Actually, I've been looking at numbers, and I'm kind of curious. They said they modified it in the last racial overhaul. For mana at least, Sojiro is getting 919 and I'm getting 1196 (both with 5996 max mana). We know that the system doesn't deal with decimals very well, but with that there's a whole 1 mp difference from being a 30% bonus. Which has me, frankly, quite confused at this point.

I'm left wondering if they only changed it for health. It's pretty difficult to tell because health has that base random amount, while mana / ego don't. Since they have different formulas, I imagine it's quite possible for only Health's formula to have been examined and not the other two when they did this.

Just for the sake of being fair in this conversation. I know how much that's been frowned upon up to this point, but hey, can always try!

For the sake of balance, the mana / ego ones should probably really just be 5% if they are not (and I'm just flubbing the numbers somehow). Which would help Viscanti and Dracnari out. It's not like Faelings are really lacking on high mana / ego; we mostly need the sip for the health end of things.

Victory is mine.

Seriously, though: Merians and Viscanti are having to become all-singing, all-dancing races in order to appease the fact that they have to be adequate for bards, warriors, mages, AND guardians. And that's what humans are for!

Let a little bit of the burden be carried by orclach for Mag, and one of the other warrior races for Celest. But Celest can decide that question for itself. The krokani rejected Ladantine hard and don't utterly suck as a racial spec, so maybe they can be something to improve upon.

There's been much less mention of Igasho, Krokani, or Dwarves yet as far as I can see: is that because they have zero constituency for RP or combat? But I think that dwarves and orclach especially have a lot of in-depth history within Lusternia, definitely one of the more unique dwarf/orc histories I've heard of, and it would be a shame to not make the weapon-spec warrior races better in general. This thread's had at least a couple of decent ideas for it, though. Maybe we could make each warrior spec race have two weapons choices, as well as a possible org spec for each? If orclach don't belong in Mag, they're never going to get a racial specialization.

Wait, what, you're going to sit here and say 'regardless that quite a few people say it's quite balanced, Aslarans should get +1str/dex anyway?" Seriously? I don't really understand why you think we're out to get aslarans, there is nothing stopping any of us Gloms from becoming aslaran except it's comparable to faeling and we get specced faeling races(specced faeling > regular faeling). No one said that it's better than faeling, we just said it's comparable.

Eh, information happens. Not gonna fault you for testing and finding it being different than expected.

Either way, I realized there is no foundation for debate, the problem was that I said (which was actually a piece of a quote) something about faeling. If you remove that part of the comment, then the change is sound I believe.

Viscanti are doomed to be subpar, so we will stick with whats been noted. Please spec orclach to be a mag warrior race, and improve base stats.

Taurian is a mostly nice race, just buff enrage to cover dex.. with the charge/tackle thing an option. I might even consider taurian if they had that. 15 str 12 dex 16 con with base 10 int/cha. That isnt too bad if you can buff dex with enrage (not as good as some others but I dont mind using decent races I just dont want to use horrible ones).

Requesting for much larger steps than what is, what I think, really needed really doesn't have much of a chance of flying, I believe. Heck, I think current spec races have a bigger chance of getting monk variations than do random races being added to become other org's spec races (like orclach for Mags).

I'm still in favour of small flavour things and helping those which actually need it (like merian and mugwump). Tweaking humans from not being the go-to would be interesting as well, but people might actually frown at that. Though, if humans were tweaked down like that, I don't mind seeing caster human statistics actually being differentiated from one another, just like warrior and monk human statistics are.

Oh, and the all important review of racial resistances and weaknesses, please. Looking past all these people trying to distract from this fact would be good, since I think it's one thing people would like to get looked at.

For one usually keen on history, you clearly don't know orclach from a toad's foot if you think it's random.

Oh, I know what basis you're trying to justify a change to the count of spec races from, but I also know that the likelihood of that ever happening is pretty low. Good try though.

I'm fairly certain we won't see races like Orclach added as spec races for Magnagora. While some Orclach reacted 'positively' to the effects of the taint, a great majority of them did not (degenerating into orcs). Why? Who knows...............

What did that poor ellipsis ever do to you.

We're going all over the place at this point, and focusing too much on specifics. I don't think the admin are going to read all of this, and their eyes are going to glaze over the majority of the arguing and the nitpicking. I'm afraid it might have gotten lost in the post piles, so I will draw attention back to an important point that I would appreciate an admin response on:



THIS IS BIG.

There are a lot of races that this will affect besides, but igasho and tae'dae have always been gutter races, and this would affect them the most. Igasho had its fire weakness increased and Tae'dae had its fire resistance removed AND replaced with a weakness, on the basis that the change to their balance/eq penalties was big enough to not offset their large array of resistances. It would also have special implications for viscanti, maybe orclach, but without knowing where admin thoughts are, it's hard to make suggestions that are sensible.

The other big problem is humans. It is especially a point for warriors, and all these warrior races where suggestions for more dex or more str are being suggested. I don't think we need to ask to know that humans are the standard they are being compared to. Rather than trying to make up reasons for why dwarves should get just +1 dex while igasho get +2 dex or whatever hypothetical argument you wish to create over several races, wouldn't it just make more sense to knock humans down a notch? I did suggest the blanket drop of base stats from 12 to 11 partially in jest, but the longer this thread goes on, the more it does sound like a good idea.

These things, more than anything, would be great to get feedback on.




With that in mind, back to the specifics:

Orlach/Taurian

I've been staying away from these because I myself have mixed feelings on them, and have had quite some mixed responses on whether they are already good or bad. Of note, Akui and Geb both played Orclach for quite a while, and Geb rather liked the race as it was for a PB, while Akui's main issue was really with the fire weakness. Though, if there's not going to be any undead orclach spec, maybe an extra DEX.

I've played Taurian off and on quite a bit, having only played human and faeling more regularly as a warrior, and I've never felt Taurian was all that wanting except in terms of CHA and having to sip bromides more often (I'm such a cheapskate). I'm equally wary as with Orclach on suggesting more DEX - even under enrage - and particularly if we're going to ignore DEX on tae'dae and igasho like they are non-issues. If anything, I might want to see the lash-out damage from enrage increased, so that if we ever have a mob of taurians fighting against each other, that element actually makes it potentially scary for the squishies hanging with them. But even that is probably not needed, and is more just a fun idea.

Viscanti

If you have not done so, read this post.

If anyone thought the forum reaction to Malarious' suggestion of +3 DEX, +3 CHA for just a reduction in taint regen and 1 level of magic resistance was ungracious, I ask that you to counter my points of comparison sensibly. I don't think anyone that plays outside Magnagora liked the suggestion. That doesn't strike me as anti-viscanti so much as that you appeared to be asking to have the master race made and packaged specifically for you, and if you don't think so, I would like a break down of how that suggested set up on a master viscanti compares to a high elfen, and how the high elfen is noticeably better in... anything.

I wouldn't be against +3 DEX and +3 CHA in its entirety, but if you want to be brought closer to the races with no/few resistances, then more resistance has to be lost. For that much of a boost, I'd feel that a level of cutting and blunt would need to go. Too much, you think? Then let's see other suggestions.

Mugwumps

I think Krellan suggested earlier that no one is going to take interest in this race again unless it gets its speed back. I don't think anyone ever responded, and I've never been a dedicated enough caster to really comment. Thoughts from actual casters? Does more resistance/con actually mean anything?

And aslarans... I've already commented on. Buffing one of the premier monk races so they can monk harder than they already do does not feel like racial balancing, and I'm mystified as to why cutting their weakness (which was increased unceremoniously along with the speed nerf the last go around) or giving them more con simply is not an acceptable option.

How about Dwarves?

I feel like brewmeister has given them a special place with bards, but they still don't show up much with warriors, and I'm not sure if this is because Axelord is so unpopular at this point, or because they are in the apparent dex vacuum with nearly every other warrior race. Hard to do anything with them.

What can be done to distinguish tae'dae and igasho more? Tae'dae have more CHA, more resists, and more penalties, and both lack much of any dex to be effective warriors with. If tae'dae get to be made tankier, then is there any archetype they can fall more reliably into? What, if anything, can be given to Igasho so that other resistance heavy races which already have better dex don't just become ++better in contrast? Igasho is the really hard one, I think.

... and I forgot what all of the merian suggestions were.

I actually find that pretty shocking considering orclach ties with Magnagora and especially the ur'Guard. It would make perfect roleplay sense for there to be an ur'Guard Orclach specialisation and I really am not sure how the fact that some Orclach degenerated into orcs is relevant here. It's not as if we're basing Orclach connection to Magnagora on the Taint in the slightest. To quote the help file:

I cannot see a monk spec coming up. Why? Because most races would be too strong as one and others (merian and viscanti) would be entirely useless without major changes to adapt.

Also, I did forget...

For Irontongue:
+3/4 charisma (total)
-3 strength (total)

With the regen/sipping change I think this would be a fairly workable option.

If resistances are weakened however I think Viscanti may wish to pursue additional adjustments as that seems to be the whole foundation the race has such poor stats. We will cross that bridge if we even come to it. Making resistances weaker would make several races a fair bit less desirable imo.

About human.....
Just reduce base str/int/con to 11 and I think you will find them be less appealing

Dropping humans down to 11 in everything at the start just feels like a very heavy-handed change to me.

Why not just alter the evolutions so that the classes are all different, and while we're at it why not make it so that, for balance's sake, on their evolutionary path a human actually loses something? I can't say this is any better of a solution, but I don't see why human mages evolve to have more than 12 strength.

As for Tae'dae/Igasho, have their high size stat contribute to their wounding/chance to proc a wounding affliction/etc. Make it a factor, somehow.

Code-intensive? Most likely, but it saves the trouble of giving them all dex so they can at least be sneezed at in warrior combat.

Viscanti
Viscanti seem to have been made as a "tank" race and were not meant to be the damage dealers the others are. A master viscanti gets 15 int a high elfen gets 17, the viscanti gets 12 charisma the elfen gets 16. Brood Viscanti is 16 / 12 / 16 / 10 / 10.... elfen gets 15 / 16 / 14 / 13 / 12. Elfen are summarily better in every way but resistances, for which Viscanti take their sipping penalty and generally crappy stats. If resistances are being nerfed the race in general will need to see some help (as well as most every other resistance reliant race).

Really it just seems like Viscanti pay twice for resistances, both low stats and sipping malus. Dracnari get comparably better stats (they still have some crappy stats) and have the sipping malus. They suffer a cold weakness but then have resistance to everything through alcohol tolerance on top of fire, poison, and psychic resistance. If elemental weaknesses are being reduced then Dracnari is a far better race than it is now.

The general way I would fix them would be lower their cap to 15, increase min dex to 10, min others to 12 generally. Change penalty to 3 maybe. I dont know anymore, they really would be easier just to lower sipping penalty and admit they are borderline useless.

Anyway.. I am headin to bed so I wont go into things from there. If people have ideas for Viscanti go for it, if people want to fully overhaul the race let me know, we can work it.

PS. Though in hindsight lowering resists to lvl 1 and adjusting stats might be decent if you add the debate damage buff.

DRACNARI
STATISTICS:
Strength : 14 Dexterity : 10 Constitution: 15
Intelligence: 14 Charisma : 12 Size : 14

I really wouldn't call this crappy, and this is without spec. I couldn't complain when I was a dracnari, nobody else really did either. Your larger vitals pools make up for the sip maluses. The only dracnari problem is the Illuminati bashing attack.

Comparatively:

VISCANTI
STATISTICS:
Strength : 13 Dexterity : 10 Constitution: 14
Intelligence: 12 Charisma : 10 Size : 13

Much worse, but with tons more resistances. Worth it? I don't know, but Dracnari are a pretty solid race. If Viscanti wants buffs it'll have to give a little.

You have resistance to all, you have tons more resistance than Viscanti do. As for crappy dracnari, I meant that you are almost the same as Viscanti warrior when you both spec. I read the stats then below that I see viscanti lvl 2 magic, cutting, blunt, lvl 1 poison.. dracnari lvl 4 fire, lvl 2 poison, lvl 4 psychic, lvl 1 cutting, blunt, magic, electric, asphyxiation, (rest of all damage types). You are basically trading elemental weakness for better stats.

Major change version of visc would drop resists to lvl 1 (unless the resists are being nerfed anyway), up int, cha, and dex by 2, add debating damage buff. The higher stats (other than con) could warrant leaving the sipping penalty at this point I would hope except.. possibly add lvl 1 health regen to help offset the increased damage taken? That is just a last note and has not been thought over heavily.

Can a Viscanti comment on the above please? No idea if the resistances make the raise of if the stats would warrant it. Then again knowing the anti visc movement the stats are probably too much for a "tank" race. heh.

Anyway, stayed up longer than expected already. Night!

PS.... if anyone else wants to take over Viscanti let me know, I have little clue what to go on beyond feedback I am given.

(We are still leaving the -2 regen, -1 sipping penalty, and debate damage boost as our request unless we get a better thing worked out

From what I understand not many people play adamant lucidians because they aren't that great.

What the christ are you smoking? :|

For aslaran vs shadowlord faeling discussion (warrior specific)

I'm not sure how lvl3sip supposedly is comparable to +1 con and +2 int...

+1 con is what? about ~300 or so health, +2 int on a surge is what about + 198? so total for health would be around +498.

lets say we have 6000 base.

6498 vs 6000 that's hardly a difference in tankiness. You all know those rough stats are just for the buffer and the major difference lies in your healing rate.

Now what's the healing rate? 974.7(15%) vs 1080(18.5%) your healing rate is still higher by 100 per 4 seconds. So in a minute of combat that's a total of 1500 more health healed.

Now lets add health buffers.

The max I've got on normal buffers are 20% (tosha, throne and what not)
6498 + 20% = 7797.6 = 1169.64
6000 + 20% = 7200 = 1332
difference 162.36 per 4 seconds. In a minute 2435.4 more health healed

Lets add a level3 health rune while we're at it!
6498 + 35% = 8772.3(15%) = 1315.845
6000 + 35% = 8100(18.5%)= 1498
difference 182.155 per 4 seconds. In a minute 2732.325 more health healed.

Look! as your health increases (and ig health goes way above that on full artified) so does the gap on sip difference, don't you just love how multipliers work vs a + on base number? Please don't say +1con and +2int makes Shadowlord Faeling and Asalaran equal on tankiness.

-----

As for strength and dex arguments, you guys are kind of doing it wrong. We don't compare stat per stat we compare with what we can do with stats. Like +str means we can afford less on precision and more on speed on a weapon for example. Then other things like expand, shrink and what not... it becomes complicated after awhile because we have +/- buff weights and higher cap effects as well.

How it works though, with more dex you can afford to have less strength. In a sense those with more strength but less dex will need to hit above minimum wounds on a state to increases rng rate for a wound. While higher dex could get a better probability on bare minimum. That means roughly -1str & +2dex vs +1str & -2dex is approximately the same when it comes to achieving a probability for wounding effect. Now you add a lvl3 vs lvl2 balance recovery on top of that then who ends up on top? In a sense when you integrate that with weapon stats, its possible to have both races achieve the same speed and dish out the same wounds but one will have higher dex and in the end have higher probability of affliction. (Disclaimer it has been awhile since I was a faeling so I need to test it but the difference before was huge and from what I know of how the formulas work Faeling is still higher than Aslaran in that department.)

-----

For regen. Regen ONLY becomes insignificant when it goes beyond cap. Like say Viscanti gets lvl3 regen in taint, then gets lvl1 from demi/titan then gets lvl2 in taint from lich... YEY lvl6 regen, when the cap is lvl3... wtf?

That being said
Faeling - +2 regen in forest
Asalaran - no regen for you buddy.

-----

+++ don't leave out fly please. I paid credits so I can fly.

-----

Then lets add resistance
Aslaran +lvl1 cold resis ooo... -lvl2 fire resis, dammit!
Faelings comparison; no vuns no buffs.

-----

Herb balance?
Aslaran -herb balance
Faeling +herb balance

-----

I'm left with my + lvl1 equi balance. I wish that made a up the difference, really. Except what do I use equilibrium for as a warrior. In combat, not really that much. Force off eq, ok cool. A lvl1 is ~ what now off skills? I invoke circle at 3.9 seconds whats it supposed to be 4? So someone forcing me off eq has to do it about 10 times for me to save 1 second? about 25 times for a swing... well I'm not dissing it, .1 of a second is cool as it can mean life and death sometimes but I'm sure you get what I'm getting at.

say a lvl1 balance bonus + a lvl1 equi bonus is not = lvl2 bonus on either or. This is because these bonus' significance increases when applied to the time it saves/offers on repeated actions. It would be different if there were combos for equi/balance but which class uses a combination of equi and balance for repetitiveness, warrior doesn't.

----

As for what is fire damage, I don't know ask the merians whats fire damage. I can name a lot of mobs that do fire damage. I know a lot of things that give off the burning affliction.

-----

Anyway, I for one don't really care for nerfs and buffs. Buff Aslaran and I'll go yey, but in the end of the day I just play with my cat and be content with whatever it has. I just don't like it when people say they're comparable when they're not.