[CF-Devel] Improved invisibility ... isn't

[crossfire-devel at archives.real-time.com]

ERACC wrote:

>
     
     
     >>
     
     Cyclops are tough monsters.  They have 50% resistance to every
     
     >>
     
     dragon attack type (and 100% resistance in one instance) unless the
     
     >>
     
     dragon has an attack type granted through their god.
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
      No kidding. But I have been in party with a fellow who was playing an
     
     >
     
      Elf char. Worshipped Devourers. Had a sword blessed by devourers that
     
     >
     
      "leeched" HP back to him in melee (according to him). I, with my own
     
     >
     
      disbelieving eyes, saw him destroy a room full of Cyclops and
     
     >
     
      Gaelotrolls in about 10 to 15 seconds. It took him about 2 seconds
     
     >
     
      per Cyclops and fractions of a second per Gaelotroll. Not fair, says
     
     >
     
      I. Dragons, being big, powerful critters themselves, should be able
     
     >
     
      to do as well with claw attacks. :-P
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
      Maybe I should wait to see how my dragon char does at much higher
     
     >
     
      physical levels. Maybe I've never gotten a dragon's phys high enough
     
     >
     
      to be effective against Cyclops without lots of help.
     
     
  Note that not all races/classes are necessarily balanced with respect to each 
other.  I believe dragons are at some of a disadvantage in that they can't use 
weapons.  The 'advantage' of that is they can now 'safely' choose a good that 
also prohibits weapons/armors.  But given that weapons are generally the most 
powerful items in the game, and give ways to get new attacktypes and other 
bonuses, not being able to use weapons is probably a bit of a disadvantage.

  OTOH, with the 'new' (newer than the original dragon code I believe) body 
code, something like dragon claws could be added as a body location, and the 
dragon guild shop perhaps sell claw coverings that give additional abilities. 
That could swing things in a different direction.


>
     
      Oh yeah, as "yuri" and I were discussin' on #crossfire, if a potion
     
     >
     
      is called "potion of invulnerability" then it should give 100%
     
     >
     
      protection. Otherwise the word "invulnerability" is a lie. We note
     
     >
     
      that this "potion of invulnerability" does not make one invulnerable.
     
     >
     
      To wit a Cyclops still hits my char for some damage even with that
     
     >
     
      potion applied. Look up the word in a decent dictionary and see the
     
     >
     
      meaning:
     
     
  Back in the 'old' days before partial immunity, they were truly invulnerable 
(in those days, you were either 100% immune, 50% resistant, or took double 
damage (vulnerable to the attacktype).  So the name was accurate.

  I think now they give you 95%, which yeah, isn't 100% protection.  Life is 
also more confusing, as there are other potions which give 90% protection I 
believe, and can have similar names.

  It'd probably be nice to fill in the msg strings of a bunch of these objects 
to actually describe what they do, eg, if the object is identified, you can know 
if it gives 90% or 95% or whatever protection without trying to remember what it is.

  Also, should probably be a shop with near unlimited supplies of these potions. 
  One of the past laments is that players have too much money - one reason is 
they have nothing to spend it on.  Perhaps if there were piles of these potions 
available for purchase, players would end up buying them and using up at least 
some of that money.



_______________________________________________
crossfire-devel mailing list
     
     crossfire-devel at lists.real-time.com
     
     
     https://mailman.real-time.com/mailman/listinfo/crossfire-devel