Fighter - Revision history

Admin: /* Which Class to Use? */

2026-03-02T20:15:09Z

Which Class to Use?

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:15, 3 March 2026
Line 178:		Line 178:
	It seems like some fighters are really more based in boosting up all the usual character metrics, this is usually gear-based character improvement, and they'll end up with really high metrics - things like HP/AC/DR/etc. Those classes also tend to not have a lot of super useful skills/spells. A Paladin is (to me) the king of those - he'll wear gear that gives him super high HP and AC, decent DR, and its easy to max a lot of their stats, buttttt they get very little 'gameplay' mechanics, their alpha attack requires them to tank, they get no combat gimmick stuff, and they lack a lot of 'basic' navigation and survival stuff. They do get some buffs/cures, but not a ton. They're 90% gear and 10% skills/spells.		It seems like some fighters are really more based in boosting up all the usual character metrics, this is usually gear-based character improvement, and they'll end up with really high metrics - things like HP/AC/DR/etc. Those classes also tend to not have a lot of super useful skills/spells. A Paladin is (to me) the king of those - he'll wear gear that gives him super high HP and AC, decent DR, and its easy to max a lot of their stats, buttttt they get very little 'gameplay' mechanics, their alpha attack requires them to tank, they get no combat gimmick stuff, and they lack a lot of 'basic' navigation and survival stuff. They do get some buffs/cures, but not a ton. They're 90% gear and 10% skills/spells.

	Conversely, a Ranger exists on the other end of the spectrum. A ranger is going to come out and wear gear that really isn't that great, the difference between a shittily dressed ranger and a really well dressed ranger isn't actually that huge in terms of HP/AC/etc. Their strength comes more from the gameplay elements - they are more versatile and more self-reliant. They can navigate around with skills really well, they can create springs and fires and get useful buff spells and cures, their attack hits most things, they can act as rescue tanks, and they get the 'missile weapons' gimmick. You get a lot of gameplay, and can have a more diverse experience with them exploring, fighting as a hitter, or as a tank, or rescuer, or whatever you wanna do - but they also just aren't that "strong" in terms of hard metrics. They're like 85% skills and 15% gear based.		Conversely, a Ranger exists on the other end of the spectrum. A ranger is going to come out and wear gear that really isn't that great, the difference between a shittily dressed ranger and a really well dressed ranger isn't actually that huge in terms of HP/AC/etc. Their strength comes more from the gameplay elements - they are more versatile and more self-reliant. They can navigate around with skills really well, they can create springs and fires and get useful buff spells and cures, their attack hits most things, they can act as rescue tanks, and they get the 'missile weapons' gimmick. You get a lot of gameplay, and can have a more diverse experience with them exploring, fighting as a hitter, or as a tank, or rescuer, or whatever you wanna do - but they also just aren't that "strong" in terms of hard metrics. They're like 90% skills/spells and 10% gear based.

	That said, of course this isn't REALLY true, each class is just its own thing. Sometimes I go out to fetch something with my Ranger cuz he seems more apt for that, but then maybe there's a fight that's kinda hard for him so I run in a Pally and just let him do the dirty work. But sometimes maybe my Pally is getting beat to shit and its actually better to use the Ranger for the higher dex, cure blind, gash hitting when other weapons don't, etc. So take this all with a grain of salt I'm kinda just trying to outline that the variation in fighters tends to be that slope between "you're a big ol meat shield heavy hitter" and "you can actually do some stuff, and maybe hit less hard" and to each his own on where and when to use which class. In MOST cases, anything will work, but in terms of what you think is fun gameplay, this is something I thought newbs might want to have a bit of sight upon as they decide what characters to make first.		That said, of course this isn't REALLY true, each class is just its own thing. Sometimes I go out to fetch something with my Ranger cuz he seems more apt for that, but then maybe there's a fight that's kinda hard for him so I run in a Pally and just let him do the dirty work. But sometimes maybe my Pally is getting beat to shit and its actually better to use the Ranger for the higher dex, cure blind, gash hitting when other weapons don't, etc. So take this all with a grain of salt I'm kinda just trying to outline that the variation in fighters tends to be that slope between "you're a big ol meat shield heavy hitter" and "you can actually do some stuff, and maybe hit less hard" and to each his own on where and when to use which class. In MOST cases, anything will work, but in terms of what you think is fun gameplay, this is something I thought newbs might want to have a bit of sight upon as they decide what characters to make first.

Admin: /* Which Class to Use? */

2026-03-02T20:12:32Z

Which Class to Use?

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:12, 3 March 2026
Line 149:		Line 149:

	*'''Stat Differences:'''		*'''Stat Differences:'''
	**Warriors/Rangers get higher dex. That can held avoid melee damage, quaff more efficiently, etc. =		**Warriors/Rangers get higher dex. That can held avoid melee damage, quaff more efficiently, etc.
	*'''Passive Combat Skill Differences:'''		*'''Passive Combat Skill Differences:'''
	**Rangers don't get 5th attack, and have a lower Enhanced Damage and Grip amounts. Less melee, less damage, more disarms.		**Rangers don't get 5th attack, and have a lower Enhanced Damage and Grip amounts. Less melee, less damage, more disarms.

Admin: /* Which Class to Use? */

2026-03-02T20:12:14Z

Which Class to Use?

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:12, 3 March 2026
Line 149:		Line 149:

	*'''Stat Differences:'''		*'''Stat Differences:'''
	**Warriors/Rangers get higher dex. That can held avoid melee damage, quaff more efficiently, etc.		**Warriors/Rangers get higher dex. That can held avoid melee damage, quaff more efficiently, etc. =
	*'''Passive Combat Skill Differences:'''		*'''Passive Combat Skill Differences:'''
	**Rangers don't get 5th attack, and have a lower Enhanced Damage and Grip amounts. Less melee, less damage, more disarms.		**Rangers don't get 5th attack, and have a lower Enhanced Damage and Grip amounts. Less melee, less damage, more disarms.
			**Rangers have the highest 'rescue' adeptness
			**Barbs have the best adept percentages of all the passive skills listed above.
	*'''General Differences:'''		*'''General Differences:'''
	**Barbs cannot style down below Standard, so make sure you can take the heat at Standard or greater!		**Barbs cannot style down below Standard, so make sure you can take the heat at Standard or greater!
Line 166:		Line 168:
	**Rangers get a lot of 'survival' based skills/spells, and some buffs. More magical conveniences.		**Rangers get a lot of 'survival' based skills/spells, and some buffs. More magical conveniences.
	**Warriors & Rangers get a lot more navigation based skills than Pally/Barb.		**Warriors & Rangers get a lot more navigation based skills than Pally/Barb.
	**Pally's ~~get some nice buffs, cures, and~~ have ~~high~~ HP and AC, but ~~are limited~~ in ~~ability otherwise~~.		**Pally's will have huge HP and AC, get some nice spells, but overall the meat of the character is in its hp/gear build, and not skills/spells.
	**Barbs not wielding a weapon will cause you to eat more melee		**Barbs not wielding a weapon will cause you to eat more melee


			*'''Dyr's Hot Take:'''

			One way to think about fighters is existing along a spectrum where one extreme I will call "high metrics" and the other is "high gameplay", but lemme explain what I mean by that more clearly. It's just my own way of looking at things, and I'm sure someone will read this and say I'm a dumbass, but i'm sure they've already said that multiple times by the time they've read to this point on my site so why not reinforce their opinions more:

			It seems like some fighters are really more based in boosting up all the usual character metrics, this is usually gear-based character improvement, and they'll end up with really high metrics - things like HP/AC/DR/etc. Those classes also tend to not have a lot of super useful skills/spells. A Paladin is (to me) the king of those - he'll wear gear that gives him super high HP and AC, decent DR, and its easy to max a lot of their stats, buttttt they get very little 'gameplay' mechanics, their alpha attack requires them to tank, they get no combat gimmick stuff, and they lack a lot of 'basic' navigation and survival stuff. They do get some buffs/cures, but not a ton. They're 90% gear and 10% skills/spells.

			Conversely, a Ranger exists on the other end of the spectrum. A ranger is going to come out and wear gear that really isn't that great, the difference between a shittily dressed ranger and a really well dressed ranger isn't actually that huge in terms of HP/AC/etc. Their strength comes more from the gameplay elements - they are more versatile and more self-reliant. They can navigate around with skills really well, they can create springs and fires and get useful buff spells and cures, their attack hits most things, they can act as rescue tanks, and they get the 'missile weapons' gimmick. You get a lot of gameplay, and can have a more diverse experience with them exploring, fighting as a hitter, or as a tank, or rescuer, or whatever you wanna do - but they also just aren't that "strong" in terms of hard metrics. They're like 85% skills and 15% gear based.

			That said, of course this isn't REALLY true, each class is just its own thing. Sometimes I go out to fetch something with my Ranger cuz he seems more apt for that, but then maybe there's a fight that's kinda hard for him so I run in a Pally and just let him do the dirty work. But sometimes maybe my Pally is getting beat to shit and its actually better to use the Ranger for the higher dex, cure blind, gash hitting when other weapons don't, etc. So take this all with a grain of salt I'm kinda just trying to outline that the variation in fighters tends to be that slope between "you're a big ol meat shield heavy hitter" and "you can actually do some stuff, and maybe hit less hard" and to each his own on where and when to use which class. In MOST cases, anything will work, but in terms of what you think is fun gameplay, this is something I thought newbs might want to have a bit of sight upon as they decide what characters to make first.

			To me, that spectrum would go (from gear based to skill based): Paladin, Warrior, Barbarian, Ranger

			Just an idea anyway, use whatever you think is fun!

Admin: /* Which Class to Use? */

2026-03-02T19:46:35Z

Which Class to Use?

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:46, 3 March 2026
Line 141:		Line 141:
	=Which Class to Use?=		=Which Class to Use?=

	~~This day in age, things are mostly equivalant and you can use whatever you want. I wouldn't put too much stress onto this.~~

	If a mob has a certain prog/limitation, then that will obviously dictate what you use. Otherwise... ~~try~~ whatever.
			If a mob has a certain prog/limitation, then that will obviously dictate what you use. Otherwise... these days things are mostly equivalent and you can use whatever you want. I wouldn't put too much stress onto this unless the mob has a specific prog or you have one char that is far better eq'd than others.

	Some general things of note between fighter classes:		Some general things of note between fighter classes:

Admin at 19:45, 2 March 2026

2026-03-02T19:45:44Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:45, 3 March 2026
Line 136:		Line 136:
	\|\|\|heal 8hp x 13rds\|\|\|\|		\|\|\|heal 8hp x 13rds\|\|\|\|
	\|}		\|}



			=Which Class to Use?=

			This day in age, things are mostly equivalant and you can use whatever you want. I wouldn't put too much stress onto this.

			If a mob has a certain prog/limitation, then that will obviously dictate what you use. Otherwise... try whatever.

			Some general things of note between fighter classes:


			*'''Stat Differences:'''
			**Warriors/Rangers get higher dex. That can held avoid melee damage, quaff more efficiently, etc.
			*'''Passive Combat Skill Differences:'''
			**Rangers don't get 5th attack, and have a lower Enhanced Damage and Grip amounts. Less melee, less damage, more disarms.
			*'''General Differences:'''
			**Barbs cannot style down below Standard, so make sure you can take the heat at Standard or greater!
			**Paladins must be tanking in order to shieldbash, mobs that switch tanks can be a problem.
			**Paladins suck at navigation, no track/scan - make sure you know the way to the mob!
			*'''Gear Differences:'''
			**Mobs that require certain weapon types will dictate what class you may want to use
			***Ranger's gash skill will evade most mobs that require magic/nonmagic weapon damage, since gash is neither.
			***Barbs typically don't wield weapons, so negate a frequently disarming mob or mob that requires magic/nonmagic weapons.
			**Smash Arms (warrior) make a huge difference, without them you're kinda meh
			**Hunter prestige make a huge difference to gash damage, as a regular Ranger you're kinda meh
			**Crufifier's make a large impact to gash mana cost, without them you'll have to stock more mana's, less heals.
			*'''Gameplay Differences:'''
			**Rangers get a lot of 'survival' based skills/spells, and some buffs. More magical conveniences.
			**Warriors & Rangers get a lot more navigation based skills than Pally/Barb.
			**Pally's get some nice buffs, cures, and have high HP and AC, but are limited in ability otherwise.
			**Barbs not wielding a weapon will cause you to eat more melee

Admin at 05:59, 24 January 2026

2026-01-24T05:59:28Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:59, 24 January 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	=Fighter Classes=		=Fighter Classes=
	*Warrior		*[[Warrior]]
	*Ranger		*[[Ranger]]
	*Paladin		*[[Paladin]]
	*Barbarian		*[[Barbarian]]

	=Stat Comparison=		=Stat Comparison=
Line 18:		Line 18:
	!Lck		!Lck
	\|-		\|-
	\|Warrior\|\|25\|\|18\|\|20\|\|22\|\|20\|\|20\|\|20		\|[[Warrior]]\|\|25\|\|18\|\|20\|\|22\|\|20\|\|20\|\|20
	\|-		\|-
	\|Ranger\|\|25\|\|20\|\|22\|\|22\|\|20\|\|18\|\|20		\|[[Ranger]]\|\|25\|\|20\|\|22\|\|22\|\|20\|\|18\|\|20
	\|-		\|-
	\|Paladin\|\|25\|\|18\|\|22\|\|20\|\|20\|\|20\|\|20		\|[[Paladin]]\|\|25\|\|18\|\|22\|\|20\|\|20\|\|20\|\|20
	\|-		\|-
	\|Barbarian\|\|25\|\|18\|\|20\|\|20\|\|22\|\|20\|\|20		\|[[Barbarian]]\|\|25\|\|18\|\|20\|\|20\|\|22\|\|20\|\|20
	\|}		\|}

Line 45:		Line 45:
	!Disarm		!Disarm
	\|-		\|-
	\|Warrior\|\|Bludgeons, Long Blades, Pugilism\|\|95\|\|95\|\|90\|\|85\|\|95\|\|70\|\|85\|\|90\|\|80\|\|85		\|[[Warrior]]\|\|Bludgeons, Long Blades, Pugilism\|\|95\|\|95\|\|90\|\|85\|\|95\|\|70\|\|85\|\|90\|\|80\|\|85
	\|-		\|-
	\|Ranger\|\|Talonous Arms, (Missile Weapons)\|\|95\|\|90\|\|70\|\|-\|\|75\|\|85\|\|90\|\|75\|\|95\|\|90		\|[[Ranger]]\|\|Talonous Arms, (Missile Weapons)\|\|95\|\|90\|\|70\|\|-\|\|75\|\|85\|\|90\|\|75\|\|95\|\|90
	\|-		\|-
	\|Paladin\|\|Bludgeons, Long Blades, Polearms\|\|95\|\|90\|\|75\|\|49\|\|90\|\|75\|\|90\|\|95\|\|80\|\|-		\|[[Paladin]]\|\|Bludgeons, Long Blades, Polearms\|\|95\|\|90\|\|75\|\|49\|\|90\|\|75\|\|90\|\|95\|\|80\|\|-
	\|-		\|-
	\|Barbarian\|\|Bludgeons, Long Blades, (Bare Handed)\|\|95\|\|95\|\|95\|\|85\|\|95\|\|80\|\|85\|\|95\|\|80\|\|95		\|[[Barbarian]]\|\|Bludgeons, Long Blades, (Bare Handed)\|\|95\|\|95\|\|95\|\|85\|\|95\|\|80\|\|85\|\|95\|\|80\|\|95
	\|}		\|}

Line 65:		Line 65:
	!Berserk		!Berserk
	\|-		\|-
	\|Warrior\|\|95\|\|95\|\|95\|\|95\|\|95		\|[[Warrior]]\|\|95\|\|95\|\|95\|\|95\|\|95
	\|-		\|-
	\|Ranger\|\|60\|\|70\|\|90\|\|90\|\|55		\|[[Ranger]]\|\|60\|\|70\|\|90\|\|90\|\|55
	\|-		\|-
	\|Paladin\|\|70\|\|70\|\|95\|\|95\|\|40		\|[[Paladin]]\|\|70\|\|70\|\|95\|\|95\|\|40
	\|-		\|-
	\|Barbarian\|\|-\|\|-\|\|95\|\|95\|\|95		\|[[Barbarian]]\|\|-\|\|-\|\|95\|\|95\|\|95
	\|}		\|}

Admin: /* Combat Comparison */

2026-01-24T05:56:30Z

Combat Comparison

@@ Line 52: / Line 52: @@
 |-
 |Barbarian||Bludgeons, Long Blades, (Bare Handed)||95||95||95||85||95||80||85||95||80||95
 |}

Admin: /* Combat Comparison */

2026-01-24T05:53:35Z

Combat Comparison

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:53, 24 January 2026
Line 38:		Line 38:
	!4th Atk		!4th Atk
	!5th Atk		!5th Atk
	!~~Enhanced Damage~~		!Enhance Dmg
	!Dodge		!Dodge
	!Parry		!Parry

Admin: /* Utility Comparison */

2026-01-23T04:25:24Z

Utility Comparison

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:25, 23 January 2026
Line 64:		Line 64:
	After those, each column just lists utilities of that class, without respect to the other classes/columns.		After those, each column just lists utilities of that class, without respect to the other classes/columns.

	I have also replaced "thematic names" with functional names here for clarity. (Paladin's "expurgation" is 'cure poison')		I have also replaced "thematic names" with functional names here for clarity. (For example, I've listed Paladin's "expurgation" as 'cure poison')

Admin: /* Utility Comparison */

2026-01-22T22:45:45Z

Utility Comparison

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:45, 23 January 2026
Line 57:		Line 57:
	What is a "utility" spell/skill?		What is a "utility" spell/skill?
	*Functional - 'does something'		*Functional - 'does something'
	*Not a buff/debuff -- does not result in an affect being applied		*Not a buff/debuff -- does not result in an affect being applied to player or mob
	*Not an attack or a passive combat skill		*Not an attack or a passive combat skill