Persistent Damage Cost Change

Is the cost change in Backstabs and Weapon Profs, overall, good?

  • Total voters
  • Poll closed .

Daimyo Shi

I am not a fan of this style of scaling, because I see it as being slightly unfair, but then I also torn on the idea of arguement "Build a Fighter with X number of points and not have Y disarms as an arguement either. Alliance like many boffer LARPs have a Class system that governs cost but also has a system that allows for buying any skill points allowing. In my thinking this is to encourge more rounded characters, certianly I see the change how how skills are able to be bought in 2.0 should support this. Granted I support more effects for fighters so they have other things to do than static damage, but that not in the cards, so speading out to different class skills is something to consider. I play a fighter, I am a jack of all trades, I am not saying everyone needs to do this but looking in a broader scope would be helpful.


Alliance Logistics
...everything around 2.0 has been presented as a "package deal", that seems unlikely, unfortunately.
Nothing says it has to be. Its up to the owners. If they decide, they can scrap the whole thing or cherry pick what they want. It's all up to them.


Seattle Staff
Firstly, I don't count crit attacks to be constant damage, 10 minutes is't that long in a wave battle and if you'd taken 20 of them with Build A, then you'd have less disarms and a better way to deal with weakness and with damage thresholds. Secondly, I think that maybe I am not properly communicating my point. Fighters need more skill options if we were to convert them to a static amount of damage like C Scholars have with wands.

Now, for your question on scaling. I honestly think 22 disarms are the only issue here. Intercept is garbage without a guard, and other than weapon guard, fighters don't have any. Resolute is almost worthless unless you were taken down by an arrow or evocation, in melee, you're dead. Back to the disarm issue: at lvl 36, you yourself stated that they were inconsequential seeing as everything has claws, spirit linked weapons, or other shenanigans (hell, just send the big bad in with the weapon paste of stickiness'd to his hand. 10 minutes of disarms being useless, then suddenly they're good for something!) So it looks to me that, as it stands, abilities are easier/more preferable to scale for than straight constant damage.
I think Intercept is one of the best team skills I have ever seen. In plenty of battles over the years I have seen one PC targeted with high damage opener attacks, just so a low damage carrier could land after the armor was breached. Undead battles, in particular come to mind, with Ancient Mariners opening with elemental ice damage to break armor, then allowing a ghoul to sneak in with a 2 drain or a wight to hit with a 3 wither limb. As long as there is good communication, Intercept allows a nearby fighter to absorb those blows on their armor, keeping both fighters in the thick of things.

Heck, if I read the rule right, an archer could be standing behind a shield wall and use intercept to absorb damage for a front line fighter (the target that was hit needs to be within weapon range of the person using intercept, not the individual that struck the blow). That is a wonderful way to share damage for a minimal cost. This is also an ideal way to protect the weapons of allies who don't have unshatterable weapons. One person with an unshatterable weapon can basically use Intercept to protect the weapons of all nearby allies.

And then there are racial defenses. Did an ally get hit with a spellstrike confine? Intercept + Resist Binding to the rescue. Parry + Resist Binding also would have worked, but at a higher cost, with part of the effect of Parry going to waste.

I see good teams relying on Intercept to spread the damage load, reduce the need for healing (if all damage lands on armor, it can easily be refit), and mitigate effects. It also works EXCELLENTLY to protect a friend that just used Resolute (huh, look at that?) until they can get healing or get to safety. I will admit it isn't a remarkable solo skill (neither is Resolute), but in team play, it may very well be overpowered given how easy it is to get and how low the cost is.

You misunderstood me. I am saying that if an archer is standing DIRECTLY behind a more "tankish" fighter (or templar or even artisan if that is somehow possible), shooting over their shoulder, they can take hits for the blocker, even though they can't directly touch the attacker with their weapon (though could reach out and touch the blocker if they were feeling cheeky).

Also, even without line fighting per se, pretty much everything I said above works for any sort of group dynamic, including modules and duos. A fighter and a scholar are a lot more effective when the fighter can intercept damage that sneaks through to the scholar, effectively turning that 20 body and 15 armor into 60 body and 40 armor. And that isn't line fighting. That is skirmish fighting with a pair.