|
|
Post by rabidbite on Nov 6, 2013 15:22:02 GMT -5
Trouble is, once you run into them, there is literally no escape ... A suggestion that ... might cause Cory to pull out his hairs, because it might be difficult to implement. Instead of having AP be the sole establisher of movement AND attacks, have 2 separate mitigators. Example: Imagine a Cave Spider: Give it .. oh ... 10 AP. Huge amount. BUT, give it 3 attacks maximum (in another table). If the mob moves more than 1 square (more than a 5 foot step) Take away 1 attack. If it moves 3 squares remove the second, if it moved 4 squqres .. remove the third. That leaves 5 AP to move ... but only move. Now take another example: Imagine a Golem. give it 4 AP. 4 attacks and make it IMMUNE TO RANGED DAMAGE. Ouch. It might not be able to move too far, but have to move within range to damage it and it also is a beast at close range. I hope the gist of the idea is understandable. rabid |
|
|
|
Post by slayernz on Nov 6, 2013 16:06:33 GMT -5
YES ... movement and attacks are different. I would love that differentiation between movement (MP) and attack (AP). Going one step further, characters have 5MP, and some AP. They can choose to "sprint" which consumes their AP. So if the Warrior has 5MP and 3AP, he can go 8 squares in a turn, but will have no attack. Armor would impact on MP but not AP ... or maybe some armors affect both (because they are so cumbersome) Oh I like it ... there is lots of opportunity to make strategic calls (do I sprint, or do I hold back ...) Oh .. and I don't like that Golem with the ranged attack immunity  you're a sadist rabid  |
|
|
|
Post by fallen on Nov 6, 2013 16:11:07 GMT -5
rabidbite - actually, that is exactly how it works already for monsters. The Outlander can get access to the same system with Burst of Speed.
|
|
|
|
Post by rabidbite on Nov 6, 2013 19:44:51 GMT -5
Ah, then balancing will be a lot easier than I thought! You guys think ahead  rabid |
|
|
|
Post by rabidbite on Nov 6, 2013 19:46:53 GMT -5
Read Cerberus one day. Sadist doesn't come close.
Also a bit of a masochist. I mean 100+ attempts to take down that pumped up Deathkin KNOWING it was next to impossible. Dunno what I was thinking.
rabid
|
|
|
|
Post by slayernz on Nov 6, 2013 20:13:16 GMT -5
My edited comment didn't appear ... I actually followed up saying that I liked the golem and thought it would be cool ... not saying that I actually wanted to fight one right now that is ... |
|
|
|
Post by rabidbite on Nov 10, 2013 6:17:07 GMT -5
Question:
Is it possible to make ranged mobs, close -just enough- to shoot the party instead of them closing to the max? I(IE within reach of my Outlander who eats them up). It would make the fights a lot more difficult (and interesting) and help reduce pathing exploitation.
rabid
|
|
|
|
Post by John Robinson on Nov 10, 2013 20:12:44 GMT -5
Question: Is it possible to make ranged mobs, close -just enough- to shoot the party instead of them closing to the max? I(IE within reach of my Outlander who eats them up). It would make the fights a lot more difficult (and interesting) and help reduce pathing exploitation. rabid I so hope this happens. When these ranged guys advance to the max, they shut down my thief's bow. I just found out today the same thing happens when the wizard, or cleric tries to cast a curse and can't. Message "Monsters to close" appears. |
|
|
|
Post by fallen on Nov 12, 2013 10:57:43 GMT -5
rabidbite / @johnrobison - this AI bug is fixed for the next release. Ranged monsters will close in, but stop acting like melee monsters.
|
|
you're a sadist rabid 
