The woman viciously leaps toward you, but a pot helm gets in the way.
I think this should go. The wording is more than ugly, and subjective as well.
The woman's attack on you is absorbed by a pot helm.
Unless this means a different sort of armor-block, this should be the only thing one sees. It is simple and factual.
Agreed.
...That's about all I have to say about that.
I always thought it was funny to see that in the midst of sparring/combat.
Soandso viciously leaps toward you, but [-insert part-] gets in the way.
What I like:
Soandso viciously leaps toward you, but a pair of chalton leather boots gets in the way.
Is the person jumping at my boots or did I just drop-kick them out of the air?
Agreed. It's not so horrible during an actual fight, when the blows can ... actually be vicious.
But when you're some cool, collected rapier using trainer, who's got the bad luck of training a noble 13 year old child, and whose main worries involve ... making her learn, and ... not killing her. And the suddenly you 'viciously leap' meh ... it feels odd.
Well, I figure that during a fight, emotes can be thrown out to describe that you wanna leap at people. I figure that a factual statement of armor blocking a blow is better than a subjective statement.
Quote from: The7DeadlyVenomz on July 07, 2008, 02:20:28 AM
Well, I figure that during a fight, emotes can be thrown out to describe that you wanna leap at people. I figure that a factual statement of armor blocking a blow is better than a subjective statement.
Yes.
A beige-striped sand raptor leaps toward you, but your tough, grey-chitin codpiece got in the way. I laughed at that one when it happened. It just implies so much.
I agree with the OP.
Even if it is entertaining to see the gurth viciously leap towards you but your tough skin gets in the way.
I mean hey, we got rid of bonzai on rescue, this should be next.
Banzai! should totally go back in.
Are you certain that one is not a message for deflection (no damage to armor) and the other for absorption (all damage that would have been done absorbed by the armor).
Having two different messages for the two different things absolutely makes sense, in my mind. I'm indifferent as to the wording, as long as you can figure out what is happening.
Banzai? The good ole DIKU rescue message 'Banzai'?
:)
Yes... I would love that.. I always loved that.
Quote from: Twilight on July 07, 2008, 12:33:10 PM
Are you certain that one is not a message for deflection (no damage to armor) and the other for absorption (all damage that would have been done absorbed by the armor).
Having two different messages for the two different things absolutely makes sense, in my mind. I'm indifferent as to the wording, as long as you can figure out what is happening.
No, I am not certain. I noted that I am not certain in my original post.
And having two different messages doesn't bother me. It's having a subjective message that bothers me.
The man's attack on you is deflected by a pot helm.That would work, if one was a deflection message.
I agree the message is somewhat subjective and clunky. I think it's compounded by also feeling stale, since you see it repeated so often.
I'd love it if there were more variations on combat messages to draw on, so they seemed less repetitive.
While the message may be stale or jarring, it is not broken functionality. We understand you guys are searching for things to talk about and be exited about , but we're trying to keep an Arm 2 focus, while fixing real issues with Arm 1.
I don't believe this is really an issue.
It's no issue, but all it is in the code is a line. A single line. At the most, it is a line per combative function. Heh. I wasn't actually lobbying to even get it fixed - although now that I think about it, Morg....
...nah, really, i am just sorta saying that it exists, and I suppose I should also have said that I hope I don't see it in Arm.2. I'd love it if all coded messages were either factual, or part of a style. For basic combat, we should have basic messages.
Quote from: Twilight on July 07, 2008, 12:33:10 PM
Are you certain that one is not a message for deflection (no damage to armor) and the other for absorption (all damage that would have been done absorbed by the armor).
Having two different messages for the two different things absolutely makes sense, in my mind. I'm indifferent as to the wording, as long as you can figure out what is happening.
When a blow is deflected off of armor you should see a message saying it is deflected. I don't want to get too IC, but I could post examples of deflection and absorption. As for the whole viciously leaping thing...I'm not 100% certain but I have always considered it a blow that was quick enough to land against you but so light that the armor absorbing it took no damage.
Made me laugh when a snake viciously lept at me three times and got deflected by a bracelet...I'm easily amused :)