Quote Originally Posted by ItMe View Post
Why does Living Dead even need a drawback?

Holmgang's "downside" is that the duration is short so timing can be tricky.
Hallowed Ground's "downside" is that the cooldown is long so you get less uses.
Superbolide... idk. There's that little gap between being set to 1HP and becoming invulnerable? But that feels more like an oversight than an intended downside.

So, why does Living Dead need some kind of complicated drawback? There are plenty of ways to differentiate it from the other invulns without having to have some kind of risk attached.
Holmgang's duration is 8 seconds now, so there is no duration drawback, really.

Superbolide's actual drawback since, afaik, they fixed that gap, is the fact that unless you're taking lethal damage, then you're potentially dealing your maximum HP in damage to yourself, making it ultimately useless as an invuln in any situation where standard mitigation would have resulted in you living. It's invulnerability at the cost of 99.9% of your HP. Pretty fair, honestly, especially as an, "Oh shiz!" button, but fairly easy to misuse. *fondly remembers healing GNBs during comets on Ruby Weapon Ex* Ahh, nothing like a tank dealing 150k damage to themselves to stop two tics of 54k damage. Silly GNBs.

Living Dead's drawback is entirely for flavor, and quite honestly, it's a pretty bad flavor. It's way too much of a penalty, as it always has been. The devs really really believe in the, "Oh it's just advanced play for good players." line. Oof.