Arcanis:

I would also like the answer of this please, so that I may understand why merians seem so broken. Merians were mostly designed for spellcaster classes and if they arent functioning in that category then yes I admit they would need fixing.

It sounds to me like people are focusing on just Aqua merians with TK. This fully leaves out Aqua merian runists/weavers/TPs, Celestine anything, and Cantor anything. The high CHA would offset some of an Aqua merian TK's lack of CON to make up for their painful weaknesses, but the other specs lack this little bit which renders them unused as a spec, let alone without the spec boosts.

If TK is all the basis someone has to argue that merians, as a whole, are fine, then something is markedly missing in their considerations.

You are missing the point of the question. Why would combat Aquamancers, who would likely choose TK, not choose to play as Merians. It can't be because they are too squishy, so that either reveals that the race's problems lie elsewhere, or that there is some measure of unfounded stigma over the race.

For that matter, weren't you JUST the person who tried to say that Viscanti make perfectly good Guardians and Bards, so we need not make them good mages or warriors?

And I point you to my previous post on racial resistances for spec merians for what I think of their "painful weaknesses".

foolofsound:

10 Proofing+10 Tattoos+15 Frost/Galvanism for everybody
Aquamancers get an additional 15 to both, and access to ForceField, which will presumably be helpful even if it is nerfed. (25% total Fire/Electric resist)
Paladins get an additional 15 to Fire, and much higher Con. (25% Fire resist, 17% Electric resist)
Cantors get an additional 10 to both. (22% Fire/Electric resist)
Celestines get an additional 13 to both. (24% Fire/Electric resist)
Psymet Tahtetso get an additional 25 to both with only one locked channel, not to mention the additional 10 from their tattoos. (33% Fire/Electric Resist)
Acrobatics Tahtetso still get the additional 10 to both from their tattoos. (22% Fire/Electric Resist)

And in any case, I play as an unspecced Faeling, and I manage with my low Con score as a Bard, who have minimal DMP. The only time I'm in danger of being Health killed is when a group focuses on me. 1 extra Con point isn't going to make much difference on if you survive a round of concentrated fire, at least not with any significant number of people.

Xiel:


It sounds to me like people are focusing on just Aqua merians with TK. This fully leaves out Aqua merian runists/weavers/TPs, Celestine anything, and Cantor anything. The high CHA would offset some of an Aqua merian TK's lack of CON to make up for their painful weaknesses, but the other specs lack this little bit which renders them unused as a spec, let alone without the spec boosts.

If TK is all the basis someone has to argue that merians, as a whole, are fine, then something is markedly missing in their considerations.

We balance around the highest tier. If TK Aquamancers can do so well as a merian, then we have to balance around them. It's the same with any other race. No race is supposed to be perfect for every situation.

All merian needs, if anything, is a +1 con. Nothing more.

I disagree, we shouldn't balance around TK; we shouldn't be forcing mages to take TK in order to be effective. The reason for my question is to find the real reason that no Aquas play merian if ForceField can negate the weakness that everyone complains about.

foolofsound:

For that matter, weren't you JUST the person who tried to say that Viscanti make perfectly good Guardians and Bards, so we need not make them good mages or warriors?

Er, what? I play a mage right now, and Viscanti work fine as them. I've also played as a wiccan as a Viscanti, and that worked fine for that as well, so I'm not quite grasping this bit about 'not making Viscanti good mages' when my experience finds them fine in that capacity as is. As a non-spec Viscanti at that.

rika:

No race is supposed to be perfect for every situation.

The existence of org specs counteracts this bit. They might not be perfect, but they're supposed to be at least viable to be one. Outside of merian TK Aquas, this doesn't hold true for the other merian caster specs, which shouldn't be the case.

I beileve you are a druid, not a mage. They are different. One has access to Psionics, which require a high Cha score to take advantage of.
Unspecced Faeling > Specced Viscanti as a Geomancer, and Aslaran >> Specced Viscanti as warriors.

And are you really trying to tell me that a demigod imperial/seasinger merian (max Con 14) with 20%+ resistance to Fire and Electric damage is not viable due to squishiness, yet one with 15 Con and 25% resistance would be? I have a difficult time believing that, considering that I roll around as a non-demi unspecced Faeling bard with platter and life blessing up and manage to deal just fine.

I believe you are wrong. Viynain is a Pyromancer.

Xiel is a pyromancer. Mage, not druid. Though he was a druid before going pyro.

Wasn't aware, but it's not relevant to the discussion of how viable merians are; I want to know if they are unplayable, or if that is merely truth by repetition. The reason I have heard is that the race is too squishy; yet no combat aquamancers, some of which certainly use TK and thus may ignore said weakness, play as the race. That leads me to believe that either the race is not viable for a different reason, or the problem with the race is more psychological.

I am telling you, Phantasmalkiller, that max life rune, tattoos, splendours, proofs, RoA, beast bodyguard, demi points, and even including glamours defenses, and other random stuff that I'm probably forgetting that Merians and Mugs are too squishy relative to my alternatives to make them even break even.

I run around as a furrikin, which has after repeated experiences, as proven a substantially better choice. I run around as an unspecc'd faeling, which is tankier than non-lady/lord merians due to complete lack of maluses combined with a very high sip bonus.

Nobody is asking for some superbuff to merians/mugs. What is being asked for is to make them survivable enough to be worth playing. Not "optimal". Slightly tougher. Even with the most liberal of the proposed changes, merians would still be squisher than faelings.

Instead, what we get, is a few people that, when the Viscanti requests were set aside, reversed their support for changes to merians in what only can be described as a purely "oh yeah, well if I can't get what I want, I don't want anyone else to either" mentality.

My attitude on all these changes has been consistent. I want changes to races to make them playable, not optimal. I was fine with Orclach the way they were. I was fine with Igasho the way they were. I wanted to see Merians and Mugs made slightly tougher than they are, either with straight con increases, or a mixed con increase/malus reduction.

I stayed quiet on races I didn't feel needed it, because that wasn't part of my objective, and I didn't want to get myself, or the thread, bogged down in partisan horse crap. If people got their pet projects through for such changes, I was fine with it. Because the important part was getting the races I feel need it fixed. But horse crap is what it has become anyway. Viscanti changes weren't brow-beat through, and all of a sudden, the response is to try and scream at merian changes that the same posters were largely ok with when things were still up in the air.


So yes, I didn't care if Viscanti got some buff in. They weren't on my "need it" list, because they didn't have a debilitating offensive penalty, and they are tough enough with resists and solid constitution that their sip malus isn't crippling. In fact, I ran around as an unspecc'd viscanti tracker for a time a ways back for the novelty of it. I'm not saying they're super great or the race of choice. But neither is Orclach, and I loved being one.

I wouldn't complain about Merians if they were even as tough as furrikins or faelings. Heck, even with the proposals, they'll still be softer than either one. And that's fine, but they are too squishy now. I have all the toys. I have all the relevant arties. I have demi stats in every damn stat. I have two bleeding trade skills, tailoring and tinkering, with rose-freaking-classes and splendours and proofs and tattoos. I took glamours, because it has a few nice little tricks that help survivability.

And it doesn't matter. Unspecced faelings are a better choice. Furrikin are a substantially better choice. But even that alone, I wouldn't overly care about (though being the unspecced race of another org's spec race over my own spec race, leave alone comparing the other org's acutal spec, should raise eyebrows). I've dealt with other races being more "optimal" than my archetype's spec with both Templars and Paladins. That's fine. What I care about is that the damn spec race (and mugwumps, through sheer similarity) just isn't worth it for what you get- it's too squishy.

So no, TK isn't a huge deal. And even if it were, take it out of the mage spec, the same way all the suggestions plainly aren't trying to buff merian lords/ladies and want the con bonus to be decreased as much as the base con is increased. There's no point in what seriously reads, from some posters, as purely punitive, partisan, and petulant opinion-about faces.

This doesn't address Rika, who has been consistent in the nature and extent of her opinion throughout. Though I disagree with her conclusion, at least I feel it is honest, and not trying to bury things under a pile of fraud because someone didn't get their way.

Question I need answered: are we trying to make "viable" in combat? If so what does that mean? Or are we trying to make spec races optimal or barely sub-optimal? If so, then we have to consider other races.

I was under the impression that we should be trying to make spec races one of the best choices for each of their respective spec archetypes, and thus I want buffs to both races. But now I am being told that we are merely trying to make all races "viable", and that merians are not. I have been told that the reason that Merians are not "viable" is that they are too squishy, yet I am also told that there are no Merian Aquamancer combatants, which tells me a different story: that either squishiness is not the real problem with the race, or that the problem with the race is a stigma on it from repetition of the line "Merians are too squishy". I somehow have difficulty believing that a max Con 15, Fire/Lightning resist 25% imperial merian is going to be significantly more "viable" than a Con 14, Fire/Lighting resist 20% imperial merian; it will improve the race, but if the race is currently not viable, I don't think that such a small change cold make it so. When we begun this thread, I was under the impression that merian needed a buff to become a "good" race, not merely a viable one, like Tae'dae.

On the other hand, if we are trying to make spec races a good choice, rather than merely a viable one, I would like to note that unspecced faelings make better mages and bards than do master or irontongue viscanti. Therefore, if we intend to make Merians into a "good" choice, then I would also expect that we would do the same with Viscanti.

So I ask:
What makes a race "viable"?
Why are merians not "viable"? In particular, why are merians "not viable" as TK aquamancers? Or if they are "viable" as TK aquamancers, then why don't people play them there at the very least?
Are we trying to balance spec races around being "viable" or being "good", as in, being amongst the top choices for a spec guild?

I would HOPE that we are trying to make all spec races a "good" choice for their spec guilds; but if that is the case, then adjustments will have to be made to some of the other spec races; changes that I have been told thus far need not be made.

foolofsound:

I don't care, and never have, argued for being "the best choice". Like I said, I'm fine with Orclach as they are right now. I loved being one, but it's rather silly to be one as a bard so I can't anymore. (Orclach bard spec, gogo!))

It was the same with Dracnari in the Templars and Pyros when I was in those guilds, and the same with Merian Lady in the Paladins when I was in that guild. None were the best choice. But they all were survivable to varying degrees, and didn't have anything particularly crippling their offense. So I was fine with them. For other races, like Faelings and Furrikin, there's enough there that I can make them more surivable. But Merians and Mugs are squisher than either, and all that has been asked for, and all that wound up in Shuyin's solutions, are minor changes that impact the squishiness of the races while still leaving them squisher than either faelings or furrikin.

Perhaps trading a point of Int or level of EQ bonus for losing the two levels of weakness and gaining a point of Con; that would make it a matter of shifting racial priorities than simply buffing a race.

foolofsound:

I beileve you are a druid, not a mage. They are different. One has access to Psionics, which require a high Cha score to take advantage of.

Well, that just made me do a double take. To think someone else would know better than I what I play as made me boggle a bit, let alone have them insinuate that I wouldn't know the difference between the two at that.

With that lapse now behind me hours later, I proceed on!

foolofsound:

And are you really trying to tell me that a demigod imperial/seasinger merian (max Con 14) with 20%+ resistance to Fire and Electric damage is not viable due to squishiness, yet one with 15 Con and 25% resistance would be? I have a difficult time believing that, considering that I roll around as a non-demi unspecced Faeling bard with platter and life blessing up and manage to deal just fine.

I believe someone else made note of it earlier, but the reason Faelings (even non-spec'd) are so prevalent among other casters is not only because of the nice stats (barring CON), but the fact that they not only have no weaknesses, but have a tremendous sip bonus that helps counteract their low health.

I know that when I tried running around as a merian with 35% resistance to electricity and 45% resistance to fire, damage still stung because of those weaknesses. The lack of sip bonus didn't help either.

However, people aren't pushing for a sip bonus for merian, but instead, to bring them up to to what base caster races are in regards to CON and weaknesses. Though, this now makes me sound like I'm trying to convince you when it's not up to you whether the decision goes through at this point. The facts have been stated and repeated, and I'm content at this point to see whether or not they go through the admin now.

Reading through this thread made me think. Viscanti and Illithoid should have a weakness to Divinus and a resistance to Excorable. Doubt anything's gonna come of that, but I still wanted to air the thought.

Whoa now, let's not make divinus even better then excorable then it already is.

foolofsound:

Perhaps trading a point of Int or level of EQ bonus for losing the two levels of weakness and gaining a point of Con; that would make it a matter of shifting racial priorities than simply buffing a race.

That would not be shifting racial priorities. It is just being punitive for the sake of it where it is unwarranted.

Slightly increasing the toughness of merians and mugs, be it either through straight constitution or a mix of constitution and lowering maluses, is a direct solution to a direct problem. It doesn't require nerfing in another area by any means, save for an argument built upon a poor foundation of taking a pound of flesh for fixing what makes the races too weak.


On the div/exo damage thing-

There's no winning that. Bashing stuff aside, lets say, completely arbitrarily, some Div. attack does X base damage. So the Exo equiavlent would go X+E damage to all targets, while the Div would do some, I assume, X + D damage where D is some value greater than E, but only to "undead" type players.

You increase E too much, and Div is weaker because the only time it does more damage is against a select few players who can often even choose whether or not to be "undead" or what not. The subset of players who are hit with the X + D damage will always complain, because they are bearing the balancing weight of D being exceptional against them, but slightly weaker than X+E against everyone else.

You throw in the stuff with bashing weaknesses, and you really get in to issues that nobody is going to win.

There have been so many damn contractions here and falsified logic that it is becoming damn disgusting.

When Viscanti was first brought up and their flawed stats for each class (except Guardian), it was explicitly stated “Not ever race is suppose to be effective at every class…” , and then these same people later state “The racial specs are made to make the race effective at the other classes…”. If we are looking at races from only what they are effective at, then it can be stated “Viscanti can take damage, Merian can dish it out” and I was fine with this. However when it goes as far as to say “the specs of Merian are unbalanced and need to be made better for Merians so that all the classes can enjoy it” then that is just plain bull since Viscanti specs are god damn crap except for Guardian.

Honestly the sheer false evidence brought up to defend Merian so far has been nothing but ludicrous. Xiel stated “You are only bringing up TK Merians..what about Runists and Dreamweavers”. Either this comment was meant to be woefully ignorant or some people are simply closing their eyes to the obvious. Mages for combat are -never- anything but TK or RARELY at times TP. TK is being utilized for every serious Mage Combatant and Hunter out there and to deny that is damn foolish. So yes when Aquamancer is brought up then TK forcefield is as well and with an Int of EIGHTEEN (18) and a Charisma of Fifteen (15), that makes incredibly good damn stats.

Merians Bards get SEVENTEEN (17) intelligence and Fifteen (15) Charisma. Added with their level 2 faster eq recovery, that makes them even better than Faeling stats, especially when they have even higher damn con. I would trade Irontongue Viscanti with its damn Twelve (12) Charisma and Fourteen (14) Intelligence and level 2 sip malus for Seasinger Merian any damn day. In Lusternia it is all about speed in combat, and any major combatant can tell you that.

I dont get the insistence that “Merian Lords/Ladys are soooo freaking bad”. You have a strength of SIXTEEN, and Con of Fifteen and a Dexterity of SIXTEEN. Those are freaking awesome stats for a Knight and FAAAAAAAAR Better than some of the “Knight races” out there. You also have very good intelligence to utilize Surge, something MANY of the Knight races do not get away with. If anything, and I will quote what someone has stated before on Viscanti “It seems like this is just some common whining from the org that has this spec and they just want to whine rather than utilize the race”.

The extra weakness can be dealt with as someone has stated above. It is not that damn crippling...

I also find it humorous that the people who are rallying for Viscanti and stating it is infact supremely superior and downright near OP, not to mention stake their lives that they use it and will use it again any day, are those people who are Opposing the very Org that has the specs…. . Added to the joke is that the members of the Org itself stating that it is in fact not at all good and there ther e is a reason why there are only around 4 active Viscanti in the entire damn game and only 1 is a Combatant (That being Silvanus, so perhaps his input on the race should not be tossed aside with a LOLno).

Oh and if people are going to bring up why Silvanus is good in combat as a Viscanti it is because, like I said, Nihilsits can play Viscanti because they dont have to depend on their intelligence or charisma. Most of the time (as Silvanus can show you in a spar), the Nihilist is tossing his hexes at you and ectoplasming you and then tossing out the crucifix.

So to the reasons brought up that “merian specs for the other classes are bad..”, well Viscanti are not a walk in the park. If specs get to be fixed up for Merians (even though I do not see the need), then the other specs should be as well.

I have this sinking feeling that we are creating another Faeling if we simply buff Merian toughness....
Merians already have (or at least, theoretically have) the best caster offense in the game, that's why their disadvantages exist. We have already agreed that speed is vitally important in Lusternian combat, and merians have Lv2 EQ bonus, allowing them to cast 14% faster in addition to the highest possible Int in the game.
This is hardly merely punitive, notice that I am also asking that Tae'daes' massive defenses be lowered slightly in exchange for a more viable offense. I feel that it is perfectly reasonable to ask the merians give up a level of EQ bonus or even merely a point of Int, reducing their high tier offense, in exchange for a point of Con AND reducing weaknesses by a total of two levels.
I would also be perfectly willing to give Merians either a point of Con OR two levels of weakness reduction, but for both I think that they need to give something up, just as the other races have.

Enyalida:

Whoa now, let's not make divinus even better then excorable then it already is.

Just saying it'd be fun and make sense. :P

I know it's not gonna happen since there's no races where an excorable weakness makes sense. Thus it'd only benefit team Divinus, but I can still dream.