Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Ebbesen
Do you have some sort of evidence that the parry part of the total defense attribute is not counted as part of the defense? My understanding is that it is added on top of the total defense (which already includes the shield parry attribute) for purposes of checking for a shield hit.
The reason that I am of this belief is that it seems to fit what I observe and that, in addition, that is how the mechanic is described very explicitly in the manual.
|
I cannot offer any substantial evidence, but I can tell you why I think that shields work as I said.
There are essentially two reasons for my line of though:
1. The description in the manual in combination with how defence is displayed in game makes me think so.
As you correctly noted, the given example does not really support my reading, but that presupposes that we already know that the 17 defence of the Black Centaur includes the parry value of the shield. It is not mentioned anywhere in the example text.
When you look at the break down on the defence value in game, the parry value is added separately as parry value and not anything else. It seems very strange to me that the parry value should be counted twice in addition to the defence modification - a much simpler way would have been to instead have a defence value that included the defence bonus from parry and just count parry once.
If you discount the example, just counting parry once seems in line with the rest of the text.
2. The performance of shields I have observed in game seems in line with my interpretation.
I know that you say the exact opposite, but consider e.g. the performance of light or medium shield-bearing infantry armed with spears. As a general rule they should not be able to hurt each other at all for quite a few rounds if your interpretation were correct. This is not consistent with what I have seen.
I know that this cannot be said to be a strong argument, so you should in no shape or form feel obligated to accept it. However, I am sure enough of my in game observation that I will not abandon my belief on the strength of the example in the manual. (I should add that, in general, I am not at all averse to count the manual as significant evidence - it is more often correct than not.) If enough members of the community tell me I am wrong, I will, though.