PDA

View Full Version : Carrying decimal heals, rather than Rounding



Yokido
01-18-2011, 03:55 PM
Simply put, I am sick and tired of having to rely on getting .5 or over to get a full heal, and wasting anything below that.

Susan heals Jerry for 10 points, Jerry has 10% healing amp, so he receives 11 points!
Jerry heals Sam for 9 points, Sam has 10% healing amp, so she receives 10 points! .9 rounded up
Sam heals Ash for 3 points, ash has 20% healing amp, so he receives 4 points! .66 Rounded up

In the revised system I propose, 10% healing amp on a healing amount of 1 would give an additional one hitpoint per ten attempts, and so on and so forth.

Ash heals Tom for 5 points, Tom has 10% healing amp, Tom receives 6 points by a 50% probability.


This idea would not interrupt healing amplification multiples, only HP.
Questions/comments are welcome.

*This idea promotes regeneration, a tool too often abandoned in DDO*

MrCow
01-18-2011, 04:59 PM
There is a reason why DDO drops most decimals and may not conform to your suggestion. Dropping the decimal is by the book (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/thebasics.htm).


Rounding Fractions

In general, if you wind up with a fraction, round down, even if the fraction is one-half or larger.

Exception: Certain rolls, such as damage and hit points, have a minimum of 1.

Yokido
01-18-2011, 05:11 PM
Several things in DDO are not by the book.


For example, in the wand of infinite heal minor wounds found in Catacombs pack, healing percentages or
wand/scroll increases below 100% are given a probability system. Where 10% of 1 means you get 2 every ten attempts on average.

The system in place for all other healing amounts is to round up with 5 or greater, or round down with anything lower than 5, which is also not by the book. This system is shoddy, and abusable.
Tweaking the system would not take major amounts of programming.

After speaking with a few people about the subject at hand, it has become clear that simply expanding the probability system used in the infinite heal minor wounds wand to all healing amounts would be most simplistic and beneficial.
Hence, I am altering the post to adhere to popular demand.

Ukenburger
01-18-2011, 05:25 PM
Are you aware of how many other aspects this would impact, including (but not limited to) healing by elemental sources (Frostmarrow skeletons, flesh golems, clay golems, iron golems), healing by negative energy (undead), physical damage amplification (Jade Strike), non-physical damage amplification/absorption (Firestorm Greaves, Winter's Touch), and so on?

donfilibuster
01-18-2011, 05:33 PM
Round down is simple enough and gives results up to the listed amount and let the devs plan monster data around it.
But round up and you tend to get a higher result than planned, which breaks the already broken monster data.

Also, whenever DDO differs from PnP is at their own convenience, to make things work where needed not to benefit players.
It is already bad that we need to use % chances instead of dice.

Yokido
01-18-2011, 05:38 PM
Uken-It would suffice to say that a work-over would indeed take time if you qualify
other effects and abilities with the percentage of probability with non-integers.
However, as DDO has done before, they could easily do it piece by piece without
many people noticing many different parts of it. The main thing would be to change
the positive energy effects caused by players first, then work their way down.



Donfili-We're already rounding up, lol.
And breaking pnp rules in this example would be to the player's benefit, as-well as to their profit margins.

Ukenburger
01-18-2011, 05:49 PM
It would suffice to say that a work-over would indeed take time if you qualify other effects and abilities with the percentage of probability with non-integers.

The reason I stated what I did was due to the likelihood that the rounding of all those situations happens in the same routine. Making this modification for a single case may cause modifications to other cases. Damage and Healing follow very similar rules that namely differ in how the net result is used (one is used to detract, the other is used to add).


We're already rounding up, lol.

Would you be willing to provide a specific game-based example?

Yokido
01-18-2011, 06:04 PM
How about talking with a GM about it for ten minutes ?...

Paragon
01-18-2011, 06:34 PM
Simply put, I am sick and tired of having to rely on getting .5 or over to get a full heal, and wasting anything below that.

Susan heals Jerry for 10 points, Jerry has 10% healing amp, so he receives 11 points!
Jerry heals Sam for 9 points, Sam has 10% healing amp, so she receives 10 points! .9 rounded up
Sam heals Ash for 3 points, ash has 20% healing amp, so he receives 4 points! .66 Rounded up

In the revised system I propose, 10% healing amp on a healing amount of 1 would give an additional one hitpoint per ten attempts, and so on and so forth.

Ash heals Tom for 5 points, Tom has 10% healing amp, Tom receives 6 points by a 50% probability.


This idea would not interrupt healing amplification multiples, only HP.
Questions/comments are welcome.

*This idea promotes regeneration, a tool too often abandoned in DDO*

Is this for real? I mean, it's one hit point. We're just trying to get nice integers here--be glad the system doesn't work like the default for C (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integer_division#Division_of_integers). Then you'd never get your extra 1 hp.

Aside from the rules of PnP, it's just not worth the developers time to fret about how 1 extra hp is decided on top of a healing spell. The only situation where this would be warranted is for vampiric weapons which heal very small amounts over a large number of hits. But those are so few it's really not a big deal.

Yokido
01-18-2011, 10:52 PM
Light healing over time effects are hindered and put to no good use at all because of in-efficient healing amp.
If healing amp worked the way I have suggested, regeneration from greensteel, pouch of jerky, and regrowth, would all have been delved into more deeply.

I'm merely stating that the method we have now is killing regeneration, or retarding it, if you will.