FinalHavenLarp.com

basic, last stand, requires the warrior to die, not just fall into negatives but die, this is very counter intuitive and never used because players are generally trying hard NOT to die. if you intended it to create an epic scene of the warrior dies but takes down the attacker then the damage needs to be radically increased as 10 crush is nothing to most NPC monsters, and a drop in the bucket to bosses.

advanced, crush, mechanically its not usable because the life to damage ratio is pathetic, we could just swing 1 and not spend precious life. crush is not helpful because A) NPC's rarely use shields or even attempt to defend themselves, and B) the PC's generally outnumber the NPC's and its very easy to not only hit them but to often hit them in the back without fear of reprisal. its thematically not usable because its restricted to blunt and 90% of warriors in FH carry swords.

please consider your setting before implementing rules

advanced, battle tactics, you had a cool concept for a series of sage or wizard abilities but increased the time into "don't bother" territory, put it into a single skill then stuck it in warrior? missed opportunity.

master, noble reputation. . .who put an eco skill into my combat path? if someone plays a warrior they probably don't care about the eco system, and if they do there are disciplines for that, clearly an attempt to avoid giving warrior another master swap out dedicated to what they are supposed to do, combat.

basic, last stand, requires the warrior to die, not just fall into negatives but die, this is very counter intuitive and never used because players are generally trying hard NOT to die.
if you intended it to create an epic scene of the warrior dies but takes down the attacker then the damage needs to be radically increased as 10 crush is nothing to most NPC monsters, and a drop in the bucket to bosses.

AGREE

advanced
crush, mechanically its not usable because the life to damage ratio is pathetic

we could just swing 1 and not spend precious life. crush is not helpful because A) NPC's rarely use shields or even attempt to defend themselves, and B) the PC's generally outnumber the NPC's and its very easy to not only hit them but to often hit them in the back without fear of reprisal

agree

agree

its thematically not usable because its restricted to blunt and 90% of warriors in FH carry swords.

disagree

please consider your setting before implementing rules

disagree

battle tactics.... missed opportunity.

agree

master
noble reputation. . .

if someone plays a warrior they probably don't care about the eco system

DISAGREE

clearly an attempt to avoid giving warrior another master swap out dedicated to what they are supposed to do, combat.

DISAGREE

Agree

Ark wrote:basic, last stand, requires the warrior to die, not just fall into negatives but die, this is very counter intuitive and never used because players are generally trying hard NOT to die. if you intended it to create an epic scene of the warrior dies but takes down the attacker then the damage needs to be radically increased as 10 crush is nothing to most NPC monsters...advanced, crush, mechanically its not usable because the life to damage ratio is pathetic, we could just swing 1 and not spend precious life. crush is not helpful because A) NPC's rarely use shields or even attempt to defend themselves,

Agree:

Ark wrote: advanced, crush, mechanically its not usable because the life to damage ratio is pathetic, we could just swing 1 and not spend precious life. crush is not helpful because A) NPC's rarely [...] even attempt to defend themselves, and B) the PC's generally outnumber the NPC's and its very easy to not only hit them but to often hit them in the back without fear of reprisal. its thematically not usable because its restricted to blunt and 90% of warriors in FH carry swords.

[...]

advanced, battle tactics, you had a cool concept for a series of sage or wizard abilities but increased the time into "don't bother" territory, put it into a single skill then stuck it in warrior? missed opportunity.

Agree:

basic, last stand, requires the warrior to die, not just fall into negatives but die, this is very counter intuitive and never used because players are generally trying hard NOT to die. if you intended it to create an epic scene of the warrior dies but takes down the attacker then the damage needs to be radically increased as 10 crush is nothing to most NPC monsters, and a drop in the bucket to bosses.

advanced, crush, mechanically its not usable because the life to damage ratio is pathetic, we could just swing 1 and not spend precious life.

/agree

Agree:

basic, last stand, requires the warrior to die, not just fall into negatives but die, this is very counter intuitive and never used because players are generally trying hard NOT to die. if you intended it to create an epic scene of the warrior dies but takes down the attacker then the damage needs to be radically increased as 10 crush is nothing to most NPC monsters, and a drop in the bucket to bosses.

advanced, crush, mechanically its not usable because the life to damage ratio is pathetic, we could just swing 1 and not spend precious life.

Agree

basic, last stand, requires the warrior to die, not just fall into negatives but die, this is very counter intuitive and never used because players are generally trying hard NOT to die. if you intended it to create an epic scene of the warrior dies but takes down the attacker then the damage needs to be radically increased as 10 crush is nothing to most NPC monsters, and a drop in the bucket to bosses.

Agree

Ark wrote:basic, last stand, requires the warrior to die, not just fall into negatives but die, this is very counter intuitive and never used because players are generally trying hard NOT to die.

Agree