Tangent: Str affects shieldstun time.

Doesn't improve acrobatics

Draylor told me it does, and I have certainly felt that my Faeling Bard dodges more than my Tae'dae one,

foolofsound:

Draylor told me it does, and I have certainly felt that my Faeling Bard dodges more than my Tae'dae one,

I've been wrong before, and it does make sense that it would from an RP stand point. To my knowledge, it doesn't.

Keep it civil.

Tested the War blessing thing with Turnus. Had no impact on wounding. Stealing his thunder by posting this. :P

lilija:

Tested the War blessing thing with Turnus. Had no impact on wounding. Stealing his thunder by posting this. :P

You're too late, I already posted in the thread that actually asked this.

I have backed up everything I've posted in this thread. I get called vile and other names and the people doing this do not back up their comments at all.

Naia:

Disagree with my comments on dexterity but tell me why.

foolofsound:

DEX will still improve your stancing/parrying, acrobatics dodge proc rates, and possibly (according to the ABs) affect monk damage.

It would help your case if you read the thread before you commented.

Why don't you just remove "Specialized" Races and just go with the flat races. That way no org has an advantage over the other :)

Also, if we are keeping specialized races, will Halli/Gaudi be getting their specialised bard races? :) :)

Remove "Specialized" races and become Achaea 2.0? >_> I don't like that idea. Even Achaeans didn't like it themselves. They ended up standardizing the stats on every race, and then added stat packs so that every race had a fair chance at roleplay and combat. It seems like every IRE mud is starting to follow this trend, with Aetolia making the first move on this years ago. *edit BTW, I don't endorse that statpack idea either. And every IRE MUD did it differently than the other. Like... there were still huge differences between each race and their stat packs.*

There are no need for such extreme measures. The core of the problem being addressed here is simply a disconnect between races that seem built primarily for knight combat, and what makes a good race for a knight combatant.

Dexterity is playing too much of a role- either in very high dex being too desireable, or very low dex being too penalizing. Remedying this lets a slew of races become much more viable choices, without altering the races themselves. They still won't be optimal, likely as not. They still won't have balance bonuses, which of course matter.

But, it would remove one of the "you shouldn't play this race" hurtles. Addressing the underlying factor side steps what amounts to working towards a baseline dex. Tae'dae would still be low dex, it just should not be crippling to their offense when they fight a high dex opponent.

The other alternative would be to make the thematically "big, slow brute" races do far more damage/wounding/affliction chance when they DO connect, but have a hard time connecting. But, that to me seems far more complicated and difficult.

Rainydays:

Dexterity is playing too much of a role- either in very high dex being too desireable, or very low dex being too penalizing. Remedying this lets a slew of races become much more viable choices, without altering the races themselves. They still won't be optimal, likely as not. They still won't have balance bonuses, which of course matter.

This is the problem in general. Reducing the defensive impact of Dexterity wil also go a long way towards moving Aslaran and Faelings (all Faelings, not just Shadowfoo Faelings) out of the Uber Race category.

Aslaran"


Faeling:


Kidding! Ok. I play a faeling for RP reasons. I was a faeling when I tried my first character, an aquamancer, then a bard, then I made naia who has gone sd > nek > sd > harb > bt > eg.

As a knight, the lack of strength means I have to rely on wounding to kill anyone. Not going to damage people if I hit like a wet noodle.

Even if the wounding competent of dexterity remains as suggested, I don't see a reason to reduce the already lowish importance of my one stat that works in favor of knights over casters (granted surge is decent as a faeling).

Having high strength is already a great advantage for those races that do. If it isn't sufficient in itself, look at fixing the mechanics that inhibit damage kills from being more viable > eg curing rates, or let str play a part in wounding (eg STR+DEX/2 = wounds). Nerfing an already mostly useless stat just because some low strength races have more of it seems counter-productive.

Even if you remove the (perceived) disadvantage, it doesn't improve anyone else at all. It just brings everyone down to the same low level. I'd definitely like a +2 str increase to make up for it.

All warriors rely on wounding to kill, not just low STR ones.

Warrior wounding (not only damage) is primarily influenced by Strength already (Dexterity plays a relatively small part). The reasons why Dexterity is such an important warrior stat is that it affects how often you hit your opponent's stance/parry, and how often your afflictions proc. Basically, a low Dexterity puts warriors at the mercy of the RNG, even moreso than they already are. Dexterity is hardly a "mostly useless stat"; ask Ixion about fighting a DEX 25 character and see if he feels the same.

The suggestions put forward in this thread hope to remedy this by standardizing aff proc rates and reduce the impact of stance/parry for low Dex warriors, while still allowing high Dex characters to take advantage of the defensive bonuses offered, as well as the bonus wounding.

We certainly don't want to increase the impact of Strength; many warriors are already quite capable of building wounds and occassionally damage quickly, and we certainly don't want to return to the days of warrior damage kills. Pure damage kills are either overpowered (if you can perform them so quickly that your opponent cannot react) or impossible (if your opponent can react, and run away).

As a knight, the lack of strength means I have to rely on wounding to kill anyone. Not going to damage people if I hit like a wet noodle.

All warriors rely on wounding to kill anyone. Warriors don't deal much damage, sorry to say. Even monks rely on wounding to dish out the damage, and, as I've stated elsewhere, a high dex/low str or low str/high dex won't produce nearly as good as results of the races that have a balance between the two (krokani, aslaran, illithoid, lobo, etc.)

Even if the wounding competent of dexterity remains as suggested, I don't see a reason to reduce the already lowish importance of my one stat that works in favor of knights over casters (granted surge is decent as a faeling).

And...to counter this, how does intelligence help knights? Or Charisma? They both definitely favor casters far more than melee races, and it's not like we're making dexterity useless for casters. In fact, we're not even making it remotely useless for casters.

Having high strength is already a great advantage for those races that do. If it isn't sufficient in itself, look at fixing the mechanics that inhibit damage kills from being more viable > eg curing rates, or let str play a part in wounding (eg STR+DEX/2 = wounds). Nerfing an already mostly useless stat just because some low strength races have more of it seems counter-productive.

Again, knights don't deal damage, and we are looking at the things that inhibit killing: high dexterity being the main component. That said, dexterity isn't useless at all! I value it quite highly as a monk and I would as a knight as well. In fact, this change would be buffing dexterity for me!

Even if you remove the (perceived) disadvantage, it doesn't improve anyone else at all. It just brings everyone down to the same low level. I'd definitely like a +2 str increase to make up for it.

Since you're trying to be fair, I'd like my charisma to counter the chances of bards and tp's hitting me (or is it tk?) with their afflictions. Intelligence to do the same for those things that benefit from intelligence on casters to make intelligence useful for melee chars.

The fact that you're asking for +2 strength demonstrates clearly that you're confused on what we're asking here. Let me explain why: the nerf is removing some (not all!) of the defensive element of dexterity. Adding strength would not increase the defensive aspect at all, actually, except perhaps in the use of a very few skills (ala, shieldstun). People who understood the nerf would be asking for con if they felt that the nerf to dexterity was going to far, but...by that argument, all races should recieve +1 con, which we know that won't fly.

A shadowfaeling still benefits 100% offensively from its high dexterity. If this nerf goes through, they'll benefit more from their dexterity.
All races that have a high dexterity will see diminishing returns on the defensive aspect of the stat. But that's okay, because it's contributing too much defense. Period. This isn't targeting faelings or aslarans or any race in specific.

Ok. Thanks for clarifying Sahmiam. I understand about not using damage to kill but don't you want to sometimes? (That's rhetorical).

So anyway, you're saying this will boost my offense if it goes ahead! That makes me content even though part of me just wants to be a strength-based bonecrusher and bashbrains all day long. Stress relief.

Naia:

Ok. Thanks for clarifying Sahmiam. I understand about not using damage to kill but don't you want to sometimes? (That's rhetorical).

So anyway, you're saying this will boost my offense if it goes ahead! That makes me content even though part of me just wants to be a strength-based bonecrusher and bashbrains all day long. Stress relief.

It will boost your offense if you're a knight and to a much lesser extent monk (if dex defends against monk wounding, that is).

And I can get damage kills as a monk, but that requires proper setup to power through all the different forms of healing.

I did not read all of this but....

- Testing from Narsrim did not show dex having an effect on acrobatics. It plays a large role in stances.
- Dexterity only effects monk PvE.