Report 590

Report #590
Skillset: Starhymn Skill: PrincessFarewell
 Org: Cantors Status: Completed Apr 2011
Furies' Decision:
Solution 3
Problem: PrincessFarewell is significantly more advantageous for Tarot users
than Glamourists in that Tarot users have an alternate way to strip quicksilver
(Aeon tarot). This was addressed in the special report, but somewhere along the
way that got tossed out, so we're still stuck with this problem.
[A: 0 R: 0] Solution #1: When PrincessFarewell strips quicksilver and doesn't
 aeon, lower the power cost.
[A: 0 R: 0] Solution #2: When PrincessFarewell strips quicksilver and doesn't
 aeon, remove the stun (so it'd be only blackout), and
 remove the power cost entirely.
[A: 0 R: 0] Solution #3: Some form of allowing PrincessFarewell to bypass (but
 not strip) quicksilver when used, and always aeon,
 and add an additional cost to compensate for this.
 This way, Tarot users can't follow up by spamming an
 aeon card to keep the target aeoned.
Player Comments:
---[Raeri on 3/17 @ 03:51 writes]:
Solution 1. Or possibly Solution 3 if you mean actually bypass and not strip
quicksilver, but guaranteed stun+aeon on demand might raise your power usage too
high.
---[Senna on 3/17 @ 05:14 writes]:
Yep, solution 3 would be an aeon that bypasses but doesn't strip quicksilver.
---[Iytha on 4/4 @ 02:59 writes]:
Solution 2 feels like it would be too unwieldy; it means going from
blackout+quicksilver stripping for 0p to blackout+aeon+stun for 3p in a way not
stricly predictable by the bard. I don't like solution 3, as quicksilver
bypassing aeon+blackout+stun is too much when coupled with the new passive angel
effects in starhymn. Solution 1 would be acceptable, though I would be
interested in what you think the lowered cost should be.
---[Talan on 4/8 @ 22:27 writes]:
The stun is useful to you whether or not you strip quicksilver, as if you use
the song back to back, the stun should allow you enough time to stick aeon on
the second refrain for sure, so I'm not really certain why you would wish for
solution 2 at all. Solution 3 would be too strong I think, as Iytha mentions.
I'm not really convinced the power cost nees to be lowered, either, in solution
1, as using it back to back should be guaranteed aeon plus the 2 blackout/stuns
in the bargain.
---[Nydekion on 4/8 @ 23:36 writes]:
It's mainly because it's a bit absurd to for an ability to cost 6 power to aeon
someone, I think, when comparable abilities that give aeon are free in power
cost or have the cost paid beforehand. Heh. Solution 2 is fine, failing that,
solution 1 with a 1p cost (instead of 3) for stripping quicksilver but not
aeoning would be fine. That would place aeoning a target at 4p which is fair for
what it does.
---[Senna on 4/12 @ 01:55 writes]:
Iytha: For solution 2, the bard already can't "strictly predict" whether or not
PrincessFarewell is going to aeon. Like Nydekion said, the purpose of this
report is to decrease the power cost for aeoning, since right now 6 power and 6
seconds of equilibrium is kind of a rediculous cost for a glamourist.
---[Senna on 4/12 @ 02:06 writes]:
And I don't really see how the "new passive angel effects" are a problem here.
AngelicHost just saves us from having to blanknote, and AvengingAngel is a total
of four afflictions over twenty seconds, and both are at a considerable cost,
making it unlikely we'll be able to effectively use them in conjunction with
PrincessFarewell while being able to still use more essential things like
PerfectFifth and Requiem as well as most of Glamours. Not to mention that they
hinder our ability to passively afflict since they wind us back three stanzas,
so we either have to go without high stanza effects or waste our time performing
the song back up while they cure their way out.
---[Nydekion on 4/12 @ 03:31 writes]:
Just a note, the angel songs aren't passive at all. They're active skills that
act over a short duration of time (ie. not instant) with significant cost to the
passive afflicting and hindering ability of the cantor in question.
---[Placeus on 4/15 @ 07:59 writes]:
Solution 3 without an additional power cost seems sensible to me. All the bard
guilds have an ability of a certain potency for 3 power and solutions 1 and 2,
if implemented would still leave Cantors at a disadvantage. Choke (hope this
doesn't derail the report) costs 3p for an aeon like effect with a requirement
for released shadows. I don't think 3p for a more easily cured aeon which
bypasses quicksilver and requires undeaf is unreasonable.
---[Placeus on 4/15 @ 08:04 writes]:
Hrmm, forgot about the stun. Blackout + aeon through quicksilver for 3p I
support, blackout + aeon through quicksilver + stun I do not.
---[Viynain on 4/15 @ 23:57 writes]:
I have no problem with lowering the cost of the ability if it does not end up
afflicting with aeon upon use. Considering it'd still afflict with a stun or
blackout still, lowering the cost to 1p or so would be understandable.