|
Bad Ivan | Sat 28-Nov-09 06:46 PM |
Member since 18th Feb 2005
39 posts
| |
|
#28730, "Question for Daevryn or Zulgh regarding Calming the Tem..."
|
I have a char that will be picking up his legacies in a day or two. I am going Gates first as I think I have a handle on how it works, and I am considering taking Calming as my second. The thought being that it should help shield me from what Gates cannot. Would either of you mind giving me a better understanding of how Calming works since from what I have heard there is no echo to help know when it does it's job. Is there a way to get the best use of the legacy, or do some races make better use of it than others? Also, in your opinion, does the logic of these two legacies being paired make sense? Thanks to either, or both, of you who take time to help me make my decesion easier.
|
|
|
|
|
Daevryn | Sat 28-Nov-09 07:01 PM |
Member since 13th Feb 2007
11117 posts
| |
|
#28732, "RE: Question for Daevryn or Zulgh regarding Calming the..."
In response to Reply #0
|
Essentially, Calming drastically increases your chances of making most saves. I've seen people pick it with the idea of using it to help the make saves and thus focus their gear on something besides -save; however, in my opinion, Calming shines the most when combined with at least moderate -save from gear. (I'm assuming you're already keeping warcry and anything else relevant from your class/cabal abilities up.)
For a very defensive/survival legacy pairing, I think Gates/Calming is a solid choice. Before picking it, I'd ask yourself what most of your enemies will be like. If you expect to fight a lot of or expect to have trouble with classes that tend to cast/commune a lot of things that care about whether or not you make a saving throw, such as necromancer, shaman, druid, magier A-Ps, invokers to some degree, etc., I think Calming is a pretty great choice. If you think you're going to have more problem with, say, other warriors, maybe something like Gates/Riddle is a better defensive combo. If you're going to struggle most with classes that can knock you out, maybe something like Gates/Place is a better combo. It all depends on what you think will get you killed.
|
|
|
|
  |
Torak | Sat 28-Nov-09 09:41 PM |
Member since 15th Feb 2007
1216 posts
| |
|
#28738, "Quick question about your comment"
In response to Reply #1
|
You said using Gates/Place for those who can knock you out....is Place relatively the same benefit in comparison with Calming on something that requires a save? Like if someone casts sleep, is Place the same amount of benefit as Calming or better?
You would think given the limited amount of knock-out effects, Place would be better than Calming for even spell knock-outs.
|
|
|
|
    |
Daevryn | Sat 28-Nov-09 09:48 PM |
Member since 13th Feb 2007
11117 posts
| |
|
#28740, "RE: Quick question about your comment"
In response to Reply #2
|
>You would think given the limited amount of knock-out effects, >Place would be better than Calming for even spell knock-outs.
In fact, it is. Even in the best case for Calming (which I would guess as not typical), Place is probably about twice as good for this specific thing.
But even in the fairly specific case of, say, a necromancer putting you to sleep, to get the whole picture you'd need to weigh "lots harder to put to sleep" vs. "somewhat harder to sleep, and somewhat harder to blind thereafter, and somewhat harder to summon to a different room thereafter, etc."
Both are useful and you might just want to jump straight on the Place/Claming warrior.
|
|
|
|
      |
Bad Ivan | Sat 28-Nov-09 10:33 PM |
Member since 18th Feb 2005
39 posts
| |
|
#28742, "Thanks...txt"
In response to Reply #3
|
Your first answer plus your reply to Torak combined really helped me decide on the legacy. I like the idea of Calming giving me an all around boost to the area where Gates will not help me. I figure Calming will will help against the Necros/APs/Transmuters of the world while also helping me overcome the neg effects of all the preps I am likely to use given the chance.
Thanks again.
|
|
|
|
|