In case meriting protectra V wasn't bad enough...

[Llana_Virren]

A bunch of nonsense.

Since you're really trying to ignore the whole point of what I was saying, I'll really try to explain it once more.

Protectra V as a merit option is a waste of merits. Protect V is not a waste of MP. Enhancing party defense is not a wasted effort, which is why I use Accession>Protect V over Protectra IV. Also, I have absolutely no MP issues inside or outside of Abyssea/VW instances, because I know what I'm doing. Using a strategem before a fight is not a waste... you're not using it on anything else at that point anyway.

"But you can Accession>Shell V the mage party". Yes, I could, but that would be a waste of MP, since they should be outside of the casting/aura radius anyway.

"But what about rebuffing during a fight?" If I have to combat-cast a buff midfight and run into the red zone, I'm going to use Protectra IV due to time expedience. However, I may also do an Accession>Run in>Protect V if I think I have the time or if it is safe to do so. Obviously conditions such as timing, current MP, etc will play a factor, however I will always make an effort to give my party the most bang for any spell I cast.

"But what if you're the only WHM in your alliance?" Then obviously what you do will depend on how well you can hold your MP while keeping people alive. In my case, Accession>Protect V does not hurt that balance, so I do it. If I find myself in a situation where it would be unwise to do so, then obviously I will not do it. However, it is not always unwise to do so. However, it is always unwise to not give your party and/or alliance 100%.

"Its not that serious." Not to you perhaps, but I like to be great at WHM, not just good at it. And while your .gif craze might be humorous, they don't actually add anything to your post except make them less serious.

The moral of the story: WHM is serious to me. Obviously, with my gameplay and experience, I have found the benefit of Accession>Protect V to outweigh the cost (both literally and figuratively). If that does not work for you, so be it; however it does not change the fact that Protectra V was a poorly designed spell that does not warrant the merits, which was the point of this thread. Proof: SE might actually fix it.

So, that being said, you're arguing something that doesn't apply to the situation at hand; you're debating MP usage when MP usage is not an issue, and you're contesting that Pro4 is better than any form of Pro5 due simply to the convenience of casting it.

I take WHM seriously, so if that's the difference between us let's just leave it there, shall we?

[Dantedmc]

Since you're really trying to ignore the whole point of what I was saying, I'll really try to explain it once more.

Protectra V as a merit option is a waste of merits. Protect V is not a waste of MP. Enhancing party defense is not a wasted effort, which is why I use Accession>Protect V over Protectra IV. Also, I have absolutely no MP issues inside or outside of Abyssea/VW instances, because I know what I'm doing. Using a strategem before a fight is not a waste... you're not using it on anything else at that point anyway.

"But you can Accession>Shell V the mage party". Yes, I could, but that would be a waste of MP, since they should be outside of the casting/aura radius anyway.

"But what about rebuffing during a fight?" If I have to combat-cast a buff midfight and run into the red zone, I'm going to use Protectra IV due to time expedience. However, I may also do an Accession>Run in>Protect V if I think I have the time or if it is safe to do so. Obviously conditions such as timing, current MP, etc will play a factor, however I will always make an effort to give my party the most bang for any spell I cast.

"But what if you're the only WHM in your alliance?" Then obviously what you do will depend on how well you can hold your MP while keeping people alive. In my case, Accession>Protect V does not hurt that balance, so I do it. If I find myself in a situation where it would be unwise to do so, then obviously I will not do it. However, it is not always unwise to do so. However, it is always unwise to not give your party and/or alliance 100%.

"Its not that serious." Not to you perhaps, but I like to be great at WHM, not just good at it. And while your .gif craze might be humorous, they don't actually add anything to your post except make them less serious.

The moral of the story: WHM is serious to me. Obviously, with my gameplay and experience, I have found the benefit of Accession>Protect V to outweigh the cost (both literally and figuratively). If that does not work for you, so be it; however it does not change the fact that Protectra V was a poorly designed spell that does not warrant the merits, which was the point of this thread. Proof: SE might actually fix it.

So, that being said, you're arguing something that doesn't apply to the situation at hand; you're debating MP usage when MP usage is not an issue, and you're contesting that Pro4 is better than any form of Pro5 due simply to the convenience of casting it.

I take WHM seriously, so if that's the difference between us let's just leave it there, shall we?

You take whm seriously, but you don't think casting -24.2% mdt on the entire mage party is more important than casting 60 defense on your melee party, even though you can do both if you would just put one merit into Protectra V. I think you need to get your priorities straight.

[Llana_Virren]

You take whm seriously, but you don't think casting -24.2% mdt on the entire mage party is more important than casting 60 defense on your melee party, even though you can do both if you would just put one merit into Protectra V. I think you need to get your priorities straight.

One merit in Protectra V does not a full potency Protectra V make. That's why we're looking at potential revisions to the spell. But using mediocre merits for the sake of helping your party isn't the answer. The point of this entire thread is how underdeveloped Protectra V is. Subscribing to "just put 1 merit in it" proves that point; and I have no desire to hinder my merit choices for the sake humoring those who are proving in each passing post they they don't care about being better than "ok" at WHM.

[Dantedmc]

One merit in Protectra V does not a full potency Protectra V make. That's why we're looking at potential revisions to the spell. But using mediocre merits for the sake of helping your party isn't the answer. The point of this entire thread is how underdeveloped Protectra V is. Subscribing to "just put 1 merit in it" proves that point; and I have no desire to hinder my merit choices for the sake humoring those who are proving in each passing post they they don't care about being better than "ok" at WHM.

Don't really see what you're saying. 1 Merit in Protectra V is the same as Protect V, 60 Defense. If you can't realize that 24.2% mdt on another party is much better and that you can have both then I think you need to stop calling others the "ok" whms. The fact that you would rather not give the entire mage party shell V then drop 5% potency from an ability that is hardly ever used is silly.

It's also getting really old how anyone who disagrees with you is somehow an "ok" whm. No my whm is not as geared as my sch, but it has appropriate gear. I have 50% potency with the +2 body, I have -80% cct, capped enhancing for boosts, and near capped for barspells. I have all my refresh idle gear. Just because someone doesn't feel like 5/5'ing an ability they may never use doesn't make them any less of a whm.