Talk:Elemental Power

Attack-dependent offenses
I'm working on the next version of Ragnarok and Odyssey, and I have a question about damage calculation. According to this article, Attack-dependent elemental offenses subtract the target's Resistance from the caster's Power, the difference is divided by 400, 1 is added to the result and the new number is multiplied by the caster's Attack. Now, my question: Does the target's Defense matter at all? If so, I think that's an important thing to point out, both here and in what I'm working on. The World&#39;s Hungriest Paperweight 20:23, 23 May 2011 (CDT)
 * Right, Defense would apply. I should specify that the new number is multiplied by what the damage of the user doing a normal physical attack on a target would turn out to be, NOT the user's Attack Stat itself. Erik the Appreciator 20:57, 23 May 2011 (CDT)


 * Thanks! By the way, another question occured to me just before I saw your answer: If the target's Resistance is higher than the caster's Power, would the caster then deal less damage than with a standard physical attack? For example, say you have 80 Power and your target has 100 Resistance. The difference, -20, would be divided by 400 to get -0.05. Add one to that and you have 0.95. Or would the -20 just get rounded up to zero? I'd imagine the former (even then, the lowest your attack would get is half damage), but I want to be certain. The World&#39;s Hungriest Paperweight 21:03, 23 May 2011 (CDT)
 * The 0.95 version would be right, both by the formulae and by my experience with the game - there's been plenty of times when I used Ragnarok and Heat Wave and the damage result felt blunted, somehow, particularly on enemies you would expect to be resistant to the element of the elemental-physical-attack you're hitting them with. Erik the Appreciator 21:07, 23 May 2011 (CDT)


 * Doesn't sound very definitive, but it sounds good enough to use the formula until proven otherwise. Thanks ;) The World&#39;s Hungriest Paperweight 21:13, 23 May 2011 (CDT)
 * Oh, wait, by "blunted" you meant "reduced", not "closer to average". Okay, it sounds more definitive now ^_^; The World&#39;s Hungriest Paperweight 21:14, 23 May 2011 (CDT)