Dramaturgy Climax

Orael · August 2020

Hi,

A message was sent to me today about Dramaturgy Climax and how it is too powerful, and they gave a couple of suggestions. I happen to think these suggestions are likely good ideas but I also don't want to make changes without being transparent about why they are being made, especially because we're out of the reporting cycle at the moment.

The suggestions are as follows

1) Change Lust to either only count if the target is lusted to the caster specifically OR remove lust as a potential climax affliction altogether.
2) Climax afflictions will end up being cured by the climax - preventing stacking climax hits from working.

The player said that these changes may not be enough, but they would at least be a start.

I'd like to hear comments for or against these changes before we go ahead and implement them.

Thanks,

Orael

Yinuish · August 2020

I think only counting lust towards the caster makes more sense for this- not being able to have any allies lusted for empress is really frustrating as a tarot user.

I think the stun on climax may also be worth looking at.

Kaizynne · August 2020

From my small testing (times may be out because of my connection), a 3 aff climax is about a 6 second stun. I have yet to look at 1, 2, 4 and 5 aff climaxes, but if its 2s per aff (which is what it looks like to me), I think that's a bit rough. Considering all you need are 3 affs to kill someone, as there is no time to cure anything between the first climax and the second, I personally think the stun does need to be looked at.

The lust mechanic makes no sense to me, and I definitely think it should only be respective of caster-target.

Climax curing affs is a start as well, but I think the stun length will make it null and void in most cases if the stun works like I wrote above.

Again, these times may be way out, but I'll have another look at it later (Or Orael or another godmin can clarify), but it definitely needs a look at.

Kreon · August 2020

Suggestion 2 is great in my opinion, but like Kaizynne said that stun is a different problem, a 5s stun with a Tear of Shallah active does require a look at.

Edit: Had suggestion 3 instead of 2, been a long day at work

Esano · August 2020

I agree that fixing or removing or restricting lust and clearing the afflictions is the best place to start. While it still leaves you open to coordinated attacks from multiple bards, it's less critical than a lucky roll on compatriotofchaos letting a bard solo-kill you in 3s for 10p ... and then refreshing power and doing it to your neighbour when they get beast balance back. The possible counters (rejecting everyone, using a tea, stacking passives) have been in turn countered (spending a few seconds to hit with lust and an aff, goldenbox, etc) enough that they aren't reliable and it ultimately falls down to RNG on however they apply their affs before and between the climaxes. That isn't a good situation.

I can't comment as much on the practical experience of the stun, because a 6s stun normally means that you're about to die from the chained climax anyway. I also don't think that getting the stun right should delay changing the chaining handling. But I went ahead and did some self-testing.

Climax has a ~3s balance, which will matter less with chaining removed. With self-testing and tear removed, a 1-aff climax stunned for ~2.3-2.5s. 2 affs was ~4.7s, 3 affs was ~7.1-7.7s. Those are very big numbers, and awkwardly don't actually benefit the bard much beyond the 3s chaining breakpoint.

I also agree that dramaturgy needs to be looked at after this, but that's a longstanding weakness in the skillset. People aren't even using dramaturgy to build affs outside of lust, they're just flinging beast attacks and maybe timing it to a song effect. I'll hold off on discussing that for now, because I do feel that fixing the chaining is the biggest issue and don't want to bog things down.

Kaizynne · August 2020

I have concluded testing and it definitely looks to be around 2s per aff with Tear. I can add a link to a log in a post if necessary.

Edit: I agree with Esano that the entire skillset of dramaturgy needs a bit of work.

Drastrath · August 2020

My suggestion would be the following independent of one another:

1: Kill check before ego damage/stun.
or
2: Increase the amount of afflictions on a climax to at least 7, but keep the stun/ego damage the same. This would mean that 1 affliction would be less strong.

Either of these would most likely nerf the skill enough to not need further nerfs.

Drastrath · August 2020

I disagree with changing the lust as it can be easily countered by rejecting. However, solution two could be interesting, but I don't think it is enough. I would suggest combining my solution 2 and the original solution 2 without lust:

New Solution 2: Climax cures afflictions it checks for including all lusts. Increase the amount of afflictions that it checks to 7. This means instead of 1 affliction equaling 10% ego damage it would be ~7.14%, and I would think .75 second stun per affliction could be good enough. This would be a max stun 5.25 seconds, or a 3 hit climax would be 2.25 second stun. I wouldn't be opposed to reducing the stun to .5 per affliction either.

Parhelion · August 2020

Drastrath said:

I disagree with changing the lust as it can be easily countered by rejecting.

As it stands, it is increasing damage if you are lusted to anyone. At all. So you're wanting people to reject all of their allies who have them lusted for empress, just so Climax does less damage/stun.

Parhelion · August 2020

How about increasing Climax's power cost to, say, 8?

Drastrath · August 2020

Parhelion said:

Drastrath said:

I disagree with changing the lust as it can be easily countered by rejecting.

As it stands, it is increasing damage if you are lusted to anyone. At all. So you're wanting people to reject all of their allies who have them lusted for empress, just so Climax does less damage/stun.

Yes, keeping 10 lusts on your ally list shouldn't be risk free even if they are your allies, in my opinion. It is one of the few if not only skill that punishes staying lusted to allies. This change would buff love potion, pheromones, etc., so I like the fact that it punishes keeping lusts active even allies. This makes people think twice before using lust effects.

The only issue with 8 power is you can still refresh power to get a double climax off. It would still be a step in the right direction.

Edit: Grammar

Parhelion · August 2020

Drastrath said:

Parhelion said:

Drastrath said:

I disagree with changing the lust as it can be easily countered by rejecting.

As it stands, it is increasing damage if you are lusted to anyone. At all. So you're wanting people to reject all of their allies who have them lusted for empress, just so Climax does less damage/stun.

Yes, keeping 10 lusts on your ally list shouldn't be risk free even if they are your allies, in my opinion. It is one of the few if not only skill that punishes staying lusted to allies. This change would buff love potion, pheromones, etc., so I like the fact that it punishes keeping lusts active even allies. This makes people think twice before using lust effects.

The only issue with 8 power is you can still refresh power to get a double climax off. It would still be a step in the right direction.

Edit: Grammar

Yeah, but the lusts themselves don't stack. You're forcing people to keep from being lusted to allies just in case there's a Dramaturgist using lust. That's a bit excessive.

As for the 8 power refresh, yeah. You can in fact do that once a day. That's a damn better thing than double climaxing, refreshing, and doing it two more times.

Drastrath · September 2020

The issue with lust is that any class can sip love potion which is mostly for negating bard songs or mage effects. This means that bards and mages are forced to reject constantly. There is no penality for this sip and forget love potion. At least, a dramaturgist(climax) makes sipping love potion a possible negative for your allies. It does this because if you decide to aoe lust then your allies will have to reject.

Since climax is based on lust, this causes a bard's enemies hesitate to use aoe lust which makes the bard not have to worry about rejecting as much. If you nerf climax using lust then this entire strategy is lost. This strategy is not unbalanced. Climax is overturned.

Luce · September 2020

As a Mage I cannot, in fact, sip love potion and expect to stay effective in combat unless I'm going to be in someone else's meld 100% of the time (at which point I'm better off changing classes or speccing into aerochem really). =(

IIRC neither can druids, bards, wiccans, or guardians since they all have effects or entities that either require or strongly prefer you have someone enemied if you're going to have them poking the target.

Lust can cause the drinker to add other people to their own allies list too. Unless that got removed, at which point the 'counterplay' to 'lust everybody, let the Gods sort them out.' is to reintroduce that.

Orael · September 2020

I'm not really a fan of leaving 'lusted to anyone' the way it works currently. The counter is too great a cost for what it gives you. Forcing it to have lusted to the caster makes it more difficult yes, but also more tactical.

Drastrath · September 2020

Luce said:

As a Mage I cannot, in fact, sip love potion and expect to stay effective in combat unless I'm going to be in someone else's meld 100% of the time (at which point I'm better off changing classes or speccing into aerochem really). =(
IIRC neither can druids, bards, wiccans, or guardians since they all have effects or entities that either require or strongly prefer you have someone enemied if you're going to have them poking the target.

Lust can cause the drinker to add other people to their own allies list too. Unless that got removed, at which point the 'counterplay' to 'lust everybody, let the Gods sort them out.' is to reintroduce that.

I agree with Mage/Druid and Bard as I tried to communicate that they, in my opinion, are the target of love potions without much they can do except reject, reject, reject. I would say that most guardians and wiccans seem to not mind it much. Institute may be the outlier due to their gem effects, but I have never really looked at them. However, I stand by my previous statements. Monks, warriors, and imo guardians/wiccans can sip love potion without much thought.

Drastrath · September 2020

Orael said:

I'm not really a fan of leaving 'lusted to anyone' the way it works currently. The counter is too great a cost for what it gives you. Forcing it to have lusted to the caster makes it more difficult yes, but also more tactical.

By nerfing the lust aspect of climax, you will be buffing aoe lust. It isn't the benefit of having lust on the climax that I am arguing for, but it is the punishment of your allies using love potion (or similar skills).

Parhelion · September 2020

Drastrath said:

Orael said:

I'm not really a fan of leaving 'lusted to anyone' the way it works currently. The counter is too great a cost for what it gives you. Forcing it to have lusted to the caster makes it more difficult yes, but also more tactical.

By nerfing the lust aspect of climax, you will be buffing aoe lust.

That's not how this works. That's not how any of this works.

Orael · September 2020

Lust effects are already double-edge swords even before dramaturgy climax gets involved. Even monks, warriors and guardians/wiccans have skills that are enemy-only or ally only effects, which lusting would either counter or include. There are plenty of artifact powers and demigod powers that also operate off these same mechanics.

It's pretty much a 'freebie' affliction that dramaturgists get, and doesn't require any real effort on their part to induce, but lusting is already a strong mechanic and forcing a rejection any time you lust -anyone- is a bit over the top in my opinion. I think it's just too strong of a mechanic and I'm okay if that means love potion and the like are stronger because of it. Requiring the lust to be to the caster of the climax maintains that threat while not making it overbearing.

Drastrath · September 2020

You realize lust to the dramaturgist is a "freebie" affliction either way just like "pacifism"? Lust can be subtext(hidden) and tea/rubeus can be stripped with a double pacifism meaning PeacefulCompanion is going to hit. The hidden lust is virtually untraceable. This means that if you are at 90% ego then the double climax is going to kill you. This is what this post was supposed to be about. The lust fix isn't a fix at all. It is hardly a nerf to climax. So four balances you can hit a double climax for 2 hits of ego each. The issue really is CompatriotofChaos and how it works with Climax.

My kills will not in any way be hindered by the lust nerf since I normally prime my climax with a subtext lust anyway.

@Parhelion Care to expand or should I just change my mind because you say so?

Yinuish · September 2020

I don't think it's a case of anyone thinking applying the lust solution will 'fix' the skill, but rather than the design of it is a needless penalty to having allies lusted.

It doesn't NEED to work that way, and there's no harm changing it, especially as you say, you can apply lust easily on your own, and it means tarot users aren't penalised for having people lusted for Empress. You don't NEED to penalise them for it.

Orael · September 2020

Drastrath said:

You realize lust to the dramaturgist is a "freebie" affliction either way just like "pacifism"? Lust can be subtext(hidden) and tea/rubeus can be stripped with a double pacifism meaning PeacefulCompanion is going to hit. The hidden lust is virtually untraceable. This means that if you are at 90% ego then the double climax is going to kill you. This is what this post was supposed to be about. The lust fix isn't a fix at all. It is hardly a nerf to climax. So four balances you can hit a double climax for 2 hits of ego each. The issue really is CompatriotofChaos and how it works with Climax.

I think you're missing the second part of the proposed changes. The second part removes the ability to double climax because the afflictions are cured after the climax, so stacking it back to back won't achieve the goal here.

Silvanus · September 2020

For Lust, it is a super easy setup and really only slowed me down by 3.5 seconds. Even right now, I have enemies on my lust list right now (reject me people) that would end up being climax bait to me. You don't even need to hide Lust in a subtext, you can just do a Scene with Lust as the primary and no one will think to Reject you right away. It is a free 1/5 to your death.

Next, as Necroscream, the only affliction I can give to you in the Dramaturgy list is when I dominate you to sip a poison. So, I would dominate you to sip ibululu, that is 1/5 to your death. Other bards are able to give more Dramaturgy afflictions, but they would not be able to give it on command as a free action the way Cacophony can. It would have to be more timing dependent to replicate passively.

The next phase was Compatriot of Chaos, which is definitely part of the issue, because it has a chance of giving 1-3 afflictions out of paranoia, stupidity, clumsiness and amnesia. 3 of those 4 are on the list needed for Climax. You can be up to 3/5 closer to your death dependent on a very lucky RNG from CoC, which I don't think I have seen happen yet actually. If CoC gave one affliction that you needed, you also didn't resist the sip of ibululu, and you never rejected me from lust, you were dead. That would be 3/5 affs needed for the first climax to do 30% of the ego damage, that would leave you stunned long enough to be chained for the next one when you are still afflicted with the same 3 afflictions to do the 30% more ego damage and dead.

The best suggestion is probably just to have the ego check occur before the skill instead of after the skill like the other ones. That would disable my kill strategy above and at least slow down two bards. Most suggestions still leave you prone to being bombed by multiple bards, but that could be true for multiple instakills. Why I think having some form of stun and keep the power low to do it twice is important? Because similar to DChord, that is the only way a bard will be able to pressure vitals enough. If you are not stunned, how is the Dramaturgist bard supposed to take advantage of it?

Dramaturgy will need work once Climax gets nerfed to better fit with bard classes. I personally think the scenes are too slow with how simple curing is, but Necroscream doesn't work well with dramaturgy at all so I am probably a bad source on how good it actually is.

Maligorn · September 2020

Smacking people down via class stacking has always been an issue for Lusternia. I don't see a need to single out Dramaturgy bards and say "hey, no multi-climaxes allowed" when wiccans/guardians/melders can be stacked for similar effects. Climax is unique in that it deals the ego damage before checking the instakill parameters (are you below 50% AFTER Climax drains your ego? Dead.) I think most of us know that by now but I'm just reiterating what makes Climax particularly unique.

So, the opposite argument becomes true at this point. Why does Climax get to be so special that it decides if you're dead after it drains your ego? Well, I would consider it to be a subpar skillset, but maybe not for commune bards. Cacophony have demonstrated that it works really well for them. Minstrels can also use it pretty well, because mental affs are great for playing with Illuminati (plus they have some inherent ego drains in their songs).

So if a skillset is good for three (Cacos, Minstrels and Spiritsingers imo), then it can't really hide behind the "niche skillset, no good without Climax" argument. Plus as Silvanus has mentioned, Compatriot of Chaos being universally available also makes Climax all the more viable. It's good food for thought.

My opinion is that the target of Climax must be lusted to the enacting bard for a lust-embedded Climax to calculate its damage. And if that's not enough, bring Climax in line by making it only kill if the target is actually at 50% or below ego when the button is pressed, otherwise just do the ego damage (and maybe take a look at reducing the stun timer?). Multiple bards will still be able to Climax people fairly simply, but to me that's not any different than getting my mana bombed by some powersink shenanigans, or Succumb, or getting timewarp built to massive in a couple of seconds by 2+ researchers, etc etc etc.

Kreon · September 2020

@Orael
If you could implement the changes on the test server and let me and Kaizynne test around, we can give you some relative feedback on this. I always love testing and breaking things for you

Esano · September 2020

Cacophony have demonstrated that Climax works well for them, not Dramaturgy as a whole. The "niche skillset, no good without Climax" absolutely applies to Caco. I didn't even bother to set up other scenes/aliases until people started rejecting everyone.

I think part of the reason Climax is so unique in the above kill-check respect is because bards, even dramaturgy bards, lack the infrastructure to properly pressure ego. If you're in a position to pressure ego you're in a position to healthkill through aurics instead. Climax is so powerful because it basically manufactures an ego kill process entirely on its own, trying to tie it into an aff-based skill, and it's terrible even as an aff skill: we've hacked it together by applying beast attacks because dramaturgy can't stick anything other than lust and necroscream, at least, has no overlapping affs (just dominate sip).

So basically any change here, including the original suggestions, reduces Climax to a group snipe insta. So it becomes a question of which change is sufficient and then easiest. We can come back during a more normal report cycle and try and fix it properly, which could involve tweaking things or even changing how Climax works entirely. But at the moment it's broken in a way that's bad for the game.

Parhelion · September 2020

Drastrath said:

You realize lust to the dramaturgist is a "freebie" affliction either way just like "pacifism"? Lust can be subtext(hidden) and tea/rubeus can be stripped with a double pacifism meaning PeacefulCompanion is going to hit. The hidden lust is virtually untraceable. This means that if you are at 90% ego then the double climax is going to kill you. This is what this post was supposed to be about. The lust fix isn't a fix at all. It is hardly a nerf to climax. So four balances you can hit a double climax for 2 hits of ego each. The issue really is CompatriotofChaos and how it works with Climax.

My kills will not in any way be hindered by the lust nerf since I normally prime my climax with a subtext lust anyway.

@Parhelion Care to expand or should I just change my mind because you say so?

I think you're missing the point, and I can't tell if it's intentional or not

I understand and agree that a dramaturgist (?) Should be able to lust you and have that as an affliction that adds damage and stun to their climax on you. No arguments here.

I have an issue with the idea that I should not be able to be lusted to anyone at all without it adding damage to my climax. If Azula, or Alexandria, or Nelras, or Aramel lusts me for empress, this shouldn't be a 20% damage buff for Silvanus. If rolsand or some other psymet is walking around with pheromones locked, this shouldn't give Silvanus a damage buff. If Magnagora douses themselves in love potion, it shouldn't give Silvanus a damage buff.

If Silvanus has love potion up and it procs on his target? Sure. If my ally has love potion up and it makes me fall deeply in love with them, Silvanus shouldn't get a 20% increase to his damage.

Parhelion · September 2020

Esano said:

(just dominate sip).

Not gonna lie, I decided this was pretty genius when I realised what you were doing. I ended up making a reflex to drain whatever vial you dropped or handed me into my rift and then emptying it just in case you caught me with it again.

Kreon · September 2020

Parhelion said:

Esano said:

(just dominate sip).

Not gonna lie, I decided this was pretty genius when I realised what you were doing. I ended up making a reflex to drain whatever vial you dropped or handed me into my rift and then emptying it just in case you caught me with it again.

Not gonne lie, idk if I was Esano's first victim but that gave me the giggles when he killed me that way. Pure genius, I was not even mad I accepted that death fully

Aeldra · September 2020

lust: I feel the solution to make it for the attacker only would be good, I don't see the need to remove lust from climax entirely.

stun: personally, I feel the most frustrating thing about climax setup as it is right now is, that you got zero chance to counter it once you've been hit. The attacker will get balance back before you do. and likely finish you unless someone else saves you.

Curing the affs after climax does circumvent people just doing double-climax, but it does not fix the issue. I think instead giving that stun a good look may be a better solution, but that's from my limited experience and simply based on how frustrating it is to have zero window to react / counter once first climax has hit you.

edit: forgot to add, I do agree that post-nerf, dramaturgy likely does need a good look.

Drastrath · September 2020

Parhelion said:

Drastrath said:

You realize lust to the dramaturgist is a "freebie" affliction either way just like "pacifism"? Lust can be subtext(hidden) and tea/rubeus can be stripped with a double pacifism meaning PeacefulCompanion is going to hit. The hidden lust is virtually untraceable. This means that if you are at 90% ego then the double climax is going to kill you. This is what this post was supposed to be about. The lust fix isn't a fix at all. It is hardly a nerf to climax. So four balances you can hit a double climax for 2 hits of ego each. The issue really is CompatriotofChaos and how it works with Climax.

My kills will not in any way be hindered by the lust nerf since I normally prime my climax with a subtext lust anyway.

@Parhelion Care to expand or should I just change my mind because you say so?

I think you're missing the point, and I can't tell if it's intentional or not

I understand and agree that a dramaturgist (?) Should be able to lust you and have that as an affliction that adds damage and stun to their climax on you. No arguments here.

I have an issue with the idea that I should not be able to be lusted to anyone at all without it adding damage to my climax. If Azula, or Alexandria, or Nelras, or Aramel lusts me for empress, this shouldn't be a 20% damage buff for Silvanus. If rolsand or some other psymet is walking around with pheromones locked, this shouldn't give Silvanus a damage buff. If Magnagora douses themselves in love potion, it shouldn't give Silvanus a damage buff.

If Silvanus has love potion up and it procs on his target? Sure. If my ally has love potion up and it makes me fall deeply in love with them, Silvanus shouldn't get a 20% increase to his damage.

Tessenchi shouldn't build timewarp? Nunchaku shouldn't build tempinsanity? Should other be able to afflict any other affliction that counts in Climax? Why is lust different than asthma? Should it only count if I afflicted the asthma? Should we apply the same to bruising? Only bruising a Bonecrusher does should count on his pills?

Lust alone would be a 10% ego hit, not 20%.

If a Mag is running around with pheromones or love potion then what is stopping a Cantor from climaxing their allies?

Lust is literally an easy application with one balance. It does little to nerf climax. Everyone would just be able to not worry about rejecting allies.

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Categories

In this Discussion

Dramaturgy Climax

Comments