Hehe, thanks for the edit kevL... you missed that i screwed up the spear type.
Weapon (Type) | DR Type | Bypass Y/N -------------------------------------------- Longsword (S) | BSP | N Longsword (S) | B | N Longsword (S) | S | Y Longsword (S) | P | Y Longsword (S) | BP | N Longsword (S) | BS | N Longsword (S) | SP | Y Club (B) | BSP | N Club (B) | B | Y Club (B) | S | N Club (B) | P | N Club (B) | BP | N Club (B) | BS | N Club (B) | SP | N Spear (P) | BSP | N Spear (P) | B | N Spear (P) | S | N Spear (P) | P | Y Spear (P) | BP | N Spear (P) | BS | N Spear (P) | SP | N Halberd (PS) | BSP | N Halberd (PS) | B | N Halberd (PS) | S | Y Halberd (PS) | P | Y Halberd (PS) | BP | N Halberd (PS) | BS | N Halberd (PS) | SP | Y Morningstar (BP) | BSP | N Morningstar (BP) | B | Y Morningstar (BP) | S | N Morningstar (BP) | P | N Morningstar (BP) | BP | N Morningstar (BP) | BS | N Morningstar (PS) | SP | NAnd fixed.
I've edited the wiki page as well. I'll just add a reference to this thread as well.
Hi Loki_999/KevL,
Great work ... Just a few questions for my slow and tired mind this afternoon ... ![]()
1) Are you saying these results are the *actual* results without altering any code in the OC?
2) Applying DR to creatures or armours work in the same way? (i.e. A creature with DR 5/Bludgeoning is the same as armour with DR 5/Bludgeoning.)
3) If we want to add DR to an item we should use the EffectDamageReduction() with the IP_CONST _* definitions?
4) As an example from above, a club would NOT bypass something with Bludgeoning/Piercing "piercings"?
5) So the Morningstar would need the "piercing" damage descriptor removed from its description (for better consistency)? (i.e. TLK 5412 for Custom.)
6) I also guess the last Morningstar (PS) was meant to be Morningstar (BP) in your list above?
FINALLY
From a quick glance, it looks as though the "logic" reverses if the creature/item has two or more "piercings" attached to them. i.e. If there is more than one "piercing" listed, then these become what the item/creature's is actually DR against! I use "piercing" in the same sense as the toolset uses it when setting DR. EDIT: Except on closer inspection, a BP armour/creature cannot be bypassed anything from the looks of it. If my theory was correct, a slashing weapon (like a longsword) would have bypassed a BP DR setting and not the SP as your results say.
Although, MAYBE the long sword descriptor is wrong and it is actually a SP weapon!
That *may* resolve the logic involved.
TEST: What happens if you use a *different* slashing weapon rather than the longsword (which may have the wrong descriptor regarding its P - which may actually be PS)?
In theory, a normal "S" weapon should bypass a "BP" DR setting if my theories are correct about the longsword and revered logic.
NB: I was just about to do the test myself, when I also noticed a "Uses_OR_Logic" parameter (FALSE by default), which suggests something about the logic usage here too. Perhaps changing to TRUE will give the expected results with respect to "piercings"?
RESULTS: I only did a quick test with respect to the "Uses_OR_Logic" and that does appear to set the logic to the correct state on a very quick test. i.e. I had a goblin with DR 5/BP, which has protection against bludgeoning when using the default FALSE for this logic, but has their DR "pierced" when this logic is set to TRUE.
RESULTS 2: A sickle (S damage) against a BP goblin seems to break this theory, as the goblin does have DR against it.
So, unless there is a fault with just one aspect of one part of DR (BP stands out to me), or some weapons are not what they say they deliver (or both), then it needs further testing. I would suggest the following:-
1) CONFIRM the damage types of *every* weapon. (i.e. Some may be delivering more than they say, and others not.) DONE - SEE BELOW!
2) TEST the application of the "Uses_OR_Logic" for every combination possible.
EDIT: Something else just occurred to me. Maybe there is a percentage chance (hard coded) applied to the type of damage done when a weapon does more than one type of damage. e.g. If a weapon does piercing/slashing damage and does one point of damage, then maybe it can only be 1 point of damage which is defined as piercing or slashing. There may even be instances when a weapon does more damage (E.g. 6 damage) and the system may still randomly determine it to be all of one type in this particular instance of attack! Therefore, a weapon with two types of damage *may* only be doing one type at any one time due to chance. This would appear to give random results with respect to DR against certain weapon types.
OBSERVATIONS
==============1) In testing, a placeable will return -1 (i.e. damage type undetected) when trying to ascertain the type of last damage by weapon type.
OK, I forgot this function was broken with respect to this type of damage being dealt! Doh!
2) I note there is no "BLUDGEONING AND PIERCING" CONSTANT for GetWeaponType function. (i.e. Confirms Morningstar descriptor as wrong?)
3) I can CONFIRM the Morningstar is BLUDGEONING only (TLK 5412 NEEDS CORRECTING) and that the Longsword is both SLASHING AND PIERCING! (See below) Also SLASHING & PIERCING: Bastard Sword, Halberd, Katana, Scythe. (Total five weapons.) Therefore, Longsword (TLK 5417), Bastard Sword (TLK 5434) and Katana (TLK 5423) need descriptor correction.
LATEST TEST REQUIRED
=====================
Use confirmed damage by weapon type to test DR with "Uses_OR_Logic" set to both TRUE and FALSE for various combinations. Suggested weapons to test: Club (Bludgeoning only); Spear (Piercing only); Scimitar (Slashing only); Halberd (Piercing and Slashing). Avoid using Morningstar or Longsword to avoid confusion due to their incorrect descriptors (to fix with updating 2da and tlk refs.) Note, there is no other type of damage type available. (i.e. There is no Bludgeoning/Piercing as the Morningstar descriptor suggests.)
Loki_999 ... Any further updates or discoveries your end?
Cheers,
Lance.






Retour en haut







