[crossfire] Fwd: Re: Attributes/Stats

[Mark Wedel]

Resending back on the list

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [crossfire] Attributes/Stats
Date: Thu, 13 May 2010 21:07:55 -0700
From: Mark Wedel <mwedel at sonic.net>
To: Brendan Lally <brenlally at gmail.com>

<snip>

>> The one issue I sort of see with that is a lot of times
>> fire/electricity/cold are not magical in nature.  So use int/pow/wis
>> for a resistance on them seems a bit misplaced.
>
> Yeah, I can see why that'd be the case, I guess really it is a question
> of balancing what makes sense with what makes the stats work sensibly,
> it might be that part of the answer to that is to alter some attack
> types for existing weapons/spells etc.

  probably - but since you are proposing redoing the attack system totally,
changing other aspects is probably going to be needed in any case.

>
>>    However, problem in that case is that if say fire is Dex, and magic
>> is Pow, if I have a 20 dex and 1 pow, that is the same damage as if I
>> have a 11 dex and 10 Pow.  If I'm a fighter type, in that case, I'd
>> probably still like the high dex/low pow - result is the same, but
>> high dex would help me out more the rest of the time.
>
> Could do something like the geometric rather than arithmetic mean, in
> that case, the 'average' of 11 and 10 is still roughly 10 1/2, the
> average of 20 and 1 is 4 1/2 (substantially worse).
>
> If that isn't an extreme enough effect, could use the harmonic mean,
> that would really punish having uneven stats.

  Maybe - I'm always a bit concerned about making things too complicated.  I
realize a geometric mean isn't all that complicated, but when you start trying
to explain and document this to new players, it can start to get confusing.

  One thought I had, which I'll probably post in a separate message, is that
penalties are greater than bonus.

  For example, the bonus you get would be (stat - 10) / 2.  So a stat of 20
gives a 5 bonus.

  But penalties would be (10-stat).  So a 1 stat gives a 9 penalty.  In this
case, your net is -4, where has having it be a 10/11 stats would be a 0.

<snip>
>>    With that, I would make some general changes:
>> Magic: Pow
>
> Or maybe separate magic attacks into arcane and divine magic, with one
> based on the average of Pow&  Int the other Pow&  Wis? (This'd require
> *lots* of item changes, but then so would most everything else
> item-related).

  It is really spell changes.  Right now, spells are just set to have magic as
one of the attacktypes - there are a few special spells that don't.

  There are very few weapons that have a magic attacktype - generally not desirable.

  So to change it for spells would just mean replacing magic with something else.

  But I suppose the real question is what do you do when an attack has multiple
attacktypes.  The use of magic right now is not really correct - it is really
there to denote it is a magical attack (it is similar to ghosthit to note that
the monster dies after hitting).  In a sense for magic, it doesn't make a lot of
sense for an attack to just hit with magic - it almost always goes with
something else.


>
>> Fire/Cold/Electricity: Dex (on idea nimbleness avoids damage).  I
>
> The reason I avoided using Dex mostly is because it is tied to the idea
> of armour class.
> The full description of how I would redefine combat is on the first wiki
> page linked above, but the short version is:
> 1) Roll an attack number (based on the object doing the attacking) and a
> defence number (based on armour class)
> 2) Consider a hit when the attack number is greater than the defence
> number.
> 3) Then damage is scaled to the ratio [attack-defence]:[resist
> points]
>
> Under such a setup then a high dex gives a higher armour class which
> should typically increase the defence roll, and reduce the
> number and 'strength' of the hits that are taken. (and this would be
> true for all attack types)
>
> Actually avoid damage from them once a hit is scored, should probably
> be based on another stat (otherwise Dex counts twice).

  Are hit rolls needed for spells?  Under the current system (and most game
systems), spells just hit - if you are in the effect, you take damage.

  This works under the current system pretty well, since in general mages will
not have very good chances to hit, but because spells always hit, not a problem.
  And one could argue that it is hard to miss with a fireball that fills an
entire room.

  This actually splits damage into a couple cases then - that from melee attacks
(flaming sword), where dex would help, and that from area of effect attacks
(dragon breath), which dex doesn't make a difference.

  I'm not actually sure in many cases if having stats give bonuses to defenses
make sense.  Dex improving ac, but no stat would really make you more resistant
to fire - the best you can do is avoid it in the first place, or be smart enough
to wear items that protect you.

  If one looks at the AD&D model, it basically works something like:
- For melee attacks or some other attacks, a hit roll is needed.  If the hit
happens, character takes full damage from hit.
- If it is an area of effect, character is hit automatically, but character gets
a saving through to reduce damage.

  Under that system, dex plays a role in each one - in the first case, improves
AC, in the second case, improves the saving throw.  Crossfire doesn't really
have saving throws however.


>
>> Drain, Turn Undead, Fear, Death, Life Stealing: Cha - you resist the
>> effect from happening.
>
> Ok, those are probably attack types where Cha could be made to matter,
> (although there might need to be some lore changes to justify some
> of those in game-terms)

  Certainly - but you are talking lots of changes.  It is interesting to note
that AD&Dv3 uses charisma for a clerics ability to turn undead.

  I'm not trying to suggest that crossfire turn into an AD&D implementation, but
a lot of it seemed based on it in various ways, like the original 6 stats
matched the 6 stats from AD&D.