View Single Post
Old October 11, 2013, 00:42   #5
Mikko Lehtinen
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,246
Mikko Lehtinen is on a distinguished road

Originally Posted by Susramanian View Post
The to-hit stat, like a number of similar things in Angband, seems to be implemented in such a way that all you can say about it to the average player is, "more is good." Lots of people would say that this is all a player needs to know to have fun, but reasonable game designers know that to be false. Essentially, mechanics like this mean the game frequently asks the player to make uninformed decisions, which are about as entertaining as optimal vs. fun gameplay decisions. The original poster's question is about just such an uninformed decision.

How can we weigh +hit against +dam? We essentially can't.
How much AC is it acceptable to lose for a +2 CON bonus? Impossible to say.

It would be really nice to see a rational discussion about fixing stuff like this in Angband. Just because a poorly-thought-out rule has been around for decades doesn't mean it has to live forever. I was ecstatic to see the demise of Charisma recently. Keep that axe swinging!

Derakon, in your Pyrel notebook, right next to where you've written down "don't force the player to choose between optimal gameplay and fun gameplay," write "don't force the player to make uninformed decisions."

If a rule cannot be implemented in such a way that it is easily explained to a player, just don't implement it.
I agree. Even having a straight 80 % chance to hit always might be preferable to the current system where the hit chance is almost always higher than 80 % anyway. New players have no way of knowing that the hit chance is almost irrelevant.

Or you could make the combat skill versus monster AC more meaningful, and show the percentage chance to the player when he targets a monster. That's what I did in Halls of Mist. Even that is probably too opaque: players generally don't bother to check their hit chance.
Mikko Lehtinen is offline   Reply With Quote