Blademasters and Polearms

[archgold]

i just think the max number of attacks per round should go down...most weapons already have a wrath or extra attack built in so you'd be lessening their dmg output without taking away their defense.

If you were to take away polearm and spear.....that would mean any warrior w/ a staff+pugil or a polearm could pwn you because Kairishi just means you'd get bashed. And you can't really land crits or trip when you're getting bashed especially if you're a halfling (3ish round bash lag I believe it is) or dwarf/duergar/feral

[Mudder]

Personally I DO agree that blademasters are a bit overpowered at the moment. Especially halfling blademasters.

Here are the problems I see with the suggestions thus far:

I do agree they should lose polearm, hell, when I think of polearm I think of a Cavalier in a jousting match. That seems out of place when I think of a Samurai. I think more the popular glaive as being a spear. But thats just me.

However this change would mage blademasters less effective against Rangers. A class that is also slightly overpowered at the moment. They balance eachother out, both being overpowered but with BLMs still able to kill them.

BLMs losing H2H? Great idea!

BLMs losing two handed? Not sure yet. I see many positives to this and also maybe too many negatives.

Though I do agree that BLMs have quite an insane damage output while keeping too much of the defense. Maybe making them slightly more like monks, in that they sacrifice defense for offense or vise versa.

I also think that halflings BLMs are a bit too powerful for an already powerful class.

Maybe making it so if BLMs want to be very offensive, they lose balance, so they are forced to predict bash if they want to not get lagged, while at the same time negating some of their offense because they can't critical strike anymore.

[Pali]

Blademasters ONLY have access to balance in the deathweaver stance. Else, they're as vulnerable to bashlock as anything else.

[goldbond]

one thing i would agree with at first is them losing H2H. however, understand that right now, every class having H2H helps greatly in keeping one of a cleric's skill marginalized. anything that marginalizes clerics is an absolute good thing, no ifs ands or buts.

however any class losing H2H also helps the purpose of monks. this is also an absolute good thing.

but if i had to pick, i pick every class keeping H2H.

once again, i am pro-getting rid of blademasters altogether.

[Tantangel]

It may not help Clerics out anyways. A BLM can flee and wait for the Cleric to chase with path which will be snakespeeded and cause the Cleric pain, flee to a big MOB to negate earthquake and if the Cleric starts to murder he most likely has two dualed weapons doublesheathed which he could easily draw and wield to counter and then switch back to throw the Cleric off and the Cleric could either go the long route of trying to kill the BLM or end up getting completely tooled altogether. If they lost it it wouldn't really hurt them too much, with one of mine I didn't master H2H and I did just fine fighting with a polearm.

If they lost two handed, they could easily keep their offensive and still have 3 defenses total.That would make them not parry/block with weapon/dodge just about every attack you deal to them and at the same time cut back on damage dealt depending on what position your weapon is in. With their weapon low they block almost every attack like a pro with a decent hit/dam while having it high leaves them a bit open for attack they still block a LOT of attacks, but who goes high as a BLM when facing melee unless they know they'll win? I wouldn't mind nixing the class altogether either, but I'd rather have them toned down some than to have people bitch even more that they don't have BLMs now. They'd just be bitching about how gimped they are once any toning down happens.

[goldbond]

i get your point regarding blm vs. cleric, but you still get the advantage of improved monk vs. blm with this particular suggestion.

[Tantangel]

Monks should have a benefit against fighting BLMs IMO because they're the master of martial arts while BLMs are the masters of Swords apparently according to another post in this thread. They should be able to completely tool a BLM in various ways, but with a BLM being able to use a decently offensive weapon as well as having pretty good defense and having double grip will make it pretty hard on a Monk to fight without going defensive. Personally I believe BLMs to be overly strong against far too many opponents as they have a stance for just about every situation and have a HUGE list of things they can predict completely obliterating any means of lag if they dual wield and predict and if they don't they go a Polearm with awesome offense and great defense. A BLM as is can completely tool a Monk over unless things go completely great for the Monk or the BLM is caught unstanced/unprepared in some other way. When a BLM is prepared it'll be an uphill battle for a Monk or most any melee. And yeah, people will say that that's how it's supposed to be, but even prepared a lot of classes can still get their asses handed to them by their nemesis class while BLMs it takes people a lot more effort even when wielding vuln weapons.

[Mudder]

I will agree, BLMs don't really have much of a Nemesis class.

Pali: I know they only get balance in deathweaver, I was stating that they should LOOSE offense in order to utilize balance... AKA? When in deathweaver stance they lose an attack or two a round.

Deathweaver us often used against classes with mobs, making it far too offensive in that case. If they lost an attack or two it would make it more balanced in this situation and if a BLM wants to use this as his, "safe" stance to keep up all the time he will have to pay some price for it.

Monks lose a whole lot for going defensive. Why shouldn't BLMs?

[archgold]

just pit blm vs. blm and you'll take care of them.

[Pali]

I will agree, BLMs don't really have much of a Nemesis class.

Pali: I know they only get balance in deathweaver, I was stating that they should LOOSE offense in order to utilize balance... AKA? When in deathweaver stance they lose an attack or two a round.

Deathweaver us often used against classes with mobs, making it far too offensive in that case. If they lost an attack or two it would make it more balanced in this situation and if a BLM wants to use this as his, "safe" stance to keep up all the time he will have to pay some price for it.

Monks lose a whole lot for going defensive. Why shouldn't BLMs?

Actually, I've been in support of something like you describe for a while (the general lose defense to gain offense and vice versa idea) for blademasters. I was just making sure people remembered that blms don't always have access to balance.

[Tantangel]

just pit blm vs. blm and you'll take care of them.

Then both would just predict critical strike to stop off the flow of that damage and go bladestorm and onslaught. Then it'd just be who's fast enough and who has the primary nodisarm weapon and who has best weapon/hit/dam.

[Mudder]

Then both would just predict critical strike to stop off the flow of that damage and go bladestorm and onslaught. Then it'd just be who's fast enough and who has the primary nodisarm weapon and who has best weapon/hit/dam.

Why not predict onslaught? Can you predict that?

You can predict anything else... Lol

[Pali]

Why not predict onslaught? Can you predict that?

You can predict anything else... Lol

No, you can't.

[Iyorvin]

I think the loss of H2H would create clerics and monks as a nemesis class for blademasters. That would create a balance, and start eliminating the number of blademasters, and the number of successful blademasters in less than average hands.

[The Forsaken]

Personally, I just think blademasters should be forced to be good/evil align like monks. When you look at it, it's the neutral blademasters that are tearing it up out there. When you are getting hit 4-5 times with a two handed weapon, something as minor as protect good/evil would help quite a bit.

[Mudder]

I like the fact that BLMs can tear up clerics. I think anything that reduces the amount of clerics is fine by me.

I like that monks are more of a nemesis class for BLMs...

Lets remove holy hands. Who is with me!?

[Mudder]

But all this still doesn't help the fact that BLMs are still pretty overpowered, not just that they lack a nemesis class.

[Aulian]

What? Do blademasters get hand to hand? you're kidding right?

[Pali]

I'm not aware of a single class in the game that DOESN'T get hand to hand.

Learning things like this are why you play more than just druids, Aulian.

[Aulian]

Meh... Stick to what you know I say..

Its a big scary world out there.. why risk it?

[Evangelion]

For serious?

Come. The. ****. On.

Every time I see one of these blademaster posts, I seriously just want to rip someone's throat out.

People. Just because you are getting your asses handed to you by blademasters does not mean they are overpowered. For Christ's sake. Every two months there's one of these threads.

In the time it takes for you people to have another complaint about blademasters, you could have rolled one up, played it for a while, and learned how to beat it.

Instead, you're content to bitch and moan, despite near constant toning of the class. Every few times one of these posts comes up, Behrens makes a downgrade to the class. Soon, they'll become what monks were and berserkers are: Useless.

Ugh. Seriously, these posts make me really, really angry.

[Raargant]

Blademasters, AFAIK, have been toned so that the problem which caused them to often get 4-5 attacks per round with a two handed weapon has been removed, along with that effect.

Whether or not they are 'too strong' is something that I am no longer in a position to judge; however, in the past, they certainly were not balanced well, in that it was too easy for them to reach their peak power while maintaining a strong rate of survivability.

Translation: Previously far too easy to play and do well with. After the nerf to their number of attacks with two handed weapons, I can't say. That change (if it has been, as I believe it is, carried out), is something I fought strongly for and personally believe was needed.

On a side note, Balinor, increasing the vehemence of your posts (something I've noticed in the past few months) generally increases neither your persuasiveness nor the effectiveness of your argument. Just a friendly comment

[Aulian]

Soon' date=' they'll become what monks were and berserkers are: Useless.[/b']

Ugh. Seriously, these posts make me really, really angry.

LOL! You're wrong! They're complaining about monks in another thread! Muwahaha. awesome.

Yeah I wasnt complaining, never had a blam so didnt know they got H2H.

Meh they are beatable. Just look at Waraz.. PFFFFTTTTT weakness!

[Evangelion]

Just a little number for you:

4 out of the 17 PK logs that are posted which contain blademasters (not including blm-vs-blm) are fights in which the blademaster actually won.

In the other 13 they fled at low health or lost.

But yeah, blademasters are overpowered.

[L-A]

Yes, attacks have been changed and that is a good start.

Now take the abilityto enfeeble, telelock and caltrap and they will probably start to be even with most other classes on the power peaks, IMHO.

Mostly they are pains because they still a lot of attacks (I'd still bet its more on average than a warrior with a 2h polearm) and can stop you getting away. I still (and will always) disagree with a class being able to deal out the melee pain AND stop you running.

L-A