Could luck affect growths?

[KliffIsTheOG]

Right now, luck is a pretty useless stat, so what if they made it affect growth rates? They are after all, statistical chances of improvement, so it would make sense that luck would affect them.

[Magical Glace]

As in, each point of luck raises all growths by 2% or something?

[Maritisa]

This is something I'd considered, but on a more broad scale.

Like, make it so Luck causes you to have a chance to get an RNG reroll, for like, everything. So lucky characters actually get lucky more.

[SatsumaFSoysoy]

I don't know what you're talking about, Luck already increased growth rates.

[NinjaMonkey]

How is luck useless? Doesn't it determine things like Avoid and Critical Avoid?

[Extrasolar]

Uh... Well, I think this depends. Just how big would the bonus be in relation to the luck stat? You'd have to handle something like this pretty delicately, or it could break the game.

I mean, I know a unit with Arthur's horribad luck is by far the exception rather than the rule, but I don't necessarily like the thought of lower luck units (even without being as extreme as Arthur) turning out worse simply because of a single stat.

And yeah, luck's definitely not a useless stat to begin with. Being a buffer against enemy critical hits is a pretty important job, in my opinion.

[Koumal8]

  Luck is definitely not a useless stat and having it affect growth rates in any way would be IMO an overly complicated way to increase stats: why not upping growths in the first place? I can think of other ways it could be made more relevant, such as affecting how likely a unit is to be targeted by the enemy, or it could give the unit a 2xLck% chance of finding better weapons and items in shining tiles, or a 2xLck% chance of not getting damaged by a trap (such as the spikes from FE14 or those flame-erupting walls in FE6).

[Shigure]

This would be an interesting idea, Luck as of now does not contribute much besides Avoid and Critical Avoid, that would give an otherwise worthless stat some form of value, my issue is that a character's usefulness would solely be measured by their Luck Growth Rate which does not add much depth and strategy.

I can't think of a way to combat this off the top of my head, I'm not saying this is bad, but it would take effort and time not to make high Luck characters OP and characters with bad Luck like Arthur horrendous.

Maybe they could make it as to where luck was based on age maybe? For example, since Gunter is an older unit presumably in his fifties, he would have decent bases because of all of his years of fighting and combat but would have horrible Growths because he is an old man who is starting to retire while youngins' like Mozu would have phenomenal potential and Luck since she would be still in fighting form though would have trash bases due to her lacking any combat experience.

This seems a little hypocritical on my side since players would obviously pick the younger units but like I said I can't think of anything to combat this idea's problems.

Edited April 16, 2017 by Exalt

[Refa]

1 hour ago, Koumal8 said:

  Luck is definitely not a useless stat and having it affect growth rates in any way would be IMO an overly complicated way to increase stats: why not upping growths in the first place?

Because Luck itself can increase through a variety of means.  Also Luck isn't useless per se, but it's only detrimental to be lacking in it at extremely low quantities and it's only beneficial to have it at extremely large quantities.  Therefore, it ends up being mostly inconsequential for most player units who aren't severely hampered or benefit greatly from it.

[Augestein]

Luck isn't useless, but it's the least useful stat of them all. I wouldn't like luck to effect growths, but rather it could effect more things if it's going to be the "all around stat." IE, people that are lucky might win contest more often, or run into randomly good events more often-- item drops, finding items, shop sales etc. I think luck could be good if it just had more out of combat effects as well as what it does now. 

[Slumber]

Definitely not.

Plus, if they continue the way they've been going with Awakening/Fates, and tie specific skills to stats, Luck has become INCREDIBLY useful(Armsthrift being arguably the most useful stat-based skill in Awakening).

[bethany81707]

1 hour ago, Augestein said:

Luck isn't useless, but it's the least useful stat of them all. I wouldn't like luck to effect growths, but rather it could effect more things if it's going to be the "all around stat." IE, people that are lucky might win contest more often, or run into randomly good events more often-- item drops, finding items, shop sales etc. I think luck could be good if it just had more out of combat effects as well as what it does now. 

So, basically, 'Stache from Mario & Luigi.

[Augestein]

Yeah, essentially. If it did a bunch of little things, it'd be a stat you want, but don't necessarily need. 

[Koumal8]

Ah, you meant using the actual Lck stat and not growth rate; well, good luck calculating average stats for LTCers and unit comparison.

[Harvey]

On 4/17/2017 at 1:31 AM, KliffIsTheOG said:

Right now, luck is a pretty useless stat, so what if they made it affect growth rates? They are after all, statistical chances of improvement, so it would make sense that luck would affect them.

Um..I tend to disagree. Luck like all the other stats is an important stat to have. Its the weakest yes but its also vital. Its no wonder why Arthur(Fates) tends to get Crit screwed in the first place.

So, basically, 'Stache from Mario & Luigi.

The M&L series hardly uses luck. Its only used to deal bonus damage which RARELY happens.

 

Edited April 19, 2017 by Harvey

[henrymidfields]

I wouldn't mind if Luck has a lot more to go with. At the moment, it only really matters when your Luck parameter is in the extremes.

• Chances for RNG re-rolls for Level Ups would be better for Luck affecting stats. The re-rolls (being Luck x n%) should happen for stats where the first RNG did not activate a growth.
• Luck should also affect the extent of temporary growths before battle. (You know, the "I'm in top form today!" dialogues.) There can be a chance (Luck x n %) where a +2/+4 boost happens in an extra stat catergory.
• On the other hand, could there be certain intro cutscenes where an ambush/accident happens before your chapter starts? And characters with lower luck have a higher chance of being forced to start the chapter with their HPs already lost 1/4 or 1/2 from their maximum HP?

(n would be a variable, depending on the stat cap number.)

Edited April 25, 2017 by henrymidfields

[SavageVolug]

I'm not sure if I like the sound of this too well. The reason being characters who have subpar luck like knights would get the short end of the stick while myrmidons would be at the other end of the spectrum. And finally luck already has a purpose and that's negating criticals so I don't see the point that and I'm wary of going from a RNG and mathematics system to more emphasis on the luck stat. And one last point while Fates often gave you crummy level ups the level ups that I've seen in the GBA game are usually decent. Most times units level up in about 3 stats and I've never seen a level up that didn't increase anything. Fates was the first game I've played where a unit could level up and not receive any stat boosts at all.

[grandjackal]

Luck increasing growths basically makes things a wash. Your characters could just skyrocket because you got lucky and got a bunch of luck early on. The amount of number tinkering you would have to do to make that work in the typical FE fashion would be too much work for something that is ultimately silly. 

The history of luck is a weird one. In FE1, I recall luck's use being comically narrow (I think it factored into avoid solely against magic. I don't recall it even effecting crit avoid. Sure didn't feel like it did). FE3 it definitely was crit avoid, along with hit and avoid in all scenarios. However, you couldn't really depend on avoiding attacks in that game since hit never got low enough to be dependable, so it didn't feel impactful. FE4, luck was low impact since critting involved skills or a weapon. FE5, luck almost FE1 useless because combat in FE5 might as well be a game of yahtzee. It's basically been FE3 homogenized since FE6 onward, up until Fates decided luck needed to be really high in order to feel safe.

Luck tends to be more a stat that's important to the enemy rather than your characters. Most characters have the luck to never get crit, and the few it do usually have comically bad luck, and it is their primary flaw. This is fine, because the punishment for low luck is to randomly restart the chapter because the game said so. No stat punishes you harder. Fates made that flaw a lot more noticeable. I wouldn't say it's useless, just that it feels like you never have enough of it. You need like 25 to feel safe. FE5 and 1. That's when luck was useless.

Also yeah, luck skills. Very neat, and I like them. Another reason luck isn't useless.

Edited May 8, 2017 by grandjackal