Blundering's effect should be replaced from the dexterity reduction to reduce basically all the modifiers of the weapon it is applied to by 20%. By modifiers, I mean the attack modifier, stat modifiers (if any), cost modifiers, durability modifiers, and so on.

Why?

Blundering only inhibits the direct use of a weapon to attack with, but it serves to make expensive weapons such as Moon Staves, Bladed Tonfas, and such to still give the user massive stat boosts at a noticeably reduced cost. Pertaining to the examples listed, Ninja and Wizards have virtually no penalty from using Blundering, despite it being supposed to inhibit a weapon. With Blundering affecting all aspects of a weapon, things can potentially be much less skewed in the direction of Wizards (because let's face it, everyone and their mother has a Red Wizard these days :o ) and more balanced for the meleers.




inb4 biased Elf

_________________________________________

Would you use a slayer whip of the blundering to throw ****?

No? Cause I would.

Just like I would use a Moon blundering to cast :)

If this gets added add a cheetah suffix for cast recoil LMAO. Then it will be balanced.

_________________________________________

reply to Killa:

Wizards already have the advantage of being able to cast spells at a decent rate as it is (seriously for the damage a T2 does, they can be cast rather rapidly).

Also yeah, Slayer Whips also fall under that category of items that can still be used completely effectively with Blundering.

_________________________________________

LOL

_________________________________________

Somewhat agreed, somewhat disagreed. I personally believe blundering is a pretty stupid suffix in itself thanks to its ability to make melee weapons worthless and magic weapons golden. Having said that, other suffixes make some weapons godly and others not. Vampire is great on fast weapons but not as much on slower ones. Feather is just a cost adder. Venom+ daggers are worthless and venom+ two handers in the hands of a knight are ludicrously overpowered.

Overall though blundering is the most varied, it'd probably be a better idea if it just added a significant fizzle rate, doesn't make sense it's a good thing. Then again alot of things need work in my opinion.

_________________________________________

Dr. Letha wrote:

reply to Killa:

Wizards already have the advantage of being able to cast spells at a decent rate as it is (seriously for the damage a T2 does, they can be cast rather rapidly).

Also yeah, Slayer Whips also fall under that category of items that can still be used completely effectively with Blundering.

There's no anti-melee elemental gear to make cheetah weapons not hurt like ****. Berry ****s me up with her slayer whips.. double 200s on a ****ing ninja. And the recoil is low as ****. Not to mention she can keep up with just about anyone because of insane ninja speed and whip 2 tile range..

Edit: Basically I'm saying for the amount of damage they can do.. auto attack melee has a very short recoil. Except I can't use elemental gear to make it heal me.

_________________________________________

i dont think they should change blundering like that, only to flux with mages, cuz example cheetah, why a staff would have cheetah? or locust? those sufix are good to melees, so blundering its like a good sufix to staves but not to melee weapons.

_________________________________________

Smiffah wrote:

i dont think they should change blundering like that, only to flux with mages, cuz example cheetah, why a staff would have cheetah? or locust? those sufix are good to melees, so blundering its like a good sufix to staves but not to melee weapons.

Those suffixes don't directly affect the staff in a negative way, unlike what Blundering does to essentially everything but staves.

Also Ners, Blundering being changed to my suggested idea could technically affect fizzle rate; if I recall correctly, fizzle rate is based on Magic stat. Although if that's just a myth, then yeah Blundering could get a fizzle rate to balance with the accuracy aspect it was supposed to affect with melees.

_________________________________________

Smiffah wrote:

i dont think they should change blundering like that, only to flux with mages, cuz example cheetah, why a staff would have cheetah? or locust? those sufix are good to melees, so blundering its like a good sufix to staves but not to melee weapons.

I didn't think about that actually. But yeah Smith's right the chances of you getting a non beneficial suffix for a staff are ALOT more likely than a good one. Looking at it from that perspective, blundering seems more justifiable I guess.

_________________________________________

Smiffah wrote:

i dont think they should change blundering like that, only to flux with mages, cuz example cheetah, why a staff would have cheetah? or locust? those sufix are good to melees, so blundering its like a good sufix to staves but not to melee weapons.

Exactly... but if they replace cheetah spawned on staves with cast recoil reduction... then it'd be fair to make blundering like that. ;)

_________________________________________

Lets face it this would be a good effect added onto blundering its only affected meleers for a long time. The fact of the matter is mages excell much faster then meleers because ranged spells...sure we might be squishy but there are ways to get around that like stone charms and a mix of mage/heavy or stealth. Me maining a black wizard class i almost never fizzle in only mid-low tier mage gear. I see almost every red wizard mixing heavy/mage armor and they fizzle less then i do.

Vote pedro for president

_________________________________________

I fizzle out the ass so I hope I'm not every red wizard.

_________________________________________

reply to Killa:

I wear a ****load of heavy on my Red Wizard and it has never stopped me from making people look bad ;)

^^ your responce in a previous post

_________________________________________

They don't contradict each other.

_________________________________________