It was a 50% chance for double aeon at inception, unsure if it's changed since then or not.
Considering the fight I had with Ollie in Mysrai's realm... passive song tics, I get double-sleep and lust... he follows up with active song less than a second later (timed, obviously) and I get double-aeon. Add a dramaturgy anorexia that I didn't catch was giving me anorexia until after the fight... and getting out of it is really based on luck.
EDIT: It happened several times, so I'm going to go out on a limb and say that some percentages there are being a bit weird.... probably the passive lust chance, which is supposed to be 15%
Forgiveness is the fragrance that the violet sheds on the heel that has crushed it.
Dramaturgy allows the embedding of lust in their scenes. Look to see if he performed a scene before the blue/aeon hit. Would doubt he's relying on aubade for lusting at all.
Dramaturgy allows the embedding of lust in their scenes. Look to see if he performed a scene before the blue/aeon hit. Would doubt he's relying on aubade for lusting at all.
Aubade gives a message when it lusts. And when the message happens right after the falling asleep bit? It's certainly fun times. And if it were coming from Dramaturgy... where does the hidden anorexia come in from?
Forgiveness is the fragrance that the violet sheds on the heel that has crushed it.
No, aubade's message ticks irregardless of if you get lusted. Can trigger it to reject on each tick and you'll only lose the balance on the few ticks it does lust.
I'd guess he probably subtext'd anorexia with the lust scene, or if he performed another scene while you were still stunned?
No, aubade's message ticks irregardless of if you get lusted. Can trigger it to reject on each tick and you'll only lose the balance on the few ticks it does lust.
I'd guess he probably subtext'd anorexia with the lust scene, or if he performed another scene while you were still stunned?
Only one scene that I saw... and it didn't give any affmessages, so it was most likely where the anorexia came from. Unless he went an even more unoriginal way and made all his scenes with the same message.
Forgiveness is the fragrance that the violet sheds on the heel that has crushed it.
Get rid of Loralaria double aeon and double sleep, because that's simply ridiculous.
EDIT: recommendation is make sure it's not possible to have both effects doubled up (I assume that comes from the crystals they stick on their instruments), and I'd also add that it's amusing that researchers - a class that revolves around aeon has a weaker aeon than a bard. No matter how you look at it, anything that insta-aeons through speed defense, no matter the power cost is a bit overkill. I thought that was why we got rid of choke in the first place.
I'm not overly familiar with them, but from what I understand, their aeon is from their High stanza 3p attack, SkySforzando which is actually just like princessfarewell, without the blackout. It's actually worse because it requires you to be lusted as well. So there's two things you can do (1) Reject periodically (2) Upkeep metawake. In doing those things, I find them manageable.
An idea shameless ripped from another MUD that I think could be adapted here by a clever envoy:
-Add a 'Aura' skill to the meld user named after the element or terrain type the meld user uses (TidalAura, FlameAura, NatureAura, WyrdenAura, ect.). The Aura skill would cost 3-5 power, and last 10 minute or so. A character would be unable to have both a demense and an aura at the same time. -While active, the meld user effectively has a 1-room demense, consisting of the room s/he is currently standing in, within which all (or most) demense effects/mote/runes can be raised/imbedded as normal. -This aura moves with the meld user, though all effects go inactive for 5 seconds or so after movement. -In order to reduce the impact of stacking, if multiple characters with active auras are in the same room, meld effect/mote/rune ticks are lengthened by 2 seconds or so per aura past the first.
If this could be adapted, it could solve the traditional problems of mage vs mage battle devolving into meld wars, allow secondary mages to access a fuller range of their skillsets in group combat, and decrease reliance on static melds.
There are, of course, some foreseeable problems with this. Certain meld effects may stack too well, and tick slowdown based on the number of aura may lend itself to problems with large numbers of enemy meld users being able to slow a single allied meld user be their very presence. I'm interested in what others think of this though, as I feel it has a lot of potential for corrected quite a few historic problems.
It's really not so much a buff as it is a reduction in flaws (flaws are not the same thing as weaknesses). It wouldn't make solo melders more powerful, merely more mobile, and at the cost of being unable to use effects such as meld-wide walls, center, phantomspheres, and more, and in groups it would merely allow melders to use their core skillset in the presence of allied melders, as right now their abilities are limited to a small subset of their core skills, plus their terts.
They introduced *chemantics and *wood to provide 'mobile mages and druids'.
And how'd that work out? The woodomatics skilllsets aren't remotely similar to traditional mages, and honestly have enough shortcomings for the foreseeable future that they aren't really viable in single combat, and are problematic in group combat. Further, requiring players to switch between two primary skillsets in order to act at capacity in either single or group combat is a major problem.
It's really not so much a buff as it is a reduction in flaws (flaws are not the same thing as weaknesses). It wouldn't make solo melders more powerful, merely more mobile, and at the cost of being unable to use effects such as meld-wide walls, center, phantomspheres, and more, and in groups it would merely allow melders to use their core skillset in the presence of allied melders, as right now their abilities are limited to a small subset of their core skills, plus their terts.
Even ignoring the issue of stacking, it would be a significant buff to mages. The major drawbacks of demesnes are as follows: The time it takes to set up, the power it takes to set up (especially if you use the insta-effects skill), the ability to break the demesne and run from it and the inability to two have two demesnes in a room. In exchange, they get powerful passives and area control. This change completely removes all the drawbacks and in fact strengthens their passive abilities with multiple mages.
Imagine the following situations:
- A mage ganking someone. Right now, they either lose time setting up a demesne and probably losing the kill in the process, or going without the demesne and having a less complete offensive/defense.
- Raiding an enemy plane. Right now, certain planes can't be melded by others not of the affiliated guild, this removes that.
- Contesting a domoth upgrade. When you enter, you can have all your meld effects up in 5s without having to bother with breaking, or even doing anything at all except prepping beforehand.
Basically, I feel that the current drawbacks of demesnes are acceptable, balanced and support the theme of the class.
And how'd that work out? The woodomatics skilllsets aren't remotely similar to traditional mages, and honestly have enough shortcomings for the foreseeable future that they aren't really viable in single combat, and are problematic in group combat. Further, requiring players to switch between two primary skillsets in order to act at capacity in either single or group combat is a major problem.
It's worked out exactly the way they wanted it to; they're not about to nullify the 6 entire skillsets by making a change which makes having a demesne-spec active far more useful in both effectiveness and mobility.
I hate the demesne mechanics, for a few reasons. First, they ensure that only a single person in the battle has access to most of their primary skillset. Second, they make numbers games more of a problem - having 1-2 more melders than the other side practically guarantees that you'll have the one meld. Third, they create the unique situation where the only counter to an org/class is another person in the same class - If you have no melders (Active) in your faction, you are disadvantaged and you cannot address it. It makes people pick a class out of duty to their faction because "someone has to do it, after all,"which is dumb. It's one of the unique mechanics that Lusternia has over the other IRE games, but it's not one of the shining ones.
But this sort of suggestion doesn't really fix anything, and is a bad idea. I had hoped that these new skillsets would work well enough to possibly (in the long term) move away from demesne mechanics entirely. They show promise, but are a very very long way from approaching that goal.
Even ignoring the issue of stacking, it would be a significant buff to mages. The major drawbacks of demesnes are as follows: The time it takes to set up, the power it takes to set up (especially if you use the insta-effects skill), the ability to break the demesne and run from it and the inability to two have two demesnes in a room. In exchange, they get powerful passives and area control. This change completely removes all the drawbacks and in fact strengthens their passive abilities with multiple mages.
Imagine the following situations:
- A mage ganking someone. Right now, they either lose time setting up a demesne and probably losing the kill in the process, or going without the demesne and having a less complete offensive/defense.
- Raiding an enemy plane. Right now, certain planes can't be melded by others not of the affiliated guild, this removes that.
- Contesting a domoth upgrade. When you enter, you can have all your meld effects up in 5s without having to bother with breaking, or even doing anything at all except prepping beforehand.
Basically, I feel that the current drawbacks of demesnes are acceptable, balanced and support the theme of the class.
Those are all fair points, so I'll respond to them in order: -Mages can get away with forgoing the use of their primary when ganking someone, since both TP and TK (which, let's be honest, the vast majority of combatant mages take) are capable of maintaining a significant, though still reduced, offense outside of their melds. Druids (and Runes/Dreamweaving mages) do not have this luxury, as all of their terts are either partially or fully reliant on fighting inside a demense, at least in order to actually score kills. There is two ways of looking at this: 1) TP and TK are problematic skills, as they allow mages to fight at high capacity outside of a static demense, their class' main feature, or 2) TP and TK are well designed skills, because they allow mages to fight at high capacity without relying on a static demense, their class' main weakness. Assuming the second (as TP and TK haven't seen and will probably continue not to see drastic changes), is there a problem with a melder being able to bring their demense with him/her using this skill? Mages can already use TP or TK within a meld anyway, and druids/non TP/TK mages rely on their demense for combat anyway.
-It would be too difficult to penalize melders for raising an Aura on a plane that they couldn't normally meld, while still allowing the mage to act without their primary skillset cut off. Increase base tick time to 12-15 seconds, depending how harsh you want to be.
-All other classes are able to immediately join combat at full or near full capacity, without the need for tedious meldwars. I particularly like an analogy for meldwars I heard at some point: think of two melders fighting as two warriors with one sword between them. Each can only act at full capacity when they have the sword, and they may steal the sword from each other. The effect of this is that battle devolve into the two warriors stealing the sword back and forth, rather than actually fight. I firmly believe that reducing the importance of meldwars is a good thing.
It's worked out exactly the way they wanted it
to; they're not about to nullify the 6 entire skillsets by making a
change which makes having a demesne-spec active far more useful in both
effectiveness and mobility.
The skillsets are virtually incapable in single combat and notably problematic in groups. They move away from demense, but at the cost being unable to fulfill a melder's role in combat, and requiring melder to be able to switch between the two skillsets if they want to operate at capacity in group fights (one goes melder, the rest go woodochematics). If the switch were free, this would be less of a problem, but as of now, a problem it remains. The fact that you claim that this would invalidate those skillsets shows a total (but proper) lack of confidence in their abilities.
The scenarios you have described about melds, ie. meldwars, difficulty of joining combat immediately, and the crippling of other meld users if they are not the one maintaining the actual meld, are all intended mechanics of the melders. They are meant to be unable to make use of their abilities - they are designed to revolve around meldwars and take time to set up. This design, by their very nature, makes melds both a pain in the ass and an extremely crucial tool in equal measure.
In fact, the design correlates these two vectors: the more of a pain the mechanics are, the more crucial they become to combat. Think about it this way: if only one melder can have a meld active, then meld effects become a mechanic that is only ever available to one of the fighting teams. The mechanics lock in the advantage of a meld to a single side - they are meant to provide an unbalanced situation by sheer dint of the existence of a competent melder (or lack thereof in the opponent team). There is, as Enyalida mentioned, no way to even break a meld if you do not have a melder.
Your suggestion is not a bad one in theory. You want to move away from these mechanics because they are a pain in the ass to all melders involved - either the ones burdened with maintaining the meld, or the ones who have to try and break it. It cripples multiple melders on one side, disadvantaging them for no reason other than "we already have a melder." However, you must recall and keep in mind that this frustration is every bit intended by the design of the skills. There has been many, many calls for a change to these mechanics, over real-life years, and made repeatedly by combatants of all archetypes with a huge amount of wide and varied reasons and arguments. And the admin answer was not to change melds, but to create chemantics. The scope of the long road of arguments that led to chemantics dwarves the reasoning behind your posts. It took that much effort for the admin to even consider addressing that issue. You can rest assured, whatever your personal feelings on the matter, melds won't be changing in mechanical design radically anytime soon.
Woodochemantics are weak. You have absolutely no kind of offensive power while using them. Sure, a group of woodochems can nuke an enemy group if they time things together, but here's the thing... one:one, woodochem does absolutely nothing, unless you're fighting against someone who is completely incapable or has low enough health to be unable to keep up with your bashing attack.
If I can just carry a meld around with me without worrying about actually melding... well, why would I bother melding in the first place... and if the effects stack, things get even worse. You're talking about penalizing by giving a 2 second increase in the ticking time on melds for each extra person with that aura present... I say, sure, give me that... and you'll see how it works when there's a roughly 20% decrease in how often the meld ticks... but a 100% increase in the amount of effects striking an enemy. You'll also need to recode a ton of other abilities that otherwise don't work or go along with the meld war once more. Even if I am running this aura, how am I going to call allergies... or sap in a non-forest environment? Something that my class kind of relies heavily on. Plenty of other issues to consider in the process.
And then you'll run into the magical thing where theoretically, a group of X can murder someone in seconds simply because of the stacking meld effects. Just watch 4 pyros twirl staff on a single target that just got smacked by 4 pyro melds and got a nice stack of burns. While I may dislike the way melds work... and how amusing it is when two melders fight, I'd really rather not see this thing happen... or we're going to turn into the Age of Elementalism/Nature
EDIT: I guess what I was trying to say with the first couple sentences there is... you eliminate the whole process of needing a meld to produce meld effects (eliminating the disadvantages of melds) and nobody is going to bother with a skill that has disadvantages.
Forgiveness is the fragrance that the violet sheds on the heel that has crushed it.
Don't want to blow Ollie's strats out of the water, but he used dramaturgy lust. He doesn't rely on his song tic to apply it.
Breaking nihilists' aeons requires assuming anorexia/impatience from their demon sometimes, you should assume anorexia from his scene.
Also, try using metawake.
Alternate strategy: get it nerfed.
You can't really trigger dramaturgy. It's literally anything they want it to be, and changeable on a whim. Not really the same as a demon, which gives the exact same message every time. Unless you just trigger the bard's name to assume anorexia. Which would end well, I'm sure.
Don't want to blow Ollie's strats out of the water, but he used dramaturgy lust. He doesn't rely on his song tic to apply it.
Breaking nihilists' aeons requires assuming anorexia/impatience from their demon sometimes, you should assume anorexia from his scene.
Also, try using metawake.
Alternate strategy: get it nerfed.
You can't really trigger dramaturgy. It's literally anything they want it to be, and changeable on a whim. Not really the same as a demon, which gives the exact same message every time. Unless you just trigger the bard's name to assume anorexia. Which would end well, I'm sure.
I thought CONFIG AFFMESSAGES ON showed Draumaturgy affs? Or is that no longer the case?
Don't want to blow Ollie's strats out of the water, but he used dramaturgy lust. He doesn't rely on his song tic to apply it.
Breaking nihilists' aeons requires assuming anorexia/impatience from their demon sometimes, you should assume anorexia from his scene.
Also, try using metawake.
Alternate strategy: get it nerfed.
You can't really trigger dramaturgy. It's literally anything they want it to be, and changeable on a whim. Not really the same as a demon, which gives the exact same message every time. Unless you just trigger the bard's name to assume anorexia. Which would end well, I'm sure.
I thought CONFIG AFFMESSAGES ON showed Draumaturgy affs? Or is that no longer the case?
It does, sure... provided it's not lust.. and it's not the hidden one as each scene can have one affliction that shows up and one that doesn't so every time they dramaturgy anything (I have my emotes colored to the point where they poke my eyes out), you need to diag... or assume they hit you with X... which won't necessarily be correct.
Forgiveness is the fragrance that the violet sheds on the heel that has crushed it.
Then, if they have the leprechaun pot curio... you need to consider the fact that their dramaturgy lines can also show up as white text on black background... or virtually anything else, which in combat spam can be confused for a curio atmospheric as well.
Forgiveness is the fragrance that the violet sheds on the heel that has crushed it.
Which is why scenes are so slow, really. That's their only saving grace. The problem with Ollie's tactic is localized to loralaria because of guarantee'd double aeon (when target is lusted) in combination with hidden anorexia. Before dramaturgy, tarot loralarias could already use hidden lust (fool hidden lusts cards), so dramaturgy didn't actually add anything to that strategy, but they couldn't give anorexia reliably. (Or at all, I think.) Not sure if glamourists could give anorexia reliably, but they certainly couldn't give hidden lusts. Dramaturgy allows for fully hidden (that is to say, untriggerable) anorexia + lust. The sleep is just icing on the cake.
Does this unbalance SkySforzando's guarantee'd aeon affect? If it does, then that's the skill that needs to be envoyed. Some ways to address this: change it back to a chance for double aeon, with a gemmed instrument boosting that chance, but still not making it guarantee'd. Keep guarantee'd double aeon, but change what allows it to be done (something not lust). Change it so that the double sleep gives a different aff when target is aeoned, so that if loralaria users are given easy aeon+anorexia, then they don't get to passively lock it in with sleep. etc
The problem with Ollie's tactic is localized to loralaria because of
guarantee'd double aeon (when target is lusted) in combination with
hidden anorexia.
Change it so that the double sleep gives a different aff when target is
aeoned, so that if loralaria users are given easy aeon+anorexia, then
they don't get to passively lock it in with sleep. etc
This is tough to swallow.
Masked anorexia in aeon is accessible to many classes in the game, however, now it's game breaking? Sleep to lock it in? If you're getting sleeplocked you need to stop playing forums and hit the arena!
Just because you died in a new way doesn't mean something is overpowered. I suggest that you adapt. The closest thing to a problem here is that loralaria lust centric. Lust reject battles are lame and boring (especially for us melders).
Comments
-
EDIT: It happened several times, so I'm going to go out on a limb and say that some percentages there are being a bit weird.... probably the passive lust chance, which is supposed to be 15%
Forgiveness is the fragrance that the violet sheds on the heel that has crushed it.
Forgiveness is the fragrance that the violet sheds on the heel that has crushed it.
I'd guess he probably subtext'd anorexia with the lust scene, or if he performed another scene while you were still stunned?
Forgiveness is the fragrance that the violet sheds on the heel that has crushed it.
I told them so
-Add a 'Aura' skill to the meld user named after the element or terrain type the meld user uses (TidalAura, FlameAura, NatureAura, WyrdenAura, ect.). The Aura skill would cost 3-5 power, and last 10 minute or so. A character would be unable to have both a demense and an aura at the same time.
-While active, the meld user effectively has a 1-room demense, consisting of the room s/he is currently standing in, within which all (or most) demense effects/mote/runes can be raised/imbedded as normal.
-This aura moves with the meld user, though all effects go inactive for 5 seconds or so after movement.
-In order to reduce the impact of stacking, if multiple characters with active auras are in the same room, meld effect/mote/rune ticks are lengthened by 2 seconds or so per aura past the first.
If this could be adapted, it could solve the traditional problems of mage vs mage battle devolving into meld wars, allow secondary mages to access a fuller range of their skillsets in group combat, and decrease reliance on static melds.
There are, of course, some foreseeable problems with this. Certain meld effects may stack too well, and tick slowdown based on the number of aura may lend itself to problems with large numbers of enemy meld users being able to slow a single allied meld user be their very presence. I'm interested in what others think of this though, as I feel it has a lot of potential for corrected quite a few historic problems.
And how'd that work out? The woodomatics skilllsets aren't remotely similar to traditional mages, and honestly have enough shortcomings for the foreseeable future that they aren't really viable in single combat, and are problematic in group combat. Further, requiring players to switch between two primary skillsets in order to act at capacity in either single or group combat is a major problem.
It's worked out exactly the way they wanted it to; they're not about to nullify the 6 entire skillsets by making a change which makes having a demesne-spec active far more useful in both effectiveness and mobility.
Those are all fair points, so I'll respond to them in order:
-Mages can get away with forgoing the use of their primary when ganking someone, since both TP and TK (which, let's be honest, the vast majority of combatant mages take) are capable of maintaining a significant, though still reduced, offense outside of their melds. Druids (and Runes/Dreamweaving mages) do not have this luxury, as all of their terts are either partially or fully reliant on fighting inside a demense, at least in order to actually score kills. There is two ways of looking at this: 1) TP and TK are problematic skills, as they allow mages to fight at high capacity outside of a static demense, their class' main feature, or 2) TP and TK are well designed skills, because they allow mages to fight at high capacity without relying on a static demense, their class' main weakness. Assuming the second (as TP and TK haven't seen and will probably continue not to see drastic changes), is there a problem with a melder being able to bring their demense with him/her using this skill? Mages can already use TP or TK within a meld anyway, and druids/non TP/TK mages rely on their demense for combat anyway.
-It would be too difficult to penalize melders for raising an Aura on a plane that they couldn't normally meld, while still allowing the mage to act without their primary skillset cut off. Increase base tick time to 12-15 seconds, depending how harsh you want to be.
-All other classes are able to immediately join combat at full or near full capacity, without the need for tedious meldwars. I particularly like an analogy for meldwars I heard at some point: think of two melders fighting as two warriors with one sword between them. Each can only act at full capacity when they have the sword, and they may steal the sword from each other. The effect of this is that battle devolve into the two warriors stealing the sword back and forth, rather than actually fight. I firmly believe that reducing the importance of meldwars is a good thing.
The skillsets are virtually incapable in single combat and notably problematic in groups. They move away from demense, but at the cost being unable to fulfill a melder's role in combat, and requiring melder to be able to switch between the two skillsets if they want to operate at capacity in group fights (one goes melder, the rest go woodochematics). If the switch were free, this would be less of a problem, but as of now, a problem it remains. The fact that you claim that this would invalidate those skillsets shows a total (but proper) lack of confidence in their abilities.
The scenarios you have described about melds, ie. meldwars, difficulty of joining combat immediately, and the crippling of other meld users if they are not the one maintaining the actual meld, are all intended mechanics of the melders. They are meant to be unable to make use of their abilities - they are designed to revolve around meldwars and take time to set up. This design, by their very nature, makes melds both a pain in the ass and an extremely crucial tool in equal measure.
In fact, the design correlates these two vectors: the more of a pain the mechanics are, the more crucial they become to combat. Think about it this way: if only one melder can have a meld active, then meld effects become a mechanic that is only ever available to one of the fighting teams. The mechanics lock in the advantage of a meld to a single side - they are meant to provide an unbalanced situation by sheer dint of the existence of a competent melder (or lack thereof in the opponent team). There is, as Enyalida mentioned, no way to even break a meld if you do not have a melder.
Your suggestion is not a bad one in theory. You want to move away from these mechanics because they are a pain in the ass to all melders involved - either the ones burdened with maintaining the meld, or the ones who have to try and break it. It cripples multiple melders on one side, disadvantaging them for no reason other than "we already have a melder." However, you must recall and keep in mind that this frustration is every bit intended by the design of the skills. There has been many, many calls for a change to these mechanics, over real-life years, and made repeatedly by combatants of all archetypes with a huge amount of wide and varied reasons and arguments. And the admin answer was not to change melds, but to create chemantics. The scope of the long road of arguments that led to chemantics dwarves the reasoning behind your posts. It took that much effort for the admin to even consider addressing that issue. You can rest assured, whatever your personal feelings on the matter, melds won't be changing in mechanical design radically anytime soon.
If I can just carry a meld around with me without worrying about actually melding... well, why would I bother melding in the first place... and if the effects stack, things get even worse. You're talking about penalizing by giving a 2 second increase in the ticking time on melds for each extra person with that aura present... I say, sure, give me that... and you'll see how it works when there's a roughly 20% decrease in how often the meld ticks... but a 100% increase in the amount of effects striking an enemy. You'll also need to recode a ton of other abilities that otherwise don't work or go along with the meld war once more. Even if I am running this aura, how am I going to call allergies... or sap in a non-forest environment? Something that my class kind of relies heavily on. Plenty of other issues to consider in the process.
And then you'll run into the magical thing where theoretically, a group of X can murder someone in seconds simply because of the stacking meld effects. Just watch 4 pyros twirl staff on a single target that just got smacked by 4 pyro melds and got a nice stack of burns. While I may dislike the way melds work... and how amusing it is when two melders fight, I'd really rather not see this thing happen... or we're going to turn into the Age of Elementalism/Nature
EDIT: I guess what I was trying to say with the first couple sentences there is... you eliminate the whole process of needing a meld to produce meld effects (eliminating the disadvantages of melds) and nobody is going to bother with a skill that has disadvantages.
Forgiveness is the fragrance that the violet sheds on the heel that has crushed it.
It does, sure... provided it's not lust.. and it's not the hidden one as each scene can have one affliction that shows up and one that doesn't so every time they dramaturgy anything (I have my emotes colored to the point where they poke my eyes out), you need to diag... or assume they hit you with X... which won't necessarily be correct.
Forgiveness is the fragrance that the violet sheds on the heel that has crushed it.
Forgiveness is the fragrance that the violet sheds on the heel that has crushed it.
Does this unbalance SkySforzando's guarantee'd aeon affect? If it does, then that's the skill that needs to be envoyed. Some ways to address this: change it back to a chance for double aeon, with a gemmed instrument boosting that chance, but still not making it guarantee'd. Keep guarantee'd double aeon, but change what allows it to be done (something not lust). Change it so that the double sleep gives a different aff when target is aeoned, so that if loralaria users are given easy aeon+anorexia, then they don't get to passively lock it in with sleep. etc
This is tough to swallow.
Masked anorexia in aeon is accessible to many classes in the game, however, now it's game breaking? Sleep to lock it in? If you're getting sleeplocked you need to stop playing forums and hit the arena!
Just because you died in a new way doesn't mean something is overpowered. I suggest that you adapt. The closest thing to a problem here is that loralaria lust centric. Lust reject battles are lame and boring (especially for us melders).
/edited significantly