druid spells

[DeathCow]

Generally speaking, negative effects are in place for, yes, realism, but also because there is something really good about the item.

Yes, heavy armor might cost you some dexterity (which would theoretically affect dodge and attack ability), but it'll absorb a hell of a lot more damage. Also, in a party this person would need to be healed less often. Any perceived deficit in attack ability could be made up with a better weapon (greater damage per hit to make up for less attacks per round). It'd just be an option if he/she is believes the benefits outweigh the cost--the benefit being a character wearing heavy enough armor could traipse across the realm and ignore half the beasties encountered in the interest of getting somewhere quickly.

Not that platemail-bearing fighters traipse. I'm just saying...

You're probably at a slight disadvantage in this conversation because there are in fact limitation on plate armour already in the game.  These negitives are repressented in your encumbrance.  The closer you are to your maximum enc, the less you swing, and the less likely you are to be able to recieve combat bonuses with a particular weapon.  In fact people who carry 34% of their maximum enc lose half of any bonuses they can get, and at 67% you lose all bonuses.  I just don't see how wearing 200 lbs of platemail would hender your combat more than lets say 200 lbs of arrows.

[Valentine]

I just don't see how wearing 200 lbs of platemail would hender your combat more than lets say 200 lbs of arrows.

It shouldn't. Unless you want to get really fancy and say that because such-n-such an item causes a character to be top heavy, or blah-blah-blah increases weight beared on the back, then weight is weight and should be treated as such.

But yes, I am at a disadvantage...maybe if I lurk long enough I'll catch on.

Edit: Also, what the next guy said. I was thinking that but didn't want to get into another long worthless post.

[Reece]

Heavy armours such as platemail, scalemail, and banded mail not only encumber you, but are extremely inflexable. You cant move your arm as well because the joints hit eachother. You can not walk well because you can not bend your knees right, In fact, a knight how has fallen down in full plate armour usually cant get back up because he cant bend his body enough to get his appendages under him.

[DeathCow]

Heavy armours such as platemail, scalemail, and banded mail not only encumber you, but are extremely inflexable. You cant move your arm as well because the joints hit eachother. You can not walk well because you can not bend your knees right, In fact, a knight how has fallen down in full plate armour usually cant get back up because he cant bend his body enough to get his appendages under him.

I just personally really dislike creating this kinda realism.  I don't think it will be the best way to serve up balance, so I think I'd like to explore other venues.

[Reece]

How about a -crit modifier for heavier armour.

[DeathCow]

We could do that, but thats pretty much that same thing as removing the crit bonus that lighter people get, we cant jsut double up on the same negitive.

[Reece]

Here's one. You could give casters a chance to resist a spell based on there magic level. We could call it counterspells. the more a class is dependent on magic the better they are at counter spells. For example, mage-1 10% + level bonus, mage-2 20% + level bonus, mage-3 30% +level bonus. This would give casters a one up on harder magic based mobs and help there ability to script, and would help them be more competative on bosses.

[DeathCow]

Thats a good idea, in theory.  If we were to do something like this we'd need some way to take into account the attacker.  It be a little silly for a level 1 druid to have a 30% chance of surviving a level 500 mages casting of LOLZUDIENOW BEAM.

[Reece]

(b + lvl increase) - (a/2)? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
b = base chance
a = attackers counterspell chance                                       level percent increase is as follows :  mage-1 (base 10%)  1-10 .1%     11-20 .2%    21-30 .3%    ect..
                                                                                                                                                        mage-2 (base 20%)  1-10 .15%   11-20 .3%    21-30 .45%  ect..
for use sake lets do a lvl 20 mage-3 vs a 50 mage-3? ? ? ? ? ?                                                           mage-3 (base 30%)  1-10 .2%     11-20 .4%    21-30 .6%    ect..
(b% + lvl increase) - {b% + (lvl increase/ 2)} =
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?36%? ? ? ? ?-? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 30%? ? ? ? ? ? ? = 6% this is the chance for a level 20 to counterspell a level 50

(b% + lvl increase) - {b% + (lvl increase / 2)} =
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?60%? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 18%? ? ? ? ?= 42% that he willl counter a spell? ? ?


Hows that for a formula.? Although this only encompasses pvp a simular formula for monsters could easily be made.
Note: players of simular level will not counter much at low levels, and at max will be able to counter 50%

[DeathCow]

Looks good.

[Reece]

Tommorow ill sit down and write some thing for player vs mob.
tired ... so very tired.

[Reece]

pvm formula

(base+level)- (monster level x .75)  lets say you have a level 55 mage-3 caster and a level 45 monster.
    66%         -            33.75%       = 32.25% chance of counterspell.
once again maxium chance of counterspell will be 50%.

[DeathCow]

Whats mosnter level based on?

[Reece]

Whats mosnter level based on?

Monster level is based on the casting level you assign the given spell.

Edit
or you cold give all monstes a level field.

[Bong]

Realism is a great thing.  However it can also be over done.  The game does need to be balanced, so adjusting combat values for certain armour types is a possibility but I'm not going to go over board on that.  The key word is balanced, not nerfed.

Aftering reading a bunch of other posts, I was glad to read that, and hope you mean it.