U57 Preview 1: Hit Point Pass

[Thar]

This seems like it leaves actual tanks in the dark. An outright nerf in many cases, especially Barbarians, but Clerics too.

Other melees might see the gap close a little unless they already used a maxed out EDF, in which case the change more likely closer to neutral.

I also think the change to VKF that can (and often does) act as ranged tree is a bit misplaced. I suggest instead making the multiselector Core 4, choosing between the critical improvements to throwing daggers OR critical improvements on melee daggers +20% HP.

Agree my tank loses EDF and doesn't have a tier 5 that compensates. Being that R1 tanks need 8000-10,000 hps in raids so the healers can keep them up, this will impact raiding.

[Thar]

How about some Tank build love? so the boss doesn't swing around and take those extra hps away in 1/2 a swing.

[Deivonte]

Agree my tank loses EDF and doesn't have a tier 5 that compensates. Being that R1 tanks need 8000-10,000 hps in raids so the healers can keep them up, this will impact raiding.

I'm curious, what build do you have that doesn't get the 20% competence bonus from a defensive stance already? I feel that this was a net buff, especially since most tank builds I know take shield feat line and get the double base hit dice HP. I don't understand how it's a nerf and could very much just be my lack of knowledge.

[Infiltraitor]

I don't know if you've ever looked at war soul and warpriest side by side. They are literally identical other than the one ability in tier 5 and one core getting 10% hp. I believe Fvs didn't get the %hp due to easy access from the feat and that would be too strong. If cleric wanted that same hp with the 10% bonus they are forced to go animal domain, giving up other very good defensive or offensive choices. Also heavy armor is a really bad argument, barbs are top tier tanks yet should be played with medium armor for most raid scenarios. Your only decent argument is the 50% threat gen, however 50% is almost nothing compared to ftr and pally getting over 900% just from the class trees.

I'll concede to being wrong about fighters. I'm not afraid to admit that you've certainly seen better fighter tanks than I have, so my opinion of them may be inaccurate.

I don't know if you've ever looked at war soul and warpriest side by side.

I literally cited the 10% hp and threat gen as being the key difference between the two. Thanks for citing the exact same thing back to me and pretending it is anything that wasn't just mentioned BY ME in the very post you are responding to. I get that you being so upset may hinder the conversation, but that isn't my concern. Unless you meant that statement as some kind of negative insinuation or insult. Then sure, I have literally never seen the two enhancement trees. ever. This is my first time seeing either one. Those citation of build features was obviously someone else using my account.

Also heavy armor is a really bad argument, barbs are top tier tanks yet should be played with medium armor for most raid scenarios.

Threat generation, regardless of the amount of it, is a clear indication that the enhancement tree was meant for holding aggro AKA tanking. The design intent was to tank. Combine this with heavy armor as a PnP class feature which also is a clear indication of tanking, along with a number of self-buffing spells which is also a clear indication of tanking, this is all pretty conclusive evidence that TANKING WAS THE DESIGN INTENT by both DDO devs and Pen and Paper devs.

We're having two different conversations.

"You are correct that nobody considers warpriest to be a tank tree, but every indication shows what the devs intended. It just happened that warpriest design was so weak that nobody considered that a possibility."

I've been arguing design intent of both the DDO devs and PnP Wizards of the Coast devs. Warpriest IS a tank tree because the devs intended for it to be a tank tree. It's an incredibly weak tank tree but it is one nonetheless. I'm not sure how to explain that to someone in the middle of a real life barbarian rage, but once the exhaustion wears off, you'll realize that we're having two completely different conversations. The next time we meet on Argo server, I will totally relish reminding you of how you went full autistic on an innocent person.

[Nandos]

Torc,

When you are working on Fighters, can you please replace the Tier 4 enhancement Counterattack from Stalwart Defender with something cool? It is super weak and clumsy to use.
Thanks!

[SpartanKiller13]

Just taking a look at my assassin I currently get a 25% hp bonus from epic defensive fighting.

Instead my hit die goes from 6 to 8 and with twf, itwf, gtwf, ptwf I get 100% bonus to that so it goes to 16. Plus I gain a 20% hp for light armor mastery.

I keep hearing this is a nerf but it seems like my net hp goes up and I no longer need to drop epic defensive fighting to heal others and use res scrolls.

It seems like my hp go up and I lose the major disadvantage of epic defensive fighting. What I am missing that people think this is a nerf and I am thinking it's a buff? I haven't looked at every build so maybe assassins are just making out better than other builds.

Builds that didn't get a good number in their T5 are usually losing out, tanks are (in P1) losing out but otherwise it's a good change and the devs are looking to help fix out some trees.

Thank you - I'll have to math it out. At least on my paladin 18/fighter 2 gains 260 hp @ 32 which gets multiplied by all my other bonuses, but then I lose the 10% bonus from unyielding sentinel. I already don't use EDF because I need to be able to throw quick heals to the healer and other party members so it's not worth the 5% extra bonus.

I am not sure what other mantle I would take with a tank as staying alive is job 1 - so not sure about the whole premise of more ED mantle diversity for tanks. I can see tanky solo builds, etc. benefiting from this.

And yes - tanks not using EDF already are a lot closer; but tanks that rely heavily on EDF - like Barb tanks - got hit a lot harder. My tank alt doesn't use EDF so I'm gaining ~1% HP even with the US loss.

It's a fair point.

I just did the math and my tank gains 64 hp with the change as is.

I am not using epic defensive fighting because I value the ability to heal party members higher, but if I was using epic defensive fighting I would instead being losing 112 hp.

This is for a not-maxed-out but reasonably accomplished tank with total hp around 6k today.

VS a not-maxed-out barb tank like the one I threw up on page 5 losing 1200 HP.

this is incredibly concerning to me that what I consider to be the best public facing Dev in the game that creates the best raids in the game (torc) has no idea what the best players are playing for builds. I really hope that this will be a moment that gets big consideration from the dev team, that maybe they need to play the game that they work on. with the players that they are affecting on the servers that they own! And interact with the players of the game that they are responsible for, even if its in a fully anon way! Actually it would be best if it was in a fully anon way and you got into an endgame guild all on your own, into an endgame guilds discord to their private channels to view the best builds for yourself! and play r10s with good players and reaper raids with good players with builds that maybe you have never thought of.

i am quite glad that after consideration of the people in this thread using real actual math with real actual in game numbers were listened to. Too often the builds we love are nerfed into the ground with no consideration from the players at all! The general consensus for this thread is that EDF is the worst and everyone is glad its going away. Other then that, nobody really wants anything else to change.

Yeah, it seems odd to me that the devs were expecting max HP around 6500 lol. A few looks at screenshots of tanks pushing raid completions will pretty easily show that one out the door. Don't even have to be a Barb to hit that lol.

Agree my tank loses EDF and doesn't have a tier 5 that compensates. Being that R1 tanks need 8000-10,000 hps in raids so the healers can keep them up, this will impact raiding.

R1 tanks needing 8-10k does not match my experience at all, I've seen like 4k tanks do just fine in R1 raids? Maybe depends on the content lol.

[jskinner937]

I'm curious, what build do you have that doesn't get the 20% competence bonus from a defensive stance already? I feel that this was a net buff, especially since most tank builds I know take shield feat line and get the double base hit dice HP. I don't understand how it's a nerf and could very much just be my lack of knowledge.

He is saying he had +20% comp and EDF...now EDF goes away but gets no further buff like other melees do, so it is a net loss. Maybe SD stance should get further buffed to compensate.

[Oliphant]

I skimmed but I saw making 'game more forgiving on new players' and 'no more EDF'. Godspeed.

[Azoyhn]

None of this post is targeted towards either party, this is constructive criticism and should not be removed by a moderator of the forums.

I'll concede to being wrong about fighters. I'm not afraid to admit that you've certainly seen better fighter tanks than I have, so my opinion of them may be inaccurate.

I'm not going to comment any further on this topic. Never forget about the Fighters. I did that and this guy proved me wrong. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbB...8Qg3-pvZd216TA

I literally cited the 10% hp and threat gen as being the key difference between the two. Thanks for citing the exact same thing back to me and pretending it is anything that wasn't just mentioned BY ME in the very post you are responding to. I get that you being so upset may hinder the conversation, but that isn't my concern. Unless you meant that statement as some kind of negative insinuation or insult. Then sure, I have literally never seen the two enhancement trees. ever. This is my first time seeing either one. Those citation of build features was obviously someone else using my account.

I'm not sure where he was the aggressor here. 10% hp and threat generation aren't any key difference, and sure as heck isn't 50% to make the substantial difference. He's not in the wrong here, you are in the wrong here for thinking 10% hp and threat generation are the key differences.

Threat generation, regardless of the amount of it, is a clear indication that the enhancement tree was meant for holding aggro AKA tanking. The design intent was to tank. Combine this with heavy armor as a PnP class feature which also is a clear indication of tanking, along with a number of self-buffing spells which is also a clear indication of tanking, this is all pretty conclusive evidence that TANKING WAS THE DESIGN INTENT by both DDO devs and Pen and Paper devs.

This just isn't it. If I have Vulkoor's Might which is +20% threat generation towards melee damage. Does this mean i'm now a tank that's also a dps based class? no. You're wrong by the fact Threat Generation automatically assumes the position of the player as a tank. Sure, you can make it work-i've seen people do it-but it's not going to be as tanky or dps as a main style would. I'm not sure where Haste would qualify as a self buffing spell for tankiness, when it improves attack speed, but sure-go on, somehow.

We're having two different conversations.

This seems to be one-sided as you're talking to yourself and convincing yourself Warpriest tree is a tanky tree.

I've been arguing design intent of both the DDO devs and PnP Wizards of the Coast devs. Warpriest IS a tank tree because the devs intended for it to be a tank tree. It's an incredibly weak tank tree but it is one nonetheless. I'm not sure how to explain that to someone in the middle of a real life barbarian rage, but once the exhaustion wears off, you'll realize that we're having two completely different conversations. The next time we meet on Argo server, I will totally relish reminding you of how you went full autistic on an innocent person.

You really just called the most sweet hearted, innocent person who's attempting to help a person such as yourself, as an "full autistic?". That is highly inappropriate and unacceptable, especially in today's standard. I don't have the energy to report you for that kind of comment. I don't really want to go into and argue further, but we're also going to pull previous comments from your paragraph and argue those points too. .

P.S Let's not forget the amount of reaper raids this person has tanked as different splits compared to your attempted/runs?

Only 3 classes in DDO get heavy armor proficiency. They are Paladin, Fighter, and Cleric.

This doesn't prove or provide information on anything.

As a design choice, clerics are clearly meant as tanks and favored souls meant as DPS.

Once again, you're wrong here. Favored Souls can be tanks, maybe not in this update because they're basically nullifying the 17/3 split, but don't exclude Favored Souls from tanking. They can both do DPS and tank.

There can’t be tanky healers.

?. I'm not going to even link my cleric, or any other cleric or favored soul on Argonnessen except my cleric can get 550 PRR with 6,5k hp and 1,100 positive spell power.

Healers are back line positions to minimize enemy exposure.

Or, idk, build a 5k hp cleric or favored soul to take a few hits, like healers are supposed to be?

Front line positions are exposed to constant enemy dps. A healer on the front line gains nothing but exposes himself to enemy aoe. In reaper, you then need a back line healer to heal the frontline healer since he can’t heal himself.

:thinking:

Are we okay with one of the only 3 heavy armor classes being unable to fulfill its role in Reaper difficulty?

What?

Warpriests get no effective AC bonuses. No MRR bonuses. The lowest PRR bonuses of any tank class. No healing amp. No dodge.

Uh, possibly because they're not tanks? It's not a tank tree? It gives bonuses to damage through favored weapons, inflame, and even the capstone giving 10% damage to the whole party, and not protection?

Animal domain, 10% sacred, and EDF were the only thing keeping Warpriests able to do the job they were intended to do.

Animal Domain and Aasimar is all you need, the 5% is good enough, but if you really want, you can expend points into that tree, but once again, IT'S NOT A TANK TREE.

IF we want cleric war priest to be able to continue its intended role as a front line tank, you are going to need to add in 75 PRR and 37 MRR just to balance out the 15% hp loss. (Gain back 15% of 500 PRR and 250 MRR to balance out the 15% hp loss)

DPS not Tank, but ok.

We CAN just say F it all and not care about the unintended effect of completely removing cleric war priest from doing its intended role but that’s a major MAJOR design decision that should not occur as an unintended effect.

I think Warpriest is nice. No reason to remove it, it's uh, NOT a TANK TREE?

Anyways, if you want to have a civil discussion, then we can talk about your build and it's flaws, and some improvements because this is all constructive criticism

[Shedrakzo]

-Boosting the Base Hit Die of certain classes:

To keep the delta between a wizard and a barbarian tighter we shift the class dice around a little.

-All Classes with a Hit Die of d4 is increased to D6.

-Bard, Arty and Rogue are increased to D8s

-Ranger increased to D10s

So would this mean that Warlocks are intentionally being left out from the D6 classes being increased to D8s? Warlocks could use some boosts and a base HP increase might be nice.

[garynash7070]

This change hurts uber players more than less uber players because we're losing % hp and gaining base hp, the more uber you are the more base hp you will have so the % loss is more important and the flat gain is less impactful. If you aren't uber, you don't have as much hp to begin with so the % loss doesn't actually lose you as much hp but the flat hp gives you the same amount, which results in a net higher % increase to your hp as a non-uber player than it does as an uber player. This is a nerf to uber players and a buff to less uber players, not the other way around.


Honestly I haven't kept up with Lamannia changes much recently, the last time I paid as much attention as I am now was when they reworked bows. I'll say, though, that when they reworked bows they actually changed an insane number of things based on player feedback, certainly more than 5% of their outline. Obviously when they've put months of work into something they're not going to scrap the entire idea, so the general gist will always stay, but they DID change a massive amount of the stuff they were specifically doing to bows based on feedback and they announced the level cap increase I think nearly 2 years ago now, announcing it would be soon, but based on player feedback they've instead only just released it very recently (they postponed it for more than a year because of feedback).

They listen, they just want to hear rational feedback and ideas rather than angry "why are you murdering the game this is the dumbest idea you've had yet" without actually commenting at all on what specifically is wrong with their proposed idea. Obviously they aren't going to change anything based on feedback that gives no information about what they might change.

Many many people have given them statistically accurate examples of what would happen or how it was truly working with no change.

They change things based off “over performing” reports. Those truly hitting those insane numbers are statistically UBER players for the most parts. I wouldn’t consider myself UBER, but a very good player with very good toons. At one time years ago I might have touched UBER. No time to invest like I have in the past. So being a “good to very good” player that’s played 16+ years I’ve Seen tons of the same old tuning and how they do it.

Losing 400-600 hp on a tank for an Uber player whom normally only runs with UBER to a higher level player IS less of a loss than to say me or those at levels reaching my abilities. I do agree that in some cases HP is gained for non-UBER category. The hp loss to my cleric, along with the nerfs to cleric casters WAS retuned due to UBER builds or “over performing”. For me and those like me that worked hard just like the UBER’s were hit the hardest. Just my opinion.

[Thar]

Class Feat - Cleric Animal Domain hit point bonus reduced to 4 hit points per level and 2 hit points per epic/legendary level

what else is good in animal domain... this was the only reason to consider it.

[Thar]

Builds that didn't get a good number in their T5 are usually losing out, tanks are (in P1) losing out but otherwise it's a good change and the devs are looking to help fix out some trees.



And yes - tanks not using EDF already are a lot closer; but tanks that rely heavily on EDF - like Barb tanks - got hit a lot harder. My tank alt doesn't use EDF so I'm gaining ~1% HP even with the US loss.



VS a not-maxed-out barb tank like the one I threw up on page 5 losing 1200 HP.



Yeah, it seems odd to me that the devs were expecting max HP around 6500 lol. A few looks at screenshots of tanks pushing raid completions will pretty easily show that one out the door. Don't even have to be a Barb to hit that lol.



R1 tanks needing 8-10k does not match my experience at all, I've seen like 4k tanks do just fine in R1 raids? Maybe depends on the content lol.

R1 on old raid yes. R1 on LOB or any newer raid need more HP. The barbarian tanks at 8-10k hp took over as an AC tank at 4k can't survive between heals even with 400 prr as most of the damage isn't by weapons. So AC is useless, bosses will hit you 99% of the time. PRR is mostly useless in the newer raids (ie steleton is does more spell damage). The skelton hp debuffs make any 4k tank a soul stone. LOB debuffs requires 5k min to be reaper worthy. So it seems the direction is to make tanks less useful. I don't have the problem with melee's getting hp as 3k for melee is a hit or 2 in reapers and not enough for healers to react to multiple party members, but a tank with no dps should have double the survivability which in current content is 90% hp, nothing else matters in a raid.

[Thar]

I'm curious, what build do you have that doesn't get the 20% competence bonus from a defensive stance already? I feel that this was a net buff, especially since most tank builds I know take shield feat line and get the double base hit dice HP. I don't understand how it's a nerf and could very much just be my lack of knowledge.

pally, fighter arti AC tank. i can pick up competence in the tree now but it wasn't worth putting the points in it as you'd use EDK instead. so i'll lose the 6 con instead that replaced it.

probably need to rebuild as AC is more and more useless with end game raiding. you don't ever get missed.

[jetster11]

I am not sure if you guys noticed, but Torc actually responded to this thread, stating "this is only preview 1 of 3."

First and foremost, I would like to say that we rarely see responses this quickly if at all these days. As a secondary comment, I think you guys all need to really tighten up with the bad attitude doom and gloom jargon. I don't know if any of you have ever worked in the service industry, but as a bartender, if you guys talked to me the way you talk to these devs, I would short pour you or flat out kick you out because you're probably a bad tipper anyway and I don't tolerate that ****. Have some respect. These are other human beings and they're not making changes just to "ruin your builds."

If you have a criticism, post your anecdotes, your reasons why, and leave it at that. This should be the standard for the forums these days and yet most of you are just disrespectful and childish, throwing tantrums and not even practicing enough patience to see if these things work. Give these devs a grateful community to work for and MAYBE they will work harder to actually appease your concerns instead of just looking at every single response and thinking, holy ****, what a bunch of babies. Refer to Zvdegor's post, where he concisely makes his point, suggests why his point is relevant, and ends his statement. BE LIKE THAT.

Thank you devs for all your hard work. This will take some tweaking, but I think you are on the right track here with removing EDF.

Actually I think most posters have been Quite reasonable in their responses. Only a few have been Hyperbolic with their responses. Most have been quite reasonable stating their expected impacts to their builds and specific classes and often with potential solutions and even some with specific buiids and impacts. There is obviously a lot of things the devs had not considered that these posts are highlighting and that suggests that this type of update should be taken quite slowly and not necessarily shoehorned into the Update 57 timeline. Lets get this one ironed out more completely before introducing. Recently the updates being sent out have been seriously not ready for prime time. Lets get it right this time.

[Emergencies]

I'll concede to being wrong about fighters. I'm not afraid to admit that you've certainly seen better fighter tanks than I have, so my opinion of them may be inaccurate.



I literally cited the 10% hp and threat gen as being the key difference between the two. Thanks for citing the exact same thing back to me and pretending it is anything that wasn't just mentioned BY ME in the very post you are responding to. I get that you being so upset may hinder the conversation, but that isn't my concern. Unless you meant that statement as some kind of negative insinuation or insult. Then sure, I have literally never seen the two enhancement trees. ever. This is my first time seeing either one. Those citation of build features was obviously someone else using my account.



Threat generation, regardless of the amount of it, is a clear indication that the enhancement tree was meant for holding aggro AKA tanking. The design intent was to tank. Combine this with heavy armor as a PnP class feature which also is a clear indication of tanking, along with a number of self-buffing spells which is also a clear indication of tanking, this is all pretty conclusive evidence that TANKING WAS THE DESIGN INTENT by both DDO devs and Pen and Paper devs.

We're having two different conversations.



I've been arguing design intent of both the DDO devs and PnP Wizards of the Coast devs. Warpriest IS a tank tree because the devs intended for it to be a tank tree. It's an incredibly weak tank tree but it is one nonetheless. I'm not sure how to explain that to someone in the middle of a real life barbarian rage, but once the exhaustion wears off, you'll realize that we're having two completely different conversations. The next time we meet on Argo server, I will totally relish reminding you of how you went full autistic on an innocent person.

50% Threat gen and a little more defensives does NOT justify warpriest as a tank tree. That is the only difference between Warpriest and War Soul, which you stated as a melee dps with defensive options. 50% melee threat is not nearly enough to help hold aggro in pugs raids. It doesn't even have any function unless you are doing damage because tanks should be blocking. For regular questing, you can't even pull aggro from the first person that presses intim. Everything either dies too fast or you run high enough reaper to where you don't do enough damage fast enough to pull aggro.

Looking at the enhancement trees, sacred defender enhancements has 1 offensive option and Stalwart Defender has 3 offensive options. There are almost no damage options in either of those trees. Compare that to Warpriest which has 22 enhancements than can increase damage, which is over half of the tree. If you still think it's more of a tank tree than a dps tree I don't what to say.

Keep in mind, you started this discussion because I said Clr/Fvs tanks should be nerfed in my original post. If you splash 3-5 pally or ftr, they are almost in line with pure tanks if not better. They can heal themselves effectively and the entire raid party if they want. You also ignored that I made a 17fvs/3pal that could self heal through Kor-Kaza in R6. That was in U50, and it's easier now at level cap 32. Even for a fully completed toon, maxed out gear and stats (which it wasn't), that is beyond broken. Tank healers are heavily over-performing at the highest level which should be addressed. If you are still trying to make warpriest a tank tree as viable as Sacred Defender or Stalwart, you are just looking to buff your character and not worry about the actual balance of the game.

[elvesunited]

My tally so far ......

---- Winner ----
Characters whose classes got increased hit dice
Epic Melee Characters who couldn't take epic defensive fighting because they needed to cast spells and now gain access to competence hp bonuses.
Epic Ranged characters who now get access to comp hp bonus as their enhancment tree was a distance or melee tree.
Heroic melee ( and some ranged ) characters getting comp hp bonuses at level 12. ( unless I missed the part where the comp hp bonuses from Tier 5 enhancments don't work until epic levels )

---- Loser -----
Favored souls or Clerics in animal domain
Epic Melee Characters whose main enhancement tree fell through the cracks and no longer get a comp hp bonus
Dedicated Tank characters who were maximizing hp bonuses.
Druid wolves who don't get their comp bonus to hp until level 22 when almost every other class get theirs by level 12

[SpartanKiller13]

Class Feat - Cleric Animal Domain hit point bonus reduced to 4 hit points per level and 2 hit points per epic/legendary level

what else is good in animal domain... this was the only reason to consider it.

The Bear dash also the fort bypass is nice, and the AoE Con on-turn isn't bad.

I had a lot of fun on a 14/6 Cleric/Fighter Silvanus build a while ago. The HP was definitely a factor for me, but yeah on tanky toons I'd expect to see more Protection domain etc.

[Emergencies]

R1 on old raid yes. R1 on LOB or any newer raid need more HP. The barbarian tanks at 8-10k hp took over as an AC tank at 4k can't survive between heals even with 400 prr as most of the damage isn't by weapons. So AC is useless, bosses will hit you 99% of the time. PRR is mostly useless in the newer raids (ie steleton is does more spell damage). The skelton hp debuffs make any 4k tank a soul stone. LOB debuffs requires 5k min to be reaper worthy. So it seems the direction is to make tanks less useful. I don't have the problem with melee's getting hp as 3k for melee is a hit or 2 in reapers and not enough for healers to react to multiple party members, but a tank with no dps should have double the survivability which in current content is 90% hp, nothing else matters in a raid.

Raids are a lot more of a tactics check rather than a stat check. For example, I'm sure I could bring in a first life tank with 4-5k into R1 LoB and do just fine. Just wear spell absorb to avoid the HP debuff or just swap tanks more often. Knowing the raid in its entirety is a lot easier than just trying to brute force it with stats. Granted the 2 newest raids Hunt and Skelly are an exception. They are heavily overtuned compared to other R1 raids. However, I can still take a 5-6k hp tank in there and be able to do my job just using the right tactics and movement. Also PRR being useless is very inaccurate. In the skelly raid, managing the dino's physical damage is the scariest part of the raid for the tanks. That also applies to most of the raid bosses in the game. Btw, AC tanks do not get 4k hp in r1 unless they were built for more than just tanking, even for a first lifer. It's not hard to at least hit 5k on a first life.

[Wdh]

T5 - Accelerated Metabolism grants +15% competence bonus to hit points in addition to it's original bonuses.


If only accelerated metabolism gives the HP barbs will be forced to take mediocre health regen instead of damage because it'll now come with the HP thats been ripped away from them. Either both give HP or you force a player to pick an enhancement . accelerated metabolism always needed to be buffed but this isn't the way to do it, you've just made the other one irrelevant instead now. Raging blows needs the HP too, or it needs to be given more damage.