Quote:
Originally Posted by DMN
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Ya, I don't know what you are going on about here. You mentioned how something wasn't "logical" and i showed you it made logical sense if you wanted to minimize the server's resources.
I could go even further and offer why it is illogical for a roleplaying game to operate in this manner too.
The idea of a bash is some sort of hard blow focused on knocking you off balance, like a trip or shove or something along those lines. You have 3 outcomes of a successfully landed bash:
The best outcome you don't get stunned or interrupted. RPG wise you got hit the softest.
The second worst outcome you get your spell immediately interrupted. RPG wise you got hit the second hardest.
The worst outcome you spell is immediately interrupted and you are stunned for 1.5 seconds. RPG wise you got hit the hardest possible. Similar to a "critical hit".
"Gee, I'm glad that guy hit me so damn hard. If only the fool would have hit me much softer would it have interrupted my spell." -- not logical RPG dialogue
So it's pretty piss poor logic from an RPG perspective as well server performance perspective.
|
There is always a trade-off between an absolute minimum resource usage, and flexibility. One number vs. two numbers, even in 1999, wasn't a big deal performance wise. The problem with your idea of a single 1-100 number is you cannot give individual percentages to stun AND interrupt chance. This is because the numbers are tied together. If you have a 30% stun chance, you can NOT have greater than a 70% interrupt chance.
From a game design perspective, it is better to take the very slight performance hit, and keep the two chances separate. This allows greater flexibility for balance tweaking. Overall, this is a better design pattern too, because you can keep the stun function generic. This means a stun from bash and a stun from spells can share the same stun function. Having a specially designed stun function for bash, and a specially designed stun function for spells, is harder to maintain.
From a pure programming perspective, the logic I described is a more common design pattern.
From a pure story perspective, this makes sense too. If an ogre is tough enough to brush off a blow that would otherwise stun a normal human being, it would make sense that they are less likely to be interrupted while casting a spell. The idea is they are less affected by heavy blows.