Maintenance for the week of March 25:
• [IN PROGRESS] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – March 28, 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)

Can you play a Stamblade on a Breton?

  • Olen_Mikko
    Olen_Mikko
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Breton can be really really effective with dual wield magblade.

    I had one, could do pretty much anything
    NB enthusiastic:
    1. Woodhippie stamblade - DW hard-hitter / PvE
    2. Know-it-all elf Magblade - Healer / PvE & PvP
    3. Hate-them-all elf Magblade - Destrostaff AoE monster / PvE
    4. Cyrodiil-Refugee stamblade - Stamina Tank / PvE

    Go dominion or go home

    Nightblade-Hipster. I played Nightblade before it was cool - from 1.5 onwards.
  • pod88kk
    pod88kk
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭
    You can play a stamblade on whatever the [removed profanity] you want mate
    Edited by ZOS_JesC on August 19, 2019 6:19PM
  • Adventurer
    Adventurer
    ✭✭✭
    Olen_Mikko wrote: »
    Breton can be really really effective with dual wield magblade.

    I had one, could do pretty much anything

    Did you also use the weapon skills (dual wield), or just had it for the passives?

    Also thank you everyone for the tips! Since I plan to do overland content, I can probably go with a Breton stamblade, or a magblade that also uses bows/dual wield, since it's all scaled anyway.
  • Raudgrani
    Raudgrani
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Why stam when you can go magblade with it? It would do so much better as that.

    Don't fall into either of these traps:

    1. "Race doesn't matter"
    2. "Race is everything"

    Generally, there are two races: Stamina race, Magicka race. Everything else is fine tuning. And really, you can use a stamina race for anything stamina related, however they might not be optimal for it. Likewise, a magicka race for anything magicka related.
    And before you start throwing rocks at me, yes - you CAN make a Nord Sorcerer, or an Altmer Stamina Nightblade, and they might work alright. But you need to admit they are probably better off doing something else.

    I have my dear Nord vamp Stamblade, running all Infused/Divines medium armor. When she's spotted and surrounded, she can be (literally) smacked about like crazy before she eventually goes down (which she doesn't always, of course), you don't see any Woodelf or Redguard Stamblade go through that, never ever. Not a chance in Oblivion.
    And no, I have no sustain issues whatsoever, and yes - I sure can burst down people, no dmg issues.

    As I use to say to people: Try this one out http://en.uesp.net/wiki/UESPWiki:EsoBuildEditor. Make your build, and try switching races and see for yourself. I was about to change race on my Nord Stamblade, but I found out I wasn't really better off changing it to anything else, not with my gear/setup.
  • notimetocare
    notimetocare
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    SydneyGrey wrote: »
    The biggest issue is the stamina sustain. A Breton won't have any. That means every time you fight, you'll run out of stamina really quickly.

    Lol "really quickly". 95% of your sustain comes from your sets, your food and most importantly, heavy attacks. If you don't know have to do a rotation and keep up your resourses with heavys, you are going to have crap dps anyways.

    Bro, that tiny bit from Redguard passive is super important. Thats why stamblades other than Redguard always fail. Like Imperials. Never see those /s xD
  • JobooAGS
    JobooAGS
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    SydneyGrey wrote: »
    The biggest issue is the stamina sustain. A Breton won't have any. That means every time you fight, you'll run out of stamina really quickly.

    Lol "really quickly". 95% of your sustain comes from your sets, your food and most importantly, heavy attacks. If you don't know have to do a rotation and keep up your resourses with heavys, you are going to have crap dps anyways.

    Bro, that tiny bit from Redguard passive is super important. Thats why stamblades other than Redguard always fail. Like Imperials. Never see those /s xD

    I had an imperial stamblade and I pulled numbers close to my redguard, sometimes better. To sustain, I just needed an extra heavy attack. Granted I race changed him to redguard because I wanted to make the original into a pvp toon, but it is still really good
  • Jade1986
    Jade1986
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭
    Play what you like! Unless you're into minmaxing and math, you're not going to lose a lot compared to Redguards or Orcs (or Khajiit/Bosmer/Imperials). Bretons' magicka bonuses let you get a few more cloaks when you're running around PvP and soloing, or some blurs in PvE content. It's a nice thing to have in your back pocket.

    Source: I take my Breton vampire stamblade to vet dungeons and normal trials, and the spell resist is great when I'm in stage 4. My Elder Scrolls mains are always Bretons, and have been since TESIII when the magicka resist let me kind-of see while wearing the Boots of Blinding Speed. >:D

    hmmm, this is making me think about changing my race, cuz i always played bretons too....
  • Rex-Umbra
    Rex-Umbra
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭
    You can fine, min maxed nope but good off stat for buffs and magic mitigation
    Xbox GT: Rex Umbrah
    GM of IMPERIUM since 2015.
  • ParaNostram
    ParaNostram
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭
    My main is a bosmer petsorc. Follow your dreams! Honestly it's like having a cake vs a cake with pieces of fruit in the icing, it's still delicious cake haha just doesn't have that little extra on top

    Just think of it this way for you, OP, you'll have more cloaks probably than a stamina race stamina nightblade.
    "Your mistake is you begged for your life, not for mercy. I will show you there are many fates worse than death."

    Para Nostram
    Bosmer Sorceress
    Witch of Evermore

    "Death is a privilege that can be denied by it's learned scholars."
    Order of the Black Worm
  • Bladerunner1
    Bladerunner1
    ✭✭✭✭
    One silver lining is you are a little bit more tanky against spell damage. Stamblades have shadow barrier and tend to add champion points in spell shield, and even then some people will yell at the top of their lungs at how squishy they feel. 3960 free spell resistance would stack on top of all the other spell resistance, cutting damage taken from spells down by approximately 20% compared to meta stamblades. Meta builds don't worry much about sort of thing, but it's something

    The 3960 spell resistance you are talking about is exactly 6% damage reduction. 660 is 1%. Not 20%. And that is is you don't go over the 33100 spell resist cap.

    Nope, it's 10%, not 6% or 20%. I forgot it was 660=1%. Meta stamblades already have close to 18,500 spell resistance when they gain shadow barrier, which means they take 72% incoming spell damage. A Breton would have 22,460 resistance, which means they take 66% incoming damage. 72 is 10% bigger than 66.
  • Lightspeedflashb14_ESO
    Lightspeedflashb14_ESO
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭
    One silver lining is you are a little bit more tanky against spell damage. Stamblades have shadow barrier and tend to add champion points in spell shield, and even then some people will yell at the top of their lungs at how squishy they feel. 3960 free spell resistance would stack on top of all the other spell resistance, cutting damage taken from spells down by approximately 20% compared to meta stamblades. Meta builds don't worry much about sort of thing, but it's something

    The 3960 spell resistance you are talking about is exactly 6% damage reduction. 660 is 1%. Not 20%. And that is is you don't go over the 33100 spell resist cap.

    Nope, it's 10%, not 6% or 20%. I forgot it was 660=1%. Meta stamblades already have close to 18,500 spell resistance when they gain shadow barrier, which means they take 72% incoming spell damage. A Breton would have 22,460 resistance, which means they take 66% incoming damage. 72 is 10% bigger than 66.

    you are looking at this very strange, that is some very purposely misleading data, though accurate, it is still only 6% spell mitigation. no more no less.
  • Rev Rielle
    Rev Rielle
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Adventurer wrote: »
    If I'd like to do PVE, can I do a stamblade well?

    How much worse off would a stamblade Breton be compared to an Orc or a Redguard?

    You can absolutely play any class-race combination and complete all the content in the game.
    Play what you want.
    If you can be anything, be kind.
  • SydneyGrey
    SydneyGrey
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    SydneyGrey wrote: »
    The biggest issue is the stamina sustain. A Breton won't have any. That means every time you fight, you'll run out of stamina really quickly.

    Lol "really quickly". 95% of your sustain comes from your sets, your food and most importantly, heavy attacks. If you don't know have to do a rotation and keep up your resourses with heavys, you are going to have crap dps anyways.
    Say what you want, but if you directly compare stamina sustain between a Breton, an Orc and a Redguard, you'll see a big difference between all of them. A Redguard or Bosmer will blow a Breton out of the water when it comes to stamina sustain. Orcs will have better sustain than Bretons, but not as good as Redguards or Bosmers. It's a fact.
    With a Breton, you'd be forced to wear gear that will help with sustain, because that will be the only way you'll be able to compete. With Redguards and Bosmers, you won't have to worry so much about sustain, so you have more of a choice as to what sets you want to put on them.
  • DRAGON_KILLER_HUNTER
    DRAGON_KILLER_HUNTER
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    For sure, you can.

    In ESO you can play EVERYTHING how you like it to play..

    I used to play a breton stamblade for ages in pvp and still killed people with ease :)
  • chaz
    chaz
    ✭✭✭✭
    Adventurer wrote: »
    If I'd like to do PVE, can I do a stamblade well?

    How much worse off would a stamblade Breton be compared to an Orc or a Redguard?

    Yes. My main protagonist is a Bretton, and I made her a Stamblade. I'm using The Vicious Ophidian set, with some ravager set and 2 piece Valkyn Skoria monster set. I may also be using Juggernaut just for some added health. All jewelry , armor is gold. Chest and Legs tristat enchantment, rest most for stam.
    Those in power only have the illusion they are powerful, however in reality, those in power are only so because we allow them to be.

    ESO Beta Test Ultimate Question for control!
    Lord Dagon's Mythic Dawn Guild is now recruiting. Dailies, trials, Raids, Fun, Discord (required for staying on Crown), guild bank and so much more. Msg me or mail me in game @Chaz for invite. **See Link Here** ElderScrollsOnlineYouTube

    ElderScrollsOnline Purchase History April 17, 2017 through May 30th 2022 (Crowns,Upgrades, ESO Plus) = $5,610.38
  • WrathOfInnos
    WrathOfInnos
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    You'll be able to stay invisible longer than any other stamblades, Bretons have the best Magicka sustain of any race. You will take a damage hit though, expect to do roughly 5% less damage than Redguards, Imperials, Orcs, and Khajiit. You will also have low stamina sustain so be prepared to heavy attack more and sprint/roll/block less.
  • Glurin
    Glurin
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭
    Anyone who says you can't or that you shouldn't is just lost in the min/max world. The only place it really matters is if you're trying to compete for one of the top spots on a leaderboard somewhere. Everywhere else, all it means is you'll be lacking that little extra bit of stamina stuff that being a Redguard or Orc or whatever would get you. It's not nearly enough to fret over.
    "He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster...when you gaze long into the abyss the abyss also gazes into you..."
  • Bladerunner1
    Bladerunner1
    ✭✭✭✭
    One silver lining is you are a little bit more tanky against spell damage. Stamblades have shadow barrier and tend to add champion points in spell shield, and even then some people will yell at the top of their lungs at how squishy they feel. 3960 free spell resistance would stack on top of all the other spell resistance, cutting damage taken from spells down by approximately 20% compared to meta stamblades. Meta builds don't worry much about sort of thing, but it's something

    The 3960 spell resistance you are talking about is exactly 6% damage reduction. 660 is 1%. Not 20%. And that is is you don't go over the 33100 spell resist cap.

    Nope, it's 10%, not 6% or 20%. I forgot it was 660=1%. Meta stamblades already have close to 18,500 spell resistance when they gain shadow barrier, which means they take 72% incoming spell damage. A Breton would have 22,460 resistance, which means they take 66% incoming damage. 72 is 10% bigger than 66.

    you are looking at this very strange, that is some very purposely misleading data, though accurate, it is still only 6% spell mitigation. no more no less.

    Have you never done the math for mitigation before? Say a person has 28% mitigation. Every 100 damage that comes their way, only 72 will be subtracted by their health. The health is decreased by 72.

    They gain 6 percent more mitigation and now have 34%. Out of every 100 damage that comes their way, only 66 gets subtracted from health. What's 72-66, then divided by 66? OK it's 9.1% more damage taken by metablades then by Bretons in this stamblade case. Not 6%. The closer to 50% mitigation you get, the bigger the effect. Someone with 44% mitigation takes 12% more damage than someone with 50% mitigation, not 6%.

    There is absolutely nothing misleading, it's just how mitigation works. When you say it's "exactly 6% damage reduction" the way you did, you're wrong
    Edited by Bladerunner1 on February 18, 2018 3:19AM
  • Lightspeedflashb14_ESO
    Lightspeedflashb14_ESO
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭
    One silver lining is you are a little bit more tanky against spell damage. Stamblades have shadow barrier and tend to add champion points in spell shield, and even then some people will yell at the top of their lungs at how squishy they feel. 3960 free spell resistance would stack on top of all the other spell resistance, cutting damage taken from spells down by approximately 20% compared to meta stamblades. Meta builds don't worry much about sort of thing, but it's something

    The 3960 spell resistance you are talking about is exactly 6% damage reduction. 660 is 1%. Not 20%. And that is is you don't go over the 33100 spell resist cap.

    Nope, it's 10%, not 6% or 20%. I forgot it was 660=1%. Meta stamblades already have close to 18,500 spell resistance when they gain shadow barrier, which means they take 72% incoming spell damage. A Breton would have 22,460 resistance, which means they take 66% incoming damage. 72 is 10% bigger than 66.

    you are looking at this very strange, that is some very purposely misleading data, though accurate, it is still only 6% spell mitigation. no more no less.

    Have you never done the math for mitigation before? Say a person has 28% mitigation. Every 100 damage that comes their way, only 72 will be subtracted by their health. The health is decreased by 72.

    They gain 6 percent more mitigation and now have 34%. Out of every 100 damage that comes their way, only 66 gets subtracted from health. What's 72-66, then divided by 66? OK it's 9.1% more damage taken by metablades then by Bretons in this stamblade case. Not 6%. The closer to 50% mitigation you get, the bigger the effect. Someone with 44% mitigation takes 12% more damage than someone with 50% mitigation, not 6%.

    There is absolutely nothing misleading, it's just how mitigation works. When you say it's "exactly 6% damage reduction" the way you did, you're wrong

    i am not wrong. 660 resist is 1% damage mitigation. 3960 divided by 660 is 6. breton have 6% more resists to spells then other races. full stop. that is all that it is worth. you are the one adding more misleading data.
  • Bladerunner1
    Bladerunner1
    ✭✭✭✭
    One silver lining is you are a little bit more tanky against spell damage. Stamblades have shadow barrier and tend to add champion points in spell shield, and even then some people will yell at the top of their lungs at how squishy they feel. 3960 free spell resistance would stack on top of all the other spell resistance, cutting damage taken from spells down by approximately 20% compared to meta stamblades. Meta builds don't worry much about sort of thing, but it's something

    The 3960 spell resistance you are talking about is exactly 6% damage reduction. 660 is 1%. Not 20%. And that is is you don't go over the 33100 spell resist cap.

    Nope, it's 10%, not 6% or 20%. I forgot it was 660=1%. Meta stamblades already have close to 18,500 spell resistance when they gain shadow barrier, which means they take 72% incoming spell damage. A Breton would have 22,460 resistance, which means they take 66% incoming damage. 72 is 10% bigger than 66.

    you are looking at this very strange, that is some very purposely misleading data, though accurate, it is still only 6% spell mitigation. no more no less.

    Have you never done the math for mitigation before? Say a person has 28% mitigation. Every 100 damage that comes their way, only 72 will be subtracted by their health. The health is decreased by 72.

    They gain 6 percent more mitigation and now have 34%. Out of every 100 damage that comes their way, only 66 gets subtracted from health. What's 72-66, then divided by 66? OK it's 9.1% more damage taken by metablades then by Bretons in this stamblade case. Not 6%. The closer to 50% mitigation you get, the bigger the effect. Someone with 44% mitigation takes 12% more damage than someone with 50% mitigation, not 6%.

    There is absolutely nothing misleading, it's just how mitigation works. When you say it's "exactly 6% damage reduction" the way you did, you're wrong

    i am not wrong. 660 resist is 1% damage mitigation. 3960 divided by 660 is 6. breton have 6% more resists to spells then other races. full stop. that is all that it is worth. you are the one adding more misleading data.

    You're right when you say 6% more resists to spells. You're right when you say 660 resist is 1% mitigation. Still wrong though about "6% damage reduction". It's only 6% damage reduction if you are comparing with something that has 0% damage mitigation, and there aren't any stamblades with 0 mitigation. Talk about misleading....
    Edited by Bladerunner1 on February 18, 2018 5:03AM
  • Lightspeedflashb14_ESO
    Lightspeedflashb14_ESO
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭
    @Bladerunner1 You're right

    thank you.
  • Glurin
    Glurin
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭
    One silver lining is you are a little bit more tanky against spell damage. Stamblades have shadow barrier and tend to add champion points in spell shield, and even then some people will yell at the top of their lungs at how squishy they feel. 3960 free spell resistance would stack on top of all the other spell resistance, cutting damage taken from spells down by approximately 20% compared to meta stamblades. Meta builds don't worry much about sort of thing, but it's something

    The 3960 spell resistance you are talking about is exactly 6% damage reduction. 660 is 1%. Not 20%. And that is is you don't go over the 33100 spell resist cap.

    Nope, it's 10%, not 6% or 20%. I forgot it was 660=1%. Meta stamblades already have close to 18,500 spell resistance when they gain shadow barrier, which means they take 72% incoming spell damage. A Breton would have 22,460 resistance, which means they take 66% incoming damage. 72 is 10% bigger than 66.

    you are looking at this very strange, that is some very purposely misleading data, though accurate, it is still only 6% spell mitigation. no more no less.

    Have you never done the math for mitigation before? Say a person has 28% mitigation. Every 100 damage that comes their way, only 72 will be subtracted by their health. The health is decreased by 72.

    They gain 6 percent more mitigation and now have 34%. Out of every 100 damage that comes their way, only 66 gets subtracted from health. What's 72-66, then divided by 66? OK it's 9.1% more damage taken by metablades then by Bretons in this stamblade case. Not 6%. The closer to 50% mitigation you get, the bigger the effect. Someone with 44% mitigation takes 12% more damage than someone with 50% mitigation, not 6%.

    There is absolutely nothing misleading, it's just how mitigation works. When you say it's "exactly 6% damage reduction" the way you did, you're wrong

    This, my friends, is why statistics are a joke. The people behind them pull this kind of crap all the time.

    Someone with 44% mitigation takes 12% more damage than someone with 50% mitigation. Ok, fine. But that comparison is worth about as much as a turd in the hand. Why? Because your damage is not contingent on how much damage someone else is taking.

    So what does matter? What stat actually has value?

    6 points of damage. Not 12, which is the impression you want people to have when you spin figures together like you did. Just a 6 point difference for every 100 points of damage that comes in.
    "He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster...when you gaze long into the abyss the abyss also gazes into you..."
  • WrathOfInnos
    WrathOfInnos
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Glurin wrote: »
    One silver lining is you are a little bit more tanky against spell damage. Stamblades have shadow barrier and tend to add champion points in spell shield, and even then some people will yell at the top of their lungs at how squishy they feel. 3960 free spell resistance would stack on top of all the other spell resistance, cutting damage taken from spells down by approximately 20% compared to meta stamblades. Meta builds don't worry much about sort of thing, but it's something

    The 3960 spell resistance you are talking about is exactly 6% damage reduction. 660 is 1%. Not 20%. And that is is you don't go over the 33100 spell resist cap.

    Nope, it's 10%, not 6% or 20%. I forgot it was 660=1%. Meta stamblades already have close to 18,500 spell resistance when they gain shadow barrier, which means they take 72% incoming spell damage. A Breton would have 22,460 resistance, which means they take 66% incoming damage. 72 is 10% bigger than 66.

    you are looking at this very strange, that is some very purposely misleading data, though accurate, it is still only 6% spell mitigation. no more no less.

    Have you never done the math for mitigation before? Say a person has 28% mitigation. Every 100 damage that comes their way, only 72 will be subtracted by their health. The health is decreased by 72.

    They gain 6 percent more mitigation and now have 34%. Out of every 100 damage that comes their way, only 66 gets subtracted from health. What's 72-66, then divided by 66? OK it's 9.1% more damage taken by metablades then by Bretons in this stamblade case. Not 6%. The closer to 50% mitigation you get, the bigger the effect. Someone with 44% mitigation takes 12% more damage than someone with 50% mitigation, not 6%.

    There is absolutely nothing misleading, it's just how mitigation works. When you say it's "exactly 6% damage reduction" the way you did, you're wrong

    This, my friends, is why statistics are a joke. The people behind them pull this kind of crap all the time.

    Someone with 44% mitigation takes 12% more damage than someone with 50% mitigation. Ok, fine. But that comparison is worth about as much as a turd in the hand. Why? Because your damage is not contingent on how much damage someone else is taking.

    So what does matter? What stat actually has value?

    6 points of damage. Not 12, which is the impression you want people to have when you spin figures together like you did. Just a 6 point difference for every 100 points of damage that comes in.

    That's not the case though. Using your example, someone is at 44% mitigation with no Breton passives and gets hit for 100 damage. Then they put skill points into the Breton spell resistance passive to increase mitigation to 50%, and they get hit with the same attack again. It now does close to 88 damage, which is 12% lower than the original hit of 100.

    Percentage of some arbitrary unmitigated hit value is irrelevant. What people care about is the change in damage taken with or without the Breton passive, which will always be >6%. I agree with @Bladerunner1 that 9% is a pretty typical value, and at the extreme best case it could be up to 12% if reaching mitigation cap.
  • Glurin
    Glurin
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭
    Glurin wrote: »
    One silver lining is you are a little bit more tanky against spell damage. Stamblades have shadow barrier and tend to add champion points in spell shield, and even then some people will yell at the top of their lungs at how squishy they feel. 3960 free spell resistance would stack on top of all the other spell resistance, cutting damage taken from spells down by approximately 20% compared to meta stamblades. Meta builds don't worry much about sort of thing, but it's something

    The 3960 spell resistance you are talking about is exactly 6% damage reduction. 660 is 1%. Not 20%. And that is is you don't go over the 33100 spell resist cap.

    Nope, it's 10%, not 6% or 20%. I forgot it was 660=1%. Meta stamblades already have close to 18,500 spell resistance when they gain shadow barrier, which means they take 72% incoming spell damage. A Breton would have 22,460 resistance, which means they take 66% incoming damage. 72 is 10% bigger than 66.

    you are looking at this very strange, that is some very purposely misleading data, though accurate, it is still only 6% spell mitigation. no more no less.

    Have you never done the math for mitigation before? Say a person has 28% mitigation. Every 100 damage that comes their way, only 72 will be subtracted by their health. The health is decreased by 72.

    They gain 6 percent more mitigation and now have 34%. Out of every 100 damage that comes their way, only 66 gets subtracted from health. What's 72-66, then divided by 66? OK it's 9.1% more damage taken by metablades then by Bretons in this stamblade case. Not 6%. The closer to 50% mitigation you get, the bigger the effect. Someone with 44% mitigation takes 12% more damage than someone with 50% mitigation, not 6%.

    There is absolutely nothing misleading, it's just how mitigation works. When you say it's "exactly 6% damage reduction" the way you did, you're wrong

    This, my friends, is why statistics are a joke. The people behind them pull this kind of crap all the time.

    Someone with 44% mitigation takes 12% more damage than someone with 50% mitigation. Ok, fine. But that comparison is worth about as much as a turd in the hand. Why? Because your damage is not contingent on how much damage someone else is taking.

    So what does matter? What stat actually has value?

    6 points of damage. Not 12, which is the impression you want people to have when you spin figures together like you did. Just a 6 point difference for every 100 points of damage that comes in.

    That's not the case though. Using your example, someone is at 44% mitigation with no Breton passives and gets hit for 100 damage. Then they put skill points into the Breton spell resistance passive to increase mitigation to 50%, and they get hit with the same attack again. It now does close to 88 damage, which is 12% lower than the original hit of 100.

    Percentage of some arbitrary unmitigated hit value is irrelevant. What people care about is the change in damage taken with or without the Breton passive, which will always be >6%. I agree with @Bladerunner1 that 9% is a pretty typical value, and at the extreme best case it could be up to 12% if reaching mitigation cap.

    No, you're just trying to confuse people. The baseline is 0% mitigation. Period. How much damage per 100 damage points will you take with 44% mitigation. 56 points. How much damage will you take with 50% mitigation. 50 points.

    When you start with a baseline of how much damage someone else mitigates, you just inflate the difference and give people a false impression of just how much impact their stats actually make.

    The damage you take does not depend on how much damage someone else takes. Therefore such comparisons are completely, 100% meaningless. Just because I'm in a group with someone who only has 44% mitigation does not mean my 50% let me prevent 56% of the damage I took. I kinda suck at math, but even I know that's not how math works.
    "He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster...when you gaze long into the abyss the abyss also gazes into you..."
  • Bladerunner1
    Bladerunner1
    ✭✭✭✭
    Glurin wrote: »
    Glurin wrote: »
    One silver lining is you are a little bit more tanky against spell damage. Stamblades have shadow barrier and tend to add champion points in spell shield, and even then some people will yell at the top of their lungs at how squishy they feel. 3960 free spell resistance would stack on top of all the other spell resistance, cutting damage taken from spells down by approximately 20% compared to meta stamblades. Meta builds don't worry much about sort of thing, but it's something

    The 3960 spell resistance you are talking about is exactly 6% damage reduction. 660 is 1%. Not 20%. And that is is you don't go over the 33100 spell resist cap.

    Nope, it's 10%, not 6% or 20%. I forgot it was 660=1%. Meta stamblades already have close to 18,500 spell resistance when they gain shadow barrier, which means they take 72% incoming spell damage. A Breton would have 22,460 resistance, which means they take 66% incoming damage. 72 is 10% bigger than 66.

    you are looking at this very strange, that is some very purposely misleading data, though accurate, it is still only 6% spell mitigation. no more no less.

    Have you never done the math for mitigation before? Say a person has 28% mitigation. Every 100 damage that comes their way, only 72 will be subtracted by their health. The health is decreased by 72.

    They gain 6 percent more mitigation and now have 34%. Out of every 100 damage that comes their way, only 66 gets subtracted from health. What's 72-66, then divided by 66? OK it's 9.1% more damage taken by metablades then by Bretons in this stamblade case. Not 6%. The closer to 50% mitigation you get, the bigger the effect. Someone with 44% mitigation takes 12% more damage than someone with 50% mitigation, not 6%.

    There is absolutely nothing misleading, it's just how mitigation works. When you say it's "exactly 6% damage reduction" the way you did, you're wrong

    This, my friends, is why statistics are a joke. The people behind them pull this kind of crap all the time.

    Someone with 44% mitigation takes 12% more damage than someone with 50% mitigation. Ok, fine. But that comparison is worth about as much as a turd in the hand. Why? Because your damage is not contingent on how much damage someone else is taking.

    So what does matter? What stat actually has value?

    6 points of damage. Not 12, which is the impression you want people to have when you spin figures together like you did. Just a 6 point difference for every 100 points of damage that comes in.

    That's not the case though. Using your example, someone is at 44% mitigation with no Breton passives and gets hit for 100 damage. Then they put skill points into the Breton spell resistance passive to increase mitigation to 50%, and they get hit with the same attack again. It now does close to 88 damage, which is 12% lower than the original hit of 100.

    Percentage of some arbitrary unmitigated hit value is irrelevant. What people care about is the change in damage taken with or without the Breton passive, which will always be >6%. I agree with @Bladerunner1 that 9% is a pretty typical value, and at the extreme best case it could be up to 12% if reaching mitigation cap.

    No, you're just trying to confuse people. The baseline is 0% mitigation. Period. How much damage per 100 damage points will you take with 44% mitigation. 56 points. How much damage will you take with 50% mitigation. 50 points.

    When you start with a baseline of how much damage someone else mitigates, you just inflate the difference and give people a false impression of just how much impact their stats actually make.

    The damage you take does not depend on how much damage someone else takes. Therefore such comparisons are completely, 100% meaningless. Just because I'm in a group with someone who only has 44% mitigation does not mean my 50% let me prevent 56% of the damage I took. I kinda suck at math, but even I know that's not how math works.

    The only thing that matters when you compare one build to another is damage you would expect to see in combat. Here's how the math works, outlined by an awesome theorycrafter

    https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/279426/damage-mitigation-explanation-updated-for-morrowind-new-calculator/p1

    If a Redguard needs 9% more healing than a Breton to stay alive, that information is relevant. It just so happens that Redguards can self heal more due to having more stamina, there's a lot of factors at play.
  • starlizard70ub17_ESO
    starlizard70ub17_ESO
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭
    Seraphayel wrote: »
    You can play every class and playstyle with every race. There might be 1-10% differences in classes but it doesn't matter. Not even in high level end game content. Your race choice doesn't matter at all.

    Unless you're one of the 'L33T' max/min players looking to be at the top .5% of the leader boards, your race doesn't matter. I have a stamina and magic version of all 5 classes, all Khajiit. I've no problem clearing any overland, normal or public dungeons, pledges, or PvP. I've even beaten some trials. (I don't like trials personally, so I don't do many of them.) You may have to adjust some of your CP to maximize your character's potential, but as @Seraphayel said, you can play any race, any class with any style.
    "We have found a cave, but I don't think there are warm fires and friendly faces inside."
  • Lightspeedflashb14_ESO
    Lightspeedflashb14_ESO
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭
    Glurin wrote: »
    Glurin wrote: »
    One silver lining is you are a little bit more tanky against spell damage. Stamblades have shadow barrier and tend to add champion points in spell shield, and even then some people will yell at the top of their lungs at how squishy they feel. 3960 free spell resistance would stack on top of all the other spell resistance, cutting damage taken from spells down by approximately 20% compared to meta stamblades. Meta builds don't worry much about sort of thing, but it's something

    The 3960 spell resistance you are talking about is exactly 6% damage reduction. 660 is 1%. Not 20%. And that is is you don't go over the 33100 spell resist cap.

    Nope, it's 10%, not 6% or 20%. I forgot it was 660=1%. Meta stamblades already have close to 18,500 spell resistance when they gain shadow barrier, which means they take 72% incoming spell damage. A Breton would have 22,460 resistance, which means they take 66% incoming damage. 72 is 10% bigger than 66.

    you are looking at this very strange, that is some very purposely misleading data, though accurate, it is still only 6% spell mitigation. no more no less.

    Have you never done the math for mitigation before? Say a person has 28% mitigation. Every 100 damage that comes their way, only 72 will be subtracted by their health. The health is decreased by 72.

    They gain 6 percent more mitigation and now have 34%. Out of every 100 damage that comes their way, only 66 gets subtracted from health. What's 72-66, then divided by 66? OK it's 9.1% more damage taken by metablades then by Bretons in this stamblade case. Not 6%. The closer to 50% mitigation you get, the bigger the effect. Someone with 44% mitigation takes 12% more damage than someone with 50% mitigation, not 6%.

    There is absolutely nothing misleading, it's just how mitigation works. When you say it's "exactly 6% damage reduction" the way you did, you're wrong

    This, my friends, is why statistics are a joke. The people behind them pull this kind of crap all the time.

    Someone with 44% mitigation takes 12% more damage than someone with 50% mitigation. Ok, fine. But that comparison is worth about as much as a turd in the hand. Why? Because your damage is not contingent on how much damage someone else is taking.

    So what does matter? What stat actually has value?

    6 points of damage. Not 12, which is the impression you want people to have when you spin figures together like you did. Just a 6 point difference for every 100 points of damage that comes in.

    That's not the case though. Using your example, someone is at 44% mitigation with no Breton passives and gets hit for 100 damage. Then they put skill points into the Breton spell resistance passive to increase mitigation to 50%, and they get hit with the same attack again. It now does close to 88 damage, which is 12% lower than the original hit of 100.

    Percentage of some arbitrary unmitigated hit value is irrelevant. What people care about is the change in damage taken with or without the Breton passive, which will always be >6%. I agree with @Bladerunner1 that 9% is a pretty typical value, and at the extreme best case it could be up to 12% if reaching mitigation cap.

    No, you're just trying to confuse people. The baseline is 0% mitigation. Period. How much damage per 100 damage points will you take with 44% mitigation. 56 points. How much damage will you take with 50% mitigation. 50 points.

    When you start with a baseline of how much damage someone else mitigates, you just inflate the difference and give people a false impression of just how much impact their stats actually make.

    The damage you take does not depend on how much damage someone else takes. Therefore such comparisons are completely, 100% meaningless. Just because I'm in a group with someone who only has 44% mitigation does not mean my 50% let me prevent 56% of the damage I took. I kinda suck at math, but even I know that's not how math works.

    The only thing that matters when you compare one build to another is damage you would expect to see in combat. Here's how the math works, outlined by an awesome theorycrafter

    https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/279426/damage-mitigation-explanation-updated-for-morrowind-new-calculator/p1

    If a Redguard needs 9% more healing than a Breton to stay alive, that information is relevant. It just so happens that Redguards can self heal more due to having more stamina, there's a lot of factors at play.

    you just cant stop misleading people. 6% spell resists is 6% spell resists. let it lie man.
  • Amdar_Godkiller
    Amdar_Godkiller
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Lower magicka cost is really powerful on a stam build in PVP. Would make cloak, mirage, and purge much more manageable.
  • GreenhaloX
    GreenhaloX
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Adventurer wrote: »
    If I'd like to do PVE, can I do a stamblade well?

    How much worse off would a stamblade Breton be compared to an Orc or a Redguard?

    Sure, I think it is doable, but you would probably need to have the Hulking as a set, in order to get more stam, as what Necro does for mag toons. Then, throw on the whichever Mundus that gives extra crit. Yeah, why not, it can work. By the way, a StamBlade does quite well in PvE (as well as in PvP.) I have a Nord 2h StamBlade and a DW Imperial, which I used both in PvP and fair quite well, and they are seemingly as effective in PvE. Different skillsets and playstyle for PvE and PvP, though.
  • ookami007
    ookami007
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Any build is playable... But not all builds are optimal. I have a half dozen Breton or high elf Stam characters. They do lower dose than my redguards... But they are still playable with most content. I have yet to take one on a raid but eventually I will.
Sign In or Register to comment.