Dey, I think you pretty much said exactly what I did. It's not that I think blademasters are overpowered, but they just have a bit much, compared to other melees.
Also Evangelion, I believe you played Manipulant, the demon cleric? I do seem to remember taking to out with my 47/48 halfer ranger while you were much better equipped, without ever even having to herb.
Blademasters are extremily versatile, and can be good in the hands of a beginner and excellent in the hands of a pro. They can also be created to be the bane of any given race class if the player decides to go for a certain cabal/mastery combo. However, does this make them overpowered? I say no. The only two aspects I think are too buff is their offensive output with a two hander, and their massive race selection.
This mud is pretty damn well balanced and as usual a smart veteran will take a good race/class/cabal and beat down the vast majority of the pbase, but this does not make said class overpowered. Ogres recently got toned and I am glad because frankly they were the best choice for anything they could be, now it is not so clear cut. I think Battlemages are also extremily powerful but can easily be beaten by the same token. At the end of the day I think it really comes down to player skill and knowledge, not class imbalance.
Sure blademasters have a lot going for them but hell it's not like they are invincible. Between staves, scrolls, wands and consumables they can be attacked without being able to counter, spellkill, or snakespeed. It just requires creativity and patience. Attrition is really the blademasters biggest enemy. Even though they can in theory be prepared for anything that comes at them, they can still be caught off guard, in a wrong stance etc...
I cannot stress enough that player skill>race/class/cabal anyday. If blademasters are so damn incredible then why do people bother rolling anything else? The answer is simple, because they are not the be all end all, they can be beaten and there are plenty of other great classes to play that can be very dangerous.
People also roll other things because they like classes other than blademasters for reasons other than owning the playerbase ;p
And the forum vacation count for flaming/flamebaiting/johnson-waving continues to rise.
If blademasters are so damn incredible then why do people bother rolling anything else? The answer is simple, because they are not the be all end all, they can be beaten and there are plenty of other great classes to play that can be very dangerous.
Well, to me it seems they don't. 
Nah, there are others, but come on, how many XXXXXXX the doomblade don't you see every time you log on? And as many again in the range around 45. And that is for a reason. You get a whole lot more when choosing a blm.
I would love to see the stats actually if any IMPS could provide some numbers. I dont think there are more blms than anything else. The mud goes through fads, usually started by someone who does well with a certain class. Remember at one point everyone and their brother had an ogre ranger, then there was the avian bmg epidemic. Evil clerics have always been very popular as with thievs and ninjas. Sure some classes like warriors, zerks, monks and dks are less common, but it isnt always because they are not as good. Like I said in my previous post blms are great for beginers and for pros, they are easy to use (long to train mind you) and fun to play because they arent hard to hit a power peak with and can beat opponents who have an eq edge on them. The bottom line is that the balance truly does exist only it is a lot more complex than rock paper scissors. Of course I agree that there are still aspects which need to be and are currently being looked into, but in general I do not think there is any one class (barring qstuff) that is better than every other class.
I haven't died in this game in months...
And also, who's the last character period to rock the pbase, other than Marty?
Pamiyn seems to be doing a decent job enough of this anymore, granted evils, still though.
So far we can agree that Footwork needs tweaked in the future so they're not cheaping someone in PK, right?
Lets see what else we can think of that we can agree on that makes them so strong. How about their 4-5 attacks a round with a single weapon? Lets base it off of their ability to have their weapons set low/normal/high. Yeah, I know that the amount of attacks usually drops, but how about instead of once in a while, all the time? Meaning if you're attacked in low you get 2 attacks a round and 3 if hasted. Normal you get 3 attacks a round 4 when hasted. High you get 4 attacks a round and 5 when hasted. Also limit the number of attacks that they get with a single weapon rather than fighting with both weapons. When fighting them dual wielding instead of getting upwards of 5 attacks with a single weapon using footwork, drop it to a max of 3 and possible 5 or so when fighting with both hands. This means you could still not be disarmed primary and you can dual wield the vuln weapon so you're still hitting it, and you still can't be disarmed, but it's not the same as just primary wield a noremove and then footwork to the left hand and vuln them up without them being able to disarm you?
...it's not the same as just primary wield a noremove and then footwork to the left hand and vuln them up without them being able to disarm you?
This, I think, should be changed... whichever hand you are hitting with should be made your primary weapon and therefore the disarm target.
I think everyone is reading way too far into how to beat a BLM. It is right in front of you... Granted, it takes a little bit, but a blm isn't a warrior.
I know with Zizelvik when I had my weapon low I didn't do 5 attacks a round every round or even most of the time, against certain classes I might have done 5 but did 5 get landed hell no. I have already agreed with the footwork, but anything else as of right now I cannot agree with, afterall blademasters are supposed to be the masters of their limited weapon selection.
Lol, maybe blademasters should lose hand to hand... 
I honestly think they should gain Axe. Low I had hit 3 frequently and sometimes 4, I just thought that was a bit obsessive though.
Seriosly. Tanking away hand to hand from blms would help monks a lot. And would give blms a nemesis. And monks would lose one of theirs.
I almost like it, even if it was a joke...
Monks in defensive reverse critical strikes. Imagine the Blademaster who decided to go that route.
I honestly think they should gain Axe. Low I had hit 3 frequently and sometimes 4' date=' I just thought that was a bit obsessive though.[/quote']
Heh, lets give blms the most offensive bladed weapon out there! That'll tone em down.
Hey, the lose hand to hand then, it's a fair trade off.
Hey' date=' the lose hand to hand then, it's a fair trade off.[/quote']
It's a weakening towards one class (two, if you count clerics) compensated for by a boost against every class without axe (healers/shamans, mages, rogues)... it even really counters the weakening towards clerics and monks, as while the blademasters lose some skill defending against hand to hand, they can still cause the clerics and monks the same loss because they don't have axe either. Overall, I'd call this a boost, not a fair trade-off.
...a monk is stuck in it for 24 hours if they need to jump from defensive to defensive or vice versa.
Monks're only ever stuck in a stance for 6 hours, or 8 if you count the re-empowerment. That's about equivalent to BLMs, right?
Monks're only ever stuck in a stance for 6 hours' date=' or 8 if you count the re-empowerment. That's about equivalent to BLMs, right?[/quote']
Yes, but except for somewhat rare situations, being in one stance instead of the perfect one for your target is far less lethal to a blademaster than for a monk. Only place I can think of it truly being a death knell is being caught out of deathweaver by a necro with a full army or an enlarged bashing/bodyslamming giant. A monk in the wrong empowerment/stance, however, doesn't have much of a chance... also, getting into the right empowerment relies on not fighting at all for two ticks, not always easy to do when you're trying to remain near a target but not yet engage, whereas a blademaster just needs to cast the stance and he's in it.
Here's a thought on that (though I don't know how much it might unbalance things, or if it would just get in the way more). Have monks able to switch b/w offense and defense in a method similar to weapon position. But, individual stances now have to be empowered instead.
You'd be able to rapidly switch to defensive if say, you're chasing a cleric and a zerk slam into you, and thus gain second parry. But, unless you can get a little free time you won't get the other benefits of being in defensive (make aura and balance require an active stance).
Really unsure if that's a viable suggestion or not, but it just came to mind as I was reading this.
EDIT: Perhaps also put a timer, so if the rapid switch is used (IE, in a stance and switch fighting styles) there is a required wait before you can switch back to the other fighting style?
