|
Urden | Fri 04-Apr-03 09:03 PM |
Member since 04th Mar 2003
97 posts
| |
|
#645, "vuln_blunt"
|
Ok, so I know gnomes and svirfs are vulnerable to blunt attacks because of their size, but it has always bothered me that this vuln does not go away if the svirf/gnome increases in size. Furthermore, _anyone_ who is the size of a gnome, due to magical/spiritual/whatever reason(s), should (logically) be subject to the same consequences. It is also logical to see how a reduced gnome/svirf could take an even greater amount of pain from bludgeonings.
If you guys think it would screw-up game balance by implementing this, I just have to say that the blun_vuln is vicious as hell, as I'm sure you all know, and there are SO MANY clubs and hammers out there that any smart opponent can easily acquire one before fighting a gnome, at any level. I think this would make sense (and also give power to using 'reduce' as an offensive spell).
One more little piece: If a gnome becomes enlarged to the size of a dwarf, how does it make sense that he still takes the extra beating of a normal-sized gnome? No logic there.
Anyway, whatcha think? Will one of my ideas actually make it to the drawing board?
P.S. No, I am not playing a gnome or svirf. Bizarro I'm helping!
|
|
|
|
RE: vuln_blunt,
nepenthe,
04-Apr-03 09:10 PM, #1
Also...,
nepenthe,
04-Apr-03 09:11 PM, #2
Hrm,
Urden,
04-Apr-03 09:23 PM, #3
RE: Hrm,
Valguarnera,
04-Apr-03 09:44 PM, #4
Well...,
Urden,
04-Apr-03 09:57 PM, #5
AHA! Here's a solution!!!!,
Urden,
04-Apr-03 10:02 PM, #6
You can get my vote for this. Not that it means too muc...,
Astillian,
06-Apr-03 02:15 AM, #8
This might have changed, but...,
Marcus_,
08-Apr-03 10:11 AM, #9
RE: Well...,
Circuits Edge (Anonymous),
05-Apr-03 12:02 AM, #7
I'm missing something here.,
Dunsel,
10-Apr-03 02:21 PM, #10
RE: I'm missing something here.,
Valguarnera,
10-Apr-03 04:22 PM, #11
| |
|
nepenthe | Fri 04-Apr-03 09:10 PM |
Member since 04th Mar 2003
3430 posts
| |
|
#646, "RE: vuln_blunt"
In response to Reply #0
|
If I have to, I'll explain away the gnome vuln as a bone structure thing, but it's not going away on something as easy as enlarge.
I can't begin to say how much gnome stats would have to go down and how much their XP penalty would have to go up for me to think they were fair if you could ditch it that easy.
|
|
|
|
  |
nepenthe | Fri 04-Apr-03 09:11 PM |
Member since 04th Mar 2003
3430 posts
| |
|
#647, "Also..."
In response to Reply #1
|
Even if something like that did happen, it would probably mean the removal of 100% of the sources of enlarge besides a PC transmuter being removed from the game, which I think strips an interesting element of strategy out. (Currently, it's never really all bad or good to be enlarged or reduced.)
|
|
|
|
    |
Urden | Fri 04-Apr-03 09:23 PM |
Member since 04th Mar 2003
97 posts
| |
|
#648, "Hrm"
In response to Reply #2
|
Well, I understand that gnome stats would be too sick by themselves, with their natural abilities on top of that, without the vuln. But I must say I feel for the little guys when I see them do so well in fights, only to be killed by horrid cheap shots, or cranials. I'm not sure what the solution is, but maybe the vuln could lessen for them when they are enlarged? Say by 50% of whatever it is now? Also, if any other players get to gnome-size somehow, they could acquire that 50% vuln. Not as steep as a true-blue gnome, but still a taste of it.
Then again, you could always give gnomes a few weird little traits instead of the vuln, such as chronic diahrrea(sp?), or bad asthma ( which could make them move slower). Hell, I dunno.
The main thing I'm going for is flexibility. People who are too big, afterall, have trouble fitting through certain doorways, and can even become trapped within rooms if they enlarge themselves while in it. I like the "flexible" aspect of CF, and I think it should apply to all things. Bizarro I'm helping!
|
|
|
|
      |
Valguarnera | Fri 04-Apr-03 09:44 PM |
Member since 04th Mar 2003
6904 posts
| |
|
#649, "RE: Hrm"
In response to Reply #3
|
But I must say I feel for the little guys when I see them do so well in fights, only to be killed by horrid cheap shots, or cranials.
Given how many gnomes there are (a lot), why should we go out of the way to create a change that can negate their largest drawback? Your proposed change creates a number of balance problems (Enlarge/Reduce need to be rethought, gnomes get a huge edge for a small investment in lightweight prep items, mace specs need to be reconsidered...), which means readjusting other variables to attempt to compensate. Once that is the case, you need a compelling reason for the change to occur, which you aren't spelling out. Otherwise, we're just shuffling code around.
valguarnera@carrionfields.com
|
|
|
|
          | |
            |
Astillian | Sun 06-Apr-03 02:15 AM |
Member since 04th Mar 2003
166 posts
|
|
|
#661, "You can get my vote for this. Not that it means too muc..."
In response to Reply #6
|
|
|
            |
Marcus_ | Tue 08-Apr-03 10:11 AM |
Member since 04th Mar 2003
681 posts
| |
|
#687, "This might have changed, but..."
In response to Reply #6
|
Default mobs who fight with hth used to be randomized between blunt/pierce/slash damage at creation. So gnomes shouldn't be vuln to more than 33% of all mobs who don't have a damage noun specified.
Besides, you can always get the resist blunt item.
-Marcus, mace spec fo life.
|
|
|
|
          |
|
#653, "RE: Well..."
In response to Reply #5
Edited on Sat 05-Apr-03 12:02 AM
|
Gnomes have the object. But the chances of getting one are about as high as a sylvan not hoarding one. Other races with vulns have a hell of an easier time dealing with their vulns, except duergar/clouds, but then, they don't have to deal with mobs that spam wrath, whereas as you point out in your post below, EVERY MOB PUNCHES YOU IN THE EYE!
|
|
|
|
          | |
            |
Valguarnera | Thu 10-Apr-03 04:22 PM |
Member since 04th Mar 2003
6904 posts
| |
|
#730, "RE: I'm missing something here."
In response to Reply #10
|
You remove that big drawback from Gnomes, then someone better start rethinking mith/iron vulns. Right now that's why you hardly ever see more than two elves on at a time.
This is incorrect. (High) Elves are consistently about the 4th most popular race, and that is consistent at all ranks.
Trust me, every single newbie has a mith or iron weapon and there's a lot more of those type weapons lying around than there are blunts.
This is incorrect. Maces, flails, and most whips together outnumber iron/mithril by a clear margin. There's also a few blunt polearms around, and rare examples from other weapon categories. Also, the recent limiting changes were the result of us accounting for object material, and high-end iron/mithril numbers have come down considerably.
That said, I still see no reason to remove any of the vulns mentioned. They're good balancers on popular races that do well as a number of classes.
valguarnera@carrionfields.com
|
|
|
|
|