Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 9 years ago
I like this ideas.
Original comment by SamuelPl...@gmail.com
on 30 Dec 2010 at 11:27
Of course, also means adjusted price.
But the main idea -- having equally powerful weapons with different
characteristics is there.
There is one more thing. This multiplier should be applied to the damage
modifier as well as weapon damage. Otherwise, it makes no sense, really.
Also, AP 5 means you can move after an attack if you have JoF (-1 AP), while
AP6 + JoF means 2 attacks without the possibility to move. This should be
considered as well.
- AP7+ x 3.0 damage = 1 attack x 3 ~ 3x damage, NO attack+move
(but free to use any amulet!)
- AP6 + JoF x 1.5 damage = 2 attacks x 1.5 ~ 3x damage, NO attack+move
- AP5 + JoF x 1.5 damage = 2 attacks x 1.5 ~ 3x damage, or attack + move
- AP4 + JoF x 1 damage = 3 attacks x 1 ~ 3x damage, or attack + move
- AP3 + JoF x 1 damage = 5 attacks x 1 ~ 5x damage, or 2 attacks + move
IMO it's still the AP4 or AP3 that are best. Unless, of course, you have better
idea than JoF. (inherent crit on axes and hammers could change the picture,
however)
An alternative recommendation:
- have 5-10% crit. threat (as in d20) for all weapons.
- have slow weapons x3 or even x4 crit damage
- may be combined with basic multiplier, e.g. hammers x2 damage, 5% x4 crit
damage whereas most weapons x1 / 5% / x2.
For those who are unfamiliar with crit threat concept:
- make attack roll
- if it is a hit, and a significant one (i.e. the attack roll was 95% or above
AND successful), make another attack roll.
- if the second roll is also a hit, deal critical damage (x2, x3, x4 depending
on weapon)
- if the second roll is a miss, deal normal damage (mostly x1; hammers x2 in
the example above)
Original comment by surrano
on 3 Jan 2011 at 9:29
Thanks for the report, good points. This is something that we should consider
when creating new items. I totally agree that weapons that have higher AP cost
should have some other benefit that makes up for it. Higher DMG or crit chance
are good ideas.
There was another thing I was thinking about when reading the above. Critical
damage could be way overpowered once we start ramping up the amount of dmg
dealt by weapons. It might already be, considering there are +6DMG rings
available. Should we change the critical damage so that it is only applied to
the base damage range? I'm also considering lessning the effeckt on the +6 DMG
rings.
Original comment by oskar.wi...@gmail.com
on 9 Jan 2011 at 8:05
Current critical damage with +DMG rings are indeed not the normal way, but
without it I am not sure I could have completed the Prison Warden quest (I've
60HP). Like damage reduction, +DMG is normally applied as 2nd final damage
calculation and final step is -DR.
Original comment by kims...@gmail.com
on 9 Jan 2011 at 9:16
In d20 games, critical does apply to all scalar modifiers of the damage roll,
and it is balanced there. The differences are
- it is hard to get a +6 damage in d20, though typical mid-level monsters have
far less than 90 hp...
- all creatures gain hp for each level, while here character can gain either hp
or something else
- crit. chance is typically 5-10% in d20, 0-20% here
- in d20, crit applies for scalar modifiers, but not extra dice, e.g. special
attacks, elemental damage, poison, etc. This is irrelevant here, though.
I think it could work; the only problem is that +dmg rings are too cheap.
Maybe +1/+2 should be 1000/1500 gp, and ramp up from this point.
+1 - 1000
+2 - 1500
+3 - 2500
+4 - 4000
+5 - 6500
+6 - 10500
Even then, around 15th or 20th level one can easily buy 2 rings +6.
Another question is, how steeply the monsters will get harder; you should
decide what should be an average difficulty level of a dungeon. For my best
effort, prison is hard but by far not impossible at level 11 and a good place
to collect xp and gold afterwards. So if you meant it to be a challenge (but
not a deadly one) for level 15, you are on right track, without modifications.
Original comment by surrano
on 9 Jan 2011 at 2:41
IMO applying critical damage only to the base damage is a good idea.
Quote: "I'm also considering lessning the effeckt on the +6 DMG rings."
Noooooo! ;-)
Original comment by SamuelPl...@gmail.com
on 13 Jan 2011 at 10:19
So we basically agree that multiplying 2 rings +6 is a bit too steep.
We could go on the way in-between.
Multiply base damage = character level bonus + weapon damage
Do not multiply magic damage = rings
In general for all modifiers: for each particular modifier, it could be
specified whether it is basic, extraordinary, supernatural or magic.
- weapon AC / DAM and armour BC is basic.
- character level / skill benefit is typically basic or extraordinary.
- some monsters have supernatural strength or toughness
- most magic items and spells are magic
Then we can say things like "crit multiplier applies only to basic and
extraordinary modifiers" To keep things fair AND simple, I suspect this is the
farthest we can go.
It makes things more complicated, but we might say that certain crit
multipliers themselves are supernatural (e.g. venomous: 20% x3). These do NOT
multiply any modifiers, only weapon damage. But personally, I do not like this
version ;)
Original comment by surrano
on 17 Jan 2011 at 8:31
As new weapons are created, we should see less of an obvious advantage to
smaller/faster weapons. New heavy AP weapons should cause greater damage in
addition to your base attack damage. As is stands today the swift dagger causes
only your base damage, but the steel sword only causes 3-7 HP more damage. In
my opinion the damage a weapon causes should be a multiple of your base damage.
Let's say your base damage is X:
swift dagger AP = 3, damage = X - 1.5X
steel sword AP = 4, damage = 1.5X - 2X
Hammer AP = 6, damage = 2X - 3X
etc...
Original comment by joeybea...@gmail.com
on 18 Jan 2011 at 7:37
Critical damage should be based on your base weapon damage.
Original comment by sdeva...@gmail.com
on 10 Feb 2011 at 1:52
I don't think that the rings themselves are too expensive (at least not early
game). For my current character, I did the math and the +15% accuracy ring was
a bigger help to me than a +2 damage ring for any enemy with a block chance of
15% or higher. It costs half as much.
I like the idea of x1.5 or x2 damage multipliers, because my buffed base damage
well outweighs the base damage of the weapons, so extra attacks are more
important. However, one should keep in mind how it is extra significant when
pitted against enemies with damage reduction.
Original comment by jch...@email.wm.edu
on 5 Apr 2011 at 4:18
Something to consider -- how do you want the players natural damage to work
with criticals? For instance, I am now done playing with my second character.
For this one, who finished by taking the dagger of the Shadowpriests at level
24, I have simply taken +1 damage every level-up until my natural damage was
20. I'm wearing 2 poilished rings of backstabbing now, and was using
Flagstones Pride for most of my existence. Life went very, very, well for this
character despite the small number of hitpoints, and no natural blocking
ability whatsoever. It's quite pleasant. But is this something you want to
encourage, or something you consider unbalanced? Definitely the first thing I
wanted to do after my first run through the game was to build another
character, and this time not try to balance the levelups. Now, of course, I
want to see how a purely defensive character, all barkskinned up plays.
I think this is rather more fun than playing the same dungeon for weeks on end
looking for legendary items, though I must admit I would dearly love to have
one.
Original comment by 160...@gmail.com
on 30 Nov 2011 at 9:05
ooops, typo, I am a level 34 character who has just taken the dagger of the
Shadow priests, not level 24 as I wrote. Sorry about that. I did spend the
first 21 levelups on +1 damage, though.
Original comment by 160...@gmail.com
on 30 Nov 2011 at 9:30
Original comment by oskar.wi...@gmail.com
on 28 Oct 2012 at 7:38
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
justin.m...@gmail.com
on 30 Dec 2010 at 11:24