My idea for Living Dead (DRK)

[Shurrikhan]

As long as Living Dead is on a longer recast than Holmgang, it should have less of a penalty to the player and team than does Holmgang. Look at Hallowed vs. Superbollide. Lower recast = penalty. WAR and DRK have it backwards. There's no point coming up with alternative designs that have penalties as long as WAR has a shorter recast.

One more thing that I'd like to see on the longer term - a limit on the number of times that your team collectively can use an invuln skill per fight.

The penalty doesn't have to be an additional effect, though. It can be the duration itself. It would help, ofc, if the devs would realize how much their particular iteration of their penalty (healing requirement) costs effective duration from Living Dead and wastes what would otherwise be healing spared, but from they're almost certainly seeing "Safety Period + 10 seconds' duration" vs. "No safety + only 6 seconds' duration" and finding the penalty and longer recast both appropriate.

Redesigning the penalty so Living Dead can actually exploit its on-paper advantages may therefore be exactly what is needed.

[TabrisOmbrelame]

For my self, I think that the basics mecanics of Living Dead is good. BUT, getting to 100% HP is really HARD on 4-people content (Should never happen, yes, but when you don't have the choice, you have to do it.)

I think, the healing needed must be nerfed, and not be 100% of the life. But something arround 70-75%, This make it really more manageable when you are not a WHM. Benediction is literraly used for Living dead and Superbolide. AStromancer get a really strong heal when you are low HP that can do a massive 70K crit, But still, something like 60-70K is missing when healing Undead. And Scholar, Do I really need to says something about them ? Come on... Their instant heal "shit button" is by far the weakest of them.

Getting down the healing needed for LD seems the better choice, since Benediction can overcome that anyway, but Scholar really have a Hard time with that.

[Lyth]

...

Penalties are supposed to offset advantages. If you have one action that is both weaker than another and has a penalty to boot, then it's going to be less useful in every situation. Most people recognised that Living Dead was weaker than Holmgang in previous expansions, but with the stream of unnecessary buffs to Holmgang, it's pretty blatant.

The least that the devs could do is admit to the obvious.

[Shurrikhan]

Penalties are supposed to offset advantages. If you have one action that is both weaker than another and has a penalty to boot, then it's going to be less useful in every situation. Most people recognized that Living Dead was weaker than Holmgang in previous expansions, but with the stream of unnecessary buffs to Holmgang, it's pretty blatant.

The least that the devs could do is admit to the obvious.

Yes, agreed.

Why quote me, though, to say something unrelated to any point I've made in this thread? Or is the connection made solely by implying that duration is worthless and thus making Living Dead's in-practice duration more equal to its on-paper duration will do nothing for the ability?