Unknown2011-10-13 20:22:14
I'll be interested to read these replies in detail after I've had a nap. But peoples, you don't need to snipe at eachother to be effective. As distant a possibility as any of this is, it's fun to speculate, but watching people name-call and brow beat is just a formula for getting a lock, or people ignoring it. Real quick then:
- Changing the underlying mechanics is a non-starter. You're (meaning, anyone) not going to be clever enough to do it without hurting another race that doesn't need hurting. Change races specifically, because, wow, the vast majority of races are viable and fine. Don't risk that.
Counter proposal to Tae'dae-
Reduce balance penalty to level 1.
Reduce cuttinng resist to level 2.
Reduce blunt resist to level 2.
Increase dexterity to 11.
What this does: It makes Tae'dae more functional as knights. They don't need other options, they aren't the only race that is geared towards one archetype. They are still VERY tough, and retain their maluses at high levels (they need to be high, since their constituion is so high already). Functionality as a knight is broken currently because of the balance malus and dex of 8. The above addresses both, and gives up a level of the two "biggest deal" resists tae'dae have in exchange.
Regarding merians/mugs-
Been over this. Neither of these need to give up anything in exchange for being able to survive, gosh. Reduce the malus, increase the con, or some middle ground between the two, or like Alacardael mentioned, give them a little sip bonus. But 10 con with no sip and two BIG elemental penalties? It just doesn't cut it, and their other stats don't make up for this at all.
Regarding faelings-
Assuming my suggestions about giving con and reducing sip to help deal with the "ball of outliers" problem that faelings present are too complicated, SL faelings probably do need that 1 str back. Maybe so they don't flatly outstrip aslaran, lose a small bit of dex when they spec SL in the bargin. Or something. Honestly, my only real concern is SL faelings going from Aslaran - 1, to Aslaran ++. I mean, if Aslaran is a good "speed knight" race for every other org, I don't find it a good argument for any one org to simply have a better version than everyone else.
That said, SL faelings should certainly be functional.
Other- Give dwarves 2 dex. It is at 10 now. They have two solid archetype choices- knight, and brewmiester bard. Both of those need dex. This isn't a make or break the race sort of thing, and I admit I've never even cameo'd into a dwarf, but still, <3, and they need it.
- Changing the underlying mechanics is a non-starter. You're (meaning, anyone) not going to be clever enough to do it without hurting another race that doesn't need hurting. Change races specifically, because, wow, the vast majority of races are viable and fine. Don't risk that.
Counter proposal to Tae'dae-
Reduce balance penalty to level 1.
Reduce cuttinng resist to level 2.
Reduce blunt resist to level 2.
Increase dexterity to 11.
What this does: It makes Tae'dae more functional as knights. They don't need other options, they aren't the only race that is geared towards one archetype. They are still VERY tough, and retain their maluses at high levels (they need to be high, since their constituion is so high already). Functionality as a knight is broken currently because of the balance malus and dex of 8. The above addresses both, and gives up a level of the two "biggest deal" resists tae'dae have in exchange.
Regarding merians/mugs-
Been over this. Neither of these need to give up anything in exchange for being able to survive, gosh. Reduce the malus, increase the con, or some middle ground between the two, or like Alacardael mentioned, give them a little sip bonus. But 10 con with no sip and two BIG elemental penalties? It just doesn't cut it, and their other stats don't make up for this at all.
Regarding faelings-
Assuming my suggestions about giving con and reducing sip to help deal with the "ball of outliers" problem that faelings present are too complicated, SL faelings probably do need that 1 str back. Maybe so they don't flatly outstrip aslaran, lose a small bit of dex when they spec SL in the bargin. Or something. Honestly, my only real concern is SL faelings going from Aslaran - 1, to Aslaran ++. I mean, if Aslaran is a good "speed knight" race for every other org, I don't find it a good argument for any one org to simply have a better version than everyone else.
That said, SL faelings should certainly be functional.
Other- Give dwarves 2 dex. It is at 10 now. They have two solid archetype choices- knight, and brewmiester bard. Both of those need dex. This isn't a make or break the race sort of thing, and I admit I've never even cameo'd into a dwarf, but still, <3, and they need it.
Unknown2011-10-13 20:35:08
Tae'dae
This work too. I would like to open Tae'dae up to Bard, but if we decide that Tae'dae should be Warriors/Monks only, then this proposal is fine as well.
Merians/Mugwumps
I am hesitant to give Merians additional Con unless their Knight spec is toned down (+5 Con). Mugwumps could certainly use another 2 points of Constitution though. I see no problem there.
Dwarves
Sounds good to me.
Faeling
While I would like SL faelings ot be functional as well, I have the same worry as you, SL faelings will outstrip all other warrior races. Already Aslaran are the best warrior race; making SL faelings preferable to Aslaran essentially allows a single org to have access to the best warrior race.
This work too. I would like to open Tae'dae up to Bard, but if we decide that Tae'dae should be Warriors/Monks only, then this proposal is fine as well.
Merians/Mugwumps
I am hesitant to give Merians additional Con unless their Knight spec is toned down (+5 Con). Mugwumps could certainly use another 2 points of Constitution though. I see no problem there.
Dwarves
Sounds good to me.
Faeling
While I would like SL faelings ot be functional as well, I have the same worry as you, SL faelings will outstrip all other warrior races. Already Aslaran are the best warrior race; making SL faelings preferable to Aslaran essentially allows a single org to have access to the best warrior race.
Unknown2011-10-13 20:56:29
Just quickly- yes, altering the Merian Lord spec accordingly would work, if deemed necessary. I could get away with merian lord pretty easily. Not as tough as an orclach, and not great, but Merian Lords aren't crippled like imperials and seasingers.
Edit- putting this in perspective-
Even against mobs that do not strike either fire or electricity, I am meaningfully tougher as an unspeced faeling than I am as a seasinger merian. That's pretty bad. A better choice for me is to be the unspec'd version of another org's specializing race, than be my own org's specializing race.
I'm not trying to say faelings of any stripe are too strong- I'm trying to say non-lord/lady merians (and by very similar situation, mugwumps) are way too squishy.
Edit- putting this in perspective-
Even against mobs that do not strike either fire or electricity, I am meaningfully tougher as an unspeced faeling than I am as a seasinger merian. That's pretty bad. A better choice for me is to be the unspec'd version of another org's specializing race, than be my own org's specializing race.
I'm not trying to say faelings of any stripe are too strong- I'm trying to say non-lord/lady merians (and by very similar situation, mugwumps) are way too squishy.
Sidd2011-10-13 21:14:30
adding +1 point of Str to SL faeling won't make the outstrip aslaran, aslaran will still have more str and more con, it'll just make them close enough that EG can choose SL Faeling to be just as competitive. I don't think it will outstrip aslaran enough for make it unfair, but if it's going to cost a point of dex to get the point of Str, I think that'd be fine
Unknown2011-10-13 21:57:28
Well, I'm a little dubious on the actual squishiness of faelings at demi. Don't get me wrong, they are on the squishy side, but when I'm taking 3 linked lobstrosities as an unspeced faeling (with Throne blessing, life rune, demi stats, RoA, beast bodyguard, acro dodging, for full disclosure here), which is something that's rather hard to do as a seasinger merian, well, the only conclusion I can draw is, I've either been repeatedly and consistently over several trips very lucky with my links since switching to faeling, or that sip bonus is doing a lot for me.
Since it is pretty apparent to my experience that 9 con and a level 3 sip bonus is > 10 con and no sip bonus (not even accounting for the elemental penalties), I feel comfortable enough assuming that 11 con of an SL faeling + level 3 sip bonus is going to be greater than a 12 con, no sip aslaran (with a herb penalty and a fire malus to top it off).
I entirely believe that SL faelings need the extra point of strength. I haven't tested it, and don't have the means to. But it struck me as odd when it went in, and I can see how it might be a problem. But apart from that, they're really really good. I've seen what some of the SL faelings HP totals can get to, they aren't feeling that 9 con the way others might, moreso with the sip bonus.
I don't believe in taking a pound of flesh just for the sake of it, however. My concern stems from, basically, SL faelings becoming essentially as good as a flying aslaran with no drawbacks beyond very slightly less strength. That would be an enviable choice for any org's knights.
Since it is pretty apparent to my experience that 9 con and a level 3 sip bonus is > 10 con and no sip bonus (not even accounting for the elemental penalties), I feel comfortable enough assuming that 11 con of an SL faeling + level 3 sip bonus is going to be greater than a 12 con, no sip aslaran (with a herb penalty and a fire malus to top it off).
I entirely believe that SL faelings need the extra point of strength. I haven't tested it, and don't have the means to. But it struck me as odd when it went in, and I can see how it might be a problem. But apart from that, they're really really good. I've seen what some of the SL faelings HP totals can get to, they aren't feeling that 9 con the way others might, moreso with the sip bonus.
I don't believe in taking a pound of flesh just for the sake of it, however. My concern stems from, basically, SL faelings becoming essentially as good as a flying aslaran with no drawbacks beyond very slightly less strength. That would be an enviable choice for any org's knights.
Enyalida2011-10-13 22:22:18
Lowing some of the odd Tae resists can definitely be done for a bit of stat buff (in con) and a good reduction in speed malus.
I'm with you all on the Merian/Mugwump thing, though holy carp mugwumps are fast with hexes.
Sip bonus is a pretty hugebig deal. Isn't that part of the outcry about the Magnagoran construct, that +2 sip is POWERFUL. I can probably dig up quotes to the effect of everyone complaining that it outstrips any bonus from other constructs. Change the spec a bit, but be careful, Faelings are not a race that is hurting.
I'm with you all on the Merian/Mugwump thing, though holy carp mugwumps are fast with hexes.
Sip bonus is a pretty hugebig deal. Isn't that part of the outcry about the Magnagoran construct, that +2 sip is POWERFUL. I can probably dig up quotes to the effect of everyone complaining that it outstrips any bonus from other constructs. Change the spec a bit, but be careful, Faelings are not a race that is hurting.
Unknown2011-10-13 22:26:48
3) Of course Glomdoring would prefer faeling specializations for their guilds; it's their specialization race. It's the same as how Magnagora would prefer viscanti (refer to Sahmiam's passionate defense of viscanti). Et cetera et cetera for the other organizations.
Can you provide links? Seriously, that is putting words in my mouth.
The -only- thing I've said in this thread is to keep the balancing on races about races. You're the one that keeps getting side-tracked with an issue about a construct. I even went as far as to -agree- with you that dracnari and viscanti would be in the same boat, but I absolutely think that discussion about constructs is off topic when the topic is racial balance.
I'm trying to keep you from getting people side-tracked with irrelevant things, and making things up or referring to things that are off-topic mean that I can't take you seriously. If you read, I have actually addressed any issues in this thread as of yet, except meta-level ones that deal with the validity of arguments.
Unknown2011-10-13 22:36:03
Malarious:
At the moment Faeling vs Aslaran says Aslaran win these contests, even specced. Why? Faeling has a sip bonus! Because strength matters that much. If fire weakness was a huge factor it would have been asked for a removal some time ago. But nowadays with tattoos, proofing, DMP, etc it is pretty easy to get past a weakness primarily performed by damage runes from monks/warriors which changes say a third of their damage is all. Lower sip bonus by 1, increase base con by 1, and give them +1 strength. Would that be good or do you feel the extra con is too good for the loss of the sip bonus? Ok then lets give +1 strength and remove the herb bonus!
To be fair, I specifically remembering asking for a reduction on the fire weakness, but I can't remember if that was before or after aslaran got faster. I think aslaran are fairly well balanced, perhaps a bit on the better side than most. I can say that the reason why they do well is because of the shrinking/expanding abilities at demigod, plus the powers. Nondemigod aslaran aren't nearly as good as the demigod ones, and the case might be that a faeling might do better as the nondemigod. I'm not going to argue that point, though, as I simply don't know nor have the means of testing it.
Sylphas2011-10-14 00:33:00
Sip bonus is huge in PvE. PvP, I don't have enough experience to say for sure, but the combatants are saying it isn't a big deal in PvP. You can't link Astral and say that's the same thing as a group fight.
Silvanus2011-10-14 00:43:45
Sylphas:
Sip bonus is huge in PvE. PvP, I don't have enough experience to say for sure, but the combatants are saying it isn't a big deal in PvP. You can't link Astral and say that's the same thing as a group fight.
If it matters in one, it's going to matter in both, especially when you have to sip between health, mana and ego.
Unknown2011-10-14 00:44:33
Sylphas:
Sip bonus is huge in PvE. PvP, I don't have enough experience to say for sure, but the combatants are saying it isn't a big deal in PvP. You can't link Astral and say that's the same thing as a group fight.
Nobody said that? Unless I missed it.
Unknown2011-10-14 00:48:40
Sojiro:
Yeah, there's nothing minor about a sip bonus
Sip bonus is a moderately significant bonus, and a malus to it can be dangerous.
Some more interesting quotes:
Prav:
I don't think it can really be argued that a level 1 sip bonus is somehow equal to a chance to prevent part of an attack. For reference:
Prevention
Shield of Absorption (500 credits): 15% chance to prevent an entire attack.
Total cost to mimic prevention: 500 credits
Sip bonus
Mayan Ring (500 credits): Level 1 sip bonus that applies to health only.
Ring of Noxtra (500 credits): Level 1 sip bonus that applies to mana only.
By logical extension (500 credits): Level 1 sip bonus that applies to ego only.
Total cost to mimic level 1 sip bonus to all sources: 1500 credits
People (the same people who're arguing now that a +1 sip is "not big") used the "SIP BONUS IS BIG" argument to justify the downgrading of faelings. I laugh with mockery.
Placeus2011-10-14 02:00:01
I don't really get why people say Mugwumpi are poorly balanced. I've been mugwump for well over a year (before the boost to eq bonuses) and have found it to be an excellent race for the guardian play style.
Careful use of guild skills can help overcome the maluses and the speed boost makes landing things like inquisition, crucify or meteor easier and building death rubs faster. Going from a 15% to a 21% speed boost has made mugwump even better at this.
They definitely aren't great at standing toe-to-toe (as bards and mages often need to do), but races that lend themselves to certain guilds and playstyles seem to be a pretty good way to get the racial diversity that everyone claims to want.
Careful use of guild skills can help overcome the maluses and the speed boost makes landing things like inquisition, crucify or meteor easier and building death rubs faster. Going from a 15% to a 21% speed boost has made mugwump even better at this.
They definitely aren't great at standing toe-to-toe (as bards and mages often need to do), but races that lend themselves to certain guilds and playstyles seem to be a pretty good way to get the racial diversity that everyone claims to want.
Malarious2011-10-14 05:29:10
foolofsound:
Proposed Tae'dae changes attempt 2:
-Reduce Balance/EQ maluses to Lv1.
(This opens up Tae'dae to Warrior/Monk/Bard and possibly Psionic Mage, while maintaining the race's characteristic slowness.)
-Remove Lv2 Sip bonus.
-Reduce Cutting/Blunt Resistances to Lv2
-Reduce Psychic Resistance to Lv1
(To make up for the increased offensive power granted by improved speed, some trade-offs from defense are necessary.)
Alternatively, if Tae'dae are not intended to be Mages/Bards, reduce the EQ penalty to Lv2 instead, and leave Psychic Resist at Lv2.
You are infringing on Igashos turf, eq penalty stays!
- Reduce balance penalty to 1 (I would say 2, but even that would leave it useless)
- Retain equilibrium penalties.
- Psionic mage is not effected. Psionics dont care about racial eq.
- Reduce sip bonus to 1.
- Reduce physical resists by 1
- Reduce psychic resist to 1 (not like anyone tends to cause psychic mind you)
You are losing a small portion of tankiness in exchange for a huge increase to offensive potential. Bards are very fast because they are based on instrument speed instead. I was an igasho bard for awhile, it was workable for tanky which is why you would be a tae'dae bard too.
We have other races to fix though still. If the belief is that Orclach are fine then we will leave orclach be, personally I find them pretty flawed still because of huge weaknesses and low int/cha.
Igasho:
- Lower balance penalty to 1.
- Lower magic resistance by 1
This makes them as fast as tae'dae with lower str, higher con, higher dex, and lower cha. Almost 1 for 1 trades but we want to make them a lil diff, and igasho have blademaster buff.
Merian and Mugwump I am still torn on how to handle. I still think merian spec well, its the weaknesses more than anything that make them bad, merian dont feel up to par, mugwumps con stays low and doesnt spec. Add 1 con to merian (lower spec con gain by 1), reduce fire weakness to 1. Raise mugwump con by 1 and reduce electric weakness by 2. This leaves mugwump easy to fry and merian more electric weak than fire but they both get a tanky buff.
Your comparison of rune of sip bonus to rune of absorption is void. Do not compare non lusternian artys to arty ones. You are also talking about a realm you could buy +eq and +bal artys. Their pricing is also different. Do not use misrepresented information to skew a point.
Unknown2011-10-14 15:30:05
Malarious:
Your comparison of rune of sip bonus to rune of absorption is void. Do not compare non lusternian artys to arty ones. You are also talking about a realm you could buy +eq and +bal artys. Their pricing is also different. Do not use misrepresented information to skew a point.
Please note that the price comparison was not by me, it was made by another forum-goer to illustrate the effectiveness of a sip bonus. I was using it, amongst the other quotes, to prove that people believe that a sip bonus/malus is a major deal. If anyone is misrepresenting the information, it is the person who made the original quote.
Malarious:
- Reduce balance penalty to 1 (I would say 2, but even that would leave it useless)
- Retain equilibrium penalties.
- Psionic mage is not effected. Psionics dont care about racial eq.
- Reduce sip bonus to 1.
- Reduce physical resists by 1
- Reduce psychic resist to 1 (not like anyone tends to cause psychic mind you)
This is fair; I was worried about Igasho as well.
Malarious:
- Lower balance penalty to 1.
- Lower magic resistance by 1
Also fair.
I agree that we should examine Orclach. I don't feel that their advantages are great enough to offset their abysmal Int/Cha. While I have difficulty imagining a charismatic orc, perhaps we could raise Orclach Int to 11-12, to give them a reasonable Surge and reduce their vulnerability to manakills.
Malarious:
Merian and Mugwump I am still torn on how to handle. I still think merian spec well, its the weaknesses more than anything that make them bad, merian dont feel up to par, mugwumps con stays low and doesnt spec. Add 1 con to merian (lower spec con gain by 1), reduce fire weakness to 1. Raise mugwump con by 1 and reduce electric weakness by 2. This leaves mugwump easy to fry and merian more electric weak than fire but they both get a tanky buff.
This seems fair.
Malarious2011-10-14 16:56:20
foolofsound:
Please note that the price comparison was not by me, it was made by another forum-goer to illustrate the effectiveness of a sip bonus. I was using it, amongst the other quotes, to prove that people believe that a sip bonus/malus is a major deal. If anyone is misrepresenting the information, it is the person who made the original quote..
Prav told time with a broken clock made of gold plating. Your use of it is still overpriced and will never give us the right time. The attempt to use his statement makes you just as guilty of misinformation, tsk tsk.
Now the part I think you will disagree with. I did not list dwarf as a broken race because their only drawback is lvl 1 eq and low dex. Previously we have increased their dex and they are currently viable monks (tank monks) because of their high strength, tankiness, and lack of balance penalty. Not to mention monks tend to get +dex skills, a stealth acro monk is getting +4 weight without kabob. Their level 1 eq penalty still makes them good bards and they can still pose as warriors and monks.
I think a good compromise for orclach might actually be a skill change too. Change hod (if it isnt already like this) to be a base + % bonus aiming at 4500 being the equalization point. So for instance... if its 25% right now you would regain 1125 mana. So lets make that base first... 575 + 15% which equals out but is better for low mana, and not as good for high mana. Why do 7000 mana people need 25% back anyway right!
Also
-1 fire weakness
+1 charisma
-1 lvl cutting resistance
Swap a resistance for a weakness level and add charisma because no one should suffer a stat of 8. Still ego kll bait, but the hod change would help them with mana kills for highmagic, lowmagic well.... *dirge*. Call it incentive!
Heading out the door had to rush this post so it might not be eloquent.
Unknown2011-10-14 17:30:28
Don't know much about Prav; was only trying to prove that a number of people believe that Sip Bonus is significant.
I am not at all adverse to giving Warriors (or low Int races as a whole) improved ability to resist manakills; note my suggestion about a Health->Mana counterpart to Surge.
I'm on the fence about dwarves. Seems like they make mediocre warriors at best, but I know they make passable monks and bards, so I could go either way on this.
Are egokills really a problem? Only TP mages get an egokill at all, and I feel that weakness to a single tertiary of a single archetype is not a major problem; at least not anywhere near as major as Manakills, which SDs, MDs, BTs, Celestines, and Nihilists have access to as a Primary or Secondary. Oh. And dreamweavers, but I think we can ignore them.
I would be more comfortable giving Orclachs a point of Int or two. Would also like to note that Tae'dae still have 8 Dex...
Trading some Cutting Resistance for reduced Fire Weakness seems fine to me.
I am not at all adverse to giving Warriors (or low Int races as a whole) improved ability to resist manakills; note my suggestion about a Health->Mana counterpart to Surge.
I'm on the fence about dwarves. Seems like they make mediocre warriors at best, but I know they make passable monks and bards, so I could go either way on this.
Malarious:
-1 fire weakness
+1 charisma
-1 lvl cutting resistance
Are egokills really a problem? Only TP mages get an egokill at all, and I feel that weakness to a single tertiary of a single archetype is not a major problem; at least not anywhere near as major as Manakills, which SDs, MDs, BTs, Celestines, and Nihilists have access to as a Primary or Secondary. Oh. And dreamweavers, but I think we can ignore them.
I would be more comfortable giving Orclachs a point of Int or two. Would also like to note that Tae'dae still have 8 Dex...
Trading some Cutting Resistance for reduced Fire Weakness seems fine to me.
Unknown2011-10-14 23:45:35
Good post Mal. I would prefer to see the CON go up by 2 points for merian/mugs (with a corresponding adjustment to the spec con naturally), but anything would be an improvement. I'd rather be a seasinger merian for RP reasons than an unspecced faeling!
Regarding Orclach, I'm slow to suggest improvements because I was one, and I like them a lot. I would question my own objectivity from the outside looking in.
When I was a knight, I made orclach work for my purposes. The int and ego did hurt, but they're hardly unique in that arena. To me it was a trade off. I didn't surge unless I really, really REALLY needed that extra little bit of health. I didn't engage with influencing unless it was strictly necessary, or, occasionally in a low stress revolt, for comic relief. In exchange, my sword was prettier, I was pretty damn hard to bring down with anything health related but fire, and I got to use the "Hooo!" emote. Like most races with some low stat issues, demi powers help.
So, I'm not going to say, "OMG BUFF ORCLACH" because, well, even though I'm a bard and thus, not likely to be one for the time being, it would be a bit like a Jojobo player demanding solar flare be buffed. We all know sundancers are OP already.
But neither am I going to say "oh shush, orclach are fine" because, at the end of the day, I had some other factors working for me, not the least of which was already being demigod.
P.S. Poking the +2 dex for dwarves coals.
Regarding Orclach, I'm slow to suggest improvements because I was one, and I like them a lot. I would question my own objectivity from the outside looking in.
When I was a knight, I made orclach work for my purposes. The int and ego did hurt, but they're hardly unique in that arena. To me it was a trade off. I didn't surge unless I really, really REALLY needed that extra little bit of health. I didn't engage with influencing unless it was strictly necessary, or, occasionally in a low stress revolt, for comic relief. In exchange, my sword was prettier, I was pretty damn hard to bring down with anything health related but fire, and I got to use the "Hooo!" emote. Like most races with some low stat issues, demi powers help.
So, I'm not going to say, "OMG BUFF ORCLACH" because, well, even though I'm a bard and thus, not likely to be one for the time being, it would be a bit like a Jojobo player demanding solar flare be buffed. We all know sundancers are OP already.
But neither am I going to say "oh shush, orclach are fine" because, at the end of the day, I had some other factors working for me, not the least of which was already being demigod.
P.S. Poking the +2 dex for dwarves coals.
Xenthos2011-10-15 13:06:44
foolofsound:
Don't know much about Prav; was only trying to prove that a number of people believe that Sip Bonus is significant.
I am not at all adverse to giving Warriors (or low Int races as a whole) improved ability to resist manakills; note my suggestion about a Health->Mana counterpart to Surge.
I'm on the fence about dwarves. Seems like they make mediocre warriors at best, but I know they make passable monks and bards, so I could go either way on this.
Are egokills really a problem? Only TP mages get an egokill at all, and I feel that weakness to a single tertiary of a single archetype is not a major problem; at least not anywhere near as major as Manakills, which SDs, MDs, BTs, Celestines, and Nihilists have access to as a Primary or Secondary. Oh. And dreamweavers, but I think we can ignore them.
I would be more comfortable giving Orclachs a point of Int or two. Would also like to note that Tae'dae still have 8 Dex...
Trading some Cutting Resistance for reduced Fire Weakness seems fine to me.
Sip bonus is a tricky thing. If you're a race with high con, it has a much larger effect than a race with low con. This is why I am so annoyed by Magnagora's sip bonus construct; it skews racial balance across the board, since it does not help Viscanti only (I would be much happier with the effect if it was Viscanti only, actually). Any health buff a Faeling can get, any other race can get as well. Since they are percentage based... well, every other race gets a much larger boost from those, which means a larger base sip even without a bonus.
Thus I do not feel it is strange for someone to be arguing in defense of a sip bonus for low con races as part of the racial balance, while not wanting other races without that disadvantage to also have a sip bonus of their own.
I do find it strange to say that the sip bonus is so important on a low con race but is a-okay on high con ones, though.
(For the sake of full disclosure, sip bonus does also affect Mana and Ego, which muddies the water much further; but as far as PvE goes, health is king).
Last point I have, diverging from the above post: Giving Shadowlords the 1 point of strength back will not automatically make them "better than Aslaran," but it will make Shadowlord competitive with Aslaran again. The Aslaran extra point of strength above the Faeling's is still in the sweet spot where it makes a significant difference, and the dex differences at those levels have less impact than at lower ranges.
Unknown2011-10-15 13:31:12
Hrm, the problem with SL faelings then is, base 11 con, 13 with demipowers. For people fully deffed and blessed, SL faelings can get pretty solid HP totals (more if they use their nice surge, though that's a trade off, yadda yadda), and then have the level 3 sip on top of that.
Maybe give SL faelings the strength bonus if they give up some of the sip bonus when they spec?
Given what the sip bonus does when health levels rise especially, on top of the generally better non essential stats for faelings over aslaran, and the lack of disadvantages (while Aslaran having the herb penalty and the level 2 fire malus), SL faelings are already better along most fronts, save that one important axis of measurement.
It's the problem with that big outlier race. For the same reason Xenthos feels that a sip bonus construct is too powerful, because it lets them apply a sip bonus to races that are already robust and powerful for greater effect, when SL faelings overcome their low constitution score and ramp their health up, they go from "fast but really squishy" to "fast and pretty tough".
I was skeptical towards the complaints about the sip bonus construct, mostly because I had gotten along with a sip malus using some races well enough, but running around as an unspecced faeling lately as a cantor, and finding myself tougher with low constitution and the level 3 sip than several higher con races, I can well believe it is worth taking a closer look at what happens at the high end.
Whatever is decided, if anything, it should be a two way street. If the sip bonus construct is too strong for high health races and thus inappropriate, then the racial level 3 sip is too strong for faelings able to push their health up past a given point.
Maybe give SL faelings the strength bonus if they give up some of the sip bonus when they spec?
Given what the sip bonus does when health levels rise especially, on top of the generally better non essential stats for faelings over aslaran, and the lack of disadvantages (while Aslaran having the herb penalty and the level 2 fire malus), SL faelings are already better along most fronts, save that one important axis of measurement.
It's the problem with that big outlier race. For the same reason Xenthos feels that a sip bonus construct is too powerful, because it lets them apply a sip bonus to races that are already robust and powerful for greater effect, when SL faelings overcome their low constitution score and ramp their health up, they go from "fast but really squishy" to "fast and pretty tough".
I was skeptical towards the complaints about the sip bonus construct, mostly because I had gotten along with a sip malus using some races well enough, but running around as an unspecced faeling lately as a cantor, and finding myself tougher with low constitution and the level 3 sip than several higher con races, I can well believe it is worth taking a closer look at what happens at the high end.
Whatever is decided, if anything, it should be a two way street. If the sip bonus construct is too strong for high health races and thus inappropriate, then the racial level 3 sip is too strong for faelings able to push their health up past a given point.
