As far as I see it, the whole main point of an aRPG like Grim Dawn is to keep improving your character, build it as strong as possible, keep improving its stats in order to conquer the game challenges more effectively. So it feels unfair to me, when the game takes some of those important stats that you’ve worked hard to build - and which you are being incentivized to build - away from you.
The game actually gives you a resistance cap, and shows you when you reach it.
“Here, look, you’ve maxed out this resistance, it won’t go any higher”.
“Well, thank you game, that means I don’t need to invest in it anymore then”
“Well… oops, actually, here’s -30% to your resistance during anyways already a difficult boss fight”.
It simply feels like the game is cheating you.
And just for clarity - I don’t have an issue with the difficulty. Just the fairness of the mechanic.
Of course you can say that you simply need to overcap your resistances, but then the cap itself becomes pointless and artificial. What do you do - add maximum reduction that exists in the game to the cap and aim for that? It becomes unintuitive.
I know you can make a counter-argument, that players too use skills that lower enemy resistances. But that’s different, since it’s a PvE game. Monsters don’t have a sense of mechanics being fair to them. The goal of the player is to defeat the environment, but it doesn’t work both ways. The environment’s role is to provide a challenge to the player, and it’s not the same thing. It’s supposed to do it in a fair way, that is consistent with the mechanics being presented to you.
That’s why I think that Sunder mechanic was actually a step in the right direction. When it was being introduced, I remember reading that there’s going to be a reduction in number of resistance lowering skills in monsters, which will now use Sunder instead, which increases damage taken. And even though the end result may be kinda the same - mechanically-wise it feels much more fair, since nothing is being taken away from my character.
If it was up to me - I’d introduce maybe more similar mechanics in place of resistance lowering skills.
Just my 2 cents. I’m not saying that this is objectively right. Am I the only one somewhat bothered by this? Nobody else minds?
Don’t reduce the arsenal at monsters’ disposal. They already cannot do many things that player can. Talking about unfair.
Resistance reduction seems more appropriate in monster’s arsenal than player’s. Player is just a human who e.g. mastered fire magic, while a monster can be made of fire, aether, chaos. They should have superior control over their elements, perhaps even be immune to them. It’s in their nature, not just in an item they picked up.
I don’t like prevalence of resistance reduction in Grim dawn in general. It should be limited to 1 or 2 masteries, a few items, same goes for monsters. This mechanic should be a special gimmick, not a checkpoint in every build. If you want to take it away from monsters, then take it from the player too.
when where is this an issue to you?
how frequent does this issue occur? why is it “unfair”
you say the game is supposed to be a portion challenge, in what way is one debuff a fair challenge layer and another is not?
What if it serves a double purpose in terms of “challenge” or mechanic, both the way it’s implemented/functions but also as intent?
Turn it the other way
why is it fair enemies can reduce your speed? dmg? non resist related defences?
Why is resist the issue “specifically”, when all the other lowerings doesn’t get raised as problematic or unfair or non challenge reasonable ?
end result is not the same, at all (which was why the specific debuff was made that way), and because it’s not remotely the same interaction; a lot of players complained and found it unfair and even bad as a debuff; because you can’t “defend” against it
(and some specifically don’t like the “reflex” aspect of the defence against it/having to actively react to it - maybe especially because resist was passive)
idono, on appearance this seems like (weirdly) cherrypicking a non-consequential debuff/mechanic as nitpick. Which isn’t explained very well why the gripe is an actual/real issue gamewise, kinda seems based on misunderstood perception, or perhaps just exacerbated when contrasted with stuff that wasn’t griped over. - maybe i’m reading it wrong?
I won’t say, one way or another, what should occur with rr but there are a few questions (IMHO) that should be kept in mind.
Number of monsters in GD?
How many shred rr % wise?
If it is somewhere south of 5%, how different is it really compared to building a character to handle celestials on a fundamental level?
Do players build all their characters to handle Cala, Ravager, etc?
How do gear affixes/enchants change if your remove the need for overcap? Will everyone just be using health, DA, HPS faction enchants and ignoring everything else (this can kinda be done already with well rolled MI’s)?
I’m just glad rr doesn’t remove res cap like it does in PoE.
I might take this one back. I mean I still think their arsenal should not be reduced, but I mostly had movement mechanics in mind when writing that. Like “Charger” monsters no longer charging, only 2 bosses kiting the player and monsters generally moving slower than player. This sometimes gives me an impression they’re helpless until I give them opportunity to attack, so I wouldn’t limit their options.
Monsters cannot react to attacks the way players can.
A monster dealing damage matters a lot more than a player dealing damage; the former is not guaranteed, the latter is. So when a monster does deal damage to a player, it has to count.
No it doesn’t? The cap exists as a set maximum of damage reduction at all times. Monster RR does not have 100% uptime, even assuming you facetank everything. And because damage types vary, one monster reducing your Vitality Resistance does not do anything for the monsters dealing Poison Damage.