Tenacity (Rerolling Saving Throws)

[Coolguy McMagic]

All of these are 'ilegal', I'm afraid. Make sure all items are actually possible to be made (in the current enchanting system, if it's not obvious).
EDIT: Actually they are probably legal. I didnt know rings of hiding are deflated in value.
I will add however that I thought it kinda goes without saying that cot and sorc are exceptions here. When cha is your primary stat... also sorc is a mage. And those are rock bottom in play rates too.
I also refuse to count good hope unless it's from spellbook. It's just too short. No one is actually spamming it every 5 min while living their life. If it's in combat it becomes a matter of action time.
Some of these builds still get quite there or just about.

I did make a legitimate mistake with some (but not all) of the boots. Note that most of these builds could easily get more saves, too. The Paladin Cav build could be replaced with Paladin Bard, which easily adds another +3 to all saves. The Liberator build spends quite a few slots on intimidate, which could also be spent on saves. And that doesn't even go into the possibility of picking save feats, which none of theses builds do. I also did not include any enchantments from weapons, which could add another +1 unisaves to if you wanted (maybe a consideration if you don't use the shield slot). I'd also like to note that this particular sorc build goes for CON mainly. The saves would be even more outrageous if it went all in on CHA.

The point is, these saves are all very high. Even if Good Hope is a step too far (I don't think it necessarily is, as it lasts 7 minutes and costs only half a round to use but I will cede that you won't have it prepared in every situation), the lowest save out of every build is like... 37? That's enough to only fail a DC 39, which is the standard maximum DC for someone ending with 38 in their main casting stat, on a 1. And that is for level 9 spells only - lower level spells will have less DCs. And this is with the CURRENT system. It will - for the most part - only get easier to gear saves after the rework.

[Rei_Jin]

You have to remember as well that the new system will require runes for folk to make the strongest items (unless they get lucky and find a unicorn item with a powerful rune and desired base properties).

And, whilst getting runes on 9-11 slots of gear is doable for some, others on the server sort of look on and go “you guys are using runes?”

The drop rate for MW Rune components is low, and whilst pirate chests do help with MW Rune availability, they’re still not selling cheaply.

My honest expectation is that at least half of the characters on Arelith who hit level cap will either have minimal runed gear or maybe some T1 or T2 runes on things, perhaps the odd T3 piece that they got lucky with or saved up for.

The rest of the player base MAY work for T3 in every available slot, but unless they’ve stocked up for the future they’ll be competing with others to get them.

And MW Woven/Bejewelled runes are already selling for, what? Last time I checked it was 600-800k each.

Considering that it’s a million gold for max benefit when rolling, that cost is really out of reach for a decent portion of players.

Top runed gear is, simply put, not going to be the norm.

[But Will It Blend]

Stuff said

Things

So. You asked somebody to prove it. And I've shown you how it's done. If you think people don't stack spellcraft/discipline and claim to be some 'PVP master' then I don't think you've been paying attention. I gave an actual conservative estimate. And this is assuming they don't have immunities.

Also the Fighter/Loremaster 26/4 gets incredible saves and can punch through premonition because it gets +6 and has a 53 AB self buffed. It still hits 56 AC outside of IE and it's fairly common to do while getting 9th level strolls. The WM variant doesn't punch through premo but instead is a WM that crits for absurd amounts.

Neither of these builds are hard to make if you can do math. And yes they both do exist and are quite absurd.

[Ork]

Fighter26/LM4 absurd? Have you tried Harbinger? We get a lot of opinions on here, but deep fighter being what is absurd gave me a sincere chuckle.

[The Vandals of Rome]

im firmly against the proposed save changes

i don't think saves are as much of a problem as it's popular for spread sheet denizens to claim

i play dc casters and i kill people with dcs sometimes, no problem

sometimes i don't, because they counterplayed well, or i just got unlucky

but i never looked at their saves and thought "wow they could not have failed anything i did"

also importantly for me

i think the proposed changes gut the identity of dnd too deeply

it might not seem like a big deal for those of us that have digested the 1000 deviations from classic dnd the server has made but i am finding it harder and harder to introduce this server to new players

making spells more like mmo modifiers is both hard for a new player to grasp and makes roleplaying about magic that much lamer, frankly

like can you imagine explaining how finger of death doesn't actually sever body from soul, it just hurts them to some degree?

it loses something, you know?

i'm not convinced a sweatier play environment is worth putting dnd's magic on the altar for

it's something roleplayed about, not just a set of numbers to achieve your next pvp w

-

anyway

numbers are useful but in my experience the people who only experience spreadsheets or pvp in the game very occasionally have wildly incorrect estimates of what is threatening and when

you gotta contextualise your numbers with the environment and the action economy

nearly every build has a weak save that even with fairly optimised gear they will fail 35-40% of the time

weaponmasters generally have a base will save of 10

this means even with all the unisave and spellcraft save bonuses in the world, they can only reach 30 because of the cap to save bonus

realistically, that's 29 because they have 8 wisdom

now they will probably hit an owl's wisdom wand and get

31

save dcs top out at 39-42

and this is under like

the sweatiest conditions for wms

could the wm take epic will and luck of heroes and whatever else?

theoretically, yes, but they'd be worse at everything else and get murdered by melees that focused on ac and ab

what about div builds? you'll find they can't readily achieve the save bonus cap while also capping their con, str, cha and getting the relevant skills

the sole exception i know of is div sorc who can achieve fail only on a 1 saves

idk if anyone's finding that much of a problem

you also need to contextualise what damage potential means

if you have sub 50 ac a melee is probably gonna kill you pretty quick (incidentally so will most of the pumped up mummy dust, conduit and warlock summons)

but at or above 50 you will find they are not hitting you with every swing, or confirming every crit

it all drops off pretty quick

unless we did this save change and added more opportunities for everyone to get flat footed and eat a million damage from any melee

[Babylon System is the Vampire]

One last post, sorry there have been so many I've just been trying to figure out just where I landed on the initial proposition, as can be seen between my first post that was "go for the flag" to my last post which laid out my growing doubts about the idea. I also want to take the time to thank Irongron for suggesting bringing this up to the players before, not after. If nothing else, the civility of this thread was 100% improved over where it would be had people's characters just been affected.

So, my final opinion is, I think there is plenty of room to muck around with dc spells. And I think there may come a point where messing around with durations may be a good thing. But i think that finding the right balance of dc vs saves that everyone is at least comfortable with while still making wizards scary should be the first step, because it's easy to roll back or adjust as needed. Once you spend months working on something, the natural inclination will be to try and adjust around that and be blind to the possibility of the initial project just not working and needing to be scrapped, and I worry that that bi product of human nature will lead to years of arelith being in a bad place.

[AstralUniverse]

I did make a legitimate mistake with some (but not all) of the boots. Note that most of these builds could easily get more saves, too. The Paladin Cav build could be replaced with Paladin Bard, which easily adds another +3 to all saves. The Liberator build spends quite a few slots on intimidate, which could also be spent on saves. And that doesn't even go into the possibility of picking save feats, which none of theses builds do. I also did not include any enchantments from weapons, which could add another +1 unisaves to if you wanted (maybe a consideration if you don't use the shield slot). I'd also like to note that this particular sorc build goes for CON mainly. The saves would be even more outrageous if it went all in on CHA.

The point is, these saves are all very high. Even if Good Hope is a step too far (I don't think it necessarily is, as it lasts 7 minutes and costs only half a round to use but I will cede that you won't have it prepared in every situation), the lowest save out of every build is like... 37? That's enough to only fail a DC 39, which is the standard maximum DC for someone ending with 38 in their main casting stat, on a 1. And that is for level 9 spells only - lower level spells will have less DCs. And this is with the CURRENT system. It will - for the most part - only get easier to gear saves after the rework.

Paladin aside - overpowered class by any measure - that does have good hope on spellbook -
Yeah. I'm willing to call myself convinced that div builds do in fact reach slightly higher saves than none-div. The reason is that while none-div can gear a lot more unisave, they hit a cap and div run out of gear slots before they hit the cap - however something all of these classes have in common is a +4 stat spell. Imagine a fighter had a +4 stat spell and that there isnt +20 save cap - suddenly div builds get about the same saves as everyone else. So it's not the cha-saves per se, it's the combination of raised cap and greater gear freedom that comes with +4 stat spell.

This is all very nice and I've been at least partially wrong in my estimation but I'm willing to cede that to someone who actually cracked down the numbers and put the effort to show the math.

However it's still a bit anacdotal. Because these builds (with the exepction of spellbook pally) really struggle to not have a low save below 37 if we gear a more realistic discipline score and discount good hope, even with a +4 stat spell. So if we look away from div builds we'll see a lot of characters with around 30 on their lowest save. Maybe 34 with epic will.

Point overall still being - You mages arent really fishing for 1s (expcet against div sorc/cot that no one plays, or spellbook paladin that is known to be very much overpowered).
Cheers.

[Anomandaris]

I did make a legitimate mistake with some (but not all) of the boots. Note that most of these builds could easily get more saves, too. The Paladin Cav build could be replaced with Paladin Bard, which easily adds another +3 to all saves. The Liberator build spends quite a few slots on intimidate, which could also be spent on saves. And that doesn't even go into the possibility of picking save feats, which none of theses builds do. I also did not include any enchantments from weapons, which could add another +1 unisaves to if you wanted (maybe a consideration if you don't use the shield slot). I'd also like to note that this particular sorc build goes for CON mainly. The saves would be even more outrageous if it went all in on CHA.

The point is, these saves are all very high. Even if Good Hope is a step too far (I don't think it necessarily is, as it lasts 7 minutes and costs only half a round to use but I will cede that you won't have it prepared in every situation), the lowest save out of every build is like... 37? That's enough to only fail a DC 39, which is the standard maximum DC for someone ending with 38 in their main casting stat, on a 1. And that is for level 9 spells only - lower level spells will have less DCs. And this is with the CURRENT system. It will - for the most part - only get easier to gear saves after the rework.

Paladin aside - overpowered class by any measure - that does have good hope on spellbook -
Yeah. I'm willing to call myself convinced that div builds do in fact reach slightly higher saves than none-div. The reason is that while none-div can gear a lot more unisave, they hit a cap and div run out of gear slots before they hit the cap - however something all of these classes have in common is a +4 stat spell. Imagine a fighter had a +4 stat spell and that there isnt +20 save cap - suddenly div builds get about the same saves as everyone else. So it's not the cha-saves per se, it's the combination of raised cap and greater gear freedom that comes with +4 stat spell.

This is all very nice and I've been at least partially wrong in my estimation but I'm willing to cede that to someone who actually cracked down the numbers and put the effort to show the math.

However it's still a bit anacdotal. Because these builds (with the exepction of spellbook pally) really struggle to not have a low save below 37 if we gear a more realistic discipline score and discount good hope, even with a +4 stat spell. So if we look away from div builds we'll see a lot of characters with around 30 on their lowest save. Maybe 34 with epic will.

Point overall still being - You mages arent really fishing for 1s (expcet against div sorc/cot that no one plays, or spellbook paladin that is known to be very much overpowered).
Cheers.

Yes, we mages aren't really "fishing for 1s on all three saves, but the probabilities are generally low enough that DC casting is effectively not a viable strategy. It's also not realistic that a mage will be able to throw enough spells to test all three saves repeatedly, let alone at 8-9th circle thus lowering the DCs we're talking about.

Naturally not every build has bullet proof saves on all 3 save profiles to require a 1 to fail DC 40-42 effects. But that's not the point, enough will have at least 1-2 saves in the high +30s or low +40s, with maybe one lower as a weak point, and sometimes no weak point at all. There are of course builds that will have legitimate hard vulnerabilities where they're always going to fail a DC 40 ish save, and must rely on immunities.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean by the +4 stat spell but, but it sounds like you're talking about zoos? A divine rogue for example can just gear +8 on dex, con, and charisma and pop potions for +4 to +12 max. Technically if they want to chug 2x potions they can run +7 on gear and get +5 from a double pot/scroll. Everyone has access to hr long zoos and tri-stat builds are very common, with well established gearing pathways to fit at least a few uni saves on there. And with the new DC system +10 from a masterwork rune gives you +1 uni (6 pts) and +1 x2 to fort/will/reflex (2 pts ea). This means you can get +2 on one piece of gear to 2/3 of your save profiles.

I have a BG/Cav/Fighter that gears Str/Con/Cha and gets +12 on all three rather easily. I have a Veng Pally that does the same. Guess what, they can also gear spellcraftand easily hit another +5-7 saves vs spells from spellcraft and fit several unis too. I have a wizard that does +12 on Dex/Con/Int while it rests at +12 int for spell slots which is even harder because it can't sandbag the casting ability score at +8 then zoo it, I still fit four unis on live without new DC update. My 24/6 Rogue Fighter has 36 fort and 42 Reflex and a 26 will vs. spells sitting at 20 spellcraft because it geared bluff instead. The will is trash but the other two are strong enough and death ward is a thing so I only really need to keep mind blank up except acid spam requiring FOM, but that's not a save issue.

Div builds are absolutely outliers when it comes to saves and often enable 3, instead of 1-2 out of 3 save profiles being largely not contestable. Arguing that somehow Div builds are not contributing to save bloat and other imbalance issues is just not grounded in reality. It's literally why they are picked and what they're designed for by people who obsess over builds and mechanics.

[AstralUniverse]

It's also not realistic that a mage will be able to throw enough spells to test all three saves repeatedly

The advantage of knowing your target is uniform across all classes in the game. It's not exclusive to mages.

aturally not every build has bullet proof saves on all 3 save profiles to require a 1 to fail DC 40-42 effects. But that's not the point

Actually that was my point exactly. Because it means if you play the fight correctly and are skilled enough to read the enemy saves in the combat log during fight, you are not fishing for 1s, except in the couple of rare cases listed. You are actually fishing for 3s, sometimes even 4s and 5s, etc.... On save/losefight spells.

I also refuse to see the game through a lense of fully buffed 1v1s because it doesnt really happen. Mostly one of two scenarios:

• a fight with clear uneven odds. "unprepared wizard having a heated argument with an armed swordsman standing in the wizard's face" being heavily in favor of the melee is the correct outcome.
• it is party pvp, which in this context these spells are really save/lose and disablers are that much more valuable assuming both sides are either warded or unwarded equally. And with this accounted for, I will reiterate that Tenacity rolls every round arent going to change the game all that much and that we should not lower saves (which would impact rolls vs dirty fighting and other mundane things too, unless you cut saves just via spellcraft I guess). If tenacity were to roll every 2 seconds for example, I would be more flexible with my opinion but lowering saves as it's currently advertised is bad baaad idea. simple.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean by the +4 stat spell but, but it sounds like you're talking about zoos?

I am not talking about zoo because zoos arent exclusive to these classes. Talking about class abilities, on top of zoos. The aura of glory and blackguard's bull strength you use on your own characters, yes?

[Irongron]

My greatest concern over this is, once again, how we often view these things through the lens of PvP. I have the impression a lot of casters would resent the change when high saves are already the norm.

Putting that to one side, and assuming this was to only affect PvE, would it change any opinions?

[AstralUniverse]

My greatest concern over this is, once again, how we often view these things through the lens of PvP. I have the impression a lot of casters would resent the change when high saves are already the norm.

Putting that to one side, and assuming this was to only affect PvE, would it change any opinions?

We view it through the lense of pvp because that's the most critical point to observe when it comes to class balance. That's just how it works really. It is where small flactuations have the biggest butterfly effect.

If we put pvp aside entirely and add this mechanic only for pve, does it mean mobs recieve Tenacity as well? Does it mean the DCs on spells from mobs will be higher? (because they are currently far lower than DCs from PCs). It still feels too vague to analyze but I would personally be more than happy to not have my Pray forced in pve whenever I roll 1 against something with DC who's like 10 lower than my save and has minutes of cc duration. Unlike in pvp, in pve the chance to live to roll Tenacity and live is far greater.

[Dancing]

Personally I don’t like the idea of inconsistency between PvP and PvE spell effects.

I like to look at monsters in the world as living (or unliving) things that cast the same spells as a player character. I do believe that these sort of things bleed into rp and undermine the world.

[Coolguy McMagic]

My greatest concern over this is, once again, how we often view these things through the lens of PvP. I have the impression a lot of casters would resent the change when high saves are already the norm.

Putting that to one side, and assuming this was to only affect PvE, would it change any opinions?

Assuming mobs don't get to reroll but PCs do? It would be a huge boon. Rolling a 1 when your short duration immunities run out and getting paralyized for several minutes is not fun. And given the mob density of some places, it's liable to happen to anyone sooner or later, no matter how well prepared they are.

[Darkstorn42]

My greatest concern over this is, once again, how we often view these things through the lens of PvP. I have the impression a lot of casters would resent the change when high saves are already the norm.

Putting that to one side, and assuming this was to only affect PvE, would it change any opinions?

It doesn't change my opinion of being open to try most anything. This could be a good way to live test the idea and get more feedback without causing the community explosion that any large scale change is expected to cause.

I'd really like to see save bloat reined-in in a constructive, fun, engaging way.

[Paint]

My greatest concern over this is, once again, how we often view these things through the lens of PvP. I have the impression a lot of casters would resent the change when high saves are already the norm.

Putting that to one side, and assuming this was to only affect PvE, would it change any opinions?

I recently did a dungeon where I lost control of my character for four minutes straight thanks to chain confusions. I lived, because nothing can hit me, but I kind of just had to take a walk. Admittedly, that character had woefully low Willsaves, -and- I knew what I was getting into, and could have avoided it entirely if I timed my clarity potions better, but it was pretty agonizing to watch.

Edit:
Okay fine, it was more like two minutes. Still. STILL.

[-XXX-]

My greatest concern over this is, once again, how we often view these things through the lens of PvP. I have the impression a lot of casters would resent the change when high saves are already the norm.

Putting that to one side, and assuming this was to only affect PvE, would it change any opinions?

I still think it'd have been still a net positive.

To elaborate, we could split the idea into two areas here:

• PvE content offering "tenacity mulligans" to player characters - overall, this'd probably decrease the difficulty of an already rather easy PvE content. At the same time it'd take away frustrating defeats while benefitting mostly players with suboptimal builds & casual approach more.

• PvE content being offered "tenacity mulligans" against player character DC spells - this'd simply represent a new problem to solve, which is rarely a bad thing with regards to PvE. The main downside here would be pushing vancian spellcasters even further into their reliance on summons. Also, having save or die spells that no longer destroy hostile NPCs on a failed save defeats their point entirely*

---

*I can recall an Undeath to Death bug that'd leave undead with 1 hp instead of destroying them on a failed save - it forced the spellcaster to expend further resources for finishing the monsters off & simply goading them through a wall of fire became a much more viable tactic by comparison.

[Irongron]

My greatest concern over this is, once again, how we often view these things through the lens of PvP. I have the impression a lot of casters would resent the change when high saves are already the norm.

Putting that to one side, and assuming this was to only affect PvE, would it change any opinions?

We view it through the lense of pvp because that's the most critical point to observe when it comes to class balance. That's just how it works really. It is where small flactuations have the biggest butterfly effect.

If we put pvp aside entirely and add this mechanic only for pve, does it mean mobs recieve Tenacity as well? Does it mean the DCs on spells from mobs will be higher? (because they are currently far lower than DCs from PCs). It still feels too vague to analyze but I would personally be more than happy to not have my Pray forced in pve whenever I roll 1 against something with DC who's like 10 lower than my save and has minutes of cc duration. Unlike in pvp, in pve the chance to live to roll Tenacity and live is far greater.

You're right; I should have been clearer. Only the PC gets the reroll, not the monsters (most of whom EXPLODE in the first 5 seconds of an encounter anyway).

And opinions differ widely on whether PvE is easy, but it would possibly make failed saves less punishing. I say this as someone that has spent much of their time confused in the Snake Cultists.

I know having differing mechanics for PvP and PvE seems like poor design, but PvE accounts for 99.9% of all combat, but we constantly (understandably) balance for that 0.01%.

[AstralUniverse]

And opinions differ widely on whether PvE is easy, but it would possibly make failed saves less punishing. I say this as someone that has spent much of their time confused in the Snake Cultists.

PCs getting a reroll would probably be a god-send for most players and we'll have easy concensus on that one because there's no caster vs melee paradigm, there's PCs vs NPCs and NPCs can be buffed in the specific dungeons who proove to be too easy after we add tenacity to PCs. I think we've all been CCed in a dungeon after rolling a 1 vs something with laughably low DC > Pray forced > CCed again by rolling 1 again before the dungeon is over > AFK for several minutes or dead. No one likes that right?

I know having differing mechanics for PvP and PvE seems like poor design, but PvE accounts for 99.9% of all combat, but we constantly (understandably) balance for that 0.01%.

Mobs saves (low) and the low ac/hp they have compared to players suggest that we dont really need to give up to Tenacity for mobs. However I'm kind of concerned that this would greatly favor combatants over casters, because combatants get the tenacity and dont care if the mobs have tencaity. In the meanwhile casters will be less efficient in pve (even if not by a huge margine) and they are not frontliners who aggro enemy caster mobs so they dont benefit from their own tenacity as much. So whatever input we have as the current difficulty level for melees and casters would give an output of "harder than before for casters. easier than before for melees". And whether or not that's alright, I'm not sure.

edited for clarity, typos and to cut down in words where I needlessly repeated myself.

[Security_Blanket]

I died just the other day to a well timed enchantment spell, it happens.

And opinions differ widely on whether PvE is easy, but it would possibly make failed saves less punishing. I say this as someone that has spent much of their time confused in the Snake Cultists.

Funny you should mention the Snake Cultists. . . If the aim was just PvE couldn't you just lower the DCs of these spawns? There are definitely some areas that seem wildly overtuned for what level they're set at for writs. I mean, you guys have Shadowmages getting +2 DC to Enchantment, Illusion, and Necromancy spells, couldn't you put in a script that does the opposite for NPCs casting spells from those schools? Then give them a set time limit on top of that so they max at 30 seconds or whatever.

[Irongron]

I died just the other day to a well timed enchantment spell, it happens.

And opinions differ widely on whether PvE is easy, but it would possibly make failed saves less punishing. I say this as someone that has spent much of their time confused in the Snake Cultists.

Funny you should mention the Snake Cultists. . . If the aim was just PvE couldn't you just lower the DCs of these spawns? There are definitely some areas that seem wildly overtuned for what level they're set at for writs. I mean, you guys have Shadowmages getting +2 DC to Enchantment, Illusion, and Necromancy spells, couldn't you put in a script that does the opposite for NPCs casting spells from those schools? Then give them a set time limit on top of that so they max at 30 seconds or whatever.

A lot of such issues with overtuned monsters, especically tthe casters, is that they benefit from the same same feats as PCs, so if a level 10 (troglodyte) necromancer has some foci in the school, they're summoning creatures well above the norm for that dungeon. Aside from going through every creature (which would be a pain) the solution there seems to be to disable all such feat effects on monsters - likely not a bad idea.

[Anomandaris]

I really hope we don’t take more teeth out of PvE it would make the world so much less interesting to explore.

There’s already a wide range of difficulty in PvE content based on your build; there are options from writ going to epic dungeons.

We need to be less afraid of our characters dying IMO and accept that it’s ok if our characters can’t do certain things or struggle.

I for one also think dif mechanics for PvE are not only unnecessary but immersion breaking. Do IC research on your foes, bring the right supplies/help, prepare and think about the encounter. There are rp answers to these problems, we shouldn’t be trying to dev our way out of hard encounters. We don’t need to just blow through content to power level and grind gold (any more than is already the norm)..

[Security_Blanket]

The thing about PvE monsters, in particularly casters is how constant they are. A new one means a whole new fresh casting of dispel, of undead summons, AoEs, and other disabling spells, then throwing the damage into the mix. I wouldn't want to be immune to everything, but I outright avoid many places in favor of higher level, harder places because the casters in that area are just so obnoxious.

[Babylon System is the Vampire]

I say this as someone that has spent much of their time confused in the Snake Cultists.

Comon man, 25 lore, 3 thousand gold, you have three lesser mind blank scrolls that will last you 27 minutes (9 each). A perfectly legit tax on someone who is about get all the gold for himself from the dungeon. The issue with the snake cultists writ is the over tuned sub boss with his dispel trap that also happens to make it impossible to bum rush him.

If you want to improve pve, and I agree that it has issues and is way more important to the game being fun than pvp balance, there are things you can do but making it less dangerous is going in the wrong direction. We need a tool to find like leveled folks, we need ways to find adamantine (the rarest material in game by far currently with treasure chests being the most consistent way to get it) that don't involve a two-hour + time investment, and we need more dungeons that are challenging for a group. And, no, I don't mean just juicing the runic bosses and calling it a day. Twohand does a great job designing dungeons where you can get mobs that flank you if you aren't paying attention, but even those could use a slight power boost to make them harder to solo. I could go on, but those are all a good first step.

The truth is that pve is considered a slog by many because it's not fun. There's no reason to ever slow down and plan your next steps, your group can steamroll everything, making group dungeon fights a sprint. Solo leveling can be fun because its more challenging, but most of us are here for collaborative gameplay, so unless you are like me and would rather a challenge over a group, that's probably boring for you too. But you also can't make it harder to solo without making it easier to group up in a timely fashion, which has been an issue since I started playing almost seven years ago and has only gotten worse as getting to level 30 solo has become easier thanks to writs.

[But Will It Blend]

If this is PVE only? Bring it on. Enough said. I find there to be zero issues with the idea of not being confused for 600 years and bodying my entire party.

[PowerWord Rage]

Is it possible to create a poll?
What needs to be said about Tenacity has probably been addressed in thorough over 5 pages of the topic.

I think, a polling right now will probably reflect better on who like or dislike this system.