>>Honestly, I'd rather have a damage reduction ability than armor stealth hinderance reduction.
QFT. And dampen works as a name :-)
TG, TG, GL, et al.
"Disagreement with the fundamental plan at this point is akin to supporting Richard III vs the Tudors."
-Raesh
GRIM45
LHALLFIN
Re: Darken and Dampen
01/14/2013 01:41 PM CST
how about making it both hindrances... that would essentially give us a damage reducer.
ZETHIN01095
Re: Darken and Dampen
01/14/2013 01:59 PM CST
>>how about making it both hindrances... that would essentially give us a damage reducer.
We already have an evasion booster and general defense booster. Also since "to hit" and damage calculations were divorced a hindrance booster would not give us a damage reducing ability. It'd be another avoidance ability.
We already have an evasion booster and general defense booster. Also since "to hit" and damage calculations were divorced a hindrance booster would not give us a damage reducing ability. It'd be another avoidance ability.
KROONERMANREVENGE
Re: Darken and Dampen
01/14/2013 03:11 PM CST
>how about making it both hindrances... that would essentially give us a damage reducer.
Not remotely the same, given how vitality and damage reduction abilities function in 3.0. Hinderance reduction is useless compared to a damage reduction ability, especially given the new crafting paradigm, where we are supposed to use armor more customized for our level.
Adding nothing to the conversation since 1834.
Not remotely the same, given how vitality and damage reduction abilities function in 3.0. Hinderance reduction is useless compared to a damage reduction ability, especially given the new crafting paradigm, where we are supposed to use armor more customized for our level.
Adding nothing to the conversation since 1834.
MRAUDIO2662
Re: Darken and Dampen
01/14/2013 05:07 PM CST
I'd be way happier with Dampen actually reducing damage by dampening it. Quick redo of code and the name still works perfect. We don't have slick spells and we're usually wearing the lighter armor so reducing damage would be more beneficial to most thieves. I'm sure some out there want to hide in HP better but I'm guessing those are few.
REWYN
Re: Darken and Dampen
01/14/2013 05:27 PM CST
As an X thief, I agree with the damage reduction power. The thief guild already has so many stealth enhancers (skulk, confidence, etc) I feel that throwing another one on just feels a bit redundant...
STAGURLEE
Re: Darken and Dampen
01/14/2013 06:12 PM CST
I don't think I'd ever use Dampen as a stealth hindrance reducer outside of the requirement for the Skulk combo on stealing runs.
My stealths have outclassed everything I've hunted since I rolled a thief. If there is a time I absolutely need to be stealthy then its better for me to just remove said armor. Maybe if it allowed me to steal unhindered while wearing armor then I could possibly see it being useful to me.
As a damage reducer I'd pretty much use it anytime I hunted.
My stealths have outclassed everything I've hunted since I rolled a thief. If there is a time I absolutely need to be stealthy then its better for me to just remove said armor. Maybe if it allowed me to steal unhindered while wearing armor then I could possibly see it being useful to me.
As a damage reducer I'd pretty much use it anytime I hunted.
TALEEK
Re: Darken and Dampen
01/14/2013 06:56 PM CST
Wasn't there some talk of a penalty for not wearing armor?
KROONERMANREVENGE
Re: Darken and Dampen
01/14/2013 09:14 PM CST
> Wasn't there some talk of a penalty for not wearing armor?
Not to my knowledge. There was 'talk' of a lot of random things for the year or 20 leading up to 3.0, but nothing going on in actual release, as far as I know.
Adding nothing to the conversation since 1834.
Not to my knowledge. There was 'talk' of a lot of random things for the year or 20 leading up to 3.0, but nothing going on in actual release, as far as I know.
Adding nothing to the conversation since 1834.