FlyingArrow wrote:
komix wrote:
I don't really understand why nearly all of the presented versions have damage presented as 0. I know that in film he wasn't in best shape, but that doesn't mean that he (it) is so weak. Go play TFU 1.
What's the point of using Sarlacc if he (mostly) would only strike 1 character via special ability??
IMO Sarlacc should have high HP, mid-def mid att and dam
at least at 20. Otherwise, I don't see myself using it at all. He won't ever be a game changer but let's create a DECENT version.
Savage SA is a must, come on
Via this SA he gets boosted by Celeste and Malakii.
The 0 (or at most 10) is because the Sarlacc didn't inflict damages on attacks. It grabbed and pulled and if you fell in you were dead. If you got caught and got away, you were fine. More importantly, though, is that people are shooting for 20s and 30s for a cost, not 50s and 60s. Hence the lower damage output. Being a huge movement hindrance is valuable.
Once again- which Sarlacc are we have in mind ? The one from ROTJ or the one from TFU1? I was thinking about making a generic mix between theese 2. It can hit quite hard with tentacles and if it kills someone (living of course)- it digest him in stomack so it gets back 10 hp back (with save).
I'm personally shooting for 40-55s cost.
UrbanShmi wrote:
It can probably be one or the other. Either the base damage is low (probably 10), and it can have Savage to get boosted by Celeste and Malakili, or else the base damage is higher, and it's just not subject to CEs at all. With Clamp he would already be at 20 damage most of the time (assuming the target fails the save), and then Celeste would put him at 30, and Malakili would make it unavoidable. Depending on the total number of attacks, I could see 30 being okay. 40 or more gets a little crazy. The piece should be playable, but not ridiculous, imo.
EDIT: And, yeah, pretty much what Flying Arrow said.
Let's not go ahead of ourselfes
30 dam-dishout is I guess ok. (And that includes Celeste, Malakili boosts).
In times when most characters have way of getting FP it doesn't make sense to putting all the eggs in one basket- it attacks only throu SA with saves? (In that case it forces player using Sarlacc to use Malakili- so it's cost rises )
FYI in my Sarlacc build doesn't have Clamp, so there you go
No worries about 40 dam
sthlrd2 wrote:
komix wrote:
I don't really understand why nearly all of the presented versions have damage presented as 0. I know that in film he wasn't in best shape, but that doesn't mean that he (it) is so weak. Go play TFU 1.
What's the point of using Sarlacc if he (mostly) would only strike 1 character via special ability??
IMO Sarlacc should have high HP, mid-def mid att and dam
at least at 20. Otherwise, I don't see myself using it at all. He won't ever be a game changer but let's create a DECENT version.
Savage SA is a must, come on
Via this SA he gets boosted by Celeste and Malakii.
Well if your not happy with any of the stats, then post your own. Don't just tell us we have bad stats and are not making good. You should at least give some suggestions.
Acually I did- this maybe shows that You Sir don't read each post in this topic
. Do that and
then criticize me.
sthlrd2 wrote:
Go ahead put savage on him and boost him with Celeste, he won't be optimized. In order for the Sarlac to be optimized is to have a way to force your opponent to him.
I thought that special ability Sunken which was used before was pretty nice. It forced opponents to move towards it(at least within 3), which at this point would make those opponents subject to attacks via melee reach 3. Of course it still needs work on definition, but I really liked where this was going on.
FlyingArrow wrote:
My preference is for a statement "not subject to CEs" instead of Savage, but it's only a slight preference. The reason I prefer it is just that it will take up less room on the card. Savage would be a whole new SA and the definition printed on the card would include the irrelevant movement restriction. "Not subject to CEs" would be tossed onto one of the other new SAs so it would only be a half line. The Empathy/Celeste Morne boost doesn't bother me, though, if people wanted to use Savage and go that route.
Who says that we have to print Savage def on card?? It's not a new ability so we can save up some space here.
FlyingArrow wrote:
Points of disagreement:
Damage output level: High Damage VS Low Damage w/Movement Hindrance
Move adjacent when attacked VS Move adjacent when moving
Savage VS Specific restriction that it's not subject to CEs
Provides Cover VS Does Not
Stealth/Advantageous Cover VS Cannot be attacked outside 3 squares
-bolded my picks.
FlyingArrow good points.