Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

[Pril]

Also shev for yuan's does scaleskin work like the armor spell or is it calculated elsewhere?

Thanks

[Gormal]

Read the thread.

[Pril]

Read the thread.

Sigh owned by Jake committing Seppuku.

[Gormal]

Bumping this cause I'm tired of digging for it.

[kiryan]

god damn it, ive lost this post about 4 times now so we getting the condensed version.

gnome 120 agi vs elf 130 agi. 1.2 racial multipler vs 1.3. Only matters on items with max agi 4, 7+ where it yields a 1 pt bonus for elf (assuming max agi bonuses are rounded down and calculated individually). Only 2 pieces of eq fit this for a net bonus of 2. So gnome vs elf is 12 agility vs 100 hps. As long as you can trade 12 agi for 100 hps, elves are superior given their relatively high other stats.

Given the ring slot easily has 50+ hps and the best max agi ring is +5, elves will not stop being the best tanks (major spell or non melee damage not withstanding or gnome only eq).

[Gormal]

Your total agility is multiplied, not each item. 5 1max_agi items would be the same as one 5max_agi item.

[Shaiith]

I know this is an old thread, but Gormal appears to be keeping it bumped, so I'll add some mostly useless info to very slightly increase the accuracy and keep it near the top. Currently attributes displays your true attribute or one above it.* It was this inaccuracy that allowed me to reverse engineer all the stat factors listed and also determine the formula for converting stats into their human equivalent (which also has odd rounding).

Attributes is calculated by taking the raw stat adjusted by gear, converting to human, and then converting back to the racial equivalent. The best way of listing attributes would be to take the raw stat adjusted by gear and publish that. I'm not sure why that's not done (maybe that number isn't maintained as easily accessible since as far as I could tell everything drives off the human equivalent).

A stat s with a factor f (expressed as 1.5, not 150) converts is human h where h = (s * f + 0.55) round down. This is the same as s * f round x.45 and higher up to x+1 or s * f + 0.05 round "normally".

I don't know why the formula is what it is, but it can easily be demonstrated that x.45 rounds up with restat now. Dwarf agi has f = 0.95, the 68 human notch is where the agility adjustment on attributes goes from 0 to -2. This notch occurs at Dwarf 71 (71 * 0.95 + 0.55 = 68.00, as 71 * 0.95 = 67.45) as you can see in the log below. It took me a long time to accept this as being the case as it seems really really odd that x.45 rounds up, but it is indeed how things function.**

The conversion back to what's shown on attributes as t is done as follows t = (h/f) round up. This is what causes elf int to always appear as an even number and for gnome/yuan int that is listed as 128 to sometimes notch int and sometimes not***

Gnome/yuan int has a factor of 1.25, 127 is the equivalent of 127 * 1.25 + 0.55 = 158.75, rounds to 159. 128 is the equivalent of 128*1.25 + 0.55 160.00, rounds to 160 (which is a notch). However attributes displays them as 159/1.25 = 127.2, rounds up to 128, and 160/1.25 = 128.0 exactly, shows as 128.****

Changing the attributes formula from t = (h/f) round up to t = ((h - 0.55)/f) round up would remove all rounding errors for stats with a factor of 100 or more. Stats with a factor under 100 sometimes have multiple values mapping to the same human stat and so it's impossible to convert some human stat equivalents back to the exact starting stat as there are multiple possibilities. The only way to make attributes always right for stats with a factor under 100 is to take the value preconversion to human equivalent.

If you want to know what is required to have your stat s be equivalent to human h, you need to calculate s = ((h - 0.55)/f) round up. The idiot table exists to make knowledge of that formula not needed to effectively roll and evaluate characters. It also allowed gear planning to take place before bidding on items, etc.

Code: Select all

< P: std > restat confirm
All ability scores reset to 70.
Autosaving...

< 38h/38H 106v/105V >
< P: std > save
Saving...

< 38h/38H 106v/105V >
< P: std > att

Character attributes for Catud

Level: 1   Race: Dwarf   Class: Warrior
Age: 75 yrs / 0 mths  Height: 48 inches  Weight: 236 lbs
STR: averageAGI: averageDEX: averageCON: average
POW: averageINT: averageWIS: averageCHA: average
Armor Class: 100  (100 to -100)  Agility Bonus: 0
Magic Resistance: 0 percent
Hitroll: 3   Damroll: 4
Alignment: Neutral Good
Saving Throws: PAR[0]  ROD[0]  PET[0]  BRE[0]  SPE[0]
   Wimpy: 10
Load carried: Paltry

< 38h/38H 106v/105V >
< P: std > addstat agi 71
Autosaving...

You increased your Agility to 71, using 2 points.
You have 348 points remaining.

< 38h/38H 105v/105V >
< P: std > save
Saving...

< 38h/38H 105v/105V >
< P: std > att

Character attributes for Catud

Level: 1   Race: Dwarf   Class: Warrior
Age: 75 yrs / 0 mths  Height: 48 inches  Weight: 236 lbs
STR: averageAGI: averageDEX: averageCON: average
POW: averageINT: averageWIS: averageCHA: average
Armor Class: 100  (100 to -100)  Agility Bonus: -2
Magic Resistance: 0 percent
Hitroll: 3   Damroll: 4
Alignment: Neutral Good
Saving Throws: PAR[0]  ROD[0]  PET[0]  BRE[0]  SPE[0]
   Wimpy: 10
Load carried: Paltry


* You can verify which you have by doing a checkpoints <stat> 100 as that tells you the true current value.

** There are only a few cases where this affects a notch, but many where it affects what's shown on attributes. I happened to run across one of the cases in my tests. I'd already determined the method the game used and was using "normal" rounding as my assumption. I remember grilling whoever it was to the nth degree as I thought they were lying to me.

*** Both 127 and 128 stat appear as 128, the 127 version doesn't notch int, the 128 version does, finding an explanation for this is what made me investigate all the stat factors.

**** This is also why sometimes in game attributes shows a higher category than the roller. ie elf int=99 is only heroic in the roller, but attributes displays it as 100, and I'm assuming as perfect below 20.