TBC Beta Info and Questions....

[Glaive]

Remember the moss snakes in EQ that could kick?

'Nuff said.

[Plaeroma]

My question: what happens with the rank 3 10% discount bonus with the advent of the new honor system? Is it gone for good or what?

[Cadrid]

Copy/Paste from the other thread, since it was never answered:


I have a question about the Warrior's 41 point Protection-tree talent "Devestate":

I read the tooltip as saying the attack deals 15/25/35 additional damage, as well as giving additional aggro per Sunder Armor counter on the target.

My cousin, however, read it as saying the attack deals 15/25/35 additional damage per counter of Sunder Armor on the target, as well as giving additional aggro per Sunder Armor counter on the target.

So, which is correct?

[Lambourne]

What are the new level ranges for BGs? ie is there a new AV from 61-70?

[Tirinal]

Originally Posted by Lambourne

What are the new level ranges for BGs? ie is there a new AV from 61-70?

60-69, 70.

[Makata]

Originally Posted by Cadrid

Copy/Paste from the other thread, since it was never answered:


I have a question about the Warrior's 41 point Protection-tree talent "Devestate":

I read the tooltip as saying the attack deals 15/25/35 additional damage, as well as giving additional aggro per Sunder Armor counter on the target.

My cousin, however, read it as saying the attack deals 15/25/35 additional damage per counter of Sunder Armor on the target, as well as giving additional aggro per Sunder Armor counter on the target.

So, which is correct?

I would assume the former. The "Damage plus X" is common wording. If you want to apply the "for each application of Sunder Armor" then it would be applying to the 50% as well, which it obviously won't. If they had meant it like the latter, I would imagine it would have been worded ".. 50% of weapon damage to the target plus an additional 15 damage per application of Sunder Armor. In addition, the attack generates additional threat for each application .."

[eqjim]

ive heard that mage invisibility will have the use of lowering threat.. it sounded like an 8sec FD.

you use invis and slowly fade out over 8s until your "invis" and you go ooc.

is that true?

[Lambourne]

Originally Posted by Tirinal

[av levels] 60-69, 70.

Thanks. Does this also mean there is a seperate 50-59 AV?

[Littles]

Originally Posted by eqjim

ive heard that mage invisibility will have the use of lowering threat.. it sounded like an 8sec FD.

you use invis and slowly fade out over 8s until your "invis" and you go ooc.

is that true?

Nobody really knows as the level cap on beta at the moment is 67.

[Tirinal]

You don't go ooc, but you drop all threat. Was a blue post some time ago.

[Moontayle]

Originally Posted by Lambourne

Thanks. Does this also mean there is a seperate 50-59 AV?

Interesting question but I think since AV holds different level values than AB and WSG that the brackets will be 51-60 and 61-70.

[Wanand]

Question for healing spec priests.

Did you respec to shadow to level? Or can you chain grind the instances in a guild group to level up just as fast?

Whats it like solo grinding in the outlands for the solo quests?

[Zest]

I spec'd Shadow, but I think the instances will probably level you faster.

[Kodylan]

Originally Posted by Tirinal

You don't go ooc, but you drop all threat. Was a blue post some time ago.

This actually isn't true. Naetharea posted that you'll be able to drink if you allow yourself to go completely invis. Will it work on bosses? I doubt it, but for basic trash clears it might.

The mechanic that I've heard for invis so far is that it's a channeled 8 second buff. Each second your threat is reduced, and then if you let yourself "fully" invis, your threat drops completely.

[Immy]

=D