Your tests illustrate nicely why CF is a bit of an awkward weapon. Most regular a-dime-a-dozen enemies just die so fast the stun hardly plays a role. Most enemies that are actually difficult to beat are either immune to stuns, or have defenses that are the real issue (once you get to hit mages, they're dead, stun or no stun; it's getting to hitting them that's the issue).
There are certainly a lot of relevant enemies you wouldn't mind stunned, of course. Just keep in mind that against most things you encounter, it'll just be fairly irrelevant.
The number of NPCs immune to CF's stun attack is rather small, actually. It boils down to Golems, Dragons, Demiliches, Demogorgon and the 5. The rest has to roll dice. Funnily, you can even stun Ascension-Melissan, at least in her last form. So, I wouldn't downplay this ability at all. As a one-handed blade, the CF is certainly top-tier, especially considering the ability to employ an off-hand weapon with additional terrific feats, like Angurvadal. It is weird comparison anyway. Carsomyr is a two-handed weapon, and who in all seriousness is going to play a Katana-wielding Paladin ? This like the Pope converting to Buddhism, lol. A more interesting comparison would be Carsomyr vs the Ravager, for example.
It boils down to Golems, Dragons, Demiliches, Demogorgon and the 5.
So in other words, all enemies that are actually dangerous? :P Are regular Liches not immune to stun? I thought they were, but I might be wrong. Though I suppose with their absurd save vs. spell it hardly matters.
Interesting to know that Mel can be stunned, though, I always just assumed she was immune (and I don't fight her very often during runs where I test stuff out).
As a one-handed blade, the CF is certainly top-tier, especially considering the ability to employ an off-hand weapon with additional terrific feats, like Angurvadal.
I think pairing CF with *anything* but a +APR offhand is a grave error. There is nothing better than making an on-hit stun weapon hit more often. If you wanted damage, you'd be using something else in the main hand (and Paladin has prof points to spare for whatever other MH choices).
It is weird comparison anyway. Carsomyr is a two-handed weapon, and who in all seriousness is going to play a Katana-wielding Paladin ? This like the Pope converting to Buddhism, lol. A more interesting comparison would be Carsomyr vs the Ravager, for example.
I'm not a paladin myself, so the only paladin I have is Keldorn, who is currently using celestial fury. I've compared the two swords..............
Maybe someone do it..........
And there are good reasons to do it. From a powergaming prospective, and PGmers do a lot of wierd things, weld the heavy DoE in the left hand, even if they are not lefty or don't have an ogre strenght (well, most of the PG characters have huge strenght from stats or items), or bastard swords, that are single welded weapons but hibrid between long swords and 2Hswords, they are at the limit of what you can use single handed and are weird to use 2handed for a problem of dimension even if the welder is strong. Or equip Mazzy whith a 2hander, let their rogues backstab whith staves, katanas and longswords. I stop here, but there are another 1000 things that they do, not only which weapon they equip (must say we,I'm a powergamer that also looks at RP, but when I have to choose not always choose RP).
And even from a RP prospective IMHO there is no problem to do it. Katanas are weapons developed in the far KarTur, but are not AFAIK related to some Divinity and there nothing that prevents paladins from using them if they find them effective. there is nothing like the faith related prohibition that clerics have about slashing weapons. Sayng that paladins dont't have to use weapons developed in the far east is like sayng that in real world Americans have to use only bows, spears and daggers, but are the only one that can use aiplanes, can you imagine shoting arrows from a B52........... Or that the Chineese are the only one allowed to use fireguns because they invented the firepowder. I admit that a paladin welding a katana look strange to us and a 2Hsword is what we associate to the idea of paladin. But this if because in real world Katanas was unknown by paladins, in FR world they are well known and higly rated weapons, check the price of a unenchanted 2Hsword against the price of a plain katana.... And RP wise the fact that a fighter choose the best weapon, related to his tactical role in the battle, makes perfect sense.
So in other words, all enemies that are actually dangerous? :P Are regular Liches not immune to stun? I thought they were, but I might be wrong. Though I suppose with their absurd save vs. spell it hardly matters.
Well, the game would get a little bit too easy, if you could stun those, too. Wouldn't it? As for the Liches, you named it save vs spell 1 does the trick for them. But this is what the Mace of Disruption and Sunrays were invented for.
I think pairing CF with *anything* but a +APR offhand is a grave error. There is nothing better than making an on-hit stun weapon hit more often. If you wanted damage, you'd be using something else in the main hand (and Paladin has prof points to spare for whatever other MH choices).
Well, yeah when talking Paladins, perhaps. A more believable wielder, like a Kensai or any other Fighter however, doesn't need APR crutches, and is hence better off with something like I mentioned.
Well, yeah when talking Paladins, perhaps. A more believable wielder, like a Kensai or any other Fighter however, doesn't need APR crutches, and is hence better off with something like I mentioned.
It's not about "APR crutches", there literally is nothing better than an APR offhand, for anyone, if your MH is a weapon you're using only because of its on-hit effect.
The only argument I could see is insufficient proficiency points, and the fact that there are no better Katanas in the game. But even a dualed Fighter should have no trouble getting two weapons to Grand Mastery, meaning you can just switch to a higher-damage MH when you don't need the stun.
Note that even for pure damage MHs you are hard-pressed to find a better OH than a +APR one. Crom Faeyr is essentially the only one, and only if you can't pair it with a +APR offhand in the first place. I suppose Angurvadal could work in fringe cases, on characters with very low STR and no belt available to remedy it.
From a pure hit damage perspective, though, it is literally impossible for an offhand weapon to be better than a +APR weapon. It's either +APR, STR bonus, or something defensive (immunity, DoE, etc.) - offhand just for hit damage is always sub-par.
And even from a RP prospective IMHO there is no problem to do it. Katanas are weapons developed in the far KarTur, but are not AFAIK related to some Divinity and there nothing that prevents paladins from using them if they find them effective. there is nothing like the faith related prohibition that clerics have about slashing weapons....
I think, there is a huge, colossal problem with it, when a RP perspective is applied. You're right Powergaming is the answer here, and 99% of PG'ers don't give the slightest bit of a damn about plausibility or credibility of their characters. Same reason you can see inane Int3/Wis18 Cleric builds, for example. Back to the RP problem. Paladins are trained within their orders. These orders are highly traditional, and will of course refer to the weapons that are widespread and common in Faerun, and have magical specimens enhanced by their gods. Katanas are neither widespread nor common in Faerun(hence the price). And I've never heard of a Katana of Tyr, Helm, Torm, Lathander or Ilmater either. In addition, with this scarcity comes the scarcity of people who could teach others in the use of these blades(another problem here is of course this being a cRPG where you can just assign PIPs on the fly after a level up without a person to visit who could train you). This is a medival world, not a contemporary one where all kinds of people can book cheap flights to anywhere. I think you can make up a backstory of a wandering Kara-Tur Armsmaster stopping by a place of scholarship like Candlekeep, and teaching your protagonist the way of the Kensai. But same guy walking into a church, and...yeah suuuuuure. RP-wise, it's just silly, no matter how you put it.
Well, yeah when talking Paladins, perhaps. A more believable wielder, like a Kensai or any other Fighter however, doesn't need APR crutches, and is hence better off with something like I mentioned.
It's not about "APR crutches", there literally is nothing better than an APR offhand, for anyone, if your MH is a weapon you're using only because of its on-hit effect.
The only argument I could see is insufficient proficiency points, and the fact that there are no better Katanas in the game. But even a dualed Fighter should have no trouble getting two weapons to Grand Mastery, meaning you can just switch to a higher-damage MH when you don't need the stun.
Note that even for pure damage MHs you are hard-pressed to find a better OH than a +APR one. Crom Faeyr is essentially the only one, and only if you can't pair it with a +APR offhand in the first place. I suppose Angurvadal could work in fringe cases, on characters with very low STR and no belt available to remedy it.
From a pure hit damage perspective, though, it is literally impossible for an offhand weapon to be better than a +APR weapon. It's either +APR, STR bonus, or something defensive (immunity, DoE, etc.) - offhand just for hit damage is always sub-par.
CF offers the on-hit effect, as well as a high damage output. APR max out at 5(10) anyway, what's the point for a Fighter with GM wasting his off-hand on something like Belm/Kundane? That is 1 out of 5 attacks completely wasted. I'd rather wear something like Angurvadal, bestowing you with 22STR and Negative Plane Protection, thus freeing up your Girdle spot for something cooler like the Girdle of Inertial Barrier, while not flushing your off-hand attack down the toilet, just as an example.
CF offers the on-hit effect, as well as a high damage output.
CF offers stun, and OKAY damage. It's nothing compared to the real hard hitters. Like, it's so far down the list I doubt it could compete in terms of damage even in a full party of dual-wielders. The stun is literally the only reason to use it (RP and so on aside).
APR max out at 5(10) anyway, what's the point for a Fighter with GM wasting his off-hand on something like Belm/Kundane? That is 1 out of 5 attacks completely wasted.
13+ Fighter = 2 APR base +0.5 Specialization (**) +0.5 Grand Mastery (*****) +1 dual wield ----------------------- = 4 APR
You do not max out APR without a +APR offhand. Nothing is wasted.
I'd rather wear something like Angurvadal, bestowing you with 22STR and Negative Plane Protection, thus freeing up your Girdle spot for something cooler like the Girdle of Inertial Barrier, while not flushing your off-hand attack down the toilet, just as an example.
Angurvadal isn't usually good enough, except for characters with low STR. Obviously there are scenarios in which you could find yourself with a low STR character and no belt, but those should not be very common given that most fighter-type characters have good STR and there are several belts (as well as STR bonuses for CHARNAME).
Keep in mind that an extra MH swing also includes an extra swing with your bonus STR damage, further increasing the gain.
But the biggest argument is that since you clearly have the choice between Angurvadal and a +APR offhand, you should just USE THOSE TWO TOGETHER. It's the same as Crom Faeyr, where people argue on end for using it over an APR offhand, when really they should be using it WITH one instead. +STR *and* +APR is a perfect synergy.
Of course, if you don't have an APR offhand available in the first place, then it's a moot point; but I think we're assuming you do since we're talking about choice.
You can RP that the paladin was sent in the far east for a mission or a holy quest and there........ I mean you can find a RP reason, mine is only one of the possible explanations, whithout stretching too much. Seems to me that a katana welding pally in one of the most acceptable things RPwise a PWgamer do. But everyone has his personal feelings about RP. Anyway I never equipped katanas on Keldorn or my pally charname. Because also I am tyed to the image of the paladin whith a 2Hsword or longsword and shield, but I had used Keldorn whith bastard sword and shield that in also disputable RPwise, bastard swords was not used whith shield, are to long and also rely on their lenght and far reach for defense, maybe can be dual welded whith a dagger so if the enemy manage to close the distance... And if we want really RP the game whe should not level up your mages, how can a beginner mage become an archmage in 100 days? It take a whole life and even so few will reach the goal, the majority will stick to middle levels and never progress further. And the 100 days are spent fighting and trying to survive, that for a fighter is a costant training but mages need to study, a lot, the only ones that can improove from that regimen are the sorcerers due to the special nature of their magic.
@jinxed75 I don't get it. 1APR of everybody + 1 fighter levels +1 GM +1 dual welding= 4APR ok gauntlets +1/2 so 4 1/2
also you have upgraded Angurvadal only for a fraction of TOB, and only a pair of 1/2APR gauntlets and you have to equip a full party whith maybe 3 o 4 mlee fighting characters that you have to optimize. And you have 2 +1APR weapons plus a 3rd usable by rogues.
Not that what you say is wrong and all depends on the composition of the party and the choices of the player, but to equip a party means to spread the limited resources between all the characters that can benefit of that tipe of resource and also limiting our analisis to TOB the game is not the last 2 battles.
Maybe a mage or a cleric whith little hp can benefit more of the Girdle of Inertial Barrier, but is true that he will have other ways to protect himself (at the cost of having less time to protect the rest of the party or debuff/damage enemies). Again all depends on party composition and choices.
But seems to me that the way of Lord_Tansheron lead to a better use of limited resources and a most effective party for a longher part of the game at the cost of 1 single character little less effective or maybe even whitout cost at all.
You forgot about the Gauntlets from WK, that grant another 1/2 attack. GM, if unnerfed grants a full attack not 1/2. So there you go, 5 APR, completely disregarding things like GWW, btw. You also seem to forget, that your off-hand APR will be used in 1 out of 5 attacks. That's 20% of your attacks executed with a +2 weapon, which is pretty suboptimal for at least ToB. Neither Belm(1d8+2) nor Kundane(1d6+2) have something good to offer besides +1APR. No Negative Plane Protection, no STR, no nothing. Angurvadal(1d8+5 +elemental damage) sets your STR to 22. How many NPCs(or CHARNAMES) do have a STR >18/00(possibly 19 after WK)? Right, zero. There is only 1 Crom Faeyr, and as I already have mentioned, using a STR belt prevents you from using something infinitely better like the Girdle of Inertial Barrier. So, from my perspective, your potentially higher(I still question even that, see above) damage output comes at the cost of making a LOT of sacrifices. Everybody has their own preferences, I suppose, but I never bought in to this use Belm/Kundane instead of something proper, and never will.
You forgot about the Gauntlets from WK, that grant another 1/2 attack. GM, if unnerfed grants a full attack not 1/2. So there you go, 5 APR, completely disregarding things like GWW, btw.
"Un-nerfed" you say, but you mean modded. Mods change a lot of things, and since no two people have the same mods, it's a bit pointless to discuss them without proper context. For that matter, my own mods have completely different things going on, and obviously I'm not taking them as a baseline because that would be silly.
The gauntlets are real, but you don't have to give them to a maxed-out Fighter. You can give them to someone else in your party and preserve value in overall throughput, in fact it's great to put them on a Fighter9->X dual because they lack the 0.5 APR from lvl 13. Unless you play solo, they are not an argument. In solo play, they are, but solo play changes a whole bunch of things.
You also seem to forget, that your off-hand APR will be used in 1 out of 5 attacks. That's 20% of your attacks executed with a +2 weapon, which is pretty suboptimal for at least ToB.
That's fairly irrelevant. The number of enemies you can't hit are minute, and the slightly lower per-hit damage is more than made up for by the fact you gain an extra main hand swing.
Neither Belm(1d8+2) nor Kundane(1d6+2) have something good to offer besides +1APR. No Negative Plane Protection, no STR, no nothing.
If you want to be defensive, that's a whole different debate. But the STR bonus can be calculated and compared to the APR bonus, where it usually falls short (see previous post).
Angurvadal(1d8+5 +elemental damage) sets your STR to 22. How many NPCs(or CHARNAMES) do have a STR >18/00(possibly 19 after WK)? Right, zero.
Everyone who:
- is a Half-Orc - comes from BG1 with STR tome bonus - uses one of two (three if you don't assemble CFae) STR belts - has completed the Hell Trials as evil (CHARNAME only) - has used the Machine of Lum the Mad - has access to Draw Upon Holy Might
Am I forgetting something? That's quite a lot of bonuses, at least three of which are guaranteed available (2xbelts and Machine).
Now don't get me wrong, it's entirely possible to have scenarios where Angurvadal is a valid choice. The lower the STR the better it is. But even then, you should just use it in the main hand and pair it with a +APR weapon, because the lower the STR the higher up on the list Angurvadal ranks.
But do keep in mind that this is only about a scenario where you have the choice between Angurvadal and +APR in the first place; which is rare. There's only 3 +APR weapons, and one of them essentially requires UAI (Monk can't dual-wield weapons so moot point). Given that everyone can get and use Flail of Ages and Crom Faeyr, and those two weapons are the best to pair with a +APR offhand, you usually just don't even have one free to throw around in the first place.
There is only 1 Crom Faeyr, and as I already have mentioned, using a STR belt prevents you from using something infinitely better like the Girdle of Inertial Barrier.
Whether the Girdle of Inertial Barrier is better is HIGHLY debatable (and whether it's "infinitely better" is not a debate at all, just needless hyperbole). Once you start trading offense for defense, the entire value system changes. You can also swap defensive items in only as needed, since you don't always face magical damage you need to protect against, but do always face enemies you need to stomp.
You're right of course that there is always a personal element as to how offensive/defensive you want to be. Which is why I didn't enter into that debate, and stayed purely within one side (+STR vs. +APR). Defensive arguments exist, but since those rely on many different factors, they need to be discussed separately and within a given context (especially once mods/special rules come in).
About the gauntlets I counted them in, was the 1/2 APR more from unnerfing them that I have missed and, as I don't play EE I don't know if there unnerfing them is something that is possible in the game or something from some mod or other stuff.
also "So, from my perspective, your potentially higher(I still question even that, see above) damage output comes at the cost of making a LOT of sacrifices", but I was trying to say the opposite, that whith your build you have a potentially highter damage, or similar if you don't unnerf the gauntlets, but at the cost of don't give the gauntlets to an other tank, maybe 2Hwelder, and a very good sword to a 3rd tank. I was trying to say that if you give to the Celestial Fury welder just Kundane or Belm is not his dps that benefit but the dps potential of all the party, and since we have only 1 pair of gauntlets and 1 Angurvadal to me seems a better choice. But I speack a very bad english so maybe I expressed in a wrong way.
And usually I prefer to have 2 more strenght enhencing items and don't upgrade Crom so for my tanks there is a strenght belt more and a pair of strenght gauntlets that make the Angurvadal strenght less important, and I have them from retourning from spellhod, not the last aprt of TOB.
Aniway I repeat myself "Not that what you say is wrong and all depends on the composition of the party and the choices of the player" I think my builds are very effective, your builds are very effective and also the ones of Lord_Tansheron or any other experienced player, Which one works the best depends on the style of the player, the composition of the party and also the point of the game. Some builds are optimized for engame, others for earlygame and others remain powrefull all the game, even if are less extreme at a specific point.
I agree, but I think that It's hard even if you have concrete values.... This if you analize the dps of the whole party, or at least of all the figters, the possible parmutations of items and weapons, you factor in the defensive potential of each build and not only the offensive, some bonuses like disrupting or stunning capability and you evalutate it for all the game quantifying for each phase the difficoulty of the encounters you will have against your offensive and defensive potential in that moment...... Not so easy!
"Un-nerfed" you say, but you mean modded. Mods change a lot of things, and since no two people have the same mods, it's a bit pointless to discuss them without proper context. For that matter, my own mods have completely different things going on, and obviously I'm not taking them as a baseline because that would be silly.
Well, I only have the EE for BG1, because there are too many quest-mods/expansions for BG2 that I like which are not compatible with BG2EE. But from what I have read, BG2EE is supposed to use the original, unnerfed GM from BG1, and then it should be +1APR
The gauntlets are real, but you don't have to give them to a maxed-out Fighter. You can give them to someone else in your party and preserve value in overall throughput, in fact it's great to put them on a Fighter9->X dual because they lack the 0.5 APR from lvl 13. Unless you play solo, they are not an argument. In solo play, they are, but solo play changes a whole bunch of things.
But I can, and well, I give them to my L13-Dual-to-Thief, if I play one, to make the 5APR complete, yeah. There wouldn't be much incentive otherwise, since other fighter-types can use GWW later anyway.
That's fairly irrelevant. The number of enemies you can't hit are minute, and the slightly lower per-hit damage is more than made up for by the fact you gain an extra main hand swing.
Well, that differs from my POV. You can make that argument for a +3 weapon, but enemies with immunity up to +2 are numerous. That extra main-hand swing is only crucial, when your off-hand sucks. It's mitigating a self-imposed problem.
If you want to be defensive, that's a whole different debate. But the STR bonus can be calculated and compared to the APR bonus, where it usually falls short (see previous post).
Well, staying power usually equates into higher damage efficiency, simple. Especially when you are not playing Vanilla.
- is a Half-Orc - comes from BG1 with STR tome bonus - uses one of two (three if you don't assemble CFae) STR belts - has completed the Hell Trials as evil (CHARNAME only) - has used the Machine of Lum the Mad - has access to Draw Upon Holy Might
That amounts to very strict set of pre-conditions, with some of them even excluding each other. Iirc, DUHM is restricted to good aligned characters. Could be wrong though.
Now don't get me wrong, it's entirely possible to have scenarios where Angurvadal is a valid choice. The lower the STR the better it is. But even then, you should just use it in the main hand and pair it with a +APR weapon, because the lower the STR the higher up on the list Angurvadal ranks.
Why? The STR bonus applies under all conditions. I don't need it in my main-hand for that. Doesn't take away from the fact, that Angurvadal is also a superb choice as a main-hand weapon, if you don't want to skill Katanas, or the generic powergaming choice named FoA.
Whether the Girdle of Inertial Barrier is better is HIGHLY debatable (and whether it's "infinitely better" is not a debate at all, just needless hyperbole). Once you start trading offense for defense, the entire value system changes. You can also swap defensive items in only as needed, since you don't always face magical damage you need to protect against, but do always face enemies you need to stomp.
The way I see it, we are talking about exchanging a slight bit of offense(even that depends on the build) for a pretty big chunk of defense. You make it sound as if trading your off-hand for a potentially additional main-hand attack is what seperates a powerhouse from a whimp, which is nonsense.
You're right of course that there is always a personal element as to how offensive/defensive you want to be. Which is why I didn't enter into that debate, and stayed purely within one side (+STR vs. +APR). Defensive arguments exist, but since those rely on many different factors, they need to be discussed separately and within a given context (especially once mods/special rules come in).
Well you kicked off this discussion by stating "pairing CF with anything but a +1APR weapon is a grave error". And that is simply not true.
But from what I have read, BG2EE is supposed to use the original, unnerfed GM from BG1, and then it should be +1APR
It is my understanding that this is not the case. It is the case in IWD:EE, but not in BG2:EE. But I might be wrong, I have never played the EE unmodded.
But I can, and well, I give them to my L13-Dual-to-Thief, if I play one, to make the 5APR complete, yeah. There wouldn't be much incentive otherwise, since other fighter-types can use GWW later anyway.
Using GWW is usually worse than using Critical Strike + high APR with Improved Haste (for dual-wielders anyway).
Well, that differs from my POV. You can make that argument for a +3 weapon, but enemies with immunity up to +2 are numerous. That extra main-hand swing is only crucial, when your off-hand sucks. It's mitigating a self-imposed problem.
Let's assume case 1, a MH with a non-buff offhand (no +APR, no +STR) OH1; let APR be the base APR (without bonuses from an APR offhand):
Damage1: (MH*(APR-1)+OH1
Case 2, a MH with an APR OH (OH2):
Damage2: (MH*APR)+OH2
Therefore:
OH1-OH2 = MH
In other words, in order for OH1 to be better, it would have to have a damage difference to OH2 equal to a MH swing (unsurprising). This of course can never be the case, as OH1 < MH by definition (otherwise it would *be* the MH).
Note that even when OH2 = 0 (total immunity of enemy), you're still left with OH1 = MH, meaning your alternative offhand would need to at least deal as much damage as your MH per swing to break even - and that's ONLY on enemies that are completely immune, which are not very common (though you do meet them regularly). However, as you will practically never have OH1 = MH in the first place, this is largely a moot point. In all other scenarios, +APR wins.
Note also that this only covers pure damage vs. APR, not accounting for STR bonuses. Those are very complicated due to their non-linear scaling, and require case-by-case analysis.
Well, staying power usually equates into higher damage efficiency, simple. Especially when you are not playing Vanilla.
This is only true in scenarios where the defense actually does anything; specifically, the defense you traded for damage. When is this actually the case? I've played for 10 years on the highest echelons of difficulty, and rarely if ever found that trade to be worth it. It is only with the advent of Hard as Bhaals mode that I have begun to reconsider, but parameters are quite different there and cannot be abstracted to general use easily (my testing is also incomplete). In regular mode however, there is almost always something else you should be doing if defense is a problem, and it is almost never due to trade-off choices. Furthermore, offensive power can actually translate into staying power as well, by removing sources of damage more quickly.
That amounts to very strict set of pre-conditions, with some of them even excluding each other. Iirc, DUHM is restricted to good aligned characters. Could be wrong though.
The innate version, yes. Not the one cast by Paladins (except Inquisitor), or by Fighter/Clerics, or Ranger/Clerics, etc.
Also, given that you have only 6 party members and can potentially give belts to 3 of them (1 either as a belt or in the form of CFae) does not make this very restrictive, I would say. If you can easily cover 50% of the party in 100% of games, that's already quite a bit covered, don't you think? Many people don't even run with more than 3 Fighter-types to begin with.
Why? The STR bonus applies under all conditions. I don't need it in my main-hand for that. Doesn't take away from the fact, that Angurvadal is also a superb choice as a main-hand weapon, if you don't want to skill Katanas, or the generic powergaming choice named FoA.
Not sure what you are saying. Of course you don't need it in your MH, but if you use it there and pair it with a MH, you get both STR bonuses and an extra APR to apply them to. That's much better than having it in the OH with 1 less APR for its bonus to work. Angurvadal may even be the 3rd best MH in the game because of that (after FoA+5 and CFae).
The way I see it, we are talking about exchanging a slight bit of offense(even that depends on the build) for a pretty big chunk of defense.
I'm not sure how save vs. breath bonus and 50% magic damage reduction is a "big chunk of defense", when it applies only to a very small percentage of enemies, and even against them only against a percentage of their attacks. That is what I would call textbook "situational". Nothing wrong with such items, but they can be swapped as needed. STR on the other hand is always useful while you're attacking, which is the vast majority of fights. I'm not sure I can follow the whole "infinitely better" argument when it's applied to certain attacks by a small number of enemies vs. damage against almost everything almost all of the time.
You make it sound as if trading your off-hand for a potentially additional main-hand attack is what seperates a powerhouse from a whimp, which is nonsense.
I could return that argument to sender almost unchanged. Do keep in mind that we are absolutely talking minutiae here. Hardly make or break stuff, considering the vanilla game can be and has been beaten by naked characters. But just because an argument may not be relevant doesn't mean it's wrong (or right). And it may in fact become relevant to people, depending on their setup. The higher the difficulty, the more small differences matter. I don't presume on what people are playing, so I present even the small stuff. It's up to them what they do with that information, I just present it and explain it.
Well you kicked off this discussion by stating "pairing CF with anything but a +1APR weapon is a grave error". And that is simply not true.
The whole damage argument aside, the entire reason to use CF is for its stun. Nothing except APR does anything to improve that, so by definition nothing else can be better.
If you change the premise, that's different; i.e. if you take CF not for the stun but for something else. Which, of course, is also a sub-par choice considering that CF is usually not optimal for most other categories of interest (i.e. mostly damage). It's not impossible of course to choose categories in ways that favor CF (e.g. "coolness" of having a katana) but that's a subjective line of argument in practically all cases.
Note that even when OH2 = 0 (total immunity of enemy), you're still left with OH1 = MH, meaning your alternative offhand would need to at least deal as much damage as your MH per swing to break even - and that's ONLY on enemies that are completely immune, which are not very common (though you do meet them regularly). However, as you will practically never have OH1 = MH in the first place, this is largely a moot point. In all other scenarios, +APR wins.
On top of my head: Adamantite Golems, Greater Mummies, named Vampires, Liches, Glabrezus, Pit Fiends, Balors, Greater Elementals, pretty much every boss in the game. Those you can hit with a +2 weapon usually don't require that extra punch from your no 5APR-without-+APR-off-hand-weapon guy
I'm not sure how save vs. breath bonus and 50% magic damage reduction is a "big chunk of defense", when it applies only to a very small percentage of enemies, and even against them only against a percentage of their attacks. That is what I would call textbook "situational". Nothing wrong with such items, but they can be swapped as needed. STR on the other hand is always useful while you're attacking, which is the vast majority of fights. I'm not sure I can follow the whole "infinitely better" argument when it's applied to certain attacks by a small number of enemies vs. damage against almost everything almost all of the time.
Ever fought a bunch of Beholders without the Shield/Cloak of Cheese? Ever fought a Dragon? Ever fought a big fight with Mages spamming Horrid Wilitings? Ever fought Ascension-Irenicus dropping 3 Comets during a Time Stop at you? Ever had Original Demogorgon cast his Implosions? There you have your *textbook* cases, the situational cases in the situations that actually matter.
If you change the premise, that's different; i.e. if you take CF not for the stun but for something else. Which, of course, is also a sub-par choice considering that CF is usually not optimal for most other categories of interest (i.e. mostly damage). It's not impossible of course to choose categories in ways that favor CF (e.g. "coolness" of having a katana) but that's a subjective line of argument in practically all cases.
I did not change the premise. You just set your own one as given, and started argumenting from there.
On paper, yes. Problem is, that in major battles it gets debuffed pretty quickly, aside from opponents wearing helmets being immune anyway.
You can handle dispels in various ways (positioning, timed buffing, SI, etc.), also the number of enemies that dispel randomly is tiny. Most have it as a scripted trigger at very predictable times (e.g. SCS Dragons have a trigger on engage, easy to block with SI:A). CS will still give automatic hit rolls vs. immune enemies, which is still a big damage bonus especially on dualed Fighters.
On top of my head: Adamantite Golems, Greater Mummies, named Vampires, Liches, Glabrezus, Pit Fiends, Balors, Greater Elementals, pretty much every boss in the game. Those you can hit with a +2 weapon usually don't require that extra punch from your no 5APR-without-+APR-off-hand-weapon guy
Did you even look at the math? Even against completely immune enemies, you are usually behind in damage. How is this difficult to understand, if you lose the OH APR you're still at the same APR (because of +1) except it's all MH - is it not obvious that is inherently better?
Ever fought a bunch of Beholders without the Shield/Cloak of Cheese? Ever fought a Dragon? Ever fought a big fight with Mages spamming Horrid Wilitings? Ever fought Ascension-Irenicus dropping 3 Comets during a Time Stop at you? Ever had Original Demogorgon cast his Implosions? There you have your *textbook* cases, the situational cases in the situations that actually matter.
Perhaps we just disagree on what "situational" means? It means exactly that: you face enemy X you know will use attack Y, you switch your gear. For the rest, you don't. That doesn't magically make the gear you use for that situation "infinitely better". In fact, it's the opposite. It makes it very finitely better, i.e. in that particular situation.
I did not change the premise. You just set your own one as given, and started argumenting from there.
I'm sorry, I sometimes assume things. Like that a discussion about CF is about the stun, because that's what it does. My bad if you meant something else.
Unless you are a paladin you don't really have a choice between Carsomyr and Celestial Fury because 80% to 100% of the game you will not have UAI in order to use Carsomyr....so Celestial Fury it is.
When you do get the option to use UAI it will be at the end of the underdark and you will already have dual wielding maxed out and you can use UAI to wield the Scarlit Nijato in your off hand. That means a +3 speed weapon that poisons targets in your off hand. At this stage you will have all of the components for the Crom Fayer.
At this point the question is not Celestial Fury vs Carsomyr it is Crom Fayer vs Carsomyr if you want the best of the best statistically.
Crom Fayer does 2D4 +3 +5 electrical damage,(wich means 10-16 a round vs Carsomyr at 7-18 fully upgraded.) Crom fayer can be dual wielded, and sets your strength to 25 which increases the to hit and damage of all 10 attacks each round. The electrical damage goes through stoneskins and the poison from your off hand continues to interrupt casting. Also, it kills goloms automatically with one hit. Being that you have two main hand weapon slots you can easily keep Celestial Fury around for backstabbing or replace it with Hindo's Doom or spectral brand.
By using Montolo's Cloak you will have no negative effects with your off hand and a plus 3 enchantment with your weapon. Also with the increased strength from Crom Fayer your offhand will have a higher chance to hit then any other combo in the game including dual wielding two +5 weapons at 9 APR a around. Considering this can be done with a mere two pips in each weapon instead of 5 pips and it has more attacks with more damage it is the way to go. A fighter who can grandmaster will not have UAI which means he cannot use Scarlet Nijato or Montilos clasp.
The reason I keep mentioning Crom Fayer is not because I want people to use it....it's that the question of Celestial Fury vs Carsomyr doesn't make sense for anyone but Paladins. There is no reason to use Celestial Fury in TOB other than RP reasons. It is a great weapon and thanks to dual wielding it can keep up with Carsomyr but dual wielding the axe of unyielding, Foebane, Crom Fayer, ect are all better choices in my opinion.
@Lord_Tansheron: There's a 4th speed weapon, but only in vanilla, not in EE. The Shadow Thief Dagger, which you get as part of Bodhi's second task and can keep by letting the target live, sets your APR to 2. It's slightly better against SCS mages in early rounds since it can break through PFMW, but much worse in most situations because it only does 1d4 damage and doesn't benefit from Strength bonuses. It's the only speed weapon usable by single-classed mages. Helps a lot with Iron Golem form and Time Stop.
No doubt that more APR you have Whith CF more chances you have to stun since every hit a save is rolled. But seems to me that a great part of the debate don't lead to nothing , and it can not lead to something because the premise is to vague. One say about Critical Strike "opponents wearing helmets being immune anyway" and the other "give automatic hit rolls vs. immune enemies, which is still a big damage bonus especially on dualed Fighters" Players that use a lot of duals rate CS in a way, players that, maybe cause don't like the downtime, use seldom dusls and prefer pure fighters or multi rate it different. Also the duals, and the multi, but not the single class, can use SI.A, so can rely better of IH that is the competitor of CS. or "positioning, timed buffing" and "also the number of enemies that dispel randomly is tiny" supposes a level of metagaming that not al the players want to use. Different premises different results.
same for damage calculation, different premises, like modded gauntlets that shift the calculation of APR of 1/2, or the use ofhand of a sword that grant a good strenght against an unspecified bese strenght lead to different results. And the argument of strenght belt against protective belt, that is involved in the calculation (because the inprecised base strenght becomes the girdle strenght) have a different weight if we assume that we use duals o multi, that have other ways to protect themselves, or single class that can not.
Whitout more defined premises no one can win. And even if we don't want to win, a board is not a basttelfield but a place to share and have fun toghether, the sad fact is that everybody loose, those who partecipate, those who read, follow and try to learn from more experienced players and also the board. If after full page of discussion a common agreement can not be found I doubt that will be found after 10 or 100 pages. And this only for premises too vague and indefinite. I wander if MrNooby still follows this topic.........
If after full page of discussion a common agreement can not be found I doubt that will be found after 10 or 100 pages.
You misunderstand the intention. This is not about agreement or consensus, it's about presentation. You present arguments and information and syntheses derived from them. Definitive conclusions are meaningless in a world of wildly different variables. The goal is not to convince anyone of one clear statement, but to present enough viewpoints and information so that they can arrive at their own conclusions, for themselves and based on the criteria and variables they themselves see as the most relevant.
The premises, as you rightly put it, are negotiable. I tend to try and assume the most neutral position, i.e. one that is based in rational action to maximize positive results. That doesn't mean everyone has to do that, or think like that. Gods no. But I find it the most useful baseline for discussion, because without a baseline there *is* no discussion. Everyone can just agree to do whatever they want and they don't have to talk about anything. But that's clearly not why people are here, is it.
Debates are there to enlighten the audience, not the participants.
We couldn't possibly hope to enlighten the participants. Those guys are out of their minds.
lol, I don't know about that. I mean, I can be a stubborn prick sometimes not because I want to be one but because I truly think I am right even when I am not. I have learned a few things from Lord_tansheron, Gotural, and yourself. Some of it through lurking and some of it through arguments.
I like arguments until they go on and on for pages. Then I get tired and need a break. I will say that sometimes I cement my own opinions and other times I learn a thing or two.
I never argue for the sake of arguing but sometimes I am wrong and don't see it until I have argued for a while. Sometimes I agree with one person and then over the course of the argument I can see where the other person is coming from and I feel more neutral about it in the end. Sometimes I am correct and know it and I can see the mental mistakes and stubbornness of the people I am arguing with. It's all part of life.
I do agree with gorgonzola about the game having so many character classes and party builds that it is almost impossible to state that one item is better than another 100% of the time and personal preference does factor in as well. Stats and math are factual though but you can beat this game with anything so personal preference is sometimes more important than anything else.
I find both can deal a lot of damage with one hit and it saves a lot of "oh bugger, missed that NPC getting into difficulties when that big group attacked us"
The point of my previous post was the premises, not a common agreement. If the premises are too vague not only a common agreement can not be found, and I agree that is not so important to find it, but also often the audience can not be enlighted...... The new players get confused instead of learning, because they have not the knowledge of the game to understand how the different points exposed are true under the personal permises of who post them and may be wrong under the premises of who support another thesis, and IMHO the tread tends to become very long and messy, so less enjoiable for every reader.
So when something so much influenced by the premises is dealt is better that common premises are found or at least someone is clear about the premises he uses. A lot of miunderstandings can be avoided and everyone gains.
Comments
You got ?????
Don't spoil me too much but what is wrong in that mod?
Thamks.
Funnily, you can even stun Ascension-Melissan, at least in her last form.
So, I wouldn't downplay this ability at all. As a one-handed blade, the CF is certainly top-tier, especially considering the ability to employ an off-hand weapon with additional terrific feats, like Angurvadal.
It is weird comparison anyway. Carsomyr is a two-handed weapon, and who in all seriousness is going to play a Katana-wielding Paladin ? This like the Pope converting to Buddhism, lol.
A more interesting comparison would be Carsomyr vs the Ravager, for example.
Interesting to know that Mel can be stunned, though, I always just assumed she was immune (and I don't fight her very often during runs where I test stuff out). I think pairing CF with *anything* but a +APR offhand is a grave error. There is nothing better than making an on-hit stun weapon hit more often. If you wanted damage, you'd be using something else in the main hand (and Paladin has prof points to spare for whatever other MH choices).
And there are good reasons to do it.
From a powergaming prospective, and PGmers do a lot of wierd things, weld the heavy DoE in the left hand, even if they are not lefty or don't have an ogre strenght (well, most of the PG characters have huge strenght from stats or items), or bastard swords, that are single welded weapons but hibrid between long swords and 2Hswords, they are at the limit of what you can use single handed and are weird to use 2handed for a problem of dimension even if the welder is strong.
Or equip Mazzy whith a 2hander, let their rogues backstab whith staves, katanas and longswords.
I stop here, but there are another 1000 things that they do, not only which weapon they equip (must say we,I'm a powergamer that also looks at RP, but when I have to choose not always choose RP).
And even from a RP prospective IMHO there is no problem to do it.
Katanas are weapons developed in the far KarTur, but are not AFAIK related to some Divinity and there nothing that prevents paladins from using them if they find them effective. there is nothing like the faith related prohibition that clerics have about slashing weapons.
Sayng that paladins dont't have to use weapons developed in the far east is like sayng that in real world Americans have to use only bows, spears and daggers, but are the only one that can use aiplanes, can you imagine shoting arrows from a B52...........
Or that the Chineese are the only one allowed to use fireguns because they invented the firepowder.
I admit that a paladin welding a katana look strange to us and a 2Hsword is what we associate to the idea of paladin. But this if because in real world Katanas was unknown by paladins, in FR world they are well known and higly rated weapons, check the price of a unenchanted 2Hsword against the price of a plain katana....
And RP wise the fact that a fighter choose the best weapon, related to his tactical role in the battle, makes perfect sense.
As for the Liches, you named it save vs spell 1 does the trick for them. But this is what the Mace of Disruption and Sunrays were invented for.
Well, yeah when talking Paladins, perhaps. A more believable wielder, like a Kensai or any other Fighter however, doesn't need APR crutches, and is hence better off with something like I mentioned.
The only argument I could see is insufficient proficiency points, and the fact that there are no better Katanas in the game. But even a dualed Fighter should have no trouble getting two weapons to Grand Mastery, meaning you can just switch to a higher-damage MH when you don't need the stun.
Note that even for pure damage MHs you are hard-pressed to find a better OH than a +APR one. Crom Faeyr is essentially the only one, and only if you can't pair it with a +APR offhand in the first place. I suppose Angurvadal could work in fringe cases, on characters with very low STR and no belt available to remedy it.
From a pure hit damage perspective, though, it is literally impossible for an offhand weapon to be better than a +APR weapon. It's either +APR, STR bonus, or something defensive (immunity, DoE, etc.) - offhand just for hit damage is always sub-par.
Back to the RP problem. Paladins are trained within their orders. These orders are highly traditional, and will of course refer to the weapons that are widespread and common in Faerun, and have magical specimens enhanced by their gods. Katanas are neither widespread nor common in Faerun(hence the price). And I've never heard of a Katana of Tyr, Helm, Torm, Lathander or Ilmater either.
In addition, with this scarcity comes the scarcity of people who could teach others in the use of these blades(another problem here is of course this being a cRPG where you can just assign PIPs on the fly after a level up without a person to visit who could train you). This is a medival world, not a contemporary one where all kinds of people can book cheap flights to anywhere.
I think you can make up a backstory of a wandering Kara-Tur Armsmaster stopping by a place of scholarship like Candlekeep, and teaching your protagonist the way of the Kensai. But same guy walking into a church, and...yeah suuuuuure.
RP-wise, it's just silly, no matter how you put it.
I'd rather wear something like Angurvadal, bestowing you with 22STR and Negative Plane Protection, thus freeing up your Girdle spot for something cooler like the Girdle of Inertial Barrier, while not flushing your off-hand attack down the toilet, just as an example.
+0.5 Specialization (**)
+0.5 Grand Mastery (*****)
+1 dual wield
-----------------------
= 4 APR
You do not max out APR without a +APR offhand. Nothing is wasted.
Angurvadal isn't usually good enough, except for characters with low STR. Obviously there are scenarios in which you could find yourself with a low STR character and no belt, but those should not be very common given that most fighter-type characters have good STR and there are several belts (as well as STR bonuses for CHARNAME).
Keep in mind that an extra MH swing also includes an extra swing with your bonus STR damage, further increasing the gain.
But the biggest argument is that since you clearly have the choice between Angurvadal and a +APR offhand, you should just USE THOSE TWO TOGETHER. It's the same as Crom Faeyr, where people argue on end for using it over an APR offhand, when really they should be using it WITH one instead. +STR *and* +APR is a perfect synergy.
Of course, if you don't have an APR offhand available in the first place, then it's a moot point; but I think we're assuming you do since we're talking about choice.
You can RP that the paladin was sent in the far east for a mission or a holy quest and there........
I mean you can find a RP reason, mine is only one of the possible explanations, whithout stretching too much. Seems to me that a katana welding pally in one of the most acceptable things RPwise a PWgamer do. But everyone has his personal feelings about RP.
Anyway I never equipped katanas on Keldorn or my pally charname. Because also I am tyed to the image of the paladin whith a 2Hsword or longsword and shield, but I had used Keldorn whith bastard sword and shield that in also disputable RPwise, bastard swords was not used whith shield, are to long and also rely on their lenght and far reach for defense, maybe can be dual welded whith a dagger so if the enemy manage to close the distance...
And if we want really RP the game whe should not level up your mages, how can a beginner mage become an archmage in 100 days? It take a whole life and even so few will reach the goal, the majority will stick to middle levels and never progress further. And the 100 days are spent fighting and trying to survive, that for a fighter is a costant training but mages need to study, a lot, the only ones that can improove from that regimen are the sorcerers due to the special nature of their magic.
@jinxed75
I don't get it.
1APR of everybody + 1 fighter levels +1 GM +1 dual welding= 4APR
ok gauntlets +1/2 so 4 1/2
also you have upgraded Angurvadal only for a fraction of TOB, and only a pair of 1/2APR gauntlets and you have to equip a full party whith maybe 3 o 4 mlee fighting characters that you have to optimize. And you have 2 +1APR weapons plus a 3rd usable by rogues.
Not that what you say is wrong and all depends on the composition of the party and the choices of the player, but to equip a party means to spread the limited resources between all the characters that can benefit of that tipe of resource and also limiting our analisis to TOB the game is not the last 2 battles.
Maybe a mage or a cleric whith little hp can benefit more of the Girdle of Inertial Barrier, but is true that he will have other ways to protect himself (at the cost of having less time to protect the rest of the party or debuff/damage enemies).
Again all depends on party composition and choices.
But seems to me that the way of Lord_Tansheron lead to a better use of limited resources and a most effective party for a longher part of the game at the cost of 1 single character little less effective or maybe even whitout cost at all.
You also seem to forget, that your off-hand APR will be used in 1 out of 5 attacks. That's 20% of your attacks executed with a +2 weapon, which is pretty suboptimal for at least ToB.
Neither Belm(1d8+2) nor Kundane(1d6+2) have something good to offer besides +1APR. No Negative Plane Protection, no STR, no nothing.
Angurvadal(1d8+5 +elemental damage) sets your STR to 22. How many NPCs(or CHARNAMES) do have a STR >18/00(possibly 19 after WK)? Right, zero. There is only 1 Crom Faeyr, and as I already have mentioned, using a STR belt prevents you from using something infinitely better like the Girdle of Inertial Barrier.
So, from my perspective, your potentially higher(I still question even that, see above) damage output comes at the cost of making a LOT of sacrifices.
Everybody has their own preferences, I suppose, but I never bought in to this use Belm/Kundane instead of something proper, and never will.
The gauntlets are real, but you don't have to give them to a maxed-out Fighter. You can give them to someone else in your party and preserve value in overall throughput, in fact it's great to put them on a Fighter9->X dual because they lack the 0.5 APR from lvl 13. Unless you play solo, they are not an argument. In solo play, they are, but solo play changes a whole bunch of things. That's fairly irrelevant. The number of enemies you can't hit are minute, and the slightly lower per-hit damage is more than made up for by the fact you gain an extra main hand swing. If you want to be defensive, that's a whole different debate. But the STR bonus can be calculated and compared to the APR bonus, where it usually falls short (see previous post).
Everyone who:
- is a Half-Orc
- comes from BG1 with STR tome bonus
- uses one of two (three if you don't assemble CFae) STR belts
- has completed the Hell Trials as evil (CHARNAME only)
- has used the Machine of Lum the Mad
- has access to Draw Upon Holy Might
Am I forgetting something? That's quite a lot of bonuses, at least three of which are guaranteed available (2xbelts and Machine).
Now don't get me wrong, it's entirely possible to have scenarios where Angurvadal is a valid choice. The lower the STR the better it is. But even then, you should just use it in the main hand and pair it with a +APR weapon, because the lower the STR the higher up on the list Angurvadal ranks.
But do keep in mind that this is only about a scenario where you have the choice between Angurvadal and +APR in the first place; which is rare. There's only 3 +APR weapons, and one of them essentially requires UAI (Monk can't dual-wield weapons so moot point). Given that everyone can get and use Flail of Ages and Crom Faeyr, and those two weapons are the best to pair with a +APR offhand, you usually just don't even have one free to throw around in the first place. Whether the Girdle of Inertial Barrier is better is HIGHLY debatable (and whether it's "infinitely better" is not a debate at all, just needless hyperbole). Once you start trading offense for defense, the entire value system changes. You can also swap defensive items in only as needed, since you don't always face magical damage you need to protect against, but do always face enemies you need to stomp.
You're right of course that there is always a personal element as to how offensive/defensive you want to be. Which is why I didn't enter into that debate, and stayed purely within one side (+STR vs. +APR). Defensive arguments exist, but since those rely on many different factors, they need to be discussed separately and within a given context (especially once mods/special rules come in).
also "So, from my perspective, your potentially higher(I still question even that, see above) damage output comes at the cost of making a LOT of sacrifices", but I was trying to say the opposite, that whith your build you have a potentially highter damage, or similar if you don't unnerf the gauntlets, but at the cost of don't give the gauntlets to an other tank, maybe 2Hwelder, and a very good sword to a 3rd tank.
I was trying to say that if you give to the Celestial Fury welder just Kundane or Belm is not his dps that benefit but the dps potential of all the party, and since we have only 1 pair of gauntlets and 1 Angurvadal to me seems a better choice.
But I speack a very bad english so maybe I expressed in a wrong way.
And usually I prefer to have 2 more strenght enhencing items and don't upgrade Crom so for my tanks there is a strenght belt more and a pair of strenght gauntlets that make the Angurvadal strenght less important, and I have them from retourning from spellhod, not the last aprt of TOB.
Aniway I repeat myself
"Not that what you say is wrong and all depends on the composition of the party and the choices of the player"
I think my builds are very effective, your builds are very effective and also the ones of Lord_Tansheron or any other experienced player, Which one works the best depends on the style of the player, the composition of the party and also the point of the game.
Some builds are optimized for engame, others for earlygame and others remain powrefull all the game, even if are less extreme at a specific point.
This if you analize the dps of the whole party, or at least of all the figters, the possible parmutations of items and weapons, you factor in the defensive potential of each build and not only the offensive, some bonuses like disrupting or stunning capability and you evalutate it for all the game quantifying for each phase the difficoulty of the encounters you will have against your offensive and defensive potential in that moment......
Not so easy!
Well, that differs from my POV. You can make that argument for a +3 weapon, but enemies with immunity up to +2 are numerous.
That extra main-hand swing is only crucial, when your off-hand sucks. It's mitigating a self-imposed problem.
Well, staying power usually equates into higher damage efficiency, simple. Especially when you are not playing Vanilla.
That amounts to very strict set of pre-conditions, with some of them even excluding each other. Iirc, DUHM is restricted to good aligned characters. Could be wrong though.
Why? The STR bonus applies under all conditions. I don't need it in my main-hand for that.
Doesn't take away from the fact, that Angurvadal is also a superb choice as a main-hand weapon, if you don't want to skill Katanas, or the generic powergaming choice named FoA.
The way I see it, we are talking about exchanging a slight bit of offense(even that depends on the build) for a pretty big chunk of defense.
You make it sound as if trading your off-hand for a potentially additional main-hand attack is what seperates a powerhouse from a whimp, which is nonsense.
Well you kicked off this discussion by stating "pairing CF with anything but a +1APR weapon is a grave error". And that is simply not true.
Damage1: (MH*(APR-1)+OH1
Case 2, a MH with an APR OH (OH2):
Damage2: (MH*APR)+OH2
Therefore:
OH1-OH2 = MH
In other words, in order for OH1 to be better, it would have to have a damage difference to OH2 equal to a MH swing (unsurprising). This of course can never be the case, as OH1 < MH by definition (otherwise it would *be* the MH).
Note that even when OH2 = 0 (total immunity of enemy), you're still left with OH1 = MH, meaning your alternative offhand would need to at least deal as much damage as your MH per swing to break even - and that's ONLY on enemies that are completely immune, which are not very common (though you do meet them regularly). However, as you will practically never have OH1 = MH in the first place, this is largely a moot point. In all other scenarios, +APR wins.
Note also that this only covers pure damage vs. APR, not accounting for STR bonuses. Those are very complicated due to their non-linear scaling, and require case-by-case analysis. This is only true in scenarios where the defense actually does anything; specifically, the defense you traded for damage. When is this actually the case? I've played for 10 years on the highest echelons of difficulty, and rarely if ever found that trade to be worth it. It is only with the advent of Hard as Bhaals mode that I have begun to reconsider, but parameters are quite different there and cannot be abstracted to general use easily (my testing is also incomplete). In regular mode however, there is almost always something else you should be doing if defense is a problem, and it is almost never due to trade-off choices. Furthermore, offensive power can actually translate into staying power as well, by removing sources of damage more quickly. The innate version, yes. Not the one cast by Paladins (except Inquisitor), or by Fighter/Clerics, or Ranger/Clerics, etc.
Also, given that you have only 6 party members and can potentially give belts to 3 of them (1 either as a belt or in the form of CFae) does not make this very restrictive, I would say. If you can easily cover 50% of the party in 100% of games, that's already quite a bit covered, don't you think? Many people don't even run with more than 3 Fighter-types to begin with. Not sure what you are saying. Of course you don't need it in your MH, but if you use it there and pair it with a MH, you get both STR bonuses and an extra APR to apply them to. That's much better than having it in the OH with 1 less APR for its bonus to work. Angurvadal may even be the 3rd best MH in the game because of that (after FoA+5 and CFae). I'm not sure how save vs. breath bonus and 50% magic damage reduction is a "big chunk of defense", when it applies only to a very small percentage of enemies, and even against them only against a percentage of their attacks. That is what I would call textbook "situational". Nothing wrong with such items, but they can be swapped as needed.
STR on the other hand is always useful while you're attacking, which is the vast majority of fights. I'm not sure I can follow the whole "infinitely better" argument when it's applied to certain attacks by a small number of enemies vs. damage against almost everything almost all of the time.
I could return that argument to sender almost unchanged. Do keep in mind that we are absolutely talking minutiae here. Hardly make or break stuff, considering the vanilla game can be and has been beaten by naked characters. But just because an argument may not be relevant doesn't mean it's wrong (or right). And it may in fact become relevant to people, depending on their setup. The higher the difficulty, the more small differences matter. I don't presume on what people are playing, so I present even the small stuff. It's up to them what they do with that information, I just present it and explain it.
The whole damage argument aside, the entire reason to use CF is for its stun. Nothing except APR does anything to improve that, so by definition nothing else can be better.
If you change the premise, that's different; i.e. if you take CF not for the stun but for something else. Which, of course, is also a sub-par choice considering that CF is usually not optimal for most other categories of interest (i.e. mostly damage). It's not impossible of course to choose categories in ways that favor CF (e.g. "coolness" of having a katana) but that's a subjective line of argument in practically all cases.
On top of my head: Adamantite Golems, Greater Mummies, named Vampires, Liches, Glabrezus, Pit Fiends, Balors, Greater Elementals, pretty much every boss in the game.
Those you can hit with a +2 weapon usually don't require that extra punch from your no 5APR-without-+APR-off-hand-weapon guy
Ever fought a bunch of Beholders without the Shield/Cloak of Cheese? Ever fought a Dragon? Ever fought a big fight with Mages spamming Horrid Wilitings? Ever fought Ascension-Irenicus dropping 3 Comets during a Time Stop at you? Ever had Original Demogorgon cast his Implosions?
There you have your *textbook* cases, the situational cases in the situations that actually matter.
I did not change the premise. You just set your own one as given, and started argumenting from there.
CS will still give automatic hit rolls vs. immune enemies, which is still a big damage bonus especially on dualed Fighters. Did you even look at the math? Even against completely immune enemies, you are usually behind in damage. How is this difficult to understand, if you lose the OH APR you're still at the same APR (because of +1) except it's all MH - is it not obvious that is inherently better? Perhaps we just disagree on what "situational" means? It means exactly that: you face enemy X you know will use attack Y, you switch your gear. For the rest, you don't. That doesn't magically make the gear you use for that situation "infinitely better". In fact, it's the opposite. It makes it very finitely better, i.e. in that particular situation. I'm sorry, I sometimes assume things. Like that a discussion about CF is about the stun, because that's what it does. My bad if you meant something else.
When you do get the option to use UAI it will be at the end of the underdark and you will already have dual wielding maxed out and you can use UAI to wield the Scarlit Nijato in your off hand. That means a +3 speed weapon that poisons targets in your off hand. At this stage you will have all of the components for the Crom Fayer.
At this point the question is not Celestial Fury vs Carsomyr it is Crom Fayer vs Carsomyr if you want the best of the best statistically.
Crom Fayer does 2D4 +3 +5 electrical damage,(wich means 10-16 a round vs Carsomyr at 7-18 fully upgraded.) Crom fayer can be dual wielded, and sets your strength to 25 which increases the to hit and damage of all 10 attacks each round. The electrical damage goes through stoneskins and the poison from your off hand continues to interrupt casting. Also, it kills goloms automatically with one hit. Being that you have two main hand weapon slots you can easily keep Celestial Fury around for backstabbing or replace it with Hindo's Doom or spectral brand.
By using Montolo's Cloak you will have no negative effects with your off hand and a plus 3 enchantment with your weapon. Also with the increased strength from Crom Fayer your offhand will have a higher chance to hit then any other combo in the game including dual wielding two +5 weapons at 9 APR a around. Considering this can be done with a mere two pips in each weapon instead of 5 pips and it has more attacks with more damage it is the way to go. A fighter who can grandmaster will not have UAI which means he cannot use Scarlet Nijato or Montilos clasp.
The reason I keep mentioning Crom Fayer is not because I want people to use it....it's that the question of Celestial Fury vs Carsomyr doesn't make sense for anyone but Paladins. There is no reason to use Celestial Fury in TOB other than RP reasons. It is a great weapon and thanks to dual wielding it can keep up with Carsomyr but dual wielding the axe of unyielding, Foebane, Crom Fayer, ect are all better choices in my opinion.
But seems to me that a great part of the debate don't lead to nothing , and it can not lead to something because the premise is to vague.
One say about Critical Strike "opponents wearing helmets being immune anyway"
and the other "give automatic hit rolls vs. immune enemies, which is still a big damage bonus especially on dualed Fighters"
Players that use a lot of duals rate CS in a way, players that, maybe cause don't like the downtime, use seldom dusls and prefer pure fighters or multi rate it different.
Also the duals, and the multi, but not the single class, can use SI.A, so can rely better of IH that is the competitor of CS.
or "positioning, timed buffing" and "also the number of enemies that dispel randomly is tiny" supposes a level of metagaming that not al the players want to use.
Different premises different results.
same for damage calculation, different premises, like modded gauntlets that shift the calculation of APR of 1/2, or the use ofhand of a sword that grant a good strenght against an unspecified bese strenght lead to different results. And the argument of strenght belt against protective belt, that is involved in the calculation (because the inprecised base strenght becomes the girdle strenght) have a different weight if we assume that we use duals o multi, that have other ways to protect themselves, or single class that can not.
Whitout more defined premises no one can win. And even if we don't want to win, a board is not a basttelfield but a place to share and have fun toghether, the sad fact is that everybody loose, those who partecipate, those who read, follow and try to learn from more experienced players and also the board.
If after full page of discussion a common agreement can not be found I doubt that will be found after 10 or 100 pages.
And this only for premises too vague and indefinite.
I wander if MrNooby still follows this topic.........
The premises, as you rightly put it, are negotiable. I tend to try and assume the most neutral position, i.e. one that is based in rational action to maximize positive results. That doesn't mean everyone has to do that, or think like that. Gods no. But I find it the most useful baseline for discussion, because without a baseline there *is* no discussion. Everyone can just agree to do whatever they want and they don't have to talk about anything. But that's clearly not why people are here, is it.
We couldn't possibly hope to enlighten the participants. Those guys are out of their minds.
I like arguments until they go on and on for pages. Then I get tired and need a break. I will say that sometimes I cement my own opinions and other times I learn a thing or two.
I never argue for the sake of arguing but sometimes I am wrong and don't see it until I have argued for a while. Sometimes I agree with one person and then over the course of the argument I can see where the other person is coming from and I feel more neutral about it in the end. Sometimes I am correct and know it and I can see the mental mistakes and stubbornness of the people I am arguing with. It's all part of life.
I do agree with gorgonzola about the game having so many character classes and party builds that it is almost impossible to state that one item is better than another 100% of the time and personal preference does factor in as well. Stats and math are factual though but you can beat this game with anything so personal preference is sometimes more important than anything else.
Also fire giants.
I find both can deal a lot of damage with one hit and it saves a lot of "oh bugger, missed that NPC getting into difficulties when that big group attacked us"
Just wanted to correct the earlier post.
The point of my previous post was the premises, not a common agreement.
If the premises are too vague not only a common agreement can not be found, and I agree that is not so important to find it, but also often the audience can not be enlighted......
The new players get confused instead of learning, because they have not the knowledge of the game to understand how the different points exposed are true under the personal permises of who post them and may be wrong under the premises of who support another thesis, and IMHO the tread tends to become very long and messy, so less enjoiable for every reader.
So when something so much influenced by the premises is dealt is better that common premises are found or at least someone is clear about the premises he uses. A lot of miunderstandings can be avoided and everyone gains.