Welcome to the Achaea Forums! Please be sure to read the Forum Rules.

Priest Classleads

2»

Comments

  • CarmellCarmell Eastern WashingtonMember Posts: 473 ✭✭✭✭ - Eminent
    Shunsui said:
    Carmell said:
    Jhui said:
    double passive healing still in place and the ability to cure any single affliction if you have healing balance?  Still unlockable.

    I could be wrong though, maybe being off eq/bal or afflicted with something stops healing, but not that I can tell from the announce post.

    Offense looks fun though.

    You obviously didn't know how healing worked.  Because your post on healing is wrong about then and now.  I'm not going to share the details.  Priests already know how it works.
    Pretty sure he was talking about angel care and rite of healing when he said 'double passive healing'.

    No he was talking about being able to heal off bal/eq which as @Makarios said we've never been able to do.
  • IocunIocun Member Posts: 3,506 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Melodie said:
    I can definitely assure you, priests won't be curing off everything you're throwing at them, especially with the bedevil defense up.
    Using healing to make sure you cure everything immediately would be a highly suboptimal use of the skill anyways though. Even before this change, that was just a way of wasting willpower and thus self-destructive.

    There's never any need to cure absolutely every affliction you have immediately, as long as you can make sure to cure off anything that seriously threatens you. For instance, if you only ever use healing for impatience against a serpent, he won't be truelocking you, because no matter how slow that healing balance is, I'm pretty sure it will be faster than starting a new hypnosis, suggesting another impatience, getting you in a lockable position, and snapping again.

    Yes, I know that there are other types of locks, but that doesn't change the fact that just using healing for a very few specific afflictions in very specific circumstances will keep you safe. Add to that balanceless diagnose, two passive healing abilities, piety as a great aid for running, and all the avenues available to everyone else (such as shielding), and staying alive against an affliction class is still a given.

    The thing is: most priests never had the need to work on a good defence before and used healing in a far exaggerated and superfluous manner, so their curing may actually suddenly feel lacking to them. But with just a bit personal work and optimisation, it easily should get as effective as before again - while wasting less willpower as an added bonus :P

    The bedevil change actually sounds neat in principle. I love the idea of voluntarily giving up some defence for increased offence. I just don't know if it goes far enough. Can you enable/disable it at will during combat? Is it essentially an absolute necessity to use to kill anyone? Are the transferred afflictions removed from the priest himself? If enabling/disabling it is a very difficult thing to do in mid-combat, it is a necessity to use for winning fights, and the transferred afflictions remain on the priest, I certainly approve. But keep in mind that even without any healing, priests would still have a very good affliction defence.
    Kellonius
  • KelloniusKellonius Cape Girardeau, MissouriMember Posts: 303 ✭✭✭✭ - Eminent
    edited September 2013
    Iocun said:
    Melodie said:
    I can definitely assure you, priests won't be curing off everything you're throwing at them, especially with the bedevil defense up.
    Using healing to make sure you cure everything immediately would be a highly suboptimal use of the skill anyways though. Even before this change, that was just a way of wasting willpower and thus self-destructive.

    There's never any need to cure absolutely every affliction you have immediately, as long as you can make sure to cure off anything that seriously threatens you. For instance, if you only ever use healing for impatience against a serpent, he won't be truelocking you, because no matter how slow that healing balance is, I'm pretty sure it will be faster than starting a new hypnosis, suggesting another impatience, getting you in a lockable position, and snapping again.

    Yes, I know that there are other types of locks, but that doesn't change the fact that just using healing for a very few specific afflictions in very specific circumstances will keep you safe. Add to that balanceless diagnose, two passive healing abilities, piety as a great aid for running, and all the avenues available to everyone else (such as shielding), and staying alive against an affliction class is still a given.

    The thing is: most priests never had the need to work on a good defence before and used healing in a far exaggerated and superfluous manner, so their curing may actually suddenly feel lacking to them. But with just a bit personal work and optimisation, it easily should get as effective as before again - while wasting less willpower as an added bonus :P

    The bedevil change actually sounds neat in principle. I love the idea of voluntarily giving up some defence for increased offence. I just don't know if it goes far enough. Can you enable/disable it at will during combat? Is it essentially an absolute necessity to use to kill anyone? Are the transferred afflictions removed from the priest himself? If enabling/disabling it is a very difficult thing to do in mid-combat, it is a necessity to use for winning fights, and the transferred afflictions remain on the priest, I certainly approve. But keep in mind that even without any healing, priests would still have a very good affliction defence.

    I'm glad you said this. Everyone is busy griping about angel care and rite of healing, neither of which I hardly ever use. Only on occasion would I have to lean on healing for afflictions. I look at SVO at it has a "partial" option, which seems to cure whenever you're off herb balace and focus balance, which is also pretty silly if you ask me. The key is that Priests get a free diagnose, and can track afflictions very easily this way. No one should need to lean on healing that much unless they're bad curers anyway.

    You cannot enable/disable bedevil at will. You use the skill and it lasts for like 30 seconds 2 minutes. I'm not sure of the actual time, but it is not very long.
    image
  • IocunIocun Member Posts: 3,506 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    edited September 2013
    Kellonius said:

    You cannot enable/disable bedevil at will. You use the skill and it lasts for like 30 seconds 2 minutes. I'm not sure of the actual time, but it is not very long.
    Well, that's a good thing. I was afraid you'd be able to just do something like "BEDEVIL OFF" whenever you feel the need to cure something. I hope bedevil has a third person message, so your opponent can see it and make use of it as an opportunity to attack on his own. Still would probably be cool if it was more extreme (both in its positive and negative effects). It will still keep a priest able to deal with afflictions easily, while the bonus of randomly transferring afflictions doesn't seem overly great (random afflictions rarely are).

    Old bedevil at least had the potential for insta-locking people, which was cool.
  • NaisarNaisar Member Posts: 255 ✭✭✭✭ - Eminent
    I'm happy about these classleads, but I wish they'd made Priests a little more vulnerable to hindering while their offense got buffed.  I wasn't a huge fan of being absolved while the priest was prone, had broken legs, and impaled.  Piety + an offense that's difficult to slow down mean you have to start bailing much earlier than normal.
    AislingSimolnHalosArador
  • AislingAisling Member Posts: 43 ✭✭✭ - Distinguished
    edited September 2013
    Naisar said:
    I'm happy about these classleads, but I wish they'd made Priests a little more vulnerable to hindering while their offense got buffed.  I wasn't a huge fan of being absolved while the priest was prone, had broken legs, and impaled.  Piety + an offense that's difficult to slow down mean you have to start bailing much earlier than normal.
    Half my wins as priest was from an absolve while impaled by a blademaster or knight :P Can be funny for the priest, but is silly otherwise
    SimolnHalos
  • MakariosMakarios Administrator Posts: 1,871 Achaean staff
    Just in case it wasn't clear, old bedevil is still in. Current bedevil can be used defensively or offensively.
    AislingSimolnMelodie
  • IocunIocun Member Posts: 3,506 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    edited September 2013
    Oh!

    So are there two different kinds of using bedevil with different syntaxes? Or does that mean that when you use "old bedevil" on someone, it will grant this new bedevil defence while at the same time doing what old bedevil did? I'm confused!
  • TectonTecton The Garden of the GodsAdministrator Posts: 2,507 Admin
    Not at the same time, no - think of it kind of like the fitness ability.
    SimolnIocun
  • KelloniusKellonius Cape Girardeau, MissouriMember Posts: 303 ✭✭✭✭ - Eminent
    Iocun said:
    Oh!

    So are there two different kinds of using bedevil with different syntaxes? Or does that mean that when you use "old bedevil" on someone, it will grant this new bedevil defence while at the same time doing what old bedevil did? I'm confused!
    You can do "bedevil" to give yourself the defence or do "bedevil iocun" to use bedevil as it previously existed to transfer afflictions.
    image
    SimolnIocun
  • IocunIocun Member Posts: 3,506 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    edited September 2013
    Can you use old/active bedevil while the bedevil defence is up?

    Also, that name is creepy. Why are priests collaborating with bed evils?
    SilasMelodie
  • ChordChord Member Posts: 142 ✭✭✭✭ - Eminent
    Iocun said:
    Can you use old/active bedevil while the bedevil defence is up?

    Also, that name is creepy. Why are priests collaborating with bed evils?
    Nono, they are collaborating with "be" devils. The devils of really bad acting, where your only objective is, "to be."
  • IocunIocun Member Posts: 3,506 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Either way, that doesn't sound very Good.
  • ChordChord Member Posts: 142 ✭✭✭✭ - Eminent
    Iocun said:
    Either way, that doesn't sound very Good.
    image
    MelodieSimoln
Sign In to Comment.