A Few Questions/Observations From an Old Player

[Timo Pietilä]

BTW, when did the game switch over to the launcher multiplier working on the launcher damage bonus? IIRC, the multiplier used to only work on the missile and the launcher damage bonus was added in afterwards.

You recall incorrectly. In vanilla launcher multiplier has always multiplied the entire damage. In fact that was toned down a bit recently, is also used to multiply slay multipliers (3x from slay * 3x from launcher = 9x entire damage) now it adds to that (3x from slay + 3x from launcher = 6x entire damage).

[Derakon]

I think NPP uses o-combat model.

If it does, then this is a recent change.

You can recognize O-style combat because instead of getting pluses to-dam, you get pluses to "deadliness".

[Oramin]

BTW, when did the game switch over to the launcher multiplier working on the launcher damage bonus? IIRC, the multiplier used to only work on the missile and the launcher damage bonus was added in afterwards.

[Timo Pietilä]

Assuming you meant to-dam instead of to-hit, you're right. Both O-style and v4-style combat do something like what you suggested: make damage bonuses into a multiplier of base damage instead of an addition. But it's a fairly drastic change; I suspect Vanilla is going to keep its current combat system for the foreseeable future.

I think NPP uses o-combat model. It didn't feel that much different, just shooters suffer big inflation in that model. Maybe if shooter multiplier works as ammo dice multiplier then it could work in vanilla.

Requires massive playtest to get same feeling, but it is doable.

[Derakon]

Assuming you meant to-dam instead of to-hit, you're right. Both O-style and v4-style combat do something like what you suggested: make damage bonuses into a multiplier of base damage instead of an addition. But it's a fairly drastic change; I suspect Vanilla is going to keep its current combat system for the foreseeable future.

[DaviddesJ]

That's generally only in the early game. And 1.5 blows with a longsword isn't going to beat 3.5 blows with a dagger, unfortunately.

If you really wanted heavier weapons to be more attractive with fewer blows, you really need to change the way to-hit bonuses work. If the to-hit bonus were a percentage of the base damage, rather than a fixed additive, then heavier weapons would look way better relative to lighter weapons. But when the great majority of the damage is coming from your bonus rather than from the base damage of the weapon itself, you can't really expect people to give up blows with a heavier weapon.

[Derakon]

I agree that blow count could use some fixing. I think what it currently does, is compute your number of blows based on strength, dex and char level and afterwards apply the bounds of 4/5/6 depending on char class.

Not quite -- level has no effect on blows; it's just STR/DEX/weapon weight. And warriors have a different blows calculation from rogues/rangers/paladins, who have a different blows calculation from mages/priests.

One fix would be to use the same base computation for all classes with say max blows 4 and then multiply the number of blows by 1.25 for max blow=5 classes and by 1.5 for warriors.

That's similar to what was suggested earlier, that warriors use the same blows calculation as the hybrid classes, but get a free bonus blow regardless of weapon at, say, clvl 25 (much lie rangers get bonus shots with bows). It would be a simplification, and also mean that warriors would be able to get their full number of blows with all weapons (except maybe Grond, which IIRC hybrid classes can't max on either).

That would mean that a mage has to put in the same effort in terms of stats to get his 4 blows as a warrior for 6. It would also give warriors 1.5 blows with any weapon, so they might use heavy weapons earlier instead of mighty HT warriors running around with tiny daggers.

That's generally only in the early game. And 1.5 blows with a longsword isn't going to beat 3.5 blows with a dagger, unfortunately.

[quarague]

I agree that blow count could use some fixing. I think what it currently does, is compute your number of blows based on strength, dex and char level and afterwards apply the bounds of 4/5/6 depending on char class. Which means my current hobbit mage at level 40+ gets the max 4 blows per round with any weapon, although his strength is only 18/80 or so.
One fix would be to use the same base computation for all classes with say max blows 4 and then multiply the number of blows by 1.25 for max blow=5 classes and by 1.5 for warriors. That would mean that a mage has to put in the same effort in terms of stats to get his 4 blows as a warrior for 6. It would also give warriors 1.5 blows with any weapon, so they might use heavy weapons earlier instead of mighty HT warriors running around with tiny daggers.

[MattB]

I have suggested this before and I suggest it again: give warriors extra blow at some level like rangers get extra shots, and use paladin, rogue or ranger blow calculation for warrior.

Makes sense to me.

[Timo Pietilä]

Yeah, for some reason warriors can't get full blows with all weapons. Everyone else can -- though everyone else also tops out at 4 or 5 blows, not 6.

I have suggested this before and I suggest it again: give warriors extra blow at some level like rangers get extra shots, and use paladin, rogue or ranger blow calculation for warrior.

[Derakon]

Yeah, for some reason warriors can't get full blows with all weapons. Everyone else can -- though everyone else also tops out at 4 or 5 blows, not 6.

[Oramin]

Hmm, looks like Hurin, which is 18 lbs, also tops out at 5.8 attacks/rd with my Kobold Warrior.

Dang it, I want my full 6.0 attacks/rd with the heavier weapons.

[Oramin]

Don't worry about it. You're familiar with the code, assumed I was too, and concluded that I therefore didn't understand the implications of the math. It happens.

[Patashu]

It could have, but I know Angband doesn't do anything like that either. Again, I'm really sorry to misunderstand you.

[Oramin]

That's okay, but you do realize that any spell caster level compensation factor doesn't need to be directly coded into the monster definition files? It could just as easily have used something like the current level of the dungeon or the native spawn level of that particular monster.