Initially testing puts the vitality cost at 17% without perform cut and 11% with it. My thoughts are this is far too much for it to see any sort of usage. I would like to see it decreased at least to 8% with perform cut, as that is around the amount regained by a single cast of SV.

---

"If I take death into my life, acknowledge it, and face it squarely, I will free myself from the anxiety of death and the pettiness of life - and only then will I be free to become myself." ~ Martin Heidegger

This is at full mana with around 1k in all magics.

---

"If I take death into my life, acknowledge it, and face it squarely, I will free myself from the anxiety of death and the pettiness of life - and only then will I be free to become myself." ~ Martin Heidegger

Ah, thanks for confirming something we suspected. My numbers are with 79 stamina. 10% with min mana no cut, 6% with perform cut.

---

"If I take death into my life, acknowledge it, and face it squarely, I will free myself from the anxiety of death and the pettiness of life - and only then will I be free to become myself." ~ Martin Heidegger

Removing or drastically reducing the vit drain while returning it to the Heavy TM cooldown timer is not out of the question.

-Armifer
"Perinthia's astronomers are faced with a difficult choice. Either they must admit that all their calculations were wrong ... or else they must reveal that the order of the gods is reflected exactly in the city of monsters." - Italo Calvino

I know I have a reputation as a WM, but I do have a baby Necromancer, so I do have some horse in this race, and I feel like I have a good understanding of the magic system.

> Removing or drastically reducing the vit drain while returning it to the Heavy TM cooldown timer is not out of the question.

Ultimately, this would be my preference. The nature of the vitality damage reduction system means that, in a clutch situation, I'm not going to be willing to burn my vitality really at all. And if it's not that clutch... well, I'm not sure designing spells around "playing with your food" is the best choice. The importance of vitality for this system means balance for this spell would be on a razor's edge between "the cost is meaningless once you get enough stamina" and "the cost is oppressive", and I think that makes a vit drain just a hard thing to do. Making the decrease an absolute value only complicates that situation, unfortunately.

I like the idea behind the changes to give BLB something to differentiate itself. I could even go for making it 3 slots and adding something to it.

> 1. Change it to a ST cyclic (be extra nice and make it aoe!). Mechanically it may behave somewhat like SA but doing vit damage instead of spirit damage. I envision something like the old MoA.

> 2. Make it like AE, and effectively become a DoT.

The big thing I'd caution about here is that these two spells are often seen as some of the most overpowered spells in the game. Even if you disagree with that statement, the mechanic of having the DoT still hit even if you're not in the room is probably one of the most frustrating things to be hit with, particularly with SA's capability of continuing to hit you for an extremely long period of time.

> 3-5
I like these, in general, as options to make existing TM spells more interesting. Maybe they're not appropriate for BLB, but they might be nice for some other spells.

> 6. Add a meta that provides flexibility - a stamina/reflex debuff, a root to prevent retreating/advancing, a reduced efficacy SV effect on hits/pulses?

As I said before, I could totally go for an additional effect, but stacking a second debilitation effect on this spell would seem a bit much. I mean, Paeldryth's Wrath costs 2 slots for a TM spell with a knockback effect, but as a cost it's actually incapable of damage. Similarly, many debil spells have had their damage removed. If that restriction is changing, I'm actually fine with that, as I think it can give spells more variety. I'd just like to know so I can suggest other changes. If it's not really changing and this is an exception, I suspect we're probably not going to get much more than Armifer has already announced.

Incidentally, Armifer, slot cost reduction or buff incoming to PW in light of this? ;)

- Saragos

My knee-jerk on the stagger is it's a neat mechanic, but the effect of Vitality in modern combat makes a vit cost VERY expensive. This spell screams at me to be an 'oh crap' or a clutch type card for those over your head type situations, and zapping your own vit in those moments is often counter productive.

I would rather a more token vit cost, removable via PERFORM CUT/Bleeding, on a longer cooldown (even Heavy TMs level), so that it's a potent tool in the toolbox without becoming a daily driver spell.

That all said, a DoT based Vitality attack (SV, as a DoT) would go a long, long way to redressing my issue with this current version, too.

Samsaren (and some various non-paladin types)

So there's three directions I'm inclined to explore the feasibility of at the moment.

1) Make the discount for cut/bleeding deeper, keep the rest of the spell more-or-less as is.
2) Make the vit cost trivial (still present for lore reasons, probably), add Heavy TM Timer.
3) Scrap this version and go back to the drawing board as time permits.

I don't mean to sound nihilistic or aggressive with #3 -- I was being very honest at the start that this was experimental and might not work. But at the same time I'm not in a position to keep iterating Blood Burst over and over again over a short time, so I'd revert to the previous version and come back to it some time later.

My personal bias is to give #1 a try. Like I said in the initial post, the intent is that the vit drain makes casting this without weaving Siphon Vitality in problematic. I think of the vit drain as a "soft timer" that slows down the use of BLB unless you have the driving need / desire to push your limits. Obviously the vit drain needs to be low enough that a cast or two doesn't endanger you, but I'm not yet convinced the idea is totally sunk.

-Armifer
"Perinthia's astronomers are faced with a difficult choice. Either they must admit that all their calculations were wrong ... or else they must reveal that the order of the gods is reflected exactly in the city of monsters." - Italo Calvino

>>1) Make the discount for cut/bleeding deeper, keep the rest of the spell more-or-less as is.

If the discount was deep enough this WOULD be preferable to the timer, imo.

So, 1 might be worth attempting, after a bit more thought, but this is only because TM foci are increasingly being introduced. Let me explain my logic.

Without TM foci, I think opportunity cost sinks the idea of BLB > SV. The reason for this is that TM is always going to be supplemental damage rank for rank compared to weapons, by design. Weapons are always primary - and the best way to maximize damage with weapons is to debilitate first. BLB with a debil effect is great because I get that debil effect AND I do damage. SV, however, has to compete with other spells I could be using in that timeslice, particularly debil spells. So, really, the question becomes, "Is the extra damage from BLB > SV worth it when I could have just cast two debil spells instead?" I realize the skillset placement of Necromancers might make that calculus a little different, but as a WM I would likely say, "probably not." I don't have anything remotely close to a HLC Necro, though.

However, TM foci might change that situation. I only just got mine, so I haven't done much testing... but on that basis BLB > SV could be a choice that's not just a "playing with your food" option.

If 1 fails, though, Armifer, I think 2 is better than scrapping this version.

Also, thanks for keeping the dev going. It's much appreciated.

- Saragos

Blood Burst has been my favorite one of our spells since Lyras used it. I always wanted a niche use for it, and I love the balance hit/knockdown. If the cut/bleeder discount was better (#1) that would be ideal.

---

"If I take death into my life, acknowledge it, and face it squarely, I will free myself from the anxiety of death and the pettiness of life - and only then will I be free to become myself." ~ Martin Heidegger

With CUT, the vit hit is fairly reasonable here (was seeing 6-7% hits), and I think barring solo chain spamming, this is something that I'd use somewhat regularly. I'm seeing knockdowns with 2-3 casts, which seems fine, I wager pairing with a shove or such this would be an effective tool in some situations, and the more I think about it, represents a nice tool without crushing penalties. Overall I think the choice between VIVI and BlB is a decent amount of combat choice that's nice to present.

I'd still like to see some additional effects added to our repertoire, either in the form of BlB metas or tweaks, OR modifications to existing spells. The cost feels appropriate for a decentish feeling bit of oomph with an added effect of the balance reduction, but something about the spell still feels not quite wowing. That may be due to personal expectations and starry eyes for it, but I think barring a complete rewriting of the spell like I over zealously suggested, it's in a fairly decent place, ish, now.

> I like the change overall, it makes for an interesting opening attack. I think given the choice I'd rather it be on the heavy tm timer (and possibly have a damage buff? :P) than the vitality hit, for the same reasons that've been stated by others.


I don't have a horse in this race. My necro hasn't made it past 20, but vit right now is too important for damage barriers. Less vit would mean you not only get bigger hits, but you're more likely to get bigger wounds (and stacking stuns).

@Armifer, what about modifying the discount based on the heavy TM timer? You can use the spell at any time, but the discount is trivial if the heavy TM timer is up. Otherwise, you have the option of going berserker and sacrificing vit for a bigger hit.

> Our experiment with Heavy TM showed that increasing TM numbers even by a substantial amount is not as desirable as the maths would suggest. I actually don't know if there's a bottleneck in Combat Core I'm unaware of, if the messaging just doesn't reflect it good enough, or what, but it just doesn't seem like a productive place to go.


Slight tangent, kind of not, but what if the Heavy TM timer did something other than additional damage? The blood burst suggestion above aludes to this.

Option 1: Cast spell, Heavy TM timer is up. Vit cost is near 0 with (without?) cut.
Option 2: Cast spell, Heavy TM timer is not ready. Vit cost is much hgiher (discount with cut).

Other possibilities:
- Spell duplicates itself as a second cast if Heavy TM timer is ready. Slightly lower base damage, but much higher (and bonus learning since it's two casts for the cost of one) when the timer is up.
- Spell turns AOE when the timer is up.
- Spell gives you a short-term buff if cast with the timer. Ie: Paladin spell temporary blinds enemies (OF buff for you / DF debuff for them).
- Spell gives some sort of draining buff. Steal stats from your target for 30s (you get +x, they get -x)

etc...

>My target is to hit roughly 5% of your vit at a discounted, level-approriate cast.
>re: Vitality hit as a balancing mechanism

With everyone running two or three of the PTW vit healing ear cuffs/necklaces, is a hit to vitality really even noticeable by the time you've targeted another cast? I suppose you could get unlucky and have all the items be on their respective cool downs at the same time but with the "speed" of combat3.0 isn't there plenty of time to make the balancing vitality hit effectively ignorable?

(Full disclosure: don't play a necromancer; don't think spells necessarily need drawbacks to be balanced)

~Hunter Hanryu
>I did not sit down and said "Screw the Rangers, I will cancel all development for them and bake cookies instead."~Armifer

I'd love to see BlB turned into a DoT that ramps up in damage as time goes on kind of like Splurt in original EQ. It'd be something we don't have, a unique twist on DoT mechanics that are really far and few between in DR, and a great way to get in a last final attempt to kill someone in PvP if they flee as they're close to death.

FWIW we're looking at making the disease/poison stuff a ritual instead of a spell. May or may not require a metaspell to activate the ability, depending on how we're feeling at the moment and how the formal proposal shakes out.

It'll just cost in... other ways.

The basic idea, though, is twofold.

1) We want to differentiate it from Empathic self-healing strongly. And keep Empathic healing a nicer, more efficient means of doing it.

2) We do not want to roll in disease/poison healing and disease/poison infliction into the same spell. I totally get the desire to do it and I think in particular dousing things with poison or acid is totally in the Necromancer wheelhouse (disease infliction would be more of a Life thing thematically), but both functions are worth their own abilities.

-Armifer
"Perinthia's astronomers are faced with a difficult choice. Either they must admit that all their calculations were wrong ... or else they must reveal that the order of the gods is reflected exactly in the city of monsters." - Italo Calvino

>It'll just cost in... other ways.

Is it a good or bad thing that the above quote is what that gets me excited, not the prospect of a disease/poison cure?

Elusive
mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur

>> I don't think this is true. Hodierna's Lilt, Famine, and Bitter Feast are all pretty efficient ways of recovering Vitality, I'd say more or at least as efficient as SV.

>Not to derail the conversation, but I disagree with this. Famine, maybe, but HL comes with cyclic restrictions (you won't be using this in a combat situation where vit matters), BF includes a stun (same combat problem), and both EF and BF costs you spirit which limits spamming.

If you're losing vitality in a fight, you aren't landing SV either - If I can hit something with TM, chances are pretty good it can't hit me back, or, at the very least, if it can hit me, I'm going to want to kill it first, instead of prolong the fight. SV, like BF really, is a 'I barely survived and now have run away and need this to not die'. The only times I use SV is when 'hunting' critters I'm using for corpse farming to heal. In terms of the spirit hit, Clerics are beyond flush with methods for keeping their spirit at full (Auspice, Vigil, and CHS). I've seen Clerics use BF in combat to restore lost vit AND mana, and I've seen Barbs running Famine. I have never once seen a Necro eek out a win because they were spamming SV. To be fair, I've never seen a Bard use Hodi in combat, and while the cyclic restriction is real, Hodi pulses seemed to scale better than SV. I've seen Bards absolutely full of holes survive because of Hodi.

> In terms of the spirit hit, Clerics are beyond flush with methods for keeping their spirit at full (Auspice, Vigil, and CHS).

That's the point behind not spammable. BF = stun. EF = addiction. Both = spirit loss.

- Auspice buffs spirit regen, but you're still dealing with regen mechanics.
- Vigil only works on another target, and it'll nerf your auspice unless you keep it up on both targets.
- CHS is basically SV for the spirit.

You've also shown why necros are more effective at keeping their vitality up than clerics. Necro = SV. Cleric = CHS + EF/BF. SV >= CHS + EF/BF.

Last comment on this as I really don't want to derail the conversation.

> To be fair, I've never seen a Bard use Hodi in combat, and while the cyclic restriction is real, Hodi pulses seemed to scale better than SV. I've seen Bards absolutely full of holes survive because of Hodi.

Here's what you're giving up on the bard to use HODI: AOE TM x2, AOE debuff, ST immobilize, AOE calm, TM barrier, Anti-clairvoyance/spawn, and dark-room/perception buffs. Basically most of their spells designed to keep them from taking damage in the first place. HODI definitely has the place of stop-gap to finding an empath or recovering from a death. In the situation you described, it's not as effective as just healing the wounds in the first place, or spamming with big casts to regain a large chunk of vit immediately.