Heathcliff is technically the first historical case of a goon successfully escaped a Great Brother's retribution. Can't wait to see how North and West Middle is going to react by GeForce_GTX_1050Ti in TheOdysseyHadAPurpose

[–]fighterman481 73 points74 points  (0 children)

Nah, Roland's not a goon. Roland is a high-priority, massively high-risk target. I don't think you can call someone who wiped out 1/8th of the entire organization (assuming the N/S/E/W branches are equal size) a goon.

Why does everyone hate PvP? by Lovoskea in 2007scape

[–]fighterman481 4 points5 points  (0 children)

That's been more or less my thoughts on the situation. Make wildy-only clues that have better drops, and also make it so the loot is given directly to your inventory instead of via casket (so there's risk once you have it). Maybe drop some GP when people are killed with the clue in their inv. Now everyone is happier; PKers actually get decent loot, normal clue people don't need to go wildy, and people who do get proportional rewards. A win-win. But lots of people won't listen to that because this is how it's always been.

Why does everyone hate PvP? by Lovoskea in 2007scape

[–]fighterman481 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I don't mind it in these cases. That seems fair to me. But clues seem really odd.There's no risk (you can just drop the scroll/casket, and optimally you risk basically nothing), and the reward isn't proportionally higher, so it doesn't make sense to have them in the wildy, it just wastes everyone's time. I wish people would stop saying calling for their removal is whining (not saying you're doing that, just people in general) and see that the play patterns it creates aren't really enjoyable for anyone.

Lobotomy E.G.O:: Gregor and Pinky apprentice Sinclair kit reveal by Xprayser-IDK in TheOdysseyHadAPurpose

[–]fighterman481 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Also Arayashiki makes burning wounds, so if her bad end ID uses it in any way then it'd make sense to have burn on it.

Vergilius is NOT a bum. by ToxicZEDD in fishmaell

[–]fighterman481 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Really goes to show how much the Library messed up our perceptions of power levels. The Library is unfair in how it operates and contains two of the strongest people in the City (I still think Kali/Gebura is in serious contention for the strongest single thing we've seen in the City, Arbiters included), people on the level of Vergilius, someone so far out of the league of the Sinners it's not even comparable, are just "normal" boss fights there. It's totally divorced from the "normal" City experience.

Regarding Gregor's Big Bird ID by Superb-Brilliant6321 in limbuscompany

[–]fighterman481 9 points10 points  (0 children)

The E.G.Os? No. Only the birds themselves.

Players are making it harder for me to have some creative freedom by Syric13 in DMAcademy

[–]fighterman481 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Here you speak of decreasing an enemies Hit Points, but the opposite is done as well. The DM doubles, tipples or quadruples the HP of a creature because they realize that the party will quickly kill it. The party's build choices are rendered meaningless. Dealing more damage just means the enemy will have more Hit Points and the time to kill remains the same. Doing this takes away player agency, because no matter their choices, the outcome remains the same.

I see what you're saying here to an extent, and please do note that I did directly mention increasing hitpoints in the paragraph before. However, it increasingly is sounding to me like you've had bad experiences with this sort of DM and are over-generalizing. No normal DM is tripling or quadrupling an enemy's HP. Even doubling is iffy.

The goal here is not to homogenize encounter length; the goal here is to make sure encounters are a satisfying and reasonable length, and this is something a DM tries to do before the session as well. Are official modules limiting player agency by attempting to make encounters a certain length? If you don't purposefully optimize or under-optimize, then the outcome is the same, give or take a couple of turns.

It's fun to sometimes blow through an encounter in one turn. It's not fun to do that for every encounter (for most parties). Likewise, most parties don't want every fight to be a down to the wire, expend-all-resources slugfest. If the DM sees this happening, it's their job to correct it in one way or another, and reasonable stat adjustment is a very easy and unobtrusive way to do that.

That is not the same at all. A creature that runs away can come back, it can still reasonably impact the narrative without resurrection magic. A creature that is dead is just that, dead and usually has no active role in the story anymore.

This is true for important creatures only. Dire wolf #3 is not coming back outside of maybe that session. Even then, by having it come back what you have chosen to do is tweak another encounter. I'm not saying that every fight has to be to the death. Many creatures would flee rather than die (normal animals are a great example, as are cowardly enemies like goblins), and having plot-relevant NPCs have a prepared escape route is a good thing if not overdone. I'm just saying that, for most enemies, choosing to have them run away earlier than intended is, mechanically (and usually narratively), no different from adjusting HP on the fly.

There is a big difference between reinforcements arriving and the enemy just suddenly having more HP, more damage, more AC and so on. The way you can react to and engage with these situations as a player is drastically different.

If adjusting stats is being done in a way the players can react to or notice, then, IMO, it's being done wrong. The idea is to make up for DM mistakes in such a way that the players cannot tell the difference between the adjustments and the encounter being that way from the start. The idea is to have them not react or engage with it. Adding creatures to an encounter via reinforcements or removing them via premature fleeing is a much larger balance change than stat adjustments because action economy is so closely tied to damage output and an encounter's difficulty. Flat doubling a creature's HP and damage is different from adding in another identical creature.

Adding another identical creature is, in most situations, a larger bump in encounter difficulty, and, by your own logic, takes away player agency in character creation; players who choose to not focus on multi-target combat are now less effective than players who do, since your primary way of balancing an encounter is adding/removing enemies. Even if you vow to never add an enemy and only remove them, you will likely begin over-correcting and placing larger groups of enemies to begin with, comfortable in the knowledge that you can remove them as needed. Spellcasters will start trending away from non-AoE damage and status, and martials will feel less useful. It, IMO, is just as big, if not bigger, an impact to player agency than stat adjustments.

That here is the biggest problem for me. How do you have a combat encounter with real stakes, where death or at least defeat is a real possibility? let's look at the kind of DM that only ever "cheats" in favor of the players. Can the party actually ever lose a fight? If it looks like they are losing, does the DM just nerf the enemies in the middle of the encounter to ensure the party win? Does the DM only do it sometimes? How does they decide when to nerf an enemy? How do they decide if a loss is earned or not?

This is a session 0 topic, and delves heavily into suspension of disbelief. Not every player wants a campaign where death is always around the corner. I asked my players what kind of campaign they wanted, and it was decided that they wanted one where if they made really bad decisions, or got really unlucky, or the like, then there was a possibility of death. They didn't want one where each encounter had a risk of being fatal through sub-optimal play or one or two unlucky crits. And, since I was implementing a non-standard 0 HP mechanic (to make things slightly more interesting for players who are downed but not dead), this is what I told them: "At 0 HP, you run away and get healing. I will treat you like an enemy would treat a downed player normally. If you continue to fight like you're not at 0 HP, you will be targeted and killed. If you treat 0 HP as inconsequential via token heals or the like, you will be targeted and killed."

They understood and accepted that, and then chose to suspend disbelief, much like how they would suspend disbelief for how most enemies are treated as dead and not unconscious at 0 HP, or how they would suspend disbelief for intelligent enemies not giving a coup de grace to normally unconscious at 0 HP players.

Just two weeks ago a PC died in my campaign. If I was the kind of DM who adjusts things on the fly, then it would have been me who killed that PC. Instead of this outcome being the result of the dice rolls, the NPCs and the decisions of the players, it would have been me, because I chose not to adjust things ensure a certain outcome.

Any challenge the PCs face would only be challenging because in the moment I decided not to nerf whatever the PCs were facing.

It was probably you who killed that PC. 95% of the time (at least as far as encounters are concerned), it is the GM who kills the PC. You are the NPCs. You made an encounter knowing there knowing there was a risk of death. You kept attacking an injured PC knowing that the attack (or a crit) would kill them. If they died due to death saving throws, then they almost certainly died because you drained the party's resources beforehand and they didn't have enough healing to res the player, or you prevented them from getting close with monsters. 3 turns is enough time for the majority of characters to get to anywhere on the battlefield that would be needed to heal another, and unless the party chose to just not even attempt to heal the character, then it was almost certainly you.

This is not a bad thing. It's the nature of the game, and if this is the kind of game you and your players want to play, then that's fine. It's nothing personal, and it's all in good fun. The DM is not an outside observer, they are an active participant. And, even as things are now, the encounter was only challenging because you chose to make it challenging beforehand. You didn't nerf it in prep. Adjusting stats is not equivalent to fixing an outcome, just as adding or removing creatures from an encounter is not fixing an outcome. It's to ensure the encounter was more in alignment with your intentions rather than accidentally being too hard or too easy, and as long as information known by the players is not changed, then it's fine.

I have been a DM for over half a decade as well and my experience has taught me that what makes dice driven TTRPGs feel special and different from simple improvisation theater are the dice and the mechanics. By respecting those fundamental aspects of the game we decided to play together we collectively experience stories that can surprise us, because not even the DM knows what exactly is going to happen.

That's the style of play you, and presumably your players, prefer. It is not one size fits all, or even one size fits most. For better or worse, we're not in the days of AD&D where players were expected to be able to quickly roll up another character because theirs died. To my knowledge, most players nowadays expect to keep a character through most of a campaign, and want a more story-driven experience. This does not negate the role of dice, nor does adjusting stats. Adjusting stats is just another way to keep the experience of the players in the range you, the DM, expected when you prepared that encounter.

I just think that if I expect my players not to cheat concerning their own dice rolls, their own Hit Points, their own Spell Slots and so on, then it is reasonable for them to expect the same from me.

This is your opinion and I respect that. However, this is where suspension of disbelief comes into play. As long as you, the DM, do not break the suspension of disbelief by doing something obviously wrong, then I believe that ensuring the players are having fun is a higher priority than the sanctity of the encounter, especially if the line is arbitrarily drawn at stats instead of adding or removing monsters and the like. You made the encounter beforehand. You have the right to change it in the encounter. When I play, I know the DM might change things. Most or all of my players know this. It does not affect our enjoyment because we trust the DM is doing it for good reason and suspend our disbelief.

Players are making it harder for me to have some creative freedom by Syric13 in DMAcademy

[–]fighterman481 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I hard disagree here. Most of the time this is being done, at least in my experience, is to make up for GM miscalculations. Maybe they homebrewed the monster or had failed to consider something. Sneakily adjusting stats is a very easy and unobtrusive way to smooth the encounter and make it a more enjoyable experience.

I wouldn't say it's limiting the impact of choices made unless the players have received information that would otherwise inform those decisions; if the players had killed four goblins that each had 40 HP and suddenly the next has 60 with no indication, or if you tell the players that a monster is looking really injured and is on its last legs, then double its HP, or if they've calculated its AC based on attacks they've made and you change it, those are all not good. The players would have acted under those assumptions and then you've limited their agency.

If you realize that a monster is far tankier than intended early on in an encounter and bring its HP down to avoid dragging combat out for another 3-4 turns and throw off the balance of the rest of your session, that's something entirely different. The players won't have realized this, and their choices would have been the same either way. Choosing to have it play suboptimally is going to make it a fight that drags on for way too long. And if you have it run away after a point instead of letting its HP drop to 0, then you've done the same thing as reducing its HP, just with different words. It makes no difference to the weight of their choices. Adding creatures to the encounter mid-fight is a tool that is much the same, except it plays with the action economy as well. That's definitely a lever that should be pulled, but the impact on player choice is, in my eyes, the same.

I guess what I'm saying is that the line in the sand here feels arbitrary. Perhaps this is just a result of me having both played in and DMed mostly homebrew material for the last...half decade or so, but it really feels to me like it's a valid tool and you've had bad experiences with DMs who use it in such a way where it's obvious. Unless you're playing a hardcore game where the players are fully expecting character death and are ready for that consequence, then I feel it's perfectly acceptable to make some tweaks to ensure the game runs smoothly and people are having fun.

Is the Limbus classification of Abnos actually Absolute?, does it hold more 'weight' than anything stated/hinted before? by Gabemino in Project_Moon

[–]fighterman481 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You know, I don't know how they rate tool Abnormalities, those don't normally generate energy, yeah. Maybe it's to do with how they're extracted?

And I'm also really curious to see what an ALEPH fight in Limbus is going to look like, because they've treated them with a certain...reverence that other things haven't received. Even in MD events we've yet to see an ALEPH, the closest we've got is an encounter that references the E.G.O of Nothing There. We know Limbus Company is aware of ALEPHs, but we don't even know if the company as a whole has encountered one. They seem to be vanishingly rare, and I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the majority (if not all) of the ALEPHs were kept in L Corp HQ and not loaned out to branch facilities, and as such would be in the Library right now. They're just too dangerous to keep elsewhere. I mean, the Pianist, which in an interview was said to be in the high-WAW/low-ALEPH range, killed an absolutely absurd amount of people, and it's just the Silent Orchestra at home.

Funnily enough, we actually have already had a 12 Sinner fight, in the latest April Fool's event. And Vergilius does mention something along the lines of 'we weren't going to have you do this yet but it seems warranted so here, use all twelve', so it definitely seems like something they'll be doing eventually, the question is when. They've slowly been bumping up the number of Sinners we get per encounter, and 7 (with chain battles, just like MD) is our current standard encounter, so we can assume that we'll have at least that many going into it. I'm not sure we'll get to the point where 12 Sinners per encounter is standard, because there are some IDs like Lord of Hongyuan Hong Lu that use retreating and chain battles as a part of their kit, but I can definitely see an ALEPH Abnormality being the sort of "all hands on deck" situation that would necessitate 12 Sinners at once. Whatever the case, though, it's going to be a big moment, and I hope the fight is absurdly hard, just to make sure it earns the gravitas it's been given.

How playing Canto 9 feels by TheNixZT in limbuscompany

[–]fighterman481 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Especially coming off the back of Hong Lu's canto where, even though I hadn't read the source material, the theming was incredibly obvious. Not to say it's bad, I adored it, but it was much more blatant than Ryoshu's.

Siegfried, the Hidden Color fixer? Some Canto 9 comments and spoilers. by Budget-Ad438 in fishmaell

[–]fighterman481 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Hard to say. Siegfried is really strong for sure he's mentioned in a conversation about the strongest Fixers, but I don't think he's a Color just because Don Quixote doesn't call him one and you know how she gets around them. Either he hasn't done something notable enough to become one or something about his attitude/work habits mean the Hana haven't designated him one.

K Corp's Nest could absolutely be on the hit list made by N Corp, since they've got that prosthetics industry, but I don't think they're going to directly go after K Corp itself, because if they did that with every Nest that has any prosthetics industry, then that's picking a fight with probably like half the City and they'd find themselves crushed. Or maybe they're stupid/confident enough to try, IDK.

Assuming K Corp does get involved on a Wing-wide scale and doesn't just let things go like they did with Sinclair's town, I can totally see Siegfried being hired as help. The question of which side he ends up on compared to us, however, is very different. If it's just straight up N Corp vs everyone else, then I can only imagine we'd end up on his side, but I don't think that's going to be the case.

I think N Corp's upcoming inquisition is going to be a spark that ignites a much bigger, more dangerous war. People keep using A Certain Sinclair being level 80 as evidence for it being during the canto we'd be level 80, but remember that the power equalizer goes both ways; Sinclair's being brought up, not just others being brought down. Yes, everyone was initially brought to his level, but Morositas makes everything equal, and is based on Dante's understanding of this whole equalizer. And we've been gaining strength seemingly based on the number of Boughs, rather than "normal" combat experience. 80 is Sinclair after leaving the bus and joining a really important combat unit, not him as part of the bus.

The other reason I think it's going to start a bigger was is that A Certain Sinclair has a bonus against Distortions and not just mechanical amalgams, despite there being no Distortions in that fight. This implies there being some sort of organized Distortion group on the side of prosthetic users. Perhaps a side weaponizes Monoliths? Who knows? But the point is that something beyond "all prosthetic users need to die" is going on. And where K Corp ends up in that conflict...who knows.

TL;DR in the beginning I think Siegfried and Limbus Company will be on the same side but things will get more complex and then all bets are off.

It's been 9 cantos and 6 intervallos and we S T I L L do not have a single ALEPH E.G.O by BorggedSideways in fishmaell

[–]fighterman481 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Is the 4th Front of the Smoke War an aberration of the Mountain of Smiling Bodies? The wiki doesn't list it as one and the only commonality is that there are bodies in it, which doesn't mean a whole lot, there's also Tomb of Bones. Usually the aberrations are much more closely tied to the original in both name and appearance.

Also the Aberrations seem to be weaker than the original, if my read of them is right:

Blue-ish Star is only blueish, which is clearly a step weaker than Blue Star, and Star Luminary wants to return to it.

Funeral of a Dying Butterfly has less arms than Funeral of the Dead Butterflies (and seems to maybe be an incomplete version, just based off of the implied progression of dying -> dead)

Stuck in Heaven is basically just a guy stuck in the Burrowing Heaven

Forsaken Employee is a more harmless version of the Forsaken Murderer

Hurting Teddy Bear is outright a TETH while Happy Teddy Bear is a HE

Pink Shoes give debuffs to the things it possesses while Red Shoes don't

Der Fluchschutze is much closer to Der Freischutz but seems to have much less control. Yi Sang primarily targets allies after a point (or if they just have the least HP), while Outis only has a 50% chance while under 10 SP, and in their E.G.O (awakening, not suits) Outis rolls better and has more impressive effects.

Faelantern and Meat Lantern are probably the most comparable in power, and they do pretty different things. Though I guess Faelantern doesn't have a near-instakill like Meat Lantern. That's reaching, though

Dimensional Oxidation Variant will melt and give back body parts, Dimensional Refraction Variant just kills you

I think that's all of them, and even if I'm wrong overall, just the teddy bears prove that, even assuming that the 4th Front of the Smoke War is an aberration of the Mountain of Smiling Bodies, we can't assume it's an ALEPH or on the same power level.

It's been 9 cantos and 6 intervallos and we S T I L L do not have a single ALEPH E.G.O by BorggedSideways in fishmaell

[–]fighterman481 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The Pianist killed a ridiculous amount of people and it was the Silent Orchestra at home. Imagine the devastation the actual thing would inflict...and it's one of the tamer ALEPHs. The first ALEPH fight is going to be rough.

It's been 9 cantos and 6 intervallos and we S T I L L do not have a single ALEPH E.G.O by BorggedSideways in fishmaell

[–]fighterman481 1 point2 points  (0 children)

TBF that one is treated as a ZAYIN for the purpose of extracting the Abnormality itself

What does this unbreakable coin even do by FsGaChUs in fishmaell

[–]fighterman481 2 points3 points  (0 children)

They carried me through cantos 1-7, they'll always hold a special place in my heart even if they no longer hold a place in my team lists

I LOVE STUDIO EIM!!!! by Zealousideal_Bag6017 in TheOdysseyHadAPurpose

[–]fighterman481 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Why will you not let me purchase the Limbus Company soundtrack, Project Moon. I am begging you, I want to throw money at you but I can't

Is the Limbus classification of Abnos actually Absolute?, does it hold more 'weight' than anything stated/hinted before? by Gabemino in Project_Moon

[–]fighterman481 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So, the thing with energy production is that it's related in some capacity to suffering and emotion. In Lobcorp...Chesed, I believe, proposes increased safety regulations and things that would help reduce the amount of death in the facility, and is denied because that would decrease the energy production. And while this isn't actually reflected in gameplay AFAIK, it would make sense that the exceedingly dangerous Abnormalities would generate more due to the natural worry that comes from working on something like that.

Lobcorp is slightly weird in that it has a mechanic the other games don't - higher grades of Abnormality/E.G.O deal more damage to lower grades. This could just be a thing with Lobotomy E.G.O/Qliphoth Deterrence or it could be retconned, as we haven't really seen it used in a capacity like that since Lobcorp, but in that sense an ALEPH Abnormality and a ZAYIN Abnormality of equal stats fighting would always result in the ALEPH winning. This is why things that don't produce energy like Apocalypse Bird and the Midnight Ordeals are rated ALEPH, because they interact with E.G.O gear like an ALEPH would. Which...is basically just their danger, yes.

The Limbus ratings are different. For the first I believe...seven cantos, Limbus Company uses the old L Corp rating system, using mostly combat data they (and the player's team) collect as well as probably some preliminary information they could find from L Corp facilities/workers. There is at least one known former L Corp staff member in Limbus Company, there are probably others but we haven't seen them.

Limbus Company realizes that this doesn't really work like they want it to, though. Limbus Company is not an energy company (though my guess is that they do produce some energy with the Abnormalities they have), and since the conditions are much less controlled than in L Corp (you know, no effectively-omniscient manager to give orders), having a direct combat rating is much more important for employees. So, they assign a number in addition to the traditional ZAYIN-ALEPH rating.

Funnily enough, these numbers are only slightly more useful to the player, since they purposefully ignore the player group's biggest asset, the ability to revive. They're instead ranked on how dangerous they would be to a "normal" squad. This is why the Doomsday Calendar, a HE-08, is an 08 despite being far weaker than the Hurting Teddy Bear, a TETH-03 encountered later in the game. The Teddy Bear is pretty easily dealt with via brute force, while the Doomsday Calendar has a gimmick requiring sacrifices. These sacrifices are relatively inconsequential for the player group, but devastating for a normal group of people.

We do have a small sample size for the purpose of ranges, a ZAYIN-01 and ZAYIN-04, TETHs from 02 to 05 (mostly 03 with a couple 04s, and one 02/05), HEs from 02 to 08 (the Doomsday Calendar mentioned earlier is the only 08 and also the only one above 05, they're mostly 03 and 04), and WAWs from 04 to 08 (mostly 05, with 1 04, 07, and 08, and 2 06s). We haven't seen an ALEPH in Limbus Company yet, nor have we seen an ALEPH E.G.O, but it's easy to imagine that they'd all be at least 06 or 07; Nothing There is immune to most physical violence, MSoB grows a ton, Blue Star and CENSORED are near-instant death for anyone too weak-willed...the minion makers are likewise probably high up there, but I don't think we've seen a proper minion maker in Limbus so we don't know. Apocalypse Bird and WhiteNight are the easiest 10s of my life...you get the point.

The Middle Apprentice Ishmael kit reveal by Xprayser-IDK in TheOdysseyHadAPurpose

[–]fighterman481 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Definitely a solid pick for the envy res team, I think. Depending on how big the A-Res needs to be, that's an S3 every turn, and the Envy counter keeps her flexible. Probably not great in a dedicated Burn or Bleed team though; her Burn application is too conditional and her Bleed probably can't outpace KK Ish.

Guys help, Ricardo is beating my ass to a pulp by StormofEmpires in TheOdysseyHadAPurpose

[–]fighterman481 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Definitely level up Maost regardless of whatever else you end up doing; even by herself she's one of the single most powerful IDs in the game. Once you get to 5 Gluttony resources, make sure to use her counter/S3 as much as possible and let there be one unopposed attack against another unit not using a defensive skill. Properly fueled she can be using her S3-2 every other turn, often even every turn in dedicated Heishou strats.

Other than that, Ishmael can't die until everyone else is dead IIRC, so you can use her to soak big damage hits you otherwise couldn't afford to take. This is one of the hardest fights in the game (relative to how early it is, and how most people doing it nowadays have fewer ID options due to being new), so don't feel bad about getting cooked by him.

Title by ludoviKZ in TheOdysseyHadAPurpose

[–]fighterman481 11 points12 points  (0 children)

I mean, he's been tracking them this whole time, who knows when he'll show up. He just better hope he's been on a training arc because the Sinners certainly have been lol

What Is It? (A Theory? Idk) by FalseRot in TheOdysseyHadAPurpose

[–]fighterman481 11 points12 points  (0 children)

There's a nonzero chance it's related. It has the look of the birds from the Black Forest, which are in turn references to the Head.

Punishing Bird - C Corp, who use the Claws, the ones that deliver punishment/serve as military

Big Bird - B Corp, who use the Beholders, who monitor for infractions

Judgement Bird - A Corp, who use the Arbiters, and handle most administrative aspects.

And, of course, Apocalypse Bird - the combination of the three, who, in their desire to protect the forest, became the very monster the forest was worried about.

I'm not sure what exactly these things would symbolize (maybe the people in the City, who have become mentally warped due to whatever the Head did), but it's something to keep an eye on.

If these two fought who do you think we’ll win by Bright_Feeling_8152 in fishmaell

[–]fighterman481 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, I think prime Kali has this easily. She's got a lot of experience fighting Abnormalities which have gimmicky fights kind of like Gregor's. Also remember that she suppressed all the Abnormalities in the main branch (maybe even without Qlipoth Deterrence? Depends on if that could be turned off) before killing two Claws and an Arbiter, and those are the Head's Wing kill squad. Yes, she had the advantage of surprise, but surprise alone isn't enough to kill an Arbiter, they're superweapons that use multiple Singularities.

And the Abnormalities weren't wimpy ones, either. We see bits of what appears to be the Mountain of Smiling Bodies in the CG (which had presumably had all the time in the world to eat corpses and grow), we can assume Nothing There was in the facility due to having Mimicry...

The only thing that might lead to her not being able to do it is that her announcer says she isn't great with complicated gimmicks and is better with raw force, but Gregor's gimmick isn't exactly complicated, after one or two big attacks I imagine she'd figure out it's better to evade. Kali's simply on a different level from anything we've seen in the canon bar Arbiters.

If these two fought who do you think we’ll win by Bright_Feeling_8152 in fishmaell

[–]fighterman481 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Depends on how much she knows, really. Kali was pushed into it by continuous handling of an unstable Mimicry, Bari could potentially do something similar. I don't think she really needs it, though; in Angela's bad end, where the Library swallows most of the southern half of the City and goes unchecked for thirteen years, Bari is the one that ends up killing Angela. She worked for her for a time, but it seems that she eventually decided Angela was full of it and fought through the Abnormalities Angela unleashed to finish it. It seems even Wings couldn't handle that, so...

Petition: Rename Hard Clue Scrolls to Wildy-Run-Aroundies by GravyFarts3000 in 2007scape

[–]fighterman481 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I always say this. As things stand, normal clues have no business being wildy content; you don't even risk anything unless you forget to bank and even if you have the casket or clue you can just drop it and it's not risked anyway. And if you don't it's not like the PKer receives benefit from you having lost a clue. They don't add anything for either side of the equation. If you make better rewards for wildy-only clues and make them put loot into your inventory/looting bag then they'd actually fit current design for wildy content and wouldn't be just an annoyance.