Should there be MR-ignoring confusion attacks?

[Rast]

Your tarantella bites the orb of fire! The orb of fire appears confused.

It's just as dumb when it happens to a MR+++++ player.

[PleasingFungus]

Should there be MR-ignoring confusion attacks?

yes

[duvessa]

Should there be MR-ignoring confusion attacks?

no

[KoboldLord]

It is a very odd design choice. MR is a defense roll against status effects. That's what it does; it is status effect resistance. Only there are some status effects that it doesn't help against and there is no particular rhyme or reason for which sources of status effects ignore your status effect resistance stat.

Tarantellas are highly visible examples of this oddity because a character that draws that branch will have to kill dozens or hundreds of them over the course of the branch, but the fact that some sources of status effects arbitrarily ignore status effect resistance means that the player has to systematically memorize every single source of status effects in the game to recognize which category the current threat belongs in.

[Seven Deadly Sins]

Tarantellas are highly visible examples of this oddity because a character that draws that branch will have to kill dozens or hundreds of them over the course of the branch, but the fact that some sources of status effects arbitrarily ignore status effect resistance means that the player has to systematically memorize every single source of status effects in the game to recognize which category the current threat belongs in.

I'm not sure that this is actually the case. There are clearly two separate effects: Magic Resistance is protection against *magic*, and I wouldn't expect it to prevent tarantella confusion or hornet paralysis. Where the status effect is tied to the poison's effect, having the effect be checked by rPois instead of MR is sane enough. It makes sense that the paralysis inflicted by a hornet's poison and the paralysis inflicted by an orc sorceror are two different sources, and one is MR-checked while one is rPois-checked. That said, I don't think tarantella confusion is actually affected by rPois, and it probably should be.

The stranger one is Giant Eyeballs - They clearly have a magical effect, but their effect is both not immediately obvious and not checked by MR.

[kuniqs]

Should there be MR ignoring paralyze? (looking at you panziggurats)

[Aean]

Tarantellas are highly visible examples of this oddity because a character that draws that branch will have to kill dozens or hundreds of them over the course of the branch, but the fact that some sources of status effects arbitrarily ignore status effect resistance means that the player has to systematically memorize every single source of status effects in the game to recognize which category the current threat belongs in.

I'm not sure that this is actually the case. There are clearly two separate effects: Magic Resistance is protection against *magic*, and I wouldn't expect it to prevent tarantella confusion or hornet paralysis. Where the status effect is tied to the poison's effect, having the effect be checked by rPois instead of MR is sane enough. It makes sense that the paralysis inflicted by a hornet's poison and the paralysis inflicted by an orc sorceror are two different sources, and one is MR-checked while one is rPois-checked. That said, I don't think tarantella confusion is actually affected by rPois, and it probably should be.

The stranger one is Giant Eyeballs - They clearly have a magical effect, but their effect is both not immediately obvious and not checked by MR.

Mm, all true, but KoboldLord makes a solid point. There's an inconsistency in which effects get through which resistances, and which special cases a player needs to remember.

Stasis, for example, blocks all sources of paralysis - magical or otherwise. Most sources of paralysis are shut down by significant MR. On the other hand, hornets can paralyze you, but their paralysis can be resisted with rPois...just not MR. Giant eyeballs can paralyze you through levels of MR that'd stop an ancient lich in its tracks, because their gaze isn't magical, and are only blocked by stasis.

In contrast, good MR blocks golden eyeballs, and their confusion, as well as that from more common sources like wands and spells. Tarantella confusion is independent of magic resistance (which blocks other sources of confusion), as well as poison resistance (which blocks spider poison, and hornet paralysis).

Add that to things like Rupert - a berserker - having paralysis and confusion abilities that are susceptible to MR, and berserk that is susceptible to silence. Or Snorg, whose berserk isn't susceptible to silence. Or demonic spellcasting, which is independent of silence.

Basically, I'd say it's debatable if there should be irresistible confusion attacks (or paralysis attacks, etc.). But there are definitely some inconsistencies that might be worth straightening out, so that new players don't have to guess whether a given resistance or counter will work on a particular source of the problem.

Edit: Not to say that some of these are necessarily bad. There are definitely advantages to, say, discriminating between wizard spells, and inherent abilities, or magical vs nonmagical sources of confusion. But consistency could make things easier, and it'd certainly help if even a new player could know at a glance whether they needed MR or rPois or clarity or something else entirely.

[ydeve]

There are clearly two separate effects: Magic Resistance is protection against *magic*, and I wouldn't expect it to prevent tarantella confusion or hornet paralysis.

The argument that flavor makes it clear which resistance is needed really doesn't work. There are a lot of people that expect flavor to be independent from game mechanics. A melee attack that causes confusion is still a melee attack that causes confusion, regardless of whether it's from a "sting" or some "mystical force". How am I to know if rPois affects "stings" instead of the status being dependent solely upon damage dealt? The "mystical force" could be stopped by rN, MR, or again just on whether or not damage is dealt. One person's "good flavor" is another person's "confusing set of arbitrary exceptions that require extra memorization". Consistency in what resistances do would be very nice.

[Siegurt]

I have proposed this before, but i will reiterate it, since it is relevant.

I think status effects should be clearly, and visibly, broken up into effect-type categories, for example, magical effects, physical effects, mental effects and maybe divine effects (?)

I would further make it so that all things that cure or prevent such effects so so as a category, and are documented as such, for example, !curing would "cure all physical and mental statuses" and !cancellation would "remove all magical effects" and clarity would "prevent all hostile mental effects" and MR would "provide a chance of negating a hostile, magical effect"

You can then go on to systematically label paralysis spells as "magical paralysis" and hornets as physical, and tarentellas as mental, if it is all systematic and labeled, and clearly communicated i think we would all be a lot happier.

I think that in such a system we could have mental confusion (tarantellas), magical confusion (the spell) and divine confusion (xom) and it would be clear that magical confusion is resisted by mr, and mental is not, and you would use curing to clear up mental confusion (and clarity to prevent it), and cancelation to clear up magical confusion, and divine confusion you just have to wait out (more power to Xom!) And when an effect hit you the color of the status light could let you know what kind of effect it was...

[dpeg]

Siegurt: Do you think you could come up with a basic framework for such a system?

[CanOfWorms]

ok so what happens if you're simultaneously hit by tarantella confusion and magical confusion in this system

[Laraso]

If we plan on making non-magical status effects resisted by MR, I propose we also change MR to SR, "status resistance", for clarity. There is nothing magical about being bitten by a tarantula or stung by a hornet.

[duvessa]

ok so what happens if you're simultaneously hit by tarantella confusion and magical confusion in this system

You get both statuses.

4 categories is too much though, there should be 1 category

[Siegurt]

Siegurt: Do you think you could come up with a basic framework for such a system?

Pretty easily, maybe 2 to 3 hours tops, but not this evening, i am busy. I could easily get my lazy butt off the couch long enough toss a patch up on mantis by end of the upcoming weekend though.

[Seven Deadly Sins]

There are clearly two separate effects: Magic Resistance is protection against *magic*, and I wouldn't expect it to prevent tarantella confusion or hornet paralysis.

The argument that flavor makes it clear which resistance is needed really doesn't work. There are a lot of people that expect flavor to be independent from game mechanics. A melee attack that causes confusion is still a melee attack that causes confusion, regardless of whether it's from a "sting" or some "mystical force". How am I to know if rPois affects "stings" instead of the status being dependent solely upon damage dealt? The "mystical force" could be stopped by rN, MR, or again just on whether or not damage is dealt. One person's "good flavor" is another person's "confusing set of arbitrary exceptions that require extra memorization". Consistency in what resistances do would be very nice.

The difference here is that it's not flavor, it's actually tied to mechanics. Poisons (which check rPois) can carry effects that are also blocked by rPois. Spells (which check MR) carry effects that are blocked by MR. Branded attacks don't check MR, they check whatever resistance is applicable, and whatever internal chance they have.

The problem is when there are outliers, like Tarantellas (in a poison branch but their attacks are not poison-checked) or Giant Eyeballs (magical effect that mimics another magical effect, but irresistible, while their other Eyeball cousins, golden eyeballs, *do* check MR). Consistency between mechanics is the important part.

[Siegurt]

Siegurt: Do you think you could come up with a basic framework for such a system?

Pretty easily, maybe 2 to 3 hours tops, but not this evening, i am busy. I could easily get my lazy butt off the couch long enough toss a patch up on mantis by end of the upcoming weekend though.

Of course then i take a shower and think about all the additional goodies i would want to add to such a system (hooks for ad hoc resistances etc.) And the feature set of what i had in mind blows up, i will see what i can get done this weekend.