What if momentum was just shifted to the opponent? Meaning, instead of momentum being based on hits you make, momentum is based on the number of ailments/afflictions the opponent has? Or would that make them too strong in group combat?
Well, I want to get rid of bleeding as it currently is. Skills that currently cause bleeding would either increase bleed wound in a random location or get replaced. Yeah, yeah, I know there are skills out there that cause bleeding and OMG it'd effect a couple of skillsets/classes more than others, but I don't like how the current bleeding is as an outlier in the system and frankly even if we don't do a bleeding wounds, I'll probably just yank out current bleeding and ask envoys to give suggestions to rework those skills impacted.
I understand! If it's on its way out, then we can work around it just like the other changes. I only meant to emphasize that it's not a couple guilds, it's all of Glomdoring (though I would disagree with @lerad and state it's actually, following my report for redcap and barghest a while back, a big part of SD mana drains. The burst from a fed barghest + redcap is a significant bleed) and the most popular mage specialization, and then a couple other guilds on top of that. I just want to make sure everyone understands the breadth of this change, it's not an isolated mechanic like sap and ectoplasm.
So moving forward, I've thought about how to replace redcap/barghest for comparable mechanics and I'm not entirely sure where to go with it. Nightsweats is definitely a significant contributor so that'll have to be reworked. Even Shuck has bleed, though that's less of an issue. If it becomes just a mana drain, it's going to make shadow twist + toad unstoppable. Maybe something that will add a mana sip penalty, but I don't know how that plays into redcap RP.
One idea I had was to instead of replacing it with mana draining attacks, redirect it to hindering. Barghest will become more like homonculus in that it has its own balance and can be commanded to do a scourge like effect, bite with a venom, bark with a stun. Redcap could...not really sure....maybe take the stun from passive barghest and give to to redcap and the redcap can punch the target in the nose like a drunk leprechaun. The argument would be that if we are reducing the our ability to pressure mana, we can rework SDs to function with the lower drain.
My only ask is to not yank the rug out of the entirety of Glomdoring without letting us implement changes at the same time bleed is removed. It's one thing to fiddle with 1 guild in an org, the org can still function effectively. Glom, though, is tied to bleeding across the board and suddenly trying to keep domoths and win villages with a severe handicap while we figure it out isn't something I want to do.
Just going to say, when I fight people I regularly get their bleeding into the 1k+ range extremely regularly. Most of my kills are bleed outs coupled with op monk damage. Losing that bleeding is going to hurt.
I am trying not to really be involved, because the whole reason I like monk is likely going away. I basically program an offense, I get slots, I get limits and I fill them based upon a current goal. We select afflictions to reach a goal and try to find the best ways to do this. The proposal sounds like monks will basically just be warriors, which isn't their design, nor is it ideal. The goal should still be dealing afflictions, not attrition as sit appears to be moving toward. Will the instas be changed to behead since we won't be able to rely on things like chestpain, hardlocks (per se), etc?
I will give some feedback though:
- Why would spending 2 power triple wounding? It is a 30% increase in wounding right now, what changes make 200% increase comparable?
- Sensitivity is 33% more damage
- Could we just delete monks and make a new system? This just looks like warriors and we put a new mechanic on top to make them "different', but lacks a smooth transition.
- Modifiers shouldn't be heavily limited, but I will wait to give more feedback until you have an example skillset @Lerad. We can work from a template if you want.
- Bleeding going away is going to have a lot of skill changes, and some fundamental design change. Although things like TK arent technically effected if the goal is still 12 vessels.
Yeah, I don't mind seeing a different system for monks too. But that's only if the admin are willing to do it. My suggestions above were all only what I think could be ways to integrate monks into a possible new system - we don't even know for sure if the admin will take Kelly's proposal anyway. There's plenty of room to wriggle around and think of stuff.
There's also always the option of keeping things the same by removing wound building from monks in the new system, and just give them afflictions, the same way they function now, too.
Why do I feel like removing bleeding is the bigger news story here, rather than adjusting physical afflictions?
Can we try to adjust Kaimanahi's idea to just have 9 afflictions, and include bleeding with the same cure as the others physical afflictions? Will it mess things up too much, is that why its an outlier, because its not cured like other physical afflictions?
I will admit, that once thought about as a new player, it is sort of weird that the main function of bleeding for most classes, is to reduce mana to < 50%, rather than a damage kill.
The bleeding changes would touch a lot of other guilds, and not everyone necessarily has the interest or expertise to weigh in on the details of the warrior-and-monk-specific parts of this section.
Yeah, if we're changing bleeding to be not-clotted, then you might as well just delete it the way Estarra wants to, because effectively that's what it'll cause: a redesign of all the classes that use it. Of course, I'd rather we not do that at all.
I have always wanted to differentiate blunt and cut weapons more than we have. I don't think it makes sense to share wounding of each damage type in a RP sense, and would like to fork them.
Had you considered contusions rather than 'brusing'?
... some kind of momentum-like mechanic for warriors (so the warrior needs to build something on him/herself rather than the target).
Please, please, please no. Momentum is the thing that I hate the most about monks, and I wouldn't wish it on any other class. Clearly we value things differently, as I would personally keep bleeding, and do away with momentum in favor of some other gate on kata classes
Some kinda of momentum-like. Momentum is a momentum-like system. Wounds are also a momentum-like system. One of my favorite classes in CoV has a momentum system for 'Brutes' called Fury. Momentum systems can be fun.
FracturedSkull: Periodic blackout and prevents use of focus skills. (delayed 4s cure)
ChestWound: Causes additional damage when hit with any physical attack. (instant cure)
SeveredSpine: Prevents most actions like paralysis. (delayed 4s cure)
OpenGut: Causes bleeding and sprawl every 3s if uncured. (instant cure)
BurstOrgans: Causes death in 12s if uncured. (delayed 4s cure)
BrokenLimb: Prevents actions that require the limb, such as attacks or movement. (instant cure)
DamagedNerve: If legs, sprawls and prevents standing. If arms, forces unwield and prevents refilling pipes. (delayed 4s cure)
DisabledLimb: Prevents many actions that require the limb, such as standing, movement, and tumbling. When cured, the new limb has a DamagedNerve. If both arms are disabled, you cannot cure. (delayed 4s cure)
Effects for cutting specs (Mild, Heavy, Critical):
Head - Bleedx1, Confusion, Unconsciousness
Chest - 1s blackout, Bleedx3, damagex5
Gut - Bleedx1, Paralysis, Impale [need to writhe to perform most actions]
Arms - Clumsiness, Bleedx3, 3s stun
Legs - Sprawled, Clumsiness, Bleedx5
Effects for blunt specs (Mild, Heavy, Critical):
Head - 1s Blackout, Bleedx3, 5s 33% amnesia on all actions
Chest - Damagex1, Paralysis, 3s Stun
Gut - 1s Stun, Vomiting, Sickening
Arms - Clumsiness, Damagex2, Spasms that cause damagex1 every 1s for 3s
Legs - Sprawled, Clumsiness, Knocks off balance 3s
I've been trying to make the above rework and it still is very hard to make 5 warrior specializations. (Try using the above to come up with 5 specializations and you'll see what I mean.) It's not impossible though (maybe 8-10 effects per specialization-there'd be a lot of duplication and each specialization would only be able to do 1-2 critical effects). I really believe the "External Afflictions" should be split between blunt and cut (5 each), and I'm assuming the effects are permanent until you heal the wounds down below their wound threshold. Anyway, can someone come up with a Cut and Blunt version?
Personally, I'd be fine with having more external affs than the ten that the goal is. Dropping things from 250+ affs to 40 might be a bit much, IMHO. Having 20 or so external affs won't really hurt much; frankly, I think it'd be preferrable to dropping to just ten.
Personally, I'd be fine with having more external affs than the ten that the goal is. Dropping things from 250+ affs to 40 might be a bit much, IMHO. Having 20 or so external affs won't really hurt much; frankly, I think it'd be preferrable to dropping to just ten.
It hurts when the cure for all of them is the same/on the same balance and people just end up stacking/overloading enemies with the affs. Therein lies the problem. I'd be fine with a second cure meant specifically for external affs if there's more than 10 remaining.
Forgiveness is the fragrance that the violet sheds on the heel that has crushed it.
2. FracturedSkull: Periodic blackout and prevents use of focus skills. (delayed 4s cure)
3. BurstOrgans: Causes death in 12s if uncured. (delayed 4s cure)
4. BrokenLimb: Prevents actions that require the limb, such as attacks or movement. (instant cure)
Cutting:
5. OpenGut: Causes bleeding and sprawl every 3s if uncured. (instant cure)
6. SeveredSpine: Prevents most actions like paralysis. (delayed 4s cure)
7. ChestWound: Causes additional damage when hit with any physical attack. (instant cure)
8 DamagedNerve: If legs, sprawls and prevents standing. If arms, forces unwield and prevents refilling pipes. (delayed 4s cure)
Shared:
9. DisabledLimb: Prevents many actions that require the limb, such as standing, movement, and tumbling. When cured, the new limb has a DamagedNerve. If both arms are disabled, you cannot cure. (delayed 4s cure)
10. Blindness: Cannot see anything, including targets. (instant cure)
Effects, that aren't cured by one of the four cures.
Not sure that my concept was fully understood, but I'll take a shot when I get home or in the next couple days.
It seemed to me as though your concept would be for one or two warrior specializations but not five. Maybe I misunderstood but try to take into account that we need 5 specializations (which means ~10 effects in each, preferably not heavily duplicated).
Estarra, Kelly's suggestion can work for 5 different specs.
The problem you're seeing, which is duplicated effects for all of them, is definitely valid, though - Kelly's suggestion, however, was made with that in mind. That all five warriors have the same afflictions available, and the same goal to work towards for a kill. It's basically one set of afflictions instead of five - which is how she has managed to keep the affliction count low.
The differentiation between specs of her suggestion is tied intricately into how each of the specs function - There is only one full blunt spec, BCs, which means that spec is different from all the others because they won't have access to cutting effects - they'd still have access to all of the afflictions, but not the cutting "effects" of wounds. PBs and BMs are differentiated from each other because of the weapon - onehand versus twohand. BMs will get the option of two afflictions at once, but they'll get a harder time building wounds as compared to PBs, who only ever have the chance of activating one affliction, but can build wounds more easily (which is basically the same way the two work right now, anyway). Again, these two specs will have access to the exact same effects and afflictions - the difference lies in their playstyle and how they reach that endgoal.
PB/BM are differentiated from AL/Cav because AL and Cav get access to blunt damage type, so while PB/BM only get cutting effects, AL/Cav get access to both. The only real problem is that AL and Cav become very similar, though ALs don't get hefting and the other peripheral attacks like Cav - they still are differentiated, albeit less obviously so when compared to the other specs.
The quintessence of Kelly's suggestion is exactly this combination - everyone becomes much more similar to each other, but still maintain distinctive differences, in order to have a system with a minimal amount of afflictions and an easier-to-understand wound system.
Estarra, Kelly's suggestion can work for 5 different specs.
The problem you're seeing, which is duplicated effects for all of them, is definitely valid, though - Kelly's suggestion, however, was made with that in mind. That all five warriors have the same afflictions available, and the same goal to work towards for a kill. It's basically one set of afflictions instead of five - which is how she has managed to keep the affliction count low.
The differentiation between specs of her suggestion is tied intricately into how each of the specs function - There is only one full blunt spec, BCs, which means that spec is different from all the others because they won't have access to cutting effects - they'd still have access to all of the afflictions, but not the cutting "effects" of wounds. PBs and BMs are differentiated from each other because of the weapon - onehand versus twohand. BMs will get the option of two afflictions at once, but they'll get a harder time building wounds as compared to PBs, who only ever have the chance of activating one affliction, but can build wounds more easily (which is basically the same way the two work right now, anyway). Again, these two specs will have access to the exact same effects and afflictions - the difference lies in their playstyle and how they reach that endgoal.
PB/BM are differentiated from AL/Cav because AL and Cav get access to blunt damage type, so while PB/BM only get cutting effects, AL/Cav get access to both. The only real problem is that AL and Cav become very similar, though ALs don't get hefting and the other peripheral attacks like Cav - they still are differentiated, albeit less obviously so when compared to the other specs.
The quintessence of Kelly's suggestion is exactly this combination - everyone becomes much more similar to each other, but still maintain distinctive differences, in order to have a system with a minimal amount of afflictions and an easier-to-understand wound system.
So it begs the question, how would the skillsets of each specialization look? Would it just be 5 skills per skillset? What's the point of transing? Give me a list of 15 skills per skillset so I can see how it would work.
I’ll preface this post by stating my thoughts on current warrior mechanics and balance. As of now, I think certain warrior specializations are in a great state of balance. In fact, of all the archetypes in the game, I feel warriors are very close to being the most balanced at the moment. The only thing that hinders them is the existence of outliers both from an offensive and defensive point of view. This is mostly due to the great variation in armour statistics on the defensive end, as well as variation in weapon statistics (due in large part to expensive artefact runes) and racial statistics and bonuses on the offensive end. If there were greater equalization across the game on these factors, warriors could easily be the most balanced class in the game.
One thing I will state as far as my biases is, that I do not feel simpler is better. Right now, warrior combat is quite nuanced and a good fight allows for the exploration of varying strategies depending on your opponent’s class and curing/defensive strategies. There exists a large skill gap between novice warriors and practiced warriors, and this is owed to the current level of complexity within the system. I believe this is a good thing for the health of combat in the game, and is rewarding to long-term, practiced players. It creates a constant incentive to improve oneself, adding to the longevity of combat enjoyment.
Looking over the proposals, I have a few questions in regards to proposal I. Would we still have wounds-based instakills? Can you explain the roadmap of how a warrior achieves a kill in this system? I’m having difficulty grasping at the general game plan for this proposed system. In addition, I’m worried about the proposed changes to bleeding and the extra layer of curing complexity that it adds. It makes it more work for us to balance across the classes that use bleeding, and I’m afraid of it ever getting too overwhelming too fast.
I’ll state that for warriors, bleeding is fairly ineffective at the moment and virtually never reaches high enough to pressure vitals. Perhaps if we do keep the current system, the doled out values to bleeding can be revisited on a case-by-case basis.
The mechanic where bruising increases balance and equilibrium times is not attractive to me. We had recently called for the improvement of a similar mechanic from numbs given by ninjakari. I’d rather we did not recreate such an unpopular mechanic.
Right now, my leanings are towards proposal II since they are closest to what we have now, and as I’ve already stated, I think our current system is very good. I like certain elements of it, but personally prefer to stick as close to what we have now as possible.
Curing wounds with healing vs Ice
At this moment, I’m not convinced we should make ice the cure for wounds instead of healing. I believe that the current status where one must choose between healing health, mana, ego or wounds is a good mechanic and should be preserved.
In making ice the cure for both afflictions and wounds, we’ll be making it such that more body parts may be wounded at a time than we have now, which would make wound building much, much faster. If wound-based instakills are to remain, they would be much easier to achieve in my eyes. Perhaps under the new system, wound thresholds and afflictions could be newly adjusted to account for this, but we’d need to spend a lot of time re-balancing each specialization.
Decreased Affliction Pool
One of the proposals of the overhaul has been to consolidate afflictions that do similar things and remove afflictions that were seen as ‘filler’ and useless. Given that we have virtually one curing balance to handle most warrior afflictions, removing a number of afflictions will not slow down our ability to outpace curing, but may actually tip it in the other direction. With that in mind, all warrior afflictions in this new system will be assumed to be of some value to the dealer. This creates a problem in a system with much reduced RNG.
The only problem with RNG in the current system is that some of the lower-level afflictions are fairly worthless to the warrior and it could become frustrating under some circumstances to have high wounds and repeatedly roll worthless afflictions. In this new system, if all afflictions retain some value, it is best to keep the RNG very similar to how it is right now.
Taking pureblade as an example, this is how I’d design the wound levels:
Jab Afflictions:
Part
Light
Medium
Heavy
Critical
Head
BleedingAff
BleedingAff
BleedingAff
BleedingAff
Chest
BleedingAff
BleedingAff
CollapseLung
Gut
BleedingAff
OpenGut
Disembowel
Arm
BleedingAff
BleedingAff
CollapseNerve
Leg
BleedingAff
LegTendon
Swing Afflictions:
Part
Light
Medium
Heavy
Critical
Head
BleedingAff
BleedingAff
SlitThroat
Behead
Chest
BleedingAff
OpenChest
Gut
BleedingAff
OpenGut
Disembowel
Arm
BleedingAff
BleedingAff
Collapsenerve
AmputateArm
Leg
BleedingAff
LegTendon
AmputateLeg
As you can see, the tables are very similar to what we have now, but the less used affs have been replaced with bleeding, which is alright. Each warrior spec retains what currently makes it unique in terms of how it deals afflictions. This keeps things in line with the current system we have now, but affs have been removed which were considered largely irrelevant to begin with. As far as my proposal of blunt and cutting affs to keep, here is a rough draft:
Cutting:
Head: BleedingAff, SlitThroat, Behead (Not an aff)
Chest: BleedingAff, OpenChest (May be replaced by BleedingAff), CollapseLung
Gut: BleedingAff, OpenGut (unique to BleedingAff in that it causes sprawling), Disembowel
Arm: BleedingAff, CollapseNerve, AmputateArm
Leg: BleedingAff, LegTendon, AmputatedLeg
Blunt:
Head: Concussion, CrushWindpipe, Brainbash (Not an aff)
Chest: CrushedChest
Gut: SeveredSpine, BurstOrgans
Arms: BrokenArm, MangledArm**
Leg: BrokenLeg, MangledLeg**
*BleedingAff in this proposal replaces affictions like leg/arm arteries and lacerations, slicedforehead etc. Essentially it can be considered an aff on its own that adds periodic bleeding as long as it remains uncured. Perhaps depending on which spec gave it or how wounded a part is, the bleeding may increased. So for instance, on diagnose it can look like “bleeding from a laceration on your (head|chest|gut|arm|leg).”
Similarly for blunt-type specs you could have BruiseAff which replaces affs such as BrokenNose and BrokenJaw, which serves only to increase bleeding while present. For instance "bleeding from a bruise on your (head|chest|gut|arm|leg)."
**As there are no regeneration afflictions in this system, mangled limbs would essentially only matter in that they instantly sprawl and when cured will always cure into broken limbs. In this way, their status as an aff that has longer-lasting effects is maintained.
I know this currently would go above the slated 10 affs per cure, but I think it’s highly worth it to make this exception. Reducing affs in this way would not make warriors any less unique than they already are.
In summary:
Reducing the affliction pool to keep only powerful afflictions, thus also keeping the RNG to maintain balance. Dealing out afflictions would work in the exact same way based on wounds as it does now. Wound levels will be adjusted, and many factors regarding how they are sustained and dealt should be standardized.
Healing will be kept as the cure for wounds. Ice will be the sole cure for all physical afflictions and will always cure the highest level affliction on that limb.
These are just my two cents as someone’s who has played nothing but warrior for the past few years and holds it very dear to my heart.
I echo Rivi's request for the "road map" for instakills/kills for each spec. All beheads are gone now? Are all the spec instakills unchanged? Forcing opponents to choose between curing head to prevent behead vs curing other limbs for the other spec instas is a HUGE feature of warrior combat currently that would be completely removed under the proposals. What I have been reading leads me to think the new warrior combat will be incredibly more linear and less interesting.
Also: - Rebounding is going away, correct? - Why is burst organs on the table? 12s instakill under the proposed systems is entirely unreasonable. This insta will only ever even remotely occur due to horrible curing systems, and not from any skill or merit from the warrior attacker. Even monks with reliable GreenLocks had difficulty bursting against an opponent with capable curing and their BO is only 8s delay.
My working assumption, and it should be clarified if I am correct or not, is that the instant kills are not afflictions, since they don't have a cure, and thus are not part of the 10 limit. They are effects.
So it begs the question, how would the skillsets of each specialization look? Would it just be 5 skills per skillset? What's the point of transing? Give me a list of 15 skills per skillset so I can see how it would work.
Hrm, I'm not sure myself how it would look, but if we were to keep the same format as current Knighthood -> Spec skillsets, then it'd be the same except maneuvers will be gone. The slash/smite/jab/etc commands would be in Knighthood, with the ability to add a qualifier to them unlocked at specialisation, so a warrior could JAB HEAD for wounds, and JAB HEAD AFF for activating afflictions. Then, each affliction could be "unlocked" as the user progresses in their specialisation skillset, so if the user does not know the affliction ability, using the activate-afflictions syntax would result in no afflictions.
For example, if a warrior doesn't have the DamagedThroat ability, and they JAB HEAD AFF when the opponent is at medium wounds, it would simply not give the damagedthroat aff, but only the blindness aff (if they have that). Or something like that. And then, blindness would be available at 50% expert, and BurstOrgans (the goal? that Kelly suggested?) being at trans. Peppered in between will be each of the other afflictions, which will basically be identical for the specs, but things like coule or hefting or heftysword would be the differences inbetween those affliction "abilities".
That would make it as similar as possible to the current set-up. The specs basically get all the same afflictions, just different skills and different weapons, and therefore different mechanics of building wounds/affs.
I echo Rivi's request for the "road map" for instakills/kills for each spec. All beheads are gone now? Are all the spec instakills unchanged? Forcing opponents to choose between curing head to prevent behead vs curing other limbs for the other spec instas is a HUGE feature of warrior combat currently that would be completely removed under the proposals. What I have been reading leads me to think the new warrior combat will be incredibly more linear and less interesting.
Also: - Rebounding is going away, correct? - Why is burst organs on the table? 12s instakill under the proposed systems is entirely unreasonable. This insta will only ever even remotely occur due to horrible curing systems, and not from any skill or merit from the warrior attacker. Even monks with reliable GreenLocks had difficulty bursting against an opponent with capable curing and their BO is only 8s delay.
I think if we want to change BO to behead instead, it's possibly a good idea. The afflictions Kelly suggested could be tweaked to something warriors feel is reasonable. I think the more important aspect to scrutinize is whether her suggestion affords enough complexity to make the system fun. Having the same bodypart be the insta for all five specs DO remove a lot of dimensions from warrior combat. But with the afflictions condensed, curing a bodypart to prevent the one insta that is available at the cost of not curing another bodypart can still be a dangerous decision to make, since the critical effects of the other bodyparts look fairly dangerous as well.
It's also possible to go with what Estarra notes, and make a separate set of afflictions to separate cutting and blunt, and then we can have two different sets of afflictions with different kill-goals, which will mix things up. But that would effectively double the afflictions Kelly proposed - whether that new number of afflictions is something we want with only restorative ice as the cure, is a different question we will want to seriously consider as well.
Burst Organs is a method of killing, but its not an instant kill, and thus can be cured directly. So it's an affliction.
I really hope that bashbrain,behead, etc stay as "effects" and the trans skill.
So there are two methods for each spec to do a kill. (And I would hope 3) 1. Damage / bleeding? (viable finally maybe?) 2. Timed curable death sequence (gut) - physical ailment with a cure. 3. Instant Death (head) - not curable directly and thus is an effect and not an ailment, but needs various wounds at specific levels to be activated.
DamagedLimb = similar to Kelly, leg = no stand + sprawl, arms = wield and no refilling
DisabledLimb = similar to Kelly, leg = damaged effects + no tumble, arms = damaged effects + no parry (need both arms)
8 new affs (?)
The rationale is that the initial proposal still relied too much on RNG and didn't really reward a warrior with results specific to achieving his or her kill condition. Warriors typically had some sort of locking feature, so moving these over to externals opens up spec-specific spots. The effects also seemed to have too big of an impact on groups. I've tried to amend this with the above suggestions. You can replace damaged lungs/throat/gut with boring anorexia/asthma/etc if you want to conserve space.
RE: Specs - Cumulative effects as discussed
BM (critical head goal with secondary bleed based goal):
Head - bleed 1, CostlyClot, Behead
Chest - bleed 1, FailureClot, SeveredSpine
Gut - bleed 1, SlowerClot, Impale,
Arms - Haemophilia, bleed 3, Bleed 5
Legs - Prone, bleed 3, Bleed 5
4 new affs (?)
CostlyClot - costs more mana to clot
FailureClot - clot has a chance to fail
SlowerClot - clot cures less bleed
SeveredSpine - super paralysis
Possible bleed instakill here to pursue, might need to make it unique v. finalsting (?)
Tbh, BM can probably also be moved to an aff-based route instead of bleed if people think that bleed is more thematically suited for a PB or something.
Ideally, I think I want about 4 unique affs per spec, to differentiate them a bit. Furthermore, I'd like to introduce secondary instakill avenues to pursue in the event that the first is untenable for a variety of reasons. Lastly, you're going to want something of a synergy that plays up to a kill goal and clearly has a point.
Since I'm at it, here's my not-fully-fleshed-out goals for the other specs:
BC - bashbrain, damage secondary
PB - heartpierce (chest instakill?), limbs secondary (needs work, this is weak)
AL - severtorso (gut instakill?), execute secondary
CV -sunder (heavy head + chest instakill?), skewer secondary
Anyway, here it is. Numbers are debatable, the intent is what's important.
Why are warriors getting three locking afflictions while having the ability to deliver the fourth along with every hit? Are we moving onto classic Achaea venomlocks? This looks quite fishy to me.
Forgiveness is the fragrance that the violet sheds on the heel that has crushed it.
I think what is needed at this point is a list of all 5 specialities and the 15 skills they have. I would like to provide that, but I don't think I know enough about the different specializations to make a list that won't be full of WTFs.`
Anyone willing/able to give a description of the basic strategy kill method for each of the specs, so I can merge the ideas together in lists which can be disected?
Comments
But that is a lore sort of thing, not anything related to the actual state of combat.
I really like Kelly's proposal otehrwise. And to add my voice to the crowd, no, please don't give momentum to warriors.
Can we try to adjust Kaimanahi's idea to just have 9 afflictions, and include bleeding with the same cure as the others physical afflictions? Will it mess things up too much, is that why its an outlier, because its not cured like other physical afflictions?
I will admit, that once thought about as a new player, it is sort of weird that the main function of bleeding for most classes, is to reduce mana to < 50%, rather than a damage kill.
Blunt External Afflictions (Mild, Heavy, Critical)
Cutting External Afflictions (Mild, Heavy, Critical)
Forgiveness is the fragrance that the violet sheds on the heel that has crushed it.
The problem you're seeing, which is duplicated effects for all of them, is definitely valid, though - Kelly's suggestion, however, was made with that in mind. That all five warriors have the same afflictions available, and the same goal to work towards for a kill. It's basically one set of afflictions instead of five - which is how she has managed to keep the affliction count low.
The differentiation between specs of her suggestion is tied intricately into how each of the specs function - There is only one full blunt spec, BCs, which means that spec is different from all the others because they won't have access to cutting effects - they'd still have access to all of the afflictions, but not the cutting "effects" of wounds. PBs and BMs are differentiated from each other because of the weapon - onehand versus twohand. BMs will get the option of two afflictions at once, but they'll get a harder time building wounds as compared to PBs, who only ever have the chance of activating one affliction, but can build wounds more easily (which is basically the same way the two work right now, anyway). Again, these two specs will have access to the exact same effects and afflictions - the difference lies in their playstyle and how they reach that endgoal.
PB/BM are differentiated from AL/Cav because AL and Cav get access to blunt damage type, so while PB/BM only get cutting effects, AL/Cav get access to both. The only real problem is that AL and Cav become very similar, though ALs don't get hefting and the other peripheral attacks like Cav - they still are differentiated, albeit less obviously so when compared to the other specs.
The quintessence of Kelly's suggestion is exactly this combination - everyone becomes much more similar to each other, but still maintain distinctive differences, in order to have a system with a minimal amount of afflictions and an easier-to-understand wound system.
Also:
- Rebounding is going away, correct?
- Why is burst organs on the table? 12s instakill under the proposed systems is entirely unreasonable. This insta will only ever even remotely occur due to horrible curing systems, and not from any skill or merit from the warrior attacker. Even monks with reliable GreenLocks had difficulty bursting against an opponent with capable curing and their BO is only 8s delay.
For example, if a warrior doesn't have the DamagedThroat ability, and they JAB HEAD AFF when the opponent is at medium wounds, it would simply not give the damagedthroat aff, but only the blindness aff (if they have that). Or something like that. And then, blindness would be available at 50% expert, and BurstOrgans (the goal? that Kelly suggested?) being at trans. Peppered in between will be each of the other afflictions, which will basically be identical for the specs, but things like coule or hefting or heftysword would be the differences inbetween those affliction "abilities".
That would make it as similar as possible to the current set-up. The specs basically get all the same afflictions, just different skills and different weapons, and therefore different mechanics of building wounds/affs.
I think if we want to change BO to behead instead, it's possibly a good idea. The afflictions Kelly suggested could be tweaked to something warriors feel is reasonable. I think the more important aspect to scrutinize is whether her suggestion affords enough complexity to make the system fun. Having the same bodypart be the insta for all five specs DO remove a lot of dimensions from warrior combat. But with the afflictions condensed, curing a bodypart to prevent the one insta that is available at the cost of not curing another bodypart can still be a dangerous decision to make, since the critical effects of the other bodyparts look fairly dangerous as well.
It's also possible to go with what Estarra notes, and make a separate set of afflictions to separate cutting and blunt, and then we can have two different sets of afflictions with different kill-goals, which will mix things up. But that would effectively double the afflictions Kelly proposed - whether that new number of afflictions is something we want with only restorative ice as the cure, is a different question we will want to seriously consider as well.
I really hope that bashbrain,behead, etc stay as "effects" and the trans skill.
So there are two methods for each spec to do a kill. (And I would hope 3)
1. Damage / bleeding? (viable finally maybe?)
2. Timed curable death sequence (gut) - physical ailment with a cure.
3. Instant Death (head) - not curable directly and thus is an effect and not an ailment, but needs various wounds at specific levels to be activated.
Forgiveness is the fragrance that the violet sheds on the heel that has crushed it.