Types of Damage

yperkeimenos

Hi all,as you know at the moment there is virtually no difference among the various forms of damage.Fire,cold,necrotic,holy etc. are all there for cosmetic purposes only. So how about if a new system was implemented where each type of damage had different effects on different enemies. For example as things stand a Fire Golem will take the same amount of damage whether it's hit by fire or Ice,which is ridiculous. With the new system, fire would do little to no damage but ,say,Ice would hurt it really bad.This diversification would make class planning and the game as a whole so much more interesting. What do you think?

ayroux

It would take too much work from the DEVs to work. So I doubt itll ever happen. This has been brought up before, they would have to do alot of extra coding and re-code alot to make this happen.

hefisdo

If that's implemented, no one would call SWs for something since most mobs would be Necrotic.

thedemien

I do wish they implement types of damage and AR/reflex/will/fortitude model from D&D. this is what was making D&D classes so valueble and different while keeping balance between them.

Obviously this is a lot of work to do. But this will allow to make that amount of difference in game as any D&D game realization have. And not fall into regular dps <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font>.

str8slayer

This is one major variable they left out of the damage equations (I'm sure it was considered and later thrown-out in alpha or something), from what I understand they use far-from-streamlined code to calculate damage resulting in... unpredictability. Adding damage type resistances to the mix, especially now, would cause FAR more problems than it would fix.

What you do get out of damage types, is chances for procs, if you use them then paying attention to damage types will be more important. Additionally, weapon enchantment damage types will NOT proc anything, keep this in mind.

thedemien

str8slayer wrote: »

This is one major variable they left out of the damage equations (I'm sure it was considered and later thrown-out in alpha or something),
What you do get out of damage types, is chances for procs, if you use them then paying attention to damage types will be more important. Additionally, weapon enchantment damage types will NOT proc anything, keep this in mind.

Well was not this what all D&D fans were expecting eventually? I do understand the need for "casual" but com on it D&D not warcraft

str8slayer

thedemien wrote: »

Well was not this what all D&D fans were expecting eventually? I do understand the need for "casual" but com on it D&D not warcraft

It is far too late to discuss any changes of this nature, this is all pretty much hard-code at this point, they do not have the resources to alter it, any longer, nor would they want to.

The die is cast, the decision is made, as it were, like I said, this was something to do when coding the game engine and they decided to pass on the mechanic entirely, as it relates to damage anything takes.

(would your ice CW really be of any use in FH, ect?)

sockmunkey

str8slayer wrote: »

(would your ice CW really be of any use in FH, ect?)

And that right there is the crux of the problem. No one wants to have a class that is useless in certain areas. Or worse, finds an area nearly impossible to progress through simply due to a class choice that isn't suitable to one area. Especially when that only effects just a few classes, while others have no issue at all. Like the martial classes doing physical damage.

For it to be even remotely fair, there would need to be mobs that can only be hurt by magic in addition to mobs that are resistant to various magical effects. It would honestly be an overly complex mess, with little return. And something more likely to turn off or annoy players, the moment they get stomped by a set of mobs they suddenly find out they cant hurt.

sockmunkey

magenubbie wrote: »

PS: mages have lightning and fire at their disposal as well

Correction, its rime fire. Its still cold damage.

sockmunkey

magenubbie wrote: »

Smolder is not rim fire. Fanning the flames is fire. And there's still lightning.

Smoulder
Many of the Master of Flames Paragon powers add Smolder to your target which deals damage over time. If the target is affected by Chill, it gains a Rimefire aspect, allowing its duration to be refreshed by Chill effects.

Seems fairly chilly to me. And seeing as how both Fanning the Flames and Furious Immolation are tied to smoulder. Both are also cold based.