Feature Specification: Weapon Breakage & Armor Damage

ç i p h é r · Post by **ç i p h é r** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 12:00 am

Halrin, we could certainly just reduce everything in the game to emotes and handwaving - "role play" can cover a lot of ground without the need for rules or systems. But as you said, the game is about skill and that is what differentiates one character from another especially in a game where players compete with each other. I don't see a reason why skill could not apply to weapon maintenance/breakage as it does with so many other things. The more skills there are, the more variation there will be in character concepts and the more challenges we will face collectively. Vanilla NWN is designed almost entirely as a combat engine so there is a lot we can add to it on the skills front to enhance the game beyond its initial, intentionally tilted design. It would be nice to see this change with NWN2 but I don't believe Obsidian intends to deviate much from the mark Bioware established.

The notion that PCs are adventurers and thereby all naturally equipped with all the requisite skills to facilitate their profession is simply not true. If that were the case, you'd start with maxxed class skills at level 1. This is even a stretch for fiction. Smithing is a profession that is itself subject to skill. Adventuring does not imply a background in blacksmithing or vice-versa, and in D&D, there is actually a "profession" skill.

As regards anyone's frustration with weapon breakage, there are a lot of things in the game that can be frustrating depending on your perspective. The game comes with disarming and knockdowns for instance which heavily favor melee characters with a strength focus. This is too generic an argument to be of any value in discourse and why the focus needs to be on specific pros and cons.

Audark · Post by **Audark** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 12:24 am

Then I appologize for not adding to the discussion, feel free to remove my last post. I was being pretty general I suppose, essentially all I wanted to get across was the fact that it is my belief that if there was a vote on whether or not we should have breakage scripts, I think the majority of ALFA players would vote against such scripts, in any form, so discussing the intricacies of a system that the players wouldn't want is unnecessary.

Again, not adding to the discussion on pros and cons, so my appologies, simply something that popped to mind.

ç i p h é r · Post by **ç i p h é r** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 4:13 am

No worries Halrin. Everyone is always welcome to post here. I'm simply looking for more than a general opinion on the subject matter so we can actually construct real requirements. I realize this is a sensitive topic - a system like this has broad reach - but it's also something that I think needs clarity before it can be put to any vote. It would be useful to share specific experiences you've had which you like or dislike. I'm not certain we'll all agree, but I'm hoping we'll identify a better system by vetting specific concerns.

You'll get a chance to express your dis/approval in the polls.

Swift · Post by **Swift** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 8:31 am

So will this be a poll on whether the feature should be something we have in ALFA2? If so, why dont we just have it now so it can be defeated and let people get on with working out systems that people actually want?

ç i p h é r · Post by **ç i p h é r** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 4:40 pm

Yes it would.

Swift wrote:why dont we just have it now so it can be defeated and let people get on with working out systems that people actually want?

Two reasons:

1. Because you'd be voting on something that isn't defined.
2. Because I think this would legitimately fall under Hard Core Rules, so while it may or may not be a development priority for us based on polling, I think we should consider laying the ground work for a system that can be added (and activated) at a later time either by us or by other community projects that adopt our "ACR". (probably should do that for other HCR features but I haven't thought about those yet)

It's much easier to fit things in if we plan for a later addition (create hooks) than to do a retrofit of existing work. There are many great examples of this, the AI being one of them. The authors recognized that there would likely be a need to extend and customize the system beyond their vision/needs by those who adopt their work. We need to have much the same mentality here if we want to issue a community release.

Mulu · Post by **Mulu** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 7:23 pm

ç i p h é r wrote:I don't see a reason why skill could not apply to weapon maintenance/breakage as it does with so many other things.

And I don't see why it can't apply without the grind, in other words have some very low chance for weapon breakage, and then have that chance modified by craft weapon skill. Weapon maintenance can occur "off stage" just like pooping. No grind necessary, craft weapon skill has a purpose beyond just crafting, nerdy realism crowd satisfied with possibility of weapon breakage, role play crowd satisfied that it isn't going to happen very often at all, and that they can help reduce it further by taking skill picks in craft weapon.

Of course, you could just scrub the whole idea and save the time and effort.

ç i p h é r · Post by **ç i p h é r** » Sun Mar 19, 2006 7:58 am

I have no problems with either, though I prefer middle ground. That seems to be:

1. Remove the grind - maintenance is assumed.
2. Tie maintenance to a skill (currently Craft Weapon) which affects the probability of breakage (skill reduces wear in proportion to ranks).
3. Limit breakage to critical miss.
4. Limit breakage probability to when weapon wear reaches a specific level.
5. Breakage will be repairable (blacksmiths or crafters according to that proposal).

How does this compare to the original implementation?

I'm going to leave this pinned up in the forum but will likely keep it at or near the bottom of our priority list.

Glad to see more people contributing though.

MShady · Post by **MShady** » Sun Mar 19, 2006 8:28 am

I experienced what weapon breakage was like originally. It was a real pain in the arse I'd prefer we just leave out of NWN2/ALFA again. We never reimplemented it for NWN1, even when we potentially could, because it was fairly unpopular and inconsistent. There is more than enough to deal with, and especially magic weapons are so hard to break, its not worth bothering with. There are enough IC means of loosing gear without having to reintroduce this. It should really be left out of NWN2. It did not work the first time and was not well liked, and not simply because of the mechanics. I am sure there are far more productive things for the Tech department to be doing than revivifying this.

Mike

Dorn · Post by **Dorn** » Sun Mar 19, 2006 9:44 am

MShady wrote: I am sure there are far more productive things for the Tech department to be doing than revivifying this.

Mike

COnsidering things I agree with this unfortunantly, as i love weapon breakage as pointed out. There is a hell of a lot of stuff to get done and worrying about smaller issues like this could hold up the base mod uneccessarily. Getting it done and getting servers live is more important than this so it should not be a reason for a hold up.

Probably could be implemented later.

Then again i have little idea how much tech team work is involved so maybe it's not that big a thing to get implemented.

ç i p h é r · Post by **ç i p h é r** » Mon Mar 20, 2006 5:52 am

MShady, can you describe what specifically was a pain in the arse and is it addressed in the outline above?

In comparison to the Sunder feat, I think the concept of weapon breakage (from wear) itself is quite mild. Sunder would fall into the "spammable" category of actions like Disarm and Knockdown, and you can imagine how annoying that would be (if your annoyance threshold is low).

In any case, ideas are cheap and we're not comitting to anything in discussing this. I fully realize the sensitivity of it and will prioritize accordingly.

Incidentally, no comments on armor damage?

MShady · Post by **MShady** » Mon Mar 20, 2006 7:42 am

While I'm sure all of the contents of the base mod will be worked out with Tech Admin first & foremost and other staffers, from my own experience in the department, breakage was a boondoogle. We never nailed an acceptable solution in several years and eventually gave up rather than fixed it when we had, nominally, the luxury to. Yes, we probably could track various things on the weapon itself through variables even now. Honestly, no one's ever got around to doing it, there was alot of other things to do that seemed to have more priority. Starting off with a whole new system, there's going to be alot to do.

While it MIGHT be possible to implement, and perhaps not particularly hard, it also may make .bic sizes larger and I have no idea on the Vault situation. Beta and play testing it, considering the difficulty with what I'd consider less complex things, was difficult enough. Its not mission critical to going live and this is the base mod. I'd consider this non-essential. Now, if BW or whomever really is including Sunder, we might have to deal with it. For the most part, I always considered magical weapons to be darn near unbreakable in canon anyways so...

Mike

Blackwill · Post by **Blackwill** » Mon Mar 20, 2006 8:08 am

ç i p h é r wrote:MShady, can you describe what specifically was a pain in the arse and is it addressed in the outline above?

I'm actually still curious about the above question.

Mulu · Post by **Mulu** » Mon Mar 20, 2006 8:49 am

ç i p h é r wrote:Incidentally, no comments on armor damage?

All the same arguments would apply.

MShady · Post by **MShady** » Mon Mar 20, 2006 9:09 am

The pain in the arse is basically the concept and time to it and to test it. Its not just breakage, but a surronding system of various things. Its unneeded complexity for something that just adds hassle factor we've lived without for quite some time. That'll probably require a fair bit of testing. Maybe down the road, but this is kind of like being distracted by shiny objects, no disrespect intended. Lets get a working Base first before we worry about bells & whistles. If its not mission critical, it can wait and out of scope.

Mike

Overfilled Cup · Post by **Overfilled Cup** » Mon Mar 20, 2006 9:38 am

I kind of agree this belongs on a wishlist of things that arent needed to get the base mod up. It would be a new feature and one that has detractors already. Best to spend our energies on what we know is mandatory. The discussion is healthy though.