Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Joined: Oct 2016
M
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
M
Joined: Oct 2016
Hey all, long time fan and supporter of Divinity OS and now OS2. Wanted to say awesome job to the dev team, the game is shaping up rather nicely.

After having time to complete a full playthrough of the alpha, I wanted to toss out a suggestion regarding Phys&Magical armor that I feel would make battle gameplay a bit smoother.

While I do love the concept of armor playing a role in protection, I personally feel it devalues strategy by quite a bit when it outright ignores enfeebling effects and attacks skills until armor has been broken.

My suggestion would have physical and magical armor it act as a resistance versus in the form of shield.


An example would be:
-Silver-trimmed Robe that offers 244 Magical Armor

*Currently: You would need to aspected damage (magical) to diminish the shield completely before you can enfeeble or damage the target. Deal 244 magic damage you break the shield, now you can damage and cc your opponents.

**Suggestion: 244/244 Magical Armor adds resistance instead of outright shielding against enfeebling effects and magic damage.

At 244/244, max strength, offers..say, 60% resistance against magic offense. Meaning, 60% chance for the Armor to fail incoming attacks completely, mitigate a successful attack but with resistance (shorter duration/weaker power), or 40% chance of attacks to land full strength (meaning resistance failed).

With my suggestion, Magical and Physical armor would not offer an outright 100% shield, instead as attacks (enfeebling/magical) are levied against armor rating it slowly chips away and begins to decrease while in battle, eventually hitting 1/244. Meaning to still offer some resistance (even if only 2 or 3 %).



I feel this change would make gameplay a bit more fluid in terms of combat. It offers on-going protection from potential cc-locks, while also offering solutions for impossible shield breaks.

Please let me know what you guys think. Thanks for reading.




Last edited by vometia; 07/11/16 06:54 AM. Reason: formatting
Joined: Sep 2016
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Sep 2016
I already made a similar suggestion, and it was not well received.

It's also simpler to have it be an absorbtion at a % remaining basis:
-At 100% armor, it absorbs 100% of the damage and a 100% to resist the debuff.
-At 50% armor remaining, it absorbs 50% of the damage, and has a 50% chance to resist the debuff.
Etc.

Joined: Sep 2015
A
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
A
Joined: Sep 2015
Actually I don't understand why armor even acts as a 2nd healt bar. When I first saw Larian talking about physical/magical armor I assumed it'd be like this: normal attacks and skills damage healthbar. Armor only acts to block cc and can only be damaged by special skill effects specifically targeting armor.
This way it'd greatly reduce cc reliance and force players to choose between killing an enemy quickly and breaking armor to cc instead of simply breakung armor with alpha strike and then stunlocking to death.

Joined: Jul 2014
I
member
Offline
member
I
Joined: Jul 2014
Originally Posted by Naqel
I already made a similar suggestion, and it was not well received.

It's also simpler to have it be an absorbtion at a % remaining basis:
-At 100% armor, it absorbs 100% of the damage and a 100% to resist the debuff.
-At 50% armor remaining, it absorbs 50% of the damage, and has a 50% chance to resist the debuff.
Etc.


seems perfectly reasonable and straightforward to me.

what were the objections to that?


Joined: Sep 2016
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Sep 2016
Originally Posted by Ichthyic
seems perfectly reasonable and straightforward to me.

what were the objections to that?


"Hurr durr RNG bad."
Or something to that effect.
As if there ever was a good RPG without a bit of chance to the encounters.

Joined: Sep 2016
A
addict
Offline
addict
A
Joined: Sep 2016
Originally Posted by Naqel
Originally Posted by Ichthyic
seems perfectly reasonable and straightforward to me.

what were the objections to that?


"Hurr durr RNG bad."]
Or something to that effect.
As if there ever was a good RPG without a bit of chance to the encounters.


Yeaaaaaaah~~ Some people really hate the idea of RNG in any and all formats -_- ...nevermind it'd help make fixing many things easier or at least simpler to discuss on how to fix

Joined: May 2010
Location: Oxford
Duchess of Gorgombert
Offline
Duchess of Gorgombert
Joined: May 2010
Location: Oxford
I'm a bit torn. I certainly don't object to it and definitely prefer a degree of unpredictability to my games; but on the other hand I also don't see it as the Holy Grail: "D&D did it this way, therefore all RPGs should do likewise" isn't gospel.


J'aime le fromage.
Joined: Sep 2016
S
member
Offline
member
S
Joined: Sep 2016
Most current hugely popular tactical games have no RNG regarding CC. They sometimes have hit or miss chances. But CC is always all or nothing, not 50% chance to stun.
I'm against RNG in anything other than gambling.

Originally Posted by Naqel
"Hurr durr RNG bad."
Or something to that effect.
As if there ever was a good RPG without a bit of chance to the encounters.
'

Tonnes. But this isn't even about chance in the encounters, this is about chance in fundamental decisions without proper information. We still have miss chance, we still have fire spreading in unpredictable ways.

And then everyone complains that CC is too much and is too powerful - while simultaneously arguing that armor protects too completely..


Moderated by  gbnf, Nicou 

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