I should have done this a while ago

[Therem Harth]

Stopped savescumming, that is.

My excuse of old was that I didn't have the time to deal with permadeath. In this statement is that tacit assumption that, if you use permadeath, you'll spend a lot of time dying.

But that is not actually the case! It turns out (for me anyway) that permadeath encourages a more cautious and thoughtful style of play. In T2 I usually suffer my first death fooling around with dragons in the wilderness. This last time, though, I played more cautiously... And didn't die until an OoD Mezzodaemon paralyzed me in the Maze.

I'd honestly forgotten how much more fun a non-savescummed game is. I think, now, that permadeath is what keeps a roguelike from being Yet Another Fantasy RPG; it makes you think more, and shifts the focus from "just winning the game" to developing your character and having a good time.

So yeah. Consider my opinion to have done a 180. I am now wholly opposed to removing permadeath in any way, shape, or form, and think the Cheat Death debug option should stay as is.

[buzzkill]

Yep. Yep. Yep.

[ghengiz]

Glad you abandoned the dark side

[PowerDiver]

Originally Posted by ghengiz

Glad you abandoned the dark side

Man, you guys are harsh.

Playing with save-scumming is like practicing tennis by hitting against a wall. It's not the real game, but it has its place if you want to learn to play better and other methods are not working for you.

[tigpup]

Originally Posted by PowerDiver

Man, you guys are harsh.

Playing with save-scumming is like practicing tennis by hitting against a wall. It's not the real game, but it has its place if you want to learn to play better and other methods are not working for you.

Man, that's a bad metaphor, Eddie.

To me (having done it many times), it's more like playing strip-poker with your little sister's dollies.

- N

[ghengiz]

Originally Posted by PowerDiver

Man, you guys are harsh.

Playing with save-scumming is like practicing tennis by hitting against a wall. It's not the real game, but it has its place if you want to learn to play better and other methods are not working for you.

Sorry, I didn't mean to sound harsh...maybe a would have been a bit more clear than

[Derakon]

Originally Posted by tigpup

Man, that's a bad metaphor, Eddie.

To me (having done it many times), it's more like playing strip-poker with your little sister's dollies.

No, I'm with Eddie here. If you had never played tennis before, and you went out and played against someone who knew what they were doing and was playing to win, you wouldn't have a good time. You'd be frustrated at your total inability to return the ball, repeated 40-0 scores, etc. Playing against the wall gives you a more forgiving setting in which to learn basic skills, so that when you go up against the "real" opponent, you know enough to at least enjoy yourself, even if you don't win. Even if you got roundly trounced.

[Nick]

Originally Posted by tigpup

To me (having done it many times), it's more like playing strip-poker with your little sister's dollies.

Wait, which one have you done many times?

[HallucinationMushroom]

Yeah, but you can never beat the wall.

[buzzkill]

Originally Posted by Derakon

No, I'm with Eddie here. If you had never played tennis before, and you went out and played against someone who knew what they were doing and was playing to win, you wouldn't have a good time.

Not really. Playing tennis against a wall (without explicit instruction) while possibly more fun than real competition, will undoubtedly teach you poor technique such as hitting softly and hitting to your opponent (in this case yourself) which won't gain you success in a real match against a competitively schooled peer.

Angband allows you learn at your own pace. It certainly doesn't start out trouncing you. The early levels are a (too) gentle introduction and the difficulty eventually ramps up from there. What Angband does lack is instruction.

If feel that if a player fails at Angabnd (quits playing), it's more likely because they didn't know the rules (how to play) and assumed that it is like most other RPG's, rather than it being too difficult (to win). If I were to play cricket and assumed it was almost exactly like baseball and there was no one there to set me straight, I would probably quickly get discouraged at my lack of success and quit. Whacking my wicket against a wall wouldn't help (I know nothing of cricket), learning the rules would.

The best way to learn just about anything, is to compete against someone who is better than you at it. While playing against an unmerciful ass who only desires to humiliate you isn't the best scenario, it will still work better than playing against a wall, and Angband is certainly not unmerciful (to start), just unfriendly (edit: as a tennis opponent who, while an expert player, intentionally thumbs down his game to just above your level, but always still beats you in the end no matter how well you play, and offers no critique or advice to you along the way).

Save scumming is more akin to playing "Guitar Hero" because learning to play a real guitar to too hard and practice is tedious. Yes, you'll have more fun while doing something that is arguably similar, but you won't get any better at the real thing.