Spells: 100 MR to resist MR nuke. 350 FR to reduce FR nuke.

[Technique]

Originally Posted by Haynar [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

No resists and only fulls and partials are better?

A resisted nuke and one that lands for full damage should both be outlier events of the sort determined by a flat chance. Both should be rare exceptions, not the rule.

Everything in between should be subject to being partialed, with the target's resist value determining the lower bound of the damage range over which the partial function's probability curve extends (a normal distribution, preferably with a negative mean and variance < 1). This would make the effect that resists have more reliable across the entire range of values and without diminishing the necessity of dispels/debuffs.

Is that strictly classic? No.

But neither is a system being built around a couple anecdotes claiming "oh, I remember fully resisting around X% of nukes and partialing maybe Y% for about Z% damage at some arbitrary resist value 14 years ago", that leads to nukes being indiscriminately resisted with great frequency, including ones that were historically used as pushback interrupts because of their reliability.

Originally Posted by Colgate [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

the amount of resists you see at like 100-120+ should be enough to convince any caster not to try and cast any of these 0 modifier or -10 modifier nukes on you

Because any caster that's not a necro or a wizard has nukes (or really any damage spells, excepting druid swarm dot line) with negative mods to choose from, huh.