Base mana (level 85)

[Dendrek]

That's fine. The fact you provide 3 spells helps to confirm my calculations. (Though with that passive buff, it's possible that I may get a number that's 1 or 2 points off from the actual number and it still be in the acceptable error range. We'll see when I test the numbers.)

[Etalia]

Edited with the lock

She was the only toon on there without a race change button next to her too. Typical :P

Let me know if any of the numbers look out and I will log back in and double check them.

Edit: I just saw what you saw about the possibility of it giving you an error - if a race change button pops up anytime soon, I'll test her again.

[Dendrek]

The lock is giving me issues. The value is between 20550 and 20558. I suspect it's 20554 (I assume the game always rounds down, which I took into account in the calculations to find this value), but I can't confirm this.

Is the Gnome passive a 5% increase in int or in mana?

[Etalia]

Faction change popped up, transferring her, and will edit the post with new values.

Edit: And for future reference, the Gnome racial is a 5% increase the mana pool in Cata, not int. Sorry for the confusion >.<

Edit #2: Changed her to Goblin. New mana pool size, int is the same.

[Dendrek]

Thank you! (It's really late -- I feel like an insomniac posting at this time of the night.) The value has been updated.

It turns out it's 20553. I had estimated 20554 before... Shame on me for being terrible at math!

[Kaosadvokit]

"Full int gemed" has nothing to do with "base" mana. In fact, that's the exact opposite of what I'm asking for. I want to know mana (at 85) with ZERO int. That means 0, none, zip, zilch, NO int. Also, I'm asking for level 85 values. :X

First of all.. Less douchebagery

Second of all.. You can't ever have 0 Int.

[Dendrek]

Do you know how to read?

[Kaosadvokit]

I'm assuming you are asking if I know how to read because I wrote you can't ever have 0 int like you didn't write that or something..?

I want to know mana (at 85) with ZERO int.

[Dendrek]

No. I'm asking if you know how to read because if you do you'd know what I'm talking about when I ask for "base mana." Even if you don't know what the term means, I've explained it 3 times in this thread. You wouldn't be making uninformed comments about "you can't ever have 0 int" if you understood what's being discussed in this thread.

[Samin]

Well sorry i was trying to help?

and i have no idea what your "base mana" will be. and i dont know any person ever that walks around with 0 int.

ever

Not to bash you but base mana is quite important. Maybe wasn't that much in wotlk, but when mana matters, base mana is important because it is the calculation base of your spells cost. It's quite interesting to get an idea how much your spells will cost.

Quite impressive base mana pools. For my ret paladin that is...what, 4 times as much as currently?

[Maxhp]

I'm assuming you are asking if I know how to read because I wrote you can't ever have 0 int like you didn't write that or something..?

You could try being a bit less hostile and think for about 2 seconds which would lead you to realise that he probably meant zero BONUS int(from gear, etc).
Then again, I guess Dendrek could've been more clear with his post, even though I understood what he meant instantly. He could also afford to be a bit nicer.

I am the bringer of peace. Let's all have a nice time on the forums.

[Kaesebrezen]

Not to bash you but base mana is quite important. Maybe wasn't that much in wotlk, but when mana matters, base mana is important because it is the calculation base of your spells cost. It's quite interesting to get an idea how much your spells will cost.

Or you do it the other way around and take the mana cost of your level 85 spells and calculate the base mana from there -.-

[Kaosadvokit]

No. I'm asking if you know how to read because if you do you'd know what I'm talking about when I ask for "base mana." Even if you don't know what the term means, I've explained it 3 times in this thread. You wouldn't be making uninformed comments about "you can't ever have 0 int" if you understood what's being discussed in this thread.

Uninformed? I was just commenting on how you wrote "Zero int"

I mean, unless you didn't really write that and it was a figment of my imagination...

[Nasser]

I'm assuming you are asking if I know how to read because I wrote you can't ever have 0 int like you didn't write that or something..?

The concept of "base mana" seems to be difficult to grasp in this thread.

Base mana works like this (without any % bonuses to Int or Mana):

xxxxx Base Mana + (yyy Base Intelect * Mana per Intelect) + (zzz Gear Intelect * Mana per Intelect)
|------------------ Naked Mana --------------------------|

What the OP is asking for is that you remove all your gear and talents, and post your naked Mana.
However as you can see above, naked Mana is still not Base Mana due to "Base Intelect" gained when leveling, so he needs to calculate it a bit.

Q.E.D. Base Mana is indeed at "0 Intelect".

There's been 3-4 posts explaining this already, please just post the information for those interested >.>

[Dendrek]

Or you do it the other way around and take the mana cost of your level 85 spells and calculate the base mana from there -.-

I wanted exact numbers. Your method would have resulted in a range of possible values.

---------- Post added 2010-09-21 at 11:32 AM ----------

Uninformed? I was just commenting on how you wrote "Zero int"

I mean, unless you didn't really write that and it was a figment of my imagination...

Do you have any clue why I wrote "zero int"? You continue to demonstrate a lack of reading comprehension, which makes attempting to reason with you impossible, so I give up.

[Vasti]

Why do you want to know base mana values? What good are they? REtri pala here, so I dont know much about mana, other then I dont need int and never run out of it.

The only thing I can think of is, that you want to know the spell costs that are based on base mana. But why not ask for those manacosts instead of base mana?

[Korvax]

I would guess because spell costs are measured as a percentage of base mana.

Edit: and also some spell abilities work with base mana such as innervate on live.

[Etalia]

Dendrek, I just realised something when I logged onto a freshly copied 80 priest and looked at her spellbook: All Priests have a trainable ability called Mysticism which grants a passive 5% bonus to intellect. I didn't notice this on the 85 because she came with it readily trained, and it's listed on the General tab, below Mastery. I apologise if this skews your numbers at all, however know that it is available to ALL Priests, regardless of spec, so whether that means you can include it as baseline or not, I don't know. Sorry :S

Edits:
Checked the Mage: They have a passive ability called Wizardry, that provides the same bonus.
Warlock's have Nethermancy; same bonus.

[Abandon]

That bonus is the "Cloth Specialization" bonus you get for wearing all the correct gear type. It's to encourage Warriors not to wear Leather, Shamans not to roll on Cloth, ect.

[Etalia]

Ah yes I'd forgotten about the Specializations! I didn't realise that's what I was looking at, as on the Mages, Priests and Warlocks (i.e. cloth wearers), its not simply called "Cloth Specialization" like it is for the other armor classes; they've been given their own names. /personal facepalm

So the hybrids also get 5% intellect, provided that they a) wear their own armor proficiency and b) it's their primary attribute. So how does that affect "base mana" for the class as a whole? :/