Blinding Speed and AA

[Kenji]

Except that they already have access to this tool but their survie ability in pve really sucks so I proposed to cut the CD on it by 3 minutes, no more than 4 minutes possible.

Rangers can get perma-haste if they get CDR on this because they can take spreads like 21+ ranger, and rogue all the rest. 30 lvls = 5 minutes CDR.

I have nothing more to add at this point. But at least now I'm getting serious logical counter arguments and not wrong numbers and comparisons to other classes that arent relevant here. Much appreciated.

Again, Rangers don't have their levels tied to reducing Blinding Speed's cooldown.

AA's survivability in PvE has more to do with the context you're talking about here. Either way, BS CDR is not the answer, due to how broken they'll become in PvP, and that's the main concern of balancing around here.

Back to survivability, are we talking about early levels? If so, then BS doesn't apply. Because you can't get BS until you're in the epics, likely mid to late epics due to 25 dex requirement. And at that point, as any archer class, one would want to group and find someone to -guard said individual to begin with. If anything comes charging at said archer, Called Shot is his/her friend, especially as an AA.

Displacer Beast cloak is a thing, invisibility wands are a thing, even corner sneaks are possible with minimal investment in hide/MS for as long as the PC has access to Camouflage and One with the Land wands. There are plenty of ways for the archer to protect itself. Running around kiting contents can be potentially dangerous as said archer might just pull in more mobs while the initial pull isn't cleaned up.

[Astral]

Again, Rangers don't have their levels tied to reducing Blinding Speed's cooldown.

You clearly either dont read my posts here or just dont understand them. And after I've tried to explain so many times, I'm just gonna stop replying to your arguments.

[Opustus]

I just wanted to pop in and say that you people are hopeless! <3

Though on the topic, I definitely think AAs lack in solo survivability compared to rangers, notably because rangers have HiPS in outdoor areas and HiPSing makes solo content safer although still a bit slow and unwieldy. I also agree with Astral's point that Blinding speed isn't comparable with AA and Ranger strictly in terms of balance, because Rangers tend to invest more in Ranger levels than AA which would result in more active time of Blinding speed for Rangers than AAs. That's quite simply the point Astral's been making, right? If rangers and AAs both had Blinding speed cooldown decrease (which I'm not sure has been proposed here?), then a build like Ranger4/Rogue17/AA9 or Ranger5/Rogue7/AA18 would reap the full benefits of that and end up perma-hasted. Same with builds like Ranger27/Rogue3.

Whether AAs should have more solo survivability or not seems to be the main question here. Right? I personally think it's good design to have classes that are more dependent on others, and I definitely think AA falls into that category. This comes as the price of being the superior offensive ranged class. If we or the mighty designers wanted to give AA some kiting tools, though, and there could be other considerations than Blinding speed. E.g. Amia had AA-only arrows with Grease on-hit that slowed enemies, but that was pretty laggy and probably a bad idea in hindsight.

[Astral]

I just wanted to pop in and say that you people are hopeless! <3

Though on the topic, I definitely think AAs lack in solo survivability compared to rangers, notably because rangers have HiPS in outdoor areas and HiPSing makes solo content safer although still a bit slow and unwieldy. I also agree with Astral's point that Blinding speed isn't comparable with AA and Ranger strictly in terms of balance, because Rangers tend to invest more in Ranger levels than AA which would result in more active time of Blinding speed for Rangers than AAs. That's quite simply the point Astral's been making, right? If rangers and AAs both had Blinding speed cooldown decrease (which I'm not sure has been proposed here?), then a build like Ranger4/Rogue17/AA9 or Ranger5/Rogue7/AA18 would reap the full benefits of that and end up perma-hasted. Same with builds like Ranger27/Rogue3.

Whether AAs should have more solo survivability or not seems to be the main question here. Right? I personally think it's good design to have classes that are more dependent on others, and I definitely think AA falls into that category. This comes as the price of being the superior offensive ranged class. If we or the mighty designers wanted to give AA some kiting tools, though, and there could be other considerations than Blinding speed. E.g. Amia had AA-only arrows with Grease on-hit that slowed enemies, but that was pretty laggy and probably a bad idea in hindsight.

Why everyone have to compare to Ranger when ranger has absolutely nothing to do with this thread?

To answer your questions.

Yes, Ranger can get perma-haste from blinding speed VERY easily if this class enters the CDR classes. Any combination of ranger with roguish classes would result in perma-haste That's not going to happen because our design team isnt stupid.

Arcane Archer cannot get perma-haste from blinding speed no matter what.

No, it is not proposed here that Rangers get the CDR along with AAs. I never said that. Frankly the mention of rangers here annoys me. This thread just derailed hard to rangers somehow.

I dont have any opinion about your or anyone else's suggestions regarding arrows cause i dont think AAs lack any offense. In fact, they have some of the best offense in the game. They need QoL for survivability in specific.

I also dont buy the arguments that CDR to blinding speed makes them broken in pvp because that CDR doesnt effect pvp unless the fight lasts longer than 5 minutes. The argument that they can use hips is also bad because SD is just one building option that AAs should not be forced into.

Invisibility is still bugged and npc enemies will still continue to chase you.

[Aren]

I just wanted to pop in and say that you people are hopeless! <3

Though on the topic, I definitely think AAs lack in solo survivability compared to rangers, notably because rangers have HiPS in outdoor areas and HiPSing makes solo content safer although still a bit slow and unwieldy. I also agree with Astral's point that Blinding speed isn't comparable with AA and Ranger strictly in terms of balance, because Rangers tend to invest more in Ranger levels than AA which would result in more active time of Blinding speed for Rangers than AAs. That's quite simply the point Astral's been making, right? If rangers and AAs both had Blinding speed cooldown decrease (which I'm not sure has been proposed here?), then a build like Ranger4/Rogue17/AA9 or Ranger5/Rogue7/AA18 would reap the full benefits of that and end up perma-hasted. Same with builds like Ranger27/Rogue3.

Whether AAs should have more solo survivability or not seems to be the main question here. Right? I personally think it's good design to have classes that are more dependent on others, and I definitely think AA falls into that category. This comes as the price of being the superior offensive ranged class. If we or the mighty designers wanted to give AA some kiting tools, though, and there could be other considerations than Blinding speed. E.g. Amia had AA-only arrows with Grease on-hit that slowed enemies, but that was pretty laggy and probably a bad idea in hindsight.

Why everyone have to compare to Ranger when ranger has absolutely nothing to do with this thread?

To answer your questions.

Yes, Ranger can get perma-haste from blinding speed VERY easily if this class enters the CDR classes. Any combination of ranger with roguish classes would result in perma-haste That's not going to happen because our design team isnt stupid.

Arcane Archer cannot get perma-haste from blinding speed no matter what.

No, it is not proposed here that Rangers get the CDR along with AAs. I never said that. Frankly the mention of rangers here annoys me. This thread just derailed hard to rangers somehow.

I dont have any opinion about your or anyone else's suggestions regarding arrows cause i dont think AAs lack any offense. In fact, they have some of the best offense in the game. They need QoL for survivability in specific.

I also dont buy the arguments that CDR to blinding speed makes them broken in pvp because that CDR doesnt effect pvp unless the fight lasts longer than 5 minutes. The argument that they can use hips is also bad because SD is just one building option that AAs should not be forced into.

Invisibility is still bugged and npc enemies will still continue to chase you.

Giving a 55+ AB, WM damage equivalent ranged sniper that could pin you to a wall from across the map, CDR on a three turn free action haste ability - seems a bit too much. And the argument that you could build a HiPS version is valid, because you can build a HiPS version. Just because you don't want to do it, doesn't mean someone else won't.

[Astral]

CDR on a three turn free action haste ability - seems a bit too much.

Why is it too much? When does it matter except in pve situations where you simply burn your haste wands slightly slower?

And the argument that you could build a HiPS version is valid, because you can build a HiPS version. Just because you don't want to do it, doesn't mean someone else won't.

I think that pushing all archers to take shadow dancer is bad for the server. They should have other options rather than defaulting to HiPS. It really makes no sense to me that every single archer on the server will be forced to be a shadow dancer (something that's entirely unrelated to archery) just like it makes no sense to me that all archers will be rangers. Versatility mate. Archers should have alternatives to HipS. I played an archer with HipS (favoured soul, sd, aa) years ago and I, hypothetically, prefer going something else next time I play an archer. Maybe something that actually gets 55 ab because in my calculation combining SD in your build will prevent you from getting that.

[Kenji]

CDR on a three turn free action haste ability - seems a bit too much.

Why is it too much? When does it matter except in pve situations where you simply burn your haste wands slightly slower?

Blinding speed can't be dispelled, haste can. On top of that, wands, scrolls, and potions take half or one round to use and proc's AoO, which can mean distance being closed. They also have a shorter duration compared to Blinding Speed.

And the argument that you could build a HiPS version is valid, because you can build a HiPS version. Just because you don't want to do it, doesn't mean someone else won't.

I think that pushing all archers to take shadow dancer is bad for the server. They should have other options rather than defaulting to HiPS. It really makes no sense to me that every single archer on the server will be forced to be a shadow dancer (something that's entirely unrelated to archery) just like it makes no sense to me that all archers will be rangers. Versatility mate. Archers should have alternatives to HipS. I played an archer with HipS (favoured soul, sd, aa) years ago and I, hypothetically, prefer going something else next time I play an archer. Maybe something that actually gets 55 ab because in my calculation combining SD in your build will prevent you from getting that.

Nothing is shoehorning AA builds into SD, it is but one of the options. The tradeoff here is often 1~2 BAB and/or UMD for HiPS anywhere. It also means a dedication of 66 points into hide/MS skills and potentially gears to further boost them. If anything, it is discouraged.

[Kenji]

Why everyone have to compare to Ranger when ranger has absolutely nothing to do with this thread?

Because you're talking AA, what else is better for comparison in your so-called Survivability QoL thing if not Ranger Archers?

If anything, you missed a margin for your argument by not using Rangers for your arguments since Rangers do have more tools to survive in PvE encounters. As Opustus has pointed out.

I also dont buy the arguments that CDR to blinding speed makes them broken in pvp because that CDR doesnt effect pvp unless the fight lasts longer than 5 minutes. The argument that they can use hips is also bad because SD is just one building option that AAs should not be forced into.

Invisibility is still bugged and npc enemies will still continue to chase you.

You'd be surprised on how long PvP lasts when ranged, casters, melee, and kiting are involved.

Invisibility is tricky, but it certainly works. Use it once, hope you get it proc'd so mobs stop following you. If not, wait for next round and it might just work.

[The Kriv]

Giving a 55+ AB, WM damage equivalent ranged sniper that could pin you to a wall from across the map, CDR on a three turn free action haste ability - seems a bit too much.

having played a dedicated Ranger 11/Fighter 4/ AA 15... all the way to 30... which is a FULL BAB progression 55+ AB ranged character... describing it as a WM-Damage Equivalent Ranged Sniper is an over exaggeration.

The damage numbers of a properly build WM vs any combo which includes 15+ levels of AA is not a true comparison.

Here... look for yourself...




Arguing against granting AA's the haste synergy based on their comparison as a ranged weapon master is a false argument raised by people who's perception is not in line with the data.

-this graph is based on WM using a Masterly Damask Scimitar with a +1d6 essence, and the AA using a longbow with +4 Strength Bonus (requiring an 18 str for an archer to take full advantage of) using damask Arrows with 2 +4 essences and a 1d6 essence


-This graph doesn't assume BOTH characters have the ABSOLUTE BEST weapon with the ABSOLUTE BEST optimized essences, just a pretty generalized setup that MOST players can achieve by lvl 30. An extra 1d6 or an extra +4 to AA's ammo isn't going to skew the results in their favor, anyway.



SO... should AA get synergy on Blinding Speed Cooldown? mmm... I'd like to see that.

I play dedicated Archer classes that are glass cannons. My characters have full +55 to Hit on highest attack and regularly hit at 150 damage range when crit against things that can actually be damaged... and those same characters get their arses handed to them regularly... and in PVP... they are not as deadly as you think... in my experience, I get killed a LOT more than I kill in pvp encounters
A LOT .... a Perma-Haste AA would be a welcome thing, IMO.


[edit]
the data plugged into the graph -might- be not quite right, but I believe it is close. I'd welcome a double-check by anyone and I'll amend the graph and repost/update. thnks!

[strong yeet]

If ranged just straight up did more damage than melee it would be better in every way. I think you kind of underestimate inequality of the logistical nature of ranged vs melee by putting up a graph like this.

[Astral]

Perma-Haste AA would be a welcome thing, IMO.

That's not going to happen even if 100 players respond in agreement with ya, if I know our design team a little bit.

Further more, you dont get perma-haste from going AA, ever. You get maximum of 4 minutes CDR if my idea passes. That leaves you with vulnerability windows where you got to at least stop to use a wand, which is fine IMO.

[CosmicOrderV]

Some considerations about the graph.

To get that kind of crit range you would need a greensteel weapon or 5% a masterly. Considering you made it sound like these were supposed to be easily obtainable for level thirties, i'm going to assume greensteel. Base damage should look more like 2d6 (weapon/essence) + 20 + 4 (perma-essence). That puts average damage closer to 30, in the melee department. For criticals, that means 90 damage. Another 2d6 for sneak attack, if you wish to include it.

Then for the melee's attack, the 'primary final to hit' ought to be 47 for the highest value. Weapon Focus stacks with Epic Weapon Focus, and you didn't max out the attribute bonus, which is easy to do with potions.

Then there's the ranged weapon. Ashwood longbow, which ought to also been keen, because it's a runic weapon, and therefore very easy to keen if you have a t3 dweomercrafter. That puts its crit range at 18-20 x 3. Ashwood also has mighty critical 2d10. Then arrow damage is 8(AA)+4(template stable)+4 (template stable)+4(damask)+4(Mighty)+1d6(template unstable)+1d8(base weapon)+2(archer path)+6(epic specialization). That's about 39 damage average, with criticals that average 127.

Then there's the ranged attack. I'm not sure why you didn't at least make the attribute bonus equal to the melee one, here. This is where the archer shines. The highest attack value here should be +53. Again you can't forget that Weapon Focus stacks with Epic Weapon Focus. Also consider Rapid Shot, here. That's something the WM cannot replicate. For -2 attack, the AA is getting an extra attack per round at their highest value.


Now what does this all mean? Yeah, an archer can't burst like a WM, but they're putting out higher damage the longer the fight continues at range. The WM can try to compensate for this by activating Power Attack, but lowers their AB, and the AB difference between these two classes is huge. The AB is what makes AA's good. Called Shot.

Like Strong Yeet said, the WM is only effective so long as it's within melee range. Ranged attacks? Draw distance is your range. In other words, you have no range. If you see them, shoot them. That's huge. The archer is putting out damage before the WM can even reach their target. That's giving said archer time to proc an absolutely devastating critical hit. Let this build then also have some free Haste on shortened cooldown? Aside from it not being thematically appropriate, I just can't see the justification. Use potions, use wands.

As mentioned before, it might be cool to see CL bumps for AA, because at least then, you'd be sacrificing potential damage/AB for more of a caster investment that actually lets them cast Haste, which would in addition enable them to fill their own unstable template slots more effectively (having a total CL in the range of 12-14 as an arcane caster, or 11-18 as a divine caster).

I'm also in agreement with whoever mentioned how Ranger having their AA req's waived seems like a hold-over from a bygone era of balance. Personally, I would love to see them no longer be granted AA without the arcane casting requirement. It would make it much easier to keep things balanced and thematic, but still keep a small ranger dip attractive for AA's, thus allowing the Arcane Archer class room to be tweaked.

[Astral]

I'm also in agreement with whoever mentioned how Ranger having their AA req's waived seems like a hold-over from a bygone era of balance. Personally, I would love to see them no longer be granted AA without the arcane casting requirement. It would make it much easier to keep things balanced and thematic, but still keep a small ranger dip attractive for AA's, thus allowing the Arcane Archer class room to be tweaked.

The team seems to disagree with you and however mentioned it beforehand because Ranger having the AA's reqs waived is younger than archer path by at least 1-2 years.

[Aren]

Some considerations about the graph.

To get that kind of crit range you would need a greensteel weapon or 5% a masterly. Considering you made it sound like these were supposed to be easily obtainable for level thirties, i'm going to assume greensteel. Base damage should look more like 2d6 (weapon/essence) + 20 + 4 (perma-essence). That puts average damage closer to 30, in the melee department. For criticals, that means 90 damage. Another 2d6 for sneak attack, if you wish to include it.

Then for the melee's attack, the 'primary final to hit' ought to be 47 for the highest value. Weapon Focus stacks with Epic Weapon Focus, and you didn't max out the attribute bonus, which is easy to do with potions.

Then there's the ranged weapon. Ashwood longbow, which ought to also been keen, because it's a runic weapon, and therefore very easy to keen if you have a t3 dweomercrafter. That puts its crit range at 18-20 x 3. Ashwood also has mighty critical 2d10. Then arrow damage is 8(AA)+4(template stable)+4 (template stable)+4(damask)+4(Mighty)+1d6(template unstable)+1d8(base weapon)+2(archer path)+6(epic specialization). That's about 39 damage average, with criticals that average 127.

Then there's the ranged attack. I'm not sure why you didn't at least make the attribute bonus equal to the melee one, here. This is where the archer shines. The highest attack value here should be +53. Again you can't forget that Weapon Focus stacks with Epic Weapon Focus. Also consider Rapid Shot, here. That's something the WM cannot replicate. For -2 attack, the AA is getting an extra attack per round at their highest value.


Now what does this all mean? Yeah, an archer can't burst like a WM, but they're putting out higher damage the longer the fight continues at range. The WM can try to compensate for this by activating Power Attack, but lowers their AB, and the AB difference between these two classes is huge. The AB is what makes AA's good. Called Shot.

Like Strong Yeet said, the WM is only effective so long as it's within melee range. Ranged attacks? Draw distance is your range. In other words, you have no range. If you see them, shoot them. That's huge. The archer is putting out damage before the WM can even reach their target. That's giving said archer time to proc an absolutely devastating critical hit. Let this build then also have some free Haste on shortened cooldown? Aside from it not being thematically appropriate, I just can't see the justification. Use potions, use wands.

As mentioned before, it might be cool to see CL bumps for AA, because at least then, you'd be sacrificing potential damage/AB for more of a caster investment that actually lets them cast Haste, which would in addition enable them to fill their own unstable template slots more effectively (having a total CL in the range of 12-14 as an arcane caster, or 11-18 as a divine caster).

I'm also in agreement with whoever mentioned how Ranger having their AA req's waived seems like a hold-over from a bygone era of balance. Personally, I would love to see them no longer be granted AA without the arcane casting requirement. It would make it much easier to keep things balanced and thematic, but still keep a small ranger dip attractive for AA's, thus allowing the Arcane Archer class room to be tweaked.

Thanks for making my point come across. And I whole-heartedly agree.

[Nitro]

The team seems to disagree with you and however mentioned it beforehand because Ranger having the AA's reqs waived is younger than archer path by at least 1-2 years.

That's not true at all. Archer path was added in 2011 (easily found with the wayback machine), while Arcane archer spellcaster requirements were removed as early as 2009 (possibly even earlier as 2009 is simply the creation date of the first ranger and arcane archer articles on the wiki, both of which mention that rangers don't need to have spellcaster levels as a prerequisite for AA).

[The Kriv]

Some considerations about the graph.

To get that kind of crit range you would need a greensteel weapon or 5% a masterly. Considering you made it sound like these were supposed to be easily obtainable for level thirties, i'm going to assume greensteel. Base damage should look more like 2d6 (weapon/essence) + 20 + 4 (perma-essence). That puts average damage closer to 30, in the melee department. For criticals, that means 90 damage. Another 2d6 for sneak attack, if you wish to include it.

Then for the melee's attack, the 'primary final to hit' ought to be 47 for the highest value. Weapon Focus stacks with Epic Weapon Focus, and you didn't max out the attribute bonus, which is easy to do with potions.

Then there's the ranged weapon. Ashwood longbow, which ought to also been keen, because it's a runic weapon, and therefore very easy to keen if you have a t3 dweomercrafter. That puts its crit range at 18-20 x 3. Ashwood also has mighty critical 2d10. Then arrow damage is 8(AA)+4(template stable)+4 (template stable)+4(damask)+4(Mighty)+1d6(template unstable)+1d8(base weapon)+2(archer path)+6(epic specialization). That's about 39 damage average, with criticals that average 127.

Then there's the ranged attack. I'm not sure why you didn't at least make the attribute bonus equal to the melee one, here. This is where the archer shines. The highest attack value here should be +53. Again you can't forget that Weapon Focus stacks with Epic Weapon Focus. Also consider Rapid Shot, here. That's something the WM cannot replicate. For -2 attack, the AA is getting an extra attack per round at their highest value.

All very good points, iirc, the graph output reflects STR/DEX stats taken from the generic cookie-cutter build outline.

I didn't include the Ashwood Bow for the archer, because that is a best-in-slot weapon, that yes a good number of archers will obtain, but likely not EVERY archer is walking around with an Ashwood bow by 30.

Nor did I intentionally take into account optimized, runic best-in-slot enhancements to the weapons.

Again, are there archers (and melee folk) walking around with Best in Slot Everything? Yeah. Does every character by level 30 have best-in-slot everything? No. So as a more realistic cross section, I used the cookie-cutter build feats and stats for each, and the most common and easily attainable (and most likely) weapons to have.

I think you're right, though, that weapon master probably will have greensteel over a masterlydamask weapon.



If someone wants to do a more optimized comparison and post it as a reference, here is the link to the graph generator:

http://www.afterlifeguild.org/Thott/nwn/




regarding ranged getting to start dealing damage far of... yep... the 'if you can see it, you can shoot it' certainly comes into play, and is a huge bonus.

if you would like... you can take a weaponmaster built character into the arena with a ranged AA character... have the weapon master start with their back against the opposite wall, and have the AA begin shooting while at them while the weaponmaster closes in for the attack... and see exactly in a real-life scenario how this plays out.. fully buffed.

I've done this, on a number of occasions on a lvl 30 AA with 15 levels of AA, with +55 attack, and using a +2/+4 Compound bow (before the days of the Ashwood) and never did my AA ever survive. Not once.

For these tests... I had my Archer stand still and -NOT- try to kite the aggressor around... simply try and kill them before they cross the Cordor Arena... trying to slow them with called shot, etc...

I was able to get my opponent down regularly to at or below 1/4 health, but never dead.


I don't disagree there are scenarios where an archer will drop a PC before they get up close and personal. Maybe my own play-technique is flawed, I don't discount this as a possibility.


I can only speak from my own experience that... yeah.. archers deal a crap done of damage.. but what I'm saying is to call an Arcane Archer a ranged Weaponmaster is grossly misrepresenting the truth, even though it certainly sounds plausible.