So You Want to Talk Stats?

[Jeshin]

Yet another thread is now open to clear up the RAT thread. If you want to discuss the perceived balance or imbalance of stats and it's effects on combat post-smirk-inducing-wrist-wear here you go!

[Synthesis]

Best warrior I ever had was prioritized agility/wisdom/strength/endurance.  It didn't suck.

[Cutthroat]

Well, the whole point of prioritizing stats during character generation is... to prioritize. So we prioritize strength if we want the benefits of strength, endurance if we want the benefits of endurance, agility if we want the benefits of agility, and wisdom if we want the benefits of wisdom.

Certain stats may be more important than others in certain aspects of combat, stealth, or other parts of the game, but ultimately one will find some kind of advantage to a stat being higher than others, regardless of the specific stat. As a fighter, arguably every stat is important in one way or another. What ends up being the most important stat in combat depends on how you play your character, and the myriad variables that arise when playing a character - equipment, style, skills, etc.

It's far more productive to figure out how to best play with the hand one is dealt, stat-wise, rather than lament the lack of a high stat that one absolutely believes he needs.

[Bacon]

I just think endurance should have more visible impact than it does to different aspects of the game. Otherwise, I think it's all good.

[Celest]

I'll just say what I said in the other thread about endurance, but summarized:

In terms of play-ability, the direct benefit gained by high endurance (HPs) is largely mitigated by the fact that the non-regeneration floor's percentage does not change, and so it's very plausible that you can have more HPs than someone who is uninjured or lightly injured (90, 80, 70, etc.), but be considered severely injured and will no longer regenerate. Strength and agility both grant direct combat bonuses to defense and offense, while endurance only grants defensive bonuses directly. Not to mention that the practical benefit of endurance's HP bonus is very dependent on the effectiveness of your armor (str) or your defensive skills (agi). Any offensive bonuses gained through endurance (if there are any) seem indirect and certainly aren't listed in help endurance, such as through skills or living longer. It seems as if str/agi aren't very reliant on endurance for effectiveness, while endurance relies heavily on str/agi (or even wisdom) for it's effectiveness.

Someone with high endurance but low strength is also worse at enduring the encumbrance of heavy armor than someone with high strength, which seems to run contrary to the very definition at endurance. Yes, someone who is strong should be able to lift things better, but when it comes to something that must be 'toughed out' for long periods on end (heavy armor), endurance makes more sense than strength. While endurance clearly does effect a lot of behind-the-scenes things as laid out in the help file, pretty much everyone recommends prioritizing str/agi for fightery types for a number or reasons, or even str/agi/wis over it. Whether this is due to the rarity of the behind-the-scenes stuff, or due to the other ways to counteract the behind-the-scenes stuff, or because you might only ever get one shot for endurance to roll against the behind-the-scenes stuff, or due to a lack of general effectiveness, I can't say, but it definitely seems like endurance is generally considered by most players to be a poor choice to prioritize.

[musashi]

That's not the case, Celest.

I don't want to give away sekrit stuff by going into detail but suffice to say that, having played characters who were able to raise and lower their max HP, I noticed that the "non-regeneration floor percentage" as you put it, changed along with the max-HP level.

[Bacon]

That's not the case, Celest.

I don't want to give away sekrit stuff by going into detail but suffice to say that, having played characters who were able to raise and lower their max HP, I noticed that the "non-regeneration floor percentage" as you put it, changed along with the max-HP level.

What he said.

[Celest]

That's not the case, Celest.

I don't want to give away sekrit stuff by going into detail but suffice to say that, having played characters who were able to raise and lower their max HP, I noticed that the "non-regeneration floor percentage" as you put it, changed along with the max-HP level.

Maybe it occurs with people who can raise/lower their max HP, but on my last PC who had naturally high HPs, the percentage was still approximately the same as PCs who had naturally low HPs, and it resulted in that floor being at approximately the same as the low-HP character's max HPs. If there is a difference, it's certainly not noticeable... Maybe a 5% difference between poor to exceptional by natural means.

Edit: It's also possible that the difference between naturally high and naturally low HPs, while fairly significant, is not significant enough to equal that of super-sekrit high HPs and thus the small percentage of difference is much more noticeable among Super Sekrit HPs than it is among natural endurance HPs. I did see someone say they had over 200 HPs as their highest before, and so if that's the scope of super sekrit HPs, a difference which may be unnoticeable at the natural range may be much more noticeable there.

[Case]

I think Celest is saying that the percentage that the floor is derived from could change, based on the following:

PC with 100 hp, arbitrary regen floor of 50% = floor of 50hp
PC with 200 hp, arbitrary regen floor of 50% = floor of 100hp

I think the regen floor may shift a little, but it does create this divide where a more HP'd character cannot regenerate what is the healthy equivalent of a less HP'd PC due to ratio. This is a problem with the HP system in general, trying to work out what each current/max health point actually means for a character.

[Synthesis]

If you're half-dead, you're half-dead...whether that's 50 hp or 100hp.  I don't see what the big deal is.

[musashi]

Like I said, I don't want to get into it in more detail since it treds on some things that are absolutely not cool for the general GDB discussion, but the change is there.

And the change might very likely be layered. I mean, there are several different ranges of HP regeneration in the game.

Get hurt a little ... you can regen it up while walking around town.
Get hurt a little more ... you have to sit down to heal it up.
Get hurt a little more ... you have to rest to heal it up.
Get hurt a lot ... you need to sleep to heal it up.

All of these different levels are based on a different percentage of your character's max HP. And some might change more drastically than others depending on your endurance stat.

If you're saying that you believe it doesn't change enough, well ... alright. That's your opinion and that's cool. But to say that it doesn't change, would be factually inaccurate.

[Case]

If you're half-dead, you're half-dead...whether that's 50 hp or 100hp.  I don't see what the big deal is.

hey man, if health worked like this RL, you'd be out of the job

[Synthesis]

musashi, you're one of those dudes who has played for 10 years but only had 3 PCs, aren't you?

The floor is ~55% of your max hp.  Once you get below that you have to sleep or bandage.  There is no sit range, or rest range, and that threshold percentage never changes.

If you're half-dead, you're half-dead...whether that's 50 hp or 100hp.  I don't see what the big deal is.

hey man, if health worked like this RL, you'd be out of the job

Think of it this way:  you have 5L of blood, and a half-giant has 10L.  Just because the half-giant has 5L left after getting bitten by a mekillot doesn't mean he's just as healthy as a woundless human.  The system really does make more sense than having an absolute cutoff point that is universal for all hp maximums.

[Case]

If you're half-dead, you're half-dead...whether that's 50 hp or 100hp.  I don't see what the big deal is.

hey man, if health worked like this RL, you'd be out of the job

Think of it this way:  you have 5L of blood, and a half-giant has 10L.  Just because the half-giant has 5L left after getting bitten by a mekillot doesn't mean he's just as healthy as a woundless human.  The system really does make more sense than having an absolute cutoff point that is universal for all hp maximums.

I agree. But it depends on what a health point is. If it's quantity of blood, cool. If it's amount of physical drive to push on, no.

[Celest]

If you're half-dead, you're half-dead...whether that's 50 hp or 100hp.  I don't see what the big deal is.

The issue is that your "half dead" is still tougher than someone's "unharmed," so why does the game treat it as if one is on the verge of death? It's a flaw with the HP system in general, but I don't see why penalizing people who prioritize endurance or have concepts where endurance is a large part because of a code limitation that can be easily changed.

And the change might very likely be layered. I mean, there are several different ranges of HP regeneration in the game.

Get hurt a little ... you can regen it up while walking around town.
Get hurt a little more ... you have to sit down to heal it up.
Get hurt a little more ... you have to rest to heal it up.
Get hurt a lot ... you need to sleep to heal it up.

That has never been my experience with how the health system works in game, ever. Are you sure we're both playing the same MUD?

[Synthesis]

The game treats you as if you're on the verge of death because you -are- on the verge of death.

If you don't want to RP it like that, that's your problem, not the game's.

[BleakOne]

I agree with Synth on this. A super-tough PC may still take more to kill than a normal person even after getting hacked in the head with an axe, but he's still been hacked in the head with an axe, and will need more than a sit down to recover.

Someone who has lost around half their hp would be pretty messed up, even if they still have more HP than a normal person on healthy.

[Celest]

The game treats you as if you're on the verge of death because you -are- on the verge of death.

If you don't want to RP it like that, that's your problem, not the game's.

But if you're "on the verge of death" but can still handle a beating better than someone who is completely unwounded then yes, it's a problem with the game and how it classifies "on the verge of death." Especially since it's a fairly arbitrary number that only makes any sense because of the simplicity of the HP system.

Trying to act like the regeneration code and endurance are perfect and the problem is with how people RP it (or, as you put it, how I RP it) is absolutely asinine, and not to mention more than a little insulting. You even admitted earlier that your best PC ever prioritized endurance last. The imms will even suggest that fightery types prioritize str/agi on a fightery type if you want to make sure you come out decent.

[Bacon]

I'm with the others that think it makes sense the way it is in that regard and I believe it would make less sense the way you believe it should be. A half-dead person is a half-dead person, period. Higher endurance means it will take more damage to get to half-dead than it will take one with lower endurance but it still doesn't change the fact that they are half-dead regardless of if half-dead for them is more hp or not.

[Is Friday]

The whole basis for your argument is just plain wrong, Celest. You very clearly do not have a finely tuned understanding of how the code actually works, and you're grasping at straws with very limited experience.

Of course a half-giant is going to be tougher to kill at all stages of his HP bar, whether he be excellent/poor/near death. Why is that? Because they can take more punishment than a human.

[hyzhenhok]

The game treats you as if you're on the verge of death because you -are- on the verge of death.

If you don't want to RP it like that, that's your problem, not the game's.

But if you're "on the verge of death" but can still handle a beating better than someone who is completely unwounded then yes, it's a problem with the game and how it classifies "on the verge of death." Especially since it's a fairly arbitrary number that only makes any sense because of the simplicity of the HP system.

Trying to act like the regeneration code and endurance are perfect and the problem is with how people RP it (or, as you put it, how I RP it) is absolutely asinine, and not to mention more than a little insulting. You even admitted earlier that your best PC ever prioritized endurance last. The imms will even suggest that fightery types prioritize str/agi on a fightery type if you want to make sure you come out decent.

It works perfectly fine and makes perfect sense. William Wallace will last longer than poncy Prince Edward while having his entrails torn out and put on display--he has more hitpoints total. But he's still on the verge of death.

[musashi]

musashi, you're one of those dudes who has played for 10 years but only had 3 PCs, aren't you?

The floor is ~55% of your max hp.  Once you get below that you have to sleep or bandage.  There is no sit range, or rest range, and that threshold percentage never changes.

Um ... really? My experience has been that if I loose ... oh to pick completely random numbers ... 5  of my 100 HP, I can regen that back without having to do anything. It's automagick.

If I lose say ... 35 of my 100 HP ... I will not heal that back unless I codedly rest. Then the normal regen kicks in.

If I lose say ... 85 of my 100 HP ... I will not heal that back unless I codedly sleep. Then the normal regen kicks in.

You're saying that's wrong? I call BS 

[BleakOne]

I've never had to rest to regain. It's either sleep, or normal regen.

I'm still fairly newb though.

[Bacon]

I've never had to rest to regain. It's either sleep, or normal regen.

Yeah, it's been my experience that you regen (resting or not) until the point that you need to sleep to regen.

[Synthesis]

musashi, you're one of those dudes who has played for 10 years but only had 3 PCs, aren't you?

The floor is ~55% of your max hp.  Once you get below that you have to sleep or bandage.  There is no sit range, or rest range, and that threshold percentage never changes.

Um ... really? My experience has been that if I loose ... oh to pick completely random numbers ... 5  of my 100 HP, I can regen that back without having to do anything. It's automagick.

If I lose say ... 35 of my 100 HP ... I will not heal that back unless I codedly rest. Then the normal regen kicks in.

If I lose say ... 85 of my 100 HP ... I will not heal that back unless I codedly sleep. Then the normal regen kicks in.

You're saying that's wrong? I call BS 

lol noob

[Nyr]

 

[BleakOne]

Oooh... froggy! 

[Synthesis]

I can't see HMG-CoA reductase either.  Doesn't mean atorvastatin doesn't work.

[Dakurus]

Actually the code takes into account the phases of the moons, the terrain, and proximity of local aggressive mobiles when determining healing rate and need for position for recovery.

Everyone has their own impressions, stop the name calling and the I'm more right then you.
You want to talk general theory, ideas, and suggestion, fine.
Thanks for playing.

[RogueGunslinger]

* RogueGunslinger scratches his head.

Wow. That's like, the best code knowledge I've gotten in months.

[musashi]

Whoa!!! *runs off to test ... well ... to work! But after that to test!*

[BleakOne]

*Goes out to take all the boots of people who go hunting during full moons*

[X-D]

I am amused.

Still, I have to wonder, on the people complaining that end does not affect enough...What race were you playing when you decided this and what end?

HP is meaningless and actually has very little to do with your end and far more to do with your race.

If you had a good end human then you rolled a EG end human...well, to be honest, that is not a large difference and cannot be considered a high end PC...hell, a AI end human cannot really be considered such.

Still, If you had a exceptional end human and did not think it had a large enough affect, I really have to think you did not stick with it long enough or were really not paying attention.

The bonuses, combat and other to having very high end are many and useful...one of my best and longest lived PCs was a dwarf ranger with good str, ave agi, ba wis and AI endurance...and that was before all the end draining skills...today he would be that much more awesome.

[Kaineus]

Celest makes a good point just because the % threshold being the same makes the benefits of having higher HP even more trivial. In any combat situation, being an endurance prime-statted character basically means you'll get powned by everyone else. End of story.

I know the idea of the game is roleplay over completely balanced gameplay (we aren't going to nerf and boost certain stats every week). However, having played an endurance prime statted character that utterly sucked, I can say this stat, as it is now, is damaging the RP environment. Ideally I'd like to a lot more high-endurance, defensive characters. But I will simply never prioritize endurance again because it is an essentially worthless stat. Prioritizing it lowers your defense (by forgoing the encumbrance boost provided by strength and reducing your ability to dodge) so much that the increased HP counts for nothing.

I'd like to reiterate my point that encumbrance should half be determined by endurance, half determined by strength. This just makes sense. Military recruits from the medieval ages to now spend a huge amount of their time just running around in their gear. Running is an endurance exercise. Fighting is an endurance excercize (as anyone who does martial arts knows). Fighting and running in heavy gear requires tremendous amounts of endurance to even take a few steps. I'm tired of people playing obscene beefcakes in silthorror who probably have endurance stats ranging from good to poor. It makes no sense at all. None.

Let me reiterate my point a third time. Please make encumbrance half determined by endurance. It just makes sense.


Regarding the racial differences: I realize dwarves, half-giants, etc may see bigger bonuses from endurance. Having played a dwarf with 130 HP and alright agility, I can still say, that 30 HP above the human average HP still doesn't count for beans compared to the huge defensive boosts provided by high strength. Just don't make strength count for equipment load so much.

[Synthesis]

If you don't think endurance is helpful, prioritize it last.

PROBLEM SOLVED

[boog]

I can't see HMG-CoA reductase either.  Doesn't mean atorvastatin doesn't work.

Whoosh, Synth. Whoosh. I think I'm the only one who understood that statement. If someone needs a $4 co-pay card for Lipitor, hit me up!

Anyway, I don't know why everyone is so concerned about stats, anyway. This is the kind of shit that takes away from roleplay. I understand that the code, of course, has a place in roleplay, but man. Sometimes it seems like it's the only thing that matters to 80% of the playerbase.

I didn't know the name of this game was, "I run out of stam and hps quicker than the other guy, so I hate it." It's like saying someone's blue candy is better than your red candy or something.

Sometimes, people aren't as good as other people. In game, in real life. Play it up, my brothas and sistahs.

[Hot_Dancer]

..I remember once-upon-a-time I had a pretty nasty assassin and had a fairly notorious dwarven Rukki in my sights.

Your average guy I could one-shot or knock out with high end poison/otherwise have them down in under a few
seconds. This enemy though.. I was worried it would either be resisted outright by said high endurance enemy or
not damage him fast enough before he could react to one-shot me back.

I hesitated, he knocked me down.

[Kaineus]

Problem not solved. I don't want to do what nearly everyone else does. I want to roleplay concepts I want to role play, that make logical sense.

Here's to illustrate my point again.

A strength prime stat warrior might look like this:
http://images.wikia.com/heman/images/5/53/He-man02.jpg
He-man doesn't need armor! He-man is too muscle-bound for any armor to even fit him! He-man uses all of his strength to heft his hugeass sword and murder people! And surprise, the game is still balanced, because He-man can reel people so badly he doesn't even -need- armor.

An endurance prime statted warrior might look like this:
http://www.biographyonline.net/people/images/joan.gif
Joan of Arc took how many arrows in battle, and kept fighting? A shit ton. She intentionally starved herself as a part of her ascetic lifestyle and still kicked ass and took names. She was never fabled for her speed or strength, and she was crazy to boot. But damn, she was tough, and had the endurance necessary to lug all that armor to boot.

As the stats are, differentiation in character concepts like this is so extremely unbalanced that very few people even bother to play low strength warriors. And to me that is very sad. I like to have a wide array of viable character concepts in game.

[Kaineus]

Thanks for your anecdote, Dancer. It gives me some hope for the viability of high endurance characters.

[Kieandatu]

Endurance has more to do with characters than HP. This has been stated many times.
The percentage, as has been stated, is the same regardless of race, as far as the auto-heal "floor".
You want to play a "defensive" character. Please define what makes a "defensive" character in your mind. Having 20 more HP does not make you more defensive.

All the things you want to do for your "defensive" PCs have nothing to do with endurance, and I would suggest you think about the actual "defense" stat in game. If you want to be defensive, and take hits, then learn to take hits. Don't assume the stat is useless just because the extra 10hp didn't make you a combat "elite".

[Kol]

Anyway, I don't know why everyone is so concerned about stats, anyway. This is the kind of shit that takes away from roleplay. I understand that the code, of course, has a place in roleplay, but man. Sometimes it seems like it's the only thing that matters to 80% of the playerbase.

I didn't know the name of this game was, "I run out of stam and hps quicker than the other guy, so I hate it." It's like saying someone's blue candy is better than your red candy or something.

Sometimes, people aren't as good as other people. In game, in real life. Play it up, my brothas and sistahs.

I heart you.

[Kaineus]

Anyway, I don't know why everyone is so concerned about stats, anyway. This is the kind of shit that takes away from roleplay. I understand that the code, of course, has a place in roleplay, but man. Sometimes it seems like it's the only thing that matters to 80% of the playerbase.

Stats and roleplay are not mutually exclusive. I try to put my statorder as whatever fits my concept and background. Most people do. But most people also put endurance last despite their description or concept. Why? Because endurance got the short-end of the code stick.

To repeat myself, as the stats are, differentiation in character concepts like this is so extremely unbalanced that very few people even bother to play low strength warriors. I am discussing this stat with the hope of improving role play. That is, allowing for warriors more like paladins (defensive, good HP, lots of armor) in addition to the high str/agi warrior/berserker types most people play.

Go on and back up boog. But I feel the game is missing out on a lot of diversity in combat because this stat is useless. Endurance doesn't make you more defensive. The defensive boosts granted by Strength and Agi make you more defensive. Endurance needs to be improved.

[Synthesis]

Endurance isn't supposed to make you "more defensive" in a melee sense.  Why are you so fixated on this point?

[Delirium]

cluex4: agility.

[Kaineus]

Endurance isn't supposed to make you "more defensive" in a melee sense.  Why are you so fixated on this point?

Because you look at any fighter training for any event in real life, and endurance is valued much more in real life, than it is in game. Look at a professional boxer. They probably spend as much time jumping rope and jogging as they do throwing punches.

The weakness of this stat leads to homogeneity in warrior concepts. It's so bad, that in a lot of guilds, the viability of warriors is only a matter of how strong they are (And oh, if they have alright agi to go with it). High endurance warriors are left by the wayside, weak and worthless. I want to be able to play a good warrior without having to be fast like a ninja or obscenely strong. I want diversity in strategies.

[Synthesis]

You're confusing the various senses of the word endurance, man.

Read the helpfile on endurance.  It tells you what 'endurance' means in terms of -this- game, and how it's helpful in -this- game.  It does not neatly overlap with real-life endurance (i.e. running a marathon).

[Kieandatu]

I want to be able to play a good warrior without having to be fast like a ninja or obscenely strong. I want diversity in strategies.

Play the character, not the stats.

I had something longer written up, but for the sake of brevity, repeat that mantra. Unless you rolled poor in every stat, ever warrior is "capable" of doing whatever you want them to. Emote how you want, and play your character how you want. Stop focusing on Endurance being the reason you can't play some role, because it isn't.

[Kaineus]

Alright, just as someone who has tried a few times, I am disappointed with how discouraging it is. I am just aiming for realism, and I am tired of something so tremendously important in real life having no weight in the game.

Here's a new suggestion--make it cost 1 stamina for every 1-6 melee hits delivered. That is completely logical (fighting will tire you the fuck out, at least from my experience doing krav maga half assedly). I am just trying to make something so logically integral to success as a warrior factor into the game more appropriately.

[Synthesis]

So...you're concerned that a stat that isn't intended to do what you think it should do doesn't perform as you'd expect, in the context of a feature that doesn't even exist.

[Kaineus]

Endurance is immensely important in succeeding as any kind of soldier in real life. For example, even riding horses in real life takes physical effort on the part of the rider. My argument is that the code should reflect how important endurance is in combat and all sorts of things. I am thinking of ways for this to happen. You all have proven the encumbrance option is not viable. So I am proposing other things.

[hyzhenhok]

Endurance is immensely important in succeeding as any kind of soldier in real life. For example, even riding horses in real life takes physical effort on the part of the rider. My argument is that the code should reflect how important endurance is in combat and all sorts of things. I am thinking of ways for this to happen. You all have proven the encumbrance option is not viable. So I am proposing other things.

Endurance is important in the game. But Strength and Agility are also important.

There is nothing about the code that prevents you from roleplaying a defensive warrior or roleplaying the importance of endurance while fighting or out in the desert.

[Synthesis]

Endurance is the stat for people who are too weak and slow to get it done quickly, or the tie-breaker when your strength and agility are matched.  It's important, yes...but if you're significantly weaker and/or slower, it's not going to save your bacon, unless you're running away.

I think it would help you if you mentally replaced 'endurance' with the typical D&D 'constitution' stat, because that's -mostly- how it works for Armageddon.

[Delirium]

Fighting taking stamina points might sound nice in theory (I don't personally think it does) but it would wreck playability.

[Fathi]

Fighting taking stamina points might sound nice in theory (I don't personally think it does) but it would wreck playability.

On the bright side, everybody would be easier to kill because they'd all be wearing Kuraci camouflage sandcloth instead of real armour.

[Wolfsong]

Provided you could find them, yes.

[Delirium]

"Yes, sir, the army's just over that dune."

"What army?"

[Kaineus]

You're right, it fits the DnD definition. But Arma doesn't work entirely like DnD, and so I think the stat is still underpowered for these two reasons.

-The effect of constitution on hit dice in DnD is cumulative, and I'm not sure the starting modifier in Arma is significant enough to compensate for the lack of this cumulative hp gain. I have seen racial and guild modifiers to be very significant. But I don't think the endurance modifier is enough to warrant anyone prioritizing it. If you got the hit-dice modifier on your DnD character only for level one, and no subsequent levels, no one would prioritize this attribute in DnD either.

I recall human warriors in DnD with 18 constitution becoming rather troll-like (seeing as half-trolls only have constitution capped to 22 or some such). In Armageddon it's as if humans are capped at 14 constitution, dwarves capped at 16, and muls and half-giants are somewhere around 22 or 24. This is only from my experience, and I don't want to talk in terms of the ranges of HP I've seen in Arma--but I think no-karma humanoid races get screwed in terms of endurance mattering as a stat.

I'm speaking without knowing the code, but it is just my sense that endurance is under valued and I'm trying my best to defend this point.

Also: all physical descriptions and backgrounds should conform to the stats of your character. I think people like to forget endurance (not to mention the famine and diseases ravaging zalanthas) exists when they write their physical descriptions.

[RogueGunslinger]

[picardfacepalm.jpg]

[sprucebark]

I had a dwarf once with poor str, exceptional agility, wisdom ( he had wisdom, I just don't remember what it was), and absolutely incredible endurance.

The poor strength meant he had to get real choosy with armor and weapon, otherwise he never had trouble hitting someone in a spar.
The high agility helped him dodge a lot of attacks and he struck back faster.
The endurance let him regenerate in the middle of a spar and be almost always ready for another match.

I think it worked exactly as intended and desired. He was in great shape, very fast, but just couldn't deliver -huge- blows.

Now I dream of rolling AI strength with the other stats staying the same......

[RogueGunslinger]

The endurance let him regenerate in the middle of a spar

What?

[Wolfsong]

Dwarves don't count, though. Hell, I had a dwarf ranger that, straight out of the box with no armor and a pair of shitty clubs, could go off and smash carru, day 1.

[Kaineus]

And also the "dwarves don't count" bit reinforces my point about DnD endurance/constitution range being more flexible than Armageddon's. But I accept that dwarves can have obscene str/endurance and humans cannot. It's fine. It adds to the setting of the game to have races so drastically differentiated in terms of stats.

[Dark Fate]

Ideally I'd like to a lot more high-endurance, defensive characters. But I will simply never prioritize endurance again because it is an essentially worthless stat. Prioritizing it lowers your defense (by forgoing the encumbrance boost provided by strength and reducing your ability to dodge) so much that the increased HP counts for nothing.

Why is endurance the defensive stat?
Endurance... is endurance. It isn't and shouldn't be "the defensive stat". It should be your characters endurance.
It also isn't worthless.

Prioritizing it doesn't lower your defense. It means you will have at least a decent endurance. With all the benefits of a decent or high endurance.

Being stronger lets you wear heavier things.
Being faster lets you dodge more attacks.
Being tougher lets you take more hits.
Why isn't it ideal that all three physical stats each contribute to make a "defensive character"?

[Calavera]

I removed a post as well as the posts that quoted it. Nobody's judging anybody by their post count, but if you sarcastically flame-bait people I'll judge you for that whether you've been playing for a decade or a week.

[Synthesis]

The endurance let him regenerate in the middle of a spar

What?

About...8-10 years ago, if you failed a bash on (or got bashed by) someone in the middle of a fight, you would regenerate hp while you were in the sitting position.  It worked for everyone, not just people with high endurance.  They've since fixed it.

[Bogre]

I can't see HMG-CoA reductase either.  Doesn't mean atorvastatin doesn't work.

Whoosh, Synth. Whoosh. I think I'm the only one who understood that statement. If someone needs a $4 co-pay card for Lipitor, hit me up!

Nah, I got it

[Bogre]

And having played a human with 88 hp, and humans with HP over 110, I promise you the guys with more HP were MUCH more effective in combat. You get a bad init round of combat with a big baddy with your 80-something HP and you can be sitting in the 40's or LOWER, and if you have 120 you're still at 80 and not in panic mode.

For most characters, especially for newer characters, I think endurance and HP is a better determinant of survivability than strength and being able to wear armor, because not every PC will be maxing out with heavy-weight armor.

As people have said, if you want to be able to take crits and damage, prioritize endurance. If you want to dish it/rely on armor, take strength. It's tailoring stats to the PC and your own playstyle. I really, really like being able to take damage, and I rarely, if ever, prioritize endurance last.

[Cutthroat]

Sadly, all the evidence that suggests endurance is actually useful right now is mostly anecdotal, but I'll share some anyway:
- I tend to favor roles with some element of combat in them
- My longest-lived characters tend to have over 100 HP
- There have been many, many times while playing where, had my PCs had a bit less HP, they would be dead
- Similarly, there have been many times where, had my PCs had a bit -more- HP, they would be alive
- Repeat the last two, except with stamina and stun
- Poison is scary.

Instances where endurance is used are: to determine hit points, and stun points; when poison is encountered; resistance to hostile transformations (such as polymorphing); living through extreme physical shock; and walking across long distances.

Endurance: often under-appreciated, until it saves your PC's life.

[X-D]

I recall human warriors in DnD with 18 constitution becoming rather troll-like (seeing as half-trolls only have constitution capped to 22 or some such). In Armageddon it's as if humans are capped at 14 constitution, dwarves capped at 16, and muls and half-giants are somewhere around 22 or 24. This is only from my experience, and I don't want to talk in terms of the ranges of HP I've seen in Arma--but I think no-karma humanoid races get screwed in terms of endurance mattering as a stat.

That amuses me...the docs straight up say, "nothing matches the hardy dwarf for endurance, though muls and half-giants come close".

If you were to assign DnD style numbers to the races, it would look more like, human 14, half-giant 20, mul 24, dwarf 26.

And you need to stop equating HP with end. Though end does determine your top HP inside that race the race itself determines your MIN HP.

As to the bonuses to combat and otherwise to having high end...there are many, some stated in the docs, well, most, some not.

But I can say, if you are a warrior and you have low end and hence low stam, stun, hp...you will be having a harder time then the one with higher....since it directly determines how many times you can kick, bash, disarm and other things.

[John]

Anyway, I don't know why everyone is so concerned about stats, anyway. This is the kind of shit that takes away from roleplay.

You know we never had these sort of discussions back before stats became prioritisable.

[Yam]

Ohhhhh yeah we did.

[John]

Ohhhhh yeah we did.

Naaah. There was always people just bitching about how much it sucks to have sucky strength when they've spent their entire main desc writing about how big their muscles are. From time to time someone might mention how it's odd that they've got absolutely incredible strength and it should probably be less based on the description they wrote.

We had that conversation again and again and again. All the time, that conversation popped up. However I don't ever recall us having a thread dedicated to how endurance isn't important enough in the game and should do more stuff.

[Synthesis]

My only gripe about endurance is that even with high dwarf rolls, you can still get screwed pretty hard by a bad diceroll.  I think one reason people might be discounting it is that it's very difficult to appreciate the difference between, say, 10% and 25%, if a failure means dying.

[Thunkkin]

the phases of the moons

I've long suspected this. I don't care if it's true or not. I BELIEVE.

[roughneck]

Endurance is an awesome stat.

Resist poisons, survive falls, resist getting 'reeled', regenerate hp, stamina and stun way faster.

For the bonus on saving throws vs poisons alone, high endurance is extremely valuable.

Hell, for any one of these advantages endurance is very valuable.

The stats are fairly well represented in the game, i think.  Especially compared to several years ago.

[musashi]

Yeah, I think Endurance is fine the way it is. I also don't think it needs to determine your encumbrance at all, that's handled in a different way already. I mean to say: the more encumbered you are, the more stamina it takes to move you room to room, so the more stamina you have, the longer you can walk. Wa-la. Endurance helps lug heavy junk around.

[jstorrie]

I feel like I don't really notice high endurance (unless it's DORF high, at which point I chug buckets of cleaning fluid and laugh) but I sure as hell notice LOW endurance. Low move sucks and low hp REALLY sucks.

Likewise I don't really notice high wisdom unless it's ELF HIGH, but I sure feel it and hate it when my wisdom's really low.

Overall though I think stats are generally fine. Increasing the component of character HP which comes from endurance is the only tweak I'd ask for, since it feels nearly entirely race-dependent right now. Retuning poison saves might be in order since I don't seem to notice much resistance to poison on non-dwarves/muls/giants, and I would kind of like it if a half-elf with AI endurance or a human with EX/AI endurance got some noticeable poison resistance.

But notice how I said 'feel' through my whole post? That's because this is all anecdotal experience. Take it with a brick of salt.

[Xagon]

Regarding poisons, there are ways to boost your resistance to them that aren't just having a high endurance stat. Use your imagination.

All in all, I think I've been convinced that Endurance isn't has helpful a stat as strength or agility might be. For humans, the difference in HP between poor and AI is somewhere between 40-50, and I can live with an average between that. Yes, having shitty movement sucks, but it's not so bad when you can abate most of the penalty by wearing movement-enhancing items. Poison resistance would be a big one, but there are ways around that, as well if you're truly dedicated.

Strength provides damage and carrying capacity, important for.. damaging things and wearing armor. Super important for any combat type. I have an inkling that it collaborates with one's accuracy in combat, similiar to how it affects your attack bonus in D&D as well.

Agility directly provides to AC, provides offensive bonuses to archery and probably throw, and helps with a menagerie of evasive maneuvers, as well as gives you additional inventory space.

Wisdom is.. wisdom.

Endurance is your Fortitude save and constitution modifier. Agility is your reflex save, applies to damage, applies to dodge AC, and applies to inventory management. Strength goes into offensive combat maneuvers and also to inventory management. I think my next combat character is going Agi < Str < End < Wis.  Save or Die spells and effects just aren't common enough in my playstyle to warrant something else.

[Cind]

I sort of wish I could play a mantis for an hour with AI agility, dodging arrows shot by tribal elves in the same room and laughing.

[Is Friday]

I sort of wish I could play a mantis for an hour with AI agility, dodging arrows shot by tribal elves in the same room and laughing.

You wouldn't dodge them.

[Cind]

I sort of wish I could play a mantis for an hour with AI agility, dodging arrows shot by tribal elves in the same room and laughing.

You wouldn't dodge them.

I believe you.

[Yam]

I sort of wish I could play a mantis for an hour with AI agility, dodging arrows shot by tribal elves in the same room and laughing.

You wouldn't dodge them.

I believe you.

You would parry them!

[musashi]

I sort of wish I could play a mantis for an hour with AI agility, dodging arrows shot by tribal elves in the same room and laughing.

You wouldn't dodge them.

I believe you.

You would parry them!

While simultaneously spamming kick, bash, and disarm.

[CravenMadness]

I've seen a mantis disarm someone, and then -catch- their weapon and use it against the person...

[Talia]

Are we getting too IC? Are we derailed? Yes, I think we are, on both counts.

[X-D]

Derailed? They are talking about stats, So I don't agree myself...IC...Well, the mantis anecdote has been mentioned likely hundreds of times on the GDB over the last 12 years...at least I have seen it more then twenty times with no comment from staff.


Though, this thread does seem to have run its course.

[Zoan]

The moral is, less dorfs, moar elfs.

[jstorrie]

I'm about to play something cool, so in the collegial spirit of this thread, please cross your fingers for my statroll.

[Xagon]

I can see how it could be a good idea to attribute endurance to "worn" weight capacity, perhaps by making it a percentage of your "strength" carrying capacity. It'd take into account the realism of becoming adjusted to wearing heavy armor, or distributing weight across your body. The system already accounts for this to a degree, but I doubt it's based off of endurance.

[Karieith]

Let's say someone gets approved for a really cool/important role. Like a Sergeant or a Templar or something, and they make the toon and then get incredibly unlucky on the stat roll even when they prioritize how they feel they need to.

Would staff fix their stats to something more reasonable or do they too have to cope with the cruel fate of the RNG?

I can understand the average joe just having to suck it up when they roll all average in every stat, but when you're supposed to be a badass I'd like to think that could be accommodated.

[Wasteland Raider]

The way the dice roll are the way the dice roll, whether you be a Byn Sergeant, a Joe Grebber, or an evil  vestric sorcerer warlord.

There have been some fantastic, long-lived role PCs out there with nothing above "very good" (and one or more far below that).