Fury

I am perfectly relaxed.

I am perfectly relaxed.

If you're too relaxed, you'll soil yourself.

Played a feral ranger, and it was much harder to play than say an ogre ranger, where you can practically kill things by accident. It has enormous potential if caballed, but it was very easy to die, especially against anything tough like a qclass or caballed character. Even if decently equipped you could get bashlocked by some fg zerker--what Celerity described happened to me, died on fire bodyslam damage alone. Halfling was much tougher to kill. Even an elf was better for survivability. I did play a feral ranger as an evil for a while, and it is very easy to kill the unawares and newbies, but tougher opponents it's not my first choice for a ranger. Also whoever said you fury once and then go with it, that was my approach as well. You can't stand there soaking up damage with a two-round lag while fury stacks, at least not against an invoker or some such. Lots of offense, but you can't take damage like an ogre, as Celerity said, or even a halfling, with better defense, AC, and magic resistance to boot. And Mya as usual is saying this is flawed because it's too tough against communers. I actually think ferals could use more strength and more con.

I actually think ferals could use more strength and more con.

dwarfs get magic resist huge hp and solid str with a medicore vuln, i think we can give ferals some more hp, i'm not a fan of giving them access to more weapons but i'll support you 100% on the +con. (they don't really lack the offense to justify + str.)

I think of fury as the balancer for the fire vuln. Ogres have that crazy regen rate to make up for their vuln, dwarves have the magic resist...everything with a vuln has something to make up for it, or at least balance it...why should ferals be any different?

I think of fury as the balancer for the fire vuln. Ogres have that crazy regen rate to make up for their vuln' date=' dwarves have the magic resist...everything with a vuln has something to make up for it, or at least balance it...why should ferals be any different?[/quote']

let me give you a for instance. On my old tribunal werebeast archer... This 1 feral who was WAY better geared than me had just warcry'd. By using vuln arrows and a decent bow i was able to kill the feral before the lag from warcry had worn off. Their hp really is that low.

let me give you a for instance. On my old tribunal werebeast archer... This 1 feral who was WAY better geared than me when he had just warcry'd. By using vuln arrows and a decent bow i was able to kill the feral before the lag from warcry had worn off. Their hp really is that low.

I've been that feral, heh, it does suck. But how much HP is an extra con point really going to give ya, and is it going to make ferals too strong?

How did i pass this thread.

My problem with ferals is mainly Fury.

Fury only affects casters and communers:

It affects: Clerics, Paladins, Dark Knights, Shamans, Healers, Battlemages, Necros, Invockers.

How does it affects them ? It has some sort of effect that acts like you where casting with reduced proficiency. You fail, and lose mana.

F0xx this is why my Elf Cleric, geared to deal with this and with bonus to ray fails only 1/3 of "RAYS".

A Dwarf or a halfling newbie would be failing 50% of their spells. My clerics is probably on 40%%-45% fail rate for other spells.

Fury is a skill, it lands about 4/5 of the times as other skills. You can go out and test this one. There is no way to increase your saves as with spells. And no way to cure it.

Fury skill stacks. It used to stack a lot, but now you can only stack up to +1 hour. This means that you need to dance the same amount of time as would dance a Flamestrike blind. As long as he furies you every tick, he can keep you furied for hours.

Ferals have a fire vulnerability, but fire spells save a diferent way. They save for quite a LOT. This means that if you have very good AFF saves (an easy task) you can save most of the damage. This messes up with Invockers.

I would probably use Fire shield as an Invocker but recourse to Call Lightning over fireball due to the saves problem.

OK there is some confusion with the Clerics thing and Demon-fire.

There is the spells Demon-Fire, which is a Relic of older clerics (or was it paladins) spell list, and which works like a Hellstream ???. I once had this spell on character during Halloween when a IMM pushed all my profeciencies to 100%.

There is a Wand that casts this spell. It's a sort of Flamestrike. And i think it's fire based damage. Or at least should be, considering the rarity of the item.

Clerics have a special thing that is similar to Fireshield/Steel Wall. It's dark Flames. I think this should be Fire Damage. But i think that Ly is correct and is Energy damage. This spells is not DEMONFIRE, even though it says so somewhere....

The is the a Combo involving Chance Clerics HOLY HANDS and FURY, that can turn any caster life miserable, and eat their mana.

I fought this Feral Cleric once with a Dwarf, and it utterly boring.

Must have dinner.

I fought this Feral Cleric once with a Dwarf, and it utterly boring.

You play a cleric after all, what do you expect?

As for fury's reliability to land, there was just a new log posted. Go check yourself. He wasted not one, not two, but FOUR rounds where he could have done something much more useful.

And yes, Lytholm is correct, although he wasn't talking about the clerics' thing, but the wand

And yes, clerics' thing acts like fire shield, mostly.

I definitely have it mastered too. I'd honestly say it hits about 1/2 the time, and since it stacks, tends to be pretty frustrating.

I definitely have it mastered too. I'd honestly say it hits about 1/2 the time' date=' and since it stacks, tends to be pretty frustrating.[/quote']

Frustrating for your enemy, or frustrating for you since you have to spam AND land it a few times for it to have any real effect?

For me. I haven't found that it really doesn't do much to sway a fight either way. As you can see from that log, I can hit it, and they still cast.

At 50, anyways. Low level it makes a bigger difference.

Make a vamp tassin. I don't know how you can comment on something you admit you've never played? Which skills need toning? The ****** skill?

I am all for a toning of it, if I get use of it at all again. Apparently there is nothing wrong with it though, it has been argued to death already!

I personally put a number of combos above a vamp, at least a half dozen combos, in the power rank. They are definitely in the top 1/3 but certainly not in ogre ranger league.

Vamps not in ogre ranger league? You really gonna say that after some recent fights that your opponent wasn't able to get one command in on both occassions before he was dead?

Mya, you are insane. Not insane in a good way, just literally insane. Sometimes I wish I knew your next door neighbor so I could call them up from time to time and tell them to go smack you on the back of the head after reading some of the things you post.

Played a feral ranger' date=' and it was much harder to play than say an ogre ranger, where you can practically kill things by accident. It has enormous potential if caballed, but it was very easy to die, especially against anything tough like a qclass or caballed character. Even if decently equipped you could get bashlocked by some fg zerker--what Celerity described happened to me, died on fire bodyslam damage alone. Halfling was much tougher to kill. Even an elf was better for survivability. I did play a feral ranger as an evil for a while, and it is very easy to kill the unawares and newbies, but tougher opponents it's not my first choice for a ranger. Also whoever said you fury once and then go with it, that was my approach as well. You can't stand there soaking up damage with a two-round lag while fury stacks, at least not against an invoker or some such. Lots of offense, but you can't take damage like an ogre, as Celerity said, or even a halfling, with better defense, AC, and magic resistance to boot. And Mya as usual is saying this is flawed because it's too tough against communers. I actually think ferals could use more strength and more con.[/quote']

Yeah, it's really not worth it to try and stack it in 90% of the fighting situations for a feral, especially a ranger. If you get lucky and land a fury on the beginning of a tick then you are lucky and you have plenty of other skills to use instead of trying to stack it, when you'll prob just miss twice and end up having not done any of your other skills and then fury has worn off because it only lasted 0 hours. Btw, not argueing anything with what you said, just reconfirming from when I first said it. The only situation where a feral stacking fury would really be worth it is a feral cleric against another cleric. And then you're sitting there using several SEVERAL rounds to fury someone while you're getting toasted by their spells. And Mya, really, am I that tired, or did you really say fighting a feral cleric with your cleric was boring? NO ****!!!! Any cleric vs. cleric fights are boring!

No, I have fun PKing Duergar Cleric vs Dwarf Cleric. Literaly hours of pk fun.

Getting shut down in 10 min is not fun.

Never mind you do not compreend the situation, because you are not familiarated with Chance Holy hands and Fury combo.

No, I have fun PKing Duergar Cleric vs Dwarf Cleric. Literaly hours of pk fun.

Getting shut down in 10 min is not fun.

Never mind you do not compreend the situation, because you are not familiarated with Chance Holy hands and Fury combo.

try getting shut down in 3 rounds..