Up front I'll state, I won't be reponding to any response to this thread. The time I'm wasting doing this isn't even worth it, but somedays I just have a morbid fascination with stupid ####.
Part 1: 30 minutes

12:51 p.m.
To show how much time wasted responding to this I'll time the length of my response.

>First Id like to say that Im a giant lover and that I am
>seeing a few things that upset me. I have also played many
>other races so these views I hope are not to bias or
>inacurate. If they are I hope a immortal with access to the
>specifics will correct my view with facts to back it up. That
>being said here are a few aspects that I want to rant about.
>
>Stat affects:
>
>Different stats seem to have a large affects in the game,
>unfortunately some more than others. And to top things off
>there is the ever elusive "luck" stat that seems to have a
>massive influence on a whole character (that or the game has
>massive consistent randomnes for specific characters).

12:52 p.m.
I'd be more inclined to say that the game has a massively inconsistent random number generator, than blame this on the elusive luck stat, or randomness on specific characters.

>A few nit picking things:
>
>STRENGTH; probably the most ####ty stat of them all, it serves
>no function other than the regular weapon weight/carry weight.
>Sure its used in a few, and I mean a few spec skills.
>Otherwise it is 100% useless.

12:57 p.m.
A few other examples:
Chance to break out of adhesive web.
Chance to force your way through gel rooms
Chance to disembowel
Chance to parry

>Other stats provide incrimented
>bonuses that are scaled from 15 to 25. From basically useless
>to extremly usefull.

12:59 p.m.
There is a sliding scale based on strength for:
hitroll
damroll
carry weight
weapon wield weight

I wouldn't call any of those "basically useless"


>Why not make strength usefull and filter
>enhanced damage through current str/25 as a multiplier.

1:02 p.m.
Because the enhanced damage skill is based on your ability in enhanced damage. You don't have to be strong to do more damage (It's one way, but not the ONLY way). You could be smart and know the sweet spot to place a blow. You could be agile and sneak a blow into an unprotected area and twist it deeper.

>Why not have str be more "beneficial" in thematically relevant
>checks. Personaly I think a 25 str giant should easily be able
>to pull itself out of quicksand, but a arial fail massivly due
>to lack of strength. Or perhaps breaking bindings, or anything
>where flexing some muscle is relevant.

1:02 p.m.
See above where there are examples of this.

>A conjurer with 10
>charisma is appauling compared with 20 charisma (10 more), why
>should a 15 str elf be able to hit as hard (5 or so less dam
>roll) as a giant with 25 str.

1:02 p.m.
See the enhanced damage argument above.


>INTELLIGENCE;
>I am working from the shadows on this one, but comments from
>other immortals in posts and in game have indicated the
>following:

>Bonuses to spell casting level

No, that's called spellcraft.

>saves check

In some cases.

>power of spell (tied in)

Again...that's called spellcraft.

>not to mention alot of checks are made against intelligence.

1:06 p.m.
"alot of checks" very factual, and not even worth responding to.

>Every level your mana (spell points) is also determind by this stat.

Partially.

>The real whopper however is that
>practice %'s are based on this stat totaly.

Correct.

>Personaly I think
>that this is crooked hugely. I think that spell learning rates
>should be based on int sure. Certain skills however should be
>based on relevant stats to that skill If your practicing
>endurance, consitution should be your check. If your
>practicing cleave, strength should be your check. If your
>practicing riposte, dex should be your check. So on and so
>forth.

No. You don't get better at cleave because you have high strength. You have to LEARN. Being strong doesn't mean you learn well.


>WISDOM;
>I've had little success in testing wisdoms affects on prayers,
>I would assume that prayers are similar to that of spells and
>bonuses are applied equally.

False.

>Wisdom also determins the number
>of mana that a person regains per
>tick/sleeping/standing/resting.

Partially.

>It also determins how many
>practices a person gets per level.

True.

>This is another aspect that
>I think needs to be addressed. Train hp/sp/mv needs to be
>removed from the game. If you can train these then you should
>be able to train luck and charisma.

How can you train luck? If there was some way to do that, people would flock to Las Vegas.
How can you train charisma? Plastic surgery perhaps. CF doesn't have that concept.

>Basically Being a gnome
>mage means that you get a extra 6 hp per level from pracs. Now
>if your average hp level was 60hp, a 10% bonus would still be
>nice, but not overly impressive. When your hp levels of say 18
>for a warrior, a bonus 6 hp is a massive 33% bonus. Seeing
>gnomes with more hps than giants and dwarfs is far from
>amusing.

1:10 p.m.
Statistical analysis ingored.

>DEXDERITY;

It's dexterity.

>One of the few stats that I think functions well. The
>difference between 15 dex and 25 is quiet noticable. Many
>skills use this, some which did not now seem to check dex
>also. There are many aspects in which I could talk about
>dexterity, but I have little to comment on it.

Chalk up 1 for the immortals. They've pleased you, which is apparently nearly impossible to do.

>CONSTITUTION;
>This is a catch 22 stat. Unfortunately due to game design this
>stat is what keeps your character ticking.

True.

>Also unfortunately it inbalances the game hugely.
>It wastes a crapload of time for many players.

I'm not seeing any inbalances in your argument.

>Con seems to be relevant to many malediction
>checks (that i've noticed),

Some.

>it determins how many hps you per tick.

Partially.

>However when it comes to leveling it only checks your
>natural con, not your current con, which is think is bad,
>really bad.

True that it does. False that it's bad.

>You can max your str/int/wis/dex/char and gain
>full affects (wis to a lesser degree due to needing 2 points
>for 1 functional point).

Because the benefit you get from magical items isn't as good as natural talent with regards to vitality and wisdom.

>Yet you
>get screwed over harshly for pking and losing con which I
>think is poor design.

1:15 p.m.
It's a good design. Nobody lives forever. There is an inherent risk in anything that you do. If you never lost constitution, what penalty is there for dying? You can go throw yourself at big nasty evil monster infinitely without any penalty.


>*** LUCK ***: Well this stat has pissed me off more than
>anything. I have had characters that get spamed almost every
>round with "you land a lucky blow" Lucky this, lucky that.

Which won't do a thing.

>Now
>I have a character that I think is the total opposite. I
>seriously think that his luck is like 1 out of 25.

Nobody's luck can be that low.

>With 100%'s in skills nothing works. And I mean shockingly low success
>rates, below 20%. I Think i've had a good 50 pks where not a
>single skill has worked, and not just 1 skill, I am talking
>about 4-6 skills that just fail 5-10 times in a row.

See the comment way up there about the random number generator.

>Luck seems to have an affect in the game

In some cases.

>It should be displayed on your character sheet.

No, it shouldn't.

>I pissed down the drain 150
>hours on a character that is ####ed up and total unfunctional,
>if it was infact due to a ####ty arse luck stat.

1:17 p.m.
That won't happen. How much luck affects you is not enough to cause a character to be completely unfunctional. You are making massive assumptions that just aren't true.

>I want to
>know, I will roll 100 characters and check the luck stat each
>time just to ensure I dont get that sort of character again.

There was a change a couple years ago to make it entirely random in a given range. The low end won't #### you, the high end won't make you a superhero. It doesn't have THAT large of an affect.

>There is 100% no need to hide the stat.

Yes there is. It's luck. It's not something YOU can quantify.

>You might as well hide
>all stats and remove trainers. Randomly generate stats for
>characters.

1:19 p.m.
Stupid comment aside, be careful what you wish for.

>END STATS:

1:20 p.m. - Break time for Zulg

So long, and thanks for all the fish!