Bring back luck... with a twist?

Same function as in DeS (whatever they were, aside from increased drop rate). However, each point of luck also gives you a 1% chance of scoring a critical hit, which would inflict a backstabs worth of damage on a regular strike.

Actually, now I think about it having a 99% chance for a critical might be a tad OP, so what about this: each hit, the game makes N 'rolls' (like throwing a dice), where there's a 1% chance of a critical, otherwise it'll be a normal hit. N is simply the number of points you have in luck. For example, with 10 luck you would have a 100*(1-0.99^10)=9.56% chance for a critical, a 39.50% chance at 50 luck and a 63.02% at 99 luck.

Which of these critical hit systems do you think is better (if any)?

I think it may happen that people will make elemental builds of weapons only meeting minimum requirements in order to get some even easier backstab damage. I don't know if this is the way.

Eh, Luck it just a tangible skill based on an intangible concept. It really refers to an ability to beat the odds and that's a metaphysical trait to have or manipulate. Critical should be a combat reward along with stunlocking, not something to be granted and built upon. Like critical rate scaling with successive blows or something. I don't think it should be in a skill form. Luck was rather useless without a Blueblood sword build to scale on it, it's just a bad skill idea in general, fallout made the most sense of it by letting it be a 'general skill' that lightly levels everything, for fine-tuning. But yeah, can't say I'm for it. Now if there were some kind of 'nimble' skill for stealth and negating-criticals as a response but that just adds two convoluted skills that serve better as mechanics.

Luck was only useful for 2 things. ! was for the BBS build and the other was for drops. To be honest it wouldn't work in Dark.
I gotta agree with the other 2 guys.

Or add Soul-Attainment aswell as Item Discovery and increased guidemarks, chances of summoning and decreased chances of getting invaded, alternately increases chances of successful invasion, and matchmaking on closer levels. To make it a viable skill you could really just make it a stockpile of misc potential. Or have it the product of a karma-esque meter. Being a prick gives you bad luck/fortune and vise versa. I really think dark souls needs a cliff-hanger mechanic for when you accidentally fall off a ledge, in this way you can also add a success rate to that on luck. A Nifty thing to have instead of a dominating feature one can focus a build on.

twigsterxd wrote:Luck was only useful for 2 things. ! was for the BBS build and the other was for drops. To be honest it wouldn't work in Dark.
I gotta agree with the other 2 guys.

I know, its just I didn't want to have another useless stat (luck in DeS, resistance in DkS) so I thought i'd give it another effect to make it worth spending souls on.

Shakie666 wrote:

twigsterxd wrote:Luck was only useful for 2 things. ! was for the BBS build and the other was for drops. To be honest it wouldn't work in Dark.
I gotta agree with the other 2 guys.

I know, its just I didn't want to have another useless stat (luck in DeS, resistance in DkS) so I thought i'd give it another effect to make it worth spending souls on.

You mentioned critical hits in your OP. Using luck to boost your critical hit ratio would still be useless IMO. Reason is, If I make a strength or dex build, in order to attempt getting critical hits, I'd have to boost a useless stat that doesn't fit my build, TAKING points away from stats that really need it. Like I said, luck in DeS was only good for 2 things. If DkS2 has a weapon like the BBS that gains attack due to luck, then I would agree. But, most people cap builds at a certain level and having a stat just for boosting critical hits doesn't work. Also, if I'm not mistaken, we have certain weapons that you can use that has a better chance for critical hits. So boosting a stat for that may or may not work.

If they bring back any sort of luck, I want to see a weapon with random damage; it hits for 800 one hit, then 20 for the next XD

Or just use diminishing returns.

Luck is great how it is in DkS with humanity and ring, I really don't want to be wasting the flexibility of building my characters with a stat that has no further use once you've done collecting items. What From did with getting rid of it was for the best. I get the feeling that people only want it back because of the nostalgia for it. Let it go and come up with something that is at least useful to use in combat.

I have a feeling there will always be that one troll stat on dark souls... I actually kinda hope they keep putting one in

Still not worth it if you ask me. I never level up luck anyway. It's useless.

Critical hits at random ruin games; they rarely add anything of value whatsoever (I give the HOMM series a pass due to its nature and the rate at which luck could proc + concessions made to have it be a serious factor in battles).

Match turnarounds on a random hit critical add nothing. Pokémon doesn't need that trash either; no reason to bring it into a good game.

Random critical hits. I really hate them, unless they seriously scale.
Like if Fallout had PvP, a player with 10 luck may easily beat a player with 4 luck. Because the scaling was serious.

Rynn wrote:Random critical hits. I really hate them, unless they seriously scale.
Like if Fallout had PvP, a player with 10 luck may easily beat a player with 4 luck. Because the scaling was serious.

I appreciate that random elements in games are generally a bad idea. I was just brainstorming ways to not have another useless stat (though now that we know what stats are in DkS2, I suppose it doesn't matter).

Don't all be hating on randomness in general. There are certain games where randomness is a great thing. For example, one of the games I like to play is X-Com Enemy Unknown, and a big part of that is not knowing whether or not you will hit with your shot. It makes you take risks, and be suspenseful to the end.

Luck is the direct enemy of skill.

Soul of Stray Demon wrote:Don't all be hating on randomness in general. There are certain games where randomness is a great thing. For example, one of the games I like to play is X-Com Enemy Unknown, and a big part of that is not knowing whether or not you will hit with your shot. It makes you take risks, and be suspenseful to the end.

It made me not shoot unless I had a 100% chance to hit. Either that or save scum every time RNG screwed me over. Don't get me wrong, I loved XCOM, but not because of the RNG.

All those 90% shot misses... and all the dead squaddies because of them...

Yeah... screw randomness.

Yep, tossing my 2cents in. I hated xcoms system to. Missing at 90% chance...it drove me nuts. Or being a sniper at point blank and missing. Ya...that was a great game, that was horribly executed. I dodon't want to see a system like that.

Rynn wrote:Luck is the direct enemy of skill.

+1. Luck doesn't nothing except equalize away differences in play ability. I guess its popular because more people lack ability than have it, but it still sends the wrong message and rewards the wrong things.

Especially in a game so centered around punishing mistakes and rewarding skill, a luck element makes absolutely no sense.

I found in X-Com, that I vastly enjoyed the fact you didn't always get 100% accuracy. With a strategy game, one of the skills you need is the ability to compensate for misses. If every shot was a guarantee, then the game wouldn't be nearly as fun. And, things like that always happen with randomness. Remember for every time a 90% shot would miss, there's a 10% shot that would have hit. (I know that's not how it works, but I summed it up.) You just don't often take those 10% percent shots, so you don't notice it.

I think the reason why randomness CAN be good in games is that if you never know what's coming, you have to be on your toes at all times. You can't get complacent. Usually it doesn't work because its implemented incorrectly (e.g. there's too much of it).

Anyhow, in a pvp scenario randomness is NEVER a good idea.

Rynn wrote:Luck is the direct enemy of skill.

Well I think it can help anyone, no matter how skilled- doesn't always hinder. Though it is the opposite of skill in a way

Serious_Much wrote:

Rynn wrote:Luck is the direct enemy of skill.

Well I think it can help anyone, no matter how skilled- doesn't always hinder. Though it is the opposite of skill in a way

Too much randomness is the opposite of skill, but the ability to deal with small bits of randomness is actually a skill in and of itself.