No Signature Spell Needed?

  • #1
    I was playing around with a Frost spec for a planned duo, and came up with this build:

    http://us.battle.net...Yjfl!YWX!bYcYaZ

    The most notable characteristic of which is that it does not make use of a signature spell at all, instead using Ray of Frost(Cold Blood) as its most basic attack.


    That wasn't central to the build concept, which was: "Apply chill/frozen status as much as possible and maximize the benefit of Cold Blooded." The heavy punch is coming from Comet, and ancillary damage from a Familiar (Arcanot - really there to buff regen) and Blizzard (Frozen Solid - really there to apply Frozen).

    My real question for people who have a deeper understanding of the numbers are twofold:

    1: Will this work in terms of mana regen with no signature spell?
    2: Am I missing a synergy that would make a big difference?

    EDIT - The core of this build is playable somewhere in the 30s, but Arcanot isn't available until 50, so I'm still trying to figure out what a good stopgap for energy production would be at level 28 when Cold Blood opens for Ray of Frost...
    I grew up gaming without internet forums. The entire phenomenon of being upset with a game developer makes no sense to me. No sense. I cannot imagine spending my time and energy being upset about something I choose to do for recreation.
  • #2
    Without testing it, I would say it will work. You basically turned ray of frost into a signature spell. Just 20 to cast, and then hold down the mousebutton for free dmg. Along with the ap regen you have there, it looks rather solid imo.

    on a sidenote, you might want to use power hungry instead of glass cannon perhaps, if damage output isnt a problem, but arcanepower is.
    I can see what you see not. Vision milky, then eyes rot.
    When you turn, they will be gone. Whispering their hidden song.

    Then you see what cannot be. Shadows move where light should be.
    Out of darkness, out of mind. Cast down into the Halls of the Blind
  • #3
    Quote from garnok

    Without testing it, I would say it will work. You basically turned ray of frost into a signature spell. Just 20 to cast, and then hold down the mousebutton for free dmg. Along with the ap regen you have there, it looks rather solid imo.


    Am i misunderstanding the Cold Blood rune? It says "reduce Casting cost to 0", so i was assuming it would not have an initial cost at all.
    I grew up gaming without internet forums. The entire phenomenon of being upset with a game developer makes no sense to me. No sense. I cannot imagine spending my time and energy being upset about something I choose to do for recreation.
  • #4
    Channeling cost is reduced to 12 with this rune i belive.
  • #5
    Yeah the tooltip is incorrect in the calcs (when are they going to fix that? it's been like that forever). In the actual beta you can mouse over the rune tooltip and it says it reduces it to 12

    In this build... you're using up way too much AP for it to be viable imo.
  • #6
    Quote from Vladdy13

    Channeling cost is reduced to 12 with this rune i belive.


    Ah, I didn't realize that, but some official forum searching did confirm that. That leaves my posted build generating 2 AP/sec (10 base, +4 from skills, -12 casting Ray at 1 APS)... may be lackluster afterall without the right gear.
    I grew up gaming without internet forums. The entire phenomenon of being upset with a game developer makes no sense to me. No sense. I cannot imagine spending my time and energy being upset about something I choose to do for recreation.
  • #7
    Standing in place channeling spells is a great way to die in harder difficulties. You can't really kite with them. Since Ray has a slow it might work out better than say Disintegrate, but I still have my doubts.

    Also, not using AP is not the same as actively regenerating AP (through a rune) which is what I see as the point of a Sig Spell.
  • #8
    Quote from Theungry

    Quote from Vladdy13

    Channeling cost is reduced to 12 with this rune i belive.


    Ah, I didn't realize that, but some official forum searching did confirm that. That leaves my posted build generating 2 AP/sec (10 base, +4 from skills, -12 casting Ray at 1 APS)... may be lackluster afterall without the right gear.


    This math is based on constant casting, which will happen at times, but as the game gets more difficult, more maneuvering is usually required, which will either mean more burst casting (of other spells), or more running with no casting...

    Another point is that different people will play the same build differently... I'm all about efficiency myself, so this could work for me, but if you're wasting your spells (holding it too long, missing a lot, etc), it might not.

    -Alamar
  • #9
    Well as I noted in the OP, this build was put together with a consistent Duo partner in mind, so it drops delegates a lot of defensive concerns to a tanky monk. Solo-ing or in mixed groupings, I'd have a very different approach.

    All that said, I will probably still experiment with this once I can, but don't hold much hope for this being a "go-to" build with the current numbers.
    I grew up gaming without internet forums. The entire phenomenon of being upset with a game developer makes no sense to me. No sense. I cannot imagine spending my time and energy being upset about something I choose to do for recreation.
  • #10
    Quote from ArcaneWeapon

    Standing in place channeling spells is a great way to die in harder difficulties. You can't really kite with them. Since Ray has a slow it might work out better than say Disintegrate, but I still have my doubts.

    Also, not using AP is not the same as actively regenerating AP (through a rune) which is what I see as the point of a Sig Spell.

    There is no real difference between a channeled spell and any other spell other than the graphic.
    You have to stand still and shoot any spell.

    Quote from Theungry

    Quote from Vladdy13

    Channeling cost is reduced to 12 with this rune i belive.


    Ah, I didn't realize that, but some official forum searching did confirm that. That leaves my posted build generating 2 AP/sec (10 base, +4 from skills, -12 casting Ray at 1 APS)... may be lackluster afterall without the right gear.


    You are generating 14 AP/sec.
    You are spending much faster than 12 per second though.

    You would lucky at best to break even just considering regen alone. With +AP on crit you could go into the green though.
    "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"

    Epicurus
  • #11
    Quote from Antirepublican
    There is no real difference between a channeled spell and any other spell other than the graphic.
    You have to stand still and shoot any spell.



    The difference is when you use a spell that has a duration, like Meteor Shower or Blizzard. You only have to stop moving to start the spell, then you can move around while it works, even cast other spells to compound damage and effects. With a channeled spell you have to stay still for the whole time and cannot cast other spells or it ends. Could make quite a difference in Inferno.
  • #12
    Quote from Gaiawolf

    Quote from Antirepublican
    There is no real difference between a channeled spell and any other spell other than the graphic.
    You have to stand still and shoot any spell.



    The difference is when you use a spell that has a duration, like Meteor Shower or Blizzard. You only have to stop moving to start the spell, then you can move around while it works, even cast other spells to compound damage and effects. With a channeled spell you have to stay still for the whole time and cannot cast other spells or it ends. Could make quite a difference in Inferno.


    You can cast a channeled spell for a split instant, and then cast another spell.
    There is absolutely no difference at all.

    This is the biggest misconception in the game and I have no idea where it comes from.
    "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"

    Epicurus
  • #13
    Quote from Antirepublican


    You are spending much faster than 12 per second though.



    Based on what? If I'm spending 12 per cast at 1 cast/per second for ray of frost, where is the other AP spent going?

    For the record, looking at staves listed, all the rares and legendaries list 1.00 APS.
    I grew up gaming without internet forums. The entire phenomenon of being upset with a game developer makes no sense to me. No sense. I cannot imagine spending my time and energy being upset about something I choose to do for recreation.
  • #14
    Quote from Theungry

    Quote from Antirepublican

    You are spending much faster than 12 per second though.



    Based on what? If I'm spending 12 per cast at 1 cast/per second for ray of frost, where is the other AP spent going?

    For the record, looking at staves listed, all the rares and legendaries list 1.00 APS.


    Well sure if you use a staff instead of a wand you can get your APS down really low, but I doubt you will be able to get no IAS on your gear.
    At 1.16 APS you would consume 14 AP per second, thus making RoF neutral in cost.
    Wands start at like 1.4 or 1.5 cast per second I believe, 1.5 * 12 = 18 AP / sec consumed.
    "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"

    Epicurus
  • #15
    As this build is concerned with AP efficiency, I would most certainly gear for the slowest weapon possible, yes. I meant to imply that when i noted the 1 APS, sorry if that wasn't clear.

    There is no reason whatsoever to believe IAS will be unavoidable, so 1 APS is a reasonable number to work with if you want a slow weapon timer.
    I grew up gaming without internet forums. The entire phenomenon of being upset with a game developer makes no sense to me. No sense. I cannot imagine spending my time and energy being upset about something I choose to do for recreation.
  • #16
    Quote from Antirepublican

    Quote from Gaiawolf

    Quote from Antirepublican
    There is no real difference between a channeled spell and any other spell other than the graphic.
    You have to stand still and shoot any spell.



    The difference is when you use a spell that has a duration, like Meteor Shower or Blizzard. You only have to stop moving to start the spell, then you can move around while it works, even cast other spells to compound damage and effects. With a channeled spell you have to stay still for the whole time and cannot cast other spells or it ends. Could make quite a difference in Inferno.


    You can cast a channeled spell for a split instant, and then cast another spell.
    There is absolutely no difference at all.

    This is the biggest misconception in the game and I have no idea where it comes from.


    It comes from the fact that after you stop channeling, the main effect of a channeling spell typically ends immediately and won't hit new targets. Conversely, a spell with a duration keeps hitting foes, including additional foes that enter the area, while you can do other things, like move to safety, heal, or cast overlapping spells. There's no misconception, it's just how the spells are used, and how they can be combined with overlapping effects.

    What's better? Hit foes with a channeling spell, then stop the spell to hit them with another channeling spell or heal/etc.? Or cast a AOE duration spell and then also hit them with a channeling spell at the same time, heal, whatever while they still suffer from your AOE?
  • #17
    I think he was talking about common bolt spells (arcane orb, magic missile) vs. chanelings. Not channelings vs. DoTs.

    Still theres no misconception. "bolt" spells deals damage in discrete ways while channeling do it continously. You can move or do other things between those interveils because the time to attack counts before the spell not after.

    Ex: You can shoot one magic missile and while it travels in the year you can move and still do the full damage of an single cast. With channeling spells if you stop to move you don't do the full damage of a single cast but a fraction of it.

    Imagine a magic missile/arcane orb that you can't move until the bolt lands. Thats a channeling spell.
    "In time the hissing of her sanity
    Faded out her voice and soiled her name
    And like marked pages in a diary
    Everything seemed clean that is unstained
    The incoherent talk of ordinary days
    Why would we really need to live?
    Decide what is clear and what's within a haze
    What you should take and what to give" - Opeth
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.
Posts Quoted:
Reply
Clear All Quotes