Tantor's Tusk
|
[Drops | Comments ]
DropsThis item is found on creatures. Western Wastes
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
  |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Send a correction | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Scars of Velious
Anonymous
Just think what a Rogues Backstab would be if they could use this .........
Anonymous
Well, I hit 300 with a 13-damage piercer last night at level 49....
so I'm guessing that *IF* a rogue could use this, the backstab potential would be over 3 times this... say, about 1000 damage.... at level 49.
AVERAGE damage would be in the 450 range.... also at level 49.
In the hands of a 60th level rogue, multiply said damage potential by about 1.4 (?)... 1400 max backstab, average around 550-600 damage...
Yeah, I guess there's a good reason why they don't let rogues use this one. But if only...
so I'm guessing that *IF* a rogue could use this, the backstab potential would be over 3 times this... say, about 1000 damage.... at level 49.
AVERAGE damage would be in the 450 range.... also at level 49.
In the hands of a 60th level rogue, multiply said damage potential by about 1.4 (?)... 1400 max backstab, average around 550-600 damage...
Yeah, I guess there's a good reason why they don't let rogues use this one. But if only...
Anonymous
that would be why rogues can't use it =P
#Anonymous,
Posted: Mar 09 2001 at 1:22 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) FRICKIN IDIOTS!!!! a rogue alone can double attack for 2k at level 60 with the epic which is 14 damage!!!!!! YEAH LETS HAVE ROGUES HIT FOR 6000+ every BACKSTAB HAHAHAA SHUTTUP ABOUT THIS YOU PANZY WHINER ROUGES
Anonymous
i would just like to point out that at lvl 60 a rogue with ragebringer can backstab for 1150 range, with this you would be talking in the 2-3k range, verant would never let that happen.
Anonymous
You would never be able to pull the mob off of the rogue if he could backstab with this thing!
6 posts
it's called evade.
Anonymous
hehe yup and with backstabs like that you would not have to work the thing be dead in a minute
Verant said that they picture paladins with big lances, before big swords, so they introduced a new skill with Velious - 2 hand piercing. These are piercing weapons with high dmg/dlys and rogues can't use em' :)
To the anon who said that rogues would have a big backstab with this - a rogue's backstab is capped and raises every level.. sorta like a shadowknight's harmtouch
Either 2 hand piercing is EXACTLY like piercing only with higher dmg/dly, or Allakhazam doesn't know about it yet... or the item graphics doesn't recognize it as 2hp... It's definently 2hp..
To the anon who said that rogues would have a big backstab with this - a rogue's backstab is capped and raises every level.. sorta like a shadowknight's harmtouch
Either 2 hand piercing is EXACTLY like piercing only with higher dmg/dly, or Allakhazam doesn't know about it yet... or the item graphics doesn't recognize it as 2hp... It's definently 2hp..
Anonymous
Regards the rogue who had a rant about warriors outdamaging him with this using discplines
well the disc is a very short lived thing =(
would be lucky to get a couple of hits off with this baby
Xariis
Iksar warrior-karana
well the disc is a very short lived thing =(
would be lucky to get a couple of hits off with this baby
Xariis
Iksar warrior-karana
Anonymous
Ok, First off, let me say this weapon makes me sick. So what if it has a slow delay. So what if it's 2 handed piercing.
I play a rogue. Rogues are supposed to be the masters of piercing. Having had extensive studies on piercing. Where to hit. How to hit. etc. etc. etc.
Warriors can use this thing. Warriors should be considered as having general expertise. Now, with this weapon combined with their crits/crips (and especially the discipline that makes every shot a crip) I can potentially see this as easilly being more damaging than ANY of the rogue weapons combined. Including backstabs.
My vision of this blade is sick, and that warriors with this will remove the need of a rogue for damage-purposes almost entirely (especially if there is a high level chanter with a really good haste buff). The only purpose we will have will be to get people into the locked rooms. Perhaps I'm just getting a little cynical with the high-damage piercers and other nice piercers that I have seen Verrant putting out, and saying "Oh, Let's not let rogues use this. It would be too unbalancing to the game".
I will now end that rant before I say something I might regret.
Now, to my other points.
In regards to Verant's view of Pally's weilding big lances. Why? If I recall correctly, a Lance isn't extremely effective when on foot. There are no horses or mounts they can use to fight from, so Lances would be fairly strange to use. (Providing I have my weapons straight) I think it would be quite ungainly.
Also, if they view the rangers weilding these things, why let the warriors and rangers use them?
Look at this image. A ranger is a woods-type fighter. Immagine running through the trees with a large weighty 8-10 foot pole in your hands. A spear is understandable, because they are thin, and not quite as ungainly.
Also, which do you think is morelikely to be seen on a warrior? Front line fighter. Big sword, maybe two medium sized swords. Stuff like that. Not a big long lance.
I can see the SK's using this weapon, because, they are the antithesis to the Pally. They are the Anti-Paladin. I can see a Black-plate wearing guy, and a shiney Silver-plate wearing guy standing across the field with these big long poles in handa and going at each other. Not the others though.
I think I will end my Tirade here.
--Sylik Shadowsoul
51 rogue, Officer of Tanstaafl
Mithaniel Marr
I play a rogue. Rogues are supposed to be the masters of piercing. Having had extensive studies on piercing. Where to hit. How to hit. etc. etc. etc.
Warriors can use this thing. Warriors should be considered as having general expertise. Now, with this weapon combined with their crits/crips (and especially the discipline that makes every shot a crip) I can potentially see this as easilly being more damaging than ANY of the rogue weapons combined. Including backstabs.
My vision of this blade is sick, and that warriors with this will remove the need of a rogue for damage-purposes almost entirely (especially if there is a high level chanter with a really good haste buff). The only purpose we will have will be to get people into the locked rooms. Perhaps I'm just getting a little cynical with the high-damage piercers and other nice piercers that I have seen Verrant putting out, and saying "Oh, Let's not let rogues use this. It would be too unbalancing to the game".
I will now end that rant before I say something I might regret.
Now, to my other points.
In regards to Verant's view of Pally's weilding big lances. Why? If I recall correctly, a Lance isn't extremely effective when on foot. There are no horses or mounts they can use to fight from, so Lances would be fairly strange to use. (Providing I have my weapons straight) I think it would be quite ungainly.
Also, if they view the rangers weilding these things, why let the warriors and rangers use them?
Look at this image. A ranger is a woods-type fighter. Immagine running through the trees with a large weighty 8-10 foot pole in your hands. A spear is understandable, because they are thin, and not quite as ungainly.
Also, which do you think is morelikely to be seen on a warrior? Front line fighter. Big sword, maybe two medium sized swords. Stuff like that. Not a big long lance.
I can see the SK's using this weapon, because, they are the antithesis to the Pally. They are the Anti-Paladin. I can see a Black-plate wearing guy, and a shiney Silver-plate wearing guy standing across the field with these big long poles in handa and going at each other. Not the others though.
I think I will end my Tirade here.
--Sylik Shadowsoul
51 rogue, Officer of Tanstaafl
Mithaniel Marr
#REDACTED,
Posted: Sep 05 2001 at 2:33 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) we already know that rouges suck, you dont have to right a damn book about it.
6 posts
For the most part, I completely agree with you. Paladins and Shadowknights should be the only ones with this. 2h piercing was put in as a role-playing aspect for the "holy" warriors, so it would only make sense that they be the only ones to be allowed to use it. Rogues are pictured with quick, deadly weapons, like rapiers and daggers. A huge lance does not make sense for them. Warriors may be pictured with a weapon of this sort, but it really doesn't make sense when they could use a sword, and besides, a weapon of this power makes warriors unbalanced. Rangers, as the original poster pointed out, are fighters of the forest, and a huge weapon like this would be crazy for them.
I don't know, but it just seems crazy for Verant to put 2hp in for a role-playing reason, and then go against those reasons by allowing these other classes to use it.
I don't know, but it just seems crazy for Verant to put 2hp in for a role-playing reason, and then go against those reasons by allowing these other classes to use it.
#Anonymous,
Posted: Dec 20 2000 at 8:02 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Cry me a river, you silly rogue.
Anonymous
aww, the rogue is jealous and angry that he cant backstab with a 50dmg weapon. god damn, for once in a while would you just be content with out-damaging a warrior? hell, given the right circumstances, a rogue could outdamage anyone (except casters of course, until they run out of mana). think to yourself on why verant does some of the things they do, such as not letting a rogue use 2hp. cause they would do thousands upon thousands of damage. i agree, having played a rogue, that BS'ing with a 50dmg weapon would own, but you cant get everything you want, now can you?
i wish my warrior could solo to 50, i wish my wizzy could tank half as good as a melee class, i wish my bard could dual wield at 1st level. none of that is ever going to happen in EQ, and i know it and i dont mind. it would be nice, but its never going to happen. much like your getting to BS with a 50dmg weapon so give it up.
Jookar
Iksar Warrior
Tarew Marr
on a side note, im glad i practiced piercing from the beginning for this weapon and weapons like it, hehe
i wish my warrior could solo to 50, i wish my wizzy could tank half as good as a melee class, i wish my bard could dual wield at 1st level. none of that is ever going to happen in EQ, and i know it and i dont mind. it would be nice, but its never going to happen. much like your getting to BS with a 50dmg weapon so give it up.
Jookar
Iksar Warrior
Tarew Marr
on a side note, im glad i practiced piercing from the beginning for this weapon and weapons like it, hehe
11 posts
Cry me a river, you silly pala . . .
Ooo deja vu ;)
Ooo deja vu ;)
Anonymous
Rogue backstab isn't capped like a sk harmtouch. It is based on their skill, the weapon base damage and their str.
Karia N'Shar 55 Blackguard Prexus
Karia N'Shar 55 Blackguard Prexus
Anonymous
Exactly...My level 30 rogue BS's for about 139 with a good STR buff, using a trakasaur tooth. Wish i had a 15 damage primary capable weapon..guess its Time to get me a Ragebringer :)
guess i could pick up a no rent ghuntak harpoon and use that for a day for kicks :)
guess i could pick up a no rent ghuntak harpoon and use that for a day for kicks :)
Anonymous
Actually bs is capped,using the damage multiplying skill it caps at around 1124 (?) with the ragebringer,this is with max strength and attack,maxed skill in piercing and bs.
Anonymous
Pallys piercing?? Pallys piercing???
*runs around screaming*
*runs around screaming*
Anonymous
Yeah... it's a new thing for Velious.
Not like I've had any weapons to practice the skill with. What's the point of having the skill if none of the piercing weapons I can get can be used by me?
Keyne Falconer
Paladin of 26 seasons.
Not like I've had any weapons to practice the skill with. What's the point of having the skill if none of the piercing weapons I can get can be used by me?
Keyne Falconer
Paladin of 26 seasons.
#Anonymous,
Posted: Dec 17 2000 at 4:08 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Honestly I have never seen a weapon earmarked as 2h piercing....Piercing is piercing is piercing. it makes no diffrence if when you weild it it looks like. Course I could be wrong, but hell a 2h piercing weapon I have never seen a skill for, just Piercing
Anonymous
Surely this is a one hand piercer, it says on the stats 'Either Melee' Inventory slot.
60 delay on a piercer...? Wow that must be one big heavy tusk.
60 delay on a piercer...? Wow that must be one big heavy tusk.
Anonymous
just imagine a nice haste buff and doubke attack together
Anonymous
Forget celerity. You want a 33 percent haste item and a wonderous rapidity cast on you with this thing. Imagine the damage you could do.
Anonymous
add a bard to that combo =)
Anonymous
Imagine a warrior wielding this and a wurmslayer with a haste item...
18 posts
how about a rogue with this(assuming they could) i am guessing like a 2000+damage backstab at level 60
Add an extra zero to that number... rogues can already backstab for 2000 at level 60 with 15 & 16dmg weapons ;)
Scholar
42 posts
Too bad its 2h, and not 1h. Plus Wurmslayer is main hand only, so it would actually be a crappy combo if it was 1h.
#Anonymous,
Posted: Dec 16 2000 at 7:10 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Too bad rogues can't use that! LOL could you imagine the backstab with that thing!
Anonymous
Good Lord that is a hell of a lot of damage! Imagine a CRITICAL with that thing!!!
Anonymous
this is 2h piercing
Anonymous
Where does it say 2-Handed and I thought Paladins were the only ones with the 2Handed Piercing skill?
Anonymous
Perhaps because they suck *** and are to busy hiding behind mobs to deserve high damage weapons. Now go pick up yer little fork of a weapon and stop crying or play a real melee class
Anonymous
well.. we all know that your dumb *** is just a newbie.. can you say.. cant go to any new high lvl dungeon without one.. and i bet you that a 50th rogue could either match or out damage a 50th war... oh yeah, and they are useful too. ah well, i dont need to prove your stupidity, you've done a excellent job yourself. so go shot yourself cause no one cares about your ignorant opinions.
vermis mysteriis
53rd wanderer of prexus
*storms of darkness*
cross the storms and face the darkness =P
vermis mysteriis
53rd wanderer of prexus
*storms of darkness*
cross the storms and face the darkness =P
you sound gay, is there any truth to this?
maybe if you pulled yer dagger out of yer *** you wouldnt be a gay rouge.
maybe if you pulled yer dagger out of yer *** you wouldnt be a gay rouge.
#REDACTED,
Posted: Feb 02 2001 at 5:06 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) hahahahahaha, that was too funny
Free account required to post
You must log in or create an account to post messages.© 2024 Fanbyte LLC