Arcanaville
-
Posts
10683 -
Joined
-
Quote:Nolan is a story teller. There's an actual story being told. Real life is sometimes ambiguous, but Nolan would rather the story speak for itself.Originally Posted by PRAF68_EU
Nolan is deliberately ambiguous. It's up to the watcher. You want Bruce to be dead? He is dead. You want him to be alive? He is alive.
I don't think he *minds* people gnashing teeth over his stories, but he does not tell vague things that could be stories. He tells stories, with beginnings, middles, and endings. -
Quote:Correction correction: Fear powers were converted to Terrorize in I3, before PvP hit test. The change was meant to address the fact that players did not like using Fear powers with the original mechanics, in particular Cloak of Fear and the Spectral Terror were explicit offenders.Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Slight correction: This was done as a means of giving Fear powers a purpose in I4 Arena PvP. Prior to I4, "fear" type powers would use the effect of Afraid, which is nothing more than an AI flag to cause the critter to run away from the source of the effect. Obviously, this couldn't work on players (some games have tried it and it sucks), so a different effect was needed which wouldn't require the AI piloting a player character. Hence, Terrorize, which acts like a hold but one that suppresses itself for a very small window whenever the Terrorized target is attacked.
I'm still not entirely sure how Terrorize works, but I do know that being unable to queue up powers while Terrorized so that they can fire whenever the short window of opportunity presents itself means you have to basically spam the button and flood your Combat channel with "You can't use powers while terrorized."
Terrorize is essentially a non-detoggling hold that has a small chance to suppress if the target is attacked. For critters, it usually boils down to them being able to attack once every eight to twelve seconds if continuously attacked. I've always suspected that Terrorize is the ancestor of all suppression effects. -
Quote:So here's an odd one I discovered back in I9, that I still have slotted in a couple characters because I never respeced them:Originally Posted by Clave_Dark_5
The best sets are always the most expensive ones. :P
Whenever looking to "sorta slot" a character (meaning I go "Ok, this power is a Ranged Attack, which sets can it take? I'll go look at the options" rather than working from a pre-planned full build), invariably I find the most useful sets are the ones that cost like 25 mill+ in recipe form, each. I try and see if I can settle for a secodary choice, but the numbers/options etc. on that one set are always so obviously better...
Pounding Slugfest (30) Acc/Dmg
Pounding Slugfest (30) Dmg/End
Pounding Slugfest (30) Dmg/Rech
Pulverizing Fisticuffs (25) Acc/Dmg
Pulverizing Fisticuffs (25) Acc/Dmg/Rech
Pulverizing Fisticuffs (25) Acc/Dmg/End/Rech
You can slot this at 27, and it gives:
71.58% acc
97.29% dmg
35.75% end
51.75% rech
and in terms of set bonuses, combined it offers:
8% regen
2.5% defense (energy/negative)
1.25% defense (ranged)
2.2% res(sleep)
Its not an especially powerful slotting option at level 50, but its pretty good for 27, and you can keep this all the way up to 50. And it costs essentially nothing. -
Quote:Everyone has deadlines, the writers have no responsibility to design NPCs, and their budget consists of Mountain Dew and number 2 pencils. What we pay them *is* the writing budget.Originally Posted by SpyralPegacyon
Now fit that all in with the ability to create multiple challenging bug-free missions, just as challenging new NPCs, and do it all on both a deadline and a shoestring budget.
Dr. Aeon was hired based in part on his demonstration of strong writing with no budget, no resources, no access to the powers team, no access to the tech team, no access to map construction, and no access to the art and effects team. And he did most of his writing on a time scale of about one issue. -
Quote:It depends on what you're aiming for, and what the circumstances of this build are. There are a lot of oddities in it that might serve some function, but I just don't know what that is. For example, you don't have any accolades turned on in your build. With accolades and just a few set bonuses you can hit the +maxhealth cap for blasters: Hoarfrost is superfluous in that case except as a really long recharge heal. It looks like you're going for defense bonuses but you don't use either defense proc: the Gladiator +3% defense proc that is kind of expensive (but not too much these days) and the Steadfast +3% defense proc that is not expensive at all. Slotting them instead of the reactive armor set in tough would net you a significant increase in defense overall. You're slotting Ruin in Ice bolt and the hold proc, but I think thunderstrike's defense is better than Ruin's.Originally Posted by Cien_Fuegos
Hi made this one. still not 100% satisfied any thing you would change?
Also: in I24 Chilling Embrace is going to become the absorb-based sustain power and its radius significantly increased. You don't devote any slots to the power but if you're aiming for higher survivability you may want to consider not spending too much money on this build before those changes hit beta, which I'm guessing will be within a month or so.
I see purples, ATIOs, scattered defense bonuses, and underslotted attacks. If you're aiming for something specific, it would help to know what that is. If you're trying to make a "balanced" build around having a little of lots of things, I think this build diffuses its slots too much and takes too many penalties. If you are trying to make a relatively inexpensive build that has significant strength, I don't think its efficient in doing that, especially with the purples.
How do you want to play this build? How do you play this character now? Do you want to drop ice patch and then play keep-away? Do you play more aggressively? Are you trying to increase the survivability strength of your current build to take more hits? -
Quote:It only seems black and white because it takes more words to properly convey shades of grey. But by the time I was finished conveying grey your eyes would be bleeding and then the grey would get all fuzzy.Originally Posted by Agent White
I agree with you and I think you're right but at the same time, I don't really want it to be that 'simple' and black and white.
-
Will CoH2 ever happen? Well lets see:
1. Is Paragon Studios actually working on CoH2 now? No: the new game is based on different IP. Probability: zero.
2. Does Paragon Studios have another dev team working on CoH2? No: there isn't the body count to do that. Probability: essentially zero.
3. Could NCSoft be working on a CoH2 without Paragon Studios. Theoretically possible, but essentially ridiculous. Probability: virtually zero.
4. Is it likely Paragon Studios would begin work on a sequel with the current CoH dev team? Very unlikely. The logistics would be a nightmare, and many of the senior developers took positions with the other dev team. Probability: < 1%.
5. Would Paragon Studios cease development on CoH to devote time to CoH2? Also unlikely. While Paragon Studios is generating revenue from CoH that's irrational. If it gets to the point they aren't, a sequel itself would be unlikely. Probability: < 1%.
6. Is there any other possible way for a CoH2 to be created within the next ten years? Not that I can see. Probability: < 1%.
7. Even if a CoH2 was miracled into existence, would it be compatible with CoH1? Nope. You don't make new games that are identical to old games, and without the current game's mechanics and power architecture, the game wouldn't be remotely compatible. Characters would not be portable or exchangeable. CoH2 would at best be connected by IP, but not by game mechanics or transferred characters. Probability of compatible CoH2: < 1%. -
Quote:Its an edge case, but I don't know why it would be an especially egregious problem since high defense buffing neutralizes those abilities to almost the same degree and are far more common than the PA.Originally Posted by Oedipus_Tex
I'm referring to AVs like Ghost Widow who heal off anything in vicinity and other enemies to which PA is immune. Modern AVs don't tend to be as weighted in favor of PA but some of the older ones seemed almost created with it specifically in mind.
-
Quote:Actually, I think that was the whole point of The Dark Knight. Bruce Wayne realizes in TDK that Gotham can't be ruled by people in masks: it needs to ultimately save itself. Gotham can't be constantly saved by Batman because in many ways, Gotham would still be controlled by costumed criminals. At the end of TDK, he realizes that Gotham needs to believe it can be saved by people like Dent, and doesn't need people like Batman. If even Batman is the villain, then Gotham needs to save itself, which it does.Originally Posted by Agent White
Which actually rolls into my next point. This movie feels much more like a direct sequel to Begins than Dark knight did and it kind of removes what I felt was one of the themes of the Dark Knight and that is the growing 'madness' of superheroes. The whole escalation of 'you fight thugs wearing a mask they're going to start coming up with their own masks'. The Joker exemplified this so perfectly and was a true 'Super Villain', Two Face was leaning into that 'madness' of being a 'freak' which to me has always been part of the appeal of the Rogue's Gallery. Bane and by extension Talia are villains, but in a more realistic terrorist feel. They're almost a step backward. That's another reason why Bane's mask doesn't work for me because it feels so superficial. It felt more like a tacked on ornament than anything truly defining about the character.
Even Scarecrow's cameo plays into that feeling. We're introduced to the whole mask/supervillain feel in Begins and even in Dark Knight he's still running around as The Scarecrow. But in this he's simply back to 'Dr. Crane'. It was a wonderful cameo and I quite liked it, but it felt less like he was 'One of the Freaks' and more like 'Just Another Criminal' in this.
I think people are slightly misinterpreting the ending of TDKR. I don't think Bruce is simply passing on the torch to Blake. I think he's realized that the Batman was something Gotham needed, and no longer needed. But it could need again, and if so, he planted the seed so the Batman could rise again. That's the symbolism of the repaired bat-signal.
I think the title is partially supposed to mean that the Batman is a necessary evil; sometimes necessary but still evil in the sense of being something we almost never want: someone above the law and beyond the rules the rest of us have to follow. He's not needed, so he goes away. If he's needed again, he'll rise again. In a sense, The Dark Knight Rises makes a point of saying that the Batman rises from pain. Bruce's pain at the loss of his parents and his inability to do anything about their death drives him to become the Batman. But he's incapable of meeting the challenge years later because there's no such thing as a retired Batman: without the constant fight Bruce is just a shell of his former self. It isn't until he drives himself singularly to escape the prison that he basically becomes Batman again: someone singularly focused on his mission.Quote:I do agree a bit that it's not really a proper ending for batman, it felt less like 'The Dark knight Rises' and more like "Bruce Wayne Ends".
If the Batman is needed again, he can't simply come out of retirement. He'll have to rise again, from whatever pain compels the need for a Batman. -
Quote:It also has an immutable target cap of three.Originally Posted by Oedipus_Tex
Let me clarify: I would have included a Disbelieve mechanic if I had written this spell at the beginning of time, and only if we were forced to keep the Invulnerable aspect. A chance for the army to Phase on a missed Psi roll, at least, would create a threshold of risk where all 3 Phantoms could be inactivated at the same time due to a skill check. What we have now is a power that is active essentially 100% of the time once you reach the right Recharge threshold. Recharge isn't a contested attribute in most situations where the army is used, so the results are very undynamic. There also currently aren't a lot of good ways to make an enemy "immune" to Phantom Army like they are to other Control powers, without also making the enemy ignore Taunts, or letting them be hit by a one-off exotic mechanic. Having a control sometimes fail is an inherent aspect of their design, and Phantom Army doesn't do that nearly enough, IMO.
The notion that there's no way to offer "protection" to the kind of control offered by the PA is an interesting one. I'm not sure how noteworthy it is though, given the fact that the PA are not under control and therefore can simply fail to engage a desired target (which is why they generate optimal results only when they are used in environments where the number of targets that need to be controlled is very small - ideally one - or that no specific targets need to be controlled in general.
To put it another way, unless you're tanking a single AV the PA are not considered reliable control in the first place. Its just that that unreliability comes in a different way than with most controls.
What would be an example of such an enemy, that doesn't involve bugged behavior or mechanics? Are you referring to things like critters with invincibility auras and PBAoE heals?Quote:More importantly, the army wouldn't get a free pass against every enemy that normally penalizes pets or adds, which is IMO is the truly egregious element of "Invulnerable," not just the not dying part. -
Quote:I remember when I first got Nova. I flew onto a rooftop in Bricks and let fly. Ok, it didn't kill them all, it crashed all my end, and it scattered them all over the place, and it'll be a couple minutes before it recharges.Originally Posted by Dr Harmony
My current stable of characters include a Energy/Elec Blaster and a Fire/Cold Corrupter.
I'm in raptures with these proposed nuke changes, and can't see any downside to them at all.
I remember my first nuke. Circling Brickstown on my Elec/Elec Blaster thinking "this power must be awesome - its on a huge recharge and drains all my energy." Finding groups of ten yellow/orange Crey minions and zapping them, and quickly getting disappointed with all its limitations. Eventually I just stopped using it.
The new nukes will be a big improvement.
...
...
Time to find another rooftop. -
Quote:I think when you say "the army would still be a good tank" you run afoul of the fact that the devs, Arbiter Hawk at least, doesn't want to give an indestructible tank to a Dominator. If that's not a problem, the PA aren't a problem as is. If it is a problem, anything that preserves the PA as an effective and indestructible tank would still be a problem, no matter how many other limitations you give it.Originally Posted by Oedipus_Tex
A tricky but maybe interesting way to tame Phantom Army would have been to have some of their powers summon an invisible psuedo-pet that performs a ToHit roll against the target's Psi defense. If the psuedo-pet attack misses that army member is Phased for 3 seconds due to being "Disbelieved" by the target. Only some of the attacks in the PA's arsenal would trigger this. The army would still be a good tank, but there would be much more throttle to it.
-
Quote:I do not. Since I said "change drain effects to make them effective" I'm not bound to any limitations drain has now, only the actual mechanics of how drain is implemented. And I reiterate: I do not need any of these caveats to make drain work properly. I posted mostly complete mechanics for doing so twice in the last six years, and outlined them again here.Originally Posted by Watchdog
I think you're arguing two extremes. I think Chaos' understands exactly what you're saying, with the caveat being that we're talking about the secondary effect of the set's attack chain. Your points all hold up perfectly as long as you concede that what you're proposing still requires a shot of a major -END power (SC/TV/PS/EMP) for a blaster to leverage their secondary effects in quick fashion.
I'll take objections seriously when they provide some evidence that there are intractable problems with what I've suggested. -
Quote:I think that misses the point of the books. The books never portray Harry as especially heroic, and in fact the most heroic character in the series ends up being Snape. Harry is not there to win anything, his character's journey is to learn the lesson that Voldemort never does: that its not about what you can do, its about other people.Originally Posted by Neuronia
Well not to put too fine a point on this, but the problem with these stories is that Harry is basically a walking Godmode. He can never truly be harmed and even when he faces Voldemort (Sp?) you know he is going to win. At that point you basically just need to put your brain into park and wait for Mr. Invincible to do silly things and go on with his life.
Harry is not invulnerable. Harry is not an indestructible horcrux. Harry could have been killed at any time. Just not by Voldemort himself. And even then Voldemort had options for killing Harry, its just that his own pride and blindness to other options prevented him from seeing them. Voldemort saw things in terms of power, but not in terms of sacrifice. Even so, Voldemort is powerful enough that even with the Elder Wand not fully under his control, he's able to kill Harry. The only reason Harry has a second chance to come back is because he's a partial horcrux: killing curses require powerful intent from the caster, and a part of Voldemort's soul obviously opposed the curse.
And Harry could have lost. He could have taken Voldemort's path, and sought a way to defeat Voldemort on his terms. He could have tried to seek out the horcruxes alone. Or, and of course this is the point, the people protecting him could have abandoned him to his fate. Particularly and especially Snape.
Harry is not the hero. He's the protagonist. Not everyone gets that. -
Quote:The device removed from the reactor is said to be the core, not the entire reactor (the thing left behind is the rest of the reactor). Its possible the core is something that can be converted into a nuclear bomb in a non-obvious way. One theoretical possibility is that it contains transuranic elements that have certain properties which can be manipulated in certain ways, perhaps to force them to decay into fissile material that can achieve criticality (i.e. detonate).Originally Posted by Venture
No. Other way around. Fission reactions are used to ignite fusion.
Decades ago one of Jerry Pournelle's friends asked him how to make a nuclear reactor explode like an atomic bomb (for a book the friend was writing). Pournelle said "put an atomic bomb in it and set it off". The friend, FWIW, didn't like that answer and ignored him. (I don't think the book ever achieved liftoff; can't imagine why.) Reactors don't explode like nuclear weapons (except, perhaps, a breeder reactor but AFAIK even that is real long odds). They can misbehave in a number of ways but they don't go kaboom. Fusion reactors, as previously noted, are even more fragile that fission ones. If the proper conditions aren't maintained the reaction will just stop. We've been working on maintaining those conditions since the 70s and from what I've heard we're actually farther away now than when we started. That's how difficult the reaction is to establish and maintain.
Of course, this is the kind of thing you have to overlook in a superhero movie. The dubious physics involved in the fusion reactor wasn't exactly the most improbable element of TDKR.
It is fanciful, but not impossible. Its certainly far more reasonable than the microwave vaporizer from Batman Begins that vaporizes water contained in metal pipes but does nothing to the walking bags of mostly water that are standing around unprotected. -
Quote:Addressing the first three:Originally Posted by Eva Destruction
That said, there are a few things I do want to know, just because I think the writers don't even know, even though they keep using the concepts:
1) How exactly does the CoH multiverse work? What is the nature of, say, Infernal's dimension, and is it the same one Envoy of Shadows comes from? What about Croatoa's spirit world, or the Netherworld?
2) How exactly does time travel work in the CoH universe?
3) What exactly is the definition of a god? For a world with so much basis in mythology, that term is getting thrown around a lot lately, and the only thing we have to separate an actual god from a very powerful metahuman is War Witch's little blurb in the Origin of Power storyline, which is suspect due to narrator's bias.
I think its often the case that fiction writers invoke alternate dimensions, alternate timelines, and the supernatural because they think it gives them carte blanc to do whatever they want. Its alternate dimensions: anything is possible. Its alternate timelines: anything is possible. Its supernatural: anything is possible.
I think that authors who think this forget that when you're telling a story it cannot be true that anything is possible. If anything is possible, nothing you say matters. Stories require involvement on the part of the audience, and that involvement generally requires that the audience believe what happens is reasonable, consequences are logical, that the world the story exists in makes sense. If there are no rules, you're not likely to capture the attention of very many people.
I don't know that Paragon Studios writers think this, but I've often been concerned they do. Time travel, alternate universes, hierarchical supernatural power; these things should be used only because they add something specific to the story, and only when you have worked out a very clear sense of how those things work. You don't just use them haphazardously like randomly setting a story in San Francisco having never stepped foot in the city.
One thing I think JK Rowling definitely got generally correct: she's said in interviews that she spent five years thinking about how magic worked in the Harry Potter universe *before* starting to write The Philosopher's Stone. That sounds just about right. Because if magic can do anything, there's no such thing as a problem, no such thing as conflict, and no such thing as drama. There's no story.
Its like piloting a Master Illusionist, but with more pets.Quote:4) Do they not know ParagonWiki exists? I'm not even talking about ***-pulls and inconsistencies, or trying to shoehorn established ideas into new storylines where they don't really fit, or "but I had a better idea." I'm talking about blatant cases of Did Not Do The Research such as "you'll be piloting a Zeus Titan." -
Quote:Because, and I already demonstrated this more than once, in actual combat the damage mitigation of endurance effects is not based on the instant by instant state of whether the critter has non-zero endurance. Endurance is not a binary switch that if its on the critter can attack at full strength or its off and the critter cannot attack at all. In fact, that assertion is trivially easy to prove false. That it continues to be asserted as if its supposed to be self-evidently true is one of the longest running combat mechanical myths that exists in City of Heroes.Originally Posted by ChaosExMachina
I can not tell how you are saying he is wrong. Either the enemy has endurance or not.
Starting from this presumption, no solution to the endurance drain problem is possible. However, since its false, anyone starting from this presumption has effectively voluntarily opted out of practical discussion of endurance drain. -
Quote:I don't see that as a bad thing. When you have enough damage and enough mitigation, team splits are a practical way to regain efficiency. Also, aim for the bosses since nukes don't kill those.Originally Posted by Moonlighter
All kidding aside, I am slightly worried that this might make the game less fun in big groups. There are already groups that kill so fast I have trouble getting off an Assassin's Strike and end up running ahead just to do some damage. I can see these changes exaggerating that.
-
Quote:Because "why not" is not a good reason for doing anything. It isn't even a particularly mediocre reason for doing anything.Originally Posted by Sir Hextor
In response to Arcana - The set is already in the game and as pointed out it's not leading to masses of rewards so why not give it to the only other AT that shares the primary?
-
Quote:*All* words can be shown to be ambiguous when used by poor speakers. However, "that story is inconsistent" says something very precise that no other words that aren't direct synonyms can express, and the only good use for using more words is to be more precise in describing the *location* of the inconsistency: what specifically is inconsistent with what else.Originally Posted by Mazey
That doesn't change the statement you quoted in the slightest, nor address the individual points I made that you failed to quote.
Using the word the way most people do it is still the case that it is less effective and less accurate than using the more specific words for any particular situation where someone might use it.
As I said before, the word is so vague that the only difference between saying "that story's inconsistent" and "I don't like that story" is that the former might fool someone into thinking you've actually bothered to make an attempt at analysing the story before spouting your mouth off. In the context of writing, it's nothing but a buzz word with no real meaning of it's own at all.
I assume that any writer that I say "there is a serious inconsistency in this part of the story" either knows what I mean and no more words are necessary to express that thought (which is not the same thing as saying more discussion wouldn't be useful), or they are illiterate and no more words would be helpful to express that thought (unless I'm talking to a six year old in which case a Dr Seuss story that illustrates the concept of inconsistency might be warranted).
The Menders have been portrayed with inconsistent knowledge of the Coming Storm and the Well of the Furies. Incarnate power has been portrayed inconsistently with Prometheus' description of the difference between Incarnates and Ascendents. Origin of Power has serious inconsistencies with the Well of the Furies itself, without using magical handwaves. Which makes the use of the term "magical" itself generally inconsistent any reasonable definition of magic. That's separate from the fact that the inconsistencies we were asked to ignore in the origin system in terms of origin partitioning are invoked in Origin of Power, making it impossible to ignore.
If I have to explain why non-scientific technology or non-magical magic is an inconsistency to a writer, there's very little point at all. I go back to reality, they go back to Dan Brown, and we call it a day. -
Quote:No, your assertion that the only way to make drain work is wrong in pretty much every way. Its not true the only way to work is to completely disable the critter. That's unambiguously false. its not true that the only way to make drain scale with critter level is to make it stronger than all other secondary mitigation.Originally Posted by Leo_G
I think the funny thing is, it's not wrong. That's exactly how endurance drain (-End + -recovery) works. I didn't object to your suggestion about -EnduranceRedux STR or -MaxEND (in fact, I suggested the very same thing as a means to improve Energy Aura's Energy Drain's mitigation back when people hated EA) but simply decided to post an alternate suggestion using a (true) rational concerning drains.
You're assuming incorrectly my purpose is to incite you to reply. My purpose was to point out you're wrong.Quote:As for your pic:
-
Quote:That's your objection?Originally Posted by Leo_G
There are auto-hit powers, ma'am.
I guess this would be one of those times when the more direct approach is waranted:
Quote:Hmm, if I were suggesting a fix for endurance drain, I'd probably just suggest an alternate advantage to the set when it *doesn't* drain. I mean, the only decent way to make drain work is to...well make it work. And if it's working, the foe can't do anything (or their actions are significantly reduced). Scale that up so it works regardless of if the foes are +0 all the way up to +5 and it practically trumps a lot of other types of mitigation. -rech? -ToHit? How about just not allowing the foes to act at all? It's technically better than a hold since I think certain effects can still be triggered while held like toggles (unless they're offensive toggles...or you're a dirty cheating *****-*** Scrapper Warden with cheating Quills). 
-
I don't think the PA is overpowered. I think its an edge case the devs don't want to propagate. Synapse and Arbiter Hawk for opposite reasons, but still.
Its an extremely unique power that opens the door to certain interesting activities, some of which can happen almost no other way, particularly with a support archetype. But in actual fact the edge case actions Illusion can perform very rarely generate high reward earning rates, which are the usual hallmark of an out of bounds power.
The Phantom Army is part of the chaotic control for Illusion. Concentrate them on one target and they are invincible and extremely difficult to shake. Put them in a crowd and they will randomly do weird things and have absolutely no problem with letting 95% of the spawn stomp your head. They deal a substantial amount of damage, but that's offset by the fact that Illusion has almost no AoE containment options. My gravity controller deals more damage against normal spawns than my Illusion controller.
The combination of weirdness in Illusion that makes it an edge case controller would make it an even weirder Dominator. For controllers, Illusion is their offensive set. For Dominators, its supposed to be the control set to supplement their offensive set. But rather than do it, it would in effect be a second offensive set: dominators could deploy the pets in one place while attacking in another, or they could supplement the pets offense with their own while letting the pets draw aggro.
What Arbiter Hawk said about the PA is probably also true for the entire Illusion set. Its not something the devs would make if they made it today. So I think if Dominators get Illusion, it will be in concept only. Its not going to have a grant invisibility, an indestructible phantom army, a fear pet.
In fact, my guess is that Darkness control is what the devs would have created if they were creating illusion today. And something like Darkness control is probably closer to what Dominators would get as an illusion control set than Illusion control itself. -
Quote:Either the critter can hit or it can't, so we should replace all tohit debuffs with holds.Originally Posted by Leo_G
Hmm, if I were suggesting a fix for endurance drain, I'd probably just suggest an alternate advantage to the set when it *doesn't* drain. I mean, the only decent way to make drain work is to...well make it work. And if it's working, the foe can't do anything (or their actions are significantly reduced). Scale that up so it works regardless of if the foes are +0 all the way up to +5 and it practically trumps a lot of other types of mitigation. -rech? -ToHit? How about just not allowing the foes to act at all? It's technically better than a hold since I think certain effects can still be triggered while held like toggles (unless they're offensive toggles...or you're a dirty cheating *****-*** Scrapper Warden with cheating Quills).
-
Quote:No, he's the bad-a** one:Originally Posted by SinisterDirge
Mace right? It's mace. Wait, is mace the pretty one?
