no, taking that away forces them to use CRAP. you can beat a blm with a polearm, its not impossible people. Thats like saying Cure crit is way to effective, limit clerics to cure light so people can kill them.
Blademasters and Polearms
RP wise, I think that polearms make a lot of sense for BLMs.
However, I think that for balance issues, removing polearms would go a LONG way. Besides, two handed weapons on BLMs work best for casters, as they allow spellkill and Serpent strike. And to my knowledge, there is no caster that can use spears. Maybe hybrids, but myeh.
In that case, a double-gripped monorod would still be pretty hard core. and sacrifice a bit of the phenomenal defense a BLM has.
Problem I see with polearms and BLMs though is that it's not only the best viable choice for mages, but melee as well. I've ranked with BLMs tons of times and their weapon of choice has always been a Polearm, and even with a very basic polearm they can go rounds and rounds without ever being really hit without sacrificing any attacks. Maybe they should have two handed removed instead of just taking polearm away from them to balance it out a little more and possibly make it so that their attack output was lessened by at least one attack per round when wielding a two handed weapon rather than letting them keep the same offense capabilities as if they were dual wielding.
I don't mind the blademasters having their weapon selection, what I do believe they should lose is H2H fighting. I think this would give monks an even par with them, as well as increasing certain other disadvantages. H2H doesn't belong with a blademaster anyway.
no' date=' taking that away forces them to use CRAP. you can beat a blm with a polearm, its not impossible people. Thats like saying Cure crit is way to effective, limit clerics to cure light so people can kill them.[/quote']
Here's the problem I see with blademasters.
They deal out INSANE damage. At the same time, they have INSANE defense.
They can mal you up like a shaman, or lag you like a warrior.
They can also disable your most effective attack, whether you are a mage or a melee.
Now, they ARE beatable. Especially if you can find a way to milk their mana. But we have a combination of some of the strongest elements of multiple class types, while removing their weaknesses.
Forcing them to use 'CRAP' (and a monorod is far from crap, imo) allows them to keep the extensive strengths of the class while balancing it so, when they deal out hefty damage, they also TAKE more damage. Or if they go defensive, their damage has a penalty. If they REALLY want a polearm, there is a stance that allows it - and maybe doing this would make that stance more viable.
Just my thought.
I like this idea. I would like to see them lose polearms and spears. I think that would add some flavor to the game--Non-giant characters would actually be seen wielding a two-handed sword. Blademasters also have a bladelore that allows them to mimic the rating of any weapon for attack and defense--People might actually get some use out of that skill.
Blademasters can be very tough the way they are right now. They're not unbeatable. I'm certainly not owning the playerbase with mine. I'm in favor of this change--I don't see it making my blademaster that much worse, just a little different. And it would make the class conform a bit better to my mental picture of what they should be.
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
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.
Blademasters ONLY have access to balance in the deathweaver stance. Else, they're as vulnerable to bashlock as anything else.
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.
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.
i get your point regarding blm vs. cleric, but you still get the advantage of improved monk vs. blm with this particular suggestion.
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.
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?
just pit blm vs. blm and you'll take care of them.
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.
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.
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
Why not predict onslaught? Can you predict that?
You can predict anything else... Lol
No, you can't.
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.
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.