Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Suggestion]: Limit Rare Combat Drifters To 2 Slots Per Round #554

Closed
Optimism333 opened this issue Aug 20, 2024 · 2 comments
Closed

[Suggestion]: Limit Rare Combat Drifters To 2 Slots Per Round #554

Optimism333 opened this issue Aug 20, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@Optimism333
Copy link
Contributor

Optimism333 commented Aug 20, 2024

Category

Balance

What is the suggestion?

Rare combat drifters: the ones with skill level (4) or above in a combat skill and/or strong armor should be limited to 2 slots per round.

There's now seven of these rare race-locked and single-slot drifter roles that I can list off the top of my head:
Bladesinger (Elf), Longbeard (Dwarf), Lancer (Humen), Swordmaster (Humen), Immortal Bulwark (Aasimar), Vaquero (Tiefling), Sentinel (Elf)

Having the chance for ALL of these to appear in a round if they're rolled or the triumph toll is paid seems a bit much, especially if I push the change to pq to make it increase the chance of these roles being rolled (thus bypassing the triumph cost).

Therefore I suggest that these rare drifters with combat skills of skill level (4) and above, in addition to strong stats and armor, be limited to 2 per round (same slot number as royal guards).

Why is this suggestion good?

Too many rare drifter roles make the term "rare" redundant. Many of these roles are royal guard tier or above, so it seems reasonable to subject them to a slot limit similar to royal guards to prevent rounds from being flooded with powerhouse drifters.

Vaquero is a bit of a grey area on the list, because unlike all the other roles it doesn't get plate armor, but I left it on regardless since it has expert (4) combat skill in swords, and will get a buff if #553 is merged.

Staff consulted

No response

@Catalaria
Copy link

What about being limited to four?
Four sounds like a pretty justified amount

@NPC1314
Copy link
Contributor

NPC1314 commented Oct 30, 2024

Hi, thanks for your suggestion! Unfortunately it's not feasible for us to prioritise this feature right now, but we'll keep it in mind and we'll hopefully revisit it in the future. To keep the issues page relevant we have to close suggestion nobody is working on after a while.

@NPC1314 NPC1314 closed this as completed Oct 30, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants