until much later in the game, after he finds it in a grimoire. Maybe Binding Web is a better example? Your melee characters still have to get within striking range to attack. The enemy can't change location, but he can still hit you. Interrupts would prevent him from even being able to do that.

Not every wizard spell is going to fully paralyze the target. Even those that do are going to occasionally graze for decreased duration or miss entirely. And always the wizard is casting this at the expense of something else (either a more appropriate spell for the encounter happening now or a spell that could've been used in the next one). If you're asking, "would you rather have a paralyzed enemy or an interrupted one", then I would always take the former. However, I don't know why I would assume that the former is always going to be available to you. You seem quite open to making this assumption, as most of your argument hinges on full paralysis spells that always hit because that's the only thing your wizard ever does.

Your counterpoint to the bear example (again) assumes that some sort of total disable spell is 1) going to be available and 2) not be saved against. All over the place you make this assumption. What disable spell is a non-caster going to take into that cave with them? What paralyze option is available to a non-caster if an Archmage get's a lucky shot against Aloth in Raedric's Keep? Maybe you think a high-lore off-tank will stop what the are doing to use a scroll or something, but they will do so at the risk of getting killed when then could be attacking and potentially keeping their target from doing anything because of interrupts.

Moving on...

You don't need a full party of people built for interrupt in order for it to be useful. You seem to have completely ignored the first part of my previous post. I really don't feel like repeating it here. The point of Interrupt is that it is a low cost, maintenance free means of causing an opponent to "lose a turn". You don't even have to do anything to make it happen. In fact, you can give someone negative Perception and it will still happen occasionally.

As for the rest of your "cost/benefit analysis", please see the first part of this post where I point out that interrupt doesn't work the way you think it does. I can't address your points because they don't make any sense within the context of how interrupt does work.

 

By "try to interrupt"  I simply mean investing in it on some people and throwing those people at the thing you want disabled as a tactical option.  If you have three guys with high interrupt and your experience says 90% of the time they disable/impair something fast enough to not need any caster support then you have this as tactical theme your party can use that a low interrupt team may not be able to do and would either need to use ability based CC or some sort of tanking tactic on that something.  Obviously some combination of all three is also possible. 

 

I never described how interrupts "work" besides mentioning concentration, so I have no idea what you are talking about when you say it doesn't work how I think when I never described how I think it works.  

 

As for the rest.  If you want to argue that the current various forms of CC are equally or less effective than interrupt, then do so.    I understand the rolls of reflex/will/fort versus accuracy and the rolls of interrupt vs concentration just fine as they have been described in the documentation.  So far I have not really seen the resultant rolls from interrupt being particularyly reliable when tested out.  I understand that abilities can be saved against, but with good accuracy you can get things pretty reliable.  Yes there is an element of randomness to all games that use dice rolls.  I was hoping I would not need to make that point and that it was obvious.  If you are hitting 90% of the time then you are "close enough for government work" so to speak.   I have not seen any interrupt builds even close to that.

 

 

Perhaps your experience is different, I dunno.  But I have not seen the ability to pump interrupt rating replicated the way you can boost accuracy and the fact that many spell also have increased accuracy as well.   Additionally interrupts need both accuracy and interrupt rating meaning you need to pump both and even though Grazes may interrupt the final result of the roll is decreased by 50% so they suck pretty hard for that purpose.

 

 

I have seen spells reliably CC things from a single character when you build a character right, additionally they can be AOE and this is not insignificant by any measure.  I have not seen any single character able to replicate such a thing using interrupts, but due to the math and my experience I am willing to believe multiple characters could get enough procs at enough duration to do something similar in effect.  If they did so they would have the advantage of doing damage while they CCd and could do it "forever" basically.   Perhaps this is a sufficient advantage I don't really know as I have not given it enough thought.

 

Obviously a lowish amounts of interrupts allows for some mitigation of damage and could be considered "soft" CC.  A large amount of interrupts with sufficient duration is almost like a "hard" CC,  it not entirely hard in that the opponent will try to do something again, but pretty much any action including auto attack will be cancelled by an interrupt and a period no action then imposed.  With sufficient amounts of interrupts in a given tiem frame something can essentially be "hard CC"d.

 

When we consider a lowish interrupt rate we can say that it could be considered roughly analogous to a condition like Blind, although not exactly as Blind impairs both offense and defense, however if we stipulate that reducing the amount/rate of defensive abilities is roughly analogous then they are similar and the only question is do the relative impairment stack up.  If my accuracy is impaired by -25 and that makes me miss 50% of the time and something is interrupting me some and my overall attack rate is reduced by 50% but I have 100% accuracy.  Then they are doing a similar thing.

 

So there we can see perhaps that an interrupt rate of what often seen on a single good interrupting character might be equal to a Cipher with Eyestrike, except Eystrike is an AoE and has +10 accuracy and does need anything but accuracy to work and in increased by Intelligence.  

 

But when we consider that Cipher is also going to get Mental Binding what kind of interrupt rate do you need to start to see to get an effect of a paralyze that has extra accuracy on a class with medium high accuracy already, that can boost accuracy in other ways, is also AOE, and whose duration is increased by Intelligence?  Its going to have to be pretty darn high.

 

You would need to have an interrupt rate occurring on a particular opponent at a pretty darn high rate to come anywhere close to a Cipher with just two powers who is smartly stacking accuracy (and all even medium competent Ciphers take those two powers).

 

Not only that but to enhance your interrupt you Accuracy and Intterupt rating and interrupt duration.  The cipher can get duration from Int and will stack accuracy, but the interuptor has to get accuracy and interrupt from equipment so they compete.  

 

 

Now perhaps some posters are right that doing damage while causing the interrupts makes up for it.  

 

But if you are getting an interrupt based char to do anything even close to a decently built cipher with the normal low level powers almost everyone takes then I will be pretty surprised.  And if you need 3 guys to do the same thing then what happens if you have 3 ciphers?

 

Now certainly its the case that tanks will probably be swinging weapons have having some interrupt helps out.  And the mechanics of a soft CC like Blind and Interrupt will work with each other without suppression so that is nice.  But, really, so what?  

 

And certainly its the case that if an opponent has a miss rate of 25% and you have two guys beating on it enough that on average it gets every other attack canceled + the delay then you are taking little of the potential damage (actual amount depends on delay) .

 

As multiple people have mentioned it can work quite well in some circumstances.  And anyone using a tank is probably getting some use from it.

 

 

But does anyone think that any one character can really make interrupt come close to Mental Binding on a well made Cipher?  A well made Cipher can throw that reliably and do it many many times.

 

I am willing to entertain the notion that a highly DPS melee/ranged focused party might be able to leverage interrupt such that they need much less, or possibly no, tanking,  I dunno if its possible, but it might be and it sounds interesting.    I think they would need some AOE caster CC though.

 

 

But a high accuracy Cipher seems to be able to do more for less given similar equipment etc.  I suppose you could take the track of saying a Cipher can do both.  You really kind of want perception for intterupting and the equipment load competes etc.  You are probably better off simply trying for as much accuracy as possible instead.

 

 

Now I know the above quoted post specified "non-caster" but why would I make a party of non-casters if I want to CC things?  This is kind of my point, if you take the right casters you don't need any interrupts.  Now if the point of interrupts is to make it so you can have a party of completely non-casters and have something resembling what a Cipher would be doing for you, that seems OK.  Is that the point of the mechanic?  Maybe it is.   Does it actually work for a party focused on interupt?  I dunno I have not tried 4+ guys with good interrupt.  Will one guy with high interrupt come close to a Cipher with good accuracy?  Very very doubtful.

[Kaigen42]

@Achilles How useful Interrupting Blows will be will depend on how they fix it, as a 15% multiplier is going to be marginal, while a +15 integer will be significant. Personally, I'd put money on it being an integer bonus. I think the relevant comparison is to accuracy, which also operates on a d100 roll against a defense in the high double-digits. +15 sounds high in that context, but unlike accuracy, interrupt rolls don't benefit from level or class-based bonuses, so it evens out in the long run.

 

Regardless, I think most builds theoretically have room for Interrupting Blows, as few builds have 6 "must-have" talents, but the issue will be how soon you can afford to take it. Defensive builds will probably want Hold the Line and Weapon & Shield Style at the very least before they can fit it in, and offensive builds will have a hard time fitting it in amidst all of the accuracy and damage-boosting talents available. Personally, I won't have any trouble fitting them into caster builds, because I'm not terribly enamored of bonus spell slot or elemental damage feats. Priests get a number of lovely talents, but they likely won't be delivering many Interrupting spells/attacks to begin with, so they can safely skip it.

 

Now you folks have me thinking about how I'd do a party optimized for interrupts. Since I don't like doubling up on classes, I'd start with a skeleton of Barbarian, Chanter, Druid, and Wizard. Give the Barbarian a morning star, and give the Chanter Shatterstar, since it's a Guarding one-handed weapon with a boosted interrupt time equal to morning stars. Blasting implement build for the Wizard. Then I'd add an arbalest-wielding Ranger to the group, since arbalests and crossbows have the best interrupts of ranged weapons, and Swift Aim helps reduce the reload time. Plus, Driving Flight means you can tag two enemies per shot, and you can take the Lion animal companion for Frightening Roar, which lessens the need to have your Barbarian or Chanter provide the Frightened debuff. The sixth slot I'm not sure about. If it doesn't look like the Chanter and Barbarian (plus Lion) are enough to hold the front, you could add in another tanky character, probably a Monk or a Fighter. Or you could toss in a Priest for buffing and additional heals. Since crits have a better chance to interrupt than hits, and hits have a better chance to interrupt than grazes, I'd run a mixture of Wood Elves and Hearth Orlans, both of which handily get Perception bonuses. If you add in a second shield user, Flails might be the way to go for that graze->hit conversion (not to mention that you get a couple of good flails early on).

 

Edit: @cctobias You seem to be looking at this as an "either or" situation, whereas we see it as a "yes, also" situation. Mental Binding is awesome, but you can only paralyze one enemy at a time. So if you have a Cipher and a couple of melee attackers in your party that have boosted interrupt chances (I'm assuming you aren't running a party of Cipher, Cipher, Cipher, Wizard, Wizard, Priest), those melee attackers can effectively debuff their attacker's attack speed so they take less damage while your Cipher is paralyzing those spellcasters standing in the back. It's something that's more effective against some enemies than others, but it's also a low-investment strategy.

Edited April 17, 2015 by Kaigen42

[Guest]

I already addressed my thoughts on that earlier in the thread. I will be very surprised if they opt to give that much power to a single talent, but I'll probably find a way to get over it.

 

I don't think it will be terribly difficult to find a place in Kana's build for it. Right now he takes Weapon Focus Adventurer, Two-Handed Style, and Deep Pockets and that last one is largely due to a lack of a better option for him. Similarly, I think Pallegina could take it at level 10 or 12 very easily.

[mazeltov]

If you are hitting 90% of the time then you are "close enough for government work" so to speak.   I have not seen any interrupt builds even close to that.

 

I already posted it. Take 24 Perception as the baseline for a dedicated Interrupter (starting 20, item/armor enchant +2, Charred Barrel rest +2). 42 Interrupt rating base, add 15 for fixed I.B.., 57 base Interrupt.

 

Cast Miasma (-30 Concentration, -20 Deflection, -20 Reflex, -40 Will) on an Ogre Druid -> Concentration drops to 57. From this point on, with a regular hit you can Interrupt that druid 100% of the time, even on a roll of 1.