Spells/Physical Damage VS NPCs
Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 12:36 pm
I'm not sure if I want to do this, but I would like feedback on this.
Armor can passively negate damage on EACH attack, on top of it's ability to absorb or deflect. While we don't have high values just yet for a few things, it's starting to get there.
Wisdom works similar. It can passively negate damage on each SPELL attack, on top of it's ability to resist the spell completely.
Both work fine, but I may have to look at the armor and actively absorbing/deflecting once we do our level 25 tests to see how well armor actually works.
-----------
NPCs get the same calculations. This means that NPCs will passively negate damage too. I am wondering however if this is a good idea for NPCs to have or if they should only have active absorb/deflect/resist.
This means that you'd be technically doing full damage to NPCs, but less to players, sometimes in heavy armor, a good deal less.
I am on the fence on what is better. Keeping the formula the same for everything is super nice, but maybe the damage might be too much less on end game leveling monsters and it will make leveling more tough. We could technically lower AC on certain mobs that probably shouldn't have so much AC.
So with passive added, we should keep the armor values lower then higher for mobs that shouldn't have armor. Obviously for OADs, quest mobs, etc it's nice to be able to have a high negation rate so we can increase it on these. You would deal less damage per attack, but they probably won't actively absorb as much as the values don't need to be set as high.
With it removed, we can boost armor on some NPCs, so that they actively absorb/deflect more to more standard playerish heavy armor values. You'd do more damage overall, but you might get more absorption or resist effects. I think it's easier to balance this way but might not be as 'standard' and people might get the wrong impression when attacking mobs vs players, as in they'll to learn that you will often do less damage on players etc.
What do people think?
Armor can passively negate damage on EACH attack, on top of it's ability to absorb or deflect. While we don't have high values just yet for a few things, it's starting to get there.
Wisdom works similar. It can passively negate damage on each SPELL attack, on top of it's ability to resist the spell completely.
Both work fine, but I may have to look at the armor and actively absorbing/deflecting once we do our level 25 tests to see how well armor actually works.
-----------
NPCs get the same calculations. This means that NPCs will passively negate damage too. I am wondering however if this is a good idea for NPCs to have or if they should only have active absorb/deflect/resist.
This means that you'd be technically doing full damage to NPCs, but less to players, sometimes in heavy armor, a good deal less.
I am on the fence on what is better. Keeping the formula the same for everything is super nice, but maybe the damage might be too much less on end game leveling monsters and it will make leveling more tough. We could technically lower AC on certain mobs that probably shouldn't have so much AC.
So with passive added, we should keep the armor values lower then higher for mobs that shouldn't have armor. Obviously for OADs, quest mobs, etc it's nice to be able to have a high negation rate so we can increase it on these. You would deal less damage per attack, but they probably won't actively absorb as much as the values don't need to be set as high.
With it removed, we can boost armor on some NPCs, so that they actively absorb/deflect more to more standard playerish heavy armor values. You'd do more damage overall, but you might get more absorption or resist effects. I think it's easier to balance this way but might not be as 'standard' and people might get the wrong impression when attacking mobs vs players, as in they'll to learn that you will often do less damage on players etc.
What do people think?