Desert Elf Endurance Changes - Discussion

[Nao]

  If you are choosing not to use sneak/hide to survive these situations, I do not know what to tell you.

Delves have to play a few days to skill that up before it's even remotely reliable - just like everyone else.

Also, are you suggesting that they sneak/hide everywhere instead of running? Because that would be the only way to avoid these critters that appear out of nowhere, from diagonal directions.

[betweenford]

  If you are choosing not to use sneak/hide to survive these situations, I do not know what to tell you.

Are you suggesting a desert elf train their sneak and hide in their camp before they walk one tile away from their camp to see a spider for the first time?

Or are you suggesting a desert elf use their novice sneak and hide to get past that brick red tarantula?

[Riev]

Personally, as callous as it makes me seem:
If you're playing a 0-day elf and engaging gortok, your HP isn't the problem.

I just don't see how 10 less HP is whats killing you. I don't play a LOT of outdoor characters but there's a progression.

Anecdote: I've lost a LOT of low-play-time outdoors characters to duskhorn because bull duskhorn hit REAL hard in the head and can knock you out. This is not because my endurance sucks or my HP is bad. This is because I wasn't ready or prepared for that encounter.

Not that anyone has anything to prove to me, but I'd want to see more reasons why that 10hp is why you died and not because you messed up. Show me how you would have lived with 8hp.

[Fawcett]

Personally, as callous as it makes me seem:
If you're playing a 0-day elf and engaging gortok, your HP isn't the problem.

I just don't see how 10 less HP is whats killing you. I don't play a LOT of outdoor characters but there's a progression.

Anecdote: I've lost a LOT of low-play-time outdoors characters to duskhorn because bull duskhorn hit REAL hard in the head and can knock you out. This is not because my endurance sucks or my HP is bad. This is because I wasn't ready or prepared for that encounter.

Not that anyone has anything to prove to me, but I'd want to see more reasons why that 10hp is why you died and not because you messed up. Show me how you would have lived with 8hp.

Maybe I play alot of outdoorsy characters, but I've had it happen more then once.

Example:
Bahamet runs in out of nowhere as I'm foraging roots, and I get unlucky because it attacks my PC instantly. Or my game lagged. It hits me for 85 damage/stun on the head, and I manage to flee with 15 hp left.

If I was an elf, I would've probably had hp in the low 80s. AKA, dead.

Novice sneak/hide would not have helped out there and this happens aaaaaalll the time on any new outdoors character. Insanely powerful creature runs in from the west, you manage to flee with HP in the tens or single digits.

But instead of fleeing, you die. That is what 10-20 HP less does for an entire race.

[Nao]

Personally, as callous as it makes me seem:
If you're playing a 0-day elf and engaging gortok, your HP isn't the problem.

I just don't see how 10 less HP is whats killing you. I don't play a LOT of outdoor characters but there's a progression.

Anecdote: I've lost a LOT of low-play-time outdoors characters to duskhorn because bull duskhorn hit REAL hard in the head and can knock you out. This is not because my endurance sucks or my HP is bad. This is because I wasn't ready or prepared for that encounter.

Not that anyone has anything to prove to me, but I'd want to see more reasons why that 10hp is why you died and not because you messed up. Show me how you would have lived with 8hp.

Have you played in the wilderness over the last year or so, since the NPCs started to wander more?

Critters no longer stay in the places you expect them to be. They chase each other and can end up pretty far from the spawn point (hello, mek in the tablelands). There are no safe gortok or duskhorn-free areas where you can follow the progression and skill up on hawks or vultures only. You might be able to find some, but you also might have to get past the some more dangerous critters to even get there.

[Brokkr]

Have you actually encountered a Mek in the Tablelands?

Cause like...mek and bahamet are the most predictable out of everything.

[Riev]

Personally, as callous as it makes me seem:
If you're playing a 0-day elf and engaging gortok, your HP isn't the problem.

I just don't see how 10 less HP is whats killing you. I don't play a LOT of outdoor characters but there's a progression.

Anecdote: I've lost a LOT of low-play-time outdoors characters to duskhorn because bull duskhorn hit REAL hard in the head and can knock you out. This is not because my endurance sucks or my HP is bad. This is because I wasn't ready or prepared for that encounter.

Not that anyone has anything to prove to me, but I'd want to see more reasons why that 10hp is why you died and not because you messed up. Show me how you would have lived with 8hp.

Maybe I play alot of outdoorsy characters, but I've had it happen more then once.

Example:
Bahamet runs in out of nowhere as I'm foraging roots, and I get unlucky because it attacks my PC instantly. Or my game lagged. It hits me for 85 damage/stun on the head, and I manage to flee with 15 hp left.

If I was an elf, I would've probably had hp in the low 80s. AKA, dead.

Novice sneak/hide would not have helped out there and this happens aaaaaalll the time on any new outdoors character. Insanely powerful creature runs in from the west, you manage to flee with HP in the tens or single digits.

But instead of fleeing, you die. That is what 10-20 HP less does for an entire race.

I would say you hit the luck zone then, more often than not. Because hitting for that much damage in one hit should reel you and give a bit of lag. Plus it sounds like you succeeded at fleeing and weren't hit as you ran away.

Plus as Halaster said:
Based on how many hps most desert elves have now, most of them will still remain above 100 after the change.

Part of this is "Riev doesn't play elves so he doesn't really care" but a big part of it is... if you consistently have sub-80hp then you are dumpstatting endurance and refusing to use things in game that can bring it up.

[Halaster]

Stepping outside camp directly into a dangerous creature is a problem, agreed.  It's nothing to do with maybe 10 less hp on average, though.  Maybe some camps need to be moved around a little.

[Nao]

Have you actually encountered a Mek in the Tablelands?

Cause like...mek and bahamet are the most predictable out of everything.

Yes. It should be in my pfile with the exact room because my PC died to that mek. I think the mek chased a jozhal or another NPC and fell off the shield wall some time before my PC also fell off the shield wall.

This death was entirely my own fault and sort of hilarious. The point here is simply that some of these critters end up a long way from where you expect them to be now.

[Brokkr]

Have you actually encountered a Mek in the Tablelands?

Cause like...mek and bahamet are the most predictable out of everything.

Yes. It should be in my pfile with the exact room because my PC died to that mek. I think the mek chased a jozhal or another NPC and fell off the shield wall some time before my PC also fell off the shield wall.

This death was entirely my own fault and sort of hilarious. The point here is simply that some of these critters end up a long way from where you expect them to be now.

Weird, it should have pathed back to the Salt Flats from there.

[Riev]

PC was tastier.

Probably still wouldn't have survived with 10 more HP.

[huntsforblood]

Just reimburse karma if you die before the end of your 2nd day played with a karma character.

No back-to-backs, though, so if you die again on the next character right away, bad luck. Prevents suicides/re-rolls.

If you're not ready to go survive in the wild by 2 days played, your character was not going to survive anyway.

That little bit would be enough to offset the insane real life annoyance of karma regen, in my mind, which is a nice bonus.

Hell 1 day played should be enough to get hide to advanced on a d-elf without doing anything except occasionally hiding.

[Armaddict]

Just a couple things.


I'm not sure whether it was in here or on discord, but there's been a lot of talk of '10 hp less in the desert is a death sentence.'  However, I'm going to quickly ask you to go over the number of times you've -actually- been at less than 10 hitpoints where you were not otherwise screwed in some other way (i.e. Out of stamina, etc).  That number is...incredibly small, or should be, anyway.  If that's a high number, I have a suggestion following.  The point being, the number of times having 10 less hp screws you is actually pretty small in most cases, and this is why I've survived well enough with hp in the 80's; most of the time Armageddon doesn't screw you with brute force, it screws you with circumstance. 

Someone earlier said that city-elves don't have to deal with the same things that desert elves do, and that makes their lower hp for comparison irrelevant; I'd like to ask you whether or not you'd rather have less hp out in the desert fighting npc's, or whether you'd like to have less hp in a place where you fight less (skill up less), are not generally expected or 'allowed' to have weapons out and ready, and your aggressors are generally people who usually have strength prioritized (like most of us) who attack you out of nowhere when your weapons are put away.  Less hp is far more disadvantageous in that scenario, and yet it's entirely survivable. (ETA: Not to mention backstabs.)

Now, the suggestion:  What lower hp -actually- impacts is the number of hp you -should- treat as '0'.  My number for this is 60% of my maximum hit points; There is almost no scenario in the game where it is worth pushing that number in order to have to sleep to regain it.  Dropping 10 hp drops that threshold by 4hp.  In other words, if I have 100 hp, 60hp is what I treat as 0.  If I have 90hp, 56hp is treated as 0.  That's not -when I flee-. That number is treated, in my head, as when I am -dead-.  It's not a line worth playing with.  If something is hitting you well enough to push you towards that boundary, then run early.  If something knocks you near it in one shot, run immediately.  Do not treat actual combat, whether against PC's or NPC's, city or desert, like you treat sparring matches.  That's not max hp screwing you over, that's just not treating wounds like they matter.

It makes PvP encounters better anyway.  Short, intense fights that devolve into hunting and prey.  Not long drawn out slogs through 100 hit points of damage where you're just -hoping- you get big hits.

[Brytta Léofa]

bro here dropping wisdom like it's a dump stat.

[najdorf]

Just a couple things.


I'm not sure whether it was in here or on discord, but there's been a lot of talk of '10 hp less in the desert is a death sentence.'  However, I'm going to quickly ask you to go over the number of times you've -actually- been at less than 10 hitpoints where you were not otherwise screwed in some other way (i.e. Out of stamina, etc).  That number is...incredibly small, or should be, anyway.  If that's a high number, I have a suggestion following.  The point being, the number of times having 10 less hp screws you is actually pretty small in most cases, and this is why I've survived well enough with hp in the 80's; most of the time Armageddon doesn't screw you with brute force, it screws you with circumstance. 

Someone earlier said that city-elves don't have to deal with the same things that desert elves do, and that makes their lower hp for comparison irrelevant; I'd like to ask you whether or not you'd rather have less hp out in the desert fighting npc's, or whether you'd like to have less hp in a place where you fight less (skill up less), are not generally expected or 'allowed' to have weapons out and ready, and your aggressors are generally people who usually have strength prioritized (like most of us) who attack you out of nowhere when your weapons are put away.  Less hp is far more disadvantageous in that scenario, and yet it's entirely survivable. (ETA: Not to mention backstabs.)

Now, the suggestion:  What lower hp -actually- impacts is the number of hp you -should- treat as '0'.  My number for this is 60% of my maximum hit points; There is almost no scenario in the game where it is worth pushing that number in order to have to sleep to regain it.  Dropping 10 hp drops that threshold by 4hp.  In other words, if I have 100 hp, 60hp is what I treat as 0.  If I have 90hp, 56hp is treated as 0.  That's not -when I flee-. That number is treated, in my head, as when I am -dead-.  It's not a line worth playing with.  If something is hitting you well enough to push you towards that boundary, then run early.  If something knocks you near it in one shot, run immediately.  Do not treat actual combat, whether against PC's or NPC's, city or desert, like you treat sparring matches.  That's not max hp screwing you over, that's just not treating wounds like they matter.

It makes PvP encounters better anyway.  Short, intense fights that devolve into hunting and prey.  Not long drawn out slogs through 100 hit points of damage where you're just -hoping- you get big hits.

I'm not arguing about OP, just answering your question.
I have been there over 10 or so times with 10+ days characters.
Whoever raise their concern here probably do NOT mind the hp chipping in a combat, where they can of course flee.
There are 2 major concerns where 105 to 95 hp matters:
a) fall from a 3 room climb fail
b)
       .---.
       |---|
       |---|
       |---|
  .---^ - ^---.
:___________:
      |  |//|
      |  |//|
      |  |//|
      |  |//|
      |  |//|
      |  |//|
      |  |.- |
      |.-'**|
       \***/
        \*/
         V

[Dar]

in all honesty.  Aside the elven endurance, or whatever.


what should staff take a second and third look at is

The lethality of climbing, considering how prevalent it is in a gameplay.

The pros and cons of 'anything' non solely specialized (ie. backstab sap, poison) to end a fight in one round.  In terms of gameplay and storytelling aspects.

[Veselka]

From my understanding, camps are on a coded rotation for the most part between a few different anchor points.

Being that most of the tribes are nomadic, I think it would be a cool constant 'side quest' to scout for new habitable locations for the tribe.

This meaning to say -- Your PC Tribemembers are always on the look out for new locations, where maybe fewer nasty beasties roam close by, or there is a resource that is valuable nearby, etc.

They put this forward to their Staff after coming to a group consensus, and one of the 'rotation points' is moved to that spot.

In order to avoid getting all the best spots, they have to constantly rotate. You could have one location that is an anchor point and doesn't get moved out of the rotation. This would be the 'Home Base' location. To outsiders it would be 'The place that <insert tribe> comes to about once a year for trade'. The others would be more malleable, and provide a bit of player input/staff input to move them around.

This is entirely separate from the endurance discussion, but I was seeing mention of 'walking out of camp and getting carru'd' as a common thread. I think it's realistic within even our world to set up camp and find out 'well shit we're in the middle of bison country' and decide to move, even if it's difficult, to another location. It's all within reason too -- It's Zalanthas, it's the wastes, so there is always going to be a considerable amount of danger even nomadically.

It's part of what you gain by being a City Folk compared to Wilderness Folk, and it was also a major theme of Dark Sun -- The City is relatively safe, especially from hostile, aggressive, often fatal encounters with creatures, raiders, and the elements. In exchange, you have to deal with <insert brutal Sorcerer King regime here>. If you can't stomach that, or if you are a part of a tribe, you brave the very challenging wastes to eke out a life outside of the crushing weight of Templars and "Civilization".

And if anything...Dark Sun as a comparison, Zalanthas is EASY PEASY. The desert in Dark Sun is quite literally fatal unless you are traveling in a caravan, and even then, you might be waylaid and enslaved or eaten along the way. So I consider many of the dangers of the Zalanthan Desert fatal to those without experience or wherewithal, but semi-predictable and avoidable for those with experience and skill.

[Knight of Knives]

I've been at sub 10 a lot. And in circumstances where you can't flee or outrun whatever, it matters a lot.

So 10 hp certainly does make a difference.

[Armaddict]

I've been at sub 10 a lot. And in circumstances where you can't flee or outrun whatever, it matters a lot.

So 10 hp certainly does make a difference.

So does being cautious.  That's the whole point.  I'm sorry, but you can bump that number up to 20, and it's still a complete rarity for anyone having the mentality I already described.  You're pushing fights too hard and -creating- the circumstance.  You're purposely fighting, not avoiding, the things that might kill you.  I don't know whether this is due to skill-gain pursuit, a lack of learning from mistakes, or the absolute worst luck in the world, but the only encounters that put me at low hp other than death are ones where I'm allowing it on purpose (only to realize how stupid I was after, i.e. 'Sure, I'll try a Carru even though I'm not that good'), or against players who can and will create the circumstances of death intelligently.

I think more of you than just being helpless to it, which means you're acknowledging the risks, then taking them, but then claiming that there's no way to avoid them.  10hp makes a difference, but not in terms of lethality; the rng required for it to save you, requires that it shave it off of something doing giant hits on you, in which case the hp ain't the issue.  What it does impact is that is that 4hp threshold.  You have 4 less hp to 'live in' with relative low risk.

Reiterating the 'in situations where you can't flee or outrun whatever' are exactly what is meant by circumstance fucking you, not the hp.  If you need 10 more hp because you can't outrun something, it ain't the hp fucking you.  And it's certainly not going to be what saves you.

[Master Color]

If this was 2010, I might agree. But there have been enough changes to wildlife, making them more deadly and much more prone to information asymmetries.

I don't know how newer players can be expected to survive even close to camp with some of these mobs. HP is just a tiny safety net that might help them survive through the wet paper towel phase of the character.

[Armaddict]

If this was 2010, I might agree. But there have been enough changes to wildlife, making them more deadly and much more prone to information asymmetries.

I don't know how newer players can be expected to survive even close to camp with some of these mobs. HP is just a tiny safety net that might help them survive through the wet paper towel phase of the character.

I mean...I don't expect new players to survive right off the bat.  It's a hard game.  Veterans still die.  I don't just boot up survival games and get mad if I die immediately because they didn't make it completely survivable right out of the gates, that's kind of the point.  We die, we learn.  The permadeath aspect of the game has somehow made characters feel like they should be permanent.  Hell, I usually have to restart city-builders because I 'die' by making critical planning mistakes.

10 hp still is NOT the deciding factor in those scenarios.

[Nao]

I've had 10 PCs since May 2018 playtesting for the new classes started.

3 died to PK/templar'd, 3 to megafauna that I did NOT seek out, one died to a spider pile after the change that made them give chase, two were stored and one is my current.

I've searched the logs for instances when I ended up with very low hp. Of those 10 PCs, 3 were in situations where they had hp in the single digits or negative HP, but lived. Another one lived with 16hp. One would likely have survived the situation that led to his death with 10 more hp (arrow to -5 just as I was about to get away with <redacted>).

So yeah, I don't think 10-15 hp are as inconsequential as you all make it out to be.

[Riev]

So yeah, I don't think 10-15 hp are as inconsequential as you all make it out to be.

Conversely, I don't think its as consequential as you make it out to be.
We can all come up with "but this one time" scenarios all we want. I can make up whatever information I want.

At this point its screaming into the void.

[Nao]

So yeah, I don't think 10-15 hp are as inconsequential as you all make it out to be.

Conversely, I don't think its as consequential as you make it out to be.
We can all come up with "but this one time" scenarios all we want. I can make up whatever information I want.

At this point its screaming into the void.

If you're just going to assume that any examples were made up, then why did you ask for those? I literally ran a regex search over all my logs, this is the result.

[Armaddict]

If you're just going to assume that any examples were made up, then why did you ask for those? I literally ran a regex search over all my logs, this is the result.

He didn't.  I did.  And I didn't ask for examples.  I asked you to examine it yourself.  You have freakishly weird luck, or a certain sort of decision making.  In 20 years of play, this is a scenario that has happened to me a handful of times.  Interestingly, the 'IF' clause of the same post was ignored, which was the examination of -why- those situations are more or less likely to happen, and IF they are happening often...

You sir, are either freakishly magnetic for bad circumstantial luck, or have found a way to normalize circumstance in your play.  Whatever the case, you can continue down the path of 'This is a bad change because I might die more' or 'I don't want to play that anymore if risks are higher', but I don't think that will have much impact on it.  I'd urge you to examine why for you (and others), this appears that it will have a giant effect, while for others it has meant almost nil as far as how survival capability is found.  There is one viewpoint in that examination in particular that would be ironic, but we'll see if it goes that way.