Breaking the Unbreakable

So this was the result of 30 minutes of work:

[-20] Double Damage That Isn't Broken - Standard Utility
You deal double damage on your next attack.

[+X] Daredevil’s Rush - Standard Utility
Deal Xd8 damage to yourself. If you roll an 8 on one or more of the dice, you take only half damage from this power. X cannot be more than 10. If you suffer less than 4 damage in this way, you gain no pips from this talent.

[+1] Gather Energy - Standard Utility [Created by Karilyn]
On your next turn, you may take 2 standard actions. You cannot use this talent two turns in a row.

[+1] Guarded Stance - Standard Utility
Until the end of your next turn, you take half damage.

[-3] Furious Rage - Standard Attack
Deal 2d10 damage to target creature. If you are bloodied, you 3d12 damage instead.

I Meant To Do That
Whenever you roll a 1 on a d8, d10 or d12; you may gain 1 pip.

Boomstick - 2000 Gold
Trinket
Twice per battle, you may use the following combat talent.

[0] This is my Boomstick! - Interrupt Utility
Trigger - You make a single-target attack
Effect - The attack now targets each enemy adjacent to the primary target as well.

Iron Shield - 1000 Gold
Trinket
Once per battle you may use the following combat talent.

[0] Endure Pain - Interrupt Utility [1/Battle]
Trigger - You would be reduced to 0 hp or less.
Effect - You are reduced to 1 hp instead

Amulet of Extraordinary Protection - 1000 Gold
Trinket
You begin the battle with 8 temporary hp.

This is a start, and is almost 100% going to give me 16+ pips by the end of turn 2 without my allies existing.

Edit: Note that this char is level 2 right now.

I don't care if that is or isn't broken... GIVE THIS MAN THE TITLE... Cause this look awesomely broken. XD

Turn 1: Gather Energy
Ally: On My Mark -> me, Guarded Stance
Turn 2: Daredevil's Rush [+10] * 2, should survive and get my pips. Shield Gets used to keep me from dying from the second DDR
Ally: OMM again -> me, Double Damage That Isn't Broken.
Turn 3: I have 1 hp, 6 pips, a boomstick, and Furious Rage.

It's a start, I'll refine it later.

*grins*

The only thing this is trying to break is Daredevil's Rush (and yes, that combo with Iron Shield is intentional - and I believe it's the most powerful thing currently in the system). I fully expect to have to cut Daredevil's rush eventually, or nerf it into the ground, it's a present I tossed out to Min/Maxers to enjoy breaking. There's a few jewels like that in the system. But since I haven't heard many bad things about it yet (and seriously folks, how long do I have to wait before hearing about how long Psychic Anomaly is broken? I thought people would crack it in half in the first week!)

After all, you can't honestly tell me that you can't find better things to do with all these pips than the -20 talent.

Either way though, great use of Daredevil's Rush. It's so nice to have awesome people trying to find the coolest things to do with the system.

Of course I wonder what you would be fighting to pull that combo off I'd love to see that get misdirected right back at the character Not to mention a single poke and the character looses all it's pips before it can act... I don't think that this quite breaks the move, it's clever use of Daredevil's rush though.

I made a variant which uses four people and allows a two turn double damage It's Over with boomstick...

Turn 1:
Me: Gather Energy
Ally 1: On My Mark -> Me: Guarded Stance
Ally 2: Gather Energy
Ally 3: On My Mark -> Ally 2: Guarded Stance

Turn 2:
Me: Daredevil's Rush * 2 (Need +14 Overall)
Ally 1: On My Mark -> Me: Double Damage That Isn't Broken
Ally 2: Daredevil's Rush * 2 (Need +11 Overall)
Ally 3: On My Mark -> Ally 2: Channel Mind -> Me: It's Over (Single Target, activate "This is my Boomstick!" if needed)

But that's not really practical, is it?

Turn 1:
Me: Gather Energy
Ally 1: Gather Energy
Ally 2: On My Mark Ally 1. Ally 1: All or Nothing

Turn 2:
Me: All or Nothing, Daredevil's Rush
Ally 1: Daredevil's Rush, Channel Mind Me. Me: Double Damage That Isn't Broken
Ally 2: On My Mark Me. Me: It's Over.

Alternately:

Turn 1:
Me: Critfisher
Allies 1-4: Gather Energy

Turn 2:
Me: Critfisher
Ally 1: All or Nothing, Channel Mind Me. Me: Royal Command Me, Allies 1-4. Me Critfisher, Ally 1: Daredevil's Rush, Allies 2-4: All or Nothing
Allies 2 & 3: Daredevil's Rush, Channel Mind Me. Me: Double Damage That Isn't Broken *2 ( Or DDTIB & Midnight's Blade or Reckless Abandon, whichever I brought, if DDTIB doesn't stack with itself.)
Ally 4: Daredevil's Rush, Channel Mind Me. Me: It's Over.

I call #2 Team And I'll Form The Head!

These are all really fun and cool, but I still don't see why using DDTIB is any better here than using another It's Over or something similar.

Stairc -Dan Felder wrote:These are all really fun and cool, but I still don't see why using DDTIB is any better here than using another It's Over or something similar.

.
Because When you double up DDTIB it quadruples the damage (Isn't math fun?) since the DDTIB states

[-20] Double Damage That Isn't Broken - Standard Utility
You deal double damage on your next attack.

Nothing but math here, having fun with it.

Also It lets you boomstick a single target It's over effectively twice. Straight. Up. Murder.

Oh yeah, the special is also Derpy's just to get a chance to proc all the crazy crap he brought to the party.

thematthew wrote:

Stairc -Dan Felder wrote:These are all really fun and cool, but I still don't see why using DDTIB is any better here than using another It's Over or something similar.

Because When you double up DDTIB it quadruples the damage (Isn't math fun?)

And do it a third time and the damage octuples...

See, Math is fun. And broken Power is broken.

thematthew wrote:See, Math is fun. And broken Power is broken.

UNLESS when it says it deals double damage on your next attack, it's a statement, not an effect. As in, it states that your next attack does double damage, as opposed to doubling the damage on the attack. Which means, no matter how many times you use it, your next attack does double damage. Not more, not less...

Sadly, English is less fun...

Yes, it is a statement and not an effect. So you can't use it twice in a row to quadruple damage.

Also, while it does combo with boomstick to deal more damage in AOE - again there are lots of other powerful options and better things to do with 20 pips. Furthermore, the builds you're talking about seem to rely on your allies building to support you in order to activate the special earlier. Having 2 allies involved in the first combo means you have to divide the damage you end up dealing by 3 to see how much is actually happening per player in your overall efforts. The second combo requires dividing by 5 - as it's 4 allies helping you.

I'm seeing a lot of fun combos, but using the [-20] power for it just seems like overkill compared to more reasonable and safer options.Furthermore, the fact that you can use a [-20] power and not immediately end the battle - but rather still need to blow more ultimates - shows that the combat talent isn't broken.

To use an MTG analogy - it's similar to Helix Pinnacle. Sure, you can get an infinite mana combo and win the game with it - but that doesn't mean Helix Pinnacle is broken. Because if you have infinite mana, you should win anyways and there are a ton of ways to win with infinite mana. It means that the process that GOT you all that Mana is broken. =)

I still love these combos, but just because DDTIB is involved in them doesn't mean it's the part that's broken.

Stairc -Dan Felder wrote:Yes, it is a statement and not an effect. So you can't use it twice in a row to quadruple damage.

Alas, poor quadruple damage! I knew him, Stairc: an ability of infinite potential, of most excellent theory: it hath borne me on it's pip cost a thousand times; and now, how abhorred in my imagination it is!

Well, at least I can use English for a counterargument: is that fact that there is so much better stuff to do mean than it is broken due to how underpowered DDTIB is? Or is it working exactly as intended?

The only intent was Stairc completely ignoring me making a valid point about game balance and responding with a stupid joke and completely missing the point. So I suppose if success is measured in not listening to people when they say things you don't want to hear.... yes?

Paper Shadow wrote:

Stairc -Dan Felder wrote:Yes, it is a statement and not an effect. So you can't use it twice in a row to quadruple damage.

Alas, poor quadruple damage! I knew him, Stairc: an ability of infinite potential, of most excellent theory: it hath borne me on it's pip cost a thousand times; and now, how abhorred in my imagination it is!

Well, at least I can use English for a counterargument: is that fact that there is so much better stuff to do mean than it is broken due to how underpowered DDTIB is? Or is it working exactly as intended?

+1 Awesomeness for the Shakespeare reference.

As for your counterargument, I'm not sure exactly what you're asking. Would you mind clarifying?

Ramsus wrote:The only intent was Stairc completely ignoring me making a valid point about game balance and responding with a stupid joke and completely missing the point. So I suppose if success is measured in not listening to people when they say things you don't want to hear.... yes?

The fact that you can type these things and then complain that you think people are being hostile or rude to you never fails to amuse me.

The problem Ramsus is that you often make these absurd statements that some effect can never be balanced or will always be broken, when a simple demonstration shows that it isn't true. Even if the [-20] version was somehow still overpowered (and it isn't), a [-100] one certainly wouldn't be. The reason you think these things are jokes is because these absolutist statements you make are absurd and it's easy to demonstrate it with an example. If your point is valid that double damage will *always* be broken, any example given should always be broken - correct? The fact you think it's a joke demonstrates that your statement was absurd.

When this happens, it's not usually good form to complain about the other party taking exactly what you said and demonstrating that it's wrong... And then complaining that they don't listen to what you say. What you're annoyed about is that we *did* listen to what you said and are demonstrating that it's wrong. If you didn't mean this, then you shouldn't have said it - or should clarify it. Not complain about being wrong.

*rolls eyes* I'm sorry that you somehow fail to miss the point. You can't use such things in a way that is viable to use that is balanced. So it's either broken or useless. I've seen the results of people trying to figure out a balancing point between the two and there isn't one. It's a little hard for me to take your opinion on such things seriously when you do things like make up unbalanced/unusable things just to attempt to prove points that don't need proving and contribute nothing to the system. Especially when elsewhere you admit to intentionally including things you thought weren't balanced in the system from the beginning.

The funny thing about my "absurd" statements is that sooner or later people tend to agree with me after they spend the time to consider why I'm making them and not just reacting without thinking about it. In fact, you failed to demonstrate anything in particular in your example. Then only result you got was something that was useless in most people's hands and absurd in other's. That's poor game design and that was my point from the beginning. If you didn't decide what I was saying was absurd or rude before thinking over why I said it you might not think I was being absurd or rude so often.

The only thing I'm annoyed about is that you completely missed the point. I don't care how much you feel like you need to belittle me, especially when your assertions about my point of view are just random conjecture that don't hold up to the facts. So, if you please, examine your position a bit more before complaining about "good form".

Ramsus, did you or did you not say that...

Ramsus wrote:Again, the issue isn't Meditate. Doubling all damage is always going to be broken. No matter what.

Doubling all damage is clearly not always going to be broken. The example demonstrates this and even if it didn't - surely you don't disagree that a [-100] example or something that destroyed all your equipment or some other clearly too-expensive set of circumstances would result in it not being broken.

You said something, I disagreed and responded with an example that contradicts your statement. That is how a discussion works. If you want to then clarify and say, "Okay, sure it's not always going to be broken but that doesn't look like a very fun or useful talent" I would certainly agree.

However, you can't make such absolutist statements then complain when a simple example demonstrates their absurdity.

Stairc -Dan Felder wrote:Yes, it is a statement and not an effect. So you can't use it twice in a row to quadruple damage.

Also, while it does combo with boomstick to deal more damage in AOE - again there are lots of other powerful options and better things to do with 20 pips. Furthermore, the builds you're talking about seem to rely on your allies building to support you in order to activate the special earlier. Having 2 allies involved in the first combo means you have to divide the damage you end up dealing by 3 to see how much is actually happening per player in your overall efforts. The second combo requires dividing by 5 - as it's 4 allies helping you.

I'm seeing a lot of fun combos, but using the [-20] power for it just seems like overkill compared to more reasonable and safer options.Furthermore, the fact that you can use a [-20] power and not immediately end the battle - but rather still need to blow more ultimates - shows that the combat talent isn't broken.

To use an MTG analogy - it's similar to Helix Pinnacle. Sure, you can get an infinite mana combo and win the game with it - but that doesn't mean Helix Pinnacle is broken. Because if you have infinite mana, you should win anyways and there are a ton of ways to win with infinite mana. It means that the process that GOT you all that Mana is broken. =)

I still love these combos, but just because DDTIB is involved in them doesn't mean it's the part that's broken.

Of course it seems like overkill. I specifically went ahead and did a straight up overkill standard to get the point across. That having been said I don't need ridiculous teammates to fire off a 3d12*2 attack at 3 of my enemies on turn 2-3 in a game wher the sensible GM banned the obviously overpowered It's Over. Seriously all the first build needs to live a happy, carefree life of raping people's faces all day and all night is a friend willing to use On My Mark on him, and a tank built character.

Would it be more effective to spam it's Over? Well as you are fond of say Dan, it's situational. Since I can easily make a solo that can survive It's Over without having to completely nerf all the other attacks coming at it, but then falls to this manshit because it didn't take into account some of the more ridiculous standards.

Also, in a nod to the 'It's a statement, not an effect' argument, so is:

[-3] Shield Up! - Interrupt Utility
Trigger - Target ally would take damage.
Effect - That ally takes only half that damage instead.

So which wins over? Since they are both statements, neither is doubling or halving my damage. They just replace the damage with twice or half that amount. Since we work in a realm of statements now, not in one where things actually affect things I'm either dealing 1/2 damage or *2 damage, but sure as hell not regular old damage.

Seriously guys, this is a game. You can't argue that something is "not an effect" in a game where multiple things can come into play to try to change results. Be they written in effect form or not.

Edit: additional note, having known Ramsus for years I can tell you that he usually argues by making blanket statements like that when he means the second one, because when he argues with clauses some of our friends would ignore the main point of the argument just to attack the clauses.

Edit Edit: People seem to be confused on the point of what I'm doing. I never said that this power was broken, I merely said I was going to do something broken with it. There is a difference. For example, It's Over isn't broken. It isn't because the pip cost is rather high, limiting it to be usable long after the fight is over unless you kill yourself to try to do it sooner.

Daredevil's Rush, on the other hand, is broken. Since it gives you a ridiculous pile of pips for what seems like a fair deal, until you realize that there is an entire build set designed to mitigate damage and make you feel better because you fell down. And seriously every party has a healer.

thematthew wrote:Of course it seems like overkill. I specifically went ahead and did a straight up overkill standard to get the point across. That having been said I don't need ridiculous teammates to fire off a 3d12*2 attack at 3 of my enemies on turn 2-3 in a game wher the sensible GM banned the obviously overpowered It's Over. Seriously all the first build needs to live a happy, carefree life of raping people's faces all day and all night is a friend willing to use On My Mark on him, and a tank built character.

Would it be more effective to spam it's Over? Well as you are fond of say Dan, it's situational. Since I can easily make a solo that can survive It's Over without having to completely nerf all the other attacks coming at it, but then falls to this manshit because it didn't take into account some of the more ridiculous standards.

Also, in a nod to the 'It's a statement, not an effect' argument, so is:

[-3] Shield Up! - Interrupt Utility
Trigger - Target ally would take damage.
Effect - That ally takes only half that damage instead.

So which wins over? Since they are both statements, neither is doubling or halving my damage. They just replace the damage with twice or half that amount. Since we work in a realm of statements now, not in one where things actually affect things I'm either dealing 1/2 damage or *2 damage, but sure as hell not regular old damage.

Seriously guys, this is a game. You can't argue that something is "not an effect" in a game where multiple things can come into play to try to change results. Be they written in effect form or not.

I can see what you mean, this definitely needs clarification. The idea is, of course, that they'd cancel each other out. Like being "blinded" multiple times - "double damage" is designed like a condition - it's either there or it isn't. Extra instances are intended to be redundant. Half damage would be thus a special cancelling rule, similar to how +1/+1 counters and -1/-1 counters actively destroy one another in MTG - they don't both sit on the creature at once.

However, this isn't said anywhere because it's a very dangerous effect to design around and we've intentionally kept it out of the system for this reason - except in tightly controlled instances like Headshot. Ramsus is absolutely correct in that Double Damage can easily be broken if it's not handled very carefully - and that's why we've been cautious about it.

I'm inclined to handle it exactly as you mention thematthew, which is the way Furnace of Rath handles it, if we ever use this sort of effect in the actual game. However, for this power, the ability is intended to be non-stacking (same as blindness or vulnerability X).

Which I would say is still what Stairc is doing here. He's ignoring the point that a "double all damage" effect is not going to be an effect that is balanced, fun, useful, or add more to the system than it detracts in favor of arguing that it's not impossible for it to fail to be overpowered. Of course it's possible for it to not be overpowered, just make it impossible to pay for. Which is the same as not having it exist in the first place.

I think I in fact can make absolutionist statements if the only counter arguments are always more absurd than my absolutionist statement actually. It doesn't mean my statement is literally true but, it functions in place of an entire paragraph of just clauses which point out why such or such are not viable options in making X thing a good idea. Though, please do feel free to argue with everyone any time they say something like "being on fire is bad". I would make a note however that if you're trying to get along and understand others that you might want to stop ignoring the intended meaning in what someone is saying just so you can pick an argument that you can't even win.

Edit: Stairc, the issue was that Headshot was not tightly controlled enough. It needed specific and clear wording to avoid people diving down into the depths of absurdity. Which was the point I was trying to make before you decided we needed to have an argument that would go nowhere.

Ramsus wrote:Which I would say is still what Stairc is doing here. He's ignoring the point that a "double all damage" effect is not going to be an effect that is balanced, fun, useful, or add more to the system than it detracts in favor of arguing that it's not impossible for it to fail to be overpowered.

I'm not sure how it can be said that I'm ignoring this when I specifically pointed out that I agree with the statement that the example would not be a useful or fun talent to play with. Here, I'll even provide a quote.

Stairc -Dan Felder wrote:. If you want to then clarify and say, "Okay, sure it's not always going to be broken but that doesn't look like a very fun or useful talent" I would certainly agree.

Though it seems Thematthew is having a lot of fun trying to break it, which is why cards like Magosi exist in MTG - to be underpowered silly cards that some players seriously enjoy trying to make work. There is certainly a value for having these kinds of powers in the system to enjoy trying to build with, even if they are rarely brought into actual battle. Regardless, I agree with you that it probably wouldn’t be much fun to use for efficiency-focused players. But that’s alright, because there is more than one type of player in the system.

Ramsus wrote: Of course it's possible for it to not be overpowered, just make it impossible to pay for.

Exactly. So, you agree with me. In that case, you might want to lead with that in the future instead of complaining that people disagreed with what you said. Why don't you just say what you mean instead, or if someone takes what you say too literally - just explain what you actually meant. That will make things a lot easier.

Ramsus wrote: Which is the same as not having it exist in the first place.

Well, no – because many players like trying to break the unbreakable. This thread is a great example of that. I had more fun building MTG decks than I ever had actually playing MTG and these types of strange deckbuilding challenges were the core of that fun.

I just enjoy using things in manners which highlight ways that people had not thought to use them or thought that they could be used. To me, breaking something is when it has become a part of a combo which does something that is ridiculous (to borrow your example: infinite mana + Helix Pinnacle = I win ha ha.) Something is broken, on the other hand, when it is in basically every horribly broken combo, eg. Daredevil's Rush.

thematthew wrote:I just enjoy using things in manners which highlight ways that people had not thought to use them or thought that they could be used.

Same. It's so fun to find great uses for seemingly terrible cards. I love budget deckbuilding and finding great uses for junk rares.

thematthew wrote: To me, breaking something is when it has become a part of a combo which does something that is ridiculous (to borrow your example: infinite mana + Helix Pinnacle = I win ha ha.) Something is broken, on the other hand, when it is in basically every horribly broken combo, eg. Daredevil's Rush.

I definitely agree that Daredevil's Rush has become broken with the addition to the system of items and new abilities that can make it easy to survive gaining 10 pips. What do you think about limiting it to 5 instead of 10? Or do you have any other suggestions on how to make it still a cool combo power without being broken? I'd rather not erase it entirely.

The problem with Daredevil's Rush is that it goes ahead and gives you a huge pile of pips while putting you closer to being bloodied, thus it activates everything a berzerker pony was built to do while giving him the huge pip pile to do it with. I think trying it with a limit of 5 could work, but I'm not entirely sure at this juncture how to fix it.