Why do the Viscanti have such low charisma?

edited February 2013 in Common Grounds
Viscanti has the lowest base charisma of all the organizational races. They also have the least amount of charisma at the upper end of specializations as well.

Viscanti Bard: 12
Merian Bard: 15
Lucidian Bard: 15
Dracnari Bard: 15
Elfen Bard: 16
Faeling Bard: 17
Trill Bard: 18

Now I remember discussing in the past, it's always been a sour topic with me because I've always been a Viscanti. I don't want to have to change just to have a chance in debates. The last time it was addressed though, the solution was to add bonuses for specific forms of influence. That balanced the field only slightly.

What I've been thinking about is why was that decision made. Is there a reason that Viscanti should be so disadvantaged in a area that has a large and massive effect on a whole form of conflict? Is it because we're supposed to be the "evil" race? Why can't we be charismatic?

Look at the example of a viscanti below.

This viscanti noblewoman carries herself with a fluid grace that only rank and riches can afford, giving her the illusion of impressive height. Her scarlet skin flushes red as sin and is contrasted by silky black curls of hair that flow freely behind her in a curtain of ebony tresses. Curving about her ears are two white horns the colour of pearl. She moves as if in a trance, the silk of her crimson gown pulled taut at every curve as it brushes against her slender body. A set of prayer beads carved of bone rests about her neck and falls just where the cut of her gown lends itself to a generous display of cleavage. A hypnotic quality shines in her emerald eyes, which draws another's gaze to hers compellingly.

Do you think that she would likely be lacking in charisma? I don't think so.

The point of this is just to make you think about why such a disparity exists. Is the reason behind it really that strong?

Comments

  • Talking with Akyaevin, Viscanti have a song effect that grants them (and only them, from what he said) +3 weighted charisma. 

    He says they can only get a max of 19, which considering the racial resists etc, isn't really that bad
  • edited February 2013
    How is that possible? The base for a Viscanti bard is 12. Has the upper cap changed? Also if you want to add buffs to the equation, how high can the other races get?
  • The cap is base+7. +1 from titan, +1 from demipower, and +5 from weighted.
    image
  • edited February 2013
    I'll have to test that because I haven't been able to go over 5, and that includes with titan and demi vanity.  That's a side issue though. The point of this is to discover the reason why the disparity exists at the racial level.
  • Weight ends at +8 weighted, which translates into +5 stat (HELP BUFFS). I've been at +8 weight myself at times, so it's definitely "possible" (in my case, it was charisma through throne, Leo, Chaos domoth, penumbra and beauty karma, I think).
    image
  • EritheylEritheyl ** Trigger Warning **
    edited February 2013
    Warbling Trill Symphonists can, without much effort, max out at 25 charisma. 24 on a bad day.

    Considering my charisma is 19 before any additional buffs as rapscallion dracnari Minstrel...yeah. I don't think I'd ever go irontongue.

    Crumkane, Lord of Epicurean Delights says, "WAS IT INDEED ON FIRE, ERITHEYL."

    -

    With a deep reverb, Contemptible Sutekh says, "CEASE YOUR INFERNAL ENERGY, ERITHEYL."
  • I can get 24 Charisma as an shadowsinger Faeling, and you said the base for them was 17. 

    The disparity exists from the overall racial look, Viscanti get the racial resists + nice base CON etc, where as faeling start with 9 Con, and don't really have any resists (just bal/sip bonuses really).

    Viscanti get the 'tanky features' at a cost of Charisma, and considering you start getting diminished returns at 20, 19's not a bad spot to be.
  • edited February 2013
    I consider charisma to be different than other stats because it has almost complete influence over debating. None of the other stats matter and none of the resists matter in a debate. It's a whole different system.

    In fact, it's the only conflict system that is separated from everything else.
  • Daevos said:
    Do you think that she would likely be lacking in charisma? I don't think so.
    Thematically, some viscanti are very attractive - many, though, are not. Broadly speaking, viscanti tend towards the 'freakish mutant' aspect of themselves. That's a very broad brush, though - some tend towards being exotically beautiful, albeit in a very dark and demonic manner. The obsession with physical beauty amongst the viscanti nobles isn't to be overlooked (it's why Angkrag is filled with their old, rotting undead - it would be socially untenable to keep them in public life), and it's probably partly reflected in the charisma gains for Master Viscanti. I note, your example is most likely just that, a Master Viscanti.

    It's important to note the Charisma is not solely a representation of 'beauty', though - perhaps one manner of looking at it is more 'influentialness', although even that isn't entirely the 'big picture' (ego serves to represent a few aspects, not limited solely to influencing). While a rather attractive viscanti may be more capable of influencing the general individual over their more.... Interestingly evolved brethren, her ability to engage in empowerment influence, for example, may be diminished. The general individual in the Basin of Life probably will not look kindly on viscanti as a race (as part of Magnagora's and the Viscanti's history, they were sort of the 'mutant freaks' that were left in the aftermath of the 'nuclear holocaust', or the Taint Wars). Even the most beautiful among them are probably regarded, on the outside, as 'freaks', products of that very terrible event. Beyond that, the viscanti aren't particularly known for their 'goodness' nor their positive or 'kind' nature (quiet the opposite).

    I think a lot of that plays into it - things like the racial weakening influence bonus make sense (even the freakish ones can intimidate and scare, and the beautiful ones can probably tear apart even the most self-righteous man's ego with a critical eye and a demeaning word), while maintaining that implication that viscanti aren't meant to be influential in a positive manner. They're brutal, dark, intimidating people - they don't go about making friends with furrikin and kids, but terrorize them into submission.

    I hope that makes sense - I feel like I was wandering a bit, heh.
  • edited February 2013
    Thank you, Eventru. That's what I was looking for. I wanted to understand the rationale behind it. I may not agree with the idea that charisma has to be "influential in a positive manner" or that Viscanti aren't capable of doing that well, but I wanted to see it from the perspective of the admin.
  • Daevos said:
    Thank you, Eventru. That's what I was looking for. I wanted to understand the rationale behind it. I may not agree with the idea that charisma has to be "influential in a positive manner", but I wanted to see it from the perspective of the admin.
    Sure! Again, that's just my perspective, though influenced by years of listening to the general intent of things. Of course, I do have a tendency to hear things in accordance with my own views, so.

     Maybe 'influential in a positive manner' is a poor way to put it, but broadly put, the ability to influence the average individual, or the average member of the masses. Maybe that makes more sense? It doesn't need to be positive, but it should be broadly inclusive - ie, it's a general measure of the ability to influence people, positive or negative. Viscanti are very weighted to the negative, and thus have low charisma (but have bonuses to 'negative' influence types, ie weaken and their city-type (which is, usually, very negative)).

    I think that's more what I was trying to get it.
  • I wanted to see a change to Viscanti debating too, not in charisma, just debating.

    New racial... either
    Conviction   Your arguments deal more damage even in the event of a draw.
    or
    Superiority    The arguments of other races hold less weight, and thus drain less ego.

    I think those would be ways to help Viscanti with debates (which are especially important in peaced villages) without directly adding charisma.  And let's face it... those both fit Viscanti so well.
  • CyndarinCyndarin used Flamethrower! It was super effective.

    Possibly the same reason why faeling's have the worst con out of the spec races. Something has to suck to counter x y and z perks.

    image
  • edited March 2013
    When i played an irontongue bard  I maxed out at 21 cha with no karma buffs. (and 21 with them)

    But..... there are a couple buts.

    I had to remain hearing and have my song up, which wasn't always convenient/advisable/possible. 

    Also, with the explosive expansion of attacks with varied damage types racial resistances are less meaningful.

    They also have a lot of other perks that sound neat but are not actually helpful. 

    Necroscream favours a tanky race with it's slow build up and lack of targeted burst damage.

    Ultimately, I decided to change races though. The sip penalty made the tanky race set up turn out not to be that tanky at all.

    image
  • edited March 2013
    How did you get 21?

    10 (viscanti) + 2 (irontongue) + 2 (titan/demipowers) + 5 (weighted) = 19.

    And honestly, I don't know that I'd consider viscanti to be that tanky considering the horrendous sip malus. Maybe it was better before our construct made every lich get lv2 regen in taint already.

    EDIT: Also take into account that +3 weighted isn't that much when without even trying I walk around with +6 from throne + karma + bardicpresence. Which means if I went viscanti, I'd hit the cap and one (and any further) points would be wasted.
  • Oh, snap. I lied. I only got to 19 with viscanti. Apologies

    image
  • Tank races, especially those whose focus is on having multiple resistances, all got practically downgraded by the introduction of divinus/excoro damage, the additional attacks or the ability to change the damage type of their attacks that almost all guilds now have. It is just that much easier to either use an attack that at least partially consists of divinus/excoro (which no race has resistance against) or use a damage type the race you're facing is not resistant to.

    If you look at the viscanti resistances, you'll find that the magic resistance part is almost useless now in pvp, unless you're facing a team of balestoning researchers, since most bards will preferredly use their alternative to minorsecond, and symbol damage got changed away from magic damage completely. Hardly any (meaning none at all) MD will use moonburst in pvp, when moonfire does yummy divinus/fire damage.

    Poison damage is, outside of Mag, pretty much only done by Blacktalon.

    Cutting/Blunt resistance may have been nice before report 941, when monks could do pretty insane damage, but it's now really only great for bashing. Granted, glinshari does half blunt damage.


    I asked for it already when divinus/excoro got released without finding much support, but I still think the tank (high resistance, not high con) races should be reviewed in the light of divinus/excoro and the shifting of damage types of attacks available.
  • Veyrzhul's argument is solidly reasoned.

    I agree with his points and would not mind seeing a review on Viscanti. Igasho and Tae'dae were changed in the last set of racials to be more on par to other races (with minor downsides as tanks).  Viscanti already have low dex, which kills them against warriors/monks, low charisma, which hinders in all ways for villages, was overkill.
  • LavinyaLavinya Queen of Snark Australia
    ...I'm not tanky at all. In fact, viscanti sucks for everything except roleplay. We are slow, uncharismatic, and I don't think having just under 6k health as a norm (as demigod) is all that impressive.



  • I'd also like to see at least dwarves and orclach included in a review. Orclach are shafted most imo, because their hefty level 3 fire weakness is shared (not in level, but type) by a lot of other races, which makes fire damage widespread (among those who can choose, like melee types), and turns them from tanky into cannonfodder in face of it.
  • What is your reasoning for dwarves? Those are still a top tank race, primarily because of tolerance and the ease of alcohol mitigation.  Still a huge fan of showing orclach some impressive love. Int is too low to surge and makes them easy to insta, low cha makes them useless in debating/influence, and high fire weakness.. blah.

    Still in support of them getting physical specs.  Perhaps a special spec/race title for Ur'Guard orclachs.

    Even with nice upgrades, I am having trouble seeing orclach having a specialization that wouldnt be horrible (+int/cha at the cost of what? str? then they make bad warriors, etc).
  • Dwarves having to rely on alcohol for damage reduction works for tough bashing and smobbing, but in pvp, the command denial is still something you don't want, especially when facing aeon attacks.
    Dwarf resistances once only excluded asphyx and psychic damage, which were very rare, so they had a good allround protection, although mostly at low levels. Now their resistances exclude those two, of which psychic is now more common, and they exclude divinus and excoro, both of which are not exactly uncommon as is, either. That makes their former allround protection not very allround any more.
  • Really I would like to see lowmagic/highmagic offer some base protection from divinus/excorable. Perhaps make divinus/excorable always considered partly magic for sake of resisting it.  I do agree, adding two types of damage and basically no defenses for them was a bad call. Skills should have had an examination to adjust for that.  Magic resistance is pretty much bleh.
  • I don't think offering more generally available protection to divinus/excoro is a solution to the racial resistance issue.
  • It is if racial resistance to magic itself would include a reduction to those two. Sorry if I explained it poorly. Since most no one will do pure magic now, make "resistance to magic" encompass a portion of divinus/excorable as well.
  • edited March 2013
    Veyrzhul said:
    Dwarves having to rely on alcohol for damage reduction works for tough bashing and smobbing, but in pvp, the command denial is still something you don't want, especially when facing aeon attacks.
    Dwarf resistances once only excluded asphyx and psychic damage, which were very rare, so they had a good allround protection, although mostly at low levels. Now their resistances exclude those two, of which psychic is now more common, and they exclude divinus and excoro, both of which are not exactly uncommon as is, either. That makes their former allround protection not very allround any more.
    As a dwarf brewmeister with charm I can get 40 dmp to all just from racial without moving past sober. Add in amber and it's a total of 60, add in dark and it's 60 DMP and 20 DAM. 

    Cut out the brewmeister and it drops to 30-something for the racial. Still very high dmp to all for absolutely no command loss (which only hits after you move past drunksober).
  • We're not looking at a general racial re-balance right now. You can try bringing up the impact of racial resistance with the new dmg type options through envoys, though.
Sign In or Register to comment.