User talk:Erasculio/Ritualist

I dunno how much you know about WoW, but I've always drawn comparisons between Rits and Shamans. Rits can heal (restoration magic), deal damage at ranged (channeling) and deal damage in melee (spirit's strength). Shamans are the same - resto, elemental and enhancement. Rits can summon spirits to do beneficial tasks like absorb damage for party members, heal party members, and deal damage to enemies. Shamans lay totems down to absorb damage, heal party members, and deal damage to enemies. Shamans recently got an ability that allows them to lay down their four chosen totems at once - ritualists recently got Signet of Spirits, which does basically the same thing.
The only difference is, as you've mentioned, the poor design choices made by ANet. Spirits were never very well designed, either being too hard to kill (i.e., you sit there and attack it for ages to kill it) or too easy (drop a AoE nuke and clear entire groups). Spirits should have been immune to AoE damage like totems and had their HP reduced to a pitiful amount - it would prevent them dying to random fire ele bullshit while making them susceptible to an alert frontline that is making an attempt to pick them off. Ritualists should also have some sort of self-preservation built into Spirit's Strength. Shamans in WoW have mail armor, which is pretty hardcore stuff for a "caster" - Spirit's Strength rits have to go into battle with 60 AL and they just cannot survive anything that way. Spirit's Strength increasing overall armor to 70 on each piece in addition to the current effect would go a long way to making melee rits less flimsy without increasing the damage of the skill (which, IMO, is decently balanced already).
Just my two cents. -Auron 13:45, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Nice, I don't know much about WoW, so it's interesting to learn about Shamans. I'm a bit curious about how balanced Shamans are; with players in groups (at least in GW) tending to focus on specialized roles (in other words, why take two ritualist hybrids instead of an elementalist and a monk), are Shamans a popular profession in WoW? If they are (popular enough to be accepted in groups, at least), Blizzard must have done an amazing job in balancing a "jack of all trades" profession. Erasculio 13:58, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Interesting you should ask... according to most polls and Blizzard's info last I checked, shamans are actually the least played class (at 80). I think there are a few reasons for this. Firstly, they're a hard class to grasp conceptually. Compare it to a warrior (run up to something, hit it with your axe, it dies) or a mage (stand far away from something, hit it with your spells, it dies) shamans have many more mechanics to master before you can play the class well. Originally, they were more of a jack of all trades - an elemental shaman was expected to assist in healing if needed, and if not, he could focus on damage. Nowadays, the "talent spec" is more narrow - ele shamans stick to damage, resto shamans stick to healing, and they very rarely do the other's job.

The class is very well balanced. Certain totems are very powerful in PvP (particularly this one), but they aren't game-breaking because totems can be destroyed by attentive attackers. Enhancement shamans (the melee guys) run in with two maces (buffed with a passive damage ability, quite like SS) and deal damage on par with most other classes.

The ranged attacking shamans use lightning bolt spam mixed with a few damage over time spells to dish out single target damage, and they have a chain lightning spell that's great for aoe. This spec is actually a bit weaker than the hardest-hitting DPS classes (like Mage or Hunter), but it's enough to pull its weight in a raid.

The healing is... unique, to say the least. It has a few heal over time spells, a particularly potent chain heal spell (which does exactly what it sounds like - bounces a heal spell from ally to ally), and a really neat Healing Hands ability, which is great for a single target taking heavy fire.

On top of all of these specific spells are the totems I mentioned - you can have up to 4, one from each "element" (earth, fire, etc), and each element has a handful to choose from. Shamans basically pick totems that complement their role - a healing shaman will want totems that restore mana, protect teammates, etc. A melee shaman would prefer a pbaoe damage totem over a healing one, and a IAS totem over a caster one. Basically, this is what I wanted ANet to do with signet of spirits - you're able to choose the three spirits you lay down based on your role. Dissonance, Shadowsong and Pain would be nice for damage rits, while Union/Shelter/Displacement would be preferred by the backline types. For a melee rit (which I think is a really cool idea, just like you) a unique combination like Displacement, Shadowsong and Union might be the best choice.

Either way, the main difference between totems and spirits is the power of the skills. Spirits take up a slot on your bar, so they have to be powerful enough to be worth it, whereas totems are just a standard addition to your normal spell rotation. I'm not sure what ANet can do to fix this, if anything, but making a single skill slot like Signet of Spirits that lets you pick the spirits you place will go a long way toward making spirits the fast and mobile buff-station that are totems in wow. -Auron 14:29, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

That's good to know. It's nice to see that variety (more than one profession under similar roles) is actually possible in MMORPGs; that's something Arena Net has not managed to do often in GW. Thanks for the information : ) Erasculio 14:41, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

I like the idea of having a sidebar like WoW has now for the Shaman to customize their totem for drop to be used by Rts in GW, and take up one of the 8 skill slots. The only problems are the potential of being overpowered, even with the reduced hp/non-effected by aoe changes. The overpower comes from opening two extra slots, and reducing the amount of energy and time it would take to cast your favorite spirit trio.

This article isn't about Shamans, but I have to make some additions. I have to argue about the reason they are the least played main...they were introduced in BC on the alliance side and didn't come out like the DKs did at a high level. By the time they came, most players on the Alliance side didn't want to switch their mains due to whatever reason, but I can't think of one person that doesn't have a Shaman alt they play when they could. Also, you have to level them from 1 to 80 leaving you behind the rest, especially if you don't have time to level up/gear a replacement and spend the time prepping for raiding and participating with your main. Grasping the multiple ways to play the class isn't hard, especially for those already used to it, Druids and Paladins (two of the most played classes due to their versatility (melee, ranged, and healing)) and to some extent, Priests (holy/disc for healing or shadow for damage).

Auron, I'd have to disagree with your ranged dps assessment somewhat. If an ele is geared, spec'd right, and know their rotation, their dps and damage output can dwarf hunters and arcane or fire mages. There's was just so few due to no real ele stats on caster mail gear. It didn't help that healadins dipped into their limited gear to get Spell crit instead of Mp5.

Enhancement shamans have great burst damage, especially when WF procs. When they rebuffed ret pally's for PvE and took away some of our ceiling, Enhancement shamans in the guild always gave me a for my money. In PvP, since both rely on burst damage, it's quite fun to go one on one.

For heals, yes, they do have the awesomeness that is chain heal and some decent single target heals. But when it comes to healer classes, each brings their specialty to the table. Paladins are the best at single target, priests are jack-of-all-trades, druids have best hots, and shamans for chain heal.

I left after farming ToC 10/25 was no fun and before Ice Crown Citadel, so I doubt any of this information has changed.

Despite my tangent, WoW's direction with their classes and unique skills make for some very fun play, though not challenging at times (face-rolling). GW had a great idea when it began, but it kind of escalated into a big glob of mess. Nothing can help GW now as it is pretty much dead, but maybe ANet will realize their faults, correct them, and we might see fun things like a Shaman totem bar for a class in GW2. — Gares 18:48, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Arcane mages are actually at the top of the charts atm (check Ensidia's charts), and I haven't met a single ele shaman that has out dps'd my hunter :p -Auron 10:26, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

The very bottom of the page

Both rits shouldn't use Vampirism, since only one can be active in the team. elix Omni 00:17, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I know. I wanted to do the math taking each ritualist individually, which is why both have Painful Bond. I have also left both with Vampirism since I can't decide what to do in a team build. I'm thinking of using this combination with a Ritualist hero (I don't expect such coordination when playing with people), and I can't decide which build to run myself, and which one to use for the hero. The Channeling build is far simpler and has spirits with lower recharge/duration ratio, so it would be easier for the hero, but then it would lose Vampirism and there isn't any other offensive spirit in Channeling to replace it. The Communing build would be more complex for a hero, and the lack of Summoning Spirits would have a bigger impact, but there are multiple spirits to replace Vampirism, and Signet of Ghostly Might has a weaker impact on that spirit anyway. Then again, the remaining offensive Communing spirits have a high energy cost, adding to a build which is already too energy-intensive.

I haven't decided yet; when I do, I'll update this page and remove Vampirism from one of the two builds. Erasculio 01:30, 26 January 2010 (UTC)