You get karma through bashing by either offering or taking the gold and buying esteem, and there are quests that give benefits to many people at once. Notice I also said mid-tier people. You have 25 hours of life. If you can't manage 100% karma in those 25 hours, then I'd say you're not trying, in which case my comment doesn't apply to you.

People can influence divine blessings, so those aren't too difficult to get.

The only thing you can lay time-constraints on is the quest aspect of it. I believe there's now a quest that's not impossible that will give an h/m/e bonus to more than one person.


Back to warriors:
- Let's see how how 481 turns out. If solution 1 goes through (the one I'm hoping for), I think something similar for warriors might be good.
- Alternatively, I don't see why there isn't some benefit for higher wounds. Perhaps it shouldn't be damage or additional wounds, but perhaps better chances at RNG would be sufficient.
- For the skills that will hit different body-parts based on chance, allow new syntax that can up the chances for a specific bodypart. Rather than something like a 50/50 spread, a 25/75 spread, etc.

It hits me for the same and I have no DMP

Bump. These are the underlying problems with warriors, and if addressed the damage complaints would likely be obsolete.

There's a pretty big difference between 'not well' and '45 minutes later and neither is dead'. Warriors are leaning heavily towards the latter, if not already there.

And groups is an entirely different beast. Telling warriors not to do their staple move against other warriors strikes me as a bit off.

I'd say this is solely a matter of preference. I for one like being able to rely on wound resistance at the cost of other warriors having the same privilege. Would be interesting to see a poll about that.

I dunno, druids and mages trying to use demesnes against each other doesn't really work either.

True, but that's entirely passive, and warriors are 98% active offense.

Classes are supposed to be strong against the same class.

If warrior v warrior never gets fixed I'm okay with that. The larger concern is to fix it versus everyone else in a fair manner.

You've never tried a mage vs. mage fight or a druid vs. druid fight then.

Bard vs. bard has some similar things due to how deafness and fugue work.

I've always thought that warriors doing large amounts of bleeding damage (in addition to potential bleeding from runes) would be interesting.

If healing and salves shared an application balance, that could make things more interesting too.

No no no no no no no no. Dear god that would be OP.

Anyone with regen afflictions would have almost guaranteed kills against anyone without Healing. Hell, anyone with potent enough salve afflictions of any kind could damage kill anyone who was vaguely squishy.

It's not always easy to reach the point of a regen affliction, and warrior damage is so poor to begin with, so would it be so bad if a serious wound lead to more damage or a longer disabled period?

No matter what's done, it will take something drastic to fix warriors at this point.

Monks.

Here we go again, clamoring for more upgrades.

Warriors are not that bad off. The only real problem I feel we have is RNG. Not the RNG of missing, but the RNG of gaining certain afflictions when they do have the wound levels required and the RNG of swings hitting the secondary and tertiary limbs more than the prime targeted limb. I believe that if those problems were fixed, warriors would be in a lot better place.

No. This always ends badly.

I play a blademaster. I've tried to optimize everything a mortal warrior can do. 19/20 strength, venom combinations chosen to improve damage and/or wounding, weapons for maximised wounds over time, transcendant weaponry, mythical discipline (put all power in lunges), hit multiple limbs per combo, focus on stuns and/or bleeding. Under these conditions, even if my opponent doesnt stance or parry so that every blow hits, people in good robes with a good system can still cure wounds faster then I can deal them out, without them hindering me.

Am I forgetting something, or is warrior combat just not for mortals?

So, I'm inclined to disagree that the RNG is the problem. Aside from that, against opponents with bad curing (so that I can build wounds) I (still) like the unpredictablilty and improvisation. Improving the RNG will boost demigod and artied warriors, but will do little for mortal warriors, since they can't build wounds in the first place, widening the gap between them. Instead of clamouring for upgrades for the top fighters, could we clamour to raise the floor a bit for lowbies?

As another 'mortal' warrior, I have to disagree. Improving the RNG of swings would help us build wounds. If you focus on their chest say, forcing and knowing that their parrying attention is switched there, and your next smite or hack down ends up hitting the parried chest instead of the intended head, that's what makes it harder to build wounds - your intended attack being wasted due to poor luck with RNG.

Go, go RNG tweaking!

(I'm BC, 17str, 12 dex, no weaponaura/forging/arti runes. Just pointing out it's not as bad as you make it out, though aeon & timeecho/oracle passives may skew that somewhat)

I have serious doubts about that. Or your alleged weapons for maximised wounds over time aren't so optimised for wounds over time. 19 or 20 strength means your wounding will only very slightly increase if you get it higher, so being mortal or not won't matter too much here.