JO>DE>Don't give me this "Witchunters are elite warriors" crap either.  Its
JO>DE>all pretty fair.  Witchunters just need more MagicRes.
JO>DE>Witchunter beats up mage.
JO>DE>Warrior can't beat up mage so well.
JO>DE>Warrior beats up witchunter.
JO>DE>Ever hear of balance?
JO>DE>---
JO>Witchunters cannot beat mages and other spellcasters so its more like
JO>this
JO>Mage beats Witchunter
JO>Mage beats warrior
JO>Warrior beats witchunter
JO>even hear of unbalance
JO>Spanky
JO>Level 30 Witchunter
Actually... a decently played witchunter should be able to beat a mage.
Okay.. so a mage Dfirs for average 160 per round (which is mighty good
already), A comparable witchy should be able to do 160 per round also.
And they've got a heck of a lot more HPs.  It'll be a close one, but I
think overall, a witchunter-vs-mage match would show the witchy to be
the victor more often.
#8) Joe
---
Sent via MailLink, 23-JUL-97, 02:07:38, from:
(ABB)Ace BBS - ace.net.au
Goodwood, South Australia