Report 1224

Report #1224
Skillset: Aquachemantics Skill: Virtuous
 Org: Aquamancers Status: Completed Oct 2016
Furies' Decision:
Solution 1.
Problem: The Virtuous sheen is a reactive ability which has a chance to delivers
the Justice affliction whenthe Aquachemancer is attacked. Justice is one of the
pre-overhaul afflictions to be removed due to the overhaul so the following
solutions are to replace Justice. Other reactives are ego drain, addiction and
pacifism.
[A: 0 R: 0] Solution #1: Replace the justice affliction with egovice.
[A: 0 R: 0] Solution #2: Replace the justice affliction with kneel with a
 short stun. (1sec stun)
[A: 0 R: 0] Solution #3: Replace the justice affliction with blackout.
Player Comments:
---[Shedrin on 9/25 @ 21:03 writes]:
Report 1392 had an option for blackout which wasn't chosen, a few comments were
raised about blackout in general being undesired. Otherwise, I don't think
Solution 2 would be of much use to a mage. Unsure about Solution 1.
---[Auriella on 9/25 @ 23:24 writes]:
Report 1392 was for mists which are the passive ticking abilities, Virtuous in
this report is a reactive which only fires on a % chance when attacked which is
why I thought blackout wouldn't be a bad option due to the unpredictable nature
of reactives firing.
---[Shedrin on 9/26 @ 01:54 writes]:
My concern about blackout reactive specifically is that it might be too much
with PhantomArmour. My concern about egovice is that aurics are usually limited
to bards, though that's been broken with Celestines and Nihilists after their
pacts update, so maybe it's not an issue. Otherwise it seems alright.
---[Auriella on 9/26 @ 06:23 writes]:
I believe Wildewood can give manabarbs with their bombs
---[Raeri on 9/26 @ 10:34 writes]:
Aquachem seemed designed to support TP, and I guess DW since it got its egokill.
I can see some synergy with egovice, and it being on reactive would mean a
little more effort on the part of the mage to track and capitalise. Preference
for Solution 1.
---[Synkarin on 9/27 @ 13:52 writes]:
I prefer solution 1 too, I think it can help pressure vitals a bit.
---[Wobou on 10/4 @ 13:48 writes]:
I prefer solution 1. I agree that solution 2 probably won't help the mage much
and I agree with Shedrin's worry about the stack of phantomarmour and the
blackout from solution 3.
---[Lerad on 10/9 @ 03:11 writes]:
I'm a little sad about the aurics no longer being unique to bards, but with the
consolidation of affs, it can't be helped, I guess. I second the comments about
blackout - it's not overbearing by any means now (at least when compared to in
the past, when vapours was still around as a proper aff etc, and before blackout
immunity) - but it's probably best to go for something that gives proper aff
pressure instead of adding more blackout. Kneel is good on paper, though -
passively proning the target is always nice (speaking as a monk) but I suppose
it might have very little application in a aquachem 1v1. I support solution 1 or
2.
---[Salome on 10/10 @ 19:01 writes]:
I concur with Lerad. I believe that auric afflictions should be left to the
bards - If adapted, we should likely get more speciality afflictions just for
bards. I support 1 or 2.
---[Aeldra on 10/11 @ 15:02 writes]:
I agree with others that blackout is not something you'd want here. I can not
really see how kneel would provide anything good in a generic situation (and
some amusement), whereas solution #1 would provide some actual benefit as a
reactive. I feel Lerad's concerns a though. I support solution 1 and solution 2
( if solution 2 really has some benefit that I did not discern ).
---[Falmiis on 10/11 @ 21:00 writes]:
Prone doesn't really do anything for aquachems in 1v1 but could help other
classes with their offence. Personally I don't think chems will be in that bad a
spot in groups once report 1479 is completed so I think the focus here should be
to help the 1v1 potential of aquachems, which would be solution 1 or 3. I don't
really share the same concerns about extra blackout as a reactive being a
balancing factor, but I do think it'd make it fairly boring to have two
reactives that can both give blackout. As a result I prefer solution 1, though
given the nature of reactives I don't think it'll end up having much of an
effect. Ultimately I'd like to see this aspect of chemwoods being reworked, but
that's beyond the scope of this report.
---[Auriella on 10/13 @ 09:26 writes]:
I've altered solution 2 as I was told it wasn't that clear. I was picturing
Kneel which an angel pact gives, which if I'm not mistaken also delivers a short
stun.
---[Aeldra on 10/13 @ 09:27 writes]:
With the clarification Auriella made that the kneel was supposed to be including
a short stun, I would possibly think that solution two may be the more
interesting one, esp. as it doesn't need to rely on egovice. Would Support
solution #1 and solution #2, preferring solution #2
---[Falmiis on 10/13 @ 19:27 writes]:
I'm good with either solution 1 or 2
---[Synkarin on 10/13 @ 22:52 writes]:
Do any other reactionary abilities give two afflictions? I feel like 2 should be
sprawled OR stun, but not both. I'm ok with solution 1.
---[Raeri on 10/14 @ 07:49 writes]:
I believe the 'kneel' affliction, as given by Celestines, includes the stun -
which might be what she is referencing
---[Synkarin on 10/15 @ 03:11 writes]:
I understand what she means by Kneel, but kneel is really two afflictions. Do
any other reactionary effects give two afflictions?
---[Wobou on 10/15 @ 19:25 writes]:
Please note that making it a stun will adversely impact all guilds that stack
commands (1h warriors, monks, certain guardians) which makes it pretty strong
against those classes depending on the proc rate. That being said an argument
could be made that chemantics/woods should have good reactives like this and
maybe other archetypes (like harmony monks with Chuuti, acrobatics dodge, etc.)
should have these sorts of combo breaking things reduced.
---[Lerad on 10/16 @ 02:07 writes]:
I agree with Wobou - I don't think stun as a reactive is a very good idea. Stun
is the strongest affliction in the game, and it is decidedly limited for a very
good reason. Most stuns are active, so that it costs the giver of the stun some
balance. There are a few instances of passive stun, and most have their own
costs (celestines take up one slot of their limited invests to choose kneel).
For a reactive, sprawl is far more than enough - I'm speaking as a class that
has a sprawl as a reactive as well. It is extremely powerful - but as I
mentioned, while that may be because I'm a monk and sprawl synergizes with
physical classes more, that doesn't mean it should be a reactive with a stun
when it's on a caster class. If solution 2 is supposed to include stun, I'm
opposed. Solution 1 only, please.
---[Raeri on 10/16 @ 12:26 writes]:
Ah I see what you meant. Support for Solution 1, Opposed to Sols 2/3. As a
balance, perhaps make virtuous sheen always proc first? (i.e. before the
reactive drains or whatever)
---[Shuyin on 10/22 @ 17:32 writes]:
Solution 1 only.