Embrace/dismiss equipment "rules" -or- constant stat increase vs. universal balance? Topic

"It's frustrating because - as much as Corf is otherwise an irredeemable person - his 2k/3 mapping is on point." ~ psy_wombats

7874

08/22/2011 11:12 PM

For a while I've been thinking about including consistent rules to equipment, such as all "claws" and "twin dagger/short sword" weapons attack twice seeing as how they require both hands to wield, weapons such as battle axes giving a 15% possibility to inflict Strength Break to the opponent, and armors such as helmets granting the same percentage to Stun resistance. This all seems simple enough, but a question still comes to mind: Should armor give a resistance percentage increase proportionate to their base defense/intellect stat, or should it work more along the lines of "lower base defense w/ higher resistance -to- higher base defense w/ lower resistance" so that as your numbers increase throughout the game (including HP with levels) you become more susceptible to conditions such as poison and breaks while giving the newbies a more forgiving starting point without just never having certain monsters cast condition spells?

Show

Simply put, you'd start off with some low defense armor (around 5) with a 60-70% chance to resist a single status condition, and end with a high defense armor (base stat in the hundreds) with a 10-20% chance to resist. Some quest-given/boss-dropped equipment might stray from this rule and give a fair boost to both ends.

This is in no way some sort of "holy bejeezus, new concept!", but just another attempt at giving equipment customization slightly more depth than to go with a helmet that gives 50 def with an agility weight of 8 or one with a 26 def boost but a weight of 4. That being said, it's not as though I couldn't just run in and do it the way I thought best, but I'd appreciate a second opinion from my possible future audience.

Killer Wolf

1235

08/23/2011 03:45 AM

To me, it would seem strange for a "stronger" character with "better" gear to suddenly become MORE susceptible to status ailments. "Oh, right sir... All the beasties in the world were giving you a free pass, since you didn't have your full fledged adventurers card yet; now that you do, hold on to your hat!"

Unless there was a continent shift or something, and "new" status ailments were introduced?

Antilurker77

871

08/23/2011 07:50 PM

That would be difficult to do. Lowbie armor might end being more effective than high-level armor. I think Killer Wolf makes a good point if stronger armor isn't actually better armor. I think the more traditional way of having several pieces of armor that have similar defensive values but resist different effects or elements would be better in the long run.

Thiamor

I assure you I'm no where NEAR as STUPID as one might think.

63

08/23/2011 07:56 PM

Normally what I always do, is have better armor only being better for certain stats, as well as better against certain magical attacks, while it lowers other stats. Like say you have a beastly armor for defense. Big ol-thing. It'll add to your defense, maybe even your magical defense, but take away from your agility. The lower level armors, make it where it doesn't do it as much (and basically balance out your stats, more or less), up until you get to mid level and higher level armors. Which then start to take over by changing individual stats, by adding to some and lowering others.

LockeZ

I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.

5958

08/23/2011 10:16 PM

Well, if needed, the player can still use the higher status-resistance items in the later stages of the game. Essentially you are making it so you gain more options over time instead of just more power, which I generally enjoy.

EMBRACE/DISMISS EQUIPMENT "RULES" -OR- CONSTANT STAT INCREASE VS. UNIVERSAL BALANCE?

Posts