Hardness scale for dungeon features

[Marbit]

Propossal:
Add a scale of hardness for dungeon features. Make spells/items that destroy materials to act accordingly.
Currently the hardness of a material is not obvious.

We have something like this:


I suggest something like this:


Also it would be nice if features in the dungeon would have its hardness explicitly stated.

  Code:

A wall of green crystal.

For some reason, some dungeon walls, like this one, have been made of this polished crystal, imbued with arcane energies. They prevent its easy destruction, and make it reflect heat and cold.

  Hardness 3


[Klown]

Nice presentation.

[duvessa]

Your graphics are missing doors, iron, ice, petrified monsters, silver, orange crystal, sapphire, bone, and toenail.

[Tiktacy]

Your graphics are missing doors, iron, ice, petrified monsters, silver, orange crystal, sapphire, bone, and toenail.

I believe most of those special cases are removed in the trunk, I just assumed those would be adjusted accordingly.

[reaver]

I just assumed those would be adjusted accordingly. Also, I believe most of those special cases are removed in the trunk.

What on earth does "adjusted accordingly" mean? Without having those materials on the chart it's impossible to tell.

I like consistency, so yes I support this, particularly if those other materials can be added in.

Along with Duvessa's suggestion, I'd add digging, permarock (Hardness 6? 10? ∞?), and maybe Lugonu's corruption to the data. Yes, there is a lot of complexity with materials. This is why a unified system would be good.

Also, I'd be more mindful of balance here. You've reduced Rock, which is the most common material in the game, from 3 to 1. I haven't used LRD or shatter, so I don't know how big an issue this is, but it's something to note.

[Marbit]

If one adds many materials, levels and special cases the system becomes too complicated and useless.
For special features of the dungeon and succeptible monsters just choose a hardness level that makes a decent fit.
Of course, the hardness level should be in the description of those features/monsters.

[1010011010]

You can always have different materials with the same hardness, something like this:

  Code:

                                       Shatter   LRD   Disintergration
rock, iron grate                           1      1      yes
statue, doors, orange crystal, silver      2      2      yes
green crystal, Ice, sapphire               3      3      no
stone, petrified monsters, bone, toenail   4      4      no
metal, Iron                                 5      5      no


Also, the feature shouldn't be described as "hardness 3" but more like very brittle/ brittle/ hard/ very hard/ extremely hard/indestructible

edit: anything with hardness 1 would be diggable.

[Weeksy]

Would balance be shifted all that much if we kept the current hardness level but made G. Crystal Desintigratable?

[nicolae]

Also, the feature shouldn't be described as "hardness 3" but more like very brittle/ brittle/ hard/ very hard/ extremely hard/indestructible

What about simply comparing its hardness to that of rock or stone? "This material is not as hard as rock/is hard as rock/harder than rock but not as hard as stone/hard as stone/harder than stone/indestructible."

[TwilightPhoenix]

That's seems unnecessarily wordy to achieve the same result.

[Weeksy]

Seems like it would affect game balance (especially when it comes to vaults) the least, while providing a cohesive 'hardness' scale.

[jejorda2]

If we need concise, almost descriptive, but maddeningly vague verbiage:
Statue-Softer than rock
Rock- Softer than crystal
Crystal- Harder than rock
Stone- Harder than crystal
Metal- Harder than stone

Can this apply to enemies as well as walls? Not all statues are affected by disintegration, are they?

[XuaXua]

HEck, can it apply to ARMOUR?

Ring Mail - more mobile, but not as protective as Scale Mail
Scale Mail - more mobile, but not as protective as Chain Mail
Chain Mail - more mobile, but not as protective as Plate Mail
Plate Mail - ... Crystal Plate Mail

[reaver]

Ok, I was the one who suggested making the system take into account digging and a couple other things, but enemies and armour is too far. Maybe it can be expanded to include those elements after it is in the game, but I think the system is around the right size now.

[TwilightPhoenix]

I think they're just trying to Crazy Yiufy the topic. >.>

The verbal scale that 10101011 suggested could work for in-game representation and it wouldn't be as unclear as stealth or MR. You would see that Disintegration would work on rock and it's "hard", so it'd be clear that it'd work on anything else that's hard or brittle. When it fails on "very hard", it'd obviously fail on "extremely hard" and so forth.