Discussion Archives Index

more issues!|U6

Current Index

Posted by Aegir on 10/05

ok, i have a prob with ring of fire spell. well not so much a problem with the spell as is, per se, but in how unfair it is to str fighters. one of the bonus' str fighters get is weapons with multiple attacks (fork-tongue etc) and using something like the hook, where damroll plays a large factor in damage done so, when fighting a 3C cause mage they need cast 1 spell and stand there to win. ya ya i know what your going to say, "blah blah don't fight them then" however, what about (yes more coding for Ea!) a

From: NEW

From: config option that allows a player to turn off extra attacks for themselves. just like the auto-rush flag. each attack round, before the extra attack(s) go off, check the flag, if its on skip over the extra attacks. this will allow a str or any other char who wants to not use the extra attacks. again, options are good. |U6

From: Kaige Wednesday, October 02 2002, 07:41PM Might wanna consider finding a way to deal with fire for any attack against you... -Kaige |U6

From: Aegir Thursday, October 03 2002, 08:02AM maybe if there were some decent +stat / resist fire items in game. which makes me think, why is resist/suscept always 33%? what about a system where an item could have 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25% first/cold/slash whatever resist, and in your display it would add up all your resists like your stats are added up, and then do the math: you are slashed for 50 damage, but have 20% slash resist, you take 50

From: .8 = 40 damage seems simple |U6

From: Herbert Thursday, October 03 2002, 06:56PM Ok as a user of ring of fire, i have used it in total perhaps 3 times in a PK situation before, because trying to trap someone in a room, before combat is initiated as is required by the spell, AND keep the target there is next to impossible unless they are a 0 dex person, in the case of multiple attacks if they ARE a 0 dex person they need to re-evaluate their life anyway. But the point I really want to make is this, its the hitters CHOICE to use multiple attacks, there is nothing saying they have to, they choose to use cheesey multi attack items and weapons to get more damage and good for them, but they dont have to, my hitter still uses an SSS and no hook and still damcaps consistently. Stop following the crowd and make your character the way you want it not how you see everyone else make theirs. If you want to fight 3c Cause mages then use a single attack weapon or suffer the consequences, not that its going to happen because the spell is near on useless in PK. bah why the hell am I even bothering, Herbert - Is Disgusted. |U6

From: Be'lal Thursday, October 03 2002, 07:04PM I agree with herbert with most, but ring of fire is very useful in pk and I use it on people with multiple attacks constantly. Its a choice you make, just like its a choice I make to use a piercing weapon knowing stoneskin exists. Don't use if it you don't want to. But, ring of fire is very useful, I use it constantly, so don't be confusing the newbie herb :P |U6

From: Aegir Thursday, October 03 2002, 09:53PM i didn't suggest changing ring of fire, i suggested a config option to turn off extra attacks. you say 'blah blah use a single attack item' but with the rent on str weapons its not like you could carry 2 around, a 3c cuase mage can stand in a room, ring of fire and out tank almost any tank by chain casting firestorm/watery death. whats the point of being a tank if you can't tank? also, when posting, plz try to refrain from first stating a spell has little use and that you don't use it, and then say you think it should not be changed, you only make yourself look foolish and/or deceptive. |U6

From: Sandra Thursday, October 03 2002, 10:00PM I can say with a certainty that any such config won't go in. Why, you ask? Well, aside from items that reduce damage from fire damage, you can easily avoid ring of fire by NOT tanking. Why would we code a config on weapons that you have a choice to use or not, when you can simply flee a room away and nullify the spell they're trying to use? -Sandra |U6

From: Herbert Friday, October 04 2002, 03:37AM I never said I dont use the spell I said I dont use it that much in PK, please check your facts. I use ring of fire CONSTANTLY in mob kill because so many mobs have multiple attacks and as a con cause i would be mental to not use a great spell that is ONLY effective against things with multiple attacks. Which is why it shouldnt be changed, it was designed for use against things with multiple attacks and is used against them, and its only in recent times that players have needed to worry about it being used on them since the mass transition to cheesy weapons and items. Deal with it. H. |U6

From: Craven Friday, October 04 2002, 04:36PM again...deceptive. It may only go off once a round, but at an average of 10 or 15 a round, that adds up fast, even just once a round. you don't have to have multiple attacks for it to be useful. |U6

From: Herbert Friday, October 04 2002, 09:33PM at 45 mana, id rather just immolate thanks H |U6

From: Craven Saturday, October 05 2002, 12:32PM I'd rather just ring of fire, then immolate :P 4 rounds or more and you've paid for it, and you didn't have to waste a fight round for it either! - Craven |U6


Current Index