*chuckle* I know the difference, but I was pointing out that there is in fact a skill to prevent all magical/demesne attacks. The argument that knights are excessively disadvantaged due to combat/resilience vs Magic resistance doesn't hold a lot of water, as others have more capably described.

I'm also not sure how my combat knowledge effects the number of hits which I took before dying, in the log above.

The same skill also stops all forms of warrior attacks, so what's your point?

Did you read this thread, Icarus? My point is that Faelings should not be able to be slaughtered so excessively.

In reference to that particular comment, I was pointing out to Ceres that although it might immediately seem that physical attackers are disadvantaged by having two common skills that reduce their effectiveness, they also have advantages that guardian/mage classes do not. This balances.

I dont see Faelings being killed more frequently than any other race.

The fact is that races are meant to be different. Faelings have a low CON makes them vulnerable to physical damage, the same goes for Orlachs, Taurians, Taedaes having a low INT, which only needed to be brought down half-way for instant-kills.

I suspect if the gods made it so that there were only one generic race, people would still find ways to whine about it.

*sigh*

If you don't look at that log and see a slight problem, well, I'm not sure I can convince you verbally.

Yes, the races are all different. I'm happy having Faelings the easiest to harm, the worst for bashing, and the quickest to die. But just don't forget, the primary method of interaction in Lusternia is combat. The primary method of defeat in combat is the draining of health.

Every class kills by damage.
Every creature kills by damage.

The only aggressive creatures attack with damage. No influence can hurt you that is not willingly entered.

Thus, if we can be killed in three hits, with half a second of recovery throughout the 'battle', that is a BIG disadvantage. I would count it as far more than a level 3 experience gain, a charisma stat of 50 and level 20 regeneration in forest would make up for.

Insta-kills by mana cannot even compare. The fact is that it is applicable ONLY in p vs p combat, and ONLY by what, three classes? The skills themselves are very high and require both strategy and power. Killing by damage requires none of these things.

At the very least, I would like our small size and incredible dexterity to count for something. At the moment, it doesn't. At least in terms of avoidance.

Edit: Also, unlike every other race (with the only exception being Furrikin, probably), we are totally -useless- in combat. Not just disadvantaged in one area - useless.

If combat is the primary means of player/player interaction in Lusternia, this is a problem. That is why I have suggested previously making influence usable player vs player, and mobs able to randomly attack using influence. Maybe there should be mental interactions possible, battles of the mind that allow weak or uncharismatic races their opportunity to participate.

If this doesn't change, then I think it is reasonable for the race advantages and disadvantages to change.

(changed two classes to three, since I'll be generous and include the Moondancer 'instakill')

To show the problem through inverse:

How about we make low charisma races as vulnerable to debate, compared to the faeling influencers, as the faelings are to the damage output of the high damage race/class combos.

If it takes... say... three hits to kill a similarly ranked faeling, said individual should probably fall to three hits of debate.

Even -then-, it wouldn't be fair to the faeling, because the faeling will die after the debate (excepting the safe rooms, which is where most debate occurs). Quite possibly, the faeling will die before the debate ends.

And then, death by debate has little repercussions individually.

Imagine if debate death were as harmful as real death. Imagine this were all true.

Fair?

And here is where knowledge would help you see things more clearly. The 'three hits' from Murphy are not just any random swings from any warriors. 1) He CRUSHED your leg on first hit deliberately, which cost him 3 power for increase chance of a knockdown and damage, 2) Even with CRUSH and less likely for a normal swing, there is no gurantee that a knockdown would occur at all, if it didn't you would have escaped after the first hit. 3) He got lucky again on third strike with another knockdown, which prevented you frop healing or running away. 4) Have you any idea how many times Murphy has reforged his weapons to get the high damage stats? And he has attached great runes to them.

High damage is what most warriors go for and Murphy has gone to great length to make sure his damage hurt even more. The 'three hits' that killed you are the result of luck, strategy, preparation and countless comms and credits combined. Faelings have low CON and it was unfortunate that you got killed so quickly, but it happens. So what can you do next time? Try parrying your legs.



Small size counts for a lot already, making writhing time negligible. Dexterity is not so obvious but it adds up in a prolonged fight against a warrior.

As for combat, I agree that Faeling is at a serious disadvantage, but races are not supposed to be all equal and balanced. Why become a Faeling when you want to be involved with combat? It's like becoming a Krokani mage then complain about the low mana, and say 'make Krokani mage a viable option, give Krokani mage specialisation that has level 20 faster experience gain'.

Here here Icarus!!!!

I am however in the process of making the most godly hammers now we have a masterwork hammer available to us.......and i'm going aslaran so we'll see how that turns out.

Everything Icarus said has been valid and true in my opinoin -highfive icarus-

You're kidding, right? Prolonged fight? Not gonna happen.

And what guild/class/occupation must Faelings choose to make them viable?

I don't think you're approaching this objectively, nor thinking about all the facets of what is involved. I didn't think logic and reason would convince you.

The player choosing to play the krokani mage has made the choice of choosing a race not well suited to the class.

The player choosing to play the faeling whatever has made the choice of choosing a race not well suited to staying alive.

Is this the fault of the player, or the game mechanics? Hard saying, but I'm still leaning towards giving faelings better avoidance.

staying alive as a faeling is esasy... hire lots of bodyguards.

and once its fixed. stick to influecing.

Another point I would make, is that 98% of all guild skills are combat-related. If you say one particular race are just not meant for combat, then they are just not meant to be in a guild. There's really no point. This is why I suggested creating more non-combat guildskills in other threads, if Faelings are to be kept as is.

Also, it is interesting to note that Tae'dae and Merians can be better influencers than Faelings in their natural home. Both races are arguably capable in combat depending on their class, so it really nullifies the argument that godly influencing is supposed to make up for our frailty.

I think actually much less than 98% of guild skills are combat related but anyway, that's a moot point. You are failing to realize that there exists non-combat guildskills already, tradeskills to be specific. Forging, herbs, enchantment, alchemy, and poisons are all class resctricted, so those already count as non-combat guildskills in a sense. And that's not factoring into general skills.

Again, faelings have low general stats aside from dexterity which aids in dodging attacks, but seeing as you haven't bothered to even trans combat, how do you expect to be able to fully dodge? A Dracnari or Viscanti knight with high strength is still going to be hitting nothing but air if he doesn't bother learning any knighthood. This holds true as well for Faelings that learned no combat.

I play one of those race/class that don't mix very well. Non-specialized Merian Serenguard, not anymore different than a Tae'dae or Krokani Mage. But I managed to stick to it this far because I wanted to try something unique. Do I lack behind other knights with high strength or health? Absolutely, but I've learned that in Lusternia creativity, skills, and adaptability play a much greater role when it comes to fighting than having the 'best' race for a class.

And this is why Knights in Achaea or Aetolia sucked. They have remained virtually unchanged in years, speed knights still dominate because damage is not a viable option to kill people and venoms hit 100% of the time. I've played a Mage and a Knight in Achaea and it is far too easy to shield/rebounding against a knight, even with no eq regain bonus. I've managed to keep a Rajas knight (level 2 speed recovery) using level 3 artifact rapiers from touching me at least for 15 seconds straight. This is why they are and still remain one of the worst class all around.

Also consider the fact that anyone could shield unlimited amount of times here with sufficient mana, whereas you run out of shield tattoo charges elsewhere, that also play a major factor. In addition, in other IRE games, speed knights are usually those with level 1 or 2 balance recovery are able to raze fairly fast and able to dsl successfully fast with venoms to prevent someone from smoking rebounding or shield right after. However, since Lusternia places heavier emphasis on strength knights and damage, not so much on venoms, you cannot compare the two at all. I've played a knight in Achaea for over 2 RL years and am the classlead (equivalent of envoy here) for one of the 3 knight guilds there, I know some of the stuffs I'm talking about.

Its not about choosing a guild that isn't perfect, Terenas. I ask again, what class should a Faeling select to make them viable?

I hate to be the one to have to point this out, but... when was the last time a poorly-timed attack against someone shielded caused you to damage, afflict, or behead yourself? That's why circle/hexagram is just so not rebounding and not comparable to it, in terms of how much of a strategic disadvantage it is to have to deal with it, and I am surprised in all this discussion no one has pointed that out. The fact is, even with the best reflexes sometimes you're going to rebound your attack into yourself because there's no way to avoid the timing happening to line up (even if you have a T1 with minimal latency) once in a while. If 1 in 10, or even 1 in 20, of your attacks hit you, I think you'd notice.

So you also think knights are far disadvantaged, Gwylifar?

Again, I have to point out it all depends on what you choose to do with your class and race. If you intend to be a fighter, it doesn't make much sense to be a Faeling anything, but you could still be one to challenge yourself. As I've said, I'm a non-specialized Merian Serenguard, I would have a much easier time fighting or hunting as a Dracnari, but I enjoy the challenge of being a Merian so I've stuck with being one. Was my race the best for my class? Heck no, but did I stick with it? Yes. Faeling is a sucky race, but if you want a challenge, then stick with being one, if not, go Elven.

Thankyou.

Other races can be compitent in at least one guild whereas faelings suck in any profession.(Until the start letting me sling runes while flying) Influencing is good, but doesnt assist in anyway in PvP which I believe is what Elryn is talking about.