The Tavern

Oh, and one thing I should point out is that the "20 weighted strength == current weapon speed effects" is functionally pretty arbitrary, the constant for what's considered "normal melee-er strength" is easily manipulable, if the perception is that this gives too much of a penalty to low-str users, the "is normal" number can be moved down, or if it's perceived to be too much of an advantage to high-str users, the "is normal" can be moved up.

Currently as-written I have the denominator for the divisor of the weapon skill for weapon speed reduction written as:

10+200/(current weighted strength)

where the 200 is (10*(normal str attribute))
and the 10 in there is 20-(the 10 to the left)

so if we wanted lower the "normal" point to 16 we could do:

10+160/(current weighted str)

or raise it to 22 with:
10+220/(current weighted str)

Or we could make it have 20% less impact with:
12+(8*(normal str attribute))/(current weighted str)

To put the formula in the general form its:

(20*(percentage unimpacted by Str)) + ((20*(percentage impacted by str)*(normal str attribute)) / (current weighted str attribute)

you should listen to this Wahaha guy, he's pretty smart imo

Before an equal and open forum on discussing attributes can truly begin, one needs to list exactly what each attribute does and how they affect combat (offensively and defensively) and their additional applications.

edit: don't type from phone

I think that attributes should not have big effect on item choice. Attributes vary wildly between races and classes, and you have very few points to distribute. Usually by level 15 you want to decide the type of equipment, and you will have only 5 points to choose from. Therefore if the attributes has large effect, it will result in less choice for many many characters because certain items are simply won't be good for them.

The strength requirement for armor is one example. I do not think it creates interesting choices, but it certainly removes a lot. On many character finding an early plate armor may change my plans to develop the char - except that if I need to wait for level 18 to effectively use it, I won't. I think that strength requirement for armor should be simply removed.

Also, item choice and adapting your character to found items are interesting. Choosing stats are not so.

Good idea. It's been removed from trunk already.

With encumbrance, strength is usually already better than int for characters wearing plate or heavier, unless they already have high strength. Up to the point of sharply diminishing returns, strength gets you about the same improvement in spell fail rates as int, along with (small) bonuses to EV, accuracy, and damage. Int only gets you small bonuses to spell hunger and spell power along with the failure reduction.

That said, I do like Siegurt's proposal -- it would make a Ring of Strength an actually exciting item to find sometimes, instead of pretty mediocre.

Well, it was never a 'requirement' and now it's a smooth curve rather than a specific fall-off point.


Saying "it's been removed" leads one to think Strength no longer has an effect on body armour penalty, which isn't true.

In fact it has more of an effect than it ever had previously.

The "requirement" has been removed. It's a semantic argument. Previously you had a "minimum" strength to use a body armor of a particular EV penalty. Now, further increases in strength yield further reductions in encumbrance. Debating this in either direction is not useful.

Technically you *could* wear the armour without sufficient strength, it was just a very bad idea, also it gave you a message letting you know it was a bad idea.

All that being said, I think while having Strength having an ongoing defensive benefit is excellent, I still believe this proposal both makes sense and gives Strength a balanced role in melee combat.