[<a href='13355.html'>Next Message in Time</a>] | 
[<a href='13353.html'>Previous Message in Time</a>] | 
[<a href='13507.html'>Next Message in Topic</a>] | 
[<a href='13349.html'>Previous Message in Topic</a>] <br/><br/>
<b>Message ID:</b> 13354 <br/>
<b>Date:</b> Thu Jan 20 19:54:06 GMT 2000 <br/>
<b>Author:</b> Reece, Tom - 25IDL G4 <br/>
<b>Subject:</b> Mez&#39;ing IG&#39;s <br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-814654032">For all you programmers out there:<br/>
<br/>
When GZ first told us about higher level mobs getting a second resist chance<br/>
aginst lullaby and pixie, I posted the following question on the Arch Mage<br/>
Answers thread:<br/>
<br/>
Why do mobs get a second resist chance against lullaby and pixie strike when<br/>
it would be much easier to code one resist check with a higher chance to<br/>
succeed.  Example: 32d bard tries to pixie strike/lullaby a 32d mob.  The<br/>
mob has a base 25% chance to resist the song.  Because higher level mobs are<br/>
more resistant to lullaby and pixie, this chance is modified in their favor<br/>
to increase the chance of resist to 35%. Like John said below, giving them<br/>
two chances (at 25% and 35%) to resist greatly increases their overall<br/>
chance to resist.  <br/>
<br/>
It seems to me that it would be easier to program one resist check with the<br/>
mob getting a resistance bonus versus programming two resist checks.  Making<br/>
it where there is only one resist check would eliminate the bug where you<br/>
dont get a resist message if they fail the first resist but make the second<br/>
one.<br/>
<br/>
Galtin of E&#39;ci<br/>
<br/>
<blockquote><span title="qreply"> &gt; (Funny, with GZ being a psychology major, I thought he&#39;d have taken enough<br/>
&gt; statistics to know that a 25%<br/>
&gt; chance of failure stacked with a 35% chance of failure makes for a 51%<br/>
&gt; chance of failure.)<br/>
&gt; </span></blockquote></div>