Agi loss from protect is kinda harsh

[Folder]

Thinking about this a bit. Unless it's changed you lose 15% agi from /protecting (and 5% MR but that's not huge).

If I wanted a dwarf guardian I'd have 19 agi. 16.15 (not sure how rounding works here) when guarding. Against a 22 agi character the dwarf would be getting hit 52% of the time, and would have a 23% hit rate when attacking back.

A halfling guardian will go down to 19.85 agi. That's still pretty low but it's not terrible. Problem is I don't think we want only 22agi+ races for guardians. Maybe I like dwarves, or maybe I want a human guardian. The way it stands that penalty is overly harsh imo, especially because paladins are really only there to /protect someone.

If we insist on a penalty to agi I think closer to 5-7% is more fair. Using the dwarf as an example...would anyone -ever- roll a character with 16 agi? I think not, and imo anyone making a guardian with less than 22 agi is playing a subpar character.

Anyone have some thoughts on this?

Characters of equal agi are starting at a 35% hit rate, for reference.

[NiteHawk]

Thinking about this a bit. Unless it's changed you lose 15% agi from /protecting (and 5% MR but that's not huge).

If I wanted a dwarf guardian I'd have 19 agi. 16.15 (not sure how rounding works here) when guarding. Against a 22 agi character the dwarf would be getting hit 52% of the time, and would have a 23% hit rate when attacking back.

A halfling guardian will go down to 19.85 agi. That's still pretty low but it's not terrible. Problem is I don't think we want only 22agi+ races for guardians. Maybe I like dwarves, or maybe I want a human guardian. The way it stands that penalty is overly harsh imo, especially because paladins are really only there to /protect someone.

If we insist on a penalty to agi I think closer to 5-7% is more fair. Using the dwarf as an example...would anyone -ever- roll a character with 16 agi? I think not, and imo anyone making a guardian with less than 22 agi is playing a subpar character.

Anyone have some thoughts on this?

Characters of equal agi are starting at a 35% hit rate, for reference.

It doesn't round values, so 16.15 is 16.15.

You don't lose hit rate. Dodge rate and hit rate have different values for things like this. You still hit for the same amount, you'll just be hit more.

Dwarf guardians have alot higher HP then lings though too. I can understand that 15% might be a bit too high. It might of been okay if there was more then one character playable but with one it might hurt too much.

I think 5% is too low though. Maybe 10%, or 7.5% at the lowest. I'd like peoples say on this too though.

[Folder]

Ok different rates for dodge/attack is interesting.

I just want there to be race variations and all races to be playable. Since there are different rates for hit/dodge then yea I'd say maybe more like 7.5% would be fair. I get that dwarves in this example have a lot more hp but I think with a 15% penalty the balance favors heavily to higher agi races.

Wanna see what others think too!

[Rodeo]

It does seem pretty high but it's only when protect is on. When protect got nerfed in rok I always tried to keep a /protect macro with a Jurgen macro on whatever I was leveling. So if you use a bit of tactics with whoever you are protecting say you have a high hp sorc under protection and you have the dwarf guardian with well over 1k unprotect the chanter, chanter casts ac spell on both while you keep the spec healed. Once protect is off everything goes back to normal and you proceed to pwn.


I wouldn't adjust it til people have a chance to test it in regular game play.