Eladrin - a request for an AC experiment on Lamannia

[noinfo]

Honestly I think grazing hits are needed. DDO allows lots of forms of stacking of stats in degenerate ways. Grazing Hits keep builds that stack AC to the max in check somewhat.

You don't notice them at all unless you have an insanely high AC, and you can mitigate them somewhat with DR. But really, they are there to compensate for monsters being too stupid to hit us with Destruction and Improved Destruction weapons, to Sunder us, and to hit us with Exhaustion, Strength Sapping, Acid Fog and maybe even Sundering Ooze - exactly the things we do as players to Malicia.

Other effects could keep degenerate builds under control too - absolute time limits on fights that force players to have a minimum level of DPS (keeps all-out defensive builds, like Shield Mastery WF sorcs with max Con and dumped Cha from soloing things like eChrono), and so on.

Basically, I feel 80% physical damage mitigation isn't gamebreaking, but 95% is. Without grazing hits, raid bosses that focus on melee would need to hit for 300+ to pose a challenge at all to AC builds.

There is no 95% even without grazing hits in end boss fights, I can't think of an end boss that does not throw other effects. My biggest bugbear with grazing hits is that it is no defense vs it. If they had it as a stacking debuf that melee mobs could impart I could easily live with that (though other debuffs would be good as well)

Eg melee based mob (including bosses) has an x percentage chance to throw a sunder, the hit lands with sunder effect imparting a grazing hit debuff, mobs can now graze for the duration of 1 minute timed debuff, in that time a second lands (can land on grazing) and the timer is reset and a level 2 graze debuff lands if on a setting harder than normal or on normal just resets timer. This can continue for up to 6 debuffs on elite for the 13 or above. This makes individual trash mobs easy to deal with but pull a heap of mobs and your ac drops massively in usefulness.

Give orange named a 2 min timer, red named 3 min and purple 5 min. This will mean that at the start of the fight an ac based toon will need less healing but will certainly scale as the fight progresses giving the option to swap tanks to give him time out and other relevant tactics.

I may actually repost this under a separate suggestion.

[Khellendros13]

These ideas are all wel land good, but complex to implement I would imagine.

Why not just adjust the numbers on a system already in Live?

Reduce grazing hit damage a bit, and tighten the grazing hit range on a d20.

Simple, easy, wont add lag. See how that goes. Or turn it off completely and add more to-hit to mobs on orange and red alerts.

Also, any end game boss worth tanking now has a lot of spell damage and effects. Abishai, Horoth, Lord of Blades.

[Auran82]

Should grazing hits be treated as though you were blocking?

Seeing they only just scraped you, it would be fair to assume you either got your shield in the way or deflected to blow (if TWFing)

[noinfo]

These ideas are all wel land good, but complex to implement I would imagine.

Why not just adjust the numbers on a system already in Live?

Reduce grazing hit damage a bit, and tighten the grazing hit range on a d20.

Simple, easy, wont add lag. See how that goes. Or turn it off completely and add more to-hit to mobs on orange and red alerts.

Also, any end game boss worth tanking now has a lot of spell damage and effects. Abishai, Horoth, Lord of Blades.

While I would be more than happy with them to go altogether adding on hit effect from mobs would add diversity, % chance for a sunder that adds the grazing debuff can also drop others fortification by 10%. This makes it much harder all around without the silly just add more damage principal that is currently followed

[sirgog]

These ideas are all wel land good, but complex to implement I would imagine.

Why not just adjust the numbers on a system already in Live?

Reduce grazing hit damage a bit, and tighten the grazing hit range on a d20.

Simple, easy, wont add lag. See how that goes. Or turn it off completely and add more to-hit to mobs on orange and red alerts.

Also, any end game boss worth tanking now has a lot of spell damage and effects. Abishai, Horoth, Lord of Blades.

The system I proposed is basically a version of the Minion to-hit debuff. The coding could be copy-pasted, although it would need to be applied twice.

[Khellendros13]

Should grazing hits be treated as though you were blocking?

Seeing they only just scraped you, it would be fair to assume you either got your shield in the way or deflected to blow (if TWFing)

Love it.

Reduces grazing dmg which is different for SD or DoS and with/without shield.

It would give a lot of power to the SnB Stalwarts, and give some DR to twf ac builds that have a bit harder time slotting DR items.

[noinfo]

Love it.

Reduces grazing dmg which is different for SD or DoS and with/without shield.

It would give a lot of power to the SnB Stalwarts, and give some DR to twf ac builds that have a bit harder time slotting DR items.

If they improved the 2 weapon defense feat this may be reasonable except of course that some of the damage from grazing is still plain stupid high, in some cases having it reduced to multiple smaller hits would be better.

[-Zyxas-]

It's the same thing I was discussing in this thread or another one with you earlier in the week.

Delink to hits from the d20 system (great for pnp, but totally silly for a computer game) by making it instead a statistical roll on a bell curve with it's center = to hit + 10. From the hitting a mobs AC perspective this would mean that anytime you rolled to hit you could roll to hit anywhere from 0 to infinity (or a practical infinite in DDO terms of +250 lets say) and each point by which you decreased the difference between (your to hit + 10) and the mob AC until your to hit +10 was greater then the mobs AC you would gain a greater and greater chance of hitting the mob per point of increased to hit/decreased mob AC. After that crossover point you would still hit the mob more and more often for each point you increased your to hit/decreased mob AC, but instead of each point giving you an even greater percentage then the last it would give you a little less.

Basically you get more benefit per point of improvement until a certain to hit to AC threshold and then after that you still improve, but to a lesser and lesser degree...

Some numerical 'samples' that demonstrate the concept, but the percentages and crossover points could be varied depending upon how Turbine wants to balance things...note this is also not a proper bell curve, but mostly a demonstration of the basic concepts here...

Your To Hit +10 - Mob AC VS. Chance to hit
-40 2%
-30 5%
-20 15%
-10 30%
0 70%
10 85%
20 90%
30 93%

/Like. Something like this so a range of AC's are useful instead of magic numbers, and so the middle of the useful range progresses the most as most people are somewhere in that range for their AC characters (don't know where exactly this would be, but...)

If they do end up testing different to hits then they need to be looking at alternatives to grazing as well. 45% of incoming damage even on a miss is garbage.

If they insist on inflicting ac with this sort of stuff its no wonder so few even bother trying. Grazing was the turing point in the death of AC.

If they must continue with this artificial means then:

Normal no graz
Hard on 19
Elite on 18
Epic on 17

Simple straight forward progression considering that monster to hit and damage is scaled already in those cases (though I don't believe they should be in game anyway).

15% on elite is a reasonalbe compremise to the garbage of 45% we get now.

That and combine with the iterative attack modifier by AD though perhaps scalling it further and we have a reasonable comprimise.

This would make AC too much of a win button... I agree grazes shouldn't be all the time (maybe ~60%?), but not so much you always have to still be healed as often as though your AC didn't exist.

EDIT: Seems very probable to me that Devs are reading this just not acknowledging it at all, I've seen plenty of Dev posts in Lama forums. Why won't you guys say anything? At least a small change?

[noinfo]

/Like. Something like this so a range of AC's are useful instead of magic numbers, and so the middle of the useful range progresses the most as most people are somewhere in that range for their AC characters (don't know where exactly this would be, but...)



This would make AC too much of a win button... I agree grazes shouldn't be all the time (maybe ~60%?), but not so much you always have to still be healed as often as though your AC didn't exist.

EDIT: Seems very probable to me that Devs are reading this just not acknowledging it at all, I've seen plenty of Dev posts in Lama forums. Why won't you guys say anything? At least a small change?

Sorry I am missing how this is making it a win button? Does it compare with the killing power of a WF sorc with quicken recon? or the Party getting mass heals? The Pale Master killing mobs with aura while regen with torc behind shield? The barb who runs through sins faster than an ac melee?

These are some points to seriously consider before coming out and making these blanket statements. Being hit 30% is way too much. Of course you can also make the statement that hitting bosses on a 2 or better is also OP and cap that as well.

No AC toon will be soloing epic even IF there were not Grazing hits and boss to hits were reasonable. It just takes forever to beat the boss down maintaining that AC and while elites can be done it is honestly easier to do just heal through it.

[wonkey]

Details, I dont' get what your saying. Take 20 off my to-hit and add a 2-40 variable instead of 1-20?

Haven't read the last 2 pages yet, so this may have been discussed, but pretty much, yeah, along those lines.

I'm now going to pull some numbers out of thin air for ullustrative purposes. If you have more realistic numbers, feel free to give them, but the point remains the same.

Let's say player 1 has 20 AC, a +60 attack bonus, and 600 hp
player 2 has 60 AC, +30 to hit, and 600 hp.

a monster has 30 AC, +60 to hit, and 10,000 hp

currently, both players will hit the monster on a 2, and he'll hit them back on a 2. That's a waste of the AC system, which really adds a dimension to the game, and encourages the MOAR DPS, HJEAL ME!!!! approach.

Now imagine that we reduce to-hit by 20 and make the die roll 2 d20.

Player 1 will still get hit on a 2, and will still hit on a 2. This is your naked dude with the blood-dripping sword and berserker fury.
Player 2 will hit on 20 or higher, and miss on 1-19. He'll also get hit on a 20 or higher, and be missed on a 1-19. It will take him twice as long to kill the baddie, but will need heals only half as often.
The damage output vs. damage taken ratio remains largely the same.
In this example, a player AC anywhere 42 and higher matters, with each point above that giving an additional 2.5% miss chance. The number matters all the way to 79, above which he'll only get hit on a 20.
Player to-hit likewise would matter from 0 to +29 for this monster (equivalent to current 20-49, because we're assuming a -20 mod to account for the extra attack die).

Of course, there'd be a wide range of players and monsters with various AC and to-hits, giving a more dynamic range of build options.

[wax_on_wax_off]

I just don't like how this sounds. We're playing a d20 game here, not a 2d20 game.

However, if you pose the suggestion as opposed rolls instead then you get a similar if not exactly the same outcome.

Ie (using wonkey's example above)

Let's say player 1 has 20 AC, a +60 attack bonus, and 600 hp
player 2 has 60 AC, +30 to hit, and 600 hp.

a monster has 30 AC, +60 to hit, and 10,000 hp

Which is really:
player 1 has 20 AC, a 1d20+60 attack bonus, and 600 hp
player 2 has 60 AC, 1d20+30 to hit, and 600 hp.

a monster has 30 AC, 1d20+60 to hit, and 10,000 hp

Then we add the opposed defense roll:
player 1 has 1d20+10 AC, a 1d20+60 attack bonus, and 600 hp
player 2 has 1d20+50 AC, 1d20+30 to hit, and 600 hp.

a monster has 1d20+20 AC, 1d20+60 to hit, and 10,000 hp

Player 1 will still get hit even if he rolls a 20 for defense and the enemy rolls a 2 for offense, and will still hit even if he rolls a 2 for offense and the baddie rolls a 20 for defense. This is your naked dude with the blood-dripping sword and berserker fury.
Player 2 will hit if his roll is 10 lower than the baddies roll or better. He'll also get hit unless his roll is 11 better than the baddies. It will take him twice as long to kill the baddie, but will need heals only half as often.

The rest of the conclusions should remain the same (I don't know if they are correct or not):

The damage output vs. damage taken ratio remains largely the same.
In this example, a player AC anywhere 42 and higher matters, with each point above that giving an additional 2.5% miss chance. The number matters all the way to 79, above which he'll only get hit on a 20.
Player to-hit likewise would matter from 0 to +29 for this monster (equivalent to current 20-49, because we're assuming a -20 mod to account for the extra attack die).

Adjustments in colourful colours

This lets us maintain the illusion that we are playing a d20 game. The game doesn't even need to work out the formula as displayed above as it is mathematically identical to the 2d20 idea. However, it looks better and stays true to the d20 formula (the above is even mentioned as a possible rule variation in official source books I'm fairly certain).

I was going to mention another point but it seems to have escaped me ... oh well.

[Brannigan]

Love it.

Reduces grazing dmg which is different for SD or DoS and with/without shield.

It would give a lot of power to the SnB Stalwarts, and give some DR to twf ac builds that have a bit harder time slotting DR items.

Yep eliminating grazing hits for those carrying a shield would be a perfect fix

[phum]

I just don't like how this sounds. We're playing a d20 game here, not a 2d20 game.

You are very right, that the defensive d20 instead of take 10 is in the books. But your point that this is a d20 game is somewhat ... true Sad, but true. I don't really understand why, with inflated numbers, computers doing all calculations, is the game holding on to d20 in pretty much everywhere it can. Or maybe I do. It would be too big of a change and they fear the response and it most likely wouldn't be cost effective for them.

To me d&d is much more than just the tool that is d20. I do agree, that it currently works almost everywhere else, but ac (unless preventing growth is taken into account). I do wonder how much the devs have played around with different statistical models. They must have at least a bit^^ Any1 know more about the weighted dice in ddo? Things like how much and why..

[fasteddie8989]

So if they (the devs) get rid of the 1d20 why just make it 2d20, make it 1d100 and now all ac counts not just in a range. Well untill ac gets above 100+min attack bonus.

I know people say in pnp it is not this way, but at he same time how many lvl 20 wizards in pnp have 400+ hitpoints?

[grodon9999]

Some dev commentary on this would be wonderful.

[jojje_b]

i like the idea, and i would also like to see what the devs think of this.

oh and shade, dont forget about the con build wf sorc tanks! they are also better than barbarians:P

/signed

[Brannigan]

i like the idea, and i would also like to see what the devs think of this.

oh and shade, dont forget about the con build wf sorc tanks! they are also better than barbarians:P

/signed

The Dev team will do exactly what they do to every other thread aout AC or shields and ignore it completely.

I doubt Eladrin will prove me wrong.

[grodon9999]

The Dev team will do exactly what they do to every other thread aout AC or shields and ignore it completely.

I doubt Eladrin will prove me wrong.

Have faith young Skywalker . . . it still would be nice to have some dialogue about this.

[voodoogroves]

So if they (the devs) get rid of the 1d20 why just make it 2d20, make it 1d100 and now all ac counts not just in a range. Well untill ac gets above 100+min attack bonus.

I know people say in pnp it is not this way, but at he same time how many lvl 20 wizards in pnp have 400+ hitpoints?

There are many differences (and similarities).

Key is to stay true to the spirit, even as the mechanics evolve.

[-Zyxas-]

Sorry I am missing how this is making it a win button? Does it compare with the killing power of a WF sorc with quicken recon? or the Party getting mass heals? The Pale Master killing mobs with aura while regen with torc behind shield? The barb who runs through sins faster than an ac melee?

These are some points to seriously consider before coming out and making these blanket statements. Being hit 30% is way too much. Of course you can also make the statement that hitting bosses on a 2 or better is also OP and cap that as well.

No AC toon will be soloing epic even IF there were not Grazing hits and boss to hits were reasonable. It just takes forever to beat the boss down maintaining that AC and while elites can be done it is honestly easier to do just heal through it.

For tanking.... AC targets (and changes to monsters' attack rolls) in this thread are all about BOSSES, not trash beating. If there were no grazes a tank with an AC build would be nearly invulnerable to damage, and people would say "Oh great we have an AC tank, then XX raging barbarian can be the designated tank healer (no healer)". So someone still has to watch your back. Note I advocated for a lessering of chance and/or damage of grazing hits, so you won't die automatically (LOL) from grazes but you'll still need attention.
Reddened part - yes it is way too much to get hit 30% of the time with enough AC, BUT it's not too much if it's also a much smaller amount of damage. Yes 45% of the normal damage on every swing is quite a bit and I can see how you don't like it, but if it was a smaller chance and/or damage they wouldn't be a huge threat, more of something so you have to get healed once in a while so there's still a healer instead of you sitting there completely invulnerable to damage. Note that I agree with you and others that things need to be changed for AC to be more effective, but I do not agree with the extreme changes as you proposed (0-15% for grazes AND only 1/3 of the current damage). Just the 1/3 of current graze damage is reasonable to me, but the tiny percent graze proc is too big imo.