That's actually quite a bad idea. Remember that a lacerate/artery is far better a choice than a sliced
bicep, and since there's no light leg aff for PBs or BMs, removing leg
lacerates/arteries actually cause your chance of hitting nothing at
critical to go up. Similarly, for BMs going for bleed tactics, I would take an arm artery over a pierced arm every day, any day.
Instead of taking away the affs, I would suggest just raising the minimum rolled number at crit to at least light wounds level. After the rng is rolled, add a line saying something like if target bodypart is critical, then rng + 100 (or however much it is to get to light wounds from 0). This way, you get effectively the same effect, but for those who (for some reason) still would want those negligble wounds affs instead of light wounds affs, they can still make them proc using maneuvers (by removing all the light wounds affs). This also gives you the added benefit of a slight possibility to push you up a wound tier if you roll a number just next to the tier change.
You need to re-read shedrin's post. The RNG generates a number - whatever wound range that number falls within, the aff in that range is given, or if that aff is not in your maneuver, the next lowest aff is given. Since there's no light aff for legs, this means that the number you roll will give you a lacerate all the way until the medium wounds threshold. If you remove lacerates from the table, you will get nothing.
You need to re-read shedrin's post. The RNG generates a number - whatever wound range that number falls within, the aff in that range is given, or if that aff is not in your maneuver, the next lowest aff is given. Since there's no light aff for legs, this means that the number you roll will give you a lacerate all the way until the medium wounds threshold. If you remove lacerates from the table, you will get nothing.
I think he wants to remove the ability to roll that low.
I'd just like to remove the absolute base tier afflictions (read, require negligible wounds) from the roll table at critical, and spread the roll chance across everything else.
So the following wounds would not be on the roll table at critical: Lacerate arm, lacerate leg, slice forehead, arm artery, leg artery, bloody nose.
...
Is what he said. Removing the ability to roll that low is what I suggested instead.
He does. But that's not the problem Lerad's pointing out.
There are five affliction levels: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 -5
Mork wants to elimate 1, meaning 2 is the lowest affliction you can get. However, Pureblades don't have an affliction that happens on level 2. This means that, if you roll a 2, you get nothing because 1 doesn't exist anymore. However, as it is now, if you roll a 2, you'll get the affliction for 1, because it exists.
I'd just like to remove the absolute base tier afflictions (read, require negligible wounds) from the roll table at critical, and spread the roll chance across everything else.
So the following wounds would not be on the roll table at critical: Lacerate arm, lacerate leg, slice forehead, arm artery, leg artery, bloody nose.
...
Is what he said. Removing the ability to roll that low is what I suggested instead.
I took "spread across everything else" to mean remove the ability to roll that low.
Yes but I also suggested spreading the odds of the negligible affliction across the other actual afflictions.
So you'd go from 20% to all five, to jabs being a 20% chance for no affliction 30% chance for pierce and 50% chance for tendon.
Swings would be 40% chance for no affliction, 30% chance for tendon, 30% chance for amputate.
Now yes, you no longer score lacerates, but when at that point you need a tendon, the odds are more favourable. Because when you really need that tendon, a lacerate is as useless as no wounds at all.
The divine voice
of Avechna, the Avenger reverberates powerfully, "Congratulations,
Morkarion, you are the Bringer of Death indeed."
You see Estarra the Eternal shout, "Morkarion is no more! Mourn the mortal! But welcome True Ascendant Karlach, of the Realm of Death!
... That's not how wounding RNG works. Shedrin explained it pretty clearly. You don't get a set percentage chance at all five afflictions. Let's say you hit your opponent, and on that hit, your target reaches 3751 wounds on a leg (minimum 3751 wounds = critical). The aff you get on that hit is then calculated by the RNG rolling a number. The probabilities are as follows:
You get 100/3751 chance of landing nothing at all (trifling wound tier 1-100). 2% You get 200/3751 chance of landing lacerate leg (negligible wound tier 101-300). 5% You get (a further) 100/3751 chance of landing lacerate leg (light wound tier 301-400) 2% [a total of 300/3751 chance, 7%] You get 900/3751 chance of landing pierced leg (medium wound tier 401-1300). 23% You get 2450/3751 chance of landing tendon (heavy wound tier 1301-3750). 65% You get 1/3751 chance of landing amputate (critical wound tier 3751 and above). 0.02%
In the current system, if you "remove lacerate" from the table, the chance of getting nothing rises from 100/3751 to 400/3751. (2% to 9%) while your chance of getting a tendon stays exactly the same. There is no way to "spread out" this percentage to the other affs except by recoding the entire wound-to-aff rng system. The percentage of the other affs also continue to change as you build wounds (or your target cures them).
The current system makes it impossible for a "removal" of the negligible aff to benefit you in any way. If you're requesting for an entire recode of the warrior rng system to fix this issue you have in an envoy report... well, best of luck to you.
I think what they are really asking for is to raise the minimum roll upwards (so in your example instead of rolling 0/3751 it might roll 400/3751). This would decrease the likelihood of the lower level affs and raise the likelihood of the upper. Even so, if you roll a 400 it would do its regular thing and hit with whatever aff is at that wound level or lower (unless explicitly removed by a maneuver).
That's the only real way I can see this working, at least. I also can envision quite a bit of opposition to the idea. Definitely adds more complexity to the wound-roll process.
If you scroll up a bit, adding a number to the wound roll is what I suggested instead of removing the aff from the roll table. =_= Adding a number to the wound roll is not removing the negligible-wounds affliction from the roll table. The aff remains on the roll table, but because you added a number to the wound roll, it will no longer be able to proc without using maneuvers.
And I doubt it'll be that hard, since Shedrin suggests that dex already gives a bonus to the wound roll. If his guess is true, then it'd certainly be easier than somehow trying to code a spreading out of the chance of hitting the negligible aff to the other affs.
I don't know how exactly it's coded so I don't know how hard it would be, but he's saying that at critical wounds you would take that 400 range of getting lacerate or nothing and distribute it across the other ranges.
So at crit wounds it would look like:
You get 0/3751 chance of landing nothing at all (trifling wound tier 1-100). 0% You get 0/3751 chance of landing lacerate leg (negligible wound tier 101-300). 0% You get 0/3751 chance of landing lacerate leg (light wound tier 301-400) 0% You get 1100/3751 chance of landing pierced leg (medium wound tier 401-1300). 29.3% You get 2658/3751 chance of landing tendon (heavy wound tier 1301-3750). 70.9% You get 3/3751 chance of landing amputate (critical wound tier 3751 and above). 0.08%
I don't know how exactly it's coded so I don't know how hard it would be, but he's saying that at critical wounds you would take that 400 range of getting lacerate or nothing and distribute it across the other ranges.
...
if you understood Shedrin's and my post, you should see
that "distributing" that range is pretty much impossible. My idea of what the game code
might look like (something I've been trying to explain for the past 3 posts):
RNG roll number, please. Store it as variable X! Now, add user's dex bonus to X! If X = trifling range then give no aff! elseif x = negligible range then give lacerate! ...etc ...etc
To
somehow take those 400 range and "redistribute" it (how much of it
you're going to give to which aff is another headache too) is going to
entail a full re-write of
that code. Of course, the above version I thought up might be waaay off
base from how the code is actually written, but if Shedrin's
observations (which I'm using primarily to imagine it) are accurate, it
probably won't be too far different from my theory.
I'm not sure
if I'm just misreading Mork's posts, and that what he's asking for is
what I'm suggesting (and advocating) but basically, my idea is detailed
in my first post about this. I pointed out the drawbacks I felt were
present in mork's proposal, and
explained, as best I could, why those drawbacks in his idea would exist
in the current system. Unless I'm entirely wrong about how the game
handles wound RNG, then those drawbacks that I have pointed out about
Mork's idea is probably going to be manifested in one way or another. I
feel that my proposed idea would solves all the problems that Mork
pointed out, be absent of the drawbacks that I have highlighted and
while also being reasonably simple to implement, so I
have no idea why people are objecting to it. But yeah, it's just a
suggestion, so if any envoy that wants to pick up this problem and make a report about it, feel free to pass my idea up if you don't like it.
Where is that range number coming from? The system has to calculate it at one point, and it seems to calculate it based on the targets wound level. I feel like you would alter that range calculation code to return different values if they are at crit or above, so that the range for nothing/negligible is 0 - 0, and the other ranges are expanded.
The RNG generates a number between 1 to whatever wound level that bodypart you are hitting. That's it. There's no "calculation" to find the full range of numbers it can draw up, so there's no way to "alter" the range calculation code. That's what Shedrin suggested was the case, and that's what I was trying to explain with my posts. -_-
The trifling/light/medium etc range is pre-set. There is no calculation involved, so there's no calculation to alter there either. 1-100 is always trifling. 101-300 is always negligible etc. That's the wound table - it's always fixed, and never changes.
Okay, so you're suggesting that the admin code in a different wound table for use when the bodypart is critical. I'm not sure it'll be any easier to do, but sure, that's a possible suggestion for the report, I guess.
Pretty much as Alban described it. Only I'd probably keep the 301-400 region in as it's light wounds, because I don't see them not allowing for a small chance of RNG. Jabs can't amputate and swings would still have a risk of failure as you're going for an amputate and you can't pierce on a swing.
So you can't just "get to critical and instaamp" but you've managed to work someone to critical, there's no justification for RNG to have such a high fail rate, which can undo your entire offence.
The divine voice
of Avechna, the Avenger reverberates powerfully, "Congratulations,
Morkarion, you are the Bringer of Death indeed."
You see Estarra the Eternal shout, "Morkarion is no more! Mourn the mortal! But welcome True Ascendant Karlach, of the Realm of Death!
Also why did Malarious say that when deflect is down, arms take more than the rest of the body? That doesn't happen to warriors who have no trueshield or deflect equivalent...
It's 90% reduction to the body part it's covering, and 20% to the rest IIRC.
I'd rather remove the "more damage on arms" bit and just delete deflect. 20% wounding reduction on top of tattoo armour (even if reduced to 75/75) is still excessive.
The divine voice
of Avechna, the Avenger reverberates powerfully, "Congratulations,
Morkarion, you are the Bringer of Death indeed."
You see Estarra the Eternal shout, "Morkarion is no more! Mourn the mortal! But welcome True Ascendant Karlach, of the Realm of Death!
It was 80%. 1000 wounds normal, 200 if you hit the deflect arm. It "covers" the same areas as true shield with emphasis on the arm deflecting.
And I said it cause its true. When using KATA DEFLECT NONE arms took more wounds than the rest of the body.
Lowering armor stats are unrelated, as deflect would still screw you over on that, changing deflect and the other skills would help more than armor since armor also means less after 72!
@Ixion: Numbs are not warrior specific, so they aren't on the list. Feel free to make proposals though as that is actually the next Ninjakari report. Ideas for that (1 of the below): 1) Make numbs hit 1 place only, but lower wound curing in that area. (least liked idea, because we deal crap wounds but OP in group). 2) Make numbs hit 2 places (hit area and 1 connected) instead of the 3 (someone said they've done 4 as well) they do now. 3) Remove the balance malus, instead a numb area is more susceptible to poisons. 1 numb per hit with chance of 2 (50/50 in draft).
Comments
Instead of taking away the affs, I would suggest just raising the minimum rolled number at crit to at least light wounds level. After the rng is rolled, add a line saying something like if target bodypart is critical, then rng + 100 (or however much it is to get to light wounds from 0). This way, you get effectively the same effect, but for those who (for some reason) still would want those negligble wounds affs instead of light wounds affs, they can still make them proc using maneuvers (by removing all the light wounds affs). This also gives you the added benefit of a slight possibility to push you up a wound tier if you roll a number just next to the tier change.
The divine voice of Avechna, the Avenger reverberates powerfully, "Congratulations, Morkarion, you are the Bringer of Death indeed."
You see Estarra the Eternal shout, "Morkarion is no more! Mourn the mortal! But welcome True Ascendant Karlach, of the Realm of Death!
So you'd go from 20% to all five, to jabs being a 20% chance for no affliction 30% chance for pierce and 50% chance for tendon.
Swings would be 40% chance for no affliction, 30% chance for tendon, 30% chance for amputate.
Now yes, you no longer score lacerates, but when at that point you need a tendon, the odds are more favourable. Because when you really need that tendon, a lacerate is as useless as no wounds at all.
The divine voice of Avechna, the Avenger reverberates powerfully, "Congratulations, Morkarion, you are the Bringer of Death indeed."
You see Estarra the Eternal shout, "Morkarion is no more! Mourn the mortal! But welcome True Ascendant Karlach, of the Realm of Death!
You get 100/3751 chance of landing nothing at all (trifling wound tier 1-100). 2%
You get 200/3751 chance of landing lacerate leg (negligible wound tier 101-300). 5%
You get (a further) 100/3751 chance of landing lacerate leg (light wound tier 301-400) 2% [a total of 300/3751 chance, 7%]
You get 900/3751 chance of landing pierced leg (medium wound tier 401-1300). 23%
You get 2450/3751 chance of landing tendon (heavy wound tier 1301-3750). 65%
You get 1/3751 chance of landing amputate (critical wound tier 3751 and above). 0.02%
In the current system, if you "remove lacerate" from the table, the chance of getting nothing rises from 100/3751 to 400/3751. (2% to 9%) while your chance of getting a tendon stays exactly the same. There is no way to "spread out" this percentage to the other affs except by recoding the entire wound-to-aff rng system. The percentage of the other affs also continue to change as you build wounds (or your target cures them).
The current system makes it impossible for a "removal" of the negligible aff to benefit you in any way. If you're requesting for an entire recode of the warrior rng system to fix this issue you have in an envoy report... well, best of luck to you.
That's the only real way I can see this working, at least. I also can envision quite a bit of opposition to the idea. Definitely adds more complexity to the wound-roll process.
And I doubt it'll be that hard, since Shedrin suggests that dex already gives a bonus to the wound roll. If his guess is true, then it'd certainly be easier than somehow trying to code a spreading out of the chance of hitting the negligible aff to the other affs.
You get 0/3751 chance of landing lacerate leg (negligible wound tier 101-300). 0%
You get 0/3751 chance of landing lacerate leg (light wound tier 301-400) 0%
You get 1100/3751 chance of landing pierced leg (medium wound tier 401-1300). 29.3%
You get 2658/3751 chance of landing tendon (heavy wound tier 1301-3750). 70.9%
You get 3/3751 chance of landing amputate (critical wound tier 3751 and above). 0.08%
if you understood Shedrin's and my post, you should see that "distributing" that range is pretty much impossible. My idea of what the game code might look like (something I've been trying to explain for the past 3 posts):
RNG roll number, please. Store it as variable X!
Now, add user's dex bonus to X!
If X = trifling range then
give no aff!
elseif x = negligible range then
give lacerate!
...etc
...etc
To somehow take those 400 range and "redistribute" it (how much of it you're going to give to which aff is another headache too) is going to entail a full re-write of that code. Of course, the above version I thought up might be waaay off base from how the code is actually written, but if Shedrin's observations (which I'm using primarily to imagine it) are accurate, it probably won't be too far different from my theory.
I'm not sure if I'm just misreading Mork's posts, and that what he's asking for is what I'm suggesting (and advocating) but basically, my idea is detailed in my first post about this. I pointed out the drawbacks I felt were present in mork's proposal, and explained, as best I could, why those drawbacks in his idea would exist in the current system. Unless I'm entirely wrong about how the game handles wound RNG, then those drawbacks that I have pointed out about Mork's idea is probably going to be manifested in one way or another. I feel that my proposed idea would solves all the problems that Mork pointed out, be absent of the drawbacks that I have highlighted and while also being reasonably simple to implement, so I have no idea why people are objecting to it. But yeah, it's just a suggestion, so if any envoy that wants to pick up this problem and make a report about it, feel free to pass my idea up if you don't like it.
The trifling/light/medium etc range is pre-set. There is no calculation involved, so there's no calculation to alter there either. 1-100 is always trifling. 101-300 is always negligible etc. That's the wound table - it's always fixed, and never changes.
The divine voice of Avechna, the Avenger reverberates powerfully, "Congratulations, Morkarion, you are the Bringer of Death indeed."
You see Estarra the Eternal shout, "Morkarion is no more! Mourn the mortal! But welcome True Ascendant Karlach, of the Realm of Death!
Monks screw over warrior wounding because of the following (tested to check which effect it), note general things (armor/combat defs/etc) are ignored:
- Kata - Deflect: decent reduction on areas it effects, 80% reduction on the arm itself. Without deflect the arms take more than rest of body.
- Psionics - Psiarmour: Reduces wounds from attacks.
- Psymet - Forcedsymm: Forces wounds on an arm or leg to split between the two sides.
- Nekotai - Scorpiontail: If we stance a blow fully we prone you. This is especially bad if we stance the first hit cause second fails as well.
If you had ideas about changes to these, throw some out.
The divine voice of Avechna, the Avenger reverberates powerfully, "Congratulations, Morkarion, you are the Bringer of Death indeed."
You see Estarra the Eternal shout, "Morkarion is no more! Mourn the mortal! But welcome True Ascendant Karlach, of the Realm of Death!
I'd rather remove the "more damage on arms" bit and just delete deflect. 20% wounding reduction on top of tattoo armour (even if reduced to 75/75) is still excessive.
The divine voice of Avechna, the Avenger reverberates powerfully, "Congratulations, Morkarion, you are the Bringer of Death indeed."
You see Estarra the Eternal shout, "Morkarion is no more! Mourn the mortal! But welcome True Ascendant Karlach, of the Realm of Death!
And I said it cause its true. When using KATA DEFLECT NONE arms took more wounds than the rest of the body.
Lowering armor stats are unrelated, as deflect would still screw you over on that, changing deflect and the other skills would help more than armor since armor also means less after 72!
@Ixion: Numbs are not warrior specific, so they aren't on the list. Feel free to make proposals though as that is actually the next Ninjakari report.
Ideas for that (1 of the below):
1) Make numbs hit 1 place only, but lower wound curing in that area. (least liked idea, because we deal crap wounds but OP in group).
2) Make numbs hit 2 places (hit area and 1 connected) instead of the 3 (someone said they've done 4 as well) they do now.
3) Remove the balance malus, instead a numb area is more susceptible to poisons. 1 numb per hit with chance of 2 (50/50 in draft).
EDIT: The bug is inconclusive, requires envoys to do specific testing I cannot do myself.