(12-20-2022, 05:44 AM)TheHopscotch Wrote: ok time for the real post
There will doubtless be a spell balance change coming with THE UPDATE™
Optimally you went every build/tree to have its own flavor and nuances which make it attractive to a certain playstyle or roleplay trope as opposed to just comparing spells to one another each and every time. (Apples to oranges.)
While stuns do seem to be the largest offender of crazy one-off builds; the whole point of them is to be a very brief thing which allows you to quickly achieve an otherwise difficult to land spell. (Beams, etc.)
Place water whip behind an intermediate slot and bring a new spell in to replace it.
My main issue with just throwing water whip getting locked behind an intermediate is that it severely hampers the effective utilization of ice and mist, devaluing them substantially, I'd argue.
Whilst I am a mist-ice-armed build, I rely on whip uniquely to either lock the enemy in place briefly punishing them for being out of position, or simply to break up the flow of their attacks and pushing my own in their place.
Essentially, what I'm saying is if you restricted water whip in this fashion, you'd need to bring up ice and mist in such a way to replace that fundamental utility, be this through slows, confusion, blind, etc.
It's not simply changing a single spell, it would functionally change how the entire synergy of the entire family of spells operated.
Naturally, this argument could be made for any sub-tree in which the parent has a utility spell that lacks in its daughter trees.
You then run into the inevitable question of 'What so we place a stun in every daughter tree?' This is where I point at your earlier point, no, that's not nessesary, but what is nessesary is giving the daughter trees in this circumstance new thematic utility. Frostbite could bite harder, etc. Not a proposed change, just an example, as ice has plenty of slowing potential.
Yes this may sound like a 'oh my God don't take away my one stun' complaint, because it literally is, but simultaneously, I think my reasoning here is sound.

