ToME: the Tales of Maj'Eyal

It always seemed odd me to me that arcane blades didn't have a single means of dealing arcane damage. With the changes to arcane blades in 43 and the ones in the last couple of patches, a physical damage spell seems like an odd fit (and the AB has plenty of that to go around) and the lack of arcane seems like a curious absence. Manathrust is probably too good to just give to AB, so why not change Earthen Missiles to be a magic missile spell? I am not sure what you would fill the rest of the tree out with, but I'd like to see them have some kind of arcane option. It would also make it so Higher had another class they were good at, as a bonus.

That would be an evil, evil thing to do. ABs love their stone, because any heavy physical damage class (which a melee AB is) just adores a base 50% physical penetration (and the rest of the tree's darn decent, too.). Arcane damage synergizes with... arcane destruction, about a quarter of the time and... nothing else, barring a crystalline weapon.

From a playing perspective, I'd probably be against this sort of change unless the tier four talent on this new tree included a flat 50% resistance penetration to everything Or something like that. It'd be hard to build a tree that wouldn't be basically a nerf to AB (who are in a decent place right now, and probably doesn't need it.), or at the very least one that wouldn't limit the blade's options (by making melee less viable.). Certainly either arcane specialist tree the Archmage has right now wouldn't manage that, and doesn't fit the class conceptually, either, from what I understand -- arcane manipulation is more of a high magic sort of thing than what ABs are doing.

Maybe with a new tree doing... something interesting. I could see a talent, possibly sustained or passive, that adds stacking resistance penetration based on the number of different elemental damage types you do in a period, which would fit interestingly with an arcane blade. Filling out the rest would be a thing, though. Short range cone for a proc spell? Would still leave two talents.

Something like this:

Aether Spark - Active
3/3/4/4/5/- range arcane damage cone, AC capable. Can't be aimed, targets the nearest enemy in range.

Arcane Carnival - Sustain
Randomly changes all damage you do into fire, lightning, or arcane at a 20/40/60/... rate. This applies to all damage sources you generate. At 5/5, critical effects may proc arcane destruction, should you have it.

??? - Active
For X turns, all lightning damage you do has a chance to daze, all fire damage may induce burning shock, all arcane damage may induce spellshock, and all physical damage may stun. Investment increases duration and chance to attempt, spellpower increases chance to land the debuff.

Elemental Erosion - Passive
For every unique damage type you deal to a target, you gain %d universal resistance penetration to that target for %d turns. Possibly limited to fire/lightning/arcane and damage sources over a certain threshold (or simply requiring a hit from one of the AC proccable talents.).

I see arcane damage as being something purely for archmages. Arcane Blades deal with elemental forces exclusively, as that comes more naturally to their semi-mage style.

ABs do have that one source of arcane damage, via arcane destruction crits. It honestly feels a little out of place, though.

Grey wrote:I see arcane damage as being something purely for archmages. Arcane Blades deal with elemental forces exclusively, as that comes more naturally to their semi-mage style.

I agree; it doesn't fit the concept of Arcane Blades to control and manipulate pure magic. I'd even say the Arcane Destruction arcane proc should be replaced by physical.

and thusly i have been admonished.

belmarduk wrote:and thusly i have been admonished.

You can always make an addon. Simple way to do it would be to overload stone.lua and change DamageType to DamageType.ARCANE, change the tactical bit to arcane as well, and you're set.

Nah, I don't care that much. Everybody else seems to like it, so I guess I need to give it another shot!

(i am really bad at arcane blades!)

People seem to also be ignoring the issue that Archmages have this tree, and running around changing it would also affect them, in particular, giving them another Arcane tree in place of their only Physical tree. This would be... odd.

Not that it matters since the general consensus seems to be "naaah."

I thought basically the same thing, for what it's worth.

Incidentally, is there a better name for this class? They don't deal arcane damage, and they aren't nearly as inclined to use blades as Shadowblades. My dumb idea is Mystic Warrior. I dunno, whoever came up with "Bulwark" should weigh in on this. Mystic Sentinel? Mystic Champion? Spellslayer? Crawl calls the equivalent class a Skald, and historically a Crusader, both of which seem to miss the mark.

bricks wrote:Incidentally, is there a better name for this class? They don't deal arcane damage, and they aren't nearly as inclined to use blades as Shadowblades. My dumb idea is Mystic Warrior. I dunno, whoever came up with "Bulwark" should weigh in on this.

You called? ;)

I quite like the name as it is actually. They use arcane powers, and thematically swords work quite well for them. Who cares if they don't use a specific element type much?

Elemental Blade?

Too many syllables.

Also DG wanted to add that reworked arcane blade add on as a separate class with that very name.