Crossfire Mailing List Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Hit Points
- To: crossfire (at) ifi.uio.no,
- Subject: Re: Hit Points
- From: Brian Thomas <>
- Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 10:29:16 -0500
> Stephen John Harley writes:
>
> After playing the latest version I was surprised that I could increase my
> hit points by using skills like search. The classical definition of HP's
I am responsible for this code change. The points that you bring
up are important ones, namely 1) gaining hit points based on non-
combat skills seems silly and 2) if we only hand out hitpoints for
fighter skills, the other classes (mages, priests, thieves,..) will
not be very well balanced for play.
So, basically I decided to take the "unrealistic" route of making the
game playable. Are there other solutions? Should we change?
I would like to point out that one gains little xp from the use of
the "non-risk" skills (which are "find traps", the identifying
skills like "smithery", and movement skills like "mountaineer).
Skills like "picklocks" and "stealing" do have very real risk. In
the case of the former, you automatically set off traps in the door
(and I grant that this is not a huge "risk", but you dont gain much
xp from using this skill either!). In the case of stealing, many times
you have to stand, without attacking, next to some hostile creature to
steal stuff. I have died more than once from deciding to "steal just one
more thing" from a creature. But then again, a player at higher levels
can engineer the situation to where they can steal from a creature with
out fear of death. One case is where the player gets the "fire immunity"
spell and steals from the red dragons. Perhaps the xp reward should be decreased
in the case of stealing from hostile creatures (Or, immunity spells
should be made much harder to obtain since they unbalance the game..)
Still, other scenarios for gaining hp from xp should be considered.
I havent been able to construct one which is simple and sensible.
Ideas anyone?
b.t.