[crossfire] Redo wc/ac/armor (+dodge)

[Juergen Kahnert]

On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 10:41:18PM -0700, Mark Wedel wrote:
> rename ac to dodge, and make it start at ten.

If working with d20 this sound reasonable.


> Remove this bonus from pretty much all armor currently in the game,
> and/or perhaps add penalty for most of the armors.

Keep ac of armour. But this value will reduce dodge.  So a plate mail
with ac 5 will reduce the dodge value by 5.

We still need to check all the armour to verify the ac value.


> I mulled over the idea of making dodge a skill, but handling exp on
> that is tricky

Let us discuss a little bit more about a dodge skill.  It would have
some advantages having dodge as a skill.  This way you're able to keep
up with wc and also mages will be able to dodge without the need to
train physical combat...


> I think base dodge should be based on dexterity,

But wc will increase with a skill which may reach level 100, dexterity
will stay around 30.

You won't be able to dodge anything on higher levels.


> certianly races/classes may get a dodge bonus,

This will make it easier on lower levels.  But at high level the problem
will still exists.


> and certain skills may give increasing dodge bonus for higher levels
> (like karate - high level person in karate should have an excellent
> dodge)

That forces mages to learn physical combat to avoid being killed on
higher levels.


> The one change I would make is that enchanting armor would increase
> the resist_physical value, and not the armor.  Right now, boots +1
> give you 1 ac point and perhaps 3 resist physical - under the revised
> system, those boots would still not give you an AC, but 4 resist
> physical instead.

Sounds reasonable.  But than we need to increase the enchanting level.
A maximum armour enchanting up to +4 won't have such a big impact than
ac +4.  One ac point is worth a 5% chance (due to the d20).

And will it take effect on all resistances or just physical?


>   The tricky part on this is balancing it out - since the to hit rolls
> is d20 based, it doesn't take too much a difference for something to
> be deadly or not deadly enough.

Do we want to stay with the d20 based system?  It allows us just 5%
steps.  We don't need to implement pen & paper systems.

We should develop something more suitable; d20 is good for pen & paper
based systems, but we don't need to care about an easy dice system.  The
computer will do the calculation part.


>   Now one thought I have here might be to sort of say what are
> reasonable/expected values of those different attributes, eg:
>
>  level  wc  dodge  resist value
>  1      1   10     20
>  10     5   15     30
>  20     13  22     45
>  ...
>  100    90  106    95

Such a table is neat and will help making better maps.


> the point is they may not really be linear - at certain points,
> characters may get different items that give them certain boosts, etc.

That heavily depends on map making.  A linear progress is favoured.

    Jürgen