Right, ive been regretting choosing celt instead of firbolg for my blademaster lately, because of the 30 strenght difference, making a firbolg having more weaponskill. Please disregard other class advantages celts might have like similarity to groups naturalists or anything else, this question concern weaponskill only.
Ive asked a lot of people about the relation between weaponskill and actual damage, and i usually end up with two views of this relation.
Its the people saying they are 10000% sure weapskill affects damage to a very large and direct degree, and usually points to the effect ressurection illness has (cutting damage and weapskill in half) as proof of this.
The other half of the people say weapskill mainly affect your chance to hit, (chance to not be parried/evaded/blocked/etc), and that damage has more sides to it than just the weaponskills. One can see that where a few skill points dont give much weapskill compared to strenght stat (for slash/crush for instance), it considerably increases damage more than strenght does(not something i have tested, something i have been told). Drawing in examples like savages being good damage dealers despite low weapskill, as well as to a certain degree friars and champions/valewalkers, are also arguments from this corner.
So, can anybody supply some constructive ideas and opinions about this, possibly even a proof or at least an attempt at an explanation according to their view of this?
Ive asked a lot of people about the relation between weaponskill and actual damage, and i usually end up with two views of this relation.
Its the people saying they are 10000% sure weapskill affects damage to a very large and direct degree, and usually points to the effect ressurection illness has (cutting damage and weapskill in half) as proof of this.
The other half of the people say weapskill mainly affect your chance to hit, (chance to not be parried/evaded/blocked/etc), and that damage has more sides to it than just the weaponskills. One can see that where a few skill points dont give much weapskill compared to strenght stat (for slash/crush for instance), it considerably increases damage more than strenght does(not something i have tested, something i have been told). Drawing in examples like savages being good damage dealers despite low weapskill, as well as to a certain degree friars and champions/valewalkers, are also arguments from this corner.
So, can anybody supply some constructive ideas and opinions about this, possibly even a proof or at least an attempt at an explanation according to their view of this?