Report 1839

Report #1839
Skillset: Nekotai Skill: Angknek
 Org: Glomdoring Status: Finalised
Problem: Presently, Angknek does damaged legs as an arm attack in base stance.
This allows a nekotai to break both legs in a single, repeatable combo over and
over again for an unnecessary amount of hindering and damage. Traditionally,
this has been justified by the fact that Nekotai have the worst access to
mutilated limbs out of every monk class. This report aims to complete the
process started in Report 1787 by giving Nekotai removing the now unnecessary
base stance double leg breaking while introducing reasonable access to leg
mutilates.
[A: 2 R: 2] Solution #1: Change Sprongma to inflict DamagedLegs on leg
 strikes. Change Angknek to afflict paralysis on leg
 strikes rather than damaged legs.
[A: 2 R: 2] Solution #2: As solution 1, but haemophilia instead of paralysis
 for angknek.
[A: 2 R: 2] Solution #3: In addition to either of the above, swap the leg
 effects of Angkai (Disloyalty) and Angkhai
 (DamagedLeg), so that nekotai retain the ability to
 break legs pre-Surge.
Player Comments:
---[Moi on 2/8 @ 17:06 writes]:
For reference, the Nekotai route to Mutilate would be (any grapple,
sprongma+oriama) after this report. Oriama is a surge+ grapple ender which
mutilates damaged limbs and damages non-damaged limbs.
---[Moi on 2/8 @ 17:06 writes]:
For further reference, the Shofangi mutilate is (any grapple, snap+buck), the
Nunchaku mutilate is (any grapple, tannaku+ganzhou) and the Tessenchi version is
(any grapple, inertialkick+falsepositive); all of these are a grapple followed
by a grapple ender in surge+. The Tahtetso version raktiah'sho+raktiah'sho+any
kick) and the Ninjakari version (ninombhi+ninombhi+any kick) are also surge+
only, but do not involve a grapple ender and therefore do not need the grapple
for setup.
---[Moi on 3/8 @ 02:42 sets as pending]
---[Veyils on 3/9 @ 03:35 writes]:
As a note report 1849 is asking for double limb breaks for Tessenchi from base.
It may be a good idea to agree upon a common standard of affliction for monks
because right now we've one report in asking for 2x limb breaks from base and
one report saying 2x limb breaks from base is too much. Doesn't really make
sense to give it to one while taking it from another.
---[Ejderha on 3/9 @ 17:07 writes]:
While I agree to an extent that consensus on early limb breaks is good, remember
that 1849 is based on a far more limited design space because of how Tessenchi
are set up - The only feasible alternate aff stack is ice and to divorce
reliance from vitals means the ice affs have to be on limbs. Short of adding new
affs, that leaves limited options. I also think that the desire for consensus
conflicts with the differentiation in monk specs. We have unequal access to many
things - prones, mutilates, etc - as a matter of design, so overly enforcing
sameness without regard for each spec makes no sense to me. My main direct
concern about this report is Sol3, doesn't that remove access to a Neko
hemorrhaging aff (disloyalty?) or am I misremembering?
---[Moi on 3/9 @ 21:43 writes]:
Ejderha: Nekotai would indeed no longer be able to give Disloyalty as a direct
affliction, but given that Angkai already has DamagedOrgans as part of the same
action, meaning that we can use Hadrudin instead, just as we currently do with
Mellitin for Dysentery. As you rightfully point out, different monk
specializations are different. Nekotai in particular is a very poisons-focused
design, getting multiple abilities to hide poisons, ignore shrugging and gain
additional poison applications.
---[Veyils on 3/10 @ 12:07 writes]:
Based on further discussion I'm opposing this report on the same basis that we
supported report 1849. I agreed that Tessenchi getting limb breaks at base was
fine, and from the votes in 1849 it looks like the majority of envoys supported
that too. Not a single envoy voted against or had an issue with Tessenchi
getting double damage limbs, the justification in discussions being that
stancing was strong enough to deal with it. I can understand a blanket statement
saying remove limb breaks from base onwards but I cant understand a double
standard where you can vote for giving double limb breaks to one monk but feel
the need to remove it from a second.
---[Moi on 3/13 @ 12:39 writes]:
Changed solution 3 not to remove disloyalty; it instead simply moves it to surge
---[Deichtine on 3/21 @ 15:04 writes]:
Would expect to see this vote rejected by the same people who supported solution
1 and 2 on report 1849. REPORT 1849 VOTES
---[Ejderha on 3/21 @ 19:08 writes]:
@Deichtine: I think your expectation is based on false equivalence. Those
reports are regarding different issues, for different specs, with severely
different constraints and kill conditions. Suggesting that votes must be the
same is unreasonable. Moi says double damaged legs at base is 'unnecessary' due
to other changes. You have not at all refuted the claims in the report. Which is
from your own org. Solution 1 seems to maintain the idea of holding in place,
but I think solution 2 would be fine. I don't think I would want Solution 3 as
Nekotai, pushing access to a hemo aff to a future stance, but I don't see that
it would be obviously OP, certainly 'better' than the status quo and a potential
compromise.