> @chryseos said: > > I currently use BtS on the biggest target for the debuff and it makes the big guys really easy to kill, so BtS and geas are in a good state in my opinion, but we lack AoE options, so killing the small guys after are what makes the battles feel worse. I think if the area on Searing Light were greater, it would help a lot. Atm I have to keep trying to get mobs as lined up as possible but the way the AI chooses how to walk does not help at all ^^' > > Also with Chains doing no damage now...
> @chryseos said: > Sunburst effect should be changed to a blinding/disable effect, similar to Burning Light in OP (M15), that way you don't make it a detriment in higher lvl group content and still keep it as a defensive mechanism to low level clerics. It also becomes a good debuff to use in group content - on live I use a Frost enchantment because the disable it gives works as a nice defense from bigger mobs. > A blinding effect makes sense in the context of the skill and the blinding effect is even better than a knock back because it can affect targets immune to movement effects. > This would also remove the need to have a feat that only affects Sunburst, and that feat could be changed to give extra stacks of judgement to all AoE powers. > (edit: accidentally a word there)
This is a great suggestion for the Sunburst debacle, thank you.
> @glowingember said: > > Since you have taken damage off of chains, it now seems to be the unwanted child of the cleric family. I do know that a great number of high level mobs and bosses are immune to control powers - so this won't do it's intended purpose of holding things back. No one will want to use chains as a mini stun. > > what about a debuff power that lowers a mobs combat advantage and crit chance (err accuracy and ...something)? it would be a great utility spell to use against bosses that have a higher than average ca an crit bonus. This feels more in line with what the dc is trying to do and keeps chains as a restraining spell. > > I'm not sure what changes would be available to sunburst since the chains of blazing light change have put us in this weird zone. > > Whatever is worse than being friend zoned, thats what you did to chains and risk doing to sunburst. > Be that as it may, sunburst does need to change.
I agree with this suggestion for Chains. It's so useful on live right now and part of my main rotation on both DO and AC (if not using the glorious Astral Shield that is on live). The Damage and utility of Chains is highly missed mod 16...
> @josiahiyon said: > Sunburst w/ the knockback is one of the best DC skills in PVP. Without the knock back, it is basically useless in pvp. Thus, allowing to either (1) do 0 damage but knock back further or (2) do more damage but don’t knock back is an ideal solution. This solution is a perfect example of how feats should be used, and is consistent with the direction outlined by the developer earlier in this thread.
This sounds good in theory, but as others have mentioned - where trying to avoid feats that are encounter specific. For someone that doesn't want to slot Sunburst (as I'm sure many won't since the power has very specific uses), this choice for Sunburst feats becomes pointless.
That lock lock was specced for healing as in soulweaver specc.
Personaly i havnt tested pvp yet but the comparison there is inaccurate
Well, tell me then how come being an Arbiter with dps spec along with a moderate TR we could not kill him BUT he has killed us both. Not only he managed to survive through our burst but to kill us one by one
I mean im alright if lock being a healer (supporter) would not be able to kill me. but unfortunately he is able to kill and heal like a boss. Same goes to tanks.
Because healing warlocks depend on damage to heal, and also, probably more importantly, Arbiter does as much dps but significantly less healing than a healing specced warlock. I addressed this in a previous post, it's bad for both pve and pvp.
> @glowingember said: > > devout paragon path makes more sense to me if they get a 4th encounter slot. I see it as a divine support caster specialist whereas the arbiter gave up that 4th slot to learn to channel more powerful divine combat spells. > This is a great suggestion to help Devout to have more of an active dynamic role that people are wanting where Arbiter gets this with the scales of judgement mechanic.
Emphasis on "should be". Arbiter is OK for solo play, but although it is meant to be equally viable as a DPS as the other DPS classes, there are some issues.
I have not tried Arbiter in PvP, but I would not be surprised to see it have issues because of control (vulnerable to control, and cannot reliably control/stun/root/whatever others).
In regular PvE, the Arbiter has two issues - its AoE is somewhat lacking, but I am actually hoping that will get fixed. The other issue is with long fights - the Arbiter does decent damage in short fights against a single opponent, but in longer fights, divinity management becomes an issue and the Arbiter has to spend too much time/powers on restoring divinity instead of doing damage. The arbiter is perfectly fine as a secondary single-target DPS, though
Same goes for pvp, the longer the fight is, the worst it becomes. Since we can not make pressure just like other casters after we run out of divinity. Something must be addressed this way.
That lock lock was specced for healing as in soulweaver specc.
Personaly i havnt tested pvp yet but the comparison there is inaccurate
Well, tell me then how come being an Arbiter with dps spec along with a moderate TR we could not kill him BUT he has killed us both. Not only he managed to survive through our burst but to kill us one by one
I mean im alright if lock being a healer (supporter) would not be able to kill me. but unfortunately he is able to kill and heal like a boss. Same goes to tanks.
Because healing warlocks depend on damage to heal, and also, probably more importantly, Arbiter does as much dps but significantly less healing than a healing specced warlock. I addressed this in a previous post, it's bad for both pve and pvp.
We used to heal as much as locks, before the bastion nurf to the ground. Since we had that, i suggest the same should go for locks. isnt it ?
1
Options
adinosiiMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 4,294Arc User
We used to heal as much as locks, before the bastion nurf to the ground. Since we had that, i suggest the same should go for locks. isnt it ?
Arbiter really should not be healing that much. Yes, having one healing power for use in absolute emergencies is OK, but I really don't see groups wanting to bring Arbiters along for their healing ability).
(In fact, I don't see groups generally wanting to bring Clerics at all as they are right now.... Arbiter is not as good at DPS as some of the other DPSers. As for the devout, yes, sure it can heal, but some groups might want a Warlock, as it can do more damage as well as heal, or a Paladin, as they have other abilities than just healing.
So, ye...I am hoping to see some changes tomorrow that will give clerics a reason to be desired for group content.
> @alfalolz said: > We used to heal as much as locks, before the bastion nurf to the ground. Since we had that, i suggest the same should go for locks. isnt it ?
No. Healing warlocks should not have their damage or healing nerfed, since they are doing what they are supposed to be doing. Arbiter is not supposed to heal as much as a healing spec warlock, paladin or cleric. As much as I liked how much we were able to heal before, that's not supposed to be the point of the DPS spec of cleric.
Instead, Devout should have their damage increased to be competitive with a healing specced warlock (or as someone else suggested, a 4th encounter power which would be awesome), and dps on Arbiter brought up to be competitive with other DPS classes.
7
Options
adinosiiMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 4,294Arc User
Instead, Devout should have their damage increased to be competitive with a healing specced warlock (or as someone else suggested, a 4th encounter power which would be awesome), and dps on Arbiter brought up to be competitive with other DPS classes.
That's it, pretty much. What reduces the DPS damage of Arbiter compared to some other classes is the following:
Limited or flawed AoE powers.
Divinity management becmoes a real issue in longer fights.
A cleric has no powers that produce CA. We have to rely either on positioning (hard when soling) or companions (which means no augments).
I have some hope that some of this might get fixed before release.
> We used to heal as much as locks, before the bastion nurf to the ground. Since we had that, i suggest the same should go for locks. isnt it ?
No. Healing warlocks should not have their damage or healing nerfed, since they are doing what they are supposed to be doing. Arbiter is not supposed to heal as much as a healing spec warlock, paladin or cleric. As much as I liked how much we were able to heal before, that's not supposed to be the point of the DPS spec of cleric.
Instead, Devout should have their damage increased to be competitive with a healing specced warlock (or as someone else suggested, a 4th encounter power which would be awesome), and dps on Arbiter brought up to be competitive with other DPS classes.
Well, If you wish healing lock to stay the same, im fine with that as long as they wouldn't be able to out damage me pve and pvp wise. At the moment its plain wrong.
Divinity management in long fights becomes HUGE issue pve and pvp wise. Thats a huge point.
> @alphastream said: > Divinity: In play I did not find the new divinity to be particularly rewarding. It's okay, but the live concept of normal vs divine vs empowering is a really cool strategy that becomes really interesting for the experienced player. The radiant/judgment has some ability to replace it, but I don't like how it is designed with regards to feats and being a bit too obvious and inflexible.
This. Divinity is half the reason it's fun to currently play AC on live. Knowing your rotation, the various versions of the encounters, there is always something to do - dynamic engaging gameplay. Mod 16 Arbiter gets scales of judgment, Devouts gets well... nothing. Standing around waiting to heal, half the time getting rooted into place by your powers - praying to the divines you don't get stuck in the red and cause a party wipe.
> @dupeks said: > Ideally, I would like to also see at more splat or positional buff, something that requires skill or timing to coordinate with others and / or in your rotation. I think a good opportunity would be to add back a 5% buff to Hallowed Ground daily (feel free to remove HoT and/or DR buff). Now that it's not spammable, it shouldn't be so out of control, and players would be forgoing using a damaging or healing daily. AA could be the heal / control removal / damage mitigation daily, balanced with a more offensive one.
This is a great suggestion for Hallowed Ground and creates a nice freedom to choose between it and AA depending in the situation.
> @adinosii said: > (In fact, I don't see groups generally wanting to bring Clerics at all as they are right now.... Arbiter is not as good at DPS as some of the other DPSers. As for the devout, yes, sure it can heal, but some groups might want a Warlock, as it can do more damage as well as heal, or a Paladin, as they have other abilities than just healing. >
I find this interesting, having tried to heal with Paladin and Warlock my feeling is that “I hope Clerics can heal”, because my (limited) experience while tanking is that if the heals fail the tank dies and then everyone dies.
Right now, I would want a DC as healer as they are the only class I’ve had experience with being successful keeping the tank alive.
Obsidian Moonlight - Paladin Obsidian Oath - Warlock A whole lot of other Obsidian toons as well.
3
Options
adinosiiMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 4,294Arc User
Right now, I would want a DC as healer as they are the only class I’ve had experience with being successful keeping the tank alive.
Well, I said "some groups"....one key difference is for example that a Cleric healer will do a lot less damage than a Warlock healer, and for some groups (or some content) that might be important.
I don't really like playing a Devout Cleric - I find healing to be boring and the current mechanisms are, well... flawed. Arbiter, the DPS cleric is sort-of OK (apart from the feats) - good enough for solo play (which is what I mostly do anyhow), and usable as a secondary DPS in a group.
I think the reason to bring a devout right now is exactly what most people hate about it right now - you want someone who is doing nothing but healing. The heals are available when you need them because they're not doing anything else. I haven't ran many dungeon attempts, so how much will really that be? But honestly, I think a lock would be a better choice. They won't get hamstrung in a fight by divinity, and they can provide utility beyond heals.
> @kythelion#3210 said: > Yeah, the battle fury things sticks in my craw a little bit. I said some very regretful words to my friend when he told me what it did and to go look at it. He's been snickering at me since and building a gwf to main instead of dc specifically for that. You get to be the DPS AND have that buff? I mean, why tf wouldn't you play that. If ANY class is going to have buffs, cleric should sitting on at least an even slice of that pie, and right now we barely got to lick the spoon. Having a couple buffs, even small ones, would go a long way to fight the "boring" that goes with playing healer. > > Edit: OMG, I just looked at PoP. What the absolute hamstering HAMSTER @Asterdahl! You tell us we can't even have a power that buffs all three damage types and is on the DPS path and the other is a hamstring modification to a DAILY of 3% for a few seconds, but battle fury and PoP are allowed to exist! One of them on a DPS class even? And one essentially always up? Now I'm seriously hamstering angry.
This seriously needs to be addressed. Looks like Barbarian started preview in the gutter, now they're getting the silver spoon again like every mod. Also as others have mentioned, Warlock's healing and damage potential is higher than either Cleric paragon, plus they get constant PoP buff.
1
Options
adinosiiMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 4,294Arc User
Now, both the Cleric and Warlock have "Healer" and "DPS" roles, but their initial stats are quite different. Why? What is the justification for that?
Clerics get a semi-decent distribution for healing (Devout), but a pathetic one for DPS (Arbiter) - Warlocks get a good DPS distribution, and a somewhat lousy healing one.
Not fair.
As I have said multiple times before, I consider the removal of initial stat rolls to be the worst mistake in Miod 16, but if we are really going to be stuck with this HAMSTER then you should be equally unfair to both classes, like like giving both classes the same initial stat distribution which would be like the average of those two.
Of course the proper thing to do would be to give people a choice.... I would pick a distribution like the Warlock gets now for my Cleric in an instant, as I expect to play Arbiter 95% of the time .... assuming I stick around, that is.
@asterdahl I'm looking at some new Devout feats right now, and, THANK YOU. I could nitpick at them, but honestly I won't because these are less restrictive and I can see them being more useful now. Not as unrestrictive as I was hoping for, but I see that you budged a little. Also, repeated blessings confuses me. I think I like the idea, but it seems like it contradicts itself. Using another heal power extends the duration of healing word, but the duration of healing word cannot be extended?
Edit: Would it be too much to ask for Swift Prayer to allow 50% movement speed to channel divinity AND Astral Shield?
Post edited by kythelion#3210 on
1
Options
adinosiiMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 4,294Arc User
@asterdahl I'm looking at some new Devout feats right now, and, THANK YOU.
I had been hoping the Arbiter would get some updated/improved feats, because (as I have said before), those are the only part of Arbiter that are just not working.
Is this really what we are going to get stuck with, or will we get some improvements?
I like the new direction for the devout feats. There are a few that pique my interest (blessed armament) and some that seem like fun ( the rhythm of the heavens).
i had a laugh over the feat that granted "divine pips" on encounter use that improved your healing at will. That feels like a partial implementation of pips for devout. Any chance on have it boost the at will damage as well? (without taking away damage from somewhere else).
I did a double check on the arbiter feats and there is a definite pattern where you are locked into one of three encounter loadouts based on your feat choices.
I was curious about the damage output of some arbiter spells in relation to magnitude/ divinity ratios but i need to go in more detail about that later. If you take the time it takes to build up divinity by eating pips, i think it was 6 pips for a daunting light, and 12 pips for a break the spirit but that is for tomorrow.
1
Options
kacsaneverMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 167Arc User
edited April 2019
"Soothing Light has been renamed Soothe and has had its magnitude increased to 50, up from 25 and now costs 10 Divinity to cast." Tieing an at-will to anything (divinity in this case) is a big no. It is named at-will for a reason. Change it to a dps at-will if you think it would be too OP if cast for free 50% weapon damage heal, but this "at-will" is a big no in its current state (it was a big no in its previous state, too). In M15 it uses divinity to heal, but just when you switched stance, big difference.
Edit: checking the feat rework changed a bit my above opinion. Feated (Empowered Soothe) Soothe would be somewhat OK if Soothe did not use divinity while under the effect of feat. It has already a limit (3 stack per encounter, max 3 stack). But I still keep my statement, tieing any at-will use to any other requirement is a fail. It is a (fire) at-will. My suggestion is: Remove the divinity requirement (mandatory) and either or * Keep the increased non feated healing magnitude. Keep the new feat (prefered to make the non feated stance at least somewhat useful) * Revert the non feated healing magnitude. Increase the feat effect of healing magnitude increase to 125 (from 100).
Edit2: better would be * remove divinity consumtion (mandatory) * revert non feated healing magnitude to 25 * add the effect to feat (also keeping the current): increases the healing magnitude of Soothe by 25 (always)
We used to heal as much as locks, before the bastion nurf to the ground. Since we had that, i suggest the same should go for locks. isnt it ?
Arbiter really should not be healing that much. Yes, having one healing power for use in absolute emergencies is OK, but I really don't see groups wanting to bring Arbiters along for their healing ability).
(In fact, I don't see groups generally wanting to bring Clerics at all as they are right now.... Arbiter is not as good at DPS as some of the other DPSers. As for the devout, yes, sure it can heal, but some groups might want a Warlock, as it can do more damage as well as heal, or a Paladin, as they have other abilities than just healing.
So, ye...I am hoping to see some changes tomorrow that will give clerics a reason to be desired for group content.
if y cleric could also heal with crit strikes - whenever you critically hit your allys get healed for the amount of damage you do - then you would be wanted in a dungeon. It could work like warlocks.
0
Options
arazith07Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 1,719Arc User
Just did a few group runs as Devout, seems to be really smooth as far as maintaining divinity and keeping the party alive. Would be nice if we had a bit more utility buffs at least, or one group damage buff to add into the mix.
1
Options
dread4moorMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 1,154Arc User
Now, both the Cleric and Warlock have "Healer" and "DPS" roles, but their initial stats are quite different. Why? What is the justification for that?
Clerics get a semi-decent distribution for healing (Devout), but a pathetic one for DPS (Arbiter) - Warlocks get a good DPS distribution, and a somewhat lousy healing one.
Not fair.
As I have said multiple times before, I consider the removal of initial stat rolls to be the worst mistake in Miod 16, but if we are really going to be stuck with this HAMSTER then you should be equally unfair to both classes, like like giving both classes the same initial stat distribution which would be like the average of those two.
Of course the proper thing to do would be to give people a choice.... I would pick a distribution like the Warlock gets now for my Cleric in an instant, as I expect to play Arbiter 95% of the time .... assuming I stick around, that is.
Had to echo this excellent suggestion. Ran content today switching b/w Arbiter and Devout. The static stats puzzled me as well. Give us a set number of stat points and let us apply them ourselves. This would allow us to make choices, good or bad. Stat points will help address the lack of meaningful choices many of us have mentioned."
I am Took.
"Full plate and packing steel" in NW since 2013.
Comments
>
> I currently use BtS on the biggest target for the debuff and it makes the big guys really easy to kill, so BtS and geas are in a good state in my opinion, but we lack AoE options, so killing the small guys after are what makes the battles feel worse. I think if the area on Searing Light were greater, it would help a lot. Atm I have to keep trying to get mobs as lined up as possible but the way the AI chooses how to walk does not help at all ^^'
>
> Also with Chains doing no damage now...
> Sunburst effect should be changed to a blinding/disable effect, similar to Burning Light in OP (M15), that way you don't make it a detriment in higher lvl group content and still keep it as a defensive mechanism to low level clerics. It also becomes a good debuff to use in group content - on live I use a Frost enchantment because the disable it gives works as a nice defense from bigger mobs.
> A blinding effect makes sense in the context of the skill and the blinding effect is even better than a knock back because it can affect targets immune to movement effects.
> This would also remove the need to have a feat that only affects Sunburst, and that feat could be changed to give extra stacks of judgement to all AoE powers.
> (edit: accidentally a word there)
This is a great suggestion for the Sunburst debacle, thank you.
>
> Since you have taken damage off of chains, it now seems to be the unwanted child of the cleric family. I do know that a great number of high level mobs and bosses are immune to control powers - so this won't do it's intended purpose of holding things back. No one will want to use chains as a mini stun.
>
> what about a debuff power that lowers a mobs combat advantage and crit chance (err accuracy and ...something)? it would be a great utility spell to use against bosses that have a higher than average ca an crit bonus. This feels more in line with what the dc is trying to do and keeps chains as a restraining spell.
>
> I'm not sure what changes would be available to sunburst since the chains of blazing light change have put us in this weird zone.
>
> Whatever is worse than being friend zoned, thats what you did to chains and risk doing to sunburst.
> Be that as it may, sunburst does need to change.
I agree with this suggestion for Chains. It's so useful on live right now and part of my main rotation on both DO and AC (if not using the glorious Astral Shield that is on live). The Damage and utility of Chains is highly missed mod 16...
> Sunburst w/ the knockback is one of the best DC skills in PVP. Without the knock back, it is basically useless in pvp. Thus, allowing to either (1) do 0 damage but knock back further or (2) do more damage but don’t knock back is an ideal solution. This solution is a perfect example of how feats should be used, and is consistent with the direction outlined by the developer earlier in this thread.
This sounds good in theory, but as others have mentioned - where trying to avoid feats that are encounter specific. For someone that doesn't want to slot Sunburst (as I'm sure many won't since the power has very specific uses), this choice for Sunburst feats becomes pointless.
>
> devout paragon path makes more sense to me if they get a 4th encounter slot. I see it as a divine support caster specialist whereas the arbiter gave up that 4th slot to learn to channel more powerful divine combat spells.
>
This is a great suggestion to help Devout to have more of an active dynamic role that people are wanting where Arbiter gets this with the scales of judgement mechanic.
(In fact, I don't see groups generally wanting to bring Clerics at all as they are right now.... Arbiter is not as good at DPS as some of the other DPSers. As for the devout, yes, sure it can heal, but some groups might want a Warlock, as it can do more damage as well as heal, or a Paladin, as they have other abilities than just healing.
So, ye...I am hoping to see some changes tomorrow that will give clerics a reason to be desired for group content.
> We used to heal as much as locks, before the bastion nurf to the ground. Since we had that, i suggest the same should go for locks. isnt it ?
No. Healing warlocks should not have their damage or healing nerfed, since they are doing what they are supposed to be doing. Arbiter is not supposed to heal as much as a healing spec warlock, paladin or cleric. As much as I liked how much we were able to heal before, that's not supposed to be the point of the DPS spec of cleric.
Instead, Devout should have their damage increased to be competitive with a healing specced warlock (or as someone else suggested, a 4th encounter power which would be awesome), and dps on Arbiter brought up to be competitive with other DPS classes.
- Limited or flawed AoE powers.
- Divinity management becmoes a real issue in longer fights.
- A cleric has no powers that produce CA. We have to rely either on positioning (hard when soling) or companions (which means no augments).
I have some hope that some of this might get fixed before release.At the moment its plain wrong.
Divinity management in long fights becomes HUGE issue pve and pvp wise. Thats a huge point.
> Divinity: In play I did not find the new divinity to be particularly rewarding. It's okay, but the live concept of normal vs divine vs empowering is a really cool strategy that becomes really interesting for the experienced player. The radiant/judgment has some ability to replace it, but I don't like how it is designed with regards to feats and being a bit too obvious and inflexible.
This. Divinity is half the reason it's fun to currently play AC on live. Knowing your rotation, the various versions of the encounters, there is always something to do - dynamic engaging gameplay. Mod 16 Arbiter gets scales of judgment, Devouts gets well... nothing. Standing around waiting to heal, half the time getting rooted into place by your powers - praying to the divines you don't get stuck in the red and cause a party wipe.
> Ideally, I would like to also see at more splat or positional buff, something that requires skill or timing to coordinate with others and / or in your rotation. I think a good opportunity would be to add back a 5% buff to Hallowed Ground daily (feel free to remove HoT and/or DR buff). Now that it's not spammable, it shouldn't be so out of control, and players would be forgoing using a damaging or healing daily. AA could be the heal / control removal / damage mitigation daily, balanced with a more offensive one.
This is a great suggestion for Hallowed Ground and creates a nice freedom to choose between it and AA depending in the situation.
> (In fact, I don't see groups generally wanting to bring Clerics at all as they are right now.... Arbiter is not as good at DPS as some of the other DPSers. As for the devout, yes, sure it can heal, but some groups might want a Warlock, as it can do more damage as well as heal, or a Paladin, as they have other abilities than just healing.
>
I find this interesting, having tried to heal with Paladin and Warlock my feeling is that “I hope Clerics can heal”, because my (limited) experience while tanking is that if the heals fail the tank dies and then everyone dies.
Right now, I would want a DC as healer as they are the only class I’ve had experience with being successful keeping the tank alive.
Obsidian Oath - Warlock
A whole lot of other Obsidian toons as well.
I don't really like playing a Devout Cleric - I find healing to be boring and the current mechanisms are, well... flawed. Arbiter, the DPS cleric is sort-of OK (apart from the feats) - good enough for solo play (which is what I mostly do anyhow), and usable as a secondary DPS in a group.
> A suggestion for the ability Wisdom: Make it decide how much Max divinity you can have saved up.
This is a great suggestion and would help out Paladins as well.
> Yeah, the battle fury things sticks in my craw a little bit. I said some very regretful words to my friend when he told me what it did and to go look at it. He's been snickering at me since and building a gwf to main instead of dc specifically for that. You get to be the DPS AND have that buff? I mean, why tf wouldn't you play that. If ANY class is going to have buffs, cleric should sitting on at least an even slice of that pie, and right now we barely got to lick the spoon. Having a couple buffs, even small ones, would go a long way to fight the "boring" that goes with playing healer.
>
> Edit: OMG, I just looked at PoP. What the absolute hamstering HAMSTER @Asterdahl! You tell us we can't even have a power that buffs all three damage types and is on the DPS path and the other is a hamstring modification to a DAILY of 3% for a few seconds, but battle fury and PoP are allowed to exist! One of them on a DPS class even? And one essentially always up? Now I'm seriously hamstering angry.
This seriously needs to be addressed. Looks like Barbarian started preview in the gutter, now they're getting the silver spoon again like every mod. Also as others have mentioned, Warlock's healing and damage potential is higher than either Cleric paragon, plus they get constant PoP buff.
On that subject - the initial stats of Warlocks and Clerics are like this:
Cleric: STR: 10, CON: 10, DEX: 10, INT: 15, WIS: 16, CHA: 13
Warlock: STR: 8, CON: 14, DEX: 12, INT: 16, WIS: 8, CHA: 16
Now, both the Cleric and Warlock have "Healer" and "DPS" roles, but their initial stats are quite different. Why? What is the justification for that?
Clerics get a semi-decent distribution for healing (Devout), but a pathetic one for DPS (Arbiter) - Warlocks get a good DPS distribution, and a somewhat lousy healing one.
Not fair.
As I have said multiple times before, I consider the removal of initial stat rolls to be the worst mistake in Miod 16, but if we are really going to be stuck with this HAMSTER then you should be equally unfair to both classes, like like giving both classes the same initial stat distribution which would be like the average of those two.
Of course the proper thing to do would be to give people a choice.... I would pick a distribution like the Warlock gets now for my Cleric in an instant, as I expect to play Arbiter 95% of the time .... assuming I stick around, that is.
Edit: Would it be too much to ask for Swift Prayer to allow 50% movement speed to channel divinity AND Astral Shield?
Is this really what we are going to get stuck with, or will we get some improvements?
i had a laugh over the feat that granted "divine pips" on encounter use that improved your healing at will. That feels like a partial implementation of pips for devout. Any chance on have it boost the at will damage as well? (without taking away damage from somewhere else).
I did a double check on the arbiter feats and there is a definite pattern where you are locked into one of three encounter loadouts based on your feat choices.
I was curious about the damage output of some arbiter spells in relation to magnitude/ divinity ratios but i need to go in more detail about that later. If you take the time it takes to build up divinity by eating pips, i think it was 6 pips for a daunting light, and 12 pips for a break the spirit but that is for tomorrow.
"Soothing Light has been renamed Soothe and has had its magnitude increased to 50, up from 25 and now costs 10 Divinity to cast."
Tieing an at-will to anything (divinity in this case) is a big no. It is named at-will for a reason.
Change it to a dps at-will if you think it would be too OP if cast for free 50% weapon damage heal, but this "at-will" is a big no in its current state (it was a big no in its previous state, too). In M15 it uses divinity to heal, but just when you switched stance, big difference.
Edit: checking the feat rework changed a bit my above opinion. Feated (Empowered Soothe) Soothe would be somewhat OK if Soothe did not use divinity while under the effect of feat. It has already a limit (3 stack per encounter, max 3 stack).
But I still keep my statement, tieing any at-will use to any other requirement is a fail. It is a (fire) at-will.
My suggestion is: Remove the divinity requirement (mandatory) and either or
* Keep the increased non feated healing magnitude. Keep the new feat (prefered to make the non feated stance at least somewhat useful)
* Revert the non feated healing magnitude. Increase the feat effect of healing magnitude increase to 125 (from 100).
Edit2: better would be
* remove divinity consumtion (mandatory)
* revert non feated healing magnitude to 25
* add the effect to feat (also keeping the current): increases the healing magnitude of Soothe by 25 (always)
Ran content today switching b/w Arbiter and Devout. The static stats puzzled me as well.
Give us a set number of stat points and let us apply them ourselves.
This would allow us to make choices, good or bad.
Stat points will help address the lack of meaningful choices many of us have mentioned."
I am Took.
"Full plate and packing steel" in NW since 2013.