Larian Banner: Baldur's Gate Patch 9
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
Joined: Jul 2014
X
stranger
Offline
stranger
X
Joined: Jul 2014
It's good to see that no matter what game I go to someone is there to tell the OP they are wrong... even when they basically agree with the OP.

OP's comments make perfect sense. If my house is burning down do I stay in it because I get hurt less? NOPE.

It become beneficial to stand in fire when fighting melee attackers, they end up killing themselves just by coming to you.

The problem is that in game as you stand still it's as if no time is passing. Scrotie has a good point with the AP usage becoming damage. Each AP essentially counts for an amount of time passing, and they could say each AP spent is 1,2,5 etc. second(s). Faster characters can run out of the area with fewer AP spent so that seems fair to me. If you choose to save AP you would need to be hurt for those AP as well.

Last edited by Xalmaren; 11/07/14 08:53 PM.
Joined: Apr 2013
B
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
B
Joined: Apr 2013
Originally Posted by Xalmaren
If you choose to save AP you would need to be hurt for those AP as well.


That would get complex real fast given the AP saving system. You could get damaged twice for the same AP. You'd need to keep track of AP that already proc'd and those that didn't. Not terribly difficult on a computer, but it might not be intuitive. You go to spend AP next turn and sometimes you take damage, sometimes you don't. You'd have to color AP from last turn in the bar someone. Potentially for multiple turns.

Joined: Jul 2014
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Jul 2014
@Wright: That's why I think you should not get punished for saving AP when you're standing on burning/poisonous ground.

However, I do think the punishment for using a 3AP attack while on damaging ground should be equal to the punishment for 3AP worth of walking through damaging ground. This would probably involve toning down the damage per AP, while making it apply to more different circumstances. It should definitely done by AP, not by distance or some other metric (thus, characters with good movement speed are better at saving themselves -- makes sense).

And if you're trying to cast a 7AP spell while on damaging ground? That should be tantamount to suicide. Unless you end the casting somewhere else, in which case I guess you can make the argument you shouldn't be hurt at all (ex: teleporting yourself out).

Last edited by ScrotieMcB; 11/07/14 09:14 PM.
Joined: Jul 2014
C
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
C
Joined: Jul 2014
I think the OP is 100% correct in terms of how elemental surfaces work now being unrealistic. I also think that they are fine just the way they are.

Why?

Because IMO, gameplay trumps realism. I feel that the combat in D:OS is pretty solid right now. WAY more solid than most games in its genre. I actually have to think every fight, and the way elemental surfaces work are a big part of that.

Right now, a poison or fire surface is both a huge danger and potential asset. If they are changed so that you can just walk through them and only take damage once, they will become more of an annoyance than anything else. And all of the neat spells specifically designed to clear certain elemental surfaces like rain or tornado, will become near useless. I mean, if I'm only going to take 20 fire damage for walking through a massive field of fire...why would I waste my mage's turn on putting it out?

I think this would drastically change how the combat in D:OS works, and not for the better. It would shift closer to "traditional" RPG combat, where the fighter runs in, healer heals him, and mage sits back...with nothing really exciting. Not what I really want.

Joined: Jan 2014
Gyson Offline OP
veteran
OP Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2014
Originally Posted by ScrotieMcB
If you want to get super-realistic about it, let's look at the amount of time spent on/in the surface/cloud. We can't just use turns straight-up, because you can spend a portion of a turn within the area, and a portion of the turn out; we need fractional turns.


We don't know what a turn represents. A turn could literally equal 5 seconds. How many actions you perform in that 5 second period shouldn't have anything to do with how much damage you take from being in a fire. You're still only standing in the fire for 5 seconds whether you spend that 5 seconds imitating a statue or doing the macarena. It's 5 seconds of fire damage either way, and since (in this example) 5 seconds = 1 turn and the damage is (example) 10 fire damage per turn, then it's 10 damage per turn. It does not go up to 10 damage per macarena movement done within that 5 second window.

Originally Posted by ScrotieMcB
Let's say it's burning ground, and you have 10 AP for the turn. If you use all 10 of that AP on the burning ground, then you should take a full turn's worth of burning ground damage. The same is true if you spent 8 of your 10 AP then passed the 2; you were still in the burning ground for eight eighths of your turn.

Now if you left during the turn, let's say 5AP in and 5AP out, then you should take half that damage. Things get complicated if you spend 5AP in, 3AP out, and 2AP sent to the next turn; you should take 5/8 of a turn of damage, but as you're walking off you only naturally take the half-a-turn damage, so the game would need to add 1/8 when you pass the turn, even though you're off the burning ground already.

This is all moot since the game appears to apply the fire damage at the start of each character's turn, before they can spend any action points. In other words, your turn starts, you take 10 fire damage, and then you spend 2 out of your 8 AP moving out of the fire.. you still took the 10 fire damage already. I never said I had an issue with this.

Originally Posted by ScrotieMcB
TL;DR: Gyson is wrong.

You never actually explained why, in your opinion, I'm "wrong". That would be like me ending my post with "TL;DR: Jello should have more flavors."

Joined: Mar 2013
T
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
T
Joined: Mar 2013
Originally Posted by Gyson
Originally Posted by Hiver
Which seems reasonable to me. After all if you are standing in fire and make a step - you will get burned more, because you just stepped onto a burning surface again. Similar with poison-acid kind of a surface.


What you're basically suggesting is that lifting your foot off a burning surface and setting it back down on the same burning surface should cause *more* damage than just leaving your foot glued to the burning surface and not moving it.

That makes no sense. Why should it cause more damage?

If a burning surface does 30 damage per turn:

1) Standing on it for 2 turns should cause 60 damage total.
2) Spending 2 turns walking 20 steps out of it should also cause 60 damage total. Instead, what's happening is you're taking 30x20+60 = good luck with that damage.


Depends. A burning surface in stasis is statically exposed. If you move the surface, if there are hidden areas to which were not exposed, then they would then be exposed upon movement, increasing the burn affected area due to the movement.

So, If I am crouched in a ball and covering as much as possible, I am exposing less area to the fire, but when I open up and move though it, I expose more areas which increases my burn area. This is a physics experiment. Ball a wad of paper tightly and see how fast it burns, but open it up, allowing maximum exposure to the surface, and it burns much faster.

It isn't perfect, but the idea that moving increasing your burn damage isn't unreasonable. Now why running would be more damage than walking, well... that one is debatable.

Last edited by Tanist; 11/07/14 10:28 PM.
Joined: Jan 2014
F
stranger
Offline
stranger
F
Joined: Jan 2014
I somewhat agree with the OP.
It should be beneficial to leave an AoE, at the moment it really isn't, better to cast a HoT and wait.

* Standing inside an AoE should hurt you when your turn begins (if you are standing in a fire and you also are burning you will take damage from two sources when your turn begins).
* Entering an AoE field should seriously hurt you.

* Once inside, walking around in it shouldn't hurt you.
* However each AP spent walking inside has a chance of applying the status effect.

Last edited by freche; 11/07/14 10:31 PM.
Joined: Jan 2014
Gyson Offline OP
veteran
OP Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2014
Originally Posted by Creslin321
I mean, if I'm only going to take 20 fire damage for walking through a massive field of fire...why would I waste my mage's turn on putting it out?

Because moving may mean the two opponents next to you get attacks of opportunity, and perhaps you would prefer to remain where you are and hit them instead?

Originally Posted by Creslin321
I think this would drastically change how the combat in D:OS works, and not for the better. It would shift closer to "traditional" RPG combat, where the fighter runs in, healer heals him, and mage sits back...with nothing really exciting. Not what I really want.


How does fixing fire/poison fields so they don't damage players and NPCs with every step taken in any way create the scenario you're describing above? In my opinion you're exaggerating more than just a bit.

With the current setup, most of the time I don't move a character (who is within an elemental field) out of the field unless that character is extremely close to its borders (i.e. one step away). Instead I roll a heal-over-time on him to offset the per-turn elemental damage (the very thing you seem to be concerned about the gameplay turning into), or I remove the elemental field itself.

I don't understand how allowing the option to move out of the field without taking massive amounts of damage somehow dumbs down or worsens the gameplay in your mind.

The problem I see in responses like yours is that you want these elemental fields to be zones that "must be avoided under penalty of death". In your mind a character running through these fields and taking reasonable damage is just bad game design, but running around these fields.. well that's tactical gameplay at its finest, or something. I disagree.

And that's not even touching on the crazy problems occurring when these fields are suddenly generated at a character's current position (from an enemy archer with a special arrow, for example).

I'm sorry, but the following scenario is ridiculous:

Enemy Archer: <twang>

Conan: "<cough> GAS!!"

Merlin: "Conan! Get out of the poisonous cloud before it disolves your flesh!"

Conan: "NOOO! <cough> I will hold my breath and remain perfectly still until it dissipates! <cough> Now heal me!!"

Merlin: "Run out of the cloud!"

Conan: "NOO! Cast da heal on me!! <cough> This is a tactically superior maneuver!!"

Merlin: "You could have been out of the cloud already!"

Conan: "Damn you wizard, cast da heal!!"

Merlin: "I have literally killed two of our opponents while you are pretending to be a statue."

Conan: "My ear has fallen off!! ARRGHH I will not move! Tactically superior!!"

Merlin: "Fight is over. Just gathering loot. Ooo.. a magical sword..!"

Conan: "Where?? I am coming! I..ahHHHH <Conan disolves>"

Merlin: "Now you move??"

..and yet that is pretty much what the current setup encourages.

Joined: Jan 2014
Gyson Offline OP
veteran
OP Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2014
Originally Posted by Tanist
Originally Posted by Gyson
Originally Posted by Hiver
Which seems reasonable to me. After all if you are standing in fire and make a step - you will get burned more, because you just stepped onto a burning surface again. Similar with poison-acid kind of a surface.


What you're basically suggesting is that lifting your foot off a burning surface and setting it back down on the same burning surface should cause *more* damage than just leaving your foot glued to the burning surface and not moving it.

That makes no sense. Why should it cause more damage?

If a burning surface does 30 damage per turn:

1) Standing on it for 2 turns should cause 60 damage total.
2) Spending 2 turns walking 20 steps out of it should also cause 60 damage total. Instead, what's happening is you're taking 30x20+60 = good luck with that damage.


Depends. A burning surface in stasis is statically exposed. If you move the surface, if there are hidden areas to which were not exposed, then they would then be exposed upon movement, increasing the burn affected area due to the movement.

So, If I am crouched in a ball and covering as much as possible, I am exposing less area to the fire, but when I open up and move though it, I expose more areas which increases my burn area. This is a physics experiment. Ball a wad of paper tightly and see how fast it burns, but open it up, allowing maximum exposure to the surface, and it burns much faster.

It isn't perfect, but the idea that moving increasing your burn damage isn't unreasonable. Now why running would be more damage than walking, well... that one is debatable.


Why are we comparing a ball of wadded paper to a warrior standing on a burning surface trading blows with an opponent? I think we can safely say the Warrior is not "crouched in a ball and covering as much as possible". And yet standing on a damaging elemental surface fighting = less elemental damage than walking even one step across it.

Joined: Mar 2013
T
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
T
Joined: Mar 2013
Originally Posted by Gyson
Originally Posted by Tanist

Depends. A burning surface in stasis is statically exposed. If you move the surface, if there are hidden areas to which were not exposed, then they would then be exposed upon movement, increasing the burn affected area due to the movement.

So, If I am crouched in a ball and covering as much as possible, I am exposing less area to the fire, but when I open up and move though it, I expose more areas which increases my burn area. This is a physics experiment. Ball a wad of paper tightly and see how fast it burns, but open it up, allowing maximum exposure to the surface, and it burns much faster.

It isn't perfect, but the idea that moving increasing your burn damage isn't unreasonable. Now why running would be more damage than walking, well... that one is debatable.


Why are we comparing a ball of wadded paper to a warrior standing on a burning surface trading blows with an opponent? I think we can safely say the Warrior is not "crouched in a ball and covering as much as possible". And yet standing on a damaging elemental surface fighting = less elemental damage than walking even one step across it.


Please tell me you aren't this fucking stupid? Please? I refuse to believe that you could read what I wrote and be that fucking oblivious to the point.

If you are too stupid to figure it out, the "Crouched in a ball" aspect was merely to explain the concept. Seriously... I am at a loss how fucking idiotic people can be this day. Do you guys labor for breath? /boggle

Last edited by Tanist; 11/07/14 10:44 PM.
Joined: Jan 2014
Gyson Offline OP
veteran
OP Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2014
Originally Posted by Tanist
Originally Posted by Gyson

Why are we comparing a ball of wadded paper to a warrior standing on a burning surface trading blows with an opponent? I think we can safely say the Warrior is not "crouched in a ball and covering as much as possible". And yet standing on a damaging elemental surface fighting = less elemental damage than walking even one step across it.


Please tell me you aren't this fucking stupid? Please? I refuse to believe that you could read what I wrote and be that fucking oblivious to the point.

If you are too stupid to figure it out, the "Crouched in a ball" aspect was merely to explain the concept. Seriously... I am at a loss how fucking idiotic people can be this day. Do you guys labor for breath? /boggle

My point was that I don't see how your physics lesson applies to the current gameplay discussion, except as an opportunity to state the obvious and get your name in the thread. I understand what you're talking about, but since we are clearly not clicking a "curl up in a ball and protect yourself" button with our characters I don't see a legitimate purpose in even having that discussion.

In other words, your statement:

"It isn't perfect, but the idea that moving increasing your burn damage isn't unreasonable."

..*is* unreasonable when you consider the fact that, unlike your wadded paper experiment, characters in the middle of a battle standing in battle-ready positions already have all their surface area exposed. So moving through a fire (instead of standing in a fire) should not cause them to take more damage by that reasoning. TL;DR: it was a silly, moot point not worth having a discussion about.

You seemed to just be looking for a way to disagree with my complaint, and (as expected from you) now the insults are flying. Typical Tanist! wink

Joined: Mar 2013
T
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
T
Joined: Mar 2013
Originally Posted by Gyson
Originally Posted by Tanist
Originally Posted by Gyson

Why are we comparing a ball of wadded paper to a warrior standing on a burning surface trading blows with an opponent? I think we can safely say the Warrior is not "crouched in a ball and covering as much as possible". And yet standing on a damaging elemental surface fighting = less elemental damage than walking even one step across it.


Please tell me you aren't this fucking stupid? Please? I refuse to believe that you could read what I wrote and be that fucking oblivious to the point.

If you are too stupid to figure it out, the "Crouched in a ball" aspect was merely to explain the concept. Seriously... I am at a loss how fucking idiotic people can be this day. Do you guys labor for breath? /boggle



My point was that I don't see how your physics lesson applies to the current gameplay discussion, except as an opportunity to state the obvious and get your name in the thread. I understand what you're talking about, but since we are clearly not clicking a "curl up in a ball and protect yourself" button with our characters I don't see a legitimate purpose in even having that discussion.


You started off the thread with how it wasn't logical for them to stay versus moving. I just reasoned to you why it may be the point and you ignored it.

How can anyone be this fucking stupid? /boggle

Last edited by Tanist; 11/07/14 11:04 PM.
Joined: Jan 2014
F
stranger
Offline
stranger
F
Joined: Jan 2014
Originally Posted by Tanist
Originally Posted by Gyson
Originally Posted by Tanist

Depends. A burning surface in stasis is statically exposed. If you move the surface, if there are hidden areas to which were not exposed, then they would then be exposed upon movement, increasing the burn affected area due to the movement.

So, If I am crouched in a ball and covering as much as possible, I am exposing less area to the fire, but when I open up and move though it, I expose more areas which increases my burn area. This is a physics experiment. Ball a wad of paper tightly and see how fast it burns, but open it up, allowing maximum exposure to the surface, and it burns much faster.

It isn't perfect, but the idea that moving increasing your burn damage isn't unreasonable. Now why running would be more damage than walking, well... that one is debatable.


Why are we comparing a ball of wadded paper to a warrior standing on a burning surface trading blows with an opponent? I think we can safely say the Warrior is not "crouched in a ball and covering as much as possible". And yet standing on a damaging elemental surface fighting = less elemental damage than walking even one step across it.


Please tell me you aren't this fucking stupid? Please? I refuse to believe that you could read what I wrote and be that fucking oblivious to the point.

If you are too stupid to figure it out, the "Crouched in a ball" aspect was merely to explain the concept. Seriously... I am at a loss how fucking idiotic people can be this day. Do you guys labor for breath? /boggle
He isn't stupid, we get your example (and there is truth in it) but it is a bit pointless since the options we have are stand up straight or move around head high.

If the areas would be burning with high flames you would be almost equally exposed regardless if you are standing there turn after turn or moving through the area.
And with that concept a character should take damage per AP spent (or saved) inside a damage field.

Joined: Jan 2014
Gyson Offline OP
veteran
OP Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2014
Originally Posted by Tanist

You started off the thread with how it wasn't logical for them to stay versus moving. I just reasoned to you why it may be the point and you ignored it.

How can anyone be this fucking stupid? /boggle

That's exactly what I'm thinking about you each time you make another post on this topic, and you are certainly not disappointing me.

But since you want to keep dragging this out in some crazy attempt to save face, please.. explain how your balled up paper experiment applies to this discussion on the gameplay mechanics of elemental surface damage. How exactly is a character fighting an opponent while standing on a burning surface even remotely similar to a ball of wadded up paper? In what way is that same character walking across the burning surface to reach its edge similar to an open sheet of paper?

Why didn't you, instead, compare a wadded up sheet of paper sitting in a fire to a wadded up sheet of paper being moved through a fire? Or an open sheet of paper laying in a fire to an open sheet of paper being moved through a fire? Because that at least would have had *something* to do with the subject instead of the nonsense you threw out there.

I'm not debating your experiment. I'm saying "that's nice, but completely pointless to this discussion".

Joined: Mar 2013
T
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
T
Joined: Mar 2013
Originally Posted by freche
He isn't stupid, we get your example (and there is truth in it) but it is a bit pointless since the options we have are stand up straight or move around head high.


Then he could have easily argued it as such, he didn't, he questioned my response as if it were pointless.

Gyson is a fucking antagonist, read up on his posts. The guy starts more trolls on this board than anyone in its history.

Joined: Jan 2014
Gyson Offline OP
veteran
OP Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2014
Originally Posted by Tanist
Originally Posted by freche
He isn't stupid, we get your example (and there is truth in it) but it is a bit pointless since the options we have are stand up straight or move around head high.


Then he could have easily argued it as such, he didn't, he questioned my response as if it were pointless.

Gyson is a fucking antagonist, read up on his posts. The guy starts more trolls on this board than anyone in its history.

Huh. I wonder why you didn't jump down Freche's throat immediately?

Let's review the flow of this discussion again:

Originally Posted by Tanist
Originally Posted by Gyson
Originally Posted by Tanist

Depends. A burning surface in stasis is statically exposed. If you move the surface, if there are hidden areas to which were not exposed, then they would then be exposed upon movement, increasing the burn affected area due to the movement.

So, If I am crouched in a ball and covering as much as possible, I am exposing less area to the fire, but when I open up and move though it, I expose more areas which increases my burn area. This is a physics experiment. Ball a wad of paper tightly and see how fast it burns, but open it up, allowing maximum exposure to the surface, and it burns much faster.

It isn't perfect, but the idea that moving increasing your burn damage isn't unreasonable. Now why running would be more damage than walking, well... that one is debatable.


Why are we comparing a ball of wadded paper to a warrior standing on a burning surface trading blows with an opponent? I think we can safely say the Warrior is not "crouched in a ball and covering as much as possible". And yet standing on a damaging elemental surface fighting = less elemental damage than walking even one step across it.


Please tell me you aren't this fucking stupid? Please? I refuse to believe that you could read what I wrote and be that fucking oblivious to the point.

If you are too stupid to figure it out, the "Crouched in a ball" aspect was merely to explain the concept. Seriously... I am at a loss how fucking idiotic people can be this day. Do you guys labor for breath? /boggle


Yes, that last comment was certainly trollish. Wait.. that was from you, not me.

Now, if you're done picking a fight with me (again) I'd like to get back to the actual topic of this thread.

Joined: Mar 2014
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Mar 2014
Maybe it should be turned around so that standing does more damage and running functions as if you are on one of those "walk barefoot across coals" kinds of events, and it works - and you run over the coals quickly... a sort of like something Jackie Chan would do, he would tiptoe over a burning surface so quickly that he would only singe his sandals a bit.

smile

So the player running away would simulate that kind of an escape stunt - and therefor get a bit less damage... could be tied to dexterity specifically so it benefits rogue - dexterity builds, if you want to make it more dependent on some of the already existing mechanics of the game and so make that mechanic more valuable too -

In turn, the Strength based builds would get less damage standing, while if they try to run over a fire they get burned more?

Bit fishy but... could work. Maybe Constitution would play better for that.

Which would then strengthen another basic build hype so you could base a character build on any of the attributes available.


- maybe they could make a talent or two about it too.

Joined: Mar 2013
T
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
T
Joined: Mar 2013
Originally Posted by Gyson

Now, if you're done picking a fight with me (again) I'd like to get back to the actual topic of this thread.


Last time I checked, you butted into a response I made to another. How about you shut that fucking trap hole of yours and don't respond to my comments if you don't want me to evaluate the idiocy of your own?


Joined: May 2013
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: May 2013
Tanist, you're getting a bit out of hand.


Unless otherwise specified, just an opinion or simple curiosity.
Joined: Mar 2013
T
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
T
Joined: Mar 2013
Originally Posted by EinTroll
Tanist, you're getting a bit out of hand.


Why, EinTroll, I forgot you were there. You may go now.

Last edited by Tanist; 12/07/14 01:54 AM.
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5