Why stun instead of kill? Your thoughts please

[Mortarion]

About halfway through my first campaign I simply stopped stunning enemies, as alternative actions seemed better to me. If something is annoying surely killing it faster will be more effective, especially if their resistences get boosted when you stun it? The whole philosophy of denying enemies their turn still stands, only you take more hits upfront to decrease the total amount of turns in a single battle (in my experience at least).
And when there was something that I actually did want to stun even just for a single turn (especially bosses), it always seemed to have a near impossible to beat stun resistance.

As an example: The plague docter has a double stun for the backline and seems quite populair on the forums for this reason. But the backline usually has a high speed, meaning that if I beat them to the punch in round 1, they simply shrug it off and can potentially hit me in round 2 with a higher resistence. When you blight them however, you get a proc from round 1 and round 2 dealing 12 damage on the third and fourth row just from 1 attack guarenteed (assuming you have blight trinkets instead of stun trinkets).


While everyone has their own playstyle and mine has gotten me through the game just fine just as yours have gotten you through the game, I am still curious to why players on the forums seem to like stun so much. Could you please explain why you choose it over other actions, with perhaps some anecdotes where it went criminally perfect or terribly wrong?

[Sir Francis]

this game is about enemy turn denial.
killing a high priority target and hereby denying its action is very valuable, ofc it is better than the stun of the hero.
but sometimes there are like 3 attacks, possibly stressful ones, coming your way on any given early turn and you have the option of a) damaging but not concievably killing an enemy before it attacks and b) stunning it, preventing an incoming attack this way.
Option b) is better in this case unless the speed distribution makes it plausible that another hero will take its turn before the enemy in question takes his, thus being able to finish the job and finishing the killl with a two punch combo.

[Gwumpy Fwog]

it also allows to stall for heals when there are less enemies, that 10-20 stress heal and or hp heal can be a life saver in a long dungeon run. its kind of hard to explain its just game sense which you can't really teach... like stunning backline then then using a spd buffer on dps to kill them on 1st or 2nd turn cuz you should go 1st this time etc thus they never get a move.

[SergeTroy]

One of the main reasons I may prefer to stun back line targets is if they are dealing either damage or stress damage that I do *not want to deal with immediately but don't have a real good response for otherwise. A lot of times this is because my heavy damage dealers are focused in spots 1 & 2, or the non-stun damage dealer in my back rank isn't qualified to wipe out those particular backline targets (non-eldritch enemies with an Occultist by example). So, I'll stun them both for a pair of rounds as possible while likewise preparing the battlefield via other debuffs or buffing up the front line to more quickly take them out. My front line then - as quickly as possible - absolutely murders the enemy front line, and drags the back line into kill position.

[What The Sigmar?]

Often can't kill one enemy with one hit. Stunning prevents enemies, particularly the high priority stress/damage dealers, from really hurting your party and allows you to wither down the enemy ranks much more comfortably.

[Mortarion]

@ Sir Francis
Valid point, wounded but still (un)living enemies hitting you does happen a lot more without stun. I suspect my love for damage dealing classes with high speed is kind of hiding that point, allowing me the one two punch combo you mentioned enough times to think stunning is less effective.

Originally posted by legion160:

it also allows to stall for heals when there are less enemies, that 10-20 stress heal and or hp heal can be a life saver in a long dungeon run. its kind of hard to explain its just game sense which you can't really teach... like stunning backline then then using a spd buffer on dps to kill them on 1st or 2nd turn cuz you should go 1st this time etc thus they never get a move.

You just explained it... Personally I prefer to leave their tanky, slow front line for last and stacking DoT, getting the last turn of a fight to do all that extra healing you mentioned as the enemy is waiting to die.
Also, according to other forum posts speed buffs do not change the order from the turn you used the buff, meaning buffing on turn one does nothing for the first turn itself. And if you are going to one shot them on turn one, what does stunning them accomplish?

@Serge Troy
Respect for your playstyle of going right through their frontline!
Kinda curious though, you mention dragging their back line to the front, is that not possible with most of your preffered compositions? Surely you could do that first, if you wanted to.

Originally posted by •҉Rosy:

Often can't kill one enemy with one hit. Stunning prevents enemies, particularly the high priority stress/damage dealers, from really hurting your party and allows you to wither down the enemy ranks much more comfortably.

Not being able to kill them in one hit is what made me stop stunning, you could get that one hit from the person doing the stun, denying them their turns by killing them faster.

[What The Sigmar?]

Originally posted by John:

Originally posted by •҉Rosy:

Not being able to kill them in one hit is what made me stop stunning, you could get that one hit from the person doing the stun, denying them their turns by killing them faster.

That's like saying DoT skills are worthless because they can't kill in one hit.

Sure, you could simplify the game to pure DPS monster slaying, but you'd be missing out on a whole world of utility that is offered by additional mechanics. I'd encourage you to not approach skills with the mindest of "how fast does this kill?" but rather the mindset of "how can I use this to micromanage the enemy formation?"

Think about the brigand pounder fight. Sure, you could dedicate 1 or 2 of your own turns to killing the matchman every round, but that's a lot less effective than simply stunning the matchman AND fusiler for up to 3 rounds in a row with a single plague doctor.

In this example, you solve the primary concern of the matchman while also minimizing damage from the fusiler and maximizing the amount of turns you could spend on the pounder itself.

I would never argue that a stun is always better than pure damage, as there are plenty of times where stunning can be unproductive. However, if you believe stunning is a completely useless mechanic then you're really dumbing down the game to your detriment.

But whatever floats your boat. I won't tell you how to enjoy your purchase.

[Mortarion]

@ Rosy

I think we got kinda off on the wrong foot here, or I am now reading your intentions wrong (both entirely possible when communicating online). It was never my intention to come off as slamming stuns, I just wanted a friendly discussion on it and hear other people's thoughs on it. And you did explain it pretty good, it needs to be said.

Your example of the brigander was very nice, as I did spend many a turn killing the matchman making it a far longer fight then needs be. Handy knowledge for next time...

I now do realize my reasoning doesn't hold quite up when I am using buffs and absolutely adore DoT's. I would change my point to that I find the payoff sometimes lacking compared to other actions. And with Sir Francis' example it does explain why it looks that way when using high speed damage dealers, like I usually do.

As for dumbing down, well. A normative statement.

Thanks again for your explanation!

[What The Sigmar?]

Originally posted by John:

My apologies, I wasn't trying to be a know-it-all either. I just assumed your initial response was being dismissive, which is something I've really come to expect out of most people on the DD forums. So that's my bad.

Glad I could make a decent case for stuns. As I said, they're by no means the bread and butter of the game, but they can be really useful when utilized correctly.

Funny little anecdote (because everything is about me):
My champion level brigand pounder fight was a nightmare. I used no stuns, Vestal-HWM-MAA-Crusader. I ultimately depended on my HWM's 35% crits to kill the matchman every round. Hardest clentching I've had in the game, couldn't use the toilet for a week.

[foxhound438]

I agree with OP here- I use stuns occasionally, but I don't use them often. Boost speed and damage with trinkets and just kill everything, it works a ton better.

[SergeTroy]

Originally posted by John:

@Serge Troy
Respect for your playstyle of going right through their frontline!
Kinda curious though, you mention dragging their back line to the front, is that not possible with most of your preffered compositions? Surely you could do that first, if you wanted to.

I sometimes can, but not always. Pull's via the Occultist or various other classes ability to shuffle enemies just don't seem as routinely reliable (dodge, resistance, etc.), though I keep trying regardless, seeing as how knocking those stress dealers and critting bastidges on the backline remains a priority.

[Sines]

I just load up my Plague Doctors with +Stun Trinkets. With this, I can spend his one action to stun two enemies, gaining a +1 turn advantage (I take three actions while they take two), for two turns in a row. Possibly three. By the time their Stun resistance has mounted to the point where I can't reliably stun the back line anymore, their front line is dead.

Additionally, stuns are common on more tanky builds. Houndmaster, Crusader, and Man At Arms have them, as well as the Vestal. You can trinket these guys out to not do damage, but to heal HP/Stress and protect the team. And that stun will go a lot farther to protecting your team than having them add their mediocre damage to the group.

But even with the Bounty Hunter, who is perfectly good at just killing people, the stun is still trading one of your turns, for one of their turns. In 4v4, this isn't a bad trade much of the time, and if you Trinket your guys properly, you can stun even highly stun resistant targets, getting a big turn advantage.

I think your problem does ultimately lie with your team compositions. Tons of damage to end battles quickly would make stunning a subpar choice. I should give it a try myself.

[grraf]

Stall tactics do quite well when used in the mop up phase of the battle it is the diference between sending a rag crew into the next battle or sending a near intact crew (strees&hp wise) into the fray... further more it aleviates the outcome of a missed 1hit kill u were counting on to finish smth nasty... i usually have at least 1 stun capable hero in party tipically 2, but of them only one has an actual stun trinket on him to guarantee multiple turn stalls on the same target(should i see the need for that) while the other one is a casual stuner used more as an ensurance policy against risky stuff(like needing 2-3 heros ganging up on smth to finish it off and either one of them missing/doing minimum dmg screws u over... its then safer to throw a casual stun on him to alow u 2 turns to safely kill it)... Another advantage of deploying stun is alowing u to go in with less then 2 dps trinkets on every darn hero and exploit things like guard&riposte mechanics/heal mechanics for instance using MAA&HM with anti poison/disease/bleed trinkets in certain areas alowing u to come into the dungeon with less suplies and come out of it not needing stuff like sanitarium investments for sick heroes---> funy aplication for this is crimsom court runs where guard&riposting MAA with disease trinkets allow u to return with no crimsom curse/at most 1-2 disead heroes instead of a full vampire crew...

[PyroPaul]

Simply said - Stun is a better option to deny support actions...
Heals, summons, stress attacks, and movement abilities can be prevented or denied with stun.

for instance - successfully Stunning the Collector before he can perform 'Collect Call'

[wolkenwand]

Stun back row with plague doctor, obliterate front row in single turn, the next turn clean corpse with plague doctor, you will found out that brigand fusilier/bone crossbow/bone courtier lose their ability to do their main attack, they only do weak stab at your heroes.

[Khan, Binary of None]

I find stuns only useful when you need a moment to heal and you can't kill any targets in your turn.