Pretty much the title. I've been trying to figure out what WMs do 'better' than clerics. Setting aside RP, clerics seem to have a lot more utility, defense, a ton more debilitation, and more everything except TM. And even then they are pretty close since you can't really use more than 1 TM spell at a go, and they're all basically 'as good' as each other.
Even setting aside clerics as overpowered, because they are, I just don't see where WMs are good at anything except TM, and it's so blech in 3.0. But they are always one of the top populated guilds so I know I'm missing stuff.
BADGOPHER
DR-RAESH
Re: Why WMs?
12/30/2015 02:39 PM CST
It's all about the gerbils baby.
-Raesh
"It was wise enough to know itself, and brave enough to BE itself, and wild enough to change itself while somehow staying altogether true." ― The Slow Regard of Silent Things
-Raesh
"It was wise enough to know itself, and brave enough to BE itself, and wild enough to change itself while somehow staying altogether true." ― The Slow Regard of Silent Things
BADGOPHER
ASHAMAN1
Re: Why WMs?
12/30/2015 03:00 PM CST
War Magi have a lot more potential 'burst' that doesn't require full target spells. Flip side, Clerics can stack debuff after debuff (many not on diminishing returns), then fire off a 'chasing' TM spell. Not really something to compare well to.
Things War Mages DO have that I find kinda neat (speaking from the outside POV, I don't play a warmie anymore):
Familiars - yes, its the constantly pointed at maguffin, but I like em
Pre-Loaded spells - BG, DB. The idea of pre-gaming mana costs to have some stuff 'in the pipe', I dig
Non-prep/target/cast damage dealing spells - MAB, MOA - regardless of viability of such, they're neat non-normals.
Elemental Weapons - Just neat, enjoyed playing with those before retiring my mage
Wide Variety of AOE options - AOE Debil, TM, Cyclics, if you like crowd pleasing, they've got choices that do function differently.
Speaking candidly - I found the War Mage more 'fun' to play then the other magic primes. I only shelved mine because I had another project I wanted to try in that account slot.
Samsaren
Things War Mages DO have that I find kinda neat (speaking from the outside POV, I don't play a warmie anymore):
Familiars - yes, its the constantly pointed at maguffin, but I like em
Pre-Loaded spells - BG, DB. The idea of pre-gaming mana costs to have some stuff 'in the pipe', I dig
Non-prep/target/cast damage dealing spells - MAB, MOA - regardless of viability of such, they're neat non-normals.
Elemental Weapons - Just neat, enjoyed playing with those before retiring my mage
Wide Variety of AOE options - AOE Debil, TM, Cyclics, if you like crowd pleasing, they've got choices that do function differently.
Speaking candidly - I found the War Mage more 'fun' to play then the other magic primes. I only shelved mine because I had another project I wanted to try in that account slot.
Samsaren
JULIAN
Re: Why WMs?
12/30/2015 05:41 PM CST
Warmages were great pre-3.0 so there's some carry-over.
For PvE, I think Warmages are a lot more fun. And PvPing against everything but Clerics (because omg, clerics) they can make great use of what they have.
Mazrian
For PvE, I think Warmages are a lot more fun. And PvPing against everything but Clerics (because omg, clerics) they can make great use of what they have.
Mazrian
LIURIDR
FAMEBRIGHT
Re: Why WMs?
12/30/2015 11:00 PM CST
Piety is just not as cool as being a wizard.
Your search-fu is pig dung!
Your search-fu is pig dung!
TFPETPATH
CHUNGUS
Re: Why WMs?
01/01/2016 01:36 AM CST
<<I've been trying to figure out what WMs do 'better' than clerics.>>
Noticeable better TM variety and versatility (preloaded spells, non-targeted spells, damage types), familiars (much better day-to-day utility than rez), easier guild skill afaik which makes for easier training, different SoI which may or may not benefit you, easier access to all-important ranged weapons buff, elemental weapons (very handy, can have great stats, can have different damage types). That's off the top of my head, dunno if there's more than that.
Clerics have advantages too, but it'd be silly to think that warrior mages have nothing to envy.
TFPETPATH
Re: Why WMs?
01/01/2016 06:20 AM CST
Pathways are also very potent. Being able to shave off 2 seconds from feat and 3 from pathway means you can cast AoE spells faster than most guilds do regular TM, for example. Accuracy is a sizeable accuracy buff. Have not quantified the rest, but they are equally potent at what they're designed to do.
RIOLOBO
Re: Why WMs?
06/27/2016 04:21 PM CDT
Currently I'm giving my Paladin a break and started up a WM for the first time ever. I played long ago and dabbled in most guilds to varying degrees other than Pallys and WMs. Oh and necros. They came along after I left to do life.
I'm having a lot of fun with both, but I think I am probably going to stick with WM as my main.
The main reason being is I am not tied down/restricted in some game altering way. At least not to my knowledge at this point of my novice career...
Rangers have their wilderness bonus to worry about.
Paladins and clerics have their souls and immortals to please, and Paladins are restricted from skills like stealing. Which I get btw. My Paladin doesnt train stealth or sorcery either for RP reasons.
moonies contend with the moons...
barbs are pretty wild and free but no spells, and I like the complexity of DRs magic system.
Empaths are severely restricted hunting wise. Which would bore me to tears.
necros I know nothing about. They were my favorite class in EQ though so I can imagine at some point I give them a whirl.
Thieves have their bonus system, plus must train a skillset that I'm really not a fan of training hard. Stealth.
Traders. I know they can hunt, and do. But hunting is my favorite thing in DR and while they can do it, it feels gimped.
Bards were the other class I thought about starting up as an alt to my Paladin, but I've never been much of a singer type and it seems the class would have some sort of demand that I wouldnt care for. But they seem pretty free to do whatever, so thats why they are still on my list to check out one of these days.
So in sum, I went with the WM because I can do whatever I want, whenever I want, and however I want!
I'm having a lot of fun with both, but I think I am probably going to stick with WM as my main.
The main reason being is I am not tied down/restricted in some game altering way. At least not to my knowledge at this point of my novice career...
Rangers have their wilderness bonus to worry about.
Paladins and clerics have their souls and immortals to please, and Paladins are restricted from skills like stealing. Which I get btw. My Paladin doesnt train stealth or sorcery either for RP reasons.
moonies contend with the moons...
barbs are pretty wild and free but no spells, and I like the complexity of DRs magic system.
Empaths are severely restricted hunting wise. Which would bore me to tears.
necros I know nothing about. They were my favorite class in EQ though so I can imagine at some point I give them a whirl.
Thieves have their bonus system, plus must train a skillset that I'm really not a fan of training hard. Stealth.
Traders. I know they can hunt, and do. But hunting is my favorite thing in DR and while they can do it, it feels gimped.
Bards were the other class I thought about starting up as an alt to my Paladin, but I've never been much of a singer type and it seems the class would have some sort of demand that I wouldnt care for. But they seem pretty free to do whatever, so thats why they are still on my list to check out one of these days.
So in sum, I went with the WM because I can do whatever I want, whenever I want, and however I want!
PRIMEQ
Re: Why WMs?
06/27/2016 06:39 PM CDT
I hate to burst your bubble, but in the future your spells will be affected by the elemental affinities of an area. It should be a relatively small effect though. Basically if you cast a spell in an area that isn't great for that element, you'll burn up some more mana.
>>Bards were the other class I thought about starting up as an alt to my Paladin, but I've never been much of a singer type and it seems the class would have some sort of demand that I wouldnt care for.
You do not have to sing to be a Bard, but you do have to perform a lot with an instrument. Eventually you get 6 ranks/circle of Performance requirement, which is not great but doable even with a strong combat focus.
- Navesi
>>Bards were the other class I thought about starting up as an alt to my Paladin, but I've never been much of a singer type and it seems the class would have some sort of demand that I wouldnt care for.
You do not have to sing to be a Bard, but you do have to perform a lot with an instrument. Eventually you get 6 ranks/circle of Performance requirement, which is not great but doable even with a strong combat focus.
- Navesi
DERIUM
Re: Why WMs?
06/27/2016 08:12 PM CDT
Doesn't that already happen? You just can't see it? Or it used to happen. I haven't looked recently, but I remember seeing something like that a LONG time ago while killing dryads.
FAMEBRIGHT
Re: Why WMs?
06/27/2016 08:16 PM CDT
A similar system has been part of WM magic since the beginning (back when Dryads was a common hunting ground) but it hasn't been noticeable (if even still there) since spell preps went from ten mana ranges to hundred mana ranges.
Everything old is new again! Which is pretty exciting in a weird way.
Re: Life mana Spell preps
You raise your hands in the air. You wave them like you just don't care. Somebody says, "Hey!" Somebody says, "Ho!" Somebody screams.
Everything old is new again! Which is pretty exciting in a weird way.
Re: Life mana Spell preps
You raise your hands in the air. You wave them like you just don't care. Somebody says, "Hey!" Somebody says, "Ho!" Somebody screams.
TOTLIIO
Re: Why WMs?
06/28/2016 09:44 AM CDT
I find this thread a little amusing, sorry I missed it originally.
To answer your question as to why wm's and what they do better than cleric? I play both classes at a decently high level, and WM does far, far more alpha damage in a small window than a Cleric does. WM's have 2 spells (one of which is converting to heavy TM) that can be pre-buffed to be cast instantly, plus also have a third spell prepped. It makes them rather deadly. Especially if you train a ranged weapon as well.
That isnt to say Cleric's are bad at all because Cleric is very strong, but their strengths imo lie more in their plethora of debuffs and self-buffs. They do have one pretty good spell in the form of AE as far as TM spells go. Overall though clerics are a different kind of "strength" than what WM's do.
The real question you should be asking im is why Moonmage over either cleric or wm, but this is the wrong forum for that.
To answer your question as to why wm's and what they do better than cleric? I play both classes at a decently high level, and WM does far, far more alpha damage in a small window than a Cleric does. WM's have 2 spells (one of which is converting to heavy TM) that can be pre-buffed to be cast instantly, plus also have a third spell prepped. It makes them rather deadly. Especially if you train a ranged weapon as well.
That isnt to say Cleric's are bad at all because Cleric is very strong, but their strengths imo lie more in their plethora of debuffs and self-buffs. They do have one pretty good spell in the form of AE as far as TM spells go. Overall though clerics are a different kind of "strength" than what WM's do.
The real question you should be asking im is why Moonmage over either cleric or wm, but this is the wrong forum for that.
FRANKYFIGGS
Re: Why WMs?
06/30/2016 01:47 AM CDT
elemental weapons. they make training all the weapons a breeze. the way you can train and fight is very diverse. magice prime always a plus. defensive buffs mean more these days.
fire, lightning, rocks, aoes. its cool to be a wizard in the cool old fashioned ways, cantrips are cool too for utility, dont need a bucket or a bin.
-Munch-
fire, lightning, rocks, aoes. its cool to be a wizard in the cool old fashioned ways, cantrips are cool too for utility, dont need a bucket or a bin.
-Munch-
JYAKULIS1
Re: Why WMs?
08/05/2016 07:20 PM CDT
Idk...don't really care about pvp so, it's a good class for me.
I feel like the damage I can deal in pve is so much higher than a lot of other classes. If I have a high level fire rain up, sometimes the spawn isn't fast enough for me. I just feel like I reign in destruction.
Also, with electrostatic eddy, the training is super simple. I can just flip between cyclic tm and cyclic debilitation. Even though complete paralysis isn't quite what it was in prior versions it is still a great debuff for hitting things with your lower weapons at level. It's kind of like khri prowess in a way but in a completely different way.
The only thing that irked me about the class was when they switched YS. I loved the old version. Wish it had a creative metaspell that made it increase protection or something.
Question about everyone complaining about clerics...How do they beat you? Can't you use aether cloak neutralize some of their attacks?
I feel like the damage I can deal in pve is so much higher than a lot of other classes. If I have a high level fire rain up, sometimes the spawn isn't fast enough for me. I just feel like I reign in destruction.
Also, with electrostatic eddy, the training is super simple. I can just flip between cyclic tm and cyclic debilitation. Even though complete paralysis isn't quite what it was in prior versions it is still a great debuff for hitting things with your lower weapons at level. It's kind of like khri prowess in a way but in a completely different way.
The only thing that irked me about the class was when they switched YS. I loved the old version. Wish it had a creative metaspell that made it increase protection or something.
Question about everyone complaining about clerics...How do they beat you? Can't you use aether cloak neutralize some of their attacks?
SARAGOS
Re: Why WMs?
08/08/2016 09:58 PM CDT
> Question about everyone complaining about clerics...How do they beat you? Can't you use aether cloak neutralize some of their attacks?
AC is amazing for a few circumstances, and is useful against Clerics, but not as useful as it is for others.
Situations I like AC for:
* My opponent is weapons tert, such as with MM's and Necro's, or I know is poorly trained with weapons. This shuts down TM and puts me at an advantage.
* My opponent doesn't understand AC, or there's too much going on, so they end up attacking themselves over and over again.
* It's a super even fight and I can use AC to make it so I don't get damaged faster than health regen, but I can slowly wear them down.
* I'm outmatched or not ready for a fight and I just want to live long enough to escape.
In other situations, I would prefer to have another cyclic up and be using my awesome TM spells to my advantage, in particular DB and BG combined with various debilitation.
However, with Clerics, I'm forced to turn that equation around. For me the big scary thing about Clerics is Soul Attrition, which can turn a very even fight into an instant loss. So in that case, I'm not using AC to gain some sort of advantage, Against Clerics, I feel like the big advantage to WM's is their TM, so when I turtle up using AC I'm just using it to avoid disaster rather than gain an advantage, while shutting down my big advantage in that matchup.
That said, I'm absolutely in love with the WM guild. I love battle-mages / gishes, and I think DR does it better than practically anything else I've seen. I also really love DR's magic system, so my main kind of has to be either magic prime or secondary. The spells have a great wow factor and the WM toolbox is pretty darn good. Do I want to improve some things? Sure, you always do. But in context, I'm pretty darn happy. From an RP perspective, WM lore also gives me a hook into a lot of the important events in the world's history without doing a lot of things to determine what my character is - my character isn't beholden to the gods, had his brain mucked with, or imbued with the gift/curse of prophecy, which leaves me free to go in my own direction.
All of that combines to gel well with the aspect of my personality I like to bring out when I'm roleplaying Saragos.
- Saragos
AC is amazing for a few circumstances, and is useful against Clerics, but not as useful as it is for others.
Situations I like AC for:
* My opponent is weapons tert, such as with MM's and Necro's, or I know is poorly trained with weapons. This shuts down TM and puts me at an advantage.
* My opponent doesn't understand AC, or there's too much going on, so they end up attacking themselves over and over again.
* It's a super even fight and I can use AC to make it so I don't get damaged faster than health regen, but I can slowly wear them down.
* I'm outmatched or not ready for a fight and I just want to live long enough to escape.
In other situations, I would prefer to have another cyclic up and be using my awesome TM spells to my advantage, in particular DB and BG combined with various debilitation.
However, with Clerics, I'm forced to turn that equation around. For me the big scary thing about Clerics is Soul Attrition, which can turn a very even fight into an instant loss. So in that case, I'm not using AC to gain some sort of advantage, Against Clerics, I feel like the big advantage to WM's is their TM, so when I turtle up using AC I'm just using it to avoid disaster rather than gain an advantage, while shutting down my big advantage in that matchup.
That said, I'm absolutely in love with the WM guild. I love battle-mages / gishes, and I think DR does it better than practically anything else I've seen. I also really love DR's magic system, so my main kind of has to be either magic prime or secondary. The spells have a great wow factor and the WM toolbox is pretty darn good. Do I want to improve some things? Sure, you always do. But in context, I'm pretty darn happy. From an RP perspective, WM lore also gives me a hook into a lot of the important events in the world's history without doing a lot of things to determine what my character is - my character isn't beholden to the gods, had his brain mucked with, or imbued with the gift/curse of prophecy, which leaves me free to go in my own direction.
All of that combines to gel well with the aspect of my personality I like to bring out when I'm roleplaying Saragos.
- Saragos
TOTLIIO
Re: Why WMs?
08/09/2016 01:48 PM CDT
AC gives WM's a strong tool vs Cleric but its not the be all end all.
You have to be wary when fighting a good cleric because they can IT your spells or Spite a room.
You have to be wary when fighting a good cleric because they can IT your spells or Spite a room.
ABSOLON
Re: Why WMs?
08/09/2016 02:06 PM CDT
<<You have to be wary when fighting a good cleric because they can IT your spells or Spite a room.
FWIW, as an aside, Grejuva edited the Dergati's Spite page a couple of days ago to update it's status from signature to non-signature, so this is technically something any caster can do. I'm not sure if that's always been the case, or if it was a very recent silent update, however.
Elanthipedia - https://elanthipedia.play.net/mediawiki/index.php/Main_Page
Epedia Admins - https://elanthipedia.play.net/mediawiki/index.php/Elanthipedia:Administrators
FWIW, as an aside, Grejuva edited the Dergati's Spite page a couple of days ago to update it's status from signature to non-signature, so this is technically something any caster can do. I'm not sure if that's always been the case, or if it was a very recent silent update, however.
Elanthipedia - https://elanthipedia.play.net/mediawiki/index.php/Main_Page
Epedia Admins - https://elanthipedia.play.net/mediawiki/index.php/Elanthipedia:Administrators
TOTLIIO
Re: Why WMs?
08/09/2016 02:09 PM CDT
>>FWIW, as an aside, Grejuva edited the Dergati's Spite page a couple of days ago to update it's status from signature to non-signature, so this is technically something any caster can do. I'm not sure if that's always been the case, or if it was a very recent silent update, however.
Thats interesting, I wonder if its coming soon to some scrolls? Not sure if i've seen one previously.
DR-GREJUVA
Re: Why WMs?
08/09/2016 02:29 PM CDT
>>FWIW, as an aside, Grejuva edited the Dergati's Spite page a couple of days ago to update it's status from signature to non-signature, so this is technically something any caster can do. I'm not sure if that's always been the case, or if it was a very recent silent update, however.
It was already non-signature and could be temporarily memorized by other guilds, but a bit of old code was interfering with the actual cast. It's been corrected.
GM Grejuva
It was already non-signature and could be temporarily memorized by other guilds, but a bit of old code was interfering with the actual cast. It's been corrected.
GM Grejuva
JULIAN
Re: Why WMs?
08/09/2016 02:45 PM CDT
DB is pretty sweet and very WM-flavored. Seems like it should be signature?
Mazrian
Mazrian
ABSOLON
Re: Why WMs?
08/09/2016 02:56 PM CDT
<<DB is pretty sweet and very WM-flavored. Seems like it should be signature?
Signature status has much more to do with confound than flavour. That said, it already is? According to the wiki, anyway.
Elanthipedia - https://elanthipedia.play.net/mediawiki/index.php/Main_Page
Epedia Admins - https://elanthipedia.play.net/mediawiki/index.php/Elanthipedia:Administrators
Signature status has much more to do with confound than flavour. That said, it already is? According to the wiki, anyway.
Elanthipedia - https://elanthipedia.play.net/mediawiki/index.php/Main_Page
Epedia Admins - https://elanthipedia.play.net/mediawiki/index.php/Elanthipedia:Administrators
JULIAN
Re: Why WMs?
08/09/2016 03:27 PM CDT
Er oops.
I read Dergati's Spite as Dragon's Breath.
Mazrian
I read Dergati's Spite as Dragon's Breath.
Mazrian
