Re: (no subject)

[Jevan Furmanski <furmansj@expert.cc.purdue.edu>]

On Mon, 2 Nov 1998 Flightgod5@aol.com wrote:

> If anyone was thinking that being a priest of tor would make them a lean
> mean killing machine, then I would say "read the manual."
> 
> Always_  it is more effective to just be a warrion than to be a priest of
> tor.  With 4 groups at base 600, I would rather have one at 300 or 360.  I
> think some people were concerned with roleplaying, and not power-gaming.
> 
> < Not necessarily.  A Priest of T'or will beat a warrior of equal or sometimes
> greater rating in single combat due to some of the heinous drills like mayhem,
> avoidance, and disarm.

So, if they are equal ratings, the warrior has more DP wince he has to
spend less to be a killer.

The priest has to make his drill check in order to even pull anything off
that round.  the % chance for a mayhem is about 40, and I wouldn't take
those.  Then, what are the chances of anything better than x3?  The
warrior is guaranteed three attacks basically.  

Same story with avoidance...  just another % change for the combat. 

The warrior will win hands down, unless the priest gets lucky and a
sucessful mayhem gives an instant crit.

Jevan

> 
> Joel
> 
> I believe that from the beginning priests of Tor were suposed to be
> martial artists  and not strict priests.  Their abilities came in the form
> of spiritual enlightenment and not spell units and spells.  How many times
> do you remember the reply to the question for punching and kicking (as
> well as defensive and grappling) skills  "no, martial arts are for the
> priests of Tor."  If no one else remembers these times without wrestling
> skill and punching and kicking skill, they might remember the rationale
> behind Dan's hesitance to introduce them.
> 
> Jevan
> 
>