Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Larrin" data-source="post: 5930684" data-attributes="member: 55816">I think giving weapon damage a type is smart. In 4e, resisting weapon attacks wasn't simple, usually it became resist all, or specifically ranged/melee or calling out weapon attacks...blah.&nbsp; I like weapons having a type of damage. &nbsp; I'm less thrilled about weapons having three separate damage types.&nbsp; B/P/S makes sense, and I agree that they are very different if you ever get to&nbsp; experience them first hand, but unless its a benefit to the player to have three different types, I don't like it.&nbsp; If the only thing weapon damage types gets used for is &quot;your bow sucks against skeletons&quot; then its not a good core mechanic.&nbsp; Even if there is the occasional &quot;your bow is good against the pin-cushion-beast&quot; you'll find yourself punished more often than not, and then, BPS is a liability.With other damage types, there is a viseral reaction to them, A fireball, a lightning bolt, ray of frost.&nbsp; You can get behind them in your immagination, and even if everything resists fire, you still want to play a pyromancer.&nbsp; If your cone of cold can freeze a salamander, but my scorching ray does half damage, I can buy that.&nbsp; But when my sword can't smash a skeleton, but your stupid club can, I don't care about cutting edge&nbsp; or trained technique or what-not, my three feet of steel has enough momentum to bludgeon with the best club out there.&nbsp; So, unless BPS will get some real support/fun/advantage for players, I would rather just have &quot;physical&quot; damage, and be done with it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Larrin, post: 5930684, member: 55816"] I think giving weapon damage a type is smart. In 4e, resisting weapon attacks wasn't simple, usually it became resist all, or specifically ranged/melee or calling out weapon attacks...blah. I like weapons having a type of damage. I'm less thrilled about weapons having three separate damage types. B/P/S makes sense, and I agree that they are very different if you ever get to experience them first hand, but unless its a benefit to the player to have three different types, I don't like it. If the only thing weapon damage types gets used for is "your bow sucks against skeletons" then its not a good core mechanic. Even if there is the occasional "your bow is good against the pin-cushion-beast" you'll find yourself punished more often than not, and then, BPS is a liability. With other damage types, there is a viseral reaction to them, A fireball, a lightning bolt, ray of frost. You can get behind them in your immagination, and even if everything resists fire, you still want to play a pyromancer. If your cone of cold can freeze a salamander, but my scorching ray does half damage, I can buy that. But when my sword can't smash a skeleton, but your stupid club can, I don't care about cutting edge or trained technique or what-not, my three feet of steel has enough momentum to bludgeon with the best club out there. So, unless BPS will get some real support/fun/advantage for players, I would rather just have "physical" damage, and be done with it. [/QUOTE]

Verification