Report 753

Report #753
Skillset: Transmology Skill: Hekoskeri
 Org: Hartstone Status: Rejected Jan 2012
Furies' Decision:
While we agree that hekoskeri could use a tweak, we are not convinced by the
offered suggestions. We request the Illuminati envoy submit ideas (with envoy
feedback) as a separate report.
Problem: Hekoskeri is firing on people who have not (and could not) leave the
room. This results in them being afflicted by an ectoplasm effect (that most
probably stacks with ectoplasm itself, if present) that cannot be cured, without
the person leaving them room, and more importantly, without leaving the ents of
the illuminati. The avalibility of domination to illuminati (through silvery
eyes) means that they may force you to attempt to move when they know you may
not to quadruple balance loss you. Hekoskeri is powerful enough as is, with the
likelihood that you will be offbalanced as you try to run away by badluck in
conjunction with greywhispers afflictions, or mucous/attempts to cure mucous.
Solution #1: Make hekoskeri only fire when you have successfully left the room.
Solution #2: Give the hekoskeri slowing a cure.
Solution #3: Change Hekoskeri to a period of anti-celerity. You may only move
 a very limited number of rooms before getting the 'now now, not
 to hasty' message. Possible extension on duration or hasty
 recovery may be in order.
Player Comments:
---[Shuyin on 12/24 @ 19:58 writes]:
Hekoskeri fires 50% of the time according to Iosai. It does -not- fire when you
are offbalance and try to leave, which, for all intents and purposes, nullifies
its use through domination midcombat. The only way forcing you to move and
hoping that it will tick will work is as an opener, when the illu is out of the
room and both of you are onbalance. Trust me, I've tried.
---[Shuyin on 12/24 @ 20:05 writes]:
Ah nuts, hit enter too early. Anyway, given this, it will tick when you're
either affed enough to fail leaving but on balance (webbed, mucoused, feared,
etc) or when you're free of affs and try to leave. Generally speaking, it is
completely up to the victim to cure enough to make sure that he is free of any
hindering affs like that before attempting to leave. Spamming a direction while
affed up (aka panicking) obviously does not end well for them when fighting an
illuminati. I'd like to call this victim error than anything particularly wrong
with hekoskeri. Furthermore, as always, there's always the option of killing the
hekoskeri before attempting to leave. Trust me, quite a few capable fighters
have successfully done so, even if some people insist that this is somehow
impossible.
---[Shuyin on 12/24 @ 21:03 writes]:
Incidentally, I have no problem with possibly changing hekoskeri itself, since I
acknowledge that there may be issues with it. What I disagree with is that
somehow the victim is not at least partially (if not mostly) at fault as well.
Iosai has said that she may change it so hekoskeri will not tick if you try to
move while sprawled, which I find to be agreeable. I would recommend we hold off
until this change goes through so we can see how far reaching it really is
---[Enyalida on 12/24 @ 22:58 writes]:
Solution 3 added.
---[Iytha on 12/24 @ 23:04 writes]:
Solution 3 is the result of discussion between Shuyin, Enyalida and I. I
recomend increasing the recovery time rather than subtracting a flat number of
rooms per recovery time or setting the number of moves per recovery to a fixed
number.
---[Shuyin on 12/24 @ 23:30 writes]:
I am fine with solution 3, but I would recommend simply making it so hekoskeri
reduces room movement to a flat 1-2 rooms before hitting hasty. That way, the
affliction would be universally useful without having to mess with any durations
---[Iytha on 1/11 @ 19:18 writes]:
I'd like to further say that the current effects of hekoskeri slow encourages
the rather degenerate tactic of trying to force your enemy to flee just so
you'll gain the benefit of the 15s of slowing.
---[Enyalida on 1/11 @ 22:45 writes]:
I agree with Iytha, that was part of my concern. To be clear, my preferred
solution at this point is changing the mechanic to Sol.3 and implimenting Sol.1
with that.
---[Wobou on 1/12 @ 00:52 writes]:
Solution 3 sounds good.