Sil 1.0.2

[Scatha]

Originally Posted by half

I would prefer it if the levels were generated independently of what has come before (excepting uniques killed, particular artefacts that have been generated, the unique forge, and the unique vaults). This is the only other exception, and the only one that isn't natural.

Well, sort of. There are two more things which kind of do this (that is, affect what you come across based on what's gone before in some unnatural fashion, although neither is quite based just on what's been generated before).

The first hardly occurs: the chance of staircases being trapped varies in a manner which needs a fairly circuitous explanation on your recent behaviour of using stairs.

The second is so central to the way the game plays these days that it's hard to notice it's an effect of this type: the forced descent. This one has the best explanation of any of these exceptions, although it's still a little odd.

[Scatha]

Originally Posted by Derakon

Keeping in mind that I've still yet to play Sil, would it be possible to balance a mechanism whereby smiths could construct their own forges (e.g. by smithing a hammer at the first forge)? The cost to building a forge would need to be such that they would generally prefer to use "natural" ones when possible, but in the event that such forges weren't available they would be able to make their own.

I think we could balance this in the sense of giving it the right power level, but I have concerns both about the flavour (how do you build a forge (which requires intense controlled fire) in a dungeon with a hammer?), and about it distorting usual play patterns in a way which turns out not to be fun. It might turn out okay, but I also think we can get good some fairly good behind-the-scenes smoothing algorithm which will be almost invisible to players (and not exploitable) except providing them with a more consistently enjoyable experience.

You can think of it as a shortcut to the central limit theorem (which ought to apply and solve our problems if forges came in smaller discrete chunks).

[buzzkill]

Originally Posted by Scatha

The first hardly occurs: the chance of staircases being trapped varies in a manner which needs a fairly circuitous explanation on your recent behaviour of using stairs.

Once again, I do have to try this "Sil" at some point. How's that tileset coming along ?).

[Patashu]

It's mentioned a lot that parry would be broken if it doubled the evasion bonus of your offhand weapon as well... but would it actually be? Keep in mind that you're giving up a shield/two handed weapon, spending exp on parry which will thereby making future evasion skills more expensive to get (and evasion has soooo many good skills - sprinting, flanking, controlled retreat, etc etc)...

[Psi]

Interesting scenario. Just found Anguirel at 350 feet. Is the correct response to take Mind over Body...?

[half]

Originally Posted by Patashu

It's mentioned a lot that parry would be broken if it doubled the evasion bonus of your offhand weapon as well... but would it actually be? Keep in mind that you're giving up a shield/two handed weapon, spending exp on parry which will thereby making future evasion skills more expensive to get (and evasion has soooo many good skills - sprinting, flanking, controlled retreat, etc etc)...

The problem we see is that this only works in conjunction with Two Weapon Fighting, and we see that ability as already being a bit too strong, and leaning a bit too much towards choosing weapons for their defensive bonuses or abilities instead of their offence. I agree that Parry is on the weak side, typically offering only a single skill point (which would be good if you had very few evasion abilities, but is often a poor deal). Its main benefit is leading to Riposte. If there were a nice clean way to make Parry more interesting we'd certainly consider it.

[Patashu]

+N evasion only when doing a normal melee attack? Like an anti-dodging

[debo]

Originally Posted by half

The problem we see is that this only works in conjunction with Two Weapon Fighting, and we see that ability as already being a bit too strong, and leaning a bit too much towards choosing weapons for their defensive bonuses or abilities instead of their offence. I agree that Parry is on the weak side, typically offering only a single skill point (which would be good if you had very few evasion abilities, but is often a poor deal). Its main benefit is leading to Riposte. If there were a nice clean way to make Parry more interesting we'd certainly consider it.

Stupid question, but what about giving a small % chance that an attack that has already been determined to do damage will whiff entirely?

I personally think parry is just fine the way it is now... it's situationally great when you find an early Defender weapon. It's really only helpful in the early game, but it leads to Riposte which is awesome in the lategame.

[jujuben]

Here's a thought to keep parry relevant longer without using the second weapon or making it too powerful too early. Either in place of the current version, or in addition to it, give a defense bonus equal to some fraction of melee score, adjusted by weapon weight. This works for me thematically, as parrying is basically hitting a weapon, rather than a monster. Something like [defense bonus] = floor([melee]/[n + weapon weight]) where n is whatever it needs to balance the skill's power.

[Scatha]

Thanks all for the suggestions. Some comments:

Originally Posted by Patashu

+N evasion only when doing a normal melee attack? Like an anti-dodging

Something like this could work (and it's certainly elegant), but is it interesting? Dodging rewards you for doing something slightly unusual (moving in combat), but attacking is something so many characters do when they'll be attacked back that it seems a bit too much like a static bonus. To be fair this is also a problem with the current ability, which just slightly rewards certain weapons!

There's also an issue of rewarding players for behaviour that's often good anyway. We wondered about Parry giving a bonus when you were fighting just one opponent, but since it's already really good to only fight one-on-one thought that could be a bit silly. Looking at it now, I wonder: perhaps it's okay to make these fights easier, as it's very hard to keep to only this type.

Originally Posted by debo

Stupid question, but what about giving a small % chance that an attack that has already been determined to do damage will whiff entirely?

This doesn't fit elegantly into the way we do abilities in the game, so we'd rather do it like this unless it really gave a cool effect we couldn't get otherwise. I also don't think it would play that interestingly -- it's a bit like another point of Con that only works against melee attacks.

Originally Posted by jujuben

Here's a thought to keep parry relevant longer without using the second weapon or making it too powerful too early. Either in place of the current version, or in addition to it, give a defense bonus equal to some fraction of melee score, adjusted by weapon weight. This works for me thematically, as parrying is basically hitting a weapon, rather than a monster. Something like [defense bonus] = floor([melee]/[n + weapon weight]) where n is whatever it needs to balance the skill's power.

Hmm. We definitely thought about some tie to melee (though I don't think to weapon weight -- I like it), and I can't remember exactly what decided us against. I do have a couple of concerns:

Since Parry is available early in the tree, it should do something nontrivial when you get it, which might be hard to balance with this version while still being fair later. It could potentially be moved later in the tree, but there is something very natural about Parry --> Riposte.

It might also suffer from the being too "samey" across different characters: more or less everyone puts points in melee. The spread on weapon weight does a good job of mitigating this, though.

One could also go for something like Versatility, letting melee partially substitute for Evasion. I think this would have interesting gameplay, but also change the flavour as it would not be for Evasion specialists, and perhaps shouldn't be in the Evasion tree.