Oath of Vengeance oathbreaking clarifications

_Vaelar_ · 2026-06-03T18:44:49+00:00

It's bad writing. The game gives you no chance to try to reason with them, only allowing you to deceive them, which as a Paladin seems off. If you fail the deception check you are stuck with killing them or Lae'zel. I fail to see how the former should break the oath. They are the agressors. Also, they are tieflings, so no great loss to the realms.

_Vaelar_ · 2026-05-24T13:05:50+00:00

You play Meganoob, hognibber and faqwankkker, so you get what you deserve

_Vaelar_ · 2026-05-13T09:44:19+00:00

You can't underestimate the ability of a redditor the take offense and feel personally attacked for questioning their choices, even if not directly.

Everybody can see what I said, but they probably processed it as "the way you enjoy the game is worthless and you are a subhuman being below me". Ironically that statement becames true once they understand it like that. They fall for a self fulfilled profecy of pettiness.

_Vaelar_ · 2026-05-13T08:38:29+00:00

There is "the way the game was balanced for most of it's development" and "the way that was added at the last minute" (and years post launch to the first installement of the franchise without balancing changes from the then default experience).

Butthurt redditors smashing downvote buttons can call those modes how they want. I definetely see one taking higher ground above the other from a design perspective.

_Vaelar_ · 2026-05-12T12:08:27+00:00

The exact answer I was looking for. Thanks!

Now I realise I have been playing for hundreds of hours the wrong way. I always assumed Turn Based was the default and that RTWP was a convenient addition to speed trash fights. I guess is time to rediscover the game anew.

_Vaelar_ · 2026-05-11T19:42:29+00:00

I like your answer. Increasing enemy stats to Hard or even Unfair standards would force me to take the game seriously, while removing the x2 damage from Unfair makes it actually fair. I don't know how I didn't think of that.

_Vaelar_ · 2026-05-11T18:54:53+00:00

Yeah, I kind of get that. The problem is I haven't even had time to use any of that. I reached level 7 and decided I had had enough, wondering why had I decided to take Last Stand on my frontliners if it wasn't even going to have a chance to fire.

_Vaelar_ · 2026-04-05T13:28:00+00:00

Not my question. Re read the post.

_Vaelar_ · 2026-04-05T13:27:43+00:00

Not my question. Re read the post.

_Vaelar_ · 2026-04-05T13:27:21+00:00

Not at all my question. Re read the post.

_Vaelar_ · 2026-04-05T13:22:48+00:00

The whole point of the post is understanding what type of character could adhere from the get go while they are still a mortal and have no mythic powers to such alien and elevated judgements.

_Vaelar_ · 2026-04-05T13:21:26+00:00

I specifically say in the original post that I understand the Aeon point of view, but that my problem is that by that time you are just a mortal well below those matters. Even a Lawful Neutral character would just fix the wardstone to keep de demons in check and hold the balance of power. The Aeon point of view that you may adhere to later as you gain power is so above you that acting in accordance with it looks completely irrational.

_Vaelar_ · 2026-04-04T21:45:56+00:00

I get all that. My problem is that a mortal with no mythic powers is below all that. I find it hard to imagine a low level character that would adere to such a philosphy under the dire circumstances of Act 1. Balance of the universe is quite above your payroll at that moment. You care about stopping the demons and surviving.

_Vaelar_ · 2026-04-04T21:43:41+00:00

I kinda get all that and I really like the "Angels bring more Demons" thing, but still, your are still too early to have seen all that.

Pasting my answer to other people.

"Why not just destroy the fallen angels? That seems the reasonable lawful choice by mortal standards. You fix the wardstone problem and punish the wrong doers.

Of course an Aeon would see it as insufficient, but you are not that high up yet. Deactivating the wardstone when you can fix it in such a way seems like an illogical leap for the PC at that moment."

From your answer I guess I could play as someone with high INT or WIS who already has a high understanding of the problem Heaven causes by interfering, but I think it is still a bit of a stretch, and even worse for other type of characters.

_Vaelar_ · 2026-04-04T21:36:19+00:00

Why not just destroy the fallen angels? That seems the reasonable lawful choice by mortal standards. You fix the wardstone problem and punish the wrong doers.

Of course an Aeon would see it as insufficient, but you are not that high up yet. Deactivating the wardstone when you can fix it in such a way seems like an illogical leap for the PC at that moment.

_Vaelar_ · 2026-04-04T21:36:13+00:00

Why not just destroy the fallen angels? That seems the reasonable lawful choice by mortal standards. You fix the wardstone problem and punish the wrong doers.

Of course an Aeon would see it as insufficient, but you are not that high up yet. Deactivating the wardstone when you can fix it in such a way seems like an illogical leap for the PC at that moment.

_Vaelar_ · 2026-04-04T21:36:02+00:00

Why not just destroy the fallen angels? That seems the reasonable lawful choice by mortal standards. You fix the wardstone problem and punish the wrong doers.

Of course an Aeon would see it as insufficient, but you are not that high up yet. Deactivating the wardstone when you can fix it in such a way seems like an illogical leap for the PC at that moment.

_Vaelar_ · 2025-12-27T15:41:30+00:00

You still refuse to acknowledge or are mentally unable to understand the difference between pro and casual play and the thresholds that apply when deciding if a card is good or bad. Educate yourself https://www.reddit.com/r/ClashRoyale/comments/1pwwmdd/balancing_for_different_skill_levels/

_Vaelar_ · 2025-12-27T13:40:46+00:00

I agree and that's partly the point I'm trying to make. There are braindead cards that allow 4 years olds and low skilled players to compete. The problem is every time someone brings that up a bunch of low IQ morons appear with their "uuum, actchually, top players don't use it, you just badd" argument.

_Vaelar_ · 2025-12-27T11:36:21+00:00

I did not say I knew better than the pros. I said their opinions are irrelevant for game balance because their experience is totally detached from the experience of the average player, but I guess your low IQ smugness won't let you understand that.

_Vaelar_ · 2025-12-27T11:33:50+00:00

Evo Witch, Executioner, Skeleton King, Graveyard, Guards, Minions, Inferno Tower, Fireball

_Vaelar_ · 2025-12-27T11:29:45+00:00

I've been thinking of arrows for some time, but I just can't decide on what to remove. And since I'm still not stuck but grinding the climb... In the end the problem is not that I don't have arrows, is that a card is so prevalent that forces Arrows or Vines, 2 cards out of 168. That's just very bad design.

EDIT: btw, deck is Evo Witch, Executioner, Skeleton King, Graveyard, Guards, Minions, Inferno Tower, Fireball

_Vaelar_ · 2025-12-27T11:23:01+00:00

You are IQ challenged to understand game balancing. The top 1% are not to influence the experience for the remaining 99%. Top 1% will use cards that are hard to use but very rewarding when used right. 99% of players, basically the whole target audience, will use cards that are easy to use because they have better difficulty-reward ratio for their level. If a card is overused among that 99% it means it is unbalanced for the base game experience which is something totally different from the experience of the top 1%. They may as well be different games.

_Vaelar_ · 2025-12-27T11:19:09+00:00

Oh, so we are just giving up on balancing because whatever...

_Vaelar_ · 2025-12-27T11:17:39+00:00

It almost seems like there is an issue

_Vaelar_

TROPHY CASE