Idea for a creature ability

[oskarwiksten]

Good points. There are two separate suggestions here that we might consider; varying the exp depending on the number of monsters being fought, and varying the exp or difficulty depending on the type of monster being fought.

The first suggestion has been discussed here:
http://code.google.com/p/andors-trail/i ... ail?id=107

In a future version, I would like to be able to categorize monsters, and give players the option of selecting skills to specialize in combat against a particular category of monsters. Sort of like a "master of goblin-killing" if you wish. We could either make the available monster categories narrow, and increase the skill benefit, or make the types of monster categories wide and lower the amount of skill benefit.

[Chest_Rockfield]

How about some more condition attack witch monster can cause:
- slow, raises the monsters chance of first attack 5-85%
- freece, you cannot done anything for 1 combat round (lose 10-12AP)
- itching, forses you to uneguip all armours
- blind, makes the screen back
- clumsy, cannot use healing items or potion and -AC -BC -CC
- and some nasty diseases as well - cannot remove only heal cauces randomly some symptons
- and curces, only priest can heal (cost 100g * lvl) causes every another nastything, cannot talk anyone, gain less exp, gold, drop item, increases chances to get another condition, etc

and all current conditions optionally permanent - until rested or healed with spesific herb, potion, etc

Does anyone else take issue with the phrase "and some nasty diseases" instead of "and some other nasty diseases"? The previous ones sound absolutely devastating, especially Itching, Freeze (?), and Clumsy.

[lady black]

As Sarumar has said many times, English is not his native language. I think he does a very good job of expressing his ideas and suggestions. Some of the finer points may slip past him, but he has quite a good grasp of the basics. You obviously understood the post, so why worry about about the exact terminology. Omitting the "other"does not imply that he does not consider the already-named effects to be nasty--that was why he suggested them in the first place, after all. I am sure you did not mean to poke fun at Saruman's English, and you are correct that it would be better phraseology to have the "other" in there, but remember that we have players from all over the world reading and posting to these boards and cut people some slack. I think he was considering the earlier items more as conditions than as diseases, and therefore listed diseases as a separate item with a different remedy. Although I might consider Freeze (or Paralysis?) as a disease.

[Sarumar]

As Sarumar has said many times, English is not his native language. I think he does a very good job of expressing his ideas and suggestions. Some of the finer points may slip past him, but he has quite a good grasp of the basics. You obviously understood the post, so why worry about about the exact terminology. Omitting the "other"does not imply that he does not consider the already-named effects to be nasty--that was why he suggested them in the first place, after all. I am sure you did not mean to poke fun at Saruman's English, and you are correct that it would be better phraseology to have the "other" in there, but remember that we have players from all over the world reading and posting to these boards and cut people some slack. I think he was considering the earlier items more as conditions than as diseases, and therefore listed diseases as a separate item with a different remedy. Although I might consider Freeze (or Paralysis?) as a disease.

Thank you lady black, you're very kind.

Bests Regards

[Chest_Rockfield]

Oh geez, I was just kidding... Sorry everyone.

It wasn't to make fun of anyone or anything. More of a suggestion of, "Please don't make anything nastier than stuff he already mentioned; that stuff seems WAY devastating!"

I guess my ability to use the English word to express what I mean isn't very good either. I already kind of knew that, so I wouldn't ever make fun of someone else. I work with numerous people whose first language isn't English, and I'm always amazed by it (I know enough French to say a couple dirty things and that's it). Heck, some of them even play Scrabble with me in English and hold their own and it is very humbling. Again, truly sorry for the misunderstanding.

[Pyrizzle]

This could be set up in fairly easily:

If you engage in a battle with: (just an idea of penalties)
1 monster = -0 to AC
2 monsters = -10 to AC & -2AD
3 monsters = -20 to AC & -4AD
And so on.

Its harder to hit when you are surrounded since you are being forced to engage with more monsters than you can keep track of at once.

Then also you could add another skill:
Bezerker Rage = When engaging multipul enemies you receive 25% less negative effects per skill point (limit 3 skill points)

[Chest_Rockfield]

See I was thinking of the exact opposite set up. I think that if you use skill points on a Berserk skill you should get bonuses for attacking more than one monster at a time since there is currently no reason to do that now.

[queztions]

While grinding for experience I have noticed the danger one gets into while engaging two or more enemies at time.

Perhaps we should be rewarded for these battles, and there might even create some incentive for getting into them.

Ie. defeat 2 enemies at once, receive 5% more experience than each individually, 10% more for 3 enemies, 15% more for 4 and so forth

[Samuel]

Has been suggested before. For example here:
http://code.google.com/p/andors-trail/i ... id=107#c13

Oskar commented it (comment 13) and it looks like he doesn't like the idea.

[Pyrizzle]

(I merged the two together already)