Curse

DrSLUGFly · Jun 21, 2005, 04:55 AM // 04:55

death penalty is 15% cumulative. But what if using any form of resurrection lowered the death penalty automatically by 3? The effect? If a party as a whole survives a nasty battle then death penalties will be 12% (assuming 1 death per person) but if the party is wiped and they have to be rezzed at a shrine, then the death penalty will be 15%. Although what I'm proposing is a lower death penalty when revived, what it amounts to is a punishment for the whole party getting killed.

harrisben · Jun 21, 2005, 04:58 AM // 04:58

I have to admit, it would certainly encourage people to try to avoid letting the entire party die. But I think 12% isn't enough of a reward/penalty for managing to survive. It should be something lower, although exactly what that is I can't say for sure.

DrSLUGFly · Jun 21, 2005, 05:03 AM // 05:03

maybe 10% I don't know how often I've been playing and when 4/6 die the response is, just die so we can get them. But why should we die? I have much more satisfaction from being pulled out by a near-dead-again resurrection than from ressing at the shrine and running all the way back.

harrisben · Jun 21, 2005, 05:32 AM // 05:32

Or worse, people want to go back to town to get rid of the DP.

Winterclaw · Jun 21, 2005, 05:37 AM // 05:37

My major peeve with the death penalty is when someone rezzes you and you quickly die again... or you get TPed to the rez shrine and a monster group is there and kills you (maybe several times if there are two mobs). I'd like a reasonable timer after rez so if you die quickly again, you don't get more of a death penalty.

Vermilion Okeanos · Jun 21, 2005, 06:06 AM // 06:06

this can be potentially exploitable... because you don't gain any dp if you die right away using a few trick... then you can rezz ur whole team back to 0 DP... then you might as well not have DP system at all.

Cnegurozka · Jun 21, 2005, 12:50 PM // 12:50

If it just good coded, this isn't a problem. Seeing potential bugs in it seems no reason to not include, there are sooooo many more "risky" things to implement, but that should be implemented, cause they mean more fun/challenge.

DrSLUGFly · Jun 21, 2005, 05:39 PM // 17:39

and seeing a potential exploit so quickly, with us (I assume) not being coders, would mean that the dev team would see it just as quickly and avoid leaving the loophole. For example, maybe the DP could come at res instead of at death, so that Vengeance simply doesn't give you a DP (and you get dp from next res), res at shrine gives you -15 and res by any other method gives you -10. That way, no exploit.

spikydude · Jun 21, 2005, 07:08 PM // 19:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrSLUGFly

and seeing a potential exploit so quickly, with us (I assume) not being coders, would mean that the dev team would see it just as quickly and avoid leaving the loophole. For example, maybe the DP could come at res instead of at death, so that Vengeance simply doesn't give you a DP (and you get dp from next res), res at shrine gives you -15 and res by any other method gives you -10. That way, no exploit.

I agree with this.

Although when you think about it, a 15% dp isnt THAT bad. You usually can work it off. But when you're at 45% dp, you can forget about working it off during the mission or whatnot.

Anyway, I think this is a good incentive for at least one member of the party to survive, and go back to res everyone.