Dis Charger
Posts: 2064
Joined: Wednesday, 9th January 2013, 19:44
Although the central place for design discussion is ##crawl-dev on freenode, some may find it helpful to discuss requests and suggestions here first.
Dis Charger
Posts: 2064
Joined: Wednesday, 9th January 2013, 19:44
Tartarus Sorceror
Posts: 1667
Joined: Saturday, 11th October 2014, 06:12
Location: Brazil. RS, Santa Cruz do Sul.
The Ferret wrote:invocations and evocations both exist
many characters will train one or both of those
Halls Hopper
Posts: 59
Joined: Tuesday, 1st December 2015, 00:19
Mines Malingerer
Posts: 54
Joined: Sunday, 29th November 2015, 17:31
Amnesiac wrote:Why would you use cboe anyway, when you have at least staff of energy, which does only good things and works from 0 evo? But tarantellas will be scary for my mus.
Dungeon Master
Posts: 3160
Joined: Sunday, 5th August 2012, 14:52
Ceann wrote:As for the actual Amulet of Harm I have not really tested it yet, does anyone know if this is an increase to spell damage or is it physical damage only?
Is the damage added on after your spell power check or does it just raise your current spell power by 25% while not surpassing the cap?
Vestibule Violator
Posts: 1508
Joined: Monday, 21st November 2011, 07:40
Dungeon Master
Posts: 3160
Joined: Sunday, 5th August 2012, 14:52
Tomb Titivator
Posts: 885
Joined: Sunday, 28th June 2015, 14:44
Slime Squisher
Posts: 386
Joined: Thursday, 26th March 2015, 01:22
Ziggurat Zagger
Posts: 5382
Joined: Friday, 25th November 2011, 07:36
Lasty wrote:For those who feel the amulet is too weak, how would it have to be changed before you would consider wearing it on at least 1/4th of your characters?
Tartarus Sorceror
Posts: 1667
Joined: Saturday, 11th October 2014, 06:12
Location: Brazil. RS, Santa Cruz do Sul.
Barkeep
Posts: 1788
Joined: Saturday, 29th June 2013, 16:52
Dungeon Master
Posts: 3618
Joined: Thursday, 23rd December 2010, 12:43
Ziggurat Zagger
Posts: 6454
Joined: Tuesday, 30th October 2012, 19:06
Lasty wrote:bcadren wrote:Confusion melee (IE Tarantella) doesn't check MR either.
But it does check AC/EV/SH.
Slime Squisher
Posts: 377
Joined: Thursday, 12th June 2014, 06:56
dpeg wrote:* the harm part could be something else than additional damage (e.g. stat rot etc.)
Siegurt wrote:Lasty wrote:bcadren wrote:Confusion melee (IE Tarantella) doesn't check MR either.
But it does check AC/EV/SH.
I would disagree that ac forms real mitigation of confusion melee, since ac mitigates damage, but confusion can't be mitigated (it is wholly binary, either you took damage and might be confused or you did not) and ac will very rarely reduce your damage to 0 (certainly not often enough to prevent being confuse locked, no matter what your ac is, some damage will usually get through)
If the chance of melee confusion was tied to the amount of damage done, then ac would help, which is a possible solution, but presently it does not.
Ev and sh can be effective ways to mitigate confusion, but sh is reduced to 0 while confused, so if you are relying on sh to avoid the confusion, when one gets through, you are more likely to be re confused.
Tomb Titivator
Posts: 885
Joined: Sunday, 28th June 2015, 14:44
Tomb Titivator
Posts: 885
Joined: Sunday, 28th June 2015, 14:44
Dungeon Master
Posts: 3160
Joined: Sunday, 5th August 2012, 14:52
duvessa wrote:I consider harm an awful design because the only way it makes sense is if the default damage values in crawl are too low. Think of an amulet that does the opposite: all incoming and outgoing damage is reduced by 20%. Is this something that would belong in the game? I really hope your answer is no. But it's the item that you effectively put on when you take off an amulet of harm. See the problem?
duvessa wrote:Also, even if you like the design of harm, not applying it to torment, hp costs, etc. is just plain stupid. How would anyone guess that? If the item is supposed to increase damage then it should increase damage, not increase all damage except for a few exceptions. So what if that allows torment to kill you at 1 hp, that's still exactly the behaviour you would expect and it won't ever make a difference in practice anyway. Sure it won't work on slow poison damage because of rounding, but that's no reason not to apply it to fast poison damage.
duvessa wrote:also this "ripping a way a piece of their spirit or animating force" line is incredibly forced and makes the amulet sound like more than it is, it should really just say "draining them" yw
Vestibule Violator
Posts: 1508
Joined: Monday, 21st November 2011, 07:40
Zot Zealot
Posts: 1031
Joined: Friday, 26th April 2013, 19:52
Location: AZ, USA
Lasty wrote:For those who feel the amulet is too weak, how would it have to be changed before you would consider wearing it on at least 1/4th of your characters?
Vestibule Violator
Posts: 1508
Joined: Monday, 21st November 2011, 07:40
Pandemonium Purger
Posts: 1386
Joined: Sunday, 5th April 2015, 22:37
byrel wrote:Changing it to -HP is completely identical to amplifying damage by %, except that it will slightly strengthen some sources of regen (and effectively amplify poison, etc. currently unaffected by the amulet).
It doesn't really matter whether you have 200 HP and get hit for 1.25*100 (ending at 37.5%, or 75 HP) or 0.8*200=160HP and get hit for 100 (ending at 37.5% or 60HP) if all damage respects it.
Either way, the amulet is scaling the threat from an unlucky 50% HP blow to an unlucky 62.5% HP blow. Same effect on spikyness.
Zot Zealot
Posts: 1031
Joined: Friday, 26th April 2013, 19:52
Location: AZ, USA
Lasty wrote:duvessa wrote:I consider harm an awful design because the only way it makes sense is if the default damage values in crawl are too low. Think of an amulet that does the opposite: all incoming and outgoing damage is reduced by 20%. Is this something that would belong in the game? I really hope your answer is no. But it's the item that you effectively put on when you take off an amulet of harm. See the problem?
I agree that I would not think an amulet that reduced all damage by 20% is a good idea, but I don't agree with the rest of the premise. The reason that 20% damage reduction across the board would be bad is that it overall lowers risk of damage while making fights take longer -- the game gets safer and slower, two aspects that make it more boring. It's also boring because the promise it offers to the player is "you'll survive longer", which is very strong but not exciting.
The amulet of harm does the opposite -- it makes the game less safe and faster, and it promises that, if you can leverage it, you get a big damage bonus. It's not as strong, because it increases risk, but it's sexier, because it increases reward.
Lasty wrote:As for poison, the initial plan was for it to apply there too, but there were some concerns that this would effectively double-dip on damage increases to poison magic; given the implementation, that might not even be a factor, in which case the restriction could be removed entirely.
Dungeon Master
Posts: 3160
Joined: Sunday, 5th August 2012, 14:52
Lasty wrote:Re: double-dipping, I accidentally left out some explanation: I was advised that the amount of poison dealt by (some sources?) is influenced by the amount of damage it deals, and thus you'd "double dip" by multiplying the amount of poison assigned and also how harmful that poison is. However, I think that the current implementation makes that a non-issue in any case.
Dungeon Master
Posts: 3160
Joined: Sunday, 5th August 2012, 14:52
Shoals Surfer
Posts: 321
Joined: Friday, 17th December 2010, 02:21
Lasty wrote:The amulet of harm [...] makes the game less safe and faster
Vestibule Violator
Posts: 1509
Joined: Wednesday, 21st September 2011, 01:10
Location: St. John's, NL, Canada
duvessa wrote:I consider harm an awful design because the only way it makes sense is if the default damage values in crawl are too low. Think of an amulet that does the opposite: all incoming and outgoing damage is reduced by 20%. Is this something that would belong in the game? I really hope your answer is no. But it's the item that you effectively put on when you take off an amulet of harm. See the problem?
Shoals Surfer
Posts: 284
Joined: Friday, 20th December 2013, 00:43
Lasty wrote:For those who feel the amulet is too weak, how would it have to be changed before you would consider wearing it on at least 1/4th of your characters?
Vestibule Violator
Posts: 1508
Joined: Monday, 21st November 2011, 07:40
Hopeless wrote:Lasty wrote:For those who feel the amulet is too weak, how would it have to be changed before you would consider wearing it on at least 1/4th of your characters?
For me, it would have to be swappable with no detriment.
Return to Game Design Discussion
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 75 guests