Stone & Fortitude <-- Which is better?

[The Ancient]

Like the title says, I was looking at the stats of Stone and Fortitude but i just wanted to ask which is better in the long run?

Or Is there a specific use for each one, like is it better for a certain character class to use Fort or stone.

Any input would be appreciated.


~The Ancient :jig:

[SirDooFuss]

Stone is good for any character that will be taking a lot of abuse from missiles and melee, but is strickly defensive. No Fast Cast Rate. No added damage.
The LO rune makes Fort a lot more expensive, but give a whopping 300% to physical damage, extra life, FCR, Chilling Armor and resists.
A vipermagi, upgraded or not, with it's +all skills is a cheaper choice for casters. But for missile shooters and melee, you gotta like the Fort!

[HardyTarget]

I'd go for forti anytime, especially for merc (life, res, damage, defense too).
Another armor for merc would be eth shaftstop (life, %dr).

As far as I see, stone only gives high defense (or highest, to be more specific).
It's possible to reach over 5000 when it's made on ethereal sacred armor.
A fortitude can get 4000+ and because of its massive other bonuses, I'd say it's the way to go if you can afford it.

[SSoG]

Stone's a bit overrated, IMO- I don't think it's the best defensive armor in the game, even though it is the armor with the highest defense. I much prefer Gloom, which loses a whopping 50% FHR, but has the second-highest defense total (260% ED possible, compared to 290% on Stone), has 30% better resist-all, and has that super-tasty "ctc Dim Vision when struck". It's also a touch cheaper (both cost a Pul and an Um, but Gloom costs a Shael and a Lum, while Gloom only costs a Fal).

Between Stone and Fort, I'd go with Fort most of the time. Between Gloom and Fort, I'd tend to prefer Gloom, unless I was playing on a character with little off-weapon ED (such as a Bowazon or a Meleemancer).

[plasmo]

Stone is pretty good, but it's nothing compared to Fortitude.

Unless you find an ethereal Sacred Armor and wanna make the highest defense armor possible.

[Jackson]

Although Stone has that seemingly large defense #, it's not that great in the long run when compared with that other defensive abilities such as resists, FHR, etc.

[yetidiah]

isnt fort still higher def than stone cause of frozen armor?

[HardyTarget]

isnt fort still higher def than stone cause of frozen armor?

Actually that's a good question, it comes very close at least.

[Mursilis]

Part of the reason Stone is popular is that it is much cheaper than Fortitude with no required HR (yes I know duping on Bnet made this a moot point, so think SP instead).

Personally I like Stone more than Fortitude for most builds. Fort is used mostly for the +300% damage than anything else and quite a lot of builds simply can't take advantage of that (not including mercenaries here). Stone has other goodies like +stats and charges available (clay golem + boulder), pluse the FHR doesn't hurt much. So unless I'm making a zealot or bowazon then Stone wins out.

[SSoG]

Part of the reason Stone is popular is that it is much cheaper than Fortitude with no required HR (yes I know duping on Bnet made this a moot point, so think SP instead).

Personally I like Stone more than Fortitude for most builds. Fort is used mostly for the +300% damage than anything else and quite a lot of builds simply can't take advantage of that (not including mercenaries here). Stone has other goodies like +stats and charges available (clay golem + boulder), pluse the FHR doesn't hurt much. So unless I'm making a zealot or bowazon then Stone wins out.

I'd recommend giving Gloom a try, sometime. Similar defense, much better resists, and that ridiculously tasty "ctc Dim Vision" that will absolute shut down archer packs (as well as a huge number of melee monsters). Plus, it costs essentially the same as Stone, so price isn't an issue.