Melee Shaman Feedback, Where it Falls Short

[Svrtr]

So, I shall open this statement by saying, despite it all, shaman barb is quite fun. It feels perhaps less unique or niche than warpriest, but there is a great deal of schadenfreude to playing one.

However, with that said it does feel *JUST* shy of being "good".


The reasons for this feel varied. Presumably melee shaman will go barb, and can gain 2 dodge AC assuming a standard array of 23 shaman 4 barb 3 bard/specialist/warlock/what have you, but this then is lost with blood frenzy, which seems to be a core component of melee shaman.

In a similar vein, the damage gains from barb are nice, but going for a shield caps you out at roughly 52 AC, with fairly decent DI assuming half giant or half orc, but in man ways this AC and DI is lacking. The damage you have is relatively low, given in part for not having as many sources of boosts as cleric with only blood frenzy, you gain 3 AB and damage only if you have ESF trans and feel shoehorned into going it and can't go abj or other foci. That you have the shaman AB bonuses if you go for a full BAB class pre epic for 4 consistent AB is nice, but then you get 4 APR, one of which is at -15, granted not reliant on a buff, and 3 AB and damage at the cost of 2 AC and some eflex save.

Compare this to cleric, who gets no AC malus, arguably better spells all in all, and with warpriest's bonus duration will get as many APR but at 0/-5/-10/0/-5 progression instead of 0/-5/-10/-15/0 while also netting 3 damage, 8 if we count prayer and some combination of battletide or warcry, along then with deafening clang there is a rather notable damage disparity.

This leans into another factor, the relatively spread stats required to get the 16 CON for barb's maximum bonuses, 19 WIS for shaman, and respectable strength. Getting this without sacrificing INT for skill points requires going half orc or some dwarf variant, or now half giant, but going any of them other than half giant then means the loss of a very valued feat given shaman's lack of bonus feats and loss of skill points on a 4+INT class. And even then it only barely reaches respectable values. Half giant with its relative stat gain on storm half giant or stone half giant can get 22 STR, 6 dex (4 for stone), 16 CON (18 for stone), 14 INT, 20 WIS, and 8 CHA. Given stone has a more extreme swing Ill focus on storm which is more standardized.

This then is much the same as a standard non charisma battle cleric array, but for the 16 CON, which is necessary for barb bonuses. Thus on other races rather extreme sacrifices must be made to get these values.

Then, even on a human base you can only barely just get all the feats you need if you want transmutation, and are starved for epic feats given the assumption of going 23 shaman to capitalize on CL synergies, and though this is subjective it is made worse by the ever present tempting thought of going for ESF divination given the free GSF, but this is purely up to personal preference along with div being a niche at best spell foci save for the ever contentious -scry.


On the matter of the shaman armor, while there is niche use for the 5% positive DI along with 5/- positive essences, it has worse DI than melven chain for the same AC, and is harder to justify assuming we even do lean into the DI aspect of it. A bit of a sidenote all in all but one that feels relavent.


I've begun to lose the plot here, but the focus at the end of the day is that while melee shaman is fun, it does feel notably worse than just going melee FS. It has no grand spell like WoF or gate, it has about the same AB, less of that AB on a timer than warpriest but its gains lesser all in all with notably less damage, while also having a feat tax in the form of transmutation and a loss of AC and reflex saves, it is tight on feats, it is tight on stats, and the damage you gain from it and from barb synergies feels overshadowed. Worst of it all is how short the barb bonuses from rage last given it is CON+2d4 rounds, which is 9+2d4 rounds assuming 16 CON but with 67 temp hp and only CL 19 rage.

All in all, it feels like it is just shy of being good, but it faces many taxes and has less potential to shine, and it has many good spells but they lack a sort of binding playstyle all in all. Likewise, the bonuses for going transmutation feel marginal other than the bonuses for stats, which granted I do love as I am very lazy in matters of gearing.

I think that having some sort of bonus to frenzy, be it regen, vampiric regen, or perhaps most notably damage resistance innate to the spell that scales with trans foci and is resistance, like marauder, to go with stone skin or premo would help immensely.

Likewise, increasing the skill points of the class, or giving them a bonus feat or two, or mildly buffing some of the gear surrounding the class or divination likewise would help in my mind, notably for races that aren't half giant (ESF div giving premo/+6 anyone? [this is a spurious idea randomly thrown out]).

Finally, just one or two more known spells, or shaman unique spells that have use might help immensely.


Doing all of these things is almost certainly a bad idea. Shaman sits in a precarious position where it borders on being way too good if its just given arbitrarily more stuff. However, battle shaman seems to lack immensely, and feels like it should lean more into the DI/DR angle or else suffer less from blood frenzy, and shaman given a better source of more consistent melee damage. For now though, I admit I see more of the wrongs than have good solutions.



Also please make the shaman dweomer tier be at 23 so you don't lose out on dweomer by going for 23/4/3



All in all, Ill update this as I think of more but moral of the story, melee shaman is squishy and lacks good lasting damage, and feels like a worse and more inconsistent battle cleric/fs as it is. Giving frenzy regen/vamp regen/dr or some combo of the 3 would help at least

[Waldo52]

You can cast 9th level spells, summon buddies and either whack things decently well or have tribal buddies to troll the limit on the maximum number of summoned allies. You're doing fine.

I played a tribal barbarian shaman and the game was a joke. I carried a whip I wasn't proficient in and useless leather armor (rule of cool) and dramatically slow walked into the field after my plethora of goons killed everything. I retired the character because I don't play god simulators and it felt unsportsmanlike.

Yes, clerics are probably better. Clerics and druids are notoriously overpowered and have needed a rework for two decades. But this isn't a reasonable benchmark for balance. I'm not going to invoke that class I constantly whine about on these boards, so let's take another class: say you take a dexterity based ranger. Just struggle through the game without allies and see how weak you feel, and that's before late game PvP happens and you realize your pet's math peaks at "never hit anyone".

If you suck next to a cleric, consider yourself a well designed class. It could be a lot worse.

[Good Character]

Certainly would be beautiful if shamans could choose between Divination and Transmutation for their free two feats pre-epic. I also agree wholeheartedly on the Blood Frenzy concept, so possibly their AC malus could be stripped if you have both the Transmutation foci and X amount of shaman levels (possibly 21+).

[AstralUniverse]

Last time I tested shaman on PGCC I dont think the +2 vs dispel bonus from arcane abjuration was working. Maybe the way it was coded doesnt stack with some of the bonus CLs the synergies? I dont know..

However, if we assume it's a bug and that the bonus should be granted as expected, then I'd say 21 shaman 5 ranger 4 monk, dex/wis main, with epic weapon focus unarmed, ki +4, planar conduit, ESF transmutation and armor skin for epic feats and 28 cl vs dispels... seems mostly fine to me. I dont know if I'd buff this. It's a pretty decent battle shaman.

Beyond that, battle shaman does indeed leave some to be desired imo.

[Paint]

I'm here to give my two cents.

At full pelt, my battle shaman(Shaman 23/Bard 3/ Barb 4) hits 54 AB after her short windup which consists of clicking warcry and bard song -- and if that sounds hilariously dumb, that's because it is --, and hits for damage in the mid 50s, lower 60s before DR & resistances. Her AC with a shield is 55.(Damage in the mid 40s, low 50s.) Without, and using a shield skleen, 50. IE increases this considerably, obviously. She doesn't have improved critical, she doesn't have improved knockdown. No planar conduit. She does have IE. She can solo most PVE content with ease. Against harder content, I have to think a little, but I've not run into anything that I couldn't handle. Elemental swarm is, and I cannot stress this enough, still a good spell.

Unsurprisingly, her spell DCs are atrocious. In a duel against a prepared martial that knows what they're doing, she loses every time. Simple as. Against casters, it really depends on how quickly I'm able to get them, and how they stagger their spell combinations. She performs fairly enough.

I have killed with this character before, and I will again.

Where she really shines is in a group of two or three, where she can give her goofy +2 AB, +2 AC to her buddies cast mass heal spells, and stay -standing- with her chunky healthpool and reasonably high discipline. That's a weird niche to be in, but it's my opinion that if you're trying to play a battle shaman like a real and raw martial, you're really missing the point. The point is that you're a melee that can provide quick support in the form of mass hastes and heals /and/ deal enough damage to provide additional kill pressure.

My opinion is that battle shaman is in a good niche right now and that if any changes are made to it, it should be changes that make it better or, at the least, more consistent at that niche; That is, a low-wind up melee that performs worse than other melees in a direct way, but has a vast library of supporting spells and flexibility that allows it to shore up the weaknesses of any team composition and continue standing when met with more than a single flurry by a martial.

My battle FvS meanwhile -- a character who does not get access to divine shield -- hits 58 AC before expertise or improved expertise. Her AB after her full windup is 57. It caps at 60 after TS. She hits in the high 30s, low 40s -- much of this damage cannot be mitigated by resistances or DR in any way. She was -much- more difficult to gear. If I built her strength instead, she'd hit 54 AC and do... quite a bit more damage. She has a higher windup, lower killpressure, but ironically, a higher healthpool than my battle shaman. Her CL is 30 because of how FvS and Warpriest interact, making her pretty difficult to dispel. She fills a similar niche, but not nearly as well. Although aid, prayer, and bless are wonderful boons to have on a party and she can mass heal, because she has more windup, doess less damage, and lacks PW:K, when push comes to shove, she's more of an inconvenient wall that can shame people with WoF. If she was a cleric instead of a FvS, she'd probably be a sight more terrifying, but even more of a nightmare to gear.

But I do think that a genuinely well-built warpriest would beat the hell out of a battle shaman nine times out of ten. Divine Might and Divine Shield are just really good and the warpriest kit is really satisfying and blisteringly effective when it isn't dispelled.

As an aside, there are a few off-meta ways to build Battle Shaman right now that are quirky enough to be pretty funny to play around with, such as a shaman/monk that invests nothing into its physical stats and relies on the shapeshift spell. The hypothetical AB and AC are high enough that it might hilariously catch someone offguard, and be downright oppressive to any character that doesn't have access to dispels or mords simply because they didn't bring the correct scrolls or items with them. Good luck not falling asleep leveling it, though.

Edit:
As an aside, it would be nice to have more high-level spells that suit the needs of a battle shaman. I find myself picking /whatever/ with some of my higher-level spells because I just run out of things I need after I pick up the essentials. I think my battle shaman has shapeshift just for a laugh just because there wasn't anything else at 9th level that I needed.

[TurningLeaf]

Are we acknowledging in this thread how warpriest gets no summons? Or is the complaint that the shaman itself doesn't best the warpriest when we ignore the existence of the summons completely..?

[AstralUniverse]

Are we acknowledging in this thread how warpriest gets no summons? Or is the complaint that the shaman itself doesn't best the warpriest when we ignore the existence of the summons completely..?

The complaint is mostly that there are no 'real' battle shamans and that battle shaman is basically a worse caster shaman, if I were to sum it up into one sentence.

[xf1313]

If casting in shifted form is allowed I trust that there’ll be more melee shamans.

You know... red dragon shamans with monk dip for instance

And druids will be very happy

[Tinderbox]

Melee Shaman has always sort of seemed weird to me. Ok AB, Ok AC, Good spells but bad spell DCs when building into melee. So you'll just mainly be casting on yourself I'd assume. You can't really call in the buffed up summons either now since shaman can't cast his strongest buffs on them. Overall, I think a melee shaman is just very middling, but shaman in general is sort of middling in my opinion unless you take exactly what you have to spellwise and dip the right classes. What they really have going for them is their spell list and they can only lock those in once (or repick with a -relevel) They also have a special gimmick that is synergizing, but now cleric seems to also be getting some decent synergizing too. So I think shaman in general now sits at a weird place. Would love to see something new and interesting thrown at them. They were supposed to be synergizer right, what if they could combine spells certain spells together. Or just give them their second magic Dweomercraft at 21 instead of 24 to help facilitate multiclassing more, I know I'd love that.

[Zanithar]

Melee Shaman has always sort of seemed weird to me. Ok AB, Ok AC, Good spells but bad spell DCs when building into melee. So you'll just mainly be casting on yourself I'd assume. You can't really call in the buffed up summons either now since shaman can't cast his strongest buffs on them. Overall, I think a melee shaman is just very middling, but shaman in general is sort of middling in my opinion unless you take exactly what you have to spellwise and dip the right classes. What they really have going for them is their spell list and they can only lock those in once (or repick with a -relevel) They also have a special gimmick that is synergizing, but now cleric seems to also be getting some decent synergizing too. So I think shaman in general now sits at a weird place. Would love to see something new and interesting thrown at them. They were supposed to be synergizer right, what if they could combine spells certain spells together. Or just give them their second magic Dweomercraft at 21 instead of 24 to help facilitate multiclassing more, I know I'd love that.

Shaman is probably currently the best summoner in the game. You do need to build it correctly and select the correct spells but that is not dissimilar to every other build in the game which means it is not a differentiator nor a reason to call out shaman as middling.

Post Sequencer nerf shaman gets a handful of very significant things:
1. Elemental Swarm and Summon Creature IX
2. Planar Conduit and/or Mummy Dust
3. One of the best remaining summon support spell line ups in the game (Aura of Vitality + Mass Haste + Mass Heal + Protection from Spells)

Add to this that they synergize with bard and have CL synergy and Epic Caster Synergy plus adding Bard Song and Curse Song and can even take enough bard levels to allow song change makes them a strong summon support and party support build.

I would not call it middling. I would agree melee shaman is middling but only because it suffers from the old spellsword issue of almost being at its Attack Cap just to hit 50 AB.

[Tinderbox]

I mean yeah, shamans are really good at summoning and running dungeons.

[Kenji]

[Ordo.Lupus]

The only gripe I have about the current shaman is the lack of inflict minor wounds cantrip. Given the recent mummy dust change I think this would make good sense for shamans. Especially those who delve in necro stuff.
Also for some reason the barb synergy can be dispelled which is a bit annoying.

[Paint]

Also for some reason the barb synergy can be dispelled which is a bit annoying.

You can unequip, then re-equip your weapon to get your soft AB back. As far as I know, this affects all of the soft AB you get from not having full AB progression pre-epic when you dip a full AB class like ranger or barb, which is, and I cannot stress this enough, really funny.

[I will never sleep]

I think a problem that melee shaman often suffers from, having been playing one for a while now, is it has a lack of damage unless you are going 2h and barb specifically, due to barb still getting a lot of bonus damage. But if you... want to dual wield or something as a ranger dip- the damage is uniquely piddly even as strength unless you go shaman/barb/fighter. Which the way the class is set up, is not exactly kind to compared to other dips given just how powerful the classes that do have synergies are. Six damage from epic spec vs. giving up potentially 2 ab, 4 ac, saves from bard, etc... Barb giving you +2 ac (basically another armor skin!) and bonus damage that more or less compared to spec as well, with no feat cost.

Shaman:
+3 damage from blood frenzy; +2 from war cry; 1d6 essence... then whatever barb or bard bonuses you may be getting (which the bard bonus bludgeoning damage doesn't stack with some of the barb stuff, amusingly).

Cleric:
+5 from favor; +2 from war cry/battletide; 1 + 1d10 deafening clang; +1 from prayer, bless weapon, etc...

I think something that will catch them up to similar gish classes (mainly cleric) is just the availability of a deafening-clang like elemental weapon spell that goes on temp essence slot. If not deafening clang, maybe a custom spell or just a tuned version of... elemental weapon that fits their themings.

I would also enjoy the bard dip not being so overwhelmingly uniquely powerful as it is. Tumble, umd and the +2 +2 from bard song is incredibly hard for any other dip to beat. But that would come with the caveat of wanting that ac and ab from a different source innate to the class, maybe. It will always be limited in potential prevalence due to needing to keep your CL high.

[Shiki]

I think something that will catch them up to similar gish classes (mainly cleric) is just the availability of a deafening-clang like elemental weapon spell that goes on temp essence slot. If not deafening clang, maybe a custom spell or just a tuned version of... elemental weapon that fits their themings.

AS I recall they used to have some special scaling for lightning shield and elemental weapon in one iteration that might not be a bad idea to re-introduce.

[Svrtr]

I think a problem that melee shaman often suffers from, having been playing one for a while now, is it has a lack of damage unless you are going 2h and barb specifically, due to barb still getting a lot of bonus damage. But if you... want to dual wield or something as a ranger dip- the damage is uniquely piddly even as strength unless you go shaman/barb/fighter. Which the way the class is set up, is not exactly kind to compared to other dips given just how powerful the classes that do have synergies are. Six damage from epic spec vs. giving up potentially 2 ab, 4 ac, saves from bard, etc... Barb giving you +2 ac (basically another armor skin!) and bonus damage that more or less compared to spec as well, with no feat cost.

Shaman:
+3 damage from blood frenzy; +2 from war cry; 1d6 essence... then whatever barb or bard bonuses you may be getting (which the bard bonus bludgeoning damage doesn't stack with some of the barb stuff, amusingly).

Cleric:
+5 from favor; +2 from war cry/battletide; 1 + 1d10 deafening clang; +1 from prayer, bless weapon, etc...

I think something that will catch them up to similar gish classes (mainly cleric) is just the availability of a deafening-clang like elemental weapon spell that goes on temp essence slot. If not deafening clang, maybe a custom spell or just a tuned version of... elemental weapon that fits their themings.

I would also enjoy the bard dip not being so overwhelmingly uniquely powerful as it is. Tumble, umd and the +2 +2 from bard song is incredibly hard for any other dip to beat. But that would come with the caveat of wanting that ac and ab from a different source innate to the class, maybe. It will always be limited in potential prevalence due to needing to keep your CL high.

I will partially agree and disagree. The bard song scaling is immensely nice, but also somewhat limited. It requires a perform investment to use on a predominantly 4+INT class, and the one thing that is nice about melee shaman is it has fairly consistent AB buffs. Its passive AB and (with the transmtuation feat tax) 4 rounds/level blood frenzy is nice, but then song lasts 1 turn and barb (which also is a stat tax for the +2 AB) is also 2d4+CON on a stat spread class, and even with all that its upper limit of AB is less than cleric.

I do yet believe its damage sources are limited, and do agree bard is strong as it provides a self buff to help it in a lot of ways it somewhat needs, but it will still not have battletide, prayer, div power, and div favor all alike. Its peak is higher but still will on average be behind cleric.

It comes back to the sort of sentiment that you spend a lot to still do somewhat less, but with more creative freedom for builds. I am yet of the opinion some shaman unique spell or perhaps spells based on dips if that is feasible (I doubt it but throwing it out there in case it is), a better damage spell like deafening or somesuch, DR on frenzy, and a bonus feat at 15 shaman or 20 shaman to help with its feat spread would all help immensely. The stat tax on barb is fine for 16 CON but huts on -CON races and no CON races who don't get a bonus to STR or WIS since you need the +2 to STR, CON, and WIS to do 23 shaman 4 barb 3 bard well.


So yea, in short the class is still a bundle of QoL being able to get summons and AoV, but you spend a lot to do overall less than cleric. Stat tax, feat tax, potentially skill tax, and still less AB and AC with potential for DI on barb if you have a synergistic race, lacking damage especially for DW to get the most of it, rather squishy all in all even with DI once you're actually being hit, then of course the ever fearful threat of mords. It all adds up to a plethora of short comings, none very severe but all noticeable over time as they stack up


EDIT: Forgot to add, even without bard song scaling I would go bard for UMD, disc, tumble, etc, but nerfing it doesn't seem nice since its another short term AB buff with the skill tax that with +2 from barb rage still falls behind. More synergies for stuff like ranger would be nicer, such as the potential to get bane of enemies with 21 combined levels or else scaling for favored enemy damage and bonuses and scaling for studied enemies you can have or some sort, plus again a weapon damage spell (or dare I say blade thirst with ranger scaling or some other weapon enhancement)

[I will never sleep]

It comes back to the sort of sentiment that you spend a lot to still do somewhat less, but with more creative freedom for builds. I am yet of the opinion some shaman unique spell or perhaps spells based on dips if that is feasible (I doubt it but throwing it out there in case it is), a better damage spell like deafening or somesuch, DR on frenzy, and a bonus feat at 15 shaman or 20 shaman to help with its feat spread would all help immensely. The stat tax on barb is fine for 16 CON but huts on -CON races and no CON races who don't get a bonus to STR or WIS since you need the +2 to STR, CON, and WIS to do 23 shaman 4 barb 3 bard well.

...

More synergies for stuff like ranger would be nicer, such as the potential to get bane of enemies with 21 combined levels or else scaling for favored enemy damage and bonuses and scaling for studied enemies you can have or some sort, plus again a weapon damage spell (or dare I say blade thirst with ranger scaling or some other weapon enhancement)

Agreed with this. Immensely.

Shaman just barely straddles the line of being Good Enough. More synergies would make some other dips more attractive. Just a +3 blade thirst though wouldn't really be good enough- for an effect that anyone can replicate already with bless weapon scrolls.

[Svrtr]

It comes back to the sort of sentiment that you spend a lot to still do somewhat less, but with more creative freedom for builds. I am yet of the opinion some shaman unique spell or perhaps spells based on dips if that is feasible (I doubt it but throwing it out there in case it is), a better damage spell like deafening or somesuch, DR on frenzy, and a bonus feat at 15 shaman or 20 shaman to help with its feat spread would all help immensely. The stat tax on barb is fine for 16 CON but huts on -CON races and no CON races who don't get a bonus to STR or WIS since you need the +2 to STR, CON, and WIS to do 23 shaman 4 barb 3 bard well.

...

More synergies for stuff like ranger would be nicer, such as the potential to get bane of enemies with 21 combined levels or else scaling for favored enemy damage and bonuses and scaling for studied enemies you can have or some sort, plus again a weapon damage spell (or dare I say blade thirst with ranger scaling or some other weapon enhancement)

Agreed with this. Immensely.

Shaman just barely straddles the line of being Good Enough. More synergies would make some other dips more attractive. Just a +3 blade thirst though wouldn't really be good enough- for an effect that anyone can replicate already with bless weapon scrolls.

Yea. As I thought about it, if somehow shaman could get bladethirst or bladethirst scaling dependent on shaman CL if ranger levels are present, for both the enhancement and life regen, this would make dual wield ranger with bladethirst immensely more appealing. How though this can be gone about without just giving shaman bladethirst to its spell book is a tricky question certainly

[Helsing]

But shaman gets Mass Haste and AoV, so it's a better summoner than battle cleric and FS, do we expect it to be as good as cleric on melee too now?

[Za-Lord~s Guard]

But shaman gets Mass Haste and AoV, so it's a better summoner than battle cleric and FS, do we expect it to be as good as cleric on melee too now?

Being a good summoner isn't something that really stands as competitive in the face of Word of Faith. Being a summoner in that sense is like being a domino stacker. You're putting a lot of effort into a style that someone can undo in an instant without much effort. It's not a great plan to balance around it.

[Helsing]

But shaman gets Mass Haste and AoV, so it's a better summoner than battle cleric and FS, do we expect it to be as good as cleric on melee too now?

Being a good summoner isn't something that really stands as competitive in the face of Word of Faith. Being a summoner in that sense is like being a domino stacker. You're putting a lot of effort into a style that someone can undo in an instant without much effort. It's not a great plan to balance around it.

Then are you suppose every good summoner shall be buffed to have same martial power as a 25 fighter/5 wm because summons are so weak one WoF can wipe them all?

[Svrtr]

But shaman gets Mass Haste and AoV, so it's a better summoner than battle cleric and FS, do we expect it to be as good as cleric on melee too now?

Being a good summoner isn't something that really stands as competitive in the face of Word of Faith. Being a summoner in that sense is like being a domino stacker. You're putting a lot of effort into a style that someone can undo in an instant without much effort. It's not a great plan to balance around it.

Then are you suppose every good summoner shall be buffed to have same martial power as a 25 fighter/5 wm because summons are so weak one WoF can wipe them all?

A melee shaman is a summoner in the same way that a regular battle cleric is a summoner. It can take a summon feat, and it has mass haste and AoV. It doesn't have prayer, it doesn't have gate, it doesn't have WoF. If you go for conjuration (or god forsaken necromancy) then you don't have trans so your AoV is weaker and you're now notably worse a melee shaman.

Just because it can summon and have mass haste doesn't mean it is a summoner. This is a sort of false equivalency in that regard. The focus here is narrow, it is worse at melee than cleric and lacks WoF and gate, by virtue of having worse AB and worse attack progression and worse damage. And when we look at how you too cannot buff your summons outside of runic sequencers other than mass spells where you cannot get mass zoo spells nor have domain spells like cleric, then yes.

Once more it comes back to the beginning point of lots of QoL but not really doing exceptionally well in any one area. Its greatest strength is its CL scaling with other classes but this once more is narrow in its scope, thus compared to lots of similar classes it yet falls behind, having nearly 10 less AC and worse gearing options all in all if it wants to have equivalent damage or else having worse damage along with AB and attack progression in both cases if it wants to have competitive AC. Its one stand out feature is its DI but this currently does not feel like enough.


So yes, saying "It can summon and has mass haste" counts for little of its problems. Summoner and caster shaman is very strong, pumping wisdom, having AC, and being a spont caster, but this isn't about caster shaman. This thread is specifically about melee shaman, and buffs to it that would not truly buff caster shaman since no caster shaman is using blood frenzy and taking a malus to saves and AC.