Protection and Defense

[Peter Ebbesen]

Originally Posted by Amorphous

I can of course not speak for Agema, but I find it likely that he did not include a shield's parry value in the defence value, which you evidently do. The thing is that the parry part of the defence is not as good as pure defence. A shield hit is still a hit.

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.

On page 75 in the manual, as the explanatory example, there's a Jotun Axeman vs a Black Centaur - the Centaur with defense 17, the Jotun with attack 9. Those 17 in defense includes +4 parry (the unit does indeed have base 14, -1 for armour+shield combo, +4 parry, for a total of 17). It is stated as an example how, if the Jotun rolls a total of 18 and the Centaur a total of 9, i.e. 27 vs 26, it is a hit exceeding the Centaur's defense by one and hence a shield hit because it is a hit that is below the defense value (which included the parry value) plus the parry value (which determined the interval in which to check for shield hits), and it would have needed to be five higher (i.e. 31) to be a normal hit. In other words, the defense roll is based on the defense attribute as you can see it in-game, shield parry included.

So according to the manual, at least, your interpretation is completely wrong and mine is right - but the manual has not proven without error in the past, and my observing what I expect to observe (the game working as is stated in the manual) is certainly no proof that it is actually doing so.

It is possible that it is generally "known" by the community that the manual is wrong and that things work differently and the shield parry isn't counted for complete defense, but I haven't come across this knowledge and, since the manual is generally trustworthy, I tend to trust it when lacking evidence to the contrary.

Do you have some sort of good tests showing that it works the way you believe to or word of god from our friendly developers (i.e. the standard "we think we implemented it this way, perhaps, somewhere in the code, I've forgotten where, I'll forget my own head next" or "the manual is wrong") on this issue?

Your SC is a rather good example of the state of things, I think. It does have a high defence in the upper twenties, but a lower protection.

The defense is in the upper thirties and the upper forties for checking shield hits... should I be right. Should you be right it is a great deal lower.

In either case, the protection value is poor - in cases where I expect many enemies to beat through it heavily, I do of course equip a heavier armour (Elemental Armor is always a favourite on SCs for general armour and resistance purposes).

A good shield makes the effective protection a lot higher in most instances, but 30 protection is still not that much considering it includes the shield protection. At the level of equipment indicated by his gear punching through 30 protection is rather easy. Just put him up against himself - he has a strength of 31. Using AP or anti-undead weaponry will make it even more effective.

Most certainly - I am not in any way, shape, or form claiming that it is a unit that cannot be defeated or won't take severe damage from thugs or SCs kitted out to deal with the undead - so long as they are capable of hitting it with some reasonable chance of success.

However, given that the hydra skin gives him about 24 hp/round and body protection 8, while an Elemental Armor would give him body protection 18, he needs on average to be hit more than 2.4 times per turn by attacks big enough to deal significant damage - and in a world with armour negating or penetrating weapons the advantage of the heavier armour with defense penalties dwindles even further, those 10 extra subtracted per attack may turn into 5 extra or even, worst case, 0 extra, boosting the value of the hydra skin considerably. (This all because of his outrageous hitpoint total - the frailer the target, the higher the value of protection over regeneration)

Also, do not make too light of the Mage Bane. The weapon has one of the best defence values in the game. Without it he is much easier to hit.

It is an incredibly good weapon for many reasons including its +6 defense - but again, unless I am shown to be wrong on the defense issue (in which case I may well weep a few manly tears), I'll keep on believing that his defense to be hit at all is closer to 40 than 30 and that the +6 rather than the normal +2 to +4 for most non-artefact swords he might be using instead, while certainly wonderful a another perk of a great weapon, isn't a major reason for his being hard to hit.