Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567
Results 61 to 69 of 69

Thread: Philosophy of beauty and corruption

  1. #61
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    356

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grey View Post
    Mana should make you more corruptible!
    I agree so much.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Knievel View Post
    I don't think that the manual needs to be changed. Chaos is mysterious.
    Make a fortune cookie instead.

    or tell some story somewhere about two brothers, the ugly one falling for chaos, the beautiful one eventually slaying him. Something like that.
    Not a fan of the specific example so much, but I do like the idea of a fortune cookie or bard story or something expanding on this. Some of it could even be contradictory as to the reason, so that it does end up being more of a mystery.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grey View Post
    Commenting just to attack other people's comments is not helpful. Talk about the subject matter instead of picking fights.

    Don't make me get my mod-stick out... :P
    I'm actually not sure if you're talking to me or not... I'm trying to be constructive?

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Cape town, South Africa
    Posts
    1,709

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Knievel View Post
    I am also a bit concerned that in every late game, due to only a few corrputions, I reach the threshold of being beyond hope in terms of appearance, because corruptions have such brutal effects on it. Maybe some adjustment is needed.
    I have slowed down the corruption rate for dungeon levels 30+ somewhat (reduced them to something between 80% and 33%). Just to provide more breathing space for the later levels.
    As low appearance is much less detrimental than high appearance (the lowest appearance score would be 1 for 910 corruption points as a corruption level boundary while the highest appearance score of 99 would in turn make that boundary 1890 points)
    I'm not very good at math, but if I try to analyze TB's statements a character with 1 Ap will gain corruptions 90/1000=0.09=9% faster than in the past.

    But corruption rate will only be 33% of what it was on D:30 and 80% of what it was on D:50, so even on D:50 a character with Ap 1 will still gain corruption 11% slower than they used to. (Edit - From background corruption, that is.)
    Last edited by Stingray1; 01-10-2014 at 10:00 PM.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SirTheta View Post
    Obviously what the stat represents has to be changed, but I find all this pitter-patter about "inner beauty" and stuff off the mark. Why can't ChAoS care about what people look like? As TB has posted, there's plenty to support this attitude being adopted.
    Well, it can, if the reason is "the game says so". That doesn't mean it feels good or is good lore or good fantasy. And as people have pointed out, it feels off logically. As written, App resists corruption. So there is something innate about being attractive that makes you less corruptible.

    We're trying to twist this to say weeell, chAoS _targets_ you more if you're ugly. But corruption feels like radiation, it's just this presence that emanates from things and hits everything equally. Some just manage to resist it.

    Corruption causes ugliness != ugliness leads to corruption

    It's just a really weird logical dance when I argue something more creative could be done to justify the whole thing.

    but I find all this pitter-patter about "inner beauty" and stuff off the mark
    Off what mark? There are two discussions taking place. The mechanics discussion, and the lore discussion. Some people don't like the current lore, and think something about it needs to change. That's that mark. It doesn't _have to_ change, because none of us can make TB do anything, but that's not a reason to stop talking about it. I'm still hopeful there's some kind of lore-based compromise that keeps the mechanics but makes those of us that DO care about the flavor of it happier.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    238

    Default

    You know, the new proposed system seems to do a lot of shifting thresholds, and seems complex when dealing with being on the borderline of a corruption. If you *just* gained a corruption, would putting on a Diadem of Beauty promptly remove it? I don't know if I like it being that fidgety.

    I wonder a simpler system would be better.
    It's my understanding that every X turns, a point of corruption is added, based on location. It is always added in units of 1.

    Why not make it so that whenever a point of corruption would be added, there's an (Ap - 10)% chance that the point of corruption would not be added?
    At 10 Ap, this translates to no modification. Each subsequent point of Ap in practice gives another 1% chance to dodge a point of corruption, any time one would be applied. Negative values indicate that at 1 Ap, theres a 9% chance that a PC would gain another point of corruption, on top of the one applied.

    In this way, 1000 points can still equal a corruption and the same value can be used for chaos death, 19000 points.
    Equipping or removing Ap gear has no impact on your current corruption counter, only the rate at which you may accumulate further counters.

    EDIT: I think Jellyslayer asked a similar question on the blog, as to whether a PC still dies from corruption at 19000 points, or if the Ap extends that cap as well.
    There was a response from TB, but it only left me more confused.
    Last edited by LFk; 01-10-2014 at 11:01 PM.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    356

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stingray1 View Post
    I'm not very good at math, but if I try to analyze TB's statements a character with 1 Ap will gain corruptions 90/1000=0.09=9% faster than in the past.

    But corruption rate will only be 33% of what it was on D:30 and 80% of what it was on D:50, so even on D:50 a character with Ap 1 will still gain corruption 11% slower than they used to. (Edit - From background corruption, that is.)
    That's true in fact. Probably there will be less overall corruption. So maybe there is a chance of remaining less corrupted overall. However, as soon as you have some 4-8 corruptions (guessing) you end up with an appearance score of 1, and raising it will be very hard. So then the "new mechanic" is no longer a mechanic, because there is nothing you can sensibly do about it.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LFk View Post
    You know, the new proposed system seems to do a lot of shifting thresholds, and seems complex when dealing with being on the borderline of a corruption. If you *just* gained a corruption, would putting on a Diadem of Beauty promptly remove it? I don't know if I like it being that fidgety.
    sami has posted the ideal solution to this conundrum on the RFE for it.
    gate closers: GeWi GnMo(unarmed) DeAs/Pa/Mi(staves)/Ra GePr DrBb HrMo | p7: MeBf | p17: GnPr | p20: DrDu GnAs DeCk MeWp OrBf GnTh MeHe | R57: MeDu | R101: DrAs (26,674 turns) GnDu (26,748) DrAs (18,533)
    ULE: HeRa — OCG: DeMi
    currently speedrunning DrAs.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    5,067

    Default

    I missed the flame war

    On a bright note though, I see a good chance of this being twisted into some sort of adom competition in the near future. Guess which team will have (who am I kidding, be lead by) grey.

    > Don't make me get my mod-stick out... :P

    I had mine out from the beginning of that flame war.
    Last edited by gut; 01-11-2014 at 04:53 AM.
    "Whip me!" pleads the adom player. The rng replies... "No."

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •