Kit Revisions (Thieves)

[Demivrgvs]

Shashbuckler's luck

For example a 10d6 Fireball becomes a 10d2, a threatening 15d4+15 Cone of Cold becomes 15d1+15.

From what I understand, you are telling me Luck makes XdY damage rolls suck for some buggy reason.

It's not a buggy at all. Luck opcode affects sustained damage by decreasing the damage taken from each dice. If you have only +1 luck bonus when you are hit by a XdY damage source you actually take Xd(Y-1), but if the luck bonus is higher that formula quickly escalates becoming extremely unbalanced for damage sources where X is a high value (e.g. spells).

[yarpen]

OH.

That's a cool effect tho!

Yeah, high luck could be dangerous. Still, having max +2 on your own plus having let's say +2 from your Bard (hey, it affects nearly everything) would be okay I guess. You are one hell of a lucky cat.

Another strat that could be affected by Luck (and that'd fit a lot) - Critical Strike Chance.

 

One of the solutions for the luck-stacking issue is preventing these effects from stacking. But that's rather silly to have Swashbuckler who doesn't benefit from your bard at all.

[Kalindor]

I think the Assassin is getting improved critical hit chance.

[Demivrgvs]

OH.

That's a cool effect tho!

Yeah, high luck could be dangerous. Still, having max +2 on your own plus having let's say +2 from your Bard (hey, it affects nearly everything) would be okay I guess. You are one hell of a lucky cat.

As I just tried to point out, even a +3 or +4 luck bonus is borderline broken imo, even more so if it is a permanent or semi-permanent feat. Considering we already have a low level spell granting it +1, and at least one item granting another +1, do not expect me to give the Swashbuckler more than a +1 bonus. Actually a full luck bonus is so great that I should either put it on a HLA or split it somehow into different levels imo.

 

One of the solutions for the luck-stacking issue is preventing these effects from stacking. But that's rather silly to have Swashbuckler who doesn't benefit from your bard at all.

Yes, we could use non-cumulative luck...but deciding which ones can or cannot stack may seem very arbitrary unless we opt for "none stack".

[yarpen]

We could just make a keyword out of it. So it's not +1 bonus to Luck but Status: Luck. And prevent it from any kind of stacking.

Both Bardsong and Swashbuckler are good candidates for that feat.

While Luck opcode is for sure cool and unique, issues you have mentioned make it heavily unbalanced I guess. Then what about simplifying the whole thing to Attack Rolls, AC, ST, Skills and CritChance bonus? That's more than enough to consider it as powerfull ability.

 

Swashbuckler could gain +1 bonus/+5% per 10 levels.

Bard could grant up to +3/+15% bonus.

[Grammarsalad]

I think a +1 luck for the swashbuckler sounds pretty,good... Or a bonus for bards song. Not both though. I'd vote swashbuckler though. You can sill do a lot with bard song. An actual luck bonus really fits the swashbuckler I think.

[yarpen]

I guess. Having Critical Strike Chance enhancer on Bardsong would be kind of broken. And on the other hand it fits Swashbuckler a lot!

[veyn]

Re. luck: having N luck actually reduces average damage from XdY to less than Xd(Y-N).

1d(Y-N) means equal probability (1/(Y-N)) to get each outcome, so average is (1 + Y - N) / 2 == (1+Y)/2 - N/2

1dY with N luck means that all rolls in [1, N+1] become 1, the rest are reduced by N, so average is (N + (1+Y-N)*(Y-N) / 2) / Y = (Y + N + (Y-N)^2) / 2Y.

 

For 1d6, this means that:

• N=0: average = 3.50
  
• N=1: average = 2.66 (1d5 average is 3.0)
  
• N=2: average = 2.00 (1d4 average is 2.5)
  
• N=3: average = 1.50 (1d3 average is 2.0)
  
• N=4: average = 1.17 (1d2 average is 1.5)
  
• N=5 and higher: average = 1.00 (all rolls are 1s)
  

In short, luck is even more broken than described by Demi. For example, 1 point of luck reduces average damage from fireball by 24%.

[kreso]

If you wanna test out how broken Luck is - set game difficulty to easiest. It applies a +5 (or 6) Luck bonus, in addition to reducing damage to half. ADHWs do 1 point of damage.

[Demivrgvs]

Don't worry guys, as I said if the Swashbuckler is getting a luck bonus it will be "only" +1, and bard songs won't use it at all because it would not only be broken but include too much stuff at once (+ hit/dmg rolls, improved saves, AC, skills, reduced sustained dmg, etc.) while I prefer to have more freedom (e.g. True Bard granting improved thac0/saves/skills, Skald granting improved thac0/dmg/AC).

[Grammarsalad]

Heh, I was going to ask if there was a skew... I was assuming it would be positive if so (e.g. d6 avg 3.33 with a 1/3 chance of 5 points)...so, wow!

 

Just checking: Does sr luck give a bonus to luck?

[leania]

I'm not sure this suggestion what i'll talk about is suitable for this thread, but I'd like to suggest something about backstabbing.

 

Not only vanilla but also these revisions have given a character an immunity effect which blocks the additional damage of backstabbing. But I've felt that the effect is too much powerful and the effect makes thieves getting hard at the late game because there are many immune-to-backstabbing creatures at that time.

 

I'd rather suggested that 'decreasing backstabbing multiplier' effect is enough and much better to provide in-game balance since we could assign the defensive level against backstabbing according to creatures, characters, etc. For example, Barbarian would have -1 backstabbing multiplier at the lower level, and could reach -4 with getting higher level. Furthermore, assassin is gonna be much more differeentiate with the other thieves in this way; assassin could at least perform backstabbing though the multiplier is quite low and and the damage is also.

[Demivrgvs]

I'd rather suggested that 'decreasing backstabbing multiplier' effect is enough and much better to provide in-game balance since we could assign the defensive level against backstabbing according to creatures, characters, etc. For example, Barbarian would have -1 backstabbing multiplier at the lower level, and could reach -4 with getting higher level. Furthermore, assassin is gonna be much more differeentiate with the other thieves in this way; assassin could at least perform backstabbing though the multiplier is quite low and and the damage is also.

First of all, Barbarian's immunity is hardcoded, I simply cannot alter it in any way.

 

Regarding the whole 'decreasing backstabbing multiplier' effect, I kinda like the idea (I think Arda was hoping for it too back then) but I'm not sure we can implement it. An "aura-like" would have too many flaws, and I still haven't properly tested if "cast spell on condition - when attacked" triggers before being hit the first time. If it does, than we might indeed think about using it, though I'm also wary of using too many contingency-like effects on this poor engine.

[n-ghost]

Guys, I'd like to suggest something about assassins (and, maybe, rogues in general, if it fits the concept).

 

So, we all know that rogues become kinda useless in the late game. In ToB (and middle-way SoA) we disable traps purely for that lil' chunk of exp it gives, not because they could do any serious damage to the party.

 

(btw, that might be another good thing to try and revise someday)

 

And in fights with bigger enemies rogues usually just sit in the far corner of the map praying that the big evil dragon won't notice them. Basically, the only role the rogue can perform well in the late game is an add killer (and almighty summons do that better anyways). Also, potion muncher and mage wannabe.

 

What can be done to counter that?

 

Adding dirtytrick-like HLA called Breaching strike. Yes, it does what it says on tin: a melee strike that removes combat protections on target.

 

It fits conceptually into assassin role (really, whatever he'd do otherwise with that mage that demands a legion of abjurers to even give him a handshake?) and would make rogue a tactical unit during the battle. Also, will save some spell slots for mages.

 

Downside is, it probably homogenizes classes a bit.

 

Is it implementable\good\bad?

[janoha]

If rogues (and clerics too) are to be more efficient, they really need to have more attacks eventually. I've been thinking, that an extra 0,5 attack at level 10 and 20 for rogues and clerics would do a lot for these classes.