With all characters gaining HP per level up and the ease of finding +END gear, I think it would be interesting to spice up this statistic with some minor bonuses.
Suggestions:
Every point of (base) Endurance over 10 gives:
+1% Chance to Cure Poison per round (if poisoned)
Example: Character with (base) Endurance of 15 would have a 5% Chance per round of Curing Poison (if poisoned)
Example: Character with (base) Endurance of 20 would have a 10% Chance per round of Curing Poison (if poisoned)
Every point of (base) Endurance over 10 gives:
0.5% Physical Damage Mitigation
Example: Character with (base) Endurance of 15 would have a natural 2.5% Reduction in Physical Damage taken
Example: Character with (base) Endurance of 20 would have a natural 5% Reduction in Physical Damage taken
Spell Duration:
Right now the average spell duration is based upon this formula: SDM x PROFICIENCY
Endurance is part of the Meditation skill.
Logically this means Endurance should play a role in Magic, atleast in some minor capacity.
However in its current iteration it does not provide any benefit to Magic.
Possibly a more accurate formula for spell duration would be: (SDM x 0.75) x (Proficiency + Endurance)
This would open up the possibility for Wizards to try more diverse attribute allocations, versus the standard (cookie cutter) ALL-INT.
Anyways, Cornucopia for thought.
Wizards outside of enchanters are already using lots of stat combinations. My wizards are 3/20/20/5, all dex, all int, and 3/16/19/10. As far as I'm concerned, my all dex thief is a type of wizard too. I'm aware of many other builds as well.
If any stat for wizards is useless, it's strength. You'd be using it to reduce your encumbrance so that you can act faster, but dex is going to do a better job of that.
I think the concern about "just use all int" arises when you're talking about wizballs rolling around with 5-6 all int or maybe one with dex, which kill everything in PvE before taking any meaningful damage. In that scenario, you may as well just max damage, because the rest of it really isn't affecting anything.
In general, our wiki's section about "optimal" builds is very misleading and fraught with inaccuracies. There's no breakdown explaining why ASGW is supposedly an optimal build. No analysis of damage per round contributed by various permutations of STR/DEX. No analysis of the effects of myst on the stat combination. No explanation as to why the base endurance of the ASGW is optimal for certain situations. I'm not saying "play what you feel like" is mathematically optimal (although for the vast majority of players that kind of optimization isn't a priority, which is fine), but "put all the points into one stat" often isn't either.
In general, our wiki's section about "optimal" builds is very misleading and fraught with inaccuracies. There's no breakdown explaining why ASGW is supposedly an optimal build. No analysis of damage per round contributed by various permutations of STR/DEX. No analysis of the effects of myst on the stat combination. No explanation as to why the base endurance of the ASGW is optimal for certain situations. I'm not saying "play what you feel like" is mathematically optimal (although for the vast majority of players that kind of optimization isn't a priority, which is fine), but "put all the points into one stat" often isn't either.
This section of the wiki is also based on legacy and has not been updated for Fin Fortress. There's no accounting for the dex adjustments that were made, and in fact I'd argue that ASGW is no longer an "optimal" build at all. Such is the problem with a wiki that relies on public edit, I suppose.
In the end I just wanted to chime in and agree with you.
