Petition for brain rattler
"I wasn't agreeing with them >.> |
![]() |
I agree that the "chance to flee" mod makes this mace less useful and would like to see it changed.
The purpose of this mace seems to be debilitation of the enemy's mind, and the flavour text references the limits of the skull. As the brain floats in the skull, severe blows to the skull usually result in damage to the area hit and the opposite area as the brain sloshes around. ![]() Given that a (slight) majority of medieval head wounds are on the left side of the brain (right handed weapon use) they are more likely to affect Broca's area - where speech is controlled. I'd suggest the following change: replace chance to flee with x% chance of incapacitating blow. 1) Incapacitating blow would multiply the damage (as the brain sloshes around) Possibly 2-3 times? This damage chance would NOT be effected by critical chance modifiers. 2)Incapacitating blow would have a flat % chance to "Silence" the target for a short period of time - since the blow is hitting the victim's speech area. 3)Incapacitating blow would have a small, but flat % chance to stun ANY monster, whether immune to status effects or not, or despite map mods. This chance would not be affected by other chance to stun mods, but the stun duration might be affected. Given the ability to bypass curse immunity, I don't think this would be out of line. "The only legitimate use of a computer is to play games." - Eugene Jarvis
PoE Origins - Piety's story http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2081910 |
![]() |
I disagree with changing it, it gives a nice possiblity of ele 2h mace builds that could go with inquisitor, as it is there isn't many 2h meleee templars. At most replace chance to flee with something useful, keep everything else.
Last edited by NetherPrime#6083 on Aug 25, 2016, 11:24:03 PM
|
![]() |
" This ENTIRE thread is JUST to get Chance to Flee changed to something useful. Nothing else. You DID read the OP, right? - Sheepster |
![]() |
" a. read. the. op. b. terrible, terrible, terrible inquisitor weapon. I mean, seriously. https://www.pathofexile.com/ascendancy/classes/Inquisitor you see much synergy here for a RT ele mace? Any synergy? Literally, the only use i can see templar deriving from that mace is an ancestral warchief hierophant -whackamole. And you can literally do that with any other weapon. |
![]() |
" THIS. This with Melee Splash and flat chance, AFAIK, would make it possible to shock...somewhat reliably, with RT and tree chance to shock. Yes, I know, I said the taboo words...Melee Splash. But AFAIK, the flat shock would roll per monster, as Shocks are based on HP, and ever monster in the splash radius could have different HP. If it IS individually rolled, then a pack of 5 monsters with a 20% chance to shock...You could actually shock ALL by shocking one. THIS would actually make the mace great, and give us a desperately needed new RT weapon. Right now...RT is just bad, most times. Spend the extra passives to get crit, triple your damage. We need good Uniques that work well with RT. - Sheepster |
![]() |
The chance to create shocking ground is so damn cool and it fits the weapon perfectly.
Please GGG, MAKE THIS HAPPEN! |
![]() |
Its a great weapon concept, i hope GGG Buffs it so it can keep up with atziri+marohi.
As of right now it feels way to inferior compared to other chaeper 2h weapons! Please GGG dont let this become another kongors Axe -,- :) PS: NO CHANCE TO FLEE PLZ NO! Last edited by hitreza#5945 on Aug 26, 2016, 6:40:08 AM
|
![]() |
" It's a maul actually, and it got somewhat invigorated with the introduction of elemental overload so it isn't a bad weapon nowadays if you can find a good roll (which admittedly can be tricky because the range is so wide). Wish the armchair developers would go back to developing armchairs.
◄[www.moddb.com/mods/balancedux]► ◄[www.moddb.com/mods/one-vision1]► |
![]() |
Thx everybody for posting, it's cool to see i am not alone in this sentiment and our community has quite the bunch of M's who still focus on melee despite the hurdles the game throws at us.
I'll take some time reading the post's, but thanks in advance. Peace, -Boem- edit : To reiterate what this thread is about, i made this thread in the hopes that GGG might revision one of the less favored stats on the unique mace revealed. It will not make it "top-end" due to this change, but might provoke more people into trying it out. " edit2 : Thx to Snorkle for his detailed post on melee and a brief explanation why he would never utilize it.(somewhat summarizing the downsides of going "slow elemental 2h melee") Obviously this weapon will be for quirky builds and never reach top-end potential of a full physical 600+dps 2h. But my intention is not to get it on par with such weapons or feats. However for being what it is in the current game-state, it can really do without the chance to flee and perhaps even get a functional stat in it's place. Even then, it will still not compete with full-out meta 2h builds in my opinion. And obviously thanks to all the others that responded. @TheVoid While the shock prolif attribute is great, i don't wish to fully redesign this mace as you have. It is quite functional already in it's current state baring the chance to flee just being "tagged on" for whatever reason. Further more, reducing the conversion to 20% would destroy the concept of a full lightning based conversion mace wielder which i think is one of the cool things this weapon allows. And the 50% reduced lightning damage reflection is a stat GGG will never implement since it warrants a heavy drawback and i don't want a 20% chance to flee on this weapon.(hehé?) @Namcap Just read your suggestion on page 6 1% damage and movement speed per enemy shocked recently. I do tend to like things like this since it emulates getting charged with energy, which does align with the lightning theme of the mace. However since we already have the innervate as a suggestion and this comes very close to what onslaught would do for you i will not add it. Thanks for your post's all. Peace, -Boem- Freedom is not worth having if it does not include the freedom to make mistakes Last edited by Boem#2861 on Aug 26, 2016, 7:56:38 AM
|