Angband.oook.cz
Angband.oook.cz
AboutVariantsLadderForumCompetitionComicScreenshotsFunniesLinks

Go Back   Angband Forums > Angband > Vanilla

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old February 6, 2017, 20:43   #21
Sky
Swordsman
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Glasgae
Age: 44
Posts: 418
Sky is on a distinguished road
is there any way that the power dragon mail could be made of a different ego class than the rest of the dragon armors?

i have no use for a dragon armor which is essentially resist 2 elements and maybe breath attack, but then the PDSM falls under the same squelch category, with its ... 7 resists?
Sky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 6, 2017, 20:55   #22
Derakon
Prophet
 
Derakon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 7,726
Derakon is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick View Post
What I was actually looking at doing was giving the option for standarts vs randarts to be less of a binary choice; I may do this anyway independent of other considerations (via a settable constant).
A birth option to do (some mix of) standarts+randarts together in the same game wouldn't be unreasonable. Actually if we had parameterizable options, you could have one for "how many standarts to have" and one for "how many randarts to have", anywhere from e.g. 0%/100% (normal randarts game), 0%/0% (no artifacts at all), 100%/100% (full sets of both standarts/randarts), etc.

Quote:
I'm planing to repurpose this thread to ask questions as I do the randart update. Here are the first two:
  • Are there some existing artifacts that should be removed (there certainly do seem to be a lot of Paur* gauntlets)?
  • What do people think of "off-type" properties - slays, brands on non-melee-weapons, extra shots on non-bows, etc ?
For the former: I wouldn't be opposed to merging all the Paurs into a single pair of gloves, and all the Thancs as well. Revert the damage back to what it used to be though. A 1d4 (+4,+6) Dagger of Elements with all three elemental brands, activating to fire three elemental bolts, etc. is more interesting as an artifact and would be better-balanced than a 2d4 (+8,+12) Dethanc or whatever IMO.

The only other artifacts I can think of that frankly aren't that interesting are Amrod/Amras and some of the early cloaks (Colluin and Luthien are the only interesting cloak artifacts). I'm not saying that said artifacts aren't necessarily useful at the time you find them, but I can't remember them ever being a key piece of kit; they're just mild incremental upgrades over whatever I had before.
Derakon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 6, 2017, 21:06   #23
Nick
Vanilla maintainer
 
Nick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Canberra, Australia
Age: 51
Posts: 6,318
Donated: $60
Nick is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Derakon View Post
A birth option to do (some mix of) standarts+randarts together in the same game wouldn't be unreasonable. Actually if we had parameterizable options, you could have one for "how many standarts to have" and one for "how many randarts to have", anywhere from e.g. 0%/100% (normal randarts game), 0%/0% (no artifacts at all), 100%/100% (full sets of both standarts/randarts), etc.
I regard the constants.txt file as a collection of paramterizable options, and this plan (which I like) is easily achievable that way.
__________________
One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them.
Nick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 7, 2017, 00:23   #24
Pete Mack
Prophet
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 3,884
Donated: $40
Pete Mack is on a distinguished road
Most early game artifacts are pretty meh, so why would amulets or rings be different? SI shows up on so much stuff already, the value of another is minimal. Weapons (artifacts and otherwise), lanterns, hats, rings, even the occasional cursed ego bow. So another source isn't all that useful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fph View Post
I like the idea of the amulet. For the ring, rBase feels a bit meh, but I guess that's what needed the most at that depth.
Another stat I'd like to see on an early-game artifact is See Invisible.
Pete Mack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 7, 2017, 12:16   #25
PowerWyrm
Veteran
 
PowerWyrm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,820
PowerWyrm is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick View Post
What do people think of "off-type" properties - slays, brands on non-melee-weapons, extra shots on non-bows, etc ?
Slay/brand on gloves. After all, it's the most logical item to use if you want to put a brand or a slay on something. For the static arts, expand the Paurs with a weak brand (the frosty one already has it) --- they would suck less. For the other ones, Cambeleg and Fingolfin are already great, Cammithrim has plusses, so I don't see where to put a slay there. Well Mithril Gauntlets and Alchemist's Gloves don't have a corresponding art... or Eol.

Extra attacks/might/shots on anything else than the weapon/shooter is a heresy.
__________________
PWMAngband variant maintainer - check http://www.mangband.org/forum/viewforum.php?f=9 to learn more about this new variant!
PowerWyrm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 7, 2017, 12:23   #26
PowerWyrm
Veteran
 
PowerWyrm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,820
PowerWyrm is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick View Post
Are there some existing artifacts that should be removed (there certainly do seem to be a lot of Paur* gauntlets)?
The "Trollshaws" crap. This means the Orcrist/Glamdring/Aeglin trilogy. Those are pathetically weak, and usually found when you don't have the STR/DEX to get more than 1.x bpr with them, making them more useless than a +0 +0 dagger. Maybe not remove them, as they have a "backstory", but seriously improve them.

Paurs and Thancs are fine, at least the elec/acid ones, because they're meant to be used at low level, where you have rFire/rCold from a ring, rElec or rAcid from an amulet and the last base resist from a Thanc or a Paur.
__________________
PWMAngband variant maintainer - check http://www.mangband.org/forum/viewforum.php?f=9 to learn more about this new variant!
PowerWyrm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 7, 2017, 14:34   #27
Derakon
Prophet
 
Derakon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 7,726
Derakon is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by PowerWyrm View Post
Extra attacks/might/shots on anything else than the weapon/shooter is a heresy.
Once again I'm going to suggest that we do away with extra shots in its entirety. I've yet to see someone make a convincing counterargument.
Derakon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 7, 2017, 21:17   #28
Grotug
Knight
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 618
Grotug is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Derakon View Post
A birth option to do (some mix of) standarts+randarts together in the same game wouldn't be unreasonable. Actually if we had parameterizable options, you could have one for "how many standarts to have" and one for "how many randarts to have", anywhere from e.g. 0%/100% (normal randarts game), 0%/0% (no artifacts at all), 100%/100% (full sets of both standarts/randarts), etc.



For the former: I wouldn't be opposed to merging all the Paurs into a single pair of gloves, and all the Thancs as well. Revert the damage back to what it used to be though. A 1d4 (+4,+6) Dagger of Elements with all three elemental brands, activating to fire three elemental bolts, etc. is more interesting as an artifact and would be better-balanced than a 2d4 (+8,+12) Dethanc or whatever IMO.

The only other artifacts I can think of that frankly aren't that interesting are Amrod/Amras and some of the early cloaks (Colluin and Luthien are the only interesting cloak artifacts). I'm not saying that said artifacts aren't necessarily useful at the time you find them, but I can't remember them ever being a key piece of kit; they're just mild incremental upgrades over whatever I had before.
I think the Paur* gloves that don't confer a to-dam bonus or weak brand could be merged into a single better artifact like the thancs but maybe keep the one with the (+3, +3) and weak brand separate. I think your thanc suggestion is interesting, though if you are going to cripple its to-dam, you might want to leave the dice augmented at 2d4? Other than Sting, artifacts generally have unusually high to-dam. So maybe 1d4 (+8, +9) would be better?

Not sure why you single out Amrod and Amras as the only non-interesting artifacts. I always like finding these, though I find Amras to be quite a lot more interesting than Amrod. How do you differentiating interesting form useful? What existing artifact do you find interesting but not very useful (or interesting and useful)?

I'd really like to see an amulet artifact that is as good or slightly better than "Trickery. I don't get why a non-artifact amulet is the most powerful amulet in the game (unless there is an artifact that's better than "Trickery that I've never found).

"Dwarves: not bad, but by the time I find it it is quite meh. Maybe DL55 native depth would be good. "Elessar: the fast recharge on the activation is cool, but it always loses out to "Trickery (maybe other classes find it more useful to "Trickery than the fighter ones I pick?). How about another high resist instead of rFire? Maybe rDark? Maybe the other ones don't need a buff and "Trickery simply needs a nerf? Remove rNexus or rPois from it? Swap "Trickery's rNexus with "Elessar's rFire? So 'Elessar has rPois and rNexus and "Trickery has rNexus and rFire?

I don't have any good ideas for a new amulet artifact. Maybe something that provides immunity to elec or acid; possibly a Dwarven artifact similar to Thorin shield but without the rSound/rChaos. Something like: provides immunity to acid, +2 CON +2 STR -1 Stealth; Sustain CON and STR and (+1, +2).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Derakon View Post
Once again I'm going to suggest that we do away with extra shots in its entirety. I've yet to see someone make a convincing counterargument.
I think it'd be interesting to have it be possible to end up with a greater amount of to-dam bonuses by endgame, which would make weapons with extra attacks more meaningful. So if you had enough to-dam bonuses and ?*weapon enchantment*s, you could actually make Sting a viable endgame weapon.

What's the argument for doing away with extra shots? More options in gear make the game more interesting, no? Do you stay with a heavy xbow (x4) (+15, +23) or switch to a longbow of extra shots (x3) (+9, +17) <+1>? The longbow might do slightly better damage per round, but uses twice as much ammo to do so, but is better against thinning out a room full of hounds or hummerhorns and it won't run you the risk of becoming overweight like the xbow does, whereas the xbow ammo break less and do more dam per missile, so you get more mileage out of your ammo, but take longer to kill it.
Grotug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 7, 2017, 22:08   #29
Derakon
Prophet
 
Derakon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 7,726
Derakon is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grotug View Post
I think your thanc suggestion is interesting, though if you are going to cripple its to-dam, you might want to leave the dice augmented at 2d4? Other than Sting, artifacts generally have unusually high to-dam. So maybe 1d4 (+8, +9) would be better?
The 'thancs used to be 1d4 (+4,+6) as I described, and that's already a great weapon to find in the early game -- a light weapon with decent to-dam that does 3d4 damage against most enemies? That's fantastic. The enhancement to the to-dam and damage dice just made it ridiculously good. The 'thancs are supposed to age out relatively quickly; as it is, if you're any kind of melee character and you find one, you're set for damage through 1500' at least. Too much.

Quote:
I'd really like to see an amulet artifact that is as good or slightly better than "Trickery. I don't get why a non-artifact amulet is the most powerful amulet in the game (unless there is an artifact that's better than "Trickery that I've never found).
Artifacts should not always be the best possible option in every slot. That said, Trickery is too powerful and should be nerfed. Lose the speed at least IMO.

Quote:
I think it'd be interesting to have it be possible to end up with a greater amount of to-dam bonuses by endgame, which would make weapons with extra attacks more meaningful. So if you had enough to-dam bonuses and ?*weapon enchantment*s, you could actually make Sting a viable endgame weapon.
Basically what I'm hearing here is "only doing 450/500/600/whatever damage/round is too little, I want to be even more powerful!" Never mind what that would do to game balance. If you want to deal huge damage, go play ToME2. Vanilla at least makes some attempt to have tighter design than that, though it's not so tight as Oangband or Sangband are.

Quote:
What's the argument for doing away with extra shots? More options in gear make the game more interesting, no?
The problem is that firing a single missile right now has roughly similar "power" as participating in an entire single round of melee (average damage is typically lower, but you're safe from taking melee damage, so it balances out). So adding +1 shots is effectively the same thing as adding +N blows, where N is the total number of blows/round you currently get. That is ridiculously strong. Add in the time-dilation effects of extra shots and you end up with a character that can deal vastly more damage than is available via any other mechanism, while being almost entirely safe from both melee damage and being double-moved.

+1 to launcher might is roughly similar to getting +1 blow in melee (again, less damage, but safety from melee reprisals). So might is OK; it's powerful but not unbalancingly so. +1 shots is a massive outlier in comparison.
Derakon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 7, 2017, 23:15   #30
Sky
Swordsman
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Glasgae
Age: 44
Posts: 418
Sky is on a distinguished road
Aren't those supposedly elven daggers? The equivalent of a short sword to a human, and a sword to a hobbit
Lower the base weight and you got a great little orc slayer.

Oops. Somehow i missed a wall of text between my reply and the Glamdring post.

Also, Elessar used to be king when it had (+7,+7), but even without it, the activation for heal 500 means you will save a ton of !heal and can tank bigger threats sooner.

Re: extra shots, you'll make short bows less useful if this ability disappears - you just need to make sure you cant get it on other gear. OR ... you could nerf the ranger. Give them an extra +1 multiplier, so a x6 bow becomes x7, instead of a full second shot. Other classes dont rely on endgame archery nearly as much.

Last edited by Sky; February 7, 2017 at 23:25.
Sky is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Plans for 4.1 - 4.3 Nick Vanilla 137 March 29, 2017 13:36
Should I use this randart? yyt16384 Vanilla 13 March 22, 2015 18:24
Neoband long-term plans Therem Harth Variants 13 August 14, 2014 03:31
Halls of Mist plans Mikko Lehtinen Variants 33 November 28, 2012 09:21
Plans for FA031 Nick Variants 11 January 9, 2008 12:45


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:34.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.