[✗] [Amendment] Kani

[Tav 4336]

since we got so many TA Kani holders in the thread can one of yall teach me plz. i'll send 50 dollars via paypal. 

[Customable 304]

Good counter-points, no comment.

[Hiccup392 724]

15 minutes ago, Tav said:

since we got so many TA Kani holders in the thread can one of yall teach me plz. i'll send 50 dollars via paypal. 

Hmu I need new ow skins

[King_Kunuk 3022]

So you bring this up, but I have had it confirmed to me that void magic abjuration doesn't cause anything to Kani moon path since voidal magic abjuration ONLY works on void magic (as abjuration from void specifically says it is unable to effect non void magics).

[PrimnyaQuorum 3999]

3 minutes ago, King_Kunuk said:

So you bring this up, but I have had it confirmed to me that void magic abjuration doesn't cause anything to Kani moon path since voidal magic abjuration ONLY works on void magic (as abjuration from void specifically says it is unable to effect non void magics).

Yes. 
 

Since tfig abjuration specifies that unless specifically stated otherwise it doesn’t effect other magics I didn’t feel a need to restate that it doesn’t work here

[Iulius 206]

1 hour ago, PrimnyaQuorum said:

Necromancers and Naztherak do not use mana in their casting at all. Auric Oil relies on the same principle as Abjuring Strike and it cannot dispel malflame.

As far as I know (and that is because STs ruled like that in the past and I've made sreqs about it to ask), yes, Abjuring Strike can currently disrupt any form of casting, Malflame and Necromantic spells included so long as they're not above T4. While if I hit ANY TYPE OF CASTER with the pulse, I'd make said caster unable to cast for 4 emotes. That includes AZDRAZI, Warlocks and Necromancers

Edited March 9 by Iulius

[King_Kunuk 3022]

Did you know that life force and malus is just mana? The deep state doesn't want you to learn this!

[PrimnyaQuorum 3999]

2 minutes ago, King_Kunuk said:

Did you know that life force and malus is just mana? The deep state doesn't want you to learn this!

abyssmal necromancer.....................

 

40 minutes ago, Iulius said:

As far as I know (and that is because STs ruled like that in the past and I've made sreqs about it to ask), yes, Abjuring Strike can currently disrupt any form of casting, Malflame and Necromantic spells included so long as they're not above T4. While if I hit ANY TYPE OF CASTER with the pulse, I'd make said caster unable to cast for 4 emotes. That includes AZDRAZI, Warlocks and Necromancers

I have dealt w/ stuff recently where i was told because I do not play a mana based creature [despite it otherwise being magical] mana based disruption would not work. I would be confused if this did not carry over to spells but I do not know anymore. 

[Navigator 4260]

Sir... PrimaQuorum has made another amendment, sir. Yes, it has garnered 21 replies in, like, less than a day because it touched on points that the people who only have Kani to gatekeep it don't agree with... yes sir, he actually made good points for once... no, people still don't care...

 

[Chimeraof1999 1187]

Real kani know this is a bad idea.

[I'm not a kani user and I know it's a bad idea]

 

Passive spell ignores already normal debuff? Hmmmm.... Seems like you want to see stuff without being anti'd buster..

[Beardicuss 486]

well that's two controversial rewrites. Will either of them get accepted is the question

[Iulius 206]

1 hour ago, PrimnyaQuorum said:

I have dealt w/ stuff recently where i was told because I do not play a mana based creature [despite it otherwise being magical] mana based disruption would not work. I would be confused if this did not carry over to spells but I do not know anymore. 

I'll put on the premise that I don't know which creature you're playing. But it might also be because to be effective against mana based creatures (example: golems) we'd need to directly attack the stream of mana. 

Now, logically, if the creature is for example an Automaton this wouldn't have any effect because lifeblood is alchemical. But if you throw at me a malflame ball and I use abjuring strike, assuming it's under t5, I can abjure it (STs, if I'm wrong correct me please)

[ScreamingDingo 20568]

I think the direction of these amendments aren’t super great but at the same time you’ve given my character compatibility with this so I have to support it. For my true, selfish reasons.

 

thank you Primnya

[PrimnyaQuorum 3999]

16 minutes ago, Iulius said:

I'll put on the premise that I don't know which creature you're playing. But it might also be because to be effective against mana based creatures (example: golems) we'd need to directly attack the stream of mana. 

Now, logically, if the creature is for example an Automaton this wouldn't have any effect because lifeblood is alchemical. But if you throw at me a malflame ball and I use abjuring strike, assuming it's under t5, I can abjure it (STs, if I'm wrong correct me please)

I play Zar'Akal

 

I personally believe because of the canon energies being a thing, we do need to be specific about what abjures/interacts with what which was my intention. If ST however seem intent to go all is mana then yea I can remove it, I'm just going off the last conversation I had. This change would only remove a oscillit's ability to abjure spells from necromancy/naztherak/azdrazi, and prevent them from using the resonant pulse to stop the casting of azdrazi, necro CAs, and infernal CAs. I think its not a huge issue but equally its nbd if mana is mana

[Sonybut7 530]

11 hours ago, PrimnyaQuorum said:

I play Zar'Akal

 

I personally believe because of the canon energies being a thing, we do need to be specific about what abjures/interacts with what which was my intention. If ST however seem intent to go all is mana then yea I can remove it, I'm just going off the last conversation I had. This change would only remove a oscillit's ability to abjure spells from necromancy/naztherak/azdrazi, and prevent them from using the resonant pulse to stop the casting of azdrazi, necro CAs, and infernal CAs. I think its not a huge issue but equally its nbd if mana is mana

Per Canon Energies lore, Maleus is Corrupted Anima, and Anima is used to "fascilitate the creation of Mana", meaning without "Anima" no Mana. It's why Zar'ei etc can learn Bardmancy etc despite not having any "Anima", because they are the same thing in the end just corrupted. Thus lead to the ultimate same outcome, which is "Mana".

Same is how Inner Flame effectively 'replaces' Mana for an Azdrazi. Which allows them to STILL use Golemancy, which requires Anima. (Making them too a Mana based creature with many extra steps), should also mean the spell bears effect on them.

Only Necromancy is different, because Lifeforce itself is something raw and unrelated to Mana directly. Though they are vaguely connected they're not mutually exclusive. It's more so a "where Anima is more abundant, there is more Lifeforce", but Lifeforce exists without interaction of Anima.

Edited March 10 by Sonybut7