Your armour absorbs the <foo>'s blow

[Hurkyl]

Various effects have special messages to indicate when they made the difference in something (at least I presume that's what they mean): e.g.

  Code:

You momentarily phase out as the <foo>'s attack passes through you.
Your shield prevents you from hitting the <foo>

I suggest you get a similar special message for GDR: if the enemy's damage roll is less than your GDR, such as

  Code:

Your armour absorbs the <foo>'s blow

[johlstei]

I don't think I would ever want to see this message, there's enough spam per turn already. However, if it's added, it should only print when your AC would have failed to protect you if not for GDR. It's less misleading that way.

[Hurkyl]

I don't think I would ever want to see this message, there's enough spam per turn already.

It wouldn't make more spam: it would replace the message

  Code:

The <foo> hits you, but does no damage.

when appropriate.

[Sar]

  Code:

You momentarily phase out as the <foo>'s attack passes through you.

I'm pretty sure that appears every time when you evade enemy blow while having Phase Shift active, regardless of whether that enemy would hit you without PS or not.

[XuaXua]

I pity the foo.

[Hurkyl]

  Code:

You momentarily phase out as the <foo>'s attack passes through you.

I'm pretty sure that appears every time when you evade enemy blow while having Phase Shift active, regardless of whether that enemy would hit you without PS or not.

Just to be sure, I had tested it just before posting: I got a lot of "The adder <adverb> misses you." before I finally saw the message.

[Sar]

Well I am wrong then. Interesting, so it does calculate both chances? Cool.

[Patashu]

Well I am wrong then. Interesting, so it does calculate both chances? Cool.

Yep, like how you only get 'your armour prevents you from hitting the foo' if having the armour unequipped for that particular roll would have let you hit it

[njvack]

I suggest you get a similar special message for GDR: if the enemy's damage roll is less than your GDR, such as

  Code:

Your armour absorbs the <foo>'s blow

Why not make this the message any time a monster hits you for 0 damage? Why would you care whether it's GDR or plain old AC that does it?

[duvessa]

Why would you care whether it's GDR or plain old AC that does it?

you're a CrawlWiki contributor

[Hurkyl]

I suggest you get a similar special message for GDR: if the enemy's damage roll is less than your GDR, such as

  Code:

Your armour absorbs the <foo>'s blow

Why not make this the message any time a monster hits you for 0 damage? Why would you care whether it's GDR or plain old AC that does it?

Why would I care whether it's my normal EV or phase shift that does it?

[Patashu]

The difference is that you can have your EV or your EV + phase shift, but you can't have your AC without your GDR or your GDR without your AC

[Leafsnail]

Can GDR just be removed and replaced with maybe a slight AC buff for heavy armours, it does little other than confuse the hell out of people

[BlackSheep]

The only problem with GDR is how much time is spent pondering its importance.

[PleasingFungus]

Can GDR just be removed and replaced with maybe a slight AC buff for heavy armours, it does little other than confuse the hell out of people

GDR reform (of some kind) is one of the things under consideration for 0.16.

[Hurkyl]

The difference is that you can have your EV or your EV + phase shift, but you can't have your AC without your GDR or your GDR without your AC

Protection and buffs and enchant armour and armour skill and non-melee attacks are things.

  Code:

Your armour absorbs the <foo>'s blow

Why not make this the message any time a monster hits you for 0 damage? Why would you care whether it's GDR or plain old AC that does it?

Because there's a mechanic that does a thing, and this is an easy, unobtrusive way to make its existence known. It's like the "your plate armour prevents you from hitting the <foo>": it doesn't really help you at all to distinguish from any other miss, but it lets you know that there's a mechanic relating your armor to your accuracy.

[Leafsnail]

"Your armour prevents you from hitting" gives you an idea of how bad the accuracy penalty of your armour is, assuming it works how I think it does. The proposed GDR message does not actually tell you anything useful about what GDR is doing. If anything, it would be very misleading:
- at least half of the time it shows up your GDR will have actually had no effect as your AC roll would have negated the attack anyway
- and in most other cases it would only have negated a small amount of damage relative to what your AC roll would have done anyway
So it would do nothing but cause people to massively overvalue GDR, since they'd probably think the negation message amounts to "this whole attack missed due to GDR".

[johlstei]

Getting more "Protection and buffs and enchant armour and armour skill" also means you are more likely to see the GDR message, since your AC will be higher. This seems like it will mislead new players into thinking that GDR is more important than +AC.

[Sandman25]

IMHO "your plate armour prevents you from hitting the <foo>" is useless without "your plate armour decreases damage by N" or at least "your plate armour protects you from harm" (when damage is reduced to 0). Otherwise I am supposed to remove the plate armour immediately after getting the message because the armour does not do anything except prevents me from hitting things, correct?

[Sprucery]

Next: "the <foo> notices you because of your unstealthy plate", "you miscast regeneration because of your plate" etc.

[damiac]

IMHO "your plate armour prevents you from hitting the <foo>" is useless without "your plate armour decreases damage by N" or at least "your plate armour protects you from harm" (when damage is reduced to 0). Otherwise I am supposed to remove the plate armour immediately after getting the message because the armour does not do anything except prevents me from hitting things, correct?

To be fair, it does make your AC number go up a lot. That in turn makes you get more 'the foo's attack does no damage' messages. However, you're correct that you never get any positive message directly credited to your plate armour.

It would be messy to say the least, because what order do you process AC in? If the foo would have done 1 damage if you had 1 less AC, should your helmet get the credit?

The negative messages credited to your armour and/or shield are much more straightforward. Your base attack roll beat their defense roll, but after your armor modifier, your attack roll isn't high enough, so it's your armour's fault.

Stupid crawl, making me spell armor like an englishman...

[Sandman25]

IMHO "your plate armour prevents you from hitting the <foo>" is useless without "your plate armour decreases damage by N" or at least "your plate armour protects you from harm" (when damage is reduced to 0). Otherwise I am supposed to remove the plate armour immediately after getting the message because the armour does not do anything except prevents me from hitting things, correct?

To be fair, it does make your AC number go up a lot. That in turn makes you get more 'the foo's attack does no damage' messages. However, you're correct that you never get any positive message directly credited to your plate armour.

It would be messy to say the least, because what order do you process AC in? If the foo would have done 1 damage if you had 1 less AC, should your helmet get the credit?

The negative messages credited to your armour and/or shield are much more straightforward. Your base attack roll beat their defense roll, but after your armor modifier, your attack roll isn't high enough, so it's your armour's fault.

Stupid crawl, making me spell armor like an englishman...

As far as I remember crawl displays "Your <body armour> prevents you from hitting", "Your shield prevents you from hitting" and even "Your body armour and shield prevent you from hitting". It says nothing about my cloak with -3 slaying (-3 "to hit" in 0.14).