Damage Equipment Command

Ellian · Post by **Ellian** » Thu Jan 15, 2004 6:01 am

With the damageself command would it also make sense to include a damageequipment command? It might be useful in all the same instances that were given as examples for damageself use, as well as a few more.

Let me think of a couple examples...

Dominik stomps a heavy boot down on the hem of Ellian's robes as he walks by. (damage robe x)
Dominik snaps his steel-tipped whip violently in Ellian's direction. Ellian staggers back, the whip cutting a gash in his tunic but barely missing his chest. He flails his arms to try and keep his balance. (damage tunic x)
Ellian shoots lazers out of his eyes and burns two molten holes in Dominik's armour. (damage self x, damage armour x)

I think it would have the same positive applications to roleplay that the damageself command would, but, being the code-illiterate person I am, I don't know if it would be as reasonable to add as damageself. I would love to hear what everyone else thinks, though.

-El-
"We`ll just have to make you into a pair of socks, won`t we?"

Dominik · Post by **Dominik** » Thu Jan 15, 2004 5:36 pm

Why am I the one used in this example? I'm insulted. No, really, I am. Insulted. Absolutely. Offended to my core. Like Dominik would EVER attack Ellian. Think about that. Well, okay...nevermind. Don't think about that. But...why me?

Alright, I just thought I'd rant a moment before adding my real thoughts. I agree with Sharni, actually, in that this command would be nowhere near as popular as damageself, and would be hardly ever used. For a couple reasons I can think of, and probably a few more I cannot.

One, like Sharni said, who'll want to keep repairing their stuff? I may like that the armour does get damaged OOCly, but ICly it irritates my character(s). Two, most armour has, I believe, some sort of set HP, and lowers at a set rate depending on usage and such things. I think. I'm no coder, so I could just as easily be wrong. But, that being the case, or not, something is set to control armour wear. And to damage your armour like that, it may take the entire coded HP or whatever out of proportion. For example, platemail going from perfect, to superb, to very good...in three commands. It'd usually take a lot more than that to wear plate down.

Ellian · Post by **Ellian** » Sat Jan 17, 2004 6:15 am

I am truly sorry if I offended anyone with my examples. If I had had any idea... well, I'm just sorry. The examples weren't meant to be serious in the least, and I guess I just assumed people would understand that from the last one... Ellian shoots lazers out of his eyes, or something quirky like that.
Really sorry, Dominik.

On the subject at hand - I do agree that this command would be used less than the damageself command, but I think there would still be people out there that would use it in their roleplay. And - you wouldn't be forced to damage your clothing - you can refer to Timaeus's excellent explaination of a smoted fight to see that you get to choose how your character reacts to an attack (within reason). This would also mean you could choose weather your heavy titanium platemail got hit hard enough to sustain noticable damage, or was just scratched/slightly dented.

Just my futile retorts.

-El-
"He smells like prettyfruit to me."

Septa · Post by **Septa** » Sat Jan 17, 2004 8:40 pm

I think, especially roleplay wise, that this isnt a bad idea at all. I can see how it wouldnt be used very often, but the very idea alone is intriguing, it allows more freedom in roleplayed fights. To my knowledge, before, you could only swing the sword or whatever and hope to hit or miss. With this command, you could actually do damage to the equipment you were hoping to damage, instead of having it be a game of chance on what you hit.

just my 2 cents...

Serge · Post by **Serge** » Tue Apr 20, 2004 8:31 pm

Interesting idea. It would extend the usefullness of the sunder feat, and the "beat" command also, as sunder is supposed to be able to destroy shields and whatnot also. You could forgo damaging your opponent, to have a chance, maybe 50% or whatever would be fair, of damaging what your aiming for. Even have smaller chances for smaller equipment slots. Easier to hit...say armor, shield, but maybe only a 10% chance to hit gloves, bracers, etc.

Serge

Rhelian · Post by **Rhelian** » Tue Apr 20, 2004 10:43 pm

At five attacks per round, you could destroy someone's entire outfit within ten or twenty rounds easily.

Not a good idea, especially with one-off items or quest rewards.

Serge · Post by **Serge** » Wed Apr 21, 2004 12:07 am

I'm not saying you could make it a combat mode or anything, replacing all attacks with sundering. That would be insane. I'm saying, you could use it like the beat command, which can only be used once every few rounds or so, I believe. It functions like a combat skill, like kick or punch. Or could even forgo all attacks in a round, for one attack aimed at equipment.

Rhelian · Post by **Rhelian** » Wed Apr 21, 2004 12:26 am

Attackers shouldn't be able to inflict specific object damage onto an opponent - if it was brought in, it should be victim-side only - or a self affecting skill, in other words.

However, that too would have it's drawbacks - damage breastplate, repair breastplate, repeat.

Serge · Post by **Serge** » Wed Apr 21, 2004 1:06 am

I understand where your coming from, as this may not be something people will love, but losing items and having things damaged does happen, and in table top d&d, players can inflict this on NPC's and monsters, and vice versa. I figured since the imms added the sunder feat, and beat command to damage weapons, it would only make sense to take it a step further. I mean, if you can smack their weapon, why not their shield or armor? I like my quest items the same as anyone on the game, but part of playing the game is risk taking. If you get into any fight, you should be prepared to lose something, even your life.

Rhelian · Post by **Rhelian** » Wed Apr 21, 2004 1:28 am

This isn't exactly tabletop though, and I can't see a lot of people volunteering to have an option added where other characters can signifcantly damage their equipment beyond the rate it already gets scrapped.

It might be more realistic, but if it were possible, players would target Item Of Supreme Rareness. What is someone targets a wedding ring and destroys that? Or items that were renamed and can no longer be reaquired? True, if you use things in a battle they will show wear and tear, but this command would allow for item destruction on a large scale.

Smart fighting might show up because of this - targeting a wizard's spellpouch for four rounds and destroying it utterly, spraying components all over the ground - or attacking a fighter's scabbards to make his magic sword fall to the ground - but primarily I personally can only see people shying away from combat so that their equipment isn't targeted.

I realise that items shouldnt be the focus of a character, but if you have a nice matching set of armour and it looses several peices in ten minutes, you're going to be more than a bit miffed.

Gwain · Post by **Gwain** » Wed Apr 21, 2004 4:18 am

What about creating a limit to such an attack, where in doing the attack the player leaves himself open to 3-5 times the damage from the pc or npc he or she is attacking?

Or what about a different kind or limit where the attacker using the skill can either use it only once or the usage of such skill burns up a percentage of exp points from the shock of the other attack. I know that if player one make the decision to beat in player two's wrist guard and lowers his body to deliver the blow this leaves him open to a nasty headshot or good bop by Two.

Or an affect can be created. Basically after the item attack is accomplished and/or tried for two rounds the attackers armour count drops to the point that it is like wearning reg clothing or nothing at all, symbolising the attacked players rage at an item being singled out and the force that he or she is now applying in vengence or through bodily impulse.

I know it seems limiting but it seems to be a better alternative to being beat to loss in only a certain place and it will help a person that might not usually think in while in battle by forcing them to consider their motives before plunging a sword into the "hallowed and holy boots of yore" just because they are there.

Jerigo · Post by **Jerigo** » Wed Apr 21, 2004 5:22 am

Just curious, Gwain, but when you talk about lowering the AC of the attacking character to symbolize the character's aggression towards that one single area of his target, would that effect end as soon as the fight was over? Maybe it would be good for its effect to be lasting, almost like the adrenaline that prevents you from quitting after a fight. I don't want to sound paranoid, but without that extra safeguard, a player could theoretically flee for a second, then come back to continue the fight with his AC restored.

Glim · Post by **Glim** » Wed Apr 21, 2004 1:17 pm

I would think, if this were to happen, it would only be able to be applied to a characters weapon. As if you were trying for something else, it would just be like a normal attack.

Serge · Post by **Serge** » Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:00 pm

About what Gwain said, making attacks against an opponents weapon, shield, or armor, provokes an attack of opportunity each time, unless you have the Sunder feat. So there is a downside to attacking someones possessions. If your not trained to be good at it, your gonna get whacked each time you try.

Serge

Gwain · Post by **Gwain** » Wed Apr 21, 2004 8:08 pm

Such is the risk you take in attacking with the skill in the first place. I think the skill needs to have serious consequences so that there will be many hard lessons along the way in training it.