Why don't spells work with the life on hit spell gem?
" I've also played many other games of this genre, and I didn't have any problem picking up many of these distinctions during my first time playing through PoE. I've found PoE to be one of the clearest games, because their word choices are consistent within itself. Even though their word choices might not match other games, I know that an "attack" will always being something cause by swinging my weapon, and an "increase" will be added to all other "increases" before being applied. Sure it caught me by surprise when 10% increased crit damage was multiplying by the 150% crit total, and so 10% increased crit damage was actually giving 15% crit damage. But I didn't complain about the wording not being specific, because I wasn't expecting to know exactly what it would be. I accepted that it was the first time that I was playing through the game, and that I'm more than likely to be surprised by many mechanics the first time I come across them. I expect that I'll have a vague idea of what to expect when I encounter a new word, and that that will be enough for me to learn exactly what that new word means. So far, this has always been the case in PoE. Last edited by Aplier#7659 on Sep 3, 2012, 8:15:15 PM
|
|
" But you basically just proved me right. Though the game may be consistent within itself, it is not consistent within the genre and that is what's most important. Every good game is consistent within itself. Even most bad games are consistent within themselves. That's hardly something to boast about. That they are not consistent within the genre is a big reason why there is a lot of chat spam in normal difficulty with simple mechanics questions. Certain elements of the game are new to the genre and need to be explained properly - not something I'm faulting the game for - but other elements are not new and are simply different with no positive and lots of drawbacks. |
|
" I dont think games need to have the exact same wording as other games. If you want the same words and the same mechanics as other games, then play those games. I play different games because they are different, because they make different distinctions and items/stats have different interactions. What in PoE is not consistent with the genre? PoE may have more distinctions because they use more mechanics, like the difference between "increased" and "more". Other games don't have that distinction, and so there's no "genre-wide" word to use there. And PoE is a game, it's not a genre. It's like how everyone in the game calls IIQ/IIR "magic find", without making the distinction between the two. PoE isn't required to adhere to specific mechanics simply because all other games have them, creativity is allowed. |
|
" Game should have similar wording. Not exactly the same (usually because it's not possible), but why create needless differences between attack type or use vague terms like "attack" on popular support gems? It makes no sense. It's frustrating. This isn't about creativity, it's about change for the sake of change. There's nothing wrong with using terms like "physical attack" or "spell" instead of just "attack", which literally mean anything. Other games have set precedent and it's both naive and foolish to disregard that precedent and do whatever you please under the false auspices of "creativity". |
|
" How is "attack" at all vague? "Attack" means any skills that use your weapon. And if you are unsure as to whether a support has an effect or not, you can just look at the icon of the skill and see if a letter appears. It might have taken me an extra 5 seconds to learn that "attacks" and "spells" are two different categories, but I don't see a problem with that. The problem with "physical attack" is that not all attacks deal strictly physical damage. Lightning strike for example deals mostly lightning damage. Maybe "weapon attack" would be easier to learn, but it would still mean the same thing as "attack" does now. Skill=all skill gems, attacks=weapon attacks, spells=spells, support=all support gems. I don't see what's so complicated and hard to understand about that. |
|
" If you can't see how the term "attack" is vague, then you simply need to go browse another thread. I'm not going to teach you basic word definitions. And as for the letter appearing, everyone told me in-game that my game was glitched and that that should work. How is it so simple and how are you so right if 20+ people disgree with you to the point of insulting me for not knowing such basic knowledge? |
|
|
Other games have used attack separately from spell before, to greater or lesser degrees of consistency. In Diablo II, "Attack rating" was specific to only weapon attacks, not spells, and had separate stats for "faster cast rate" and "increased attack speed". While it may not fit with your expectations, it does with many other people's. Nothing we can do will be intuitive to everyone. We therefore strive to use terms which we feel make sense and use them consistently within the game.
We also capitalise most such "keywords" to indicate that they have a specific meaning within the game - "Attack", "Damage", "Elemental" are capitalised within stat descriptions wherever they occur (please let me know if you find an exception). "Physical attack", would be, as Aplier points out, unnecessarily confusing because not all attacks are physical, and some spells are. You attack with a weapon, or cast a spell. It's not the same as every other game in the genre because not all other games are the same. It is, however, similar to how the terms are used in some other games, while also being internally consistent, sensible, and easy to learn. As Charan mentioned, you can expect the attack/spell distinction to be very explicitly clarified in-game soon (and there are plans in place to clarify the corner cases of damage types, such as detonate dead, as well - that'll take a little longer). | |
" I understand how the term "attack" can be vague the first time you encounter it in this game, just like everything has some vagueness until you learn it's specific application. But after playing for even an hour, I could tell that "attack" and "spell" meant two different things. I guess that I am simply overestimating the level of intelligence of the common human being. Also, were those 20+ people in normal chat where they're just guessing at what things do or in merciless where players have had time to gain an understanding of game mechanics? Last edited by Aplier#7659 on Sep 3, 2012, 9:55:04 PM
|
|
|
Please just give me some god damn examples of games where "Attack" means spell casts or attacks.
Diablo 2, the most played ARPG by FAR, had this exact distinction. Attacks were base attack or skills that struck with your weapon. Casts were spells that didn't. Plain and simple. For instance:
Spoiler
Death
5 Socket Swords/Axes Hel + El + Vex + Ort + Gul 100% Chance To Cast Level 44 Chain Lightning When You Die 25% Chance To Cast Level 18 Glacial Spike On Attack Indestructible +300-385% Enhanced Damage (varies) 20% Bonus To Attack Rating +50 To Attack Rating Adds 1-50 Lightning Damage 7% Mana Stolen Per Hit 50% Chance of Crushing Blow +(0.5 per Character Level) 0.5-49.5% Deadly Strike (Based on Character Level) +1 To Light Radius Level 22 Blood Golem (15 Charges) Requirements -20% WoW, while another genre, is one of the most played games of all time. This game also clearly has the word "attack" as when you strike with your weapon. Case in point: http://www.wowhead.com/item=87160 Also titan quest has skills that do things "on attack" which only affect weapon attacks: http://www.gamebanshee.com/titanquest/skills/stormnimbus.php Dungeons and dragons, arguably the grandfather of all role playing games, a system that has been used in plenty RPGS like baldur's gate and neverwinter nights, also uses the term Attack to mean when you attack with your weapon, not counting spells. http://dungeons.wikia.com/wiki/SRD:Action_Types#Table:_Actions_in_Combat You are arguing based on absolutely nothing, in the face of massive precedence in the genre, so if you want to continue this argument, put some weight into it. Refutation of the argument. no appeals to emotions, begging the question, or ad hominems. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwPLQ43JVYU  Last edited by Pwntheon#1421 on Sep 4, 2012, 5:57:44 AM
|
|
" No. I done (too) many builds but not this one. It just came to me as I was reading this thread lol. And now I got an itch but I will need to make myself wait until some new 1-2 week race to scratch it. |
|
