Andor's Trail

When you check the monster tab you see how easy your fight is. Easy, normal, hard etc.
I find this rather confusing. Easy and Very easy monsters beat me up some times.

What i suggest is to change it or add a number for monster lvl. Chalenge rating. This will also help the player with his griding sequence.

Since a lvlup grants 5Hp, 1dmg etc. each of these values will add to the CR.

Lvl 1 we have a sum of 22 lvl points.
25Hp. (5points)
1dmg. (1point)
80att. (16points)
0deff. (0points)

So monsters with combat stats of 22 points will be CR1.
Special effects like poison, will add some points as well.

Now because of gear, the player will be stronger than the same CR monsters.

Since the player sheet has already ungeard and total stats, the player can look at his Lvl (naked CR) or at his CR (geared) and compare it with monsters.

Too complicated and giving each skill and level bonus a specific rating would only make it confusing.

Also depending on a player's play-style and tactics eventually any NPC can be taken down given enough time and energy.

Im not sure how this will be confusing. The addition to the players eyes will be a symbol and a number.

Lvl 2 Vasifan
CR 4 Vasifan (with gear and skills)
CR 2 Wolf (Easy)
CR 4 Rabid Wolf (Normal)
CR 16 Izthiel (Go farm elsewhere! XD )

The points i suggest are a formula to calculate existing monster CR. The player wont see them in game.

I understand that its a very low priority change, because of a low effort/impact ratio, but why confusing?

this kind cr systen (originally creted into the rpg system WFRP) might work, but IMO it might be really hard to do..

IMHO:

Figuring out how to rate the skills and their effects would be almost impossible because different players value the skills at varying levels of effectiveness (Or CR as you put it)

For Example:
I might rate the Hard Hit, Weapon Accuracy, and Dodge skills as 0.5 points each
Another member might think they are worth a solid point (1) each or even more depending on their playstyle.


The same goes for skills such as Cleave,

I would give cleave a VERY low rating because of the fact that it is a skill that is completely useless useless you are fighting more than one NPC at once.

A bunch of player would disagree with this statement and may say that they think it is more useful than that.

There are some skills that have absolutely do not change your effectiveness in battle: Like Merchant,
Treasure Hunter, Failure Mastery, and Magic Finder. (Some have an effect on finding/buying new gear but no actual boost during combat)

Come to think of it...
*Have you ever seen all of us agree on one thing?*

I'm sure it could be done somewhat easily. First you would only calculate skills that directly impact the fight.
You would have to take and plug in variables so that the end result would show for example: in 1 round of combat the player will average this amount of damage against this monster which has so many hit points. It will take this many rounds to kill this monster. The monster will average this much damage per round and will kill the player in this many turns.
Obviously, you have to factor in and compare ac, bc, ap, ap cost per attack,
Crit chance, crit damage, damage reduction, life regeneration, hp, actor conditions, actor condition chance, ect BUT, what's important to know is that a formula can be applied to each variable to reach an accurate number. This all seems like one giant formula using order of operations with simple addition, subtraction, multiplication and division. Putting the actual formula together seems arduous and is best left to the professionals (thystonius/dark savant). =)

Pyr. Ofc we can't all agree in every detail. I like my steak almost burned, you like it half done. But we both like steak. (Unless you are a vegie, wich will make me create a rant thread.)

An indicator of monster power will be helpful even if its poorly calculated. Well, more helpful than no indicator at least.

Sometimes i find myself beaten up and then i see "easy" and im like, oO

As i said, i realize its alot of calculating for a really small impact to the game. I still felt like commenting it.

Don't make it overly complicated by losingourselves in details. The essense of this idea is, to provide with a meaningful ratio that helps players decide if the monsters are doable.

This idea, I like.

Now the next step, conceptualize this idea. To keep it simple to code and to avoid the discussion of relation between skills and CR, why not start to visualize only using the base stats of the player versus those of the mobs. So AC, hp, BC and AD. Crithit comes from equipment anyways, so is something that should not be in CR. CR is a pure indicator here, players will have to read more stats than just the CR to guess whether or not the mobs are OK. For example, immunity to crithits might impact certain builds and the toughness of killing such a mob, but no need to put that into CR.

Thystonius wrote:Don't make it overly complicated by losingourselves in details. The essense of this idea is, to provide with a meaningful ratio that helps players decide if the monsters are doable.

This idea, I like.

Now the next step, conceptualize this idea. To keep it simple to code and to avoid the discussion of relation between skills and CR, why not start to visualize only using the base stats of the player versus those of the mobs. So AC, hp, BC and AD. Crithit comes from equipment anyways, so is something that should not be in CR. CR is a pure indicator here, players will have to read more stats than just the CR to guess whether or not the mobs are OK. For example, immunity to crithits might impact certain builds and the toughness of killing such a mob, but no need to put that into CR.

Very well said.

Apart from explicitly giving numbers instead of adjectives, how is this different than simply refining the existing monster difficulty rating system?