Angband Forums

Angband Forums (http://angband.oook.cz/forum/index.php)
-   Vanilla (http://angband.oook.cz/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=3)
-   -   Randarts... (http://angband.oook.cz/forum/showthread.php?t=3587)

Fendell Orcbane August 15, 2010 22:11

Randarts...
 
I've been thinking about Randart games for awhile and I'm pretty ambivalent about them. On one had they would seem cool if you are getting bored with V. On the other had I sort of don't feel that they are fair, because how can you compare your character with other characters that are playing standard V? Granted this could be said for different versions as well.

So that is how I feel, but how do the rest of you feel on this matter?
And having said all that I do know that its the player and not his magic items that win or lose the game. Hell I died with both Ringil and Feanor. How does that happen? But then again the very next game I found The One Ring: ) which in my opinion is pretty much the best thing that I've ever had.

Taha August 15, 2010 22:36

Most randart games seem harder than normal artifact games. I like it for the variations that keep things interesting.

But the whole concepts of fair and comparable don't apply to this game anyway. Luck plays such a huge role; if you can find feanor and ringil in one game, how do you compare that to a game where you find no boots of speed until level 90? It's just about making do with what you find.
________
BLCKPOIZEN

PowerDiver August 15, 2010 23:41

Your dumps are from 3.1.2v2, in which I believe randarts had an artificial extra rarity put on them. That may be why you find the games harder.

If you look at my most recent dump, I have base speed+40 and 3 immunities and a 6d6 slay evil weapon with all but rChaos covered. That's not atypical for randart games.

I think randart games are generally easier, but occasionally harder, than standart games, now that the extra rarity has been removed.

Derakon August 16, 2010 00:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fendell Orcbane (Post 38881)
I've been thinking about Randart games for awhile and I'm pretty ambivalent about them. On one had they would seem cool if you are getting bored with V. On the other had I sort of don't feel that they are fair, because how can you compare your character with other characters that are playing standard V? Granted this could be said for different versions as well.

And why is it necessary that you be able to compare your character with other characters? The only times we compete, we do so using the same savefile, and thus the same set of artifacts. Everything else is personal.

Fendell Orcbane August 16, 2010 00:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derakon (Post 38887)
And why is it necessary that you be able to compare your character with other characters? The only times we compete, we do so using the same savefile, and thus the same set of artifacts. Everything else is personal.

Well there is a ladder and all. I do agree that it is a personal thing but on the other hand it is a way to judge how far you have come or how far you have to go in terms of playing skill.

Derakon August 16, 2010 04:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fendell Orcbane (Post 38889)
Well there is a ladder and all. I do agree that it is a personal thing but on the other hand it is a way to judge how far you have come or how far you have to go in terms of playing skill.

I'm not willing to sacrifice randarts just so that a third-party website can compare characters more "fairly". Especially since everything in the game still comes down to the RNG by a massive degree.

That said, randarts should still be of comparable power to standarts. They should just be, yannow, random.

ewert August 16, 2010 06:53

Aside from weapons, I actually think standarts are maybe easier than randarts.

Now WEAPONS, that is where some sickening randart stuff happens. ;)

PS. Pre-statgain +8 wis/speed boots for half-troll paladin with rDis. I thought I was gonna wear that forever. ;) Then found +9wis/speed with rDis, mwahahaha (and some low stuff 1-2 on both too)

Magnate August 31, 2010 21:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by ewert (Post 38893)
Aside from weapons, I actually think standarts are maybe easier than randarts.

Now WEAPONS, that is where some sickening randart stuff happens. ;)

PS. Pre-statgain +8 wis/speed boots for half-troll paladin with rDis. I thought I was gonna wear that forever. ;) Then found +9wis/speed with rDis, mwahahaha (and some low stuff 1-2 on both too)

You found TWO pairs of boots with +8 or +9 WIS *and* speed, in the same game?? Weird.

Anyway, Derakon is right, the total power of a set of randarts should be within 3% of the total power of the standard artifact set, so feel free to compare as much as you like. Whether you're lucky enough to *find* that 6d6 Morgoth-killer or those +9 WIS/Speed boots is another matter ... but that's no different to comparing one game where you find Ringil at 1000' to another one where you don't ...

ewert August 31, 2010 23:27

And the 2nd pair of +9 had also good +hit +dmg. =P For paladin. =P It was just too nutty.

fizzix September 1, 2010 03:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magnate (Post 39412)
You found TWO pairs of boots with +8 or +9 WIS *and* speed, in the same game?? Weird.

Anyway, Derakon is right, the total power of a set of randarts should be within 3% of the total power of the standard artifact set, so feel free to compare as much as you like. Whether you're lucky enough to *find* that 6d6 Morgoth-killer or those +9 WIS/Speed boots is another matter ... but that's no different to comparing one game where you find Ringil at 1000' to another one where you don't ...

Here are the boots from my most recent game. There are also 2 with over +8 Wis and Speed:


The Pair of Leather Boots of Menya [2,+7]
-----------------------------------------
+8 wisdom, tunneling, speed.
Provides resistance to acid, cold.
Cannot be harmed by acid, electricity, fire, cold.
Prevents paralysis.


Min Level 27, Max Level 127, Generation chance 1, Power 214, 1.8 lbs


The Pair of Mithril Shod Boots of Amenor [8,+21]
------------------------------------------------
+3 wisdom, constitution.
Provides immunity to acid.
Cannot be harmed by acid, electricity, fire, cold.

When activated, it detects traps nearby.
Takes 49 to 54 turns to recharge.


Min Level 20, Max Level 124, Generation chance 78, Power 156, 3.2 lbs


The Pair of Leather Boots of Lothith (+4,+2) [2,+19]
----------------------------------------------------
+13 speed.
Provides resistance to fire, confusion, nether.
Cannot be harmed by acid, electricity, fire, cold.
Aggravates creatures nearby.

When aimed, it grants fire resistance for d20+20 turns and creates a fire ball of
damage 80.
Takes 90 to 110 turns to recharge.


Min Level 40, Max Level 127, Generation chance 1, Power 317, 2.0 lbs


The Pair of Leather Boots 'Gaere' [2,+18]
-----------------------------------------
+11 wisdom, speed.
Cannot be harmed by acid, electricity, fire, cold.


Min Level 32, Max Level 127, Generation chance 4, Power 256, 2.0 lbs


The Pair of Steel Shod Boots of Uniel [7,+16]
---------------------------------------------
+7 speed.
Cannot be harmed by acid, electricity, fire, cold.
Sustains your life force.


Min Level 19, Max Level 122, Generation chance 82, Power 153, 6.0 lbs


The Pair of Leather Boots of Embangwar (+8,+0) [2,+21]
------------------------------------------------------
+13 tunneling, speed.
Provides resistance to chaos.
Cannot be harmed by acid, electricity, fire, cold.


Min Level 38, Max Level 127, Generation chance 1, Power 303, 2.0 lbs


dump here:
http://angband.oook.cz/ladder-show.php?id=10561

I was a priest, so the +11 wis/speed boots came in very handy.

edit: There was also a +10 speed / wis weapon, a +13 speed / strength weapon, a +11 speed / wis ring and a +10 speed amulet

EpicMan September 1, 2010 17:42

I prefer randarts to standarts because they are a logical extension of ego items. While the uber standards (Ringil, etc) are very rare and are special finds, moist artifacts are common enough you can plan on finding them (phial, whatever helm has the resist blindness, etc) almost every single game.

With Randarts, I have absolutely no idea what my endgame gear is going to look like, and I can't even depend on scumming for Thengel or whatever to fill in a hole in my gear. Instead of set items, randarts are super-ego items.

I'd also go for some randomized unique foes as well (maybe add some random flags to the orc uniques to give them some flavor, etc), but the consensus on that seems to be it's a variant thing.

Magnate September 1, 2010 22:21

Blimey, that's rather too much speed on boots (every pair except one). I rather hope that set is an outlier.

Taha September 1, 2010 22:31

My last game the max artifact boots were a +10 speed, AC +40, nothing else. All the others were far lower speed, and generally pathetic. The game before that, +9 INT / +9 speed was pretty nice, but those were the only features on them - and while +9 int sounds great, they showed up deep enough so that I was already at max. That set is far, far better than any I have seen.
________
Roll a joint

fizzix September 1, 2010 22:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magnate (Post 39468)
Blimey, that's rather too much speed on boots (every pair except one). I rather hope that set is an outlier.

The power rating for +8 Wis, +8 speed seems a tad low, doesn't it?

Magnate September 1, 2010 23:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by fizzix (Post 39472)
The power rating for +8 Wis, +8 speed seems a tad low, doesn't it?

What, the 214? That seems about right - don't forget how little WIS is worth to 4/6 of characters.

Derakon September 1, 2010 23:37

That's something that bugs me about the power ratings, actually. They're independent of the character being played. Half the classes don't care about INT; two-thirds of the classes don't care about WIS. But for the classes that do care, those stats are hugely important! In other words, player power ratings for artifacts don't match the assigned power ratings because the player is giving ratings based on the practical utility of the item for the character in question, while the game is trying to generate a power rating that's independent of character.

What do you think of the idea of making randart generation dependent on the character? In other words, you'd have a set of power-rating tweaks based on class/race: a priest will value +WIS more than a warrior will, but is less interested in +INT than a mage. Most powers would be of equal utility for all classes, so it's only a few outliers that would need this. I'll grant this is really weird, but given the potential for randarts to sometimes wildly favor one class over another (unlike standarts, which tend to be less extreme), I think it'd serve as an effective nerf of these only-useful-to-some randarts. It'd also make priest randart games a bit less of a gamble, since non-blessed sharp weapons would get a power rating nerf.

Heck, you could base the power ratings on the character's base stats, too. "Oh, I see you're a gnome mage. Whelp, this +6 CON shield is now too powerful; guess I'll have to reroll it."

fizzix September 2, 2010 02:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derakon (Post 39476)
What do you think of the idea of making randart generation dependent on the character?

I don't like this approach if only for your gnome mage example. It would suck to play a mage and have all the randarts get huge Wis bonuses just because the power is then low enough.

@Magnate

214 is low. Boots with nothing but +8 speed should be about 250. I think you're oscillating around the correct point with how much to value speed. You've overshot on the latest adjustment undervaluing it.

@rest of thread:

Something does need to be done with fudging the Int and Wis power. My last game had tons of huge Wis bonuses but no big Int bonuses. That seems wrong. I think it should be split more 50-50. This is begging for multiple pvals though, so we may have to wait for that. Then we can soft cap stat bonuses to some reasonable level, like +5, and still allow speed to be +10.

In reality I'd like to see Int and Wis combined and Charisma removed altogether, but that's fantasyland.

Magnate September 2, 2010 10:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by fizzix (Post 39478)
I don't like this approach if only for your gnome mage example. It would suck to play a mage and have all the randarts get huge Wis bonuses just because the power is then low enough.

@Magnate

214 is low. Boots with nothing but +8 speed should be about 250. I think you're oscillating around the correct point with how much to value speed. You've overshot on the latest adjustment undervaluing it.

@rest of thread:

Something does need to be done with fudging the Int and Wis power. My last game had tons of huge Wis bonuses but no big Int bonuses. That seems wrong. I think it should be split more 50-50. This is begging for multiple pvals though, so we may have to wait for that. Then we can soft cap stat bonuses to some reasonable level, like +5, and still allow speed to be +10.

In reality I'd like to see Int and Wis combined and Charisma removed altogether, but that's fantasyland.

Wow, lots to pick up here.

First, I haven't actually changed the power ratings for speed for a very long time. My last change was to make speed more common on boots in higher quantities, because there were too many randart sets with no boots better than +4 speed, and too many winners wearing straight +9 speed boots instead of artifacts. I may have gone too far, but it's too early to tell whether fizzix's set is an outlier.

Secondly, I don't have a clear idea of the difference between 214 and 250, so I'm curious as to how anyone else can. I don't mean to be rude, I just don't understand. The only difference I can think of is price, and speed items have always seemed underpriced because of the psychological effect of their previous massive prices. That's not to say that they're now correctly priced, of course - it's possible that speed is still undervalued so I'm happy to revisit that with the next set of changes (real soon now ...).

Thirdly, I'm open to the idea of allowing object_power to make reference to p_ptr->pclass in its calculations. It's a complete change from the current paradigm, and will further break comparability with standarts, but neither of those issues is insurmountable. Grateful for further views on this. (I don't think the gnome mage example would be a problem, as referring to class would actually help *reduce* the number of junk randarts.)

Finally, I'm really thinking about multiple pvals quite seriously now, as it's something I know Takkaria would support. I've got two quite big things to do first (pref files and fractional blows), but then I think a return to artifacts would be helpful. I want to do a complete rewrite of both obj-power.c and randart.c, and both fractional blows and multiple pvals are necessary before I can do that properly. (So are three other things: getting rid of the limitations around "special" artifacts, sorting out the new curses, and revising the monster power algorithm. Fortunately someone (nullfame, IIRC) has taken on the latter.)

Ho hum. Shame I have to work, really.

EpicMan September 2, 2010 20:09

The problem with tying the powers of stat boosts to player class is that priests would find lots more artifacts with int bonuses while mages would see lots of useless wis bonuses and fewer int bonuses. Even in the most powerful arts, the opposite stat would be more likely to be added because it is cheaper and more could be fit in than the higher-valued main stat.

The upshot of this is that the best mage randarts would be found in priest/paladin games and vice-versa.

Then again, the RNG has a tendency to be sadistic, so perhaps this would fit right in after all.

Magnate September 2, 2010 20:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by EpicMan (Post 39493)
The problem with tying the powers of stat boosts to player class is that priests would find lots more artifacts with int bonuses while mages would see lots of useless wis bonuses and fewer int bonuses. Even in the most powerful arts, the opposite stat would be more likely to be added because it is cheaper and more could be fit in than the higher-valued main stat.

The upshot of this is that the best mage randarts would be found in priest/paladin games and vice-versa.

Then again, the RNG has a tendency to be sadistic, so perhaps this would fit right in after all.

I am pretty confident that we can code around that problem, if we choose to introduce class-specific randart generation.

camlost September 2, 2010 21:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magnate (Post 39495)
I am pretty confident that we can code around that problem, if we choose to introduce class-specific randart generation.

Or you can just add a 50% chance of swapping Int for Wis or vice versa so that the player is happy. At the end of the day, randarts that are useful are more important than strict balance.

Tiburon Silverflame September 2, 2010 21:37

A side comment on the effect of Int/Wis...

Even for the classes where it's very important, one thing to note is, the score in question has a very high maximum before equipment...typically it's gonna be at least 18/130, and we could probably settle on, say, 18/150 as a 'typical' max. Therefore, there's absolutely no difference between +7 and +9...and if you've got any other desirable piece of gear that gives, say, +3...there's no difference between +4 and +9.

In the latter case, sure, there could be a different equipment set where it matters, but the value and therefore price should IMO be based on the more common scenario...and most of the time, especially for, say, DL 50+ artifacts/items, you'll have something else giving some decent boost.

That suggests, if it's not being done now...the value of a stat booster probably should be capped, or at least start rolling off drastically, at/after some point. +4? +5? I'm not sure.

Note, too, that this holds for any stat. +9 Con sounds awesome, but again, you're getting Con from more than one source...I often find that my endgame Con would show as 18/270 or the like.

Magnate September 2, 2010 23:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tiburon Silverflame (Post 39497)
A side comment on the effect of Int/Wis...

Even for the classes where it's very important, one thing to note is, the score in question has a very high maximum before equipment...typically it's gonna be at least 18/130, and we could probably settle on, say, 18/150 as a 'typical' max. Therefore, there's absolutely no difference between +7 and +9...and if you've got any other desirable piece of gear that gives, say, +3...there's no difference between +4 and +9.

In the latter case, sure, there could be a different equipment set where it matters, but the value and therefore price should IMO be based on the more common scenario...and most of the time, especially for, say, DL 50+ artifacts/items, you'll have something else giving some decent boost.

That suggests, if it's not being done now...the value of a stat booster probably should be capped, or at least start rolling off drastically, at/after some point. +4? +5? I'm not sure.

Note, too, that this holds for any stat. +9 Con sounds awesome, but again, you're getting Con from more than one source...I often find that my endgame Con would show as 18/270 or the like.

Interesting. I have exactly the opposite view: the value of +8 or +9 is precisely that you *don't* need any other item to boost that stat - making the choices when combining items considerably easier.

Derakon September 2, 2010 23:01

I'm actually not so much interested in the INT/WIS conundrum (which standarts "solve" by making it so that most artifacts that boost one also boost the other) as I am in the blessed weapon issue. Nobody except for priests cares about the blessed flag, but it is seriously important for priests (in the late game, you can sometimes get away with a sharp weapon if you don't mind the failure rate increase on your higher spells).

Then again, we might want to solve this by simply getting rid of the sharp-weapon penalty entirely. Give them (and by extension, paladins) the same gloves penalty all the other casters have instead.

Tiburon Silverflame September 2, 2010 23:46

Magnate, your point's valid...you don't *have* to look for anything else with an Int boost, when you have something giving +8. BUT, you probably find stuff with key things that you want, that *also* has a nice Int boost as an incidental aspect. While this won't be true all the time, I suspect it will be true most of the time. Look at your late-game gear; how many of those late-game items are stat boosters, and how many of your stats are being boosted by at least 2 items? Then, on the assumption that you didn't need anything else to boost Int (or whatever)...how many of those items would you swap out for something else, strictly based on the fact that the Int bonus is now meaningless?

@Derakon: IMO the priest's edged-weapon rule is awful. It's a carryover of a half-assed 40 year old notion, that has been steadily eroded ever since Gygax's whims were no longer allowed to dominate. And it's *by far* the most restrictive rule...arcanists can use +Dex OR FA gloves, and those exist as ego items and standarts both. But an ego weapon that's Blessed, only has something else if it's a Holy Avenger, and damn few higher-end standarts are Blessed.

And yes, I *much* prefer the notion that Magic Is Magic. I hate "divine magic" or "arcane magic" or most of the artificial distinctions. If gloves interfere with casting, do it for *everyone*. If a wizard can't wear metal armor because it interferes, then neither can a priest.

Timo Pietilš September 3, 2010 05:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by EpicMan (Post 39493)
The problem with tying the powers of stat boosts to player class is that priests would find lots more artifacts with int bonuses while mages would see lots of useless wis bonuses and fewer int bonuses. Even in the most powerful arts, the opposite stat would be more likely to be added because it is cheaper and more could be fit in than the higher-valued main stat.

The upshot of this is that the best mage randarts would be found in priest/paladin games and vice-versa.

Then again, the RNG has a tendency to be sadistic, so perhaps this would fit right in after all.

I'm thinking that randart code should take a small peek what has already been created before creating another one, so that items do not get too similar. A bit more not-so-random set of random artifacts? Make it create only a couple sets of boots with very high speed bonus and then stop creating them because they are there already. Same with WIS and INT bonuses, not base them on class (because like you said it would really suck to get INT-bonuses with priest, and WIS with mage).

Give enough variability that they can still be called "randarts", but not allow 10 sets of boots with speed bonus. And after creation make sure that there is at least one "great" one for each equipment slot.

Might be quite hard to code though.

Magnate September 3, 2010 09:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Timo Pietilš (Post 39509)
I'm thinking that randart code should take a small peek what has already been created before creating another one, so that items do not get too similar. A bit more not-so-random set of random artifacts? Make it create only a couple sets of boots with very high speed bonus and then stop creating them because they are there already. Same with WIS and INT bonuses, not base them on class (because like you said it would really suck to get INT-bonuses with priest, and WIS with mage).

Give enough variability that they can still be called "randarts", but not allow 10 sets of boots with speed bonus. And after creation make sure that there is at least one "great" one for each equipment slot.

Might be quite hard to code though.

Funnily enough I was thinking along exactly these lines in response to Tiburon's last post: yes I do see that one is likely to have incidental stat bonuses on items one wants to wear anyway - we could in fact check to see if that's true (i.e. look at what is available) when determining the value of the +8!

I don't think it would be too hard to code. I've been thinking for a long time that randart.c needs to maintain a stats array, so it would be easy to peek into that during generation.

I also quite like the idea of calling them semirandarts. True randomness does lead to some undesirable results ...

Derakon September 3, 2010 16:17

Call them prandarts -- pseudo-random artifacts. :)

PowerDiver September 3, 2010 18:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magnate (Post 39515)
I also quite like the idea of calling them semirandarts. True randomness does lead to some undesirable results ...

It is feasible to win without any artifacts. Is a non-random approach really worth the effort?

Tiburon Silverflame September 3, 2010 18:10

I don't know the steps involved in creating a randart for sure, but from comments, it seems like it's

a) create randart
b) determine power, and therefore depth/rarity

IF this is the case, might it not make sense to work this a bit differently? I'm thinking, plan the randart set based on depth. START by assigning depth, or a small range for depth, and deriving a power range from that. Then build the artifacts to the appropriate power.

I think this would be complementary to keeping an internal table of all artifacts created so far. As to the difficulty...the problem may be that it's a multi-dimensional problem. One might have a relatively low-power artifact that is the only source of, say, rConf, or maybe more likely, there are other artifacts that have rConf, but they all get massively trumped by others in their item class.

Finally, of course, depth and rarity have to play a big role, because that impacts the notion of 'available.' We all look over the randart posts and drool at The Big One I Didn't Find. :)

PowerDiver September 3, 2010 18:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tiburon Silverflame (Post 39503)
And yes, I *much* prefer the notion that Magic Is Magic. I hate "divine magic" or "arcane magic" or most of the artificial distinctions. If gloves interfere with casting, do it for *everyone*. If a wizard can't wear metal armor because it interferes, then neither can a priest.

Nor a rogue, ranger, or paladin.

fizzix September 3, 2010 19:04

I'm just going to chime in and say that I like the distinctions between classes as they are. I don't see the pointy penalty as being fundamentally broken either.

Magnate September 3, 2010 21:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by PowerDiver (Post 39530)
It is feasible to win without any artifacts. Is a non-random approach really worth the effort?

Well, a week ago I wouldn't have said so, but there does seem to be a consensus building around making more accurate assessments of the usefulness of INT/WIS/blessed etc. This really means allowing p_ptr->pclass to influence generation, which is nonrandom. I'm fairly easygoing either way: if Takk tells me he has a huge problem with it, it won't happen. If it makes for better randarts and happier players (but not easier gameplay, no never that), then why not.

Magnate September 3, 2010 21:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tiburon Silverflame (Post 39531)
I don't know the steps involved in creating a randart for sure, but from comments, it seems like it's

a) create randart
b) determine power, and therefore depth/rarity

IF this is the case, might it not make sense to work this a bit differently? I'm thinking, plan the randart set based on depth. START by assigning depth, or a small range for depth, and deriving a power range from that. Then build the artifacts to the appropriate power.

I think this would be complementary to keeping an internal table of all artifacts created so far. As to the difficulty...the problem may be that it's a multi-dimensional problem. One might have a relatively low-power artifact that is the only source of, say, rConf, or maybe more likely, there are other artifacts that have rConf, but they all get massively trumped by others in their item class.

Finally, of course, depth and rarity have to play a big role, because that impacts the notion of 'available.' We all look over the randart posts and drool at The Big One I Didn't Find. :)

Randart generation goes like this:

For every artifact in artifact.txt:
1. Calculate the power of the standart
2. Choose a base item
3. Calculate the power of the base item
4. If between 20% and 80% of #1 (not sure of exact %s), continue, else back to 2. This ensures that the base item is not too good or too weak to make a sensible randart of the target power.
5. Add random powers to the base item (calculate power after each addition, and roll back if power exceeds 105% of #1)
6. Stop when power exceeds 90% of #1, and calculate depth and rarity based on original depth/rarity and new power

Cursed artifacts (with negative power) are slightly different. Once all artifacts are randomised the whole set is checked to see that there are at least three sets of boots, four hats, five swords etc. We start over if not.

Derakon September 3, 2010 21:32

To be clear, I'm not necessarily advocating that we take class into account. I'm just saying that randarts often have items that are useful to some classes but useless to others, which seems to not happen so much with standarts, and was wondering if this was a problem we would want to try to solve by considering the player's class during artifact generation. I'm sure there's other ways to deal with it. Or we could just leave it be. It's not like randart games are impossible as it stands.

PowerDiver September 3, 2010 22:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magnate (Post 39543)
This really means allowing p_ptr->pclass to influence generation, which is nonrandom.

That idea has been hated, over and over, in the past.

A simpler fix would be to insist in randart generation that any item with one of +INT or +WIS gets both.

fizzix September 3, 2010 23:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by PowerDiver (Post 39547)
That idea has been hated, over and over, in the past.

A simpler fix would be to insist in randart generation that any item with one of +INT or +WIS gets both.

That could work. I like that a lot better than the class based approach. Probably because it's right in line with INT and WIS being the same stat, something I support.

(+4 INT, +4 WIS) should probably be somewhere between +4 CON and +4 STR in power. (assuming the ordering coes CON, STR, DEX from most to least powerful)

Magnate September 4, 2010 08:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by fizzix (Post 39548)
That could work. I like that a lot better than the class based approach. Probably because it's right in line with INT and WIS being the same stat, something I support.

(+4 INT, +4 WIS) should probably be somewhere between +4 CON and +4 STR in power. (assuming the ordering coes CON, STR, DEX from most to least powerful)

This really bothers me, actually - but I take the point that there is opposition to using pclass.

I would happily support making INT and WIS the same stat, but while they're separate I'd like to treat them separately. As a sop to casters, I could make sure that the *total* INT and WIS bonuses in the artifact set were the same - and I could ensure that on weapons and nonweapons separately.

PowerDiver September 4, 2010 09:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magnate (Post 39556)
This really bothers me, actually - but I take the point that there is opposition to using pclass.

I would happily support making INT and WIS the same stat, but while they're separate I'd like to treat them separately. As a sop to casters, I could make sure that the *total* INT and WIS bonuses in the artifact set were the same - and I could ensure that on weapons and nonweapons separately.

The total is irrelevant. It doesn't make any difference if you add +2 int to a bunch of weak artifacts. If you bias the set that way, I'd guess you would do more harm than good.

I can't figure out your point of view. As i see it ...

Premise: It is bad if a player looks at an artifact and would use it if the spellstat boost matches, but won't use it if it does not match.

If you agree with the premise, int=wis solves the situation precisely. If you disagree with the premise, things are fine as they are now.

Obviously I am missing something.

TJS September 4, 2010 20:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magnate (Post 39556)
This really bothers me, actually - but I take the point that there is opposition to using pclass.

I would happily support making INT and WIS the same stat, but while they're separate I'd like to treat them separately. As a sop to casters, I could make sure that the *total* INT and WIS bonuses in the artifact set were the same - and I could ensure that on weapons and nonweapons separately.

You could also make sure con, dex and str are boosted whenever int and wis are to make sure warriors don't miss out as well.

TJS September 4, 2010 20:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derakon (Post 39501)
I'm actually not so much interested in the INT/WIS conundrum (which standarts "solve" by making it so that most artifacts that boost one also boost the other) as I am in the blessed weapon issue. Nobody except for priests cares about the blessed flag, but it is seriously important for priests (in the late game, you can sometimes get away with a sharp weapon if you don't mind the failure rate increase on your higher spells).

Then again, we might want to solve this by simply getting rid of the sharp-weapon penalty entirely. Give them (and by extension, paladins) the same gloves penalty all the other casters have instead.

Please let's not get rid of the sharp weapon penalty for priests. It is one of the few flavour things left that actually has an effect on gameplay. I quite like searching around for a suitable weapon for my class rather than just expect every weapon to be equally useful to all classes.

It isn't as if the priest is the most difficult class currently anyhow.

Timo Pietilš September 4, 2010 20:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by TJS (Post 39568)
Please let's not get rid of the sharp weapon penalty for priests. It is one of the few flavour things left that actually has an effect on gameplay. I quite like searching around for a suitable weapon for my class rather than just expect every weapon to be equally useful to all classes.

It isn't as if the priest is the most difficult class currently anyhow.

The fact that priests need a "blunt" weapon is a bit arbitrary. Especially since it definitely is not "weapon that does not draw blood" because some of those "blunt" weapons contain spikes and other sharpish edges, just not one sharp edge.

Maybe we could make that restriction even more restricted and just force priests to use "blessed" weapons: Temple should sell blessed weapons, and some high level priest spell could be "bless weapon" to make any weapon "blessed" for priest. Otherwise they suffer from penalty just like mages suffer from handgear without DEX or FA. Note that I'm not talking about "blessed" -ego, just flag "blessed".

PowerDiver September 4, 2010 20:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by TJS (Post 39568)
Please let's not get rid of the sharp weapon penalty for priests. It is one of the few flavour things left that actually has an effect on gameplay. I quite like searching around for a suitable weapon for my class rather than just expect every weapon to be equally useful to all classes..

I think the pointy weapon penalty is the stupidest thing in the game. If anything, priests should have a blunt penalty, not a pointy penalty. But I digress.

If there is going to be a penalty for using priest realm spells while wielding particular weapons, surely it should apply equally to paladins.

Magnate September 4, 2010 21:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by PowerDiver (Post 39559)
The total is irrelevant. It doesn't make any difference if you add +2 int to a bunch of weak artifacts. If you bias the set that way, I'd guess you would do more harm than good.

I can't figure out your point of view. As i see it ...

Premise: It is bad if a player looks at an artifact and would use it if the spellstat boost matches, but won't use it if it does not match.

If you agree with the premise, int=wis solves the situation precisely. If you disagree with the premise, things are fine as they are now.

Obviously I am missing something.

No, you're not - IMO things are fine as they are now. This whole discussion started because someone found a *random* set of artifacts with a whole load of +WIS and little or no +INT. So we started thinking about biasing the generation in various ways. I'm quite happy not to do that, but was equally happy discussing possibilities.

If I were going to do that (bias generation), one method I would not use is setting int=wis. Unless the stats were merged elsewhere in the game, I would not do it only for randart generation.

Is that clearer?

PowerDiver September 4, 2010 21:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magnate (Post 39571)
Is that clearer?

affirmative

TJS September 5, 2010 13:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Timo Pietilš (Post 39569)
The fact that priests need a "blunt" weapon is a bit arbitrary. Especially since it definitely is not "weapon that does not draw blood" because some of those "blunt" weapons contain spikes and other sharpish edges, just not one sharp edge.

Maybe we could make that restriction even more restricted and just force priests to use "blessed" weapons: Temple should sell blessed weapons, and some high level priest spell could be "bless weapon" to make any weapon "blessed" for priest. Otherwise they suffer from penalty just like mages suffer from handgear without DEX or FA. Note that I'm not talking about "blessed" -ego, just flag "blessed".

The way I see it is that the priests have chosen their religion and interpret it in their own way. They decide that their God doesn't like them using pointed weapons such as swords, which means that when they wield them they feel uncomfortable because it is against their own beliefs and that interferes with their praying. It isn't a punishment from their God.

The fact that their belief isn't particular logical is fine, because a lot of religious beliefs are quite contradictory anyway.

From a gameplay point of view it is fun because it encourages different equipment choices for different characters.

I agree with Powerdiver that paladins should suffer the same penalty and it should also apply when wielding bows and crossbows too.

Timo Pietilš September 5, 2010 16:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by TJS (Post 39580)
The fact that their belief isn't particular logical is fine, because a lot of religious beliefs are quite contradictory anyway.

I agree with Powerdiver that paladins should suffer the same penalty and it should also apply when wielding bows and crossbows too.

Taken real world into account there is no reason for paladins to have same penalty. Major religions are full of contradictions and for example Christianity has been used to rationalize pretty horrible things in the past even that main message is forgiveness and love, even your enemies.

Tiburon Silverflame September 6, 2010 03:01

Applying the blunt weapon penalty to a paladin, is also a much greater negative. Paladins can't use spells to anywhere near the degree that priests can. Also, the principles for the 2 classes, are quite different. The paladin is a Holy Champion, and is definitely intended to be a warrior in the name of his deity. One doesn't hamstring one's champion. :)

kaypy September 6, 2010 13:11

Possibly what randarts need isnt so much a fixed linkage between INT and WIS as a more general, more probabalistic notion of compatibility between pairs (or more) of abilities. So one makes the other more likely, but not guaranteed.

Datamining the standard artifacts (and probably the egos as well, for extra thematic groupings) should bring out a bunch more common groupings (and a likely extent of them)

A variety of likely candidates off the top of my head (needs more research and less guesswork...):
WIS and bless
DEX and blows
DEX and speed
DEX and Free Action
[stat] and sustain [stat]
[baseresist] -> resist all

Bound to be a zillion more. (And probably some 'these shouldnt happen' pairings, too...)

Magnate September 6, 2010 22:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by kaypy (Post 39617)
Possibly what randarts need isnt so much a fixed linkage between INT and WIS as a more general, more probabalistic notion of compatibility between pairs (or more) of abilities. So one makes the other more likely, but not guaranteed.

Datamining the standard artifacts (and probably the egos as well, for extra thematic groupings) should bring out a bunch more common groupings (and a likely extent of them)

A variety of likely candidates off the top of my head (needs more research and less guesswork...):
WIS and bless
DEX and blows
DEX and speed
DEX and Free Action
[stat] and sustain [stat]
[baseresist] -> resist all

Bound to be a zillion more. (And probably some 'these shouldnt happen' pairings, too...)

Some of those already happen in the existing code, but yes, it's a good point. Ultimately my plan is to have any corroboration in artifact.txt mirrored in randarts.

Derakon September 6, 2010 23:27

Some others off the top of my head:

Slay Undead + SI
WIS + telepathy
STR + DEX + CON
SI + FA + base 4 resists
STR + tunneling


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 18:01.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.