This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Dark Planetar vs Spell Revisions Dark Planetar

#1DeathpointPosted 11/16/2010 7:29:18 AM
I would like your opinion on which you think is stronger/better.

Normal stock Fallen Planetar

Vorpal 25% chance save at -2

Dispells on hit

Level 25

HP 110

AC -7

Thaco 5

Unhasted attacks 3

Stats:

STR 19

DEX 15

CON 14

INT 16

WIS 16

CHAR 18

Resists:

Fire(100) Cold (100) Electricity (100) Acid (0) Magic (75) Magic Fire (50) Magic Cold (100) Slashing/piercing/crushing all =10

Spells(Please note these are modified by the Spell Revisions mod):

Remove Fear
Remove Curse
Cure Disease
Nuetralize Poison
Lesser Restoration
Flame Strike
Raise Dead
True Seeing
Insect Plague
Heal
Fire Storm
Symbol, Fear
Holy Word
Symbol, Death
Earthquake
Globe of Blades
Magic Missle
Detect invis
Flame Arrow
FireBall
Haste
Improved invis


VS


Modified Planetar


Vorpal 5% chance saves at -6

No longer has dispel on hit ability

Level 18

HP 198

AC -3

Thaco 2

Unhasted attacks 3

Stats:

STR 19

DEX 19

CON 18

INT 18

WIS 21

CHAR 22

Resists:

Fire(100) Cold (0) Electricity (100) Acid (50) Magic (75) Magic Fire (100) Magic Cold (0) Slashing/piercing/crushing all =20

Spells(Please note these are modified by the Spell Revisions mod):

Resist Fear
Doom
Find Traps
Hold Person
Know Opponent
Silence
Break Enchantment
Contagion
Unholy Blight
Mental Domination
Poison
Cause Critical Wounds
Cloak of Fear
True Seeing
Flame Strike
Greater Command
Blade Barrier
Harm
Dolourous Decay
Fire Storm
Unholy Word


Thank you guys.
#2red255Posted 11/16/2010 9:00:03 AM
Lvl 25 Vs Lvl 18. which do you THINK is better?

I can't comment on the spells because I don't know how Heal, Harm and Haste were modified.
---
If the next one is called, because of his MO, the underwear bomber, you'll know I'm on to something. Calvin Trillin June 16, 2006.
#3letstryagainPosted 11/16/2010 9:21:10 AM
I don't like the offensive cleric spells tbh, and harm only does 150hp on touch or something. Not sure which is stronger but I know that the planetar is a lot handier than the dark version in SR.
#4Deathpoint(Topic Creator)Posted 11/16/2010 12:11:36 PM

From: red255 | #002
Lvl 25 Vs Lvl 18. which do you THINK is better?


Levels don't really matter do they? They are immune to level drain and both are immune to the same level of magic weapons. The lower level one actually has more hp because it is a fighter and has higher CON.

From: red255 | #002
I can't comment on the spells because I don't know how Heal, Harm and Haste were modified.


Haste seems pretty much irrelevant since I improve haste my planetars. However, I think I would miss heal a lot :(

From: letstryagain | #002
I don't like the offensive cleric spells tbh, and harm only does 150hp on touch or something.


I agree with this, in most cases any time spent casting is time the Planetar is not killing things with his insane melee capabilities. So offensive spells seem kind of bad. Although Near infinity says the SR Planetar has some increased casting speed so maybe that would make those offensive spells better.

Does anyone know how nice the dispel on hit is in the stock game? I'm playing with scs and it seems like it would be really super nice. Does he actually have to do damage to dispel? Losing that dispel plus worse spells doesn't seem worth the increase in survivability that the SR version has. I wonder which vorpal effect is better? Are there a lot of things that can be deathed that -6 saves would help on?

Thanks everyone.
#5letstryagainPosted 11/16/2010 2:04:23 PM
I ran with the original carsomyr version and it sorta killed the whole point of scs. It does dispel even if you don't damage IIRC. So if you're looking for a challenge (which is why you've installed scs to begin with I'm supposing) I'd recommend against it. Spellstrike works well enough already anyway, unless they've got SI:abjuration.

5% at -6 is more or less 2.5% around ToB while 25% at -2 should be around 5%? Not too sure about the numbers but it's not life changing and bosses will be immune to it anyway. Of course if you do Watcher's Keep early and hit 3M in chapter 3 or 4 then the 25% would work a lot more often, but at that stage it's not like you'd need it anyway.
#6atakdougPosted 11/17/2010 6:56:40 AM

From: letstryagain | #0055% at -6 is more or less 2.5% around ToB while 25% at -2 should be around 5%? Not too sure about the numbers but it's not life changing and bosses will be immune to it anyway. Of course if you do Watcher's Keep early and hit 3M in chapter 3 or 4 then the 25% would work a lot more often, but at that stage it's not like you'd need it anyway.


This is an interesting point to look at, albeit not hugely important.

At a natural save of exactly 0, the curves intersect, with a probability of successful vorpal effect of 1.25% per hit. However, at all other natural save levels, 5% at 6 is much worse than 25% at 2. At really high (bad) saves, the 6 doesn't matter much, and the kill percents rise toward 25% for the original and 5% for the revamped planetar; at really low (good) saves, the save penalty is irrelevant because you're killing on a save roll of 1 only so all that matters is the frequency with which you roll it. In each case, high and low saves, the original planentar's vorpal effect works several times as often, but at saves of 0 it's the same. (You don't have to get far from 0 to see a big difference: at 2 the revamped one works only 60% as often; at +2 it works 47% as often.)
#7atakdougPosted 11/17/2010 7:01:15 AM
^ The above does not account for the difference in THAC0, which will bring the numbers closer together (but for all realistic combinations of save and AC the original vorpal effect will happen more often, except at saves of exactly 0 and sometimes 1).
#8Deathpoint(Topic Creator)Posted 11/17/2010 11:12:27 AM
Thanks for clarifying the math. I was going to calculate it but I felt like I didn't know the mechanics and stats of the saves well enough to make an accurate calculation. I didn't even think of having to roll a natural 1. So saves on monsters are either pretty much really good or really bad? I'm having a hard time understanding why the -6 doesn't help more often.
#9atakdougPosted 11/17/2010 11:31:32 AM

From: Deathpoint | #008
Thanks for clarifying the math. I was going to calculate it but I felt like I didn't know the mechanics and stats of the saves well enough to make an accurate calculation. I didn't even think of having to roll a natural 1. So saves on monsters are either pretty much really good or really bad? I'm having a hard time understanding why the -6 doesn't help more often.


I didn't look at what the saves actually are, I just did the calculation for ever save. 6 is obviously a good thing, but it doesn't matter nearly as much as forcing the bad guy to roll that save literally five times as often, except in the one specific case where a save of 0 goes to +2 (meaning it's still failed only on a natural 1) or to +6 (failed five times as often, on 15).

To illustrate, consider a very good ToB save of 5 (I think they go this low), a not so good save of +5, and a bad save of +10.

Starting at 5, you go to 3 (failing on a natural 1) x 25%, for 1.25%, or to 1 (still failing only on a natural 1) x 5%, for 0.25%. The revamped vorpal effect kicks in only 20% as often, because the save bonus literally doesn't matter.

Starting at +5, you go to 7 (failing on 16) x 25% = 7.5%, or 11 (failing on 110) x 5%, or 2.5%, a third as often. The save bonus is nice but it doesn't nearly make up for the five times greater frequency.

Starting at +10 (a typical SoA save, I think), you go to 12 (failing on 111) x 25% = 13.75%, or 16 (failing on 115) x 5% = 3.75% With 6 the bad guy usually fails his save, but its still invoked only rarely, while the save is still pretty bad at 2.

Only at the magic number of an initial zero do these curves touch. They're pretty close at 1, sort of close (the revamped vorpal works 60% as often as the original) at 2 and +1. They're not close at all, with the revamped being much worse, at all other saves.

Again, THAC0 changes this somewhat, particularly because neither planetar has the godlike THAC0 that we're used to well-equipped ToB warriors having. These guys do miss a fair amount of the time; to model the combat efficiency correctly we'd need assumptions about armor class, saves, and hit points (the latter to value the vorpal effect). Anyone who wants can supply reasonably assumptions (I really have no idea what AC or HP ToB enemies tend to have I just hit 'em), and I can easily run some numbers.
#10Deathpoint(Topic Creator)Posted 11/17/2010 12:00:27 PM
Thanks for going into so much detail I appreciate that very much. I understand how saves work better now which was confusing me.