The person who best handles badluck is the one who, obviously, does nothing (so saying you handle it fine can backfire here).

It gets a bit strange then when badluck tics four times in a row on you trying to stance or every other hex you draw...

Nobody said that, implied it, or assumed it, except you just now. Handling it fine meant maintaining an effective TK offense, while under attack from full use of paradigmatics in my case.

Because it was simulating the initial post. The only difference was, I was being hit by psychadelic aura in addition.

Natually, this doesn't say anything about illuminati as a whole, as I stated initially.

Close, but not quite correct.

I have fixed it for you, for I am nothing if not a generous and kind lover.

Uh huh. Curing that I was using as well, actually. That handled it just fine. And I was constantly under all the paradigmatics effects. The only time I got in to trouble in our tests was when I didn't hinder at ALL, in any way, and didn't pay any attention to greywhispers. Then he build up insanity on me- but badluck had little to do with that, and much more to do with me getting overconfident and failing.

The whole of the dubious curing argument here comes largely from him sparring with none save two lines from harmonics.

In fact, this same "dubious curing" is the same curing that let me handle badluck well enough to build vessels on him. Which is the aspect of curing that matters for the purposes of this thread.

The whole "bad curing" conversation of this thread was just a pissing contest that, logically, only proves the point if it were accurate- that is, badluck can be handled with "dubious curing" even.

Personally, it's not even accurate. Because he didn't even have the harmonics lines to have curing against it.

I was more talking about how you maintained an 'effective TK offense'. Effective offense means little when your target is called out for dubious curing and then also later admits to not having amazing curing/combat ability. If the person using Badluck had, say, Ceren's curing, and you managed to build vessels and maintain a 'TK offensive', that offense could be called effective. For example, I can stage a very powerful TP offensive against someone who does not focus mind and does not know how to properly test for the masked Telepathic afflictions. But what does that say about my offense?

This also applies in regards to the use of Paradigmatics. I do not have any characters that are in the Templars or Illuminati; I myself am unsure of the full potential of either of these classes. However, the person using Paradigmatics in your testing was shown to be unable to build an 'effective' offense against another target later on. This could mean that the latter target was a superior curer, that the latter target's class abilities are overpowered, or that the person using Paradigmatics is not able to use the skill to its full potential. The mere possibility of that last statement being true means that your testing does not show how "handling it fine meant maintaining an effective TK offense, while under attack from full use of paradigmatics in case".

Alger already tried to point this out. However, you refuted his point with an exaggeration of an analogy. If you had been more serious, your analogy would have something along the lines of, 'It's like arguing that whoever demonstrates the better understanding of climate change is in the better position to discuss global warming.'

EDIT: For those unaware, I am not on a crusade against Badluck. I think Badluck should not proc on touching transplanar devices and I think that Snafu should only affect enemies in the room who are temporarily insane (or some other appropriate nerf because Badluck to all enemies is overpowered for something so simple to put up). But past that, Badluck is what it is and people who have fought against it more can judge it as necessary. I just can't handle bad arguments - the internet must have only the best and most serious of argumentation.

"Wait what? Showing Greg or whomever has "bad curing" merely proves the point for them- because they can demonstratably handle it fine. Feck, I can demonstratably handle it and was able to maintain an offense under the same scenario given in the original post. And if I can do it, that's saying something."

You just said here that "I can demonstratably handle it". Dunno, I tried, and it was ticking off me drawing every other hex. Nevermind throwing would have been a joke. It'd be great to see your log of it ticking and what was your offense like.

I can. Me, for instance, because that list would still way too long. Reduce it to focus MIND and offensive acts and give it an appropriate powercost and we're getting closer to the solution. Give snafu a 10p cost and reduce its duration heavily, because noone wants people to have group dodge for a minute. Or just remove it completely.

Have to wait for greg on the log, but he has it. :shrug: I have it somewhere on my home computer. If I have to eventually clean out all the HTML crap and buffer spam, and clan crap, I'll probably do that, because its lame to wave around a log and then not post it. So treat it as a hypothetical until I can do that, matters not.

As for greg not maintaining an offense (against an oppnent he didn't have lines for, geebus people), that's a different matter and a different opponent. He talked about the results of that, a quick search reveals that. His comments about his curing were contextual to the fight.

I don't know why Vadi got hit every other hex. That happens with statistics. The fire rate is 33% chance on its covered actions. Everything else is just die rolling. If it is firing at greater than 33%, by all means, bug it. Because it shouldn't.



As for the mere possibility of Kalin's curing not being good vis a vis a TK offense invalidating the testing, the solution is to test him against a TK without badluck involved- but unhindered TK offense will build on any system, so it comes down to hindering. Since Kalin was using pure paradigmatics against me, his hindering was composed of badluck and the results of Greywhispers, and eyesnare, though eyesnare is very negligible from the "hindering" standpoint. Since I could handle both, it effectively meant that I was able to build on him. Hence the constant disclaimer of the whole test not being reflective of illuminati.

Of course, on the other side of the coin is the fact that I am not any great shakes as a combatant, and I was able to build on him just by constantly dumping psionics and the same illusions on him (no demesne) through badluck (including a cleanse cure, which worked well to hinder him in return). When I didn't do any hindering, I got in to trouble.

Regardless, being dismissive of the fact that I was able to at all because, against a different opponent for which he did not have proper curing for their specific skills, isn't the proper course of action either. Saying "because Akui could do it, it MUST mean that Gregori's TK curing is terrible! See, he didn't cure well against a skillset he didn't have lines for, and as such couldn't build an offense against that person!" is as off base as it sounds.

As for the analogy, I'd phrase it more like this, in two different ways:

"The person who is a better applied scientist is not necessarily the best person to determine the validity of global warming." or, for a less political topic, "the fastest runner is not inherently the most knowledgeable about the health and mechanics of running".

Also, and gonna depart from global warming because to use that example for this would be seen as "political commentary":

"If a person is invested strongly in ISSUE, then they are not trustworthy to debate the validity of arguments that would dismiss the existence/severity of ISSUE."

In our case, nobody is going to be unbiased here. The only good thing that has come from these threads has been a better understanding of what badluck actually does. And even that had to be dragged kicking and screaming out of some initial threads that were grossly, grossly off base, but argued with all the vitriol and zeal of these later threads.

As for whether or not you're on a crusade Synl, that's irrelevant window dressing. I could say something like "I'm an objective defender of a skillset possessed by the population minority". And who would believe me? People who agree with me. Nobody who didn't. The reverse is true as well. Bias is in the action, not the posture.

So, easier for me to throw out the pretense and own the bias, because even when we tell ourselves we're "objective", we're not really. So what do we see? Kalin is nerfing his own skill, but it's not enough for the forum Jihad. Hasn't even gone through yet. Hasn't even been tested to see the overall effect yet. People haven't even properly disseminated curing that better handles badluck yet. But it's still not enough for the forum mob.

Hopefully, the Administration will learn well the lessons of previous sets and skills.

Then again, if they DO actually nerf choke this time, it would certainly make taking a harder look at Gaudi's incureable boogeyman seem more equitable from a philisophical standpoint.

Sorry to derail, but I can't believe this thread is still going. What is the point in arguing an ability on forums. I did this once and it does nothing, really. Take, for example, my posts about pyromancer demesne and various logs of me keeping up just fine with it or the various fights I did in it against a pyromancer and won, etc. Even though I offered reasonable nerfs that many could agree on and would still leave the meld much more capable than it is now, look where it is. That being said, whatever is going to happen will happen despite what posts and objective material you post on forums. No matter how long of a post you write, doesn't make you any more right than the person with the 2 sentence post above you. Jesus this thread is old.

The only thing this thread proves is that taking examples out of context makes you right.

This picture represents all combat threads, especially those that start with a log.

It's Log. It's Log. It's big. It's heavy. It's wood.

You eeediot.

It's lo-o-og, lo-o-og, it's better than bad, it's good!

Obviously you can't do much more here than try to collect as much information on the skill as possible and state your own view on the consequences you draw. Whether that does anything to influence any decision the admins might make is doubtful, but at least a few people might learn a bit more about the skill.