ToME: the Tales of Maj'Eyal

Currently the ICE damage type will still have a 25% chance of freezing the target even if the COLD damage is completely resisted. I would suggest adding an "and dam > 0" to the freeze check, but let the debate begin.

/me debates on the finer points of munchkinism

oh... wait you mean debate on why this should or should not happen

personally I would say if you are frozen in a block of ice, you are still frozen, no matter if you are immune cold or not... the same logic would apply if you say you are hit in the head with the blob of ice instead (to reason why stun resistance affects being frozen), in that case, the blunt trauma put you out cold (ie, frozen) even though you took no damage from the cold.

Blunt trauma compaison won't apply, since in your example you would be stunned from the physical part of the damage. (And if you were immune to that you would not)

Considering frozen, i totally agree with a damage check and aso i would not necessarily place the threshold at 0. Other scenarios could be 'if dam > c' or even better freeze chance = dam*c (or even dam^2 * c) with c being a constant value. Parameters would need finetuning then, though.

IMO we should also leave theories out of this about what exactly is causing the frozen state and how cold resistance is working. That would just end in a battle of opinionated arguments.

I agree, 100% resist should completely negate all the effects of the resisted damage type. Also, IMO the chances of such effects to take place should rely on a formula taking into account not only damage done, but also base damage resist (so the formula would look like dam * c * (1 - resist), with resist ranging from -1 (i.e. -100%) to 1 (i.e. 100%)).

Well I see beeing frozen as being encased in a block of ice, you ca resist the damage you are still in a block of ice

ok, so my first guess was more correct, but it makes me wonder why stun immunity is good against being frozen then.

maybe add a frozen bar (like air, except the other way) so that the duration of the freeze it in relation to the amount of "frozen" the actor has (ie, the more frozen you are, the longer the duration, anything less than a certain threshold, does not freeze the player (maybe still a small chance), but slow them down a bit, say up to 0.3 before they are frozen, this would make ice weapons less powerful.

This reminds me of the Chill/Frozen effects in Diablo 2. Frozen was fully encased in ice, Chilled was beign slwoed in move/attack/castign speed due to coldness. they had separate overlapping immunity checks. Freeze immunity would give chill imunity, but chill imunnity would not guarantee freeze immunity, Cold damge resistance was another separate factor but had no bearing on the status resistances.

I think that a high cold resistance should reduce freeze duration, as a character 100% immune to cold with a body temperature greater than zero would melt through the block of ice far faster than one with no resistance who would be greatly chilled by the initial cast and would take much longer to thaw out.

If being frozen is being encased in a block of ice, how in the world can arrows and swords deal damage to you without breaking it?

In fact, that gives me an idea for an ice spell. Shatter: deals massive damage to frozen enemies while unfreezing them. (The idea being that the ice they're stuck in suddenly turns into a ton of ice shards.)

Maybe the Cyromancer already has something like that though... I wouldn't know, I still haven't gotten to the far east.

How about this...

Should an alchemist with 100% alchemist protection freeze himself w/frost infused bombs?

Big chunk of ice it is... note that making 100% cold resistance also resist freeze would not just be a boon for players... Carn Dum would be more difficult more archmages and wielders of Ringil.