It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
I'm playing MM4 + 5 for the first time and only having ever played the 3D ones I'm quite enjoying it. However I can't seem to figure how to see how much damage my heroes do and their hit chance.

I have found a chart online that tells me how much each weapon does in damage base on the base, materials and what not. but I'm not sure how to check in game to see what I do after my stats.
As far as I know, the closest thing to seeing the damage done is by looking at the size of the blood splash that appears when you hit an enemy. I don't know how that is determined either though, like if the size is determined by damage done in relation to the enemy's hitpoints or something else.

I doubt you can see the chance-to-hit either. I think it's best to give the most accuracy points to the characters that deal the most damage though, like your strongest melee fighter or the sorcerer.
The damage you do depends on weapon statistics, might, accuracy and attacks per round vs enemy AC which seems to subtract an amount of damage independent of the net damage, so double number of attacks does usually more than double damage.
You can use the "identify monster" spell before and after attacking if you want to know exactly how much damage your attack has done.
Post edited February 26, 2016 by kmonster
yeah the blood splatter size is the only indication of how much damage you are outputting
i found i enjoyed the games more without the ability to easily min/max your party
avatar
gaspop: I don't know how that is determined either though, like if the size is determined by damage done in relation to the enemy's hitpoints or something else.
I don't know either, but I would guess the size is simply dependent on the total damage done by the attack. Early in the game I was getting only small and mid-sized blood splatters, but later when my fighters were powerful I would regularly get huge blood splatters. I don't remember suddenly getting huge blood splatters if I went back to fight easy enemies, so I think it's just how much damage the attack does in total.

Also note that the colors of the enemies' names changes to indicate roughly how much health they have left.

EDIT: Put another way, early in the game it's possible to kill enemies with a single attack and still only get a mid-sized blood splatter. Later in the game, one can hit a powerful enemy, get a huge blood splatter, but still not kill it. So I don't think it takes into account how much health the enemy has.
Post edited February 27, 2016 by Waltorious
I'll just keep using the charts then, thank you all for your help!
avatar
seanlou: I'll just keep using the charts then, thank you all for your help!
I believe that same information is included in the cluebook, which is in the extras pack from GOG. But beware other spoilers in the book. When I used it, I just searched the PDF for the specific item I wanted to check so I wouldn't accidentally see other spoilers.

It is annoying to check item stats without this, because you have to take it to a blacksmith and get it identified.
Also if you want to test your damage output, you can cast Identify Monster before and after you deal the damage.
avatar
Sarisio: Also if you want to test your damage output, you can cast Identify Monster before and after you deal the damage.
Unfortunately, that spell only gives precise information if the enemy has 999 or fewer HP. Anymore and the HP is abbreviated; 1999 appears the same as 1000.
avatar
dtgreene: Unfortunately, that spell only gives precise information if the enemy has 999 or fewer HP. Anymore and the HP is abbreviated; 1999 appears the same as 1000.
Indeed. Another way to see damage output is through using some memory browser like Cheat Engine, though it will require extra efforts to see damage from overkill.
avatar
Vyraexii: yeah the blood splatter size is the only indication of how much damage you are outputting
i found i enjoyed the games more without the ability to easily min/max your party
Personally, I see what you call min/maxing your party to be the core of RPG gameplay, and what makes the games fun.

Sometimes, though, I put some self-imposed restrictions on myself to fix design mistakes that make the gameplay worse. For example, here are the ones I like for World of Xeen:

1. No training in Castle Kalindra or Olympus; training stops at level 50. (This fixes the problem of having to wait too long on permanent level bonuses, as well as the money issues that plague the endgame.)

2. There is an event, only accessible after actually playing through most of Darkside (there's no way to get there early), that raises any stat below 50 by 50 points. My rule is that I pretend it doesn't exist; this way I can actually use most of the stat bonuses I encounter during the game, and not have to wait to endgame to get my stats up.
avatar
dtgreene: 2. There is an event, only accessible after actually playing through most of Darkside (there's no way to get there early), that raises any stat below 50 by 50 points. My rule is that I pretend it doesn't exist; this way I can actually use most of the stat bonuses I encounter during the game, and not have to wait to endgame to get my stats up.
It might sound kind of funny, but that +50 boost means a lot less at higher stat point values. The first 50 points are worth a huge bonus (+10). But once you double that to 100 points, it's only worth +2 more (+12). It's like "diminishing returns" or something.

I don't think you're "supposed" to try to eek out every point this way. I don't think the designers are wringing their hands maniacally, saying "Gotcha!" if you went over 50 points by the end.
avatar
dtgreene: 2. There is an event, only accessible after actually playing through most of Darkside (there's no way to get there early), that raises any stat below 50 by 50 points. My rule is that I pretend it doesn't exist; this way I can actually use most of the stat bonuses I encounter during the game, and not have to wait to endgame to get my stats up.
avatar
MadOverlord.755: It might sound kind of funny, but that +50 boost means a lot less at higher stat point values. The first 50 points are worth a huge bonus (+10). But once you double that to 100 points, it's only worth +2 more (+12). It's like "diminishing returns" or something.

I don't think you're "supposed" to try to eek out every point this way. I don't think the designers are wringing their hands maniacally, saying "Gotcha!" if you went over 50 points by the end.
Still, if you play with the mindset of having the most powerful party in the long run, this mechanic end up hurting the game. Many players *will* play focusing entirely on late game power; I know I used to do this and am only recently trying to move away from this. (In my current Wizardry 8 play through, for example, I have been purposefully not saving my Bishop's spell picks for high level spells; hence, my level 18 Bishop only knows 5 6th level spells (Banish is learnable from a spell book, the others are not) and 1 7th level spell (Restoration; no 7th level spells are learnable from spellbooks).

Incidentally, Lords of Xulima has a serious problem with this sort of mechanics: There's a skill called Learning that increases XP gains, and in LoX enemies don't respawn so experience gains are limited. Similarly, there's a skill called Knowledge of Herbs that increases the quantity of stat boosting herbs you find, but there are only finitely many spots, each of which can only be harvested once. Focusing on endgame stats, hence, leads to gameplay that is definitely not fun.

Remember, the designers' intent does not always become apparent in practice; hence I need self-imposed rules to make the game more enjoyable and closer to how I believe the game was intended to be played.

(Of course, then I break the game (WoX) by clearing the Dragon Tower early, but at least actually doing so is a fun challenge that allows magic to be quite useful.)
avatar
dtgreene: Still, if you play with the mindset of having the most powerful party in the long run, this mechanic end up hurting the game. Many players *will* play focusing entirely on late game power;
Yeah but isn't that sort of like going crazy looking for a penny in a couch cushion, despite already having $1000?

When you're talking about the "most powerful party", if you compared yours to a non-maximized party, would they really function all that differently? I don't see how it's "hurting the game", unless you genuinely couldn't beat the game because your party is too weak, not being maximized.
avatar
MadOverlord.755: Yeah but isn't that sort of like going crazy looking for a penny in a couch cushion, despite already having $1000?

When you're talking about the "most powerful party", if you compared yours to a non-maximized party, would they really function all that differently? I don't see how it's "hurting the game", unless you genuinely couldn't beat the game because your party is too weak, not being maximized.
Different players play in different ways. Some players are really into maximizing their party, working within the rules of the game to create the absolute best possible party, while others play more "in the moment", adapting to each situation that arises and not worrying about having a party that's not quite as powerful as it could have been. For the first type of player, the rules in Lords of Xulima make optimizing the party tedious and not fun, but for the second kind of player, those same rules might make for an enjoyable experience of give-and-take during the game. For example, investing in the Learning skill means more XP in the long run, but maybe it's better to put points into different skills instead to help out in the early game? For a maximizer, more XP is more XP, so that's always going to be their choice, but other players might wish to increase their power early at the cost of power later.

Some games favor one type of player over the other. Many of the Might and Magic games are good for optimizing parties, for example (see all the threads on strategies for MM6 and later games), whereas a game like Arcanum is really bad for that since it's easy to make an overpowered character and the focus is more on intentionally playing "sub-optimal" builds because each offers a very different experience during the game. In Arcanum, oftentimes the most enjoyment is had by truly role-playing a character, complete with flaws and limitations, rather than trying to make the absolute best out of the game systems.

Personally, I tend to play as I go in most games, with some plan in place to create an effective party but without worrying about making it the absolute best it can possibly be. Usually this is fine, but the first and only time I played MM6 I was having a very tough time until I looked at some guides with some better advice for maximizing my party's effectiveness. It doesn't surprise me that that game in particular attracts players who enjoy that process.

For Xeen, the sense I get is that it's pretty easy to simply "win" it without worrying about one's party too much, but many players still find enjoyment in playing for a completely maxed-out party, or in setting optional challenges to tackle that are much harder than the game itself (e.g. clearing out the Dragon Tower early). But I've only played Xeen once, when I was much younger, so I'll have a better sense of that when I play it again (I need to play MM3 for the first time ever first, now that I've finally played MM1 and MM2).