Discussion:
"Improvements" to Angband
(too old to reply)
Walter Landry
18 years ago
Permalink
Greetings,

After over a year of playing, I have finally managed to defeat
Morgoth. Wow, what an addictive game. Great fun. Of course, in the
course of playing, there were a number of things that annoyed me.
Some of these things are well known. For reference, I played mostly
gnome mages, with an occasional half-troll warrior or high-elf mage.
Easy detection and identification made the game much more fun for me.
For some reason, surviving the early levels was never very difficult
for me. I was almost exclusively a spell-only mage: no ranged weapons
and melee weapons only used on incredibly wimpy creatures. This was
Vanilla 3.0.6.

I have looked a bit at other variants, and they have their own issues.
I like the basic idea of Angband (linear dungeon with town to escape
to), so variants with wilderness and quests is not quite what I want.
I like diving. I also like the direction that Vanilla is going with
the new maintainer, so it seems best to improve upon Vanilla.

In any case, I have compiled a list of the annoyances and some
possible solutions. I think a few of these things have been fixed in
3.0.9, but some of these changes may be too much for Vanilla. If no
one else wants to implement these things, I may get around to it
(especially item #1), but it may take me a long time.

1) Line of sight: This is the biggest problem by far. At the end, I
could trivially kill uniques with no danger to me by digging a tunnel,
filling it with runes, and zapping them before they could even see me.
Specifically, something like

####
#@;##
###;##
####;##
#####;##
######;##
#######p#

I found out about this particular abuse of line of sight when I was on
the other side of it, with a Lich zapping me while I could not see it.
In any case, this makes the end game way too easy. The monsters can't
zap, summon, or teleport-to. They just have to (very slowly) plow
through the kill zone. My monster memory has almost nothing about
Sauron because he never really saw me. Azriel was a pushover. Even
Morgoth was easier than he should have been, because I was able to
create doors to manipulate line of sight.

I think this also showed up in the behavior of pack animals. I have
smart_packs on, and if you are in a hallway, they tend to wait in a
room so as to surround you. They tend to be out of direct line of
sight, but if I cast detect monsters, I can still target them. So I
can zap them from the safety of the hallway, rest when I am out of
mana, and then continue zapping them.

If I was going to fix one thing about Angband, I would fix this. The
basic principle should be that if I can see you, then you can see me.
We can argue whether you can see around hockey-sticks or not, but
vision should never be one-way.


2) Armor, weapon, and item restrictions: The problem is that there are
almost none. Mages get a significant penalty when wearing gloves and
a mild penalty when wearing too much armor. In practice, this meant
that my gnome mage was walking around in plate armor wielding a
halberd near the end game. That is just not right.

If I were king, mages could only wear robes, no shield, weapons only
lighter than 2 lbs, only soft leather boots (no hard leather boots or
metal shod boots), and no ranged weapons. Rogues could only wear
non-metal armor and use weapons lighter than 10 lbs. Priests get a
severe penalty when using edged weapons, there are no "blessed"
weapons, and can only use slings (not bows or crossbows). Priests
should just not be able to fight as well as warriors.

Also, I would not allow warriors to use wands, staves, or scrolls.
Rods are ok. I would probably have to give a rod of recall to
everyone at the beginning.

Now that a lot of items are no longer useful to certain classes, we
can automatically squelch them when they are generated. So you can't
sell as many things in the stores. This would reduce the tendency to
make Angband the game of shopping. It should also help with the Too
Much Junk problem, though I do not claim that it is a complete fix.

I am pretty sure that this change would make the game significantly
harder, so some rebalancing might be required.

As a side note, one thing that does not bother me in 3.0.6 is that
wands and staves never get destroyed during recharging. Since I did
not use ranged weapons, recharging wands was often the only way I had
to actually kill anything. I understand that this has been changed in
later versions. I would change it back.

3) Constitution is too important for mages (and maybe rogues): Mages
should be weak, frail creatures that protect themselves with powerful
magics. Rogues just avoid being noticed until they stab you in the
back. This really gets annoying after stat-gain, where mages are
wearing rings of constitution rather than rings of intelligence.

I would fix this by making the shield spell also add level*6 temporary
hit points to the total. All damage comes from those additional hit
points first. Healing potions don't affect the additional hit points.
Casting shield while a shield is up only extends the duration of the
spell, but does not resupply the additional hit points. In this case,
rangers would be barred from using this spell.

I would also make the maximum allowed stats depend on class. So a
mage can get as high an Int as possible, but a warrior is capped at
18/100, including equipment bonuses. Similarly, warriors can max out
Str and Con, but mages are capped. Making up a list, it would be
something like

Capped Stats
Warrior: Int, Wis
Mage: Str, Con
Priest: Int, Dex
Rogue: Str, Con
Paladin: Int, Dex
Ranger: Wis, Dex

I also like the idea of having Charisma affect when monsters flee.
That would make it a much more interesting stat.

4) Boring play is rewarded: This happens several ways, and fixing each
one requires a different approach. But the basic idea is to make it
so that boring play is not rewarded.

i) stair scumming

It irks me that you go up and down and be in a completely new
place. I would make the levels somewhat persistent. Going down
from the town, recalling, and teleport level always gives you a new
level, but otherwise levels are persistent. So to get a new level,
you have to get a new set of stairs.

ii) Angband: the game of shopping

This is going down into the dungeon, waiting for 1000 turns, and
coming back up to find those potions of Cure Critical Wounds or
scrolls of Recall. One way of reducing this behavior is to make
every trip into the dungeon significant. Specifically, whenever you
go into the dungeon, the minimum recall depth goes up by one. This
also keeps people from hanging around stat-gain too long. Also, you
can have the shops restock only when either you go up a character
level or down a dungeon level.

Another thing is that all of the normal shops (everything except the
black market), should not sell magical stuff. That is where you get
normal stuff. The black market is the only place that will sell
magical items. Otherwise, I am tempted to waste time by checking
all of the shops for special items. That is less than fun. I
understand that some of this is fixed already in 3.0.9, for which I
am grateful.

iii) Monster farming

Cloned, bred, and summoned monsters should not give XP or drop items.


5) Weapon speed is wrong: A warrior should not be grabbing a dagger to
start. I would fix this by making the number of blows independent of
weapon type. Rather, it would depend on character level. Off the top
of my head, I would make a warrior start with 2 blows/round. Everyone
else (including paladin and ranger) starts with 1 blow/round.
Warriors get an extra blow every 7 levels, paladins and rangers every
10, priests every 15, rogues every 20, and mages every 25.

6) Non-circular detection area: Having the detection area depend on
the size of the screen is wrong. I have heard that this is fixed in
3.0.9. Great.

7) *Id* is not so useful: Because artifacts are static, *Id* is only
useful for the items with random abilities. I can never remember
which artifacts I have already seen, so I end up using the spoilers
for everything. The fix is to implement artifact memory and/or random
artifacts. As I understand it, 3.0.9 implements both, so I am happy.

8) Racial Imbalance: I tried playing humans, but it was always so much
more difficult than other races. Other races already have significant
advantages. There should also be significant downsides from playing
other races. XP penalties do not cut it.

For example, there is no disadvantage to having infravision. You can
just see more. So one idea would be to make fire attacks blind
characters with infravision. Cold attacks would darken the area.

If you innately resist light/dark, then you take double damage from
dark/light.

If one of your stats is sustained, then stat gain potions only work
half the time for that stat. If you received an initial bonus to a
stat, then the effectiveness of stat potions is again reduced by 10%
for every point you get. So Dunadan and High Elf characters will gain
stats much more slowly.

Gnomes are never paralyzed or slowed, so make increased speed only
work 2/3 as well.

High elves can see invisible, so they are always susceptible to
blinding (subject to a save).

Kobolds resist poison, so healing potions only work 2/3 as well.

Hobbits resist life drain, so this seems like the appropriate place
for an XP penalty. A 10% penalty sounds right.

Dwarves resist blindness. Hmm. Maybe make their vision not reliable
past 5 squares. So they know something is there, and they know what
general kind of monster it is (p vs D vs X), but they can't tell the
difference between Sauron and a novice mage.


9) Too Much Junk: As a mage, I only found it to be a minor annoyance.
It was pretty bogus when I was clearing out dragon pits to have the
message "Too many objects" flash up, but otherwise it did not bother
me. But as a warrior, it was pain.

10) Priests and Paladins get too many good spells: It seems odd to me
that priests get Clairvoyance, but mages do not. Healings, Dispel
Evil, and Holy Word all make sense, but not Clairvoyance. Detect Evil
is good, but priests also get Detection. Mages have to cobble
together Detect Monsters, Detect Invisible, and Detect Enchantment.

So I would take away Find Traps, Detect Doors/Stairs, Portal,
Clairvoyance, and everything in Ethereal Openings and Godly Insights.
Maybe Unbarring Ways and Recharging as well. Unfortunately, I do not
have anything to replace them with. That would require more thought.

11) Useless spells: Slow monster and sleep monster just need to work
on stronger creatures.

Wonder works well as a wand when you are weak, but I never cast the
spell as a mage. Maybe it should have a reduced mana cost (perhaps
even zero). So it would be like fiddling with forces beyond your
control. Usually good (so that people bother), but sometimes bad.

There might also be a wider variety of bad things happening, such as
filling up the room with similar monsters, or blind, confuse, or stun.

I am also not sure about Earthquake in Kelek's. By the time you find
Kelek's, you probably already have a low fail rate for word of
destruction. Maybe it is more useful for Rangers. Hmm.

12) Constrained Dungeons: It always seemed artificial that dungeons
are constrained to fit exactly into a 9x9 square. They should be
allowed to be any shape and size. I do not know for certain, but I
would guess that there are technical reasons to use a fixed size.
This would require some care when implementing, because otherwise you
might get an infinite level.

13) Inifinite monster mana: Creatures should not be able to heal
themselves forever. I think the best fix would be finite monster
mana. It sounds like a lot of work, though.

One thing that does not bother me is the length of the dungeon. I am
also not bothered that Kronos, The Tarrasque, and Morgoth all occupy
the same dungeon.

-----------------

All in all, I think these changes would more clearly differentiate
classes and races. Trade offs are what makes Angband an interesting
game to me, and this increases their richness and variety.

It also would make the game significantly harder.


-----------------

So those are a list of the problems I saw in Angband. I also have a
list of features I would like. Few (none?) of these ideas are
original to me. Just consider these to be my vote for them.

1) Lit/Dark monsters: Novice priests etc. carry torches so you can see
them from afar. Light hounds permanently light up the areas they
traverse, and dark hounds permanently darken the area. Other
creatures should have a similar effect (Phoenix lights up a large
area, Morgoth darkens a large area). So without ESP, you can never
really see Morgoth.

2) Make large creatures have reach, so they can attack from two
squares away. Similarly, give polearms reach.

3) Displacer beasts should appear to be in a different square than
they actually are.

4) When generating monsters, if you generate a unique but no unique is
left for that level, then keep looking at more powerful uniques until
you find one. This imposes a clock of sorts, because once you kill a
weak unique, you constantly get more and more powerful ones.

5) For some creatures, do not show how much health they have left.

6) If attacking hydras with a edged weapon and you get a critical hit,
you create a hydra with more heads.

7) Terrain (water, mud, lava, air, etc.)

8) Monsters are affected by traps, and rogues can create traps. Also
let rogues steal drops from monsters. Especially if they are
sleeping. Maybe make rogues a weaker warrior at the same time.

10) A Monk class:

Not allowed armor, weapons, rings or necklaces, but can carry a
light source.

Fist damage=1/level with no strength bonus.

Speed bonus=1/level. Can not be hasted or slowed.

Excellent stealth.

Can "hear" monsters nearby, sort of like a limited ESP with noisy
monsters (e.g. not ghosts) with a range of level/10.

Maybe get some inherent resists at various levels: Fire at 10, Cold
at 20, Electricity at 30, Acid at 35, and poison at 40.

Stats sustained at level 40.

Able to jump (level/10 +1) spaces every 50/level turns.

Hit points like a rogue

Can use rods and potions, but not wands, staves, or scrolls.

This will almost certainly require tweaking to get right. But the
basic idea is that a monk would be a very different way of going
through the dungeon.

11) Monsters have a "magic mirror" spell, which creates illusionary
copies of themselves. So you would not be sure of which one is the
real monster.

-----------------

That's all for now.

Cheers,
Walter Landry
***@caltech.edu
andrewdoull
18 years ago
Permalink
Post by Walter Landry
Greetings,
After over a year of playing, I have finally managed to defeat
Morgoth. Wow, what an addictive game. Great fun. Of course, in the
course of playing, there were a number of things that annoyed me.
Wow. What a great and well thought out list. Can I recommend you try NPPAngband,
perhaps NPPAngband 0.4.x, which addresses many of the issues that you outline,
and will be the closest in feel to what you like?

Andrew
--
The Roflwtfzomgbbq Quylthulg summons L33t Paladins -more-
"Apple: Celebrating the poisoning of Alan Turing since 1977."
ASCII Dreams: http://roguelikedeveloper.blogspot.com
Unangband: http://unangband.blogspot.com
Walter Landry
18 years ago
Permalink
Post by andrewdoull
Post by Walter Landry
Greetings,
After over a year of playing, I have finally managed to defeat
Morgoth. Wow, what an addictive game. Great fun. Of course, in the
course of playing, there were a number of things that annoyed me.
Wow. What a great and well thought out list. Can I recommend you try NPPAngband,
perhaps NPPAngband 0.4.x, which addresses many of the issues that you outline,
and will be the closest in feel to what you like?
I tried many variants.

NPPAngband: It just did not grab me. Recharging blows up wands, which
makes a spell-only mage rather difficult. Also, it has quests, which I
guess I can ignore. It implements a number of the feature requests, but
only solves some of the problems. NPPAngband is the closest to what I
want outside of vanilla.

Quickband: Too short of a game. I like the epic scale of Angband.

Oangband: I found it difficult to dive, and I never had enough money
for even basic supplies. The combat system is an interesting solution,
but I don't know that I like it.

Sangband: Unfortunately, I don't really like the basic premise of
Sangband, which is to have skills instead of classes. First of all, I
don't really want to spend that much effort trying to figure out what to
improve each level. I also prefer the approach that you are somewhat
forced into a particular path because of a choice you made long ago. So
if I discover a staff of the magi lying on the ground at 50 feet, I just
have to thank the RNG and move on.

Cheers,
Walter Landry
***@caltech.edu
Phil Carmody
18 years ago
Permalink
Post by Walter Landry
If I was going to fix one thing about Angband, I would fix this. The
basic principle should be that if I can see you, then you can see me.
We can argue whether you can see around hockey-sticks or not, but
vision should never be one-way.
Was JFK's sniper clearly visible? Was JFK clearly visible?
It's not always symmetric.

Phil
--
Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all.
-- Microsoft voice recognition live demonstration
pete m
18 years ago
Permalink
Post by Phil Carmody
Post by Walter Landry
If I was going to fix one thing about Angband, I would fix this. The
basic principle should be that if I can see you, then you can see me.
We can argue whether you can see around hockey-sticks or not, but
vision should never be one-way.
Was JFK's sniper clearly visible? Was JFK clearly visible?
It's not always symmetric.
It doesn't matter what's true in RL. No matter how you cut it, the
hockey stick is a terribly cheesy tactic. It's been fixed in a lot of
variants, like NPP.


As for Walter's bit about extreme restrictions on equipment: that's
only a good idea if you can somehow force only equipment that can be
worn. There just aren't that many robes or soft-leather boots in the
entire game. 95%+ of the stuff in the dungeon is already worthless.
Making further restrictions just makes it worse.

For what it's worth, if you dive fast you will end up with pretty
limited equipment, at least until very near the end of the game.

Suggestions:

try NPP.
try Quickband!
magnate
18 years ago
Permalink
Post by pete m
As for Walter's bit about extreme restrictions on equipment: that's
only a good idea if you can somehow force only equipment that can be
worn. There just aren't that many robes or soft-leather boots in the
entire game. 95%+ of the stuff in the dungeon is already worthless.
Making further restrictions just makes it worse.
I've suggested before (and I think originally RDH mentioned it) that
item generation should be geared towards the current character, rather
than absolute. So you could solve the above problem by making the game
generate more soft boots and robes when the player is a mage, and more
plate armours for a warrior, and so on. It's a completely different
paradigm, but one that would both solve TMJ and allow meaningful
equipment restrictions.

Probably better in a variant than in V though.

CC
tigpup
18 years ago
Permalink
...
NPP does something a little this with quest rewards if your reputation
is high enough. It tries to generate somethat that you need. Like a
dungeon spell-book that you don't currently have.
R. Dan Henry
17 years ago
Permalink
Post by magnate
I've suggested before (and I think originally RDH mentioned it) that
item generation should be geared towards the current character, rather
than absolute.
Actually, I dislike that idea, although I did argue that mage and priest
books could be combined and just display differently depending on class.
Steamband does it for automaton body parts and that isn't too bad, but
it does mean another bonus for two of the most powerful races, since the
parts sell for a good price. I think a lot of this sort of thing just
gives the dungeon a sense of inconsistency.
--
R. Dan Henry
***@inreach.com
Holy Avenger should be a Paladin title,
not an ego item.
Walter Landry
18 years ago
Permalink
Post by pete m
As for Walter's bit about extreme restrictions on equipment: that's
only a good idea if you can somehow force only equipment that can be
worn.
That is exactly what I was suggesting.

Cheers,
Walter Landry
***@caltech.edu
VALIS
18 years ago
Permalink
Post by Walter Landry
Greetings,
I have looked a bit at other variants, and they have their own issues.
I like the basic idea of Angband (linear dungeon with town to escape
to), so variants with wilderness and quests is not quite what I want.
I like diving. I also like the direction that Vanilla is going with
the new maintainer, so it seems best to improve upon Vanilla.
You've tried Oangband? Someone else mentioned NPP - also addresses a lot of your
concerns.

I'd recommend steam, but it's not really what you're looking for.
--
-Campbell

- Join the steamband group by sending an email to
steamband-***@Yahoogroups.com !
- Visit the Steamband web page, and follow the progress of Steam! (and view my
art!) http://angband.oook.cz/steamband/
camlost
18 years ago
Permalink
Many of your changes are "fixed" in variants. Instead of recommending a
whole slew of variants, I'm going to respond as to how Sangband has
addressed these issues, so you can decide for yourself.

1) LOS is symmetric
2) No restrictions on armor or weapons (and you risk too much junk,
otherwise, IMO).
3) I don't think that the current system works without having a very
high con in the end-game. The game would have to drastically change to
allow this.
4) Boring play is well rewarded in almost all variants. This is
partially due to the long dungeon. Variants with shorter dungeons
(Steam, Quick) fix this best. Variants where diving is more continuous
(O, S) are better for this than V.
5) Oangband combat. 'Nuff said (O, S, FA, current Z)
6) Sangband (and O, FA) have circular detection.
7) Partial randarts + partial fixed artifacts in S
8) Racial imbalance. Most races are well played, but I'm not 100%
satisfied here. High-Elves and Dunadun suffer a score penalty (score
actually means something in S). Humans are pretty good if you want to
do something that isn't a shoe-in for a particular race.
9) TMJ: Better than V, not perfect. Fewer drops, but they're more
likely to be good.
10) Spells are well balanced in the 4 schools of magic. Each has plenty
of variety, but not everything you want.
11) Slow, Confuse, and Wonder are staples of my sorcerors, *especially*
against uniques. (you have no idea how awesome it is to double move
Azog instead of the other way around).
12) No improvements here, but there are "special rooms"
13) 4GAI, no infinite monster mana.


7) Plenty of terrain
8) Burglars can set traps and steal from monsters. Being a rogue
doesn't guarantee spellcasting.
9) What happened here?
10) Monk classes are very well supported in Sangband


Happy *banding!

(for my list of variants I recommend: Sangband, Quickband, FAAngband,
NPPAngband, Steamband, Oangband, Entro/Hengband)

Joshua
VALIS
18 years ago
Permalink
Post by camlost
5) Oangband combat. 'Nuff said (O, S, FA, current Z)
I just wanted to point out that although Steamband does not have O combat, there
is a combat system in place that rewards users of heavy weapons. Also, Steamband
has skills, and hence, specialization.
Post by camlost
13) 4GAI, no infinite monster mana.
Again, both Steam, NPP, and Sang all run the 4GAI. (Uh, does O?)
Post by camlost
(for my list of variants I recommend: Sangband, Quickband, FAAngband,
NPPAngband, Steamband, Oangband, Entro/Hengband)
Thanks for the recommendation of Steam. :-) Based on his comments though it
doesn't sound like he'd like it.
Post by camlost
Joshua
--
-Campbell

- Join the steamband group by sending an email to
steamband-***@Yahoogroups.com !
- Visit the Steamband web page, and follow the progress of Steam! (and view my
art!) http://angband.oook.cz/steamband/
andrewdoull
18 years ago
Permalink
Post by VALIS
Post by camlost
5) Oangband combat. 'Nuff said (O, S, FA, current Z)
I just wanted to point out that although Steamband does not have O combat, there
is a combat system in place that rewards users of heavy weapons. Also, Steamband
has skills, and hence, specialization.
Post by camlost
13) 4GAI, no infinite monster mana.
Again, both Steam, NPP, and Sang all run the 4GAI. (Uh, does O?)
I think you'll find 4GAI came from O. Un does as well, while we're throwing
variant names around.
--
The Roflwtfzomgbbq Quylthulg summons L33t Paladins -more-
"Apple: Celebrating the poisoning of Alan Turing since 1977."
ASCII Dreams: http://roguelikedeveloper.blogspot.com
Unangband: http://unangband.blogspot.com
VALIS
18 years ago
Permalink
...
It came from Leon, who's baby is SAngband. Yes, I know Bahman helped write the
4gai, I just didn't know if it was in O. (I didn't know if it was in O off the
top of my head, since I haven't played it in years ;-p)
--
-Campbell

- Join the steamband group by sending an email to
steamband-***@Yahoogroups.com !
- Visit the Steamband web page, and follow the progress of Steam! (and view my
art!) http://angband.oook.cz/steamband/
magnate
18 years ago
Permalink
Post by VALIS
Post by andrewdoull
Post by VALIS
Post by camlost
13) 4GAI, no infinite monster mana.
Again, both Steam, NPP, and Sang all run the 4GAI. (Uh, does O?)
I think you'll find 4GAI came from O. Un does as well, while we're throwing
variant names around.
It came from Leon, who's baby is SAngband. Yes, I know Bahman helped write the
4gai, I just didn't know if it was in O. (I didn't know if it was in O off the
top of my head, since I haven't played it in years ;-p)
The confusion here is that Leon actually wrote O before he wrote S. So
yes, 4GAI is Leon's baby (which is why it's in S), but it was
originally released in O.

CC
camlost
18 years ago
Permalink
...
These are just stock recommendations -- there's pretty much always a
variant you'll like in that list. It sounds like he wants something
pretty close to Vanilla, which means NPP, O, or maybe S or FA. When he
looks for something more exotic than those, he should try the other
variants in the list. Un would be here too, but I have next to no
personal experience with it.

Partway through, I gave up trying to list all the variants with
features, which perhaps was a bit misleading. I apologize.

Joshua
Timo Pietilä
18 years ago
Permalink
Post by Walter Landry
Greetings,
1) Line of sight: This is the biggest problem by far.
If I was going to fix one thing about Angband, I would fix this. The
basic principle should be that if I can see you, then you can see me.
We can argue whether you can see around hockey-sticks or not, but
vision should never be one-way.
Problem with hockey stick is that it doesn't follow same rules as LoS.
I'm okay with targetting/LoS being asymmetric, but it should follow same
rules as LoS so that you shouldn't be able to use hockey stick.

Like this: x marks the spot monster can't see you, s marks the spot it
can. And vise versa.

########
@.######
##xs####
####xs##
######xs
Good points.
Post by Walter Landry
3) Constitution is too important for mages (and maybe rogues)
I think Constitution is too important to all classes.
Post by Walter Landry
4) Boring play is rewarded: This happens several ways, and fixing each
one requires a different approach. But the basic idea is to make it
so that boring play is not rewarded.
i) stair scumming
It irks me that you go up and down and be in a completely new
place.
Use disconnected stairs. No more stair scumming.

One point of stair scumming is that using stairs _doesn't use a turn_.

That means that you can do that indefinitely until something interesting
happens.
Post by Walter Landry
I would make the levels somewhat persistent. Going down
from the town, recalling, and teleport level always gives you a new
level, but otherwise levels are persistent. So to get a new level,
you have to get a new set of stairs.
This can be quite difficult to make.
Post by Walter Landry
ii) Angband: the game of shopping
This is going down into the dungeon, waiting for 1000 turns, and
coming back up to find those potions of Cure Critical Wounds or
scrolls of Recall. One way of reducing this behavior is to make
every trip into the dungeon significant. Specifically, whenever you
go into the dungeon, the minimum recall depth goes up by one. This
also keeps people from hanging around stat-gain too long.
Bad idea. You just end up getting people complaining about how they have
to use stairs. I'm very strongly against all kinds of "time
restrictions" like this one. OTOH I don't like the idea being able to
reset recall depth by using recall in shallower level than your deepest
level is.
Post by Walter Landry
Also, you
can have the shops restock only when either you go up a character
level or down a dungeon level.
I don't like that either. If you play ranger and use a lot of arrows
then you might want to get those arrows. Same as all other consumables
like ID for warrior etc.
Post by Walter Landry
Another thing is that all of the normal shops (everything except the
black market), should not sell magical stuff.
I think you mean enchanted armor/weapons.
Post by Walter Landry
That is where you get
normal stuff. The black market is the only place that will sell
magical items. Otherwise, I am tempted to waste time by checking
all of the shops for special items. That is less than fun.
This is quite good idea.
Post by Walter Landry
iii) Monster farming
Cloned, bred, and summoned monsters should not give XP or drop items.
Specifically not drop items if _you_ summon/clone them. I have no
problem with dragon/demon/angel explosions giving me items. Those are
dangerous enough that it feels like well deserved reward.
Post by Walter Landry
5) Weapon speed is wrong: A warrior should not be grabbing a dagger to
start. I would fix this by making the number of blows independent of
weapon type. Rather, it would depend on character level. Off the top
of my head, I would make a warrior start with 2 blows/round.
This far everything looks OK. Give warrior extra blow and use rogue or
ranger calculation for blows. That prevents too many blows with dagger.
Post by Walter Landry
Everyone
else (including paladin and ranger) starts with 1 blow/round.
Warriors get an extra blow every 7 levels, paladins and rangers every
10, priests every 15, rogues every 20, and mages every 25.
So that mage ends up with three at clvl 50? And has only two up to that
point? And rogue max is also three? This doesn't make sense.
Post by Walter Landry
6) Non-circular detection area: Having the detection area depend on
the size of the screen is wrong. I have heard that this is fixed in
3.0.9. Great.
How would you fix it? Circular detection is OK if you get _A VERY_ clear
warning about going in non-detected area.
Post by Walter Landry
7) *Id* is not so useful: Because artifacts are static, *Id* is only
useful for the items with random abilities.
...unless you play with randarts...
Post by Walter Landry
I can never remember
which artifacts I have already seen, so I end up using the spoilers
for everything. The fix is to implement artifact memory and/or random
artifacts. As I understand it, 3.0.9 implements both, so I am happy.
8) Racial Imbalance: I tried playing humans, but it was always so much
more difficult than other races. Other races already have significant
advantages. There should also be significant downsides from playing
other races. XP penalties do not cut it.
Different race/class combinations are _NOT_ supposed to be equally
easy/hard. Humans are hard but that is how it should be.
Post by Walter Landry
9) Too Much Junk: As a mage, I only found it to be a minor annoyance.
It was pretty bogus when I was clearing out dragon pits to have the
message "Too many objects" flash up, but otherwise it did not bother
me. But as a warrior, it was pain.
AFAIK this is going to be fixed, but if you have read this newsgroup you
know that it isn't done just like that. Rebalancing game after this is
going to be long process.
Post by Walter Landry
10) Priests and Paladins get too many good spells: It seems odd to me
that priests get Clairvoyance, but mages do not. Healings, Dispel
Evil, and Holy Word all make sense, but not Clairvoyance. Detect Evil
is good, but priests also get Detection. Mages have to cobble
together Detect Monsters, Detect Invisible, and Detect Enchantment.
I think problem here is not that priest gets detection. It is that mage
doesn't. Give mage detection and clairvoyance.
Post by Walter Landry
So I would take away Find Traps, Detect Doors/Stairs, Portal,
Clairvoyance, and everything in Ethereal Openings and Godly Insights.
Maybe Unbarring Ways and Recharging as well. Unfortunately, I do not
have anything to replace them with. That would require more thought.
So basically you are taking away all detections and all escapes. That
would make priest (and paladin) a very weak warrior with some utility
spells. Bad _bad_ *bad* idea. No thanks.
Post by Walter Landry
13) Inifinite monster mana: Creatures should not be able to heal
themselves forever. I think the best fix would be finite monster
mana. It sounds like a lot of work, though.
One word: 4GAI. (actually that is acronym for four words, but who's
counting).

Timo Pietilä
Walter Landry
18 years ago
Permalink
...
This is one thing that bothers me about NPP. I can see creatures, but I
can not target them. I can understand some bonuses to AC because of
cover, but I should always be able to zap them with spells.
Post by Timo Pietilä
Post by Walter Landry
4) Boring play is rewarded: This happens several ways, and fixing each
one requires a different approach. But the basic idea is to make it
so that boring play is not rewarded.
i) stair scumming
It irks me that you go up and down and be in a completely new
place.
Use disconnected stairs. No more stair scumming.
It doesn't bother me that you can immediately run away from a dangerous
level. I just don't want to make it trivial to do so.
Post by Timo Pietilä
One point of stair scumming is that using stairs _doesn't use a turn_.
That means that you can do that indefinitely until something interesting
happens.
You must stair scum a lot if it matters to you that it doesn't use a
turn. That you can do that and be rewarded is one thing I want to change.
Post by Timo Pietilä
Post by Walter Landry
I would make the levels somewhat persistent. Going down
from the town, recalling, and teleport level always gives you a new
level, but otherwise levels are persistent. So to get a new level,
you have to get a new set of stairs.
This can be quite difficult to make.
I thought that there was one (japanese?) variant that implemented this.
It can make the save files much larger.
...
When I first read this, I thought "No one will actually walk down 30
levels because they don't want to go past 1600 feet". But then I
realized that people will :( So you could have the stairs from the town
go down a deeper level each time. So if you like to jump up and down
too much, eventually Sauron will be waiting for you when you go down ;)
For regular players, they probably won't notice much. I certainly did
not recall 100 times for my winner.
Post by Timo Pietilä
Post by Walter Landry
Also, you
can have the shops restock only when either you go up a character
level or down a dungeon level.
I don't like that either. If you play ranger and use a lot of arrows
then you might want to get those arrows. Same as all other consumables
like ID for warrior etc.
If you can't manage to go up a character level or down a dungeon level
with 99 arrows, I feel that it is time to modify your playing strategy.
There is far too much leeway to play it safe in Angband. Delving into
the dungeons is not for the faint of heart.
Post by Timo Pietilä
Post by Walter Landry
iii) Monster farming
Cloned, bred, and summoned monsters should not give XP or drop items.
Specifically not drop items if _you_ summon/clone them. I have no
problem with dragon/demon/angel explosions giving me items. Those are
dangerous enough that it feels like well deserved reward.
It is a bit too easy to teleport them away and then hunt them down one
by one for me to be comfortable with that.
...
We could make it that mages get it every 35. Then they would end up
with two at level 50, and rogues would get three. Yes, mages and rogues
suck at melee. That is part of the point.
Post by Timo Pietilä
Post by Walter Landry
6) Non-circular detection area: Having the detection area depend on
the size of the screen is wrong. I have heard that this is fixed in
3.0.9. Great.
How would you fix it? Circular detection is OK if you get _A VERY_ clear
warning about going in non-detected area.
I run around with center continuously, and I never had too much problem
with running off the end of detection. It may be partly because I could
detect traps/monsters all of the time. That said, I was occasionally
surprised by invisible monsters. That is part of the fun.

In any case, coloring the screen so that you can clearly see where you
have detected seems doable.
Post by Timo Pietilä
Post by Walter Landry
8) Racial Imbalance: I tried playing humans, but it was always so much
more difficult than other races. Other races already have significant
advantages. There should also be significant downsides from playing
other races. XP penalties do not cut it.
Different race/class combinations are _NOT_ supposed to be equally
easy/hard. Humans are hard but that is how it should be.
So here we have a philosophical difference. I feel that humans should
just be a different set of tradeoffs, not a challenge race. Some races
are easy in the beginning but harder later, etc.
Post by Timo Pietilä
Post by Walter Landry
9) Too Much Junk: As a mage, I only found it to be a minor annoyance.
It was pretty bogus when I was clearing out dragon pits to have the
message "Too many objects" flash up, but otherwise it did not bother
me. But as a warrior, it was pain.
AFAIK this is going to be fixed, but if you have read this newsgroup you
know that it isn't done just like that. Rebalancing game after this is
going to be long process.
I know.
Post by Timo Pietilä
Post by Walter Landry
10) Priests and Paladins get too many good spells: It seems odd to me
that priests get Clairvoyance, but mages do not. Healings, Dispel
Evil, and Holy Word all make sense, but not Clairvoyance. Detect Evil
is good, but priests also get Detection. Mages have to cobble
together Detect Monsters, Detect Invisible, and Detect Enchantment.
I think problem here is not that priest gets detection. It is that mage
doesn't. Give mage detection and clairvoyance.
I don't like having a "Detect Everything" spell. It makes it too easy.
Clairvoyance for mages would make sense. Then I would not have to lug
around a staff of enlightenment. But it is not critical.
Post by Timo Pietilä
Post by Walter Landry
So I would take away Find Traps, Detect Doors/Stairs, Portal,
Clairvoyance, and everything in Ethereal Openings and Godly Insights.
Maybe Unbarring Ways and Recharging as well. Unfortunately, I do not
have anything to replace them with. That would require more thought.
So basically you are taking away all detections and all escapes. That
would make priest (and paladin) a very weak warrior with some utility
spells. Bad _bad_ *bad* idea. No thanks.
Priests still have excellent healing and offensive spells against
certain types of monsters [1]. As for escapes, you can use scrolls
(unlike the poor warrior, who I would take away the ability to use
scrolls, wands or staves). For detection, I just thought of a "Detect
Life" spell, which detects everything that is not a golem, elemental,
demon, undead, or vortex. Coupled with "Detect Evil", they should be
able to detect most, but not all, monsters. And that is how it should
be. If you want to detect everything super easily, run a mage.

Cheers,
Walter Landry
***@caltech.edu

[1] Maybe we should take Cure Light Wounds away from the mage? I only
found it useful later in the game, where it becomes a way to convert
mana to hitpoints when you're in relative safety.
Timo Pietilä
18 years ago
Permalink
...
Did you get to stat-gain and got Poison Resist or have 500+ HP within 10
recalls? Or did you use recall anywhere near 1000' "barrier"? This
simply is bad idea. Very bad.

100 recalls is nothing odd in game of angband. That is only one
recall/dlevel on average. I might easily do seven or even ten within few
levels going up and down.

Timo Pietilä
Walter Landry
18 years ago
Permalink
...
The idea is that the _minimum_ recall/stair depth increments with each
dungeon trip. So it is not that once you get to stat-gain, you have a
very small number of recalls in order to overcome it. That would only
be the case if you took too long in getting to stat-gain in the first
place. I certainly got past stat gain within 40 recalls of the start of
the game. Mages don't have to stop at 1000' because they have excellent
detection. But it should not take more than 20 recalls to do so.
Post by Timo Pietilä
100 recalls is nothing odd in game of angband. That is only one
recall/dlevel on average. I might easily do seven or even ten within few
levels going up and down.
More recalls = more tedium. It may be that the game has to be
rebalanced for fewer allowed recalls. But I don't think so. I am not a
crazy diver like Eddie, and these restrictions will just keep me from
doing boring things.

Cheers,
Walter Landry
***@caltech.edu
pete m
18 years ago
Permalink
Post by Walter Landry
We could make it that mages get it every 35. Then they would end up
with two at level 50, and rogues would get three. Yes, mages and rogues
suck at melee. That is part of the point.
Why should Rogues suck so much at melee? They need to be able to kill
monsters somehow! The class description in the help files tells the
story pretty well. (A flexible, tough class with good survival skills
and who can fight it out or evade on the situation. Suitable for
powerdiving.)

(And Mages already do suck at melee in V. 4 blows with lousy to_hit
means they just can't do all that much damage. Even at cl 50, they
can't expect to do more than ~300 dam/turn, even with a really
spectacular weapon.)

As for slow play being rewarded: so what? Angband is a solo game, and
you are not required to use any particular strategy. I don't
particularly like slow play, but I don't care if somebody else wants
to clear jelly pits for the hell of it. The only arguably bad thing
is stair-scumming, which I confess to using occasionally at dl 1-4
for !Berserk and !Speed.
Walter Landry
18 years ago
Permalink
Post by pete m
Post by Walter Landry
We could make it that mages get it every 35. Then they would end up
with two at level 50, and rogues would get three. Yes, mages and rogues
suck at melee. That is part of the point.
Why should Rogues suck so much at melee?
Because they are not Rangers. They (should) get some abilities that
Rangers don't (excellent stealth, instant pseudo-id, better detection
and defensive spells [1]), but in return they are just not as good at
duking it out.
...
I don't have a problem with clearing jelly pits. It is not like the
game rewards you for doing that. It is when I feel that I should do
some boring activity in order to progress in the game. The game is
somewhat balanced to encourage these kinds of behaviors. I spend way
too much time at 2000' trying to increase my Con. Less than fun.

Cheers,
Walter Landry
***@caltech.edu

[1] Why does a Ranger get Rune of Protection but not a Rogue? It seems
reversed to me.
pete m
18 years ago
Permalink
Post by Walter Landry
Post by pete m
Post by Walter Landry
We could make it that mages get it every 35. Then they would end up
with two at level 50, and rogues would get three. Yes, mages and rogues
suck at melee. That is part of the point.
Why should Rogues suck so much at melee?
Because they are not Rangers. They (should) get some abilities that
Rangers don't (excellent stealth, instant pseudo-id, better detection
and defensive spells [1]), but in return they are just not as good at
duking it out.
That's already true, to a large extent.
They still need to be able to kill monsters without 0% fail and no
offensive spells. Rogues have a somewhat worse to-hit than rangers in
melee, and they have a stricter limit on maximum weapon weight. And
in any case the extra shot granted to rangers is just a huge benefit.

Ranger bad-pseudo is only a (major) inconvenience; it doesn't have
significant impact on survivability. The right way to fix this is to
get rid of bad pseudo-ID, or add the NPP mass ID spell, or both.
R. Dan Henry
17 years ago
Permalink
On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 12:11:11 -0700, Walter Landry
Post by Walter Landry
Post by pete m
Why should Rogues suck so much at melee?
Because they are not Rangers.
True. Rangers could be made to suck at melee with little harm. Their
spells and missile attacks are more than adequate offensive power.
Rogues, on the other hand, are melee-centric and you are talking about
taking away their offensive focus.
--
R. Dan Henry
***@inreach.com
Holy Avenger should be a Paladin title,
not an ego item.
Steve
18 years ago
Permalink
Hi Walter,

I must say I find the game hard enough already, I've been playing on and
off for about seven years now.

And try letting a 10 year old loose on Angband, he finds it to be such a
difficult game.

I've never killed Morgi, and never been down below dungeon level 35 but I
do other things too like going to work and studying, not to mention walking
the dog, eating, sleeping and reading the mail. After all it's only a
computer game.

--
Steve
http://www.zeropps.uklinux.net
Walter Landry
18 years ago
Permalink
Post by Steve
Hi Walter,
I must say I find the game hard enough already, I've been playing on and
off for about seven years now.
And try letting a 10 year old loose on Angband, he finds it to be such a
difficult game.
I've never killed Morgi, and never been down below dungeon level 35 but I
do other things too like going to work and studying, not to mention walking
the dog, eating, sleeping and reading the mail. After all it's only a
computer game.
Almost any game that is fun and challenging for a 10 year old will not
be fun and challenging for an adult. He may find it more fun if he
savescums. Then it will be like most commercial games, where it is hard
to avoid winning after a while.

Cheers,
Walter Landry
***@caltech.edu
VALIS
18 years ago
Permalink
...
?!
Post by Walter Landry
He may find it more fun if he
savescums. Then it will be like most commercial games, where it is hard
to avoid winning after a while.
Cheers,
Walter Landry
--
-Campbell

- Join the steamband group by sending an email to
steamband-***@Yahoogroups.com !
- Visit the Steamband web page, and follow the progress of Steam! (and view my
art!) http://angband.oook.cz/steamband/
Timo Pietilä
18 years ago
Permalink
Post by Walter Landry
Almost any game that is fun and challenging for a 10 year old will not
be fun and challenging for an adult.
?!
I have to agree with Walter. There aren't many games that can be both
challenging and fun for 10 year old and adult.

Timo Pietilä
pete m
18 years ago
Permalink
Post by Timo Pietilä
Post by Walter Landry
Almost any game that is fun and challenging for a 10 year old will not
be fun and challenging for an adult.
?!
I have to agree with Walter. There aren't many games that can be both
challenging and fun for 10 year old and adult.
Chess? Scrabble?
pete m
18 years ago
Permalink
Post by Timo Pietilä
Post by Walter Landry
Almost any game that is fun and challenging for a 10 year old will not
be fun and challenging for an adult.
?!
I have to agree with Walter. There aren't many games that can be both
challenging and fun for 10 year old and adult.
[ctd]

Baseball?
Timo Pietilä
18 years ago
Permalink
Post by pete m
Post by Timo Pietilä
Post by Walter Landry
Almost any game that is fun and challenging for a 10 year old will not
be fun and challenging for an adult.
?!
I have to agree with Walter. There aren't many games that can be both
challenging and fun for 10 year old and adult.
[ctd]
Baseball?
Many != any. And I don't count sports as games. Football is fun for all
ages (I'm not talking about that wimpy version of Rugby here).

Timo Pietilä
VALIS
18 years ago
Permalink
Post by Timo Pietilä
Post by pete m
Post by Timo Pietilä
Post by Walter Landry
Almost any game that is fun and challenging for a 10 year old will not
be fun and challenging for an adult.
?!
I have to agree with Walter. There aren't many games that can be both
challenging and fun for 10 year old and adult.
[ctd]
Baseball?
Many != any. And I don't count sports as games. Football is fun for all
ages (I'm not talking about that wimpy version of Rugby here).
Well, if you're going to discount whole sections of games (Oh, no, sports aren't
games. I don't understand that - don't you go watch a football game?) It might
be a little harder to come up with some. (that's scarcasm)

There are card games . . .
Casino, war, go fish, Magic and other assorted CCGs, four corners, speed, ERS,
oh, gosh, go pick up any hoyle book and you'll find a ton - not to mention
specialty card games from places like cheap-ass games.

There are sports - which even if you don't count them, I suppose we're all
agreed that it's as fun for the little leaguers as it is for adults.

There are board games - which if I'm not mistaken are often played *with* kids
by adults, Risk, Monopoly, Scrabble, Boggle (loose definition of 'board' here),
or to stretch it out - the whole hasbro line Jenga, Sorry etc.

And finally there are computer games. I was playing doom, Civ, *band/moria, and
dozens of others (console/computer) when I was ten - some of which I still play
today.

A large part of my job is playing games with teens. Granted - often the 10 year
old isn't playing on the same level of skill as me - but it *is* just as fun for
them, as it is for me. I guess I'll concede that if I were to play against a 10
year old I might not be as challenged, but I'm pretty sure I'm having as much
fun as he is when I have a reasonable opponent.
Post by Timo Pietilä
Timo Pietilä
--
-Campbell

- Join the steamband group by sending an email to
steamband-***@Yahoogroups.com !
- Visit the Steamband web page, and follow the progress of Steam! (and view my
art!) http://angband.oook.cz/steamband/
Djabanete
18 years ago
Permalink
Post by Timo Pietilä
Post by Walter Landry
Almost any game that is fun and challenging for a 10 year old will not
be fun and challenging for an adult.
?!
I have to agree with Walter. There aren't many games that can be both
challenging and fun for 10 year old and adult.
There aren't many good games.
Nick
18 years ago
Permalink
Usually at about this point in this sort of discussion, someone says "Why not
make your own variant".

Why not make your own variant?

Seriously, this looks like the ideal thing to do. You have definite opinions on
what should change and how, many of which are simple changes to make with big
consequences. In fact, your post reads rather like a changelist for a new
version.

I don't know how well it would work, but that comes with the territory - it
would be interesting to find out. In particular, I'd be interested to see how
your planned combat and stat capping played out. And the worst thing that could
happen is that you'd spend a lot of time making something not very playable -
but then you'd be able to change it to make it playable, or at least have more
insight into what's possible and what isn't.

This is your mission, should you choose to accept it.

Nick.
--
"There is no safety, and there is no end. The word must be heard in silence;
there must be darkness to see the stars. The dance is always danced above the
hollow place, above the terrible abyss."
- The Farthest Shore, Ursula Le Guin
Walter Landry
18 years ago
Permalink
Post by Nick
Usually at about this point in this sort of discussion, someone says "Why not
make your own variant".
Why not make your own variant?
That would be the option of last resort. I would think that at least
some of my suggestions could go into the main line of development at
least as options (e.g. symmetric LOS) assuming they don't negatively
impact the existing code. After that happens, I might consider a variant.

Cheers,
Walter Landry
***@caltech.edu
Peter Knutsen
18 years ago
Permalink
Walter Landry wrote:
[...]
Post by Walter Landry
13) Inifinite monster mana: Creatures should not be able to heal
themselves forever. I think the best fix would be finite monster
mana. It sounds like a lot of work, though.
[...]

There might be an alternative to keeping track of monster mana. Not
quite as good, but the sort of quick-and-dirty solution that might work.

Give each and every monster an OOM flag. Each monster description should
state the chance of the monster being generated with OOM=1. This should
be 1 for non-spellcasting monsters, and a low value for spellcasters.
Perhaps 0.01 or 0.02.

Then each spell that each monster can cast is classified according to
how mana draining it is. A low-drain spell has a 0.02 chance of causing
the monster to become OOM, a medium-drain spell has a 0.1 or 0.15
chance, and a high-drain spell has a 0.5 chance. Once OOM, the monster
stays OOM until it dies.

Each spell needs to be classified for each monster, because a spell that
heals 10d10 hitpoints should drain a different amount from an Novice
Priest than from an Archpriest. It may be the most powerful spell in a
Novice Priest's arsenal, but for the Archpriest it is a trivial spell.
--
Peter Knutsen
sagatafl.org
Billy Bissette
18 years ago
Permalink
Post by Peter Knutsen
[...]
Post by Walter Landry
13) Inifinite monster mana: Creatures should not be able to heal
themselves forever. I think the best fix would be finite monster
mana. It sounds like a lot of work, though.
[...]
Without having coded it, it doesn't sound that bad.

First thing is that it would take more memory, as each monster
instance needs a new variable to track that instance's current mana.

Mana recovery could be tied to natural monster regeneration, or
just the game clock.

Monster designs would need mana costs for abilities. How it handles
not having enough mana to cast is up to the implementor. Some seem
to like having the monster take no action, while others prefer the
monster take an alternative action.

Smart spell selection with multiple available spells of different
costs is probably the most complicated part. This can be simplified
by making all the spells of a specific monster have the same cost,
which would mostly drop cost out of the equation. Or just limit
how many different spells a creature has access to. There should
be a few other tricks that could be used with spells/abilities of
different costs and different effects.

A decent amount of the work falls into the AI area, and if you
want to get into limiting monster mana then you probably want to
address monster AI anyway. There are shortcuts that can be taken,
depending on what kind of results you want.
...
Down side is that you could still have an excessive run of magic
from any durable creature. (Creatures that aren't durable are likely
to die anyway.)

Second down side is that you don't have a method of mana recovery,
which means a sufficiently durable creature may run out of half its
bag of tricks on its first or second action. (You could have a
small random chance to reset the mana flag each action, but that
itself risks being as unbalanced.)
R. Dan Henry
17 years ago
Permalink
Executive summary: I would hate your Angband variant.

Okay, so most of it comes down to taste, but there are some points on
which I think my perspective might be of some interest to you.

On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 14:29:49 -0700, Walter Landry
Post by Walter Landry
After over a year of playing, I have finally managed to defeat
Morgoth.
Congratulations.
Post by Walter Landry
1) Line of sight: This is the biggest problem by far. At the end, I
could trivially kill uniques with no danger to me by digging a tunnel,
filling it with runes, and zapping them before they could even see me.
Specifically, something like
####
###;##
####;##
#####;##
######;##
#######p#
Ah, the infamous "hockey stick" corridor abuse. Cheesy, true, but nobody
is forcing you to use it.
Post by Walter Landry
If I was going to fix one thing about Angband, I would fix this. The
basic principle should be that if I can see you, then you can see me.
Okay, but don't make it "if I can target you, then you can target me" or
you take away 90%+ of tactical positioning. (All you really leave is
staying in a corridor vs. going into a room.)
Post by Walter Landry
We can argue whether you can see around hockey-sticks or not, but
vision should never be one-way.
Without some replacement, removing the asymmetry of targeting (not
necessarily those of sight) makes tactical positioning irrelevant and
removes a major gameplay element. While replacements can be done, it is
much more work than eliminating the asymmetries. In so far as there is a
problem, it is due not to exploitable targeting/vision asymmetries, but
their trivial creation due to easy digging. If I were to address this
"problem", I would do so by taking away the ability to modify the
dungeon, replacing walls that seal off (sections of) vaults with doors
that only the player can open. Then if the player is *lucky* enough to
have a place where he can use asymmetries against a tough opponent, it
is simply a case of the RNG smiling on him.
...
In short, you'd enforce every silly *D&D cliche ever devised and then
some. Priests cannot fight as well as warriors now. You also seem to not
understand that Rogues are a melee-centric class and you cripple their
only important attack mode. Why should mages be so restricted when the
only literary examples of such restrictions come from game-derived
hackwork? Rogues aren't Thieves. They're fighters who have learned some
utility spells. If you want a Thief class, add one. Don't hijack Rogues.
Post by Walter Landry
Also, I would not allow warriors to use wands, staves, or scrolls.
Rods are ok. I would probably have to give a rod of recall to
everyone at the beginning.
So, you'd only leave potions and rods as warrior magic. Why rods?
They're just a variant of charged item, like a wand or a staff. Well,
this would really improve the case of those who argue warriors are
"boring", by taking away most of their options.
Post by Walter Landry
As a side note, one thing that does not bother me in 3.0.6 is that
wands and staves never get destroyed during recharging. Since I did
not use ranged weapons, recharging wands was often the only way I had
to actually kill anything. I understand that this has been changed in
later versions. I would change it back.
I would make rods destructible. They're too convenient as it is. With
infinite charging, why not just eliminate charges altogether? Especially
if you are going to take away wands and staves from warriors, so the
fact that they need scrolls (or an artifact) to do recharging becomes
irrelevant.
Post by Walter Landry
iii) Monster farming
Cloned, bred, and summoned monsters should not give XP or drop items.
Breeding monsters can be a serious threat, for which XP is entirely
appropriate. The same goes for summoned monsters. This also removes what
marginal utility there is for cloning in *bands -- which is very little,
since it is a minor convenience to create another of a particular
monster type instead of seeking it out "in the wild". A non-issue. If
you are worried about "hold the key down with a golf ball" uber-farming,
just relax out-of-depth limits on monster generation after a certain
amount of time on a level. Mr. Golf Baller will come back to find that
his louse-scummer has been eaten by a Hell Wyrm.
Post by Walter Landry
5) Weapon speed is wrong: A warrior should not be grabbing a dagger to
start. I would fix this by making the number of blows independent of
weapon type. Rather, it would depend on character level.
Requiring arbitrary class limitations to even justify having daggers in
the game. (Even a ten-year-old is better off with a short sword than a
dagger, so the idea that anyone should be strength-limited to daggers is
vastly more unrealistic than the current blows system.)
Post by Walter Landry
6) Non-circular detection area: Having the detection area depend on
the size of the screen is wrong. I have heard that this is fixed in
3.0.9. Great.
Actually, I think it would be okay to have detection spells cover the
whole level. Just up the costs a bit.
Post by Walter Landry
8) Racial Imbalance: I tried playing humans, but it was always so much
more difficult than other races. Other races already have significant
advantages. There should also be significant downsides from playing
other races. XP penalties do not cut it.
Races are not supposed to be "balanced". They are the roguelike
equivalent of difficulty levels. A win with a human is much more
boast-worthy than a win with a Dunedan or high elf.
Post by Walter Landry
Gnomes are never paralyzed or slowed, so make increased speed only
work 2/3 as well.
Would you apply this to anyone wearing a Ring of Free Action as well?
Innate free action is useful early in the game, but it isn't hard to get
from items and is much less valuable by the mid-game.
Post by Walter Landry
11) Useless spells: Slow monster and sleep monster just need to work
on stronger creatures.
Finally, something I can actually agree with.
Post by Walter Landry
13) Inifinite monster mana: Creatures should not be able to heal
themselves forever. I think the best fix would be finite monster
mana. It sounds like a lot of work, though.
Programming monster mana is not such a big deal. I expect I could do it
in a week (including basic debugging) and I'm not much of a programmer.
Adding mana to all the monsters and balancing it properly is a much
bigger task.
Post by Walter Landry
3) Displacer beasts should appear to be in a different square than
they actually are.
Bit more hack-like than band-like, but it isn't a bad idea. There is,
however, the issue that monsters come closely packed very often in
Angband. What do you do when that displacer beast is surrounded by other
monsters? Do you not display it? Do you displace another monster's image
in order to make room for the displace beast's image?
Post by Walter Landry
5) For some creatures, do not show how much health they have left.
Why not do that for all? That's how it was to begin with. In my
unreleased variant, some items have a curse that removes the monster
health bar.
Post by Walter Landry
6) If attacking hydras with a edged weapon and you get a critical hit,
you create a hydra with more heads.
It has been done. And given that different numbers of heads grant
different ability sets in Angband, it would create an illogical
situation.
Post by Walter Landry
8) Monsters are affected by traps, and rogues can create traps. Also
let rogues steal drops from monsters. Especially if they are
sleeping. Maybe make rogues a weaker warrior at the same time.
Again, if you want a Thief class, add one. Rogues are variant Warriors
with utility magic. "Rogue" does not mean "thief", or do you expect a
rogue elephant to pick your pocket? If a man is a thief, do not trust
him around your wife's jewelry. If he is a rogue, do not trust him
around your wife.
--
R. Dan Henry
***@inreach.com
Holy Avenger should be a Paladin title,
not an ego item.
Phil Cartwright
17 years ago
Permalink
Post by R. Dan Henry
Requiring arbitrary class limitations to even justify having daggers in
the game. (Even a ten-year-old is better off with a short sword than a
dagger, so the idea that anyone should be strength-limited to daggers is
vastly more unrealistic than the current blows system.)
I've been staying out of this until now, but I can't resist any longer.

What about *stealth*-limited?

Where are daggers normally used for real? Sneaky backstabs,
assassinations, and the like. They're concealable and small and light.

This suggests a more general fiddling with the stealth system, in
particular to put stealth maluses on equipment types. (Any ego/artifact
stealth modifier would add to the base modifier.)

Robes, cloaks, soft shoes and gloves, daggers, slings, whips, and empty
slots: no base modifier.
Soft leather armor: tiny penalty.
Hard leather/studded leather: small penalty.
DSM: small penalty.
Short/small swords, lighter clubs and suchlike, and bows: small penalty.
Hard leather boots: small penalty.
Metal-shot boots and most weapons, incl. light xbow: medium penalty.
Heavy xbow, heavy melee weapons (e.g. lucerne hammer, bastard sword),
chain mails: sizable penalty.
Huge weapons (e.g. GoP, Grond, Scythe of Slicing), plate mails, rusty
chain mails: large penalty.

The tiny penalty would be about 1/10 of a point of stealth, the small
2/10, the medium 3/10, the sizable 5/10, and the large a full point, so
a rusty chain mail gives you a minus one on the same scale where an
Elvenkind [x,+y] (+1) armor gives plus one.

This penalty or a multiple would also affect to-hit, and replace the
existing to-hit malus on armors.

Some ego types might nullify or proportionally reduce the effect,
perhaps with an additional explicit stealth bonus.

Elvenkind ego type would be limited to lighter armors -- chain mail of
elvenkind doesn't really seem very in-theme. Except maybe mithril chain.
Mithril chain should have hard-leather level penalties anyway.

This would make equipment choice a bit more interesting when playing a
stealth-oriented character. Make speed impact stealth negatively
(opposite to now) or have no effect as well, and stealth becomes much
more interesting in this game.

Stealth's already somewhat modified in these directions in Sangband, but
the armor and weapon stealth effect suggestions aren't, to my knowledge,
found in any form in any of the "close-to-vanilla" variants. (I wouldn't
know about Z, Steam, Heng, Pern (now ToME?), Ey, Hell, Pos, and all of
them other variants. :))
--
There's only four things you can be certain of: taxes, change, spam, and
death.
Timo Pietilä
17 years ago
Permalink
Post by Phil Cartwright
Post by R. Dan Henry
Requiring arbitrary class limitations to even justify having daggers in
the game. (Even a ten-year-old is better off with a short sword than a
dagger, so the idea that anyone should be strength-limited to daggers is
vastly more unrealistic than the current blows system.)
This really depends what are you against with. If it is some sort of
animal (like a big dog) you might be better of with that dagger which
you can use several times fast in very close range. Sword might be too
slow and cumbersome for that. If it is a man with a katana you have to
keep his blows from hitting you so anything with a reach is better.
Post by Phil Cartwright
I've been staying out of this until now, but I can't resist any longer.
What about *stealth*-limited?
Where are daggers normally used for real? Sneaky backstabs,
assassinations, and the like. They're concealable and small and light.
Medieval daggers aren't that small. Some of them are almost sword-like
in appearance (Typically about 15" long, but they can be 20" long and
still count as dagger). Difference is mainly how they were used. Dagger
is/was mainly stabbing-weapon, while sword could be used for slashing.
Basic Roman Gladius is hardly longer than long dagger (and was actually
used mainly as stabbing-weapon).
Post by Phil Cartwright
This suggests a more general fiddling with the stealth system, in
particular to put stealth maluses on equipment types. (Any ego/artifact
stealth modifier would add to the base modifier.)
Weapons don't affect much to stealth. They don't restrict your movements
much and, unless you use them, are silent. You could add tiny penalty
for biggest weapons, but for up to medium size swords it isn't
reasonable to have any penalty. Some items in your backpack could cause
penalties though.

Timo Pietilä
Phil Cartwright
17 years ago
Permalink
[snickety-snack]

Realism arguments against gameplay changes? I thought that was frowned
upon around here. :)

Re: weapons affecting stealth, it may be that USING the weapon doesn't
affect stealth so much (though with big swords clashing versus smaller
weapons clinking ... maybe), yet having a big sword in your scabbard
banging and clanking against your plate armor won't let you move all
that quietly.

Heavy crossbows of course are clanking hunks of metal as well. Light
crossbows maybe should be stealthy; heavy ones sound more likely to be
noisy to me, and sound more like weapons armies would carry where
stealth isn't nearly as big an issue as firepower.
--
There's only four things you can be certain of: taxes, change, spam, and
death.
R. Dan Henry
17 years ago
Permalink
On Mon, 05 Nov 2007 16:50:59 -0500, Phil Cartwright
Post by Phil Cartwright
Metal-shot boots and most weapons, incl. light xbow: medium penalty.
Heavy xbow, heavy melee weapons (e.g. lucerne hammer, bastard sword),
chain mails: sizable penalty.
Crossbows are excellent ambush/sniping weapons. They should not be given
a stealth penalty.
--
R. Dan Henry
***@inreach.com
Holy Avenger should be a Paladin title,
not an ego item.
Walter Landry
17 years ago
Permalink
Post by R. Dan Henry
Post by Walter Landry
1) Line of sight: This is the biggest problem by far. At the end, I
could trivially kill uniques with no danger to me by digging a tunnel,
filling it with runes, and zapping them before they could even see me.
Specifically, something like
####
###;##
####;##
#####;##
######;##
#######p#
Ah, the infamous "hockey stick" corridor abuse. Cheesy, true, but nobody
is forcing you to use it.
It is rather irritating when other monsters use it against me.
Post by R. Dan Henry
Post by Walter Landry
If I was going to fix one thing about Angband, I would fix this. The
basic principle should be that if I can see you, then you can see me.
Okay, but don't make it "if I can target you, then you can target me"
Actually, that is exactly what I would do.
Post by R. Dan Henry
or
you take away 90%+ of tactical positioning. (All you really leave is
staying in a corridor vs. going into a room.)
Post by Walter Landry
We can argue whether you can see around hockey-sticks or not, but
vision should never be one-way.
Without some replacement, removing the asymmetry of targeting (not
necessarily those of sight) makes tactical positioning irrelevant and
removes a major gameplay element.
Ball spells still work, and ASC's are still useful. This just gets rid
of the cheese factor. The only asymmetry I am willing to tolerate is
that monsters in walls can target you, but you can't target them. But
as a player, you can fix that with stone-to-mud.
Post by R. Dan Henry
While replacements can be done, it is
much more work than eliminating the asymmetries. In so far as there is a
problem, it is due not to exploitable targeting/vision asymmetries, but
their trivial creation due to easy digging.
So this is a different question. It is easy for the player to modify
the dungeon, but difficult for monsters to do so. For example, while
killing Sauron, it seemed odd that this master sorcerer has not learned
stone-to-mud. Morgoth is not as bad, since he eats through walls. I do
not have a simple fix for this.
Post by R. Dan Henry
If I were to address this
"problem", I would do so by taking away the ability to modify the
dungeon, replacing walls that seal off (sections of) vaults with doors
that only the player can open. Then if the player is *lucky* enough to
have a place where he can use asymmetries against a tough opponent, it
is simply a case of the RNG smiling on him.
This does not appeal to me.
...
I don't know of any literary examples of mages who wore plate armor and
wielded a halberd. In any case, the point of enforcing these
restrictions is to draw a stronger distinction between the classes. You
can think of it as the exact opposite of Sangband.
Post by R. Dan Henry
Rogues aren't Thieves. They're fighters who have learned some
utility spells.
I call that a Ranger, although the archery benefits that Rangers receive
clouds the issue.
Post by R. Dan Henry
If you want a Thief class, add one. Don't hijack Rogues.
I prefer the term burglar ;) In any case, the description of Rogue does
not sound like a fighter who learned some utility spells. It sounds
more like someone who steals for a living.
Post by R. Dan Henry
Post by Walter Landry
Also, I would not allow warriors to use wands, staves, or scrolls.
Rods are ok. I would probably have to give a rod of recall to
everyone at the beginning.
So, you'd only leave potions and rods as warrior magic. Why rods?
They're just a variant of charged item, like a wand or a staff.
Rods are simple to use and maintain. In a sense, they are "Magic for
Dummies". Scrolls, wands, and staffs are more difficult to use and
maintain, but can give much better results.
Post by R. Dan Henry
Well,
this would really improve the case of those who argue warriors are
"boring", by taking away most of their options.
Ah, but warriors, paladins, and rangers are the only ones who get to use
all of the cool artifacts. And warriors are the only ones who can just
walk all over their enemies.
...
You only have a finite number of charges when you go into battle, and
you can't reliably recharge during battle. Recharging also takes time,
time which you may not have during a battle. Have you tried playing a
spell-only mage? Not having arrows or even a melee weapon to fall back
on makes a big difference.
Post by R. Dan Henry
Post by Walter Landry
iii) Monster farming
Cloned, bred, and summoned monsters should not give XP or drop items.
Breeding monsters can be a serious threat, for which XP is entirely
appropriate.
Or they might not be a serious threat. Open door, zap some worms, close
door, repeat, is not fun. It is a way to level up early in the game,
though.
Post by R. Dan Henry
The same goes for summoned monsters. This also removes what
marginal utility there is for cloning in *bands -- which is very little,
since it is a minor convenience to create another of a particular
monster type instead of seeking it out "in the wild". A non-issue.
It is more than a minor convenience. People seem to particularly focus
on cloning death quasits.
Post by R. Dan Henry
If
you are worried about "hold the key down with a golf ball" uber-farming,
just relax out-of-depth limits on monster generation after a certain
amount of time on a level. Mr. Golf Baller will come back to find that
his louse-scummer has been eaten by a Hell Wyrm.
That kind of clock does not appeal to me.
...
The idea is that each class is different. Right now, characters look
more and more alike as they get to the end game.
Post by R. Dan Henry
Post by Walter Landry
6) Non-circular detection area: Having the detection area depend on
the size of the screen is wrong. I have heard that this is fixed in
3.0.9. Great.
Actually, I think it would be okay to have detection spells cover the
whole level. Just up the costs a bit.
That is what a potion of Enlightenment does. Giving it as a spell would
remove a most of the uncertainty when you start a new level.
Post by R. Dan Henry
Post by Walter Landry
8) Racial Imbalance: I tried playing humans, but it was always so much
more difficult than other races. Other races already have significant
advantages. There should also be significant downsides from playing
other races. XP penalties do not cut it.
Races are not supposed to be "balanced". They are the roguelike
equivalent of difficulty levels. A win with a human is much more
boast-worthy than a win with a Dunedan or high elf.
This is a matter of taste. I feel that it just clutters the game to
have a million challenge options, when you could make them have real
tradeoffs.
Post by R. Dan Henry
Post by Walter Landry
Gnomes are never paralyzed or slowed, so make increased speed only
work 2/3 as well.
Would you apply this to anyone wearing a Ring of Free Action as well?
No.
Post by R. Dan Henry
Innate free action is useful early in the game, but it isn't hard to get
from items and is much less valuable by the mid-game.
That is why it is a tradeoff. Gnomes have an easier early game and a
tougher end game.
...
If there is no place for the displacer beast to seem to be, then you put
the image where the displacer beast actually is. It would still change
the tactics when dealing with them. Right now, they are a fairly
uninteresting invisible creature.
Post by R. Dan Henry
Post by Walter Landry
5) For some creatures, do not show how much health they have left.
Why not do that for all? That's how it was to begin with.
This is a matter of taste. I think that, in general, monster health
indicators adds to the gameplay. It would just be neat to not have it
for some kinds of creatures (e.g. a Will o' the Wisp).
Post by R. Dan Henry
In my
unreleased variant, some items have a curse that removes the monster
health bar.
That sounds interesting. It would be a good curse to go on something
like the One Ring.
Post by R. Dan Henry
Post by Walter Landry
6) If attacking hydras with a edged weapon and you get a critical hit,
you create a hydra with more heads.
It has been done. And given that different numbers of heads grant
different ability sets in Angband, it would create an illogical
situation.
Ain't magic neat? It would certainly make hydras more interesting to fight.

Cheers,
Walter Landry
***@caltech.edu
Jonathan Ellis
17 years ago
Permalink
Post by Walter Landry
Post by R. Dan Henry
Okay, but don't make it "if I can target you, then you can target me"
Actually, that is exactly what I would do.
I'm kind of in two minds about this. The monsters, remember, are MUCH
stronger than the player. They are also much dumber. This is
intentional. Should all monsters be reduced so the toughest of them
have, say, 1000-1500 HP - maybe no more than 2000, to compare with the
player who is expected to beat them? Careful positioning is part of
*strategy*, when it comes to targetting.

Now, when it comes to seeing... the main thing that seems odd is that
all monsters seem able to "see" the player at all times if within
their detection radius, regardless of walls in the way. If there was a
thing I'd change, this would be it, so that monsters didn't always
automatically detect and move towards the player even if the player
was not in direct line of sight.
Post by Walter Landry
Ball spells still work, and ASC's are still useful. This just gets rid
of the cheese factor. The only asymmetry I am willing to tolerate is
that monsters in walls can target you, but you can't target them.
But
as a player, you can fix that with stone-to-mud.
Why shouldn't some monsters have stone-to-mud as well? Instead of
KILL_WALL.

The difference would be, they can cast stone to mud on one turn, then
move into the space on the next turn. Instead of being able to destroy
the wall and move into the space simultaneously.

You'd then have a monster that could cast stone-to-mud, if it was
coming down a "hockey stick"-type corridor, it would stone-to-mud its
way towards the player instead of coming the long way around a bend
where its ability to target was at a disadvantage...

And of course monsters that couldn't do that, would be at a
disadvantage in the positioning stakes.
Post by Walter Landry
It is more than a minor convenience. People seem to particularly focus
on cloning death quasits.
No. Your information is WAY WAY WAY out of date. That is, it belongs
to Moria, not Angband. It is not worthwhile to clone death quasits in
Angband, since the objects they drop are not even particularly good.
In Moria, where there was no such thing as a "guaranteed good" drop,
it was much better *by comparison* because death quasits were the
monster that dropped the most objects and XP for the easiest kill (by
comparison), because Ancient Dragons and Emperor Liches were much
harder to kill. In Angband, by the time you meet death quasits, there
are so many monsters you do not need to clone monsters at all.
Post by Walter Landry
Post by R. Dan Henry
Races are not supposed to be "balanced". They are the roguelike
equivalent of difficulty levels. A win with a human is much more
boast-worthy than a win with a Dunedan or high elf.
This is a matter of taste. I feel that it just clutters the game to
have a million challenge options, when you could make them have real
tradeoffs.
It's a matter of the game. Neither races nor classes are *meant* to be
"equal".
Post by Walter Landry
Post by R. Dan Henry
Post by Walter Landry
Gnomes are never paralyzed or slowed, so make increased speed only
work 2/3 as well.
Would you apply this to anyone wearing a Ring of Free Action as well?
No.
Post by R. Dan Henry
Innate free action is useful early in the game, but it isn't hard to get
from items and is much less valuable by the mid-game.
That is why it is a tradeoff. Gnomes have an easier early game and a
tougher end game.
Wouldn't work. There simply is not enough +speed in the game for a
gnome (lower hit points, remember) to survive with it only working at
half strength, especially during the most crucial part of the game of
all - the middle period when you're not yet powerful enough to blow
everything away, and rely on the ability to haste oneself up by *the
full +10* with potions, spells or staves.
...
I wonder if they should therefore have a different form of
"displacement" - let them phase-door, displacing themselves, or cast
teleport-to, displacing the player. If it's difficult to code one type
of displacement into the game, code another type in instead.

Jonathan.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Eddie Grove
17 years ago
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Ellis
Post by Walter Landry
It is more than a minor convenience. People seem to particularly focus
on cloning death quasits.
No. Your information is WAY WAY WAY out of date. That is, it belongs
to Moria, not Angband. It is not worthwhile to clone death quasits in
Angband, since the objects they drop are not even particularly good.
Actually, that is precisely the reason *to* clone death quasits. There are
some useful items that are not "DROP_GOOD", and if you want to get them, the
best method is killing death quasits. Andrew is improving things, but they
are still useful kills. I believe that the last time I played V with
randarts, I had to clone death quasits to get enough ?*ID.


Eddie
Walter Landry
17 years ago
Permalink
...
I am not philosophically opposed to giving monsters stone-to-mud, but I
worry that it will complicate the AI. Route-finding becomes much more
complicated. For example, should a monster go the direct way, or the
fastest way? Should they just try to open up a straight line of sight,
or should they try to be as close as possible when line of sight gets
opened up?
...
Don't play a gnome, then. Play a human instead. I would still find it
interesting, although it has to be playtested. I may have to tweak the
penalty, but I don't think it is fundamentally impossible.

Cheers,
Walter Landry
***@caltech.edu
Timo Pietilä
17 years ago
Permalink
...
What happened to "all classes and races should be equal"?

Timo Pietilä
Walter Landry
17 years ago
Permalink
Post by Timo Pietilä
Post by Walter Landry
Don't play a gnome, then. Play a human instead. I would still find it
interesting, although it has to be playtested. I may have to tweak the
penalty, but I don't think it is fundamentally impossible.
What happened to "all classes and races should be equal"?
If the gnome ends up being just a harder class to play, then I have
failed. I am trying to come up with disadvantages for each race that
match their advantages, so that there is no obviously better race. I am
not wedded to the list I have now. If you have a better suggestion for
the gnome, I am all ears.

Also, just to be clear, the speed penalty would only apply to temporary
speed boosts, not permanent speed boosts from items.

Cheers,
Walter Landry
***@caltech.edu
Timo Pietilä
17 years ago
Permalink
Post by Walter Landry
Post by Timo Pietilä
Post by Walter Landry
Don't play a gnome, then. Play a human instead. I would still find it
interesting, although it has to be playtested. I may have to tweak the
penalty, but I don't think it is fundamentally impossible.
What happened to "all classes and races should be equal"?
If the gnome ends up being just a harder class to play, then I have
failed.
Yes, you have failed. Speed is gazillion times more important than FA.
Post by Walter Landry
I am trying to come up with disadvantages for each race that
match their advantages, so that there is no obviously better race. I am
not wedded to the list I have now. If you have a better suggestion for
the gnome, I am all ears.
Nothing to do really. Gnome isn't very good race. Kobold which has
poison resist is much better. Hobbit with Hold Life and excellent
skills. High-Elf with resist light and See invisible. Half-orc with
resist dark. Half-Troll just by being so big. Dwarf with resist
blindness. Humans for being bigger and getting levels faster. Dunedain
for several reasons.

Only races I count weaker than Gnome are Half-elf and Elf.
Post by Walter Landry
Also, just to be clear, the speed penalty would only apply to temporary
speed boosts, not permanent speed boosts from items.
It doesn't matter. If you mess with speed you are crippling that more
than anything else in game.

Timo Pietilä
Walter Landry
17 years ago
Permalink
Post by Timo Pietilä
Post by Walter Landry
Post by Timo Pietilä
Post by Walter Landry
Don't play a gnome, then. Play a human instead. I would still find it
interesting, although it has to be playtested. I may have to tweak the
penalty, but I don't think it is fundamentally impossible.
What happened to "all classes and races should be equal"?
If the gnome ends up being just a harder class to play, then I have
failed.
Yes, you have failed. Speed is gazillion times more important than FA.
Are you really saying that 3 points of temporary speed is a gazillion
times more important than FA _and_ resistance to being slowed? My
experience differs.
Post by Timo Pietilä
Post by Walter Landry
I am trying to come up with disadvantages for each race that
match their advantages, so that there is no obviously better race. I am
not wedded to the list I have now. If you have a better suggestion for
the gnome, I am all ears.
Nothing to do really. Gnome isn't very good race.
Gnomes are my favorite. With a mage, you can pretty much dive down to
2000' before you have to stop to get more Con.

In any case, it seems that the only way I will convince some people is
to actually code a variant and let people play with it. That will take
a while.

Cheers,
Walter Landry
***@caltech.edu
Timo Pietilä
17 years ago
Permalink
...
Yes, because you can have FA so easily.

Timo Pietilä
tigpup
17 years ago
Permalink
Post by Walter Landry
Post by Timo Pietilä
Yes, you have failed. Speed is gazillion times more important than FA.
Are you really saying that 3 points of temporary speed is a gazillion
times more important than FA _and_ resistance to being slowed? My
experience differs.
I have some sympathy with your viewpoint here Walter. FA is one of the
most frustrating resists not to have. But, only at a certain point of
the game. It's one of those resists that's like buses. None forever,
then you find three at a time. Later in game, it always becomes
trivial. Multiple sources and saving throw make it so.

I agree with Timo that speed is fundamentally different. There is no
point in the game when speed is unimportant.

I also agree that kobold inherent poison-resist makes kolbold a better
race than gnome. But even there, the inherent poison resist becomes
pretty meaningless as better kit starts to turn up.

Shuffling the race bonuses or adding penalties for your own var isn't
in itself a bad idea, but mucking around with speed might just create
races that no-one would ever want to play.
Kenneth 'Bessarion' Boyd
17 years ago
Permalink
..., but mucking around with speed might just create
races that no-one would ever want to play.
Or even making the monster AI speed-aware.

If even moderately dangerous passwall monsters actually knew what to do with
triple-moves on the player, things would get *really* ugly fast (even though
most of these have some sort of random movement flag).
andrewdoull
17 years ago
Permalink
Post by Kenneth 'Bessarion' Boyd
..., but mucking around with speed might just create
races that no-one would ever want to play.
Or even making the monster AI speed-aware.
If even moderately dangerous passwall monsters actually knew what to do with
triple-moves on the player, things would get *really* ugly fast (even though
most of these have some sort of random movement flag).
As I mentioned on my development blog, I just added 'hack-and-back' tactics to
fast monsters in Unangband - its about 8 lines of code.

However, it does require the 4GAI.

Andrew
--
The Roflwtfzomgbbq Quylthulg summons L33t Paladins -more-
"Apple: Celebrating the poisoning of Alan Turing since 1977."
ASCII Dreams: http://roguelikedeveloper.blogspot.com
Unangband: http://unangband.blogspot.com
VALIS
17 years ago
Permalink
Post by andrewdoull
As I mentioned on my development blog, I just added 'hack-and-back' tactics to
fast monsters in Unangband - its about 8 lines of code.
However, it does require the 4GAI.
Andrew
sauce?
--
-Campbell

- Join the steamband group by sending an email to
steamband-***@Yahoogroups.com !
- Visit the Steamband web page, and follow the progress of Steam! (and view my
art!) http://angband.oook.cz/steamband/
The Wanderer
17 years ago
Permalink
...
I think what he's saying is that, without the ability to gain the full
benefits of temporary haste, it would not be *possible* - short of
either extremely tedious hang-back-as-long-as-possible play or
improbable luck - to make it through that part of the game - and,
possibly, later in the game - as a gnome. If your solution to this is
"don't play a gnome", then people would wind up never playing gnomes at
all, which would make it kind of a waste.
--
The Wanderer

Warning: Simply because I argue an issue does not mean I agree with any
side of it.

Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny.
Phil Cartwright
17 years ago
Permalink
[snickety-snack]

Please, for the love of God, no more talk about playing through a game
with a gnome! Not for a good long year at least.

I ... I thought this place would be safe ...

I ... the horror ... too much ...
--
There's only four things you can be certain of: taxes, change, spam, and
death.
pete m
17 years ago
Permalink
...
This is just wrong; if anything it shows that you haven't played many
characters below 2500'.

You are overvaluing Free Action, and undervaluing speed, by a lot.
Lack of free action kills a lot of early characters. It almost never
kills late characters, in part because almost all advanced characters
can get good free action without significant effort. (Boots,
gloves(!!), hat, amulet.) In fact, I value native rPoison (from
Kobolds) or rDark (from Half-orcs) more than Free Action.

Lack of speed is a far more common killer of high-level characters.
R. Dan Henry
17 years ago
Permalink
On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 12:49:09 -0800, Walter Landry
Post by Walter Landry
I don't know of any literary examples of mages who wore plate armor and
wielded a halberd.
Name one literary example of halberd wielder of any type as a main
character.

Elric wore plate armor and wielded an absurdly big sword while being the
numero uno sorcerer in his world. There's one with plate armor and a big
weapon (and he may have picked up a polearm at some time, though I don't
recall such a case at the moment).

Gandalf didn't wear armor, but then he was supposed to avoid conflict as
much as possible. He still carried a nice big sword (although not
absurdly big) and used it quite handily.

Adventurers of any sort rarely wear plate armor because it isn't
practical for that sort of life, really, so examples are hard to come
by. But I cannot think of many warrior examples in plate, either.

On the other hand, I cannot think of single non-game-based source for a
wizard using a quarterstaff. They may carry a walking staff, possibly
with some magical function as well, but not a fighting staff.

As for daggers, they are most typically found in the hands of thieves
(who, if they are not being silly, are using them to cut purse strings
and poke holes in bags of coins, rather than picking fights) and
*priests* who use them for sacrificial purposes. Special daggers are
used in certain magical traditions for spell-casting, but I cannot think
of a portrayal of someone using one as conventional weapon. No, I take
that back. Jadis does wield the stone knife after she loses her wand,
but I'm not sure she actually kills anyone at that point.

Of course, many literary users of magic don't wear armor or carry heavy
weapons because they are either non-combatants or because they inhabit a
world where magic so out-classes physical force that metal would offer
no benefit. (On the other hand, there's no good reason from a realism
perspective why nobody in the Harry Potter universe doesn't start
packing muggle weaponry and take out Voldemort and his crew before they
can get a spell off. Nevermind, getting even farther off topic now.)
Obviously, neither of these apply in the *bandverse, although they're
common enough in both traditional tales and literature.
--
R. Dan Henry
***@inreach.com
Holy Avenger should be a Paladin title,
not an ego item.
konijn_
17 years ago
Permalink
Post by R. Dan Henry
Adventurers of any sort rarely wear plate armor because it isn't
practical for that sort of life, really, so examples are hard to come
by. But I cannot think of many warrior examples in plate, either.
I am reading Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser right now, Fafhrd seems to
wear an inordinate amount of amour he could just as well have worn
plate if plate existed in that universe.
Post by R. Dan Henry
On the other hand, I cannot think of single non-game-based source for a
wizard using a quarterstaff. They may carry a walking staff, possibly
with some magical function as well, but not a fighting staff.
The hero from the First Law of Magic if I'm not mistaken.

Cheers,
T.
Fred Stone
17 years ago
Permalink
Post by R. Dan Henry
On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 12:49:09 -0800, Walter Landry
Post by Walter Landry
I don't know of any literary examples of mages who wore plate armor
and wielded a halberd.
Name one literary example of halberd wielder of any type as a main
character.
"Shef the smith" in Harry Harrison's "Hammer and Cross" fantasy series.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"Private property is the last refuge for the aristocracy in this
country, and aristocrats will not stand in the way of the people's
progress in San Francisco."
Loading...