The November 2019 Developer Update is now available: https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/103996/
Chapter 14 Teaser:
We have updated our Forum Rules. Please take a moment to read through them: https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/87004/

If Jane can Head-on, then...

laplacelaplace Member Posts: 36

In the entity's realm the devs said that survivors can't fight back, it's like they're in a bad dream or something. Then I thought about how the killers can get stunned by pallets, or how Decisive Strike also stuns the killer, or how Head-on stuns the killer too. Basically these are all survivors finding ways to stun or hurt the killer. That's when it hit me. If Jane Romero, the latina Oprah, can run into a killer and stun them, then why doesn't David, who is a rugby player and an actual fighter, do a tackle or something to the killers? He can no doubt hit harder than Jane, so why doesn't he have a rugby tackle perk? Hell, we have some survivors who seem pretty solid in a fight like Bill, Jeff, or Tapp. Why can't they also be able to stun the killer? How come all these guys don't have that ability but Jane of all people has it? And I'm not talking in gameplay perspective, I'm talking lore wise.

Comments

  • Raven014Raven014 Member Posts: 2,038

    Because a perk like that would be unfun for killers. It's also a gamble too, since Jane is sacrificing an exhaustion perk for the ability to stun killers like that.

  • BossBoss Member, Trusted Posts: 7,086

    I think they don't want them too get too close to being on the Killer's level.

    Jane has to hide in a Locker and use Locker doors & herself to stun the Killer.

    Laurie has to use a piece of whatever (though that's not animated) and use it only in a desperate situation.

    If you put in a Perk for a guy who can use it to tackle the Killer just like that, it'll probably lower the feeling of power a lot as Killer.

  • MikeadatrixMikeadatrix Member Posts: 438

    Balance, simple as that.

    I'd love an alternative End Game Colapse with some F13 style brawling between Survivors and Killers but I sure as hell don't expect everyone to start carrying shivs and heavy sticks into trials simply because it wouldn't be fun for Killers.

  • SteveyTheExEeveeSteveyTheExEevee Member Posts: 82

    So make dead hard still exhaustion and make the stun a sacrifice for the exhaustion, its also a gamble too cause the killer can just hit you at close range.


    It's not unfair for the killer, its just unfair to you, because you think you wont be able to outplay it. Dont mistake "all players" for "just me" next time, thank you.

  • Rizzo90Rizzo90 Member, Mod Posts: 3,047
    edited October 28

    Please keep it civil and discuss about the topic, don't attack one another over a different opinion.

    Also keep your private quarrels for yourself, no need to discuss them on the forum.

  • bubbascalbubbascal Member Posts: 318

    I feel like people have misunderstood OP.

    Y'all are talking about this from a gameplay perspective when @laplace is referring to the lore.

    I feel like Head-On only works because the Killer isn't expecting it. A Killer will be ready to swing with their weapon if a Survivor runs at them. The Killer will be on guard. A Killer has to be caught off-guard in order to get stunned.

  • ShraarShraar Member Posts: 180
    edited October 31

    David would totally do that though, let's be honest. The quote for No MIther is telling a story of when he really shouldn't have assaulted that ref because he knew he'd regret it, but he did it anyway: couldn't be mithered with the consequences. He knows the Entity's games suck, he probably doesn't care if he gets killed, he just wants to fight with a Killer, especially if it saves his friend.

    Honestly, they should rework No Mither completely. Some kind of aggressive dive at the Killer, and THEN you're permanently broken, with no additional benefits.

  • Gato_LocoGato_Loco Member Posts: 12

    David absolutely would do that, but it might only could work on small and most humanly killers like Legion, Ghostface or Amanda (and still they have higher chances to win because they have stabbing weapons)

    On the others killers wouldnt do [BAD WORD], cause the most are bigger and tougher than the survs, so tackle on Trapper or Huntress wouldnt make them anything, it just will make the survs to get hurt by himself and then the killer will beat the [BAD WORD] out of him for being that stupid

  • thrawn3054thrawn3054 Member Posts: 1,158

    I thought it was basically representing her tenacity. Game play wise. Yeah it doesn't make sense really. Of course if you want to go that route. Why would the survivors be unable to fight back? I mean hell, the lockers are full of hatchets when facing huntress.

  • Jacoby2041Jacoby2041 Member Posts: 311

    Lore-wise I think some survivors can have the ability to fight back to some degree because that gives them a lot of hope, and the Entity feeds on hope. Still, their efforts are limited because the Entity also feeds on desperation and misfortune, so if the survivors could fight back too much then it wouldn't get enough of that negative energy and the killers wouldn't be able to make as many sacrifices. The Entity makes killers unkillable for this reason; although they can be slowed down they can never be completely stopped so survivors will always have the dread of a killer coming for them.

    As for why Jane has that ability? I'm not sure, but I think she's the type of person who is just waiting for someone to underestimate her so she can surprise them. Like people think she's hiding in a locker scared but she's actually waiting to burst out of the locker right in the killer's face.

    I think David, while he would love to fight the killers, knows he's outmatched. He is unarmed while the killers have weapons, powers, and the Entity's favor. He still wants to "fight" them, but indirectly, by helping his friends and dodging attacks. His perk No Mither comes from his desire to take on challenges and prove his skill against the killer even when it is a huge risk.

  • SaintDenisSlasherSaintDenisSlasher Member Posts: 154

    I think the killers aren't actually getting hurt just surprised. Pallet being slammed on their head in the middle of a chase, someone busting out of a locker, or a random knife going in their back all are unexpected, but if laurie would take the same knife and stab them in the chest i think they'd be unaffected.

    It would hilarious to see David pounce on a 8 foot tall Leatherface tho lol

  • ShraarShraar Member Posts: 180
    edited November 4

    David's No Mither perks talks about how even though he knew it was a bad idea, he still assaulted that ref like an idiot. His WGLF perk states "Your few friends deserve the best protection". It's clear that David King would directly attack a Killer: He would not care (No Mither) if he was outmatched, he would still sacrifice himself to save a friend (WGLF)

    So why is he forced to run away like a little b when Susie comes at him with a ruler!? They really ought to design fun new perks that allow Survivors to majorly set themselves back in exchange for protecting a friend. With how much fun Head On is, there's clearly a desire to fight back, and flashlights and pallets stuns do NOT count: How many fights have you gotten into where you dropped a pallet on someone or shined a flashlight in their eyes? That's not relatable, that's not satisfying, it's too gamey. Let us tackle the Killer, even if it downs/breaks us, to save an ally getting tunneled or carried to their final hook. I guarantee people would love that perk for the fun-factor alone, and if the setbacks were major enough, the Killer would enjoy it too because it would be like swapping survivors, or making an easy target for the rest of the match if it broke a tackler.

  • Nyaren_ChanNyaren_Chan Member Posts: 84

    I think the Entity enables/allows that because it feeds on the hope of survivors. Maybe they just can't fight back, maybe they can't in such world.

  • spirits_despairspirits_despair Member Posts: 36

    Sound familiar?

  • spirits_despairspirits_despair Member Posts: 36

    They should add a clicker to dbd, it would be fair because they cant see but they have strong hearing.

  • spirits_despairspirits_despair Member Posts: 36

    A clicker from the last of us.

  • spirits_despairspirits_despair Member Posts: 36

    😐️

  • EnderloganYTEnderloganYT Member Posts: 30
  • laplacelaplace Member Posts: 36

    I'm just saying that head on seems to be more of a David perk than a Jane one. Because it makes more sense for a tall muscular guy can ram and stun the killer instead of a thicc latina.

  • sobrat1sobrat1 Member Posts: 28

    they have like baseball bats and machetes... not guns. If the survivors got together, even a group of meekly neas could take down those big killers.

  • RezblazeRezblaze Member Posts: 154

    Again, its spoken like someone who has never been in that situation.

    Nobody WANTS to get stabbed, beaten, or potentially killed. Even if it means knocking a killer on their ass, the chances of you actually killing them is extremely low. The chances of them killing or gravely injuring you, however, is far higher. Not a risk anyone is willing to take.

  • sobrat1sobrat1 Member Posts: 28

    NO, it was spoken by someone in pretty much that exact situation. Fight or flight... some people are fight.

  • C3ToothC3Tooth Member Posts: 247
    edited November 10

    I remember someone suggest a Survivor perk that able to ram Killer to make them stunned, with many downside (have to be on the run, have to be healthy, lead to dying if ram success, cause exhaustion if miss, able to do once per game if success). Which can be used to help the last hook team mate being carried to the hook. I think its a good perk for David that scarify himself for other to live. It would make more sense than No mither & WGLF

Sign In or Register to comment.