View Single Post
Old June 26, 2018, 20:30   #21
Derakon
Prophet
 
Derakon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,024
Derakon is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by fizzix View Post
Angband has a lot of monsters that deal 50% of a characters HP or more with a single attack. A lot of monsters can do this, even through resistances. This winds up limiting tactically interesting possibilities. You simply can not afford to interact with more than one monster that can deal 50% of your health in an attack. Currently Angband resolves the problem by giving the player powerful abilities to control the rules of engagement. Teleport, destruction, teleport other, terrain modification, etc. Any rework in monsters should consider serious nerfs to monsters along these lines, to be compensated by nerfs to player escapes, resistances, or boosts to other monster abilities.

Basically if I had to sum up the changes I'd like Angband to be, Angband currently looks like, "I need to do X now or I may die next turn." I'd like it to be "I need to do X now or I may die in 5 turns"
We're getting pretty far afield here. But I'd like to see you justify that "should nerf monsters so we can nerf the player" argument. Why is it desirable to make combat less binary? Current combat is very high-stakes, and the player has plenty to think about and plenty of options. That means they have difficult and important choices to make, and that's good.

I'd like to see your vision for what combat would look like in your hypothetical rework, and in particular I want to see that that vision is at least as compelling as the combat we have currently. Sure, there are things that the current system does poorly (the dominance of Teleport Other comes to mind), but it does an awful lot well too. If we're going to toss all that out then we need a really good replacement for it.

(I'd also like to see that vision be in a separate thread, since this one seems to be more about thematic and minor balance changes, not systemic reworks)
Derakon is offline   Reply With Quote