Item Revisions Mod

[Artimus]

I just want to make sure I'm explaining it right.

 

I haven't put any thought into the percentages, I'm just making up numbers. I haven't done a whole lot of modding, so there might be a better way to accomplish this.

 

Add an Equipped Effect to the sword:

While Equipped: Apply Repeating EFF [272] (100% probability)

Use Type 0 to apply this effect every second. It calls a Dummy EFF.

 

The Dummy EFF:

5% chance of Opcode 177 (Use EFF File: Parry Effect)

 

Parry Effect (I used Absolute Immunity as a guide):

* Duration 1 second Effect: Protection: from Melee Weapons [120] Non-Magical

* Duration 1 second Effect: Protection: from Melee Weapons [120] Magical

 

That's assuming you want it to block ALL weapons. You could use multiple effects (like Absolute Immunity) to block just up to +3 weapons or something similar.

 

You can easily change probabilities on the dummy effect or in the "Apply Repeating EFF" effect itself (to make it apply the effect every 2 seconds or every round, every other round, etc)

 

EDIT: I didn't look into EFF's very well. Still, the concept should be the same if spells are used. I might mess around with it (it'd be good practice for me).

 

SECOND EDIT: That on-hit effect will come into play before the character receives any damage, right? If so, I like that even more.

[Miloch]

Apply Repeating EFF [272]

Yuck (not crazy about this opcode).

SECOND EDIT: That on-hit effect will come into play before the character receives any damage, right? If so, I like that even more.

In theory, it should have a chance to kick in for the PC when the PC hits something, not when something hits him (though that could be done too I suppose). That's at least something like how parrying works from what I recall of fencing - you have to have your weapon up and be using it actively, at any rate. If you wanted to make it completely defensive, I suppose it could be a per-use ability or repeating EFF, but I'm not fond of those either, and that should reduce the ability to attack, since you'd be too busy parrying.

[Demivrgvs]

Apply Repeating EFF [272]

Yuck (not crazy about this opcode).

That opcode doesn't work very well imo, I would prefer "cast spell on condition" over it, anytime.

SECOND EDIT: That on-hit effect will come into play before the character receives any damage, right? If so, I like that even more.

In theory, it should have a chance to kick in for the PC when the PC hits something, not when something hits him (though that could be done too I suppose).

Both solutions are doable. I would prefer to have it like a permanent effect which isn't related neither to a successful hit nor on being it, but if you do know that it should be related to be offensive I'll tie it to attacks.

If you wanted to make it completely defensive, I suppose it could be a per-use ability or repeating EFF, but I'm not fond of those either, and that should reduce the ability to attack, since you'd be too busy parrying.

I'm not fond of those two either, as I've said I would opt for "cast spell on condition - every round". Your suggestion about reduced offensive capabilities is interesting, -1/2 attack per round?

[Miloch]

if you do know that it should be related to be offensive I'll tie it to attacks.

Yes, it should. Doesn't make sense that it should be triggering when the wielder is just wandering around with the weapon dangling by his side. Though I suppose your "condition" could be 7 (each round attacked) or perhaps 2 (enemy within sight). If it's 0 (on hit), it's much the same as what I suggested.

[Salk]

This idea is nice and I like it.

 

I think Miloch is right and the condition should be 2.

 

Also a -1/2 to attack rate is a welcome balancing measure.

[Demivrgvs]

I think Miloch is right and the condition should be 2.

Well, actually I think Miloch was suggesting to tie it to wielder's attacks, I was instead suggesting to have it automatically while wielding it (condition 2 seems ok). I'm still uncertain about which one should be implemented.

[Salk]

Oh then I misunderstood.

 

I think your solution is pefectly feasible, provided you set condition to 2, as Miloch suggested.

[Miloch]

I think your solution is pefectly feasible, provided you set condition to 2, as Miloch suggested.

7 (each round attacked) makes more sense than 2 (enemy in sight) IMO. Since this is a parrying ability for melee weapons, it doesn't need to (and probably shouldn't) trigger while an enemy is just in sight, but rather when the wielder is actually in combat.

[Salk]

I still like better condition 2...

[Miloch]

I still like better condition 2...

How can you parry a melee weapon 30' away from you? If it was Protection from Missile Weapons, that'd be different, but you've no idea how hard it is to parry a projectile, regardless of what you see in the movies.

[Salk]

Well, then how do Monks deflect arrows?

[Demivrgvs]

7 (each round attacked) makes more sense than 2 (enemy in sight) IMO. Since this is a parrying ability for melee weapons, it doesn't need to (and probably shouldn't) trigger while an enemy is just in sight, but rather when the wielder is actually in combat.

Well, players won't even notice the difference unless there's a fancy visual effect pointing out whenever the parry ability is in effect. Miloch is theoretically right, but though parry should work in melee only the "protection from weapon" effect will make it work against missiles too.

[Miloch]

Well, then how do Monks deflect arrows?

Like I said, something straight out of the Hong Kong Kung-Fu movie market.

 

The original suggestion was for a Protection from Melee Weapons effect, which, as Demivrgvs says, does not extend to missile weapons.

[Ilyich]

Keeping it to melee weapons would be best, deflection of projectiles is ludicrous, and should be kept unique to Monks imo.

[Bursk]

The Laughing D-Man, thanks to Miloch I've discovered a thread over at PPG - http://forums.pocketplane.net/index.php/to....html#msg314495 - where Echon talks about implementing size-based shield restrictions. I think this is a wonderful idea (in fact, I always avoid giving the smaller races large weapons or shields in my games) that would work great in IR. As you can see from that thread, Echon is doing this:

 

Humans, elves and half-elves can use all shields.

Dwarves can use medium shields and below. The medium shield will work as a large shield.

Gnomes and halflings can use small shields and below. The small shield will work as a large shield.

 

I assume he's not making any changes to strength requirements, which I agree with.

 

To make sized-based restrictions more appropriate for IR, I propose the following:

 

Humans, elves and half-elves can use all shields.

Dwarves, gnomes and halflings can use medium shields and below. The medium shield will work as a large shield. Maybe the small shield should work as a medium shield, but the buckler should probably continue to work as a buckler.

 

This change from Echon's original will mean that gnomes and halflings will have a choice other than just "large" and buckler (and, as we've discussed before, large shields aren't likely to be suitable for non-warrior classes and multi-class warriors due to the THAC0 penalty).

 

Whatcha think?