1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Greetings Guest!!

    In order to combat SPAM on the forums, all users are required to have a minimum of 2 posts before they can submit links in any post or thread.

    Dismiss Notice
  3. Greetings Guest! Tonights Maintenance is complete and the Stratics Community Wiki is now live. Please see this thread for more details.
    Dismiss Notice

[Throwing] going full gargoyle

Discussion in 'UO Warrior' started by imperterritus, Nov 3, 2009.

  1. (Note to mods: Throwing not in list of prefixes.)

    I'm planning on converting an existing human fencer to a gargoyle thrower/mystic. He would be my imbuer because I just couldn't fit it on my existing mule. How does the following template look:

    120: Throwing, Imbuing
    100: Tactics, Mysticism, EvalInt
    100: Meditate
    80: Chivalry

    The character would be used for both Imbuing and (usually) solo PvM.
    I like the fact that once you get Mysticism and Imbuing to 80, you no longer need spell channeling on your weapons.
  2. Petra Fyde

    Petra Fyde Peerless Chatterbox
    Stratics Veteran Alumni Stratics Legend

    Jan 5, 2001
    Likes Received:
    'tis now :)
  3. Aibal

    Aibal Slightly Crazed
    Stratics Veteran

    May 14, 2008
    Likes Received:
    You can certainly try that template. Personally, I worked throwing up to 115 and found it next to worthless. Yet another gargoyle attribute that is less than stellar.
  4. Stupid Miner

    Stupid Miner Guest

    Looks decent on paper. Personally i'd try to fit some magery on there too, but yea that looks decent. Need full LMC, lots of MR to cast Colossus and Hail Storm.
  5. Sitromis

    Sitromis Guest

    Connor posted his cynicism about the gargoyle only being useful as a crafter here - http://vboards.stratics.com/showthread.php?p=1435697 – and while I’d say it’s pretty clear that the race does indeed make a good crafter, it seems to me like Mythic is making an attempt to bring back the “tank” mage… of sorts... though I haven’t quite figure out just how yet.

    The "tank mage" (from what I can tell) seem to have gone by the way side and it seems like there may be some potentials with the Gargoyle to bring that back. I’m not seeing a lot of positive energy towards them yet, but I suspect not all the combinations have yet been tried. Take the “Sampire” template as a prime example. It took some time before folks figure that one out.

    The largest issue I’m seeing is certainly the lack of artifact usage. Most of the "big boys" abusing (or is that using) the game mechanics of UO now are doing so via an extravagant collection of artifacts. If you can't find them on your servers, you know what site(s) to use to get them there. That's the reality of being UBER and the Gargoyle does not have that level available to them just yet. Until then, it's regular game-play with less than peerless encounters I'd guess. Unless someone's seen/done otherwise?!?

    Anyway… there’s some room for making a Throwing caster class or possibly a “tank/mystic” as both Parrying and Swords offset the penalties applied to Throwing while allowing for Melee combat to take place as well.

    I’m wondering if something like this might work -

    100 Throwing
    120 Imbuing
    100 Tactics
    120 Mysticism
    100 Parrying
    80 Chivalry
    100 Swords

    Or some combination there-in. Obviously skills such as Focus and Anatomy have some appeal, and we can’t rely too heavily on radical jewelry or “suits” to buff an 8th skill up to where it would be useful. It’s certainly a tough challenge, but I’d be curious to hear more.

    Eventually, I’ll post my own findings but I haven’t even GM’d Throwing yet so I can’t mix and match skills just yet. Personally, I’d love to see this template without Chivalry as I have too many damn toons with that already and I certainly don’t wanna make another accursed “mule!” … Gargoyle or no!
  6. Stupid Miner

    Stupid Miner Guest

    Without mana regen Mysticism will be useless. Parry doesn't offset shield penalty (reduces? yes. offsets? no.)
  7. Sitromis, interesting speculation concerning tank/mystic, but for me that would only be a roleplay template. I view a bladeweaver as a ranged fighter, so spending hundreds of skill points on parry and swordfighting would be counter-productive to my playstyle.

    I might consider taking some swords and parry if the devs set a debuff-elimination threshold of maybe 50 each. You could raise those skills higher if you wanted, just like anyone else, but the penalties to throwing would be gone at 50.
  8. Miner, why squeeze magery in? The only way I could see to do it is replace the 80 points of chiv with 80 points of magery. I could probably lower tactics to 90 and get 10 more magery... But still, on a template without resisting spells, I think i'd prefer the chivalry for remove curse. Plus chiv tends to have a much lower mana load.