View Single Post
Old August 16, 2008, 08:24   #23
darkdrone
Apprentice
 
darkdrone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 72
darkdrone is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzkill View Post
When wielding a branded weapon, a particular brand, such as fire, grants additional damage per attack vs enemies which are not resistant to it, while also granting resistance to the character from the very same elemental attacks.
It seems to me that these provisions effectively cancel each other out. Any enemy with a elemental resistance is likely to also have that similarly branded elemental attack. So, when fighting a fire elemental (or any creature resistant to fire), one could either wield a ??? or burning and gain the resistance to fire (but do no additional damage), or wield a ??? of freezing (for example, or any other) and deliver the extra damage (but then have no resistance to fire based attacks you're likely to face).

I'm sure it just a matter of game balance once again, but having branded weapons that grant resistance to the opposite or a different brand would make for a more useful weapon. A Mace of Burning that grant resistance to cold, or a Dagger of Venom that grants resistance to water.
i second this query ...

in summation, wielding a Flame-branded weapon having flame resistance is pointless (and so on....for acid/elec/cold) ESPECIALLY for a melee character.

i do recall, however, reading in rgra or this forum, that the whole "Cold monster vulnerable to flame" thing is not true anymore even if it were in the older roguelikes ??

IMO , more knowledgable posters would have more to say on this previous point....
__________________
"When you look into an abyss, the abyss also looks into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche.
(does this mean the RNG learns my worst fears, mummy?)
darkdrone is offline   Reply With Quote