Scholar's Roll

[BroodIfrit]

Has anyone had a chance to see the Conserve MP effects of each number? Or the rate at which the ability procs?
I'd like to test this out, but I don't really know a feesable way of doing it. Any ideas?

[Kylen]

Cast any spell 500 times for each different roll value, and record the number of times you save any amount of mp when casting it. Divide that number by 5, and that's pretty close to the amount of total Conserve MP that you have. For more accurate results, do more iterations.

I can't really think of any better way to test Scholar's Roll, sadly.

[shaddix]

i wasn't impressed on an 11 when i tested with a cor friend of mine

[Callisto]

I've been testing this in my spare time since it came out, but it's incredibly fucking annoying to test.

From what I've seen so far the rates are pretty meh. I'll post my #'s when they're done if noone beats me to it.

[Bakthi]

Post yours anyway; these numbers suck.

I tested as COR 75/WHM 37. It was during a full moon, and dark/lightsday did occur during the testing, but if those have anything to do with Conserve MP, then I give up.

Gear (mostly for MP): dark staff, w.turban, star necklace, loq. earring, antivenom earring, windurstian aketon (modesty!), crimson finger gauntlets, ether ring, electrum ring (yeah), astute cape, skadi feet. I don't know why I had the dark staff really, or the feet, since I just zoned back and forth from the MH. But if either of those affect Conserve MP (it wasn't mentioned), then I give up also. Just listing it for the sake of completion. If Skadi feet turn out to have hidden Conserve MP, well.../anhero

I only bothered testing 2 (lucky), 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11 (6 is unlucky). If you have a SCH roll with any other value, something has gone wrong anyway. This was annoying enough without testing crap I don't really care about.

I zoned out, applied a SCH roll of one of the above numbers, and cast cure 2 on myself until my MP (402) was gone. I noted whether each cast had taken 24 MP or fewer, since according to both wikis, I shouldn't have to record how much MP was actually saved to get the Conserve MP value. This was all solo; I know a 75 SCH that I should be able to get to AFK with me in-party for more testing.

2 Roll (lucky number)
218 normal casts, 20 reduced cost casts. 8.4% proc rate.

7 Roll
122 normal casts, 9 reduced cost casts. 6.87% proc rate

8 Roll
94 normal casts, 5 reduced cost casts. 5.05% proc rate.

9 Roll
120 normal casts, 13 reduced cost casts. 9.77% proc rate

10 Roll
151 normal casts, 8 reduced cost casts.. 5.03% proc rate

11 Roll
87 normal casts, 17 reduced cost casts. 16.35% proc rate

So...WTFBBQKITTENZ, right? 9 is better than the lucky number, 7 is better than 8, and 10 just sucks. I seriously blew through 3 MP pools on a 10 roll in a row with no procs. I was hoping that if I did at least ~100 casts on each number, that would be enough. Sadly, this does not appear to be the case, because these numbers are just weird.

I suspect that if anything, 8 10 and 2 are low, and 9 is perhaps a bit high. 7 9 and 11 are probably the closest to the real thing. I have a headache and my house isn't going to clean itself, so I'm leaving this for now.

[Kylen]

So...WTFBBQKITTENZ, right? 9 is better than the lucky number, 7 is better than 8, and 10 just sucks

Well with only 100-200 rolls, the margin of error is going to be fairly high; your numbers could easily be off by a few percentage points in either direction.

Regardless, though, it's nice to see some initial data for this roll, so thanks for doing those tests. Those numbers are pretty disappointing, and they pretty much confirm that Scholar's Roll doesn't even come close to the overall mp savings from Evoker's roll.

[Xrave]

Those numbers are pretty disappointing, and they pretty much confirm that Scholar's Roll doesn't even come close to the overall mp savings from Evoker's roll.

However it's still the best roll to use with Evokers for any tank party COR assuming you don't need MDB.