Re: CF: incompatible objects (was Re: Experiments)

[David Andrew Michael Noelle <dave@Straylight.org>]

Peter Mardahl wrote:
> 
> I'm not so bothered about multiple protections in force.  The game gets
> harder as you go up in level, but HP does NOT go up so fast after a
> while.  Spells can kill a player AWFULLY fast.
> 
> When the game is such that a player can count on not being hit by
> a fire spell AND a cold spell at the same time, THEN I might support
> such a restriction on protections.

    I agree.  Those big ugly critters that throw fire, ice, and lightning at
you all at the same time are tough enough when you *do* have protection from
all three elements.  And you can be sure they're protected and/or immune to
all three.  And then there's the "Great Wyrm Convention Halls" with equal
numbers of chinese dragons, red dragons, and blue dragons.
   Those situations are, by the way, the reason I wanted indiscriminately
destructive raw mana attacks - just be sure there's nothing in there you
*don't* want to vaporize.  After all- Warriors have their physical and
weaponmagic attacks that affect everything (with few exceptions for physical
and VERY few for weaponmagic).  Why should Mages be required to cast enough
fire spells to kill the ice creatures, and then an additional number of ice
spells to take out the fire creatures, and then have to figure out a way to
take down the magic-immune monsters that are still throwing both fire and
ice at them?  Even though I made the raw mana spells cost twice as much as
the elemental versions, they have the advantage of working twice as fast as
dealing with fire and ice seperately.


> > players of all kinds (fighters, mages or priests) to be protected from
> > almost everything.  This in turn encourages the map designers to
> 
> The thing is, protection isn't really worth that much, especially
> at high level where your hitpoints start to decline compared to the
> damage done by spells.  Immunity is a different matter.
> 
> At SOME point, there was supposed to be a change where protections
> would add in a reducing fashion:  what's the status on this?

    I remember seeing that suggestion, too.  I don't remember seeing anyone
volunteer to actually do it, though.  If nobody else is working on this,
I'll do it.  And while I'm at it, I'll throw in a counter to keep track of
the player's spell point regeneration penalty.  It's currently being
calculated by scanning their inventory every time they regenerate a spell
point!

-- 
            -Dave Noelle,                 dave@Straylight.org
            -the Villa Straylight,  http://www.straylight.org
Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial Email  ==  http://www.cauce.com

Disclaimer:
This has been a public service announcement brought to you by the makers of
Fat-Free Nutra-Sweet Coated Decaf-Coffee Crunch cereal!  New and Improved
with "I Can't Believe It's Not Lard"(tm) synthetic fat-substitute!

Quote of the Day:
The two most common things in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity.
-
[you can put yourself on the announcement list only or unsubscribe altogether
by sending an email stating your wishes to crossfire-request@ifi.uio.no]