Thanks. Keep 'em coming.

foolofsound:

The suggested reduction is resistances are pretty minor, and ultimately these changes cannot be seen as anything but a buff. I actually calculated it out; a Tae'dae Serenguard with Moon virtually cannot be health killed as of right now. I think cutting back slightly on this ridiculous level of defensive ability in exchange for a viable offense is nothing but beneficial to the race.

(Note: I calculated an average damage reduction of 39% across all damage types for Tae'dae Serenguard with Moon. Those two racial weaknesses? With tattoos, they take 77% damage from those damage types. In addition, Tae'Dae max Constitution is 21. That's a lot of health. Not to mention that Sip Bonus.)
(Note also: This is not as overpowered as it seems; Tae'dae are still highly vulnerable to mana and timer kills.)

Perhaps you'd like to do similar calculations for other races, and realise that this tankiness is a result of warrior with Moon/Night more than anything else. Go run your figures on igasho (more con than tae), or surged spec elfen/faeling with Moon/Night. They can't even surge unless they want to drop down to around 2k max mana. That said, if you're attempting a damage kill, what are the chances you're hitting with blunt/cutting/psychic? Unless you're considering trying to damagekill a warrior (note: plate) as an unartied warrior, in which case you're doing something very wrong regardless of the race.

Tae'dae have already given up some of their tankiness when resistances were nerfed in the last racial revamp. They were also made even slower. Even if you reduced their eq/bal maluses from lv3 to lv2 and changed *nothing else*, it would still be better overall from tae'daes before the last racial revamp. I just see no reason why tae'dae have to give up even more before qualifying for a buff.

In number form, my suggestions would be:

Tae'dae:
-2 balance penalty
+2 dex

Igasho:
-1 balance penalty
+1 dex

Mugwump:
+2 con

I feel the point of Viscanti is being missed. Truly there -is- a reason why people have been complaining about them and not playing them for years now. unspeced Viscanti alone has not one stat that is considered above-par like other races would. Faeling have amazing cha and good int, Tae'dae have amazing strength and con and even good charisma, Merian have outstanding intelligence (even when not speced!), Illithoid have amazing Con and Dex, etc. I know one would say "but their resistances balance them out to be more of tanks rather than damagers" but their sip malus alone counteracts this idea of "tankiness".

Yes Demigod Viscanti are good, but truly all races that get Demigod become "good". I think we need to step away from this thought and think of the race by itself without this addition. Viscanti alone are just not appealing to anyone that comes to play the game. Even speced Master Viscanti have "good" int (15), not amazing, Brood have rather good strength but horrid dex for a Knight and Irontongue are still sub-par in all stats (not 1 above 14).

I know we are focusing on the suggested 5 races currently, but I wanted to point out Viscanti are -not- okay and havent been for some time. After the discussion with the current 5 suggestions are done I would hope that Viscanti are looked at again please?

Also would like to mention that one of the reasons for my previous post was that a member in my guild who is Viscanti and level 91 said they cant keep up their health when attempting to hunt astral creatures. Also trans resilience and acrobatics. If this at all helps in seeing Viscanti in bashing.

During the last round of changes, when we had free reincarnations to test things out, I seriously considered staying Viscanti. I honestly survived better as a Viscanti than as a Faeling (I was a Blacktalon). I didn't keep a Knowledge karma blessing, and it was still good. The resistances do offset greatly the sip malus. I also influenced with 12-13 charisma (throne and demigod+). And no, I didn't get a Penumbra most of the time. The only reason why I went back to faeling because of the RP (ew, viscanti, Tainted scum etc., plus we were at war with Magnagora, plus I could go faeling and be all shadowy).

Regarding the Demigod comment - with the ease it takes to get Demigod (and considering the fact that we seem to churn out 10 demigods a week), it should be considered as an addition.

People have been complaining about viscanti, but it seems like all they do is complain rather than actually play the race.

Stolen and tweaked for my input.
Tae'dae: (unusuable)
- Increase Dex to 9.
- Reduce Balance Penalty to Lv2.
- Reduce Cutting Resistance to Lv2
- Reduce Blunt Resistance to Lv2

Igasho: (unusuable)
- Reduce Balance Penalty to Lv1
- Reduce Magic Resistance to Lv1

Usable/debated but could use a little help
Merian:
- Increase Constitution to 11.
- Reduce Merian Lord spec Constitution modifier to +4.

Mugwump:
- Increase Constitution to 11.

Orclach:
- Increase Int to 12
- Increase Dex to 14

Viscanti:
Increase Dex to 12 base

Also regarding viscanti, there's no reason to be brood (warrior) viscanti. Other races do it better, and the atrocious dex makes it unplayable IMO. It's harder to tweak races which tend to be warrior races because they're so darned stat reliant.

Tae'dae:
-Reduce balance penalty to level 1.
-Increase Dex to 10.
Reasoning: they are big, solid, and slow. That is their thing. The problem is, at the moment they are big, solid and slow like a 500 pound shut in that has to be removed from their house with a crane. Not like Russian bear. Change would make them more like Russian Bear, and less like "What's Eating Gilbert Trundle".

Mugwump:
-Increase constitution to 12.
-Leave everything else alone
OR:
-Increase constitution to 11.
-Reduce fire malus to level 1.
-Reduce electric malus to level 2.
-New special ability- once per month, summon Grover Cleveland to lower commodity prices.
Reasoning: Post U.S. civil war political humour aside, 10 con and two big malus penalties is impractically bad. Yes, they are fast. But with either of the above, they would still be squishier than furrikin. I can make furrikin work, so this doesn't seem unreasonable.

Merian:
-Increase CON to 12.
-Leave everything else alone.
OR
-Increase CON to 11.
-Reduce fire malus to level 1.
-Reduce electric malus to level 1.
In either case: Reduce merian lady/lord con increase respectively.
Reasoning: As it is, it isn't just that some other race is a better choice. That would be fine. You can live with that. It's that like Mugs above, they're too squishy to be fun. The unspecced spec race of another org is a substantially better choice for me (and would be even more so were I tarot!), leave alone comparing the specced version of faelings. Again, I can make furrikin work- I'm still squishy, but its doable. The above changes would still leave merians over all slightly squishier than furrikin, and slightly faster. This makes intuitive sense to me.

Arcanis:

Yes Demigod Viscanti are good, but truly all races that get Demigod become "good". I think we need to step away from this thought and think of the race by itself without this addition. Viscanti alone are just not appealing to anyone that comes to play the game. Even speced Master Viscanti have "good" int (15), not amazing, Brood have rather good strength but horrid dex for a Knight and Irontongue are still sub-par in all stats (not 1 above 14).

I know we are focusing on the suggested 5 races currently, but I wanted to point out Viscanti are -not- okay and havent been for some time. After the discussion with the current 5 suggestions are done I would hope that Viscanti are looked at again please?

First off, you need to balance out around demi, that's just fact, for reasons already explained. If you don't, then the top demigod super OP races rape the balanced non-demi races. That's why you absolutely -have- to balance from the top. You also missed the part where several people stated that they play unspecced Viscanti on a regular basis. I changeling into them if I need to be tankier for a group fight. It really does make a big difference.

You can't come and just ignore what others are saying.

Says Sidd as he ignores Silvanus.

I would also ask you Sidd: Why does Magnagora ave virtually no Viscanti combatants, despite spec bonuses? Viscanti can be use highly situationally, but they are still subpar.

Ixion, I believe the Tae'dae will remain unusable with a Lv.2 Balance penalty; speed is extraordinarily important. Tae'dae are retaining their Lv3 EQ penalty in order to keep the "slow moving" RP, but not be crippled as warriors thanks to balance.

The theory is that Magnagora's combatants like to whine about the race rather than actually play it, despite spec bonuses and the option of raising a construct to mitigate the oft-hated sip malus.

EDIT:

Also, just because I like answering all statements, this was Sidd's reply to Silvanus' last post about viscanti combatants and how Magnagora's combatants choose other races than viscanti.

Sidd:

I regularly roll around as an unspecced Viscanti

I think they're a great race for tankyness as a caster, Malarious and Lothringen have already stated that they think Viscanti guardians and bards are fine and don't really need much.

What I see in those suggestions are a lot of buffs with one little nerf

So I don't really see Sidd ignoring Silvanus.

I haven't ignored Silvanus, see, unlike you, I actually read posts. He asked for outliers that use the spec, I provided them. Lothringen was a magnagoran combatant and he says Viscanti were fine, did you miss that post or just ignore it too? Malarious was also a magnagoran combatant and he says the same thing. As to why Magnagora has no viscanti, I can't say. I did say they weren't the best race (maybe you missed that too?), so it's possible they flock to those races. I have the advantage of having a cameo, so I can change races once a month, and I can say that if I did not have that, I would not be a permanent viscanti. They are situationally useful (turns out most races are, just more races have more situations in which they are useful than others), but they are by no means subpar, if they were, why would Viynain, Vadi or me use them at all?

Lawdy lawdy, calm down.

While we should balance around demigod, balance also has to consider permanently, or semi-permanently being a race. It's all well and good to switch into a race and back out for a situation, but if there is strong reason you'd not want to be a race on a permanent basis, there may be a problem.

Also, having racial problems fixed by wide spectrum patches is a bad idea. Viscanti's sip balance is offset by the construct, but it still leaves them behind by the exact same amount from say... a Magnagoran Loboshigaru who also benefits from the construct. There was so much outcry based around that construct, I can't believe people forget that it does in fact effect everyone. More then anything, that's the problem.

Sidd:

I did say they weren't the best race (maybe you missed that too?), so it's possible they flock to those races.

Sidd:

Eh, I think that SL faeling should be better than aslaran by just enough that eg chose them over aslaran. I realize that this isn't really the case with other spec races, but I'm not against making it so.

Oh no, contradiction!

Viscanti go unused because there are always one or more better choices for each Mag archetype. You say that spec races should be better than or equal to all other choices for those archetypes within that org. I'm not sure where this sudden change of heart has come from (except for an absolute lack of objectivity), but now you are saying "Viscanti are mediocre, useful situationally, so they need not be buffed".

foolofsound:


Oh no, contradiction!

Viscanti go unused because there are always one or more better choices for each Mag archetype. You say that spec races should be better than or equal to all other choices for those archetypes within that org. I'm not sure where this sudden change of heart has come from (except for an absolute lack of objectivity), but now you are saying "Viscanti are mediocre, useful situationally, so they need not be buffed".

I didn't say that at all, you are once again shoving words into someones mouth. I said they weren't subpar or the bottom 5. They can be used and used to great effect, but better choices are out there. It appears your sole focus is to try to demean anything I say now, rather than actually focus on the topic at hand.

See, It makes it really hard to think you have any credibility when you do things like this. I'm not against spec races being better choices for guilds(I've said this multiple times as well, I also said I don't think it's possible to make every race 'the best' choice), I just don't think that viscanti are in the realm of the bottom 5 races. When you take context, you'll see there is no contradiction.

Go ahead, find more quotes trying to prove me wrong.

As far as Enyalida said, I agree, There isn't really a strong reason I don't stay viscanti other than wanting to maximize potential in other areas. Not all races need to be great at everything. I'm not about to stay viscanti if I want to influence some guards, I'll go faeling, or if I'm trying to gather a bunch of essence, I'll go human, or if I want speed, I'll go mugwump etc. Viscanti is good, it's just not the best, it's definitely not in the bottom 5 races.

Sidd:

I think they're a great race for tankyness as a caster, Malarious and Lothringen have already stated that they think Viscanti guardians and bards are fine and don't really need much.

No one is arguing that it is in the Bottom 5 Sidd; perhaps you should stop shoving words into people's mouths. I accepted the listed Bottom 5 as the races to be fixed first. What we are asking is the we discuss Viscanti afterwards, time permitting (which Shuyin has already listed as a possibility; perhaps you should read all the posts). You and others have heavily implied that you are opposed to buffing Viscanti at all; none of your previous posts list the reason for not discussing them as "Not in the bottom five", instead you list the reason repeatedly as "Viscanti are fine, I use them all the time". You have changed your entire argument in a single post in order to avoid what truly does amount to contradiction, as well as blatant self-service in your arguments (buff Faeling, don't buff Viscanti).

Yes, I am attempting to discredit you, just as you do to me. I feel that you lack any sort of objectivity on this or any other balance subject, and I believe that I am fully justified in calling you out on it. For the record, I DO read every post; you either are ineffectual at getting your meaning across or, as I suspect, change your "intended meaning" later when your opponent makes arguments against you in the hopes of discrediting them. In either case, the discussion of Viscanti can be put on hold for now, as can any further argument between us, as it's not likely to take us anywhere useful.

As lovely as it is to hear the insinuations that we are constantly insulting one another in some form...., shall we move on and attempt to calm down?

Sidd, so far your main point in insisting that Viscanti are alright is that strong fighters (Such as Viynain and Vadi) have mentioned that they have played these races at some point and found them rather acceptable. While we can all accept the points made, and they do offer a bit of evidence as to the effectiveness of Viscanti, we also must take into consideration why it is several of the people who have claimed "Viscanti work" have not remained Viscanti as well. As you said "Viscanti is good in certain situations" but what someone is looking for is not a race that would be useful at certain opportunities (such as when you are being ganged up on and attempting to handle the damage), but rather they are looking for a race that is overall satisfactory to their needs.

For example, Influencing plays a rather large role in -many- of Lusternia's players lives, however by reviewing Viscanti their charisma is almost shameful, thus those players that want to influence will look away from being that race.

Now let us consider the other players that come in intended to Bash their way until their fingers go numb. Viscanti offers barely "acceptable" hunting privileges, what with their resistances and a con of 14 is not all that bad. However when one's eyes land on the sip malus, one will think "I should pick another race that will allow me to be more effective" (usually that race being Illithoid/Faeling for Mage, or Trill/Faeling for Bard or Orclach/Aslaran for Knights). I know that these races are usually wanted above all else, but I am mostly pointing out that those that would -want- to be Viscanti for the fun and RP of it find that the disadvantages tend to overweight this for them and they seek another race.

This leaves us with Combat. From a combat perspectives, Viscanti stats can be deemed agreeable, but as You have been stating "in certain circumstances", also Viscanti (with specs) is only "good" for Guardian and (as one has claimed) Bards yes? This brings us back to the point that one would attempt choose a race more agreeable for more aspects of combat in general, and that could maximize their damage/kill potential rather than make them somewhat tanky enough to take damage dealt to them.

Does this perhaps explain more to everyone?

Also concerning the fighters here that have stated they found Viscanti acceptable, could you perhaps give a more defined summary of it exactly? I have reviewed and found only 2 to 3 lines of these fighters saying "I have been Viscanti, and found it good (paraphrased)". Perhaps mention weaknesses you struggled with? Disadvantages you found compared to other races you utilized? etc? More information in general would be very helpful in understand the strengths you said you discovered.

foolofsound:


No one is arguing that it is in the Bottom 5 Sidd; perhaps you should stop shoving words into people's mouths.

Where did I do this? I'm curious, I was merely stating what -I- already said. I didn't say anyone else said this. Lets compare that to your previous statement

foolofsound:

... you are saying "Viscanti are mediocre, useful situationally, so they need not be buffed".

See the difference there? You are trying to tell me what -I- am saying while I'm just re-iterating what -I- am saying. That's not me shoving words into anyone's mouth but my own.

I'm not quite sure how saying Viscanti are viable and usuable all the suddens transforms me into not wanting them to be buffed and makes me adamantly against it. You posted in quote none less, that I said Vicanti was mediocre (I said no such thing, anywhere), was not the best race (I did say this), and they don't need any buffs (not quite sure where I said this one either.)

I figured this thread was for adjustments to the bottom 5 races, thus I figured all arguments for viscanti was trying to get them back into the bottom 5 list. I apologize if that was not the case, but then I think those posts should be placed elsewhere. I'm not opposed to making Viscanti a better choice, in the slightest(go ahead and quote me where I did say that), I just disagree they are as horrible as people make them out to be, they don't need much to be improved. If you noticed, I've not actually said anything in regards to how they should be buffed or nerfed except to point out a list of suggestions you made as 'a lot of buffs and 1 little nerf'.

It's hard to believe you read everything, in the other thread, I stated that I agree Tae'dae need some help and directly afterwards you posted something to the line of 'How can you be so vehemently against making Tae'dae usuable' I don't know how that isn't me clarifying my point enough for you. I can pull those quotes if you like? Again in this thread, you stated I ignored Silvanus, after I have a post directly stating it was a response to Silvanus (posting outlier viscanti). I can quote that too if you like.

You can claim I have a lack of objectivity, but I think it's rather obvious you're dislike for me, of my ideas of balance (which I'll be the first to admit are not perfect, but I try to stay objective). In fact, you even stated that you just plain disagree with my idea of balance before any of these race threads were started, before a special envoy was appointed! It's pretty apparent that my ideas of what Tae'dae needed were more generally accepted than your original ideas (nerf resists, remove speed maluses) and it's funny that you now support them despite arguing so hard against me.

Edit: Sorry to say Arcanis, but not every race is the best in everything, Viscanti actually bash pretty well, the resists more than make up for the sip malus, unless I'm trying to amass essence quickly, I'll stay viscanti for hunting. I agree influencing is weak for unspecced.

The downsides to Viscanti is fighting is the lack of damage (as far as druid is concerned). The intelligence isn't as high, so you don't nearly do as much damage with your meld or your cudgel, I can keep up fine with sipping health and applying for wounds so the sip bonus doesn't really affect me as much. It really is for the 'tanking' factor. Silvanus may disagree, but he's one of the harder people in Mag to kill in big fights (from my perspective).

A ) It appears that we in fact agree on Viscanti; we should work on them given time later. I apologize for any misunderstanding on my part.
B ) Actually the Tae'dae changes are more or less Malarious' compromise between our two ideas; you asked for MUCH larger nerfs to resists. I admit that we should have made a better attempt to compromise before.
C ) I admit that I don't really like your methods or ideas on what balance should be. That doesn't mean that I am going to be hostile to your ideas on principal; if I legitimately like your ideas I will agree with them.

Good. That's settled. Back to your regularly scheduled report.

foolofsound:

A ) It appears that we in fact agree on Viscanti; we should work on them given time later. I apologize for any misunderstanding on my part.
B ) Actually the Tae'dae changes are more or less Malarious' compromise between our two ideas; you asked for MUCH larger nerfs to resists. I admit that we should have made a better attempt to compromise before.
C ) I admit that I don't really like your methods or ideas on what balance should be. That doesn't mean that I am going to be hostile to your ideas on principal; if I legitimately like your ideas I will agree with them.

Good. That's settled. Back to your regularly scheduled report.

The only read difference was I was saying removing both speed maluses (bal and eq) and removing resists in response to this. With only balance being removed, less resists need to be removed. If I misunderstood that only balance was being removed from the get go, then I apologize, but I thought it was bal and eq being removed.

Going back to mana kills: I'm not sure Orclach should be first in line for a buff to INT. Krokani are at 8 INT, and Brood Viscanti at 10 INT with L2 sip malus is arguably more vulnerable than Orclach's 9 INT.

I think the problem here isn't entirely the low base: a caster has INT, CHA and CON to consider primarily, for both offence and defence; a warrior/monk also has to consider STR and DEX for their offence in varying amounts, plus INT, CHA and CON as defensive concerns. With limited amounts of demiweight available, this puts the physical archetypes (the archetypes which can actually make effective use of the low INT races) immediately at a dilemma about what to buy from the essence shop. Further, max mana is hard to buff compared to more or less everything else. I think the only methods available to me (as a Tahtetso; other monks and warrior are similar, I believe) are a knowledge karma blessing, a TF, or a mana blessing from various quests. Rather than touching the racial stats, how about we add more ways to buff mana to help these races? My suggestion is to give artisans the ability to construct a scholar's desk (name is up for debate) which offers a weighted +2 INT, but which cannot be held at the same time as the CHA buff from a throne. Alternatively, some way to trade health for mana (by means of exclusionary CON/INT buffs, or some other way) would also work.