home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: rec.games.moria
- Path: sparky!uunet!haven.umd.edu!darwin.sura.net!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!rpi!petitc
- From: petitc@nuge111.its.rpi.edu (Christopher Jon Petit)
- Subject: Re: As long as we're taking suggestions...
- Message-ID: <1!t26!=@rpi.edu>
- Nntp-Posting-Host: nuge111.its.rpi.edu
- References: <10563563.45.724391047@eng2.eng.monash.edu.au> <ykk2waq@rpi.edu> <ABADDON.92Dec22101729@suprenum.uk.ac.liverpool.scm.suprenum> <1h7mskINNi3c@gap.caltech.edu>
- Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 20:56:59 GMT
- Lines: 27
-
- ljones@cithe501.cithep.caltech.edu (Lawrence Jones) writes:
-
- >Just an idea. To balance up the warrior class, why not add a small probability
- >for your weapon to break while in use (become a broken sword (1d1) or
- >whatever). Since warriors know better how to look after the weapon their
- >probability would be lower. Maybe similarly for rogues. Not sure what to
- >do about priests. Mages probability would be relatively high - but they wouldn't
- >use their weapon nearly as much anyway.
-
- >Any comments ?
-
- Sounds reasonable. As I've got it coded now, spell failure rises by 1% for
- every 1/10 of a pound you are over your heaviest armor. As for breakage, it
- would probably be that higher + to-hit means a smaller chance of breakage.
-
- In response to the guy who thought that it was unfair not to let mages wear
- armor (and Priests only VERY light armor), my response is:
-
- If you get into hand-to-hand combat against a creature, you're doing something
- seriously wrong. And yes, every kind of armor can be enchanted and ego-tized,
- so a mage still can get (R), but it's just harder. Isn't that reasonable?
-
- --
- Cat Owner/Passionate Romantic/Poet/Singer/Dreamer/Philosopher...
- That's me! Modest? Sometimes. Crazy? BETTER BELIEVE IT!! :&)
- "The greatest beauty in the world is beauty that is private."
- "Protect endangered species! Contribute to the Exxon Supporter's Fund!"
-