http://gilgamesh.hamsterrepublic.com/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=440





------- Comment #2 from [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-08-23 05:21 -------
I find it a little odd that nobody's thinking about some of these in the
old-type-Dragon Warrior-style. I say old-type Dragon Warrior because Dragon
Warrior VII had it to where some types of spells (like Sap, Upper, Increase,
Defence, &c.) wore off after awhile, unlike the old one where those types of
spells were permanently on for the rest of the battle.

Anyway, on the subject of Reflection: I'm used to the spells being reflected
back to the caster, no matter who (that has a Reflection) it's being cast on,
enemy OR ally.

For instance, we'll just take a sample battle from Dragon Warrior VII: there're
three enemies, and one's this big dude that just cast Bounce on himself
(causing all spells to reflect off of him). You try to cast a spell on him, and
it'll just bounce off, whatever the spell is.

Of course, by simple logic here, if the spells bounce back at the caster when
there's a wall of reflection in front of them, then that should also mean it
reflects onto them when they cast a spell on themself.

On the subject of Confusion — in the old Dragon Warrior games, the confused
allies would only attack other party members, cast spells on other party
members, or attack the enemies for about 50%-25% their usual attack damage.
Sometimes they'd cast spells on the enemies as well, but not as often as on
party members. Having the confusion just reverse everything for whoever's
confused is irritating, it's like they're not trying to fight the confusion at
all.

Anyway, that's just my twenty cents-worth. :)


-- 
Configure bugmail: 
http://gilgamesh.hamsterrepublic.com/cgi-bin/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

_______________________________________________
Ohrrpgce mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.motherhamster.org/listinfo.cgi/ohrrpgce-motherhamster.org

Reply via email to