Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Warlord255]

A question involving the new wounds system and how weapons work in it; are weapons going to have to be reclassified to interact with wounds in a more complex way?

Let's take, as an example, the three current ammo types; bolts, arrows, and blowguns, which all do Piercing damage.

Right now, the system gives bolts and arrows the same damage. However, if a bolt and arrow strike with the same damage on a given target, there's no consideration for their length. If both pierce through (as a gross example) four layers of fat, does the new system consider their length so that the bolt can't be grabbed, but the arrow can? And if a blowdart is given the same damage as an arrow, does it simply become an arrow, or does it turn into a high-speed bullet?

Similarly, is a mace differentiated from a hammer? Does anything stop a piercing-damage Pick from running its target through entirely as if it were a spear?

Any answers/thoughts are appreciated from the Toad. Thanks, and sorry for any trouble.

[Fieari]

I'm pretty sure they don't all "do the same damage", because damage is now dependent on mass and energy imparted.  I don't think size and length are accounted for if I recall toady's description in the stickied threads though.  Just slash/pierce/bludgeon, mass of weapon, and strength of person using weapon. 

[Tormy]

I'm pretty sure they don't all "do the same damage", because damage is now dependent on mass and energy imparted.  I don't think size and length are accounted for if I recall toady's description in the stickied threads though.  Just slash/pierce/bludgeon, mass of weapon, and strength of person using weapon. 

Yeah this is correct AFAIK. Anyway, perhaps you should've posted this question in the FotF topic?

[Warlord255]

I'm pretty sure they don't all "do the same damage", because damage is now dependent on mass and energy imparted.  I don't think size and length are accounted for if I recall toady's description in the stickied threads though.  Just slash/pierce/bludgeon, mass of weapon, and strength of person using weapon. 

Yeah this is correct AFAIK. Anyway, perhaps you should've posted this question in the FotF topic?

Probably. Those threads are getting to be quite labyrinthine, though.

[MuonDecay]

wait wait wait...

If the projectile damage is a property of kinetic energy, does this mean copper and bronze bolts will begin to be more damaging than iron or steel?

[LegoLord]

Isn't steel heavier than copper?

[Footkerchief]

wait wait wait...

If the projectile damage is a property of kinetic energy, does this mean copper and bronze bolts will begin to be more damaging than iron or steel?

It's not JUST kinetic energy.  The material properties will also determine its ability to pierce armor and tissue.

[MuonDecay]

Isn't steel heavier than copper?

Copper is denser than iron, and in reality steel is slightly less dense than iron (though in DF iron and steel are the same density).

Bronze is almost all copper, so in DF it weighs the same as copper. Copper and bronze very heavy in DF. If you get a chance you can see how they stack, ratio-wise up by examining a bar of each in a metal stockpile and comparing weights.

wait wait wait...

If the projectile damage is a property of kinetic energy, does this mean copper and bronze bolts will begin to be more damaging than iron or steel?

It's not JUST kinetic energy.  The material properties will also determine its ability to pierce armor and tissue.

Ahh, okay, so damage dealt is a function of both mass and material damage value.

So the change is basically just a fix for the coin-shurikens of gory doom.

[Footkerchief]

Ahh, okay, so damage dealt is a function of both mass and material damage value.

So the change is basically just a fix for the coin-shurikens of gory doom.

Kind of.  There is no "material damage value" anymore -- rather materials have sets of properties, like their compressive strength, shear yield, and sharpenability, that determine how they interact.  So there'll be a lot more factors in any damage calculation, and certain materials might perform well in some weapons and poorly in others (adamantine will be amazing for daggers, but terrible for war hammers).  But yeah, hopefully the improvised projectiles of doom will be fixed.

[MuonDecay]

Ahh, okay, so damage dealt is a function of both mass and material damage value.

So the change is basically just a fix for the coin-shurikens of gory doom.

Kind of.  There is no "material damage value" anymore -- rather materials have sets of properties, like their compressive strength, shear yield, and sharpenability, that determine how they interact.  So there'll be a lot more factors in any damage calculation, and certain materials might perform well in some weapons and poorly in others (adamantine will be amazing for daggers, but terrible for war hammers).  But yeah, hopefully the improvised projectiles of doom will be fixed.

Wow, that is wonderfully ambitious and intriguing. Perhaps a bit intimidating for a new player to grasp, though.

I'd hate to be in Toady's shoes debugging that system if something went haywire, too.

[Pilsu]

Arrow damage being tied to the weight seems kinda silly since it ignores the myriad of downsides heavy missiles have

[Greiger]

Well weapon weight does(or will...whatever) have an effect on melee damage.  If somebody isn't strong enough to swing the weapon properly it will inflict little or no damage, as the wielder can't get the weapon up to speed.

I would assume he would do the same with bolts, if not a direct weight:range ratio, he could probably make it less damaging because the crossbow fired it with less force or some fluff.

[Mel_Vixen]

Its an Force consume. As long you have a straight shot the formula looks something like this: "damage = projectilproperties + (initial Force/Time)" (<- very much abstracted). Its something else if you have fireing arcs. You have to consider the accelration by the gravitation if you have arcs. For "Ultra realism" you could also calculate the angle of the projectile to the hit surface. With a low angle a arrow can rebound from a surface without doing damage.

This said i say before we get to magics we need a "Gravitational acceleration" and a "air-resistance" number for every tile.

[Fieari]

Arrow damage being tied to the weight seems kinda silly since it ignores the myriad of downsides heavy missiles have

I don't think you quite understand.  You're still thinking in terms of a standard cRPG where a weapon does "x" damage to the targets "hit points".

That's gone.  There's no more of that.  For one thing, the new system is additive, not subtractive.  If you're hit by a weapon, you don't lose HP, you gain a wound, and wounds come in multiple types, and do different things, and are independent of each other.  So you could have a thousand paper cuts, or one compound fracture, and so on and so forth.

Secondly, additional mass does not necessarily mean more damage, for exactly the reason you said.  I said mass was a factor, I didn't say that "more mass = more damage".  More energy imparted means more damage, and more mass CAN provide more energy, but depending on the weapon and the strength of the wielder, a heavier weapon can also provide far LESS damage.  It depends!

[Pilsu]

Yes but it's a ranged weapon. User strength has little to do with the flight properties and the resulting strength of a crossbow shot. There's very little data on that to begin with. Solid metal bolts did exist but today we use carbon/aluminum. Which should deal more damage, a solid bronze bolt or a wooden bolt with a bronze tip? Is/should the range be reflected?