Chayesh's bless

Because you get more vs mal than you get vs spell?

Even if you get more saves vs. Mals, the saves vs. Spells stack onto it. Like I posted above, if you have -40 saves to Mals and -15 saves to Spells, it's basically like having -55 saves to Mals. And being the fact that it takes into account both saves, the help file basically says that it's combining the two saves together. Hence why I'd like to know why Pali would choose Mal saves over Spell saves when they're the same thing basically just that the Spell saves also stack onto the other saves you have not just the one.

Even if you get more saves vs. Mals' date=' the saves vs. Spells stack onto it. Like I posted above, if you have -40 saves to Mals and -15 saves to Spells, it's basically like having -55 saves to Mals. And being the fact that it takes into account both saves, the help file basically says that it's combining the two saves together. Hence why I'd like to know why Pali would choose Mal saves over Spell saves when they're the same thing basically just that the Spell saves also stack onto the other saves you have not just the one.[/quote']

I'd say it this way. Against a shaman you want the most possible saves period right? Well, look at the other bless spells. You get maybe 5-6 tops svs. Now with Chayesh's bless you get ALOT more saves vs mal. SO think of it this way. When fighting the said shaman, your total mal + svs is what counts. I'd rather have the chayesh bless at that point over let's just say Anithraril.

yeah i get what is being said here, just personally cant help but be irked over only one effect, like the purity bless. but these blesses, as was stated by you guys, are more for people who want to make a character for qrace/qclass and i didnt think about that because i never make them.

but just to be sure, if i rolled a duergar mage i would take anithraril waaay over chayesh, relying on a duergar's magical resistance +managain +save vs. spell over just a mal save, some of which is already negated by the duergar's high con which already resists poison and plague and probably some other mals.

also i must be confused over the mal effect of this bless if it's Chayesh religion that undead wannabe's follow because a mal perk is largely useless to a character that's undead, right?

Hm... I always remembered deteriorate as stronger vs strong spell saves instead of strong mal saves. Guess not.

In that case, then yeah... -8 mal saves is a kind of pathetic bless compared to a lot of the others.

Hm... I always remembered deteriorate as stronger vs strong spell saves instead of strong mal saves. Guess not.

In that case, then yeah... -8 mal saves is a kind of pathetic bless compared to a lot of the others.

I think I know what you're talking about now. The whole if your saves vs. spell is higher the easier it is to deteriorate someone. I don't think that was really in the help file so much as it was stated by Viri on the forum a good while back. In fact as far as I know it still pretty much does this, as when I fought Olom and some other Shamans back on my Healer, I had around -40 saves vs. Spell and they landed deteriorate, but it usually took them a while to even with those saves. And finally when they did, I still had a ton of saves to get through before they got me down low enough to blasphemy myself. And then I just fled and cured it so I could commune again.

three or four grasps + det + curse = shaman will shut you down.

Deteriorate hurts more based on the more saves you have...so basically it takes anyone and debuffs them to the same point. I have seen it do +24 saves, and i have seen it do +8.

A shaman is equipped to strip away anyones defences no matter how much they have..the challenge is surviving long enough to do it. As a "victim" the challenge is to delay the shaman enough so you can kill it...which can be quite difficult as any good shaman is as slippery as an eel.