Jotun Vuln Removal

[Davairus]

I think you guys are severely underestimating the defensive drawbacks of frenzy. I realize you don't have source code or anything. But I'll just note that the reason why monks stopped using tiger style, which was formerly pwning, is because I made tiger style recognized as a frenzy for defensive purposes. It really hurts defenses, a lot more than its offensive benefit. Its a true glass cannon spell. This is a decent idea that doesn't cripple jotuns but I wouldn't call it a buff exactly.

[Mogu]

What about giving Jotuns fire vuln? You mentioned that in another thread. Is that still on the table?

[lionSpyre]

I like the idea of giving a race something other than a vuln to contend with (especially a really common vuln like fire). I'll just reiterate that this could be a really dangerous thing combined with diamond skin.

Think about it this way - most of the time, if two skilled players are fighting and one manages to land a kill, it's because both of them got low and each of them determined that trying for the kill was worth the risk. Now imagine the PK adrenaline flowing, you see that Jotun drop to 'pretty hurt', and while you may be there yourself, you think 'oh hell yes, this is it. I can bash/trip and burn him down quicker than he can burn me down'. So you hit that two-round lag ability and go for it. Except, oops, they have diamond skin so even with the defensive penalty they just got an extra boost in both health and offensive output, so you're the one that gets burned in two rounds while they walk away still alive thanks to that long cooldown but clutch ability.

I think without diamond skin, then I agree, Davairus. The defensive penalty of frenzy will likely outweigh the benefits of it. And this will really reek havoc on the mentality of jotun players who think their survival rates is still high even when they're at 'pretty hurt'.

[Xenyar]

Jotun probably has the pest parry/set parry in the game. Paladins can take damage very well, and obviously have the ability to cure efficiently enough.
Going low health vs low health against a paladin is risky business due to the their ability to strike hard. Throw in avenging angels mixed with frenzy and fighting them low health as an evil guy just isn't worth it...you'll take way more damage than you can possibly dish out.

Dark Knights also can put a beating down quickly with unholy strength and AOEs..adding MORE damage output to that seems over the top. Dk's can also bash/trip, so being stuck in combat eating massive damage, along with a compulsed creature...would be too much.

As somebody who's played both these classes into the HOE, I objectively say this is a bad idea.

[Xenyar]

This would also make life as a caster/cleric more difficult, where parry isn't relied on as much, and pure damage output is.

If we're trying to add buffs or racial legacies... let's do it to race/class combos that aren't quite as easy to play.

[Davairus]

"As someone whose objectively played this into the HOE" .. wtf dude, this is not a rational or even reasonable argument. That is just a popularity contest that in your case was spared your own downvote elitism. It is what it is but we can't judge class balance off this.

Everyone is familiar with your playstyle and knows that you, even if you were playing as a jotun, are not likely to stick around in a fight past big nasty , which is the only time this damroll buff would be significant enough to contribute anything meaningful to the fight. But even if you did, considering that you'd have a 50 hitroll 85 damroll "future HoE" gear setup already anyway, will mean gaining very little additional relative power in return for a HUGE parry penalty that you will not want. If that doesn't sink in right away, it'll definitely sink in later when you are geared and thinking you are hot shit up until the pasting this will cause you, and then I predict you will then become the first guy to open "bugs" urging Olyn (it'd have to be Olyn, because I won't do it) to reconsider the great jotun bitchslap of 2023, where all the jotuns thought they got buffed and it turned out that we pimp slapped them with one of the most diabolically evil nerfs since Burzuk took away the saves from the elf valley brown cloaks. I thought all the way through to that before I even posted this thought out here, btw. Listen to your buddy Lionspyre here. He definitely gets it, he's warning you how bad it is going to be. He isn't wrong. I am confident that this will push you off wanting to even roll jotuns. We can still look at diamond skin and other vuln options but this is lightning in a bottle here. As for paladins in general, hunt evil is being a really nice crutch right now, and its on my list. I'm sure it will take very little else to topple all these supposed overpowered paladins.

[Xenyar]

Meh, I disagree with you per usual. The beat down given will outweigh the hindrance in most circumstances, in high level pk situations.

Adding 7/7, 8/8?(I don't remember exactly what frenzy gives anymore) is no joke...along with 6 dam from inspiring presence, or unholy strength.

I gave you my opinion. You can take it, leave it, or shove it.

[Xenyar]

It's not just about frenzy. It's the combination of things. DK/Pally... Highest AC classes(earth invoker is there too), sanc/protection/bulwark shield, really high damage output, Jotun best parry in game already... so they can take a beating, and dish it out... With those factors, and frenzy on top of it, I'll take that down to low HP against just about anything, any day...warriors, ninjas, thieves, casters /clerics with out a second thought.. I guess I'd be hesitant against maybe a berzerker? But that's already the case..nobody likes going low hp against them anyways as it is. Maybe a ranger if they've got their pets?
In general, I'd be extremely confident to go down low HP and simply overpower my opponent due to all those factors on my side.

[Davairus]

I don't think we'd allow this to stack on top of unholy strength, bless, inspiring presence, errantry etc. One active hit/dam buff at a time. Meaning you would get the drawback but no further power. Thats fairly easily avoidable power creep.

[BlackWidow]

Allowing only one hit/dam roll buff at a time sounds like an awfully extreme decision to me. Consider the following:

It nerfs berserkers heavily because now berserk affects no longer stack with rage in terms of providing damage output (not to mention that relegates warcry to trying to stun an opponent in combat while raged, since there's no point to getting the hitroll bonus any more if it stops you from getting stronger hit/dam benefits from rage if active first.

Werebeast rangers (aside from possibly fox and boar) now have to decide whether to save their warcry until after they transform (so as it get the benefits of transformation), or to use it to obtain a wolf and then not gain full benefits once transformed.

Warriors now only get healing from berserk unless they've specifically chosen not to use their warcry beforehand.

A bard's tarots are even more useless now since they might (with the Sun or Moon cards) simply swap hit/dam stats rather than buff them. It also prevents a bard from using Battle Hymn at the same time as Complete Focus.

It indirectly affects illusionists (not that this is necessarily an important factor) since enlarge and shrink both affect the damroll stat.

A druid cannot stack anything combat stat related with fire bond because that buffs damroll.

The accession spell from healers is suddenly less useful (not that many people play healers...).

...and that's just what comes to mind immediately as some examples.

[Xenyar]

Not stacking those damage buffs was specifically in reference to the Jotun low health frenzy idea, not other classes.

Maybe there's a way to flesh out the idea of low hp frenzy in lieu of the other damage buffs?

Thematically, it's tough for me to see a paladin or dark knight "abandoning or forfeiting their un/holy communions and abilities(bless/insp. presence) to go into a frenzy because a fit of frustration. A pally seems like a pillar of self control from their spiritual and holy roots. DK's feel like they have a harnessed anger, ready to exploit the weaknesses of others with calculation and malice.
Don't feel them losing themselves to frustration and forgoing their spells/abilities for frenzy.

[Davairus]

Its actually just the classic Thor/Anakin Skywalker character, some noble hero with a personality flaw that sets up downfall. A personality flaw wouldn't be enough to rule out someone from becoming a paladin or a dark-knight. This could definitely be an interesting character to develop, although I can see how some players would take much more easily to it.

[lionSpyre]

One thing that we seem to be leaning into though, which I think Xenyar was trying to bring up, is the idea of imposed RP. Like, when I roll a character, I should get to decide (or let develop naturally) what their personalities are. I don't necessarily want it forced upon me that my character 'gets pissed' once they drop below a certain health threshold. It's the difference of imposing a physical character flaw (aka a vuln or a size disadvantage) versus imposing a personality flaw that takes away player agency. Imagine if I feel like rolling a conflict-averse Jotun devotion paladin, who is all about promoting beauty in the world and generally avoids a fight. Maybe I envision them as a noble or herald. I would be forced to write in a reason why they 'enter a frenzy' once their health drops below a threshold, rather than promote a more game-play based and organic reason that they would get much more defensive and run when they get low enough.

I also agree that it doesn't seem to make sense that this frenzy wouldn't stack with already existing buffs. Maybe just make the frenzy boon less impactful in terms of hit/dam to compensate for paladin and DK existing buffs. But at the same time, I don't agree with Xenyar that I would just duke it out in a frenzied state. Parry penalty hits hybrid classes much harder than it hits monk or warrior classes. And look at how non-viable tiger stance is, or fighting in berserk unless there are no other options and you needed the health buff.

I also want to point out the havoc this will create for Jotuns in PVE situations. Sometimes you get into rooms in Winter where your health will dip below 20% while you and the healer are scrambling to keep you alive. This new idea will pretty much render Jotuns near-useless as tanks in dangerous raid situations. Which I'm not necessarily a fan of.

[Xenyar]

Good point about PvE Lionspyre. Didn't cross my mind. PvP I'd still feel very confident with 400AC and a natural hard hitter, with cures.

I see your point too Dav. Perhaps make a different spec paladin, one specific to Jotun(kind of like elf with eradicator). If you want to choose thise frenzy/personality trait, you go with the "thor" spec.

[Ashlyn]

Take away holy/unholy armor from paladin/dk. 400 ac is no joke. My healer can't even get 400 ac.

[lionSpyre]

Looking at Dav's post a few messages ago, it looks like balance changes are coming to paladins anyways? Which I'm sure is necessary. But, at the very least I hope that you're involving some vengeance paladin players in that conversation. Otherwise the only player opinions you're likely hearing are from people who are salty that they have just lost to one. If you're going to accept unsolicited opinions from one end of the biased spectrum, I would recommend soliciting opinions from the other side just to inform your decisions a little better.

I know Davairus and Olyn have done this in the past when I've played Warlords and balance changes came to monks and warriors. So I'm sure this is already in play.

[Xenyar]

.....or objective feedback from a successful vengeance paladin player(516 hours) You're getting feedback from somebody who has probably played them the most hours wise, as well as fought them endlessly(maybe more than most?)..knows them inside and out, and how much of a beefstick they are....and that was before the buff via the Jotun vuln removal.

The paladin being OP conversation has been around since the updates...that's years ago....way before this thread was created.

I do agree with you it's good to get multiple perspectives for changes.

Ironically I'm not suggesting any changes to paladins in this thread, other than they didn't need a big buff via the Jotun vuln removal. A little over the top change that only adds to the beefiness of an extremely beefy class... And that was a concern brought up when the change happened...before any current Jotun paladin or dk became "notable" or got recognition.
Now, why was that concern brought up back then??? Because I know how bad ass paladins are, specifically the vengeance spec. Then I see the stat line of a jotun(which is fine when balanced with a vuln, just like illithids and gnomes have), best parry in game, second best shield block in game(2nd to dwarf), wield over-sized weapons on-handed, 4 practices per rank..which can convert to HP..throw is 22 con and some single practicing, you can get close to 1k hp, with 400+ AC, and all those other things I listed above. (And that's not even taking into account the other perks of the spec, short term haste, golden road for easy peazy chasing, and so on...)
Now, I don't have a college degree, but I am good at simple math. The above adds up to.... ALOT....which needs to be balanced with a VULN. Should not have removed pierce vuln to begin with.

[Davairus]

Common sense says that if a players "parry, shield block, oversized weapon, 4 pracs a level, 22 con, 1k hp, 400AC" is all ahHouse of cards that is easily destroyed by one factor - i.e. by your opponent's ave 33 piercing polearm - its hardly balanced is it? In fact, its very unbalanced, and players have called it out as such. Not sure why you are trying to argue this point. Your 600 hours paladin wasn't a jotun was it? Pretty sure you made a human, didn't you? Everyone could see the calamitous result of pierce vuln on jotuns.

P.S. Try to remember the jotuns RP are supposed to be leaning toward conceit, arrogance, etc, there is a common trope that the characters with huge ego's are the villains and turn out to be unable to actually back their egos up. We want them able to have some banger fights, not just get steamrolled.

As opposed to restoring a pierce vuln on jotuns, which we all already know makes them rubbish, we were discussing a multi-pronged approach where you can (A) use material vulns to meaningfully impact their "healing" (rather than just directly increase damage - it would tax their healing and regen), with the jotun material vuln being stone. (B) introduce a double-edged sword with an innate battle frenzy that provides appeal and comes with drawbacks, likely kicking in because of (A) or potentially because of sloppy play, just take your pick. At least, that's the conversation I've been reading, here and there.

[BlackWidow]

I don't feel that these discussions of the jotun are really considering the fact that DKs are not affected to the same degree by most of these changes. The frenzy idea without hit/dam buff affects demon DKs (the ones with unholy strength and bash) much more than it does the devil DKs (the ones with spellstrike, buckler, and blasphemy) because running out of mana while frenzied and under the affect of unholy strength weakens you heavily.

I still feel it would've been more reasonable to lower the damage multiplier of the piercing vulnerability... It's a simple, direct approach which is easy to adjust.

[Davairus]

Well I think the main problem with that approach is that the broadness of a pierce vuln really sucks. I mean, think about it blackwidow. A water vuln puts players off playing dwarf, despite all of the appeal of 25 con. and all that takes is a water cube. everyone gets a vorpal sword against dwarf because of that weapon. That's a badass vuln that's easy to ride. But you know, at least its predictable. You can be ready for an exotic weapon with a mace and have both good parry and a weapon advantage. On rare occassion you might see the trident, which at like ave 22 (if its even that) puts the fear of god into dwarves. You meet that weapon almost never really because someone's just going to be hoarding it. In the case of a pierce vuln, though, they'll be coming at you with badass centurioun polearms, ruby-hilted daggers, spears, spiked flails, just all sorts of weapons, all of them badass and always in. So you say, oh no problem. decrease the vuln by 10%. Do it like Riot Games where you make these conservative nerfs that fail to solve the problem for multiple nerfs in a row. Pierce weapons are still going to be something that is readily available for everyone. As Xenyar pointed up above, its simple math. Literally we might as well just remove 2 con from jotuns if you just want a permanent 10% nerf to their hp. Why hide that behind pierce weapons that pretty much everyone can find? Just look how many classes get daggers. Notice how easily you can find rare spears and daggers that pierce. They are everywhere. At least if we go the stone vuln route, its kind of interesting that huge stone clubs are something that giants would be able to employ effectively to try to fend off jotuns wearing dream catchers, and it also means that jotuns can't use huge stone clubs despite high str. That seems like something that would add more depth to the game, something that delivers on our promise of brains over brawn.