Angband.oook.cz
Angband.oook.cz
AboutVariantsLadderForumCompetitionComicScreenshotsFunniesLinks

Go Back   Angband Forums > Obsolete > v4

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old October 31, 2011, 22:26   #1
Jungle_Boy
Swordsman
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 434
Jungle_Boy is on a distinguished road
More thoughts on v4

I'm enjoying playing v4, it seems much tougher than V and while I may not like the change I think it is probably for the good, just means I run through characters even faster than before. I did find a couple small issues and had some thoughts on affix naming.

I learned a staff of slow monsters by slowing an invisible unknown monster. This bug was mentioned before and I thought it was fixed perhaps it's shown up again. Unfortunately I don't remember what version of v4 it was since it's on my other computer.

This is a very small issue but See Invisible still had a ? in the 'C'haracter scren for my new weapon even though I fought invisible monsters so the item obviously did not grant see invisible.

I got the "It glows!" message upon wielding an item that I already knew had the 'golden' affix.

I've noticed a couple items whose names are too long to fit in the equipment screen.

I've found it is possible to deduce that an item has another more valuable affix because the known affix does not show up in the name.

My suggestion on naming is this: any affix whose effects can be seen in the 'i'nventory screen should not be in the name. It could still be shown in the 'I'nspect screen though. This includes, number of die, number of sides, to-hit and to-dam modifiers, weight modifiers, and AC and light radius modifiers as well as stats. All this info is easily visible already and when you have it in the name you can end up with things like a Tough Cloak of Protection [1,-1] after a couple rounds with an acid hound. This looks bad and gives a disconnect between what the item name implies and actual properties. I think if something is going to be in the name it should be something that cannot be removed and it should be significant. a dagger that is (+0,+1) does not qualify as 'Sharp' in my book, it's just a dagger that has one less knick in the blade. If you want to have these modifiers still in the name make them only apply to boni of at least +5, that would also help reduce the number of names you need to come up with.

Another possible suggestion that could help with naming and too long names is to make the name only one affix rather than a prefix and a suffix. If you have affixes of equal power call it a dagger of slays or armor of resists.
__________________
My first winner: http://angband.oook.cz/ladder-show.php?id=10138
Jungle_Boy is offline  
Old November 1, 2011, 00:15   #2
Jungle_Boy
Swordsman
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 434
Jungle_Boy is on a distinguished road
One more thing I just found and it may be working as intended. It's possible to get a light with the 'of Brightness' affix twice and it does stack. In my current game I found a lantern in the Black market with radius 4 light and everburning!
__________________
My first winner: http://angband.oook.cz/ladder-show.php?id=10138
Jungle_Boy is offline  
Old November 1, 2011, 00:34   #3
Magnate
Angband Devteam member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: London, UK
Posts: 5,054
Magnate is on a distinguished road
Send a message via MSN to Magnate Send a message via Yahoo to Magnate
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jungle_Boy View Post
One more thing I just found and it may be working as intended. It's possible to get a light with the 'of Brightness' affix twice and it does stack. In my current game I found a lantern in the Black market with radius 4 light and everburning!
That is intended, but it's a little more common than it should be just at the moment ;-) (this is because we need a few more different affixes available on lights ...)

Thanks for your reports - there are a few issues remaining to be sorted out with pseudo-ID - it doesn't work too well with rune-based ID (but it's playable).

The one about learning effects on unseen monsters is intentional - you are assumed to be able to hear them slow down! (A bit silly I know, but that's what was decided at the time.)

Being able to deduce that a more valuable affix is on the item is also intentional. But there's still no magic bullet for naming items with more than two affixes - I'm still mulling this over. I think I'm the wrong person to make the final call on this, because I actually like the flavour of all the pointless names (the ones which tell you stuff you can see about dice etc.), and I also don't mind the name not telling me everything. Ho hum.
__________________
"3.4 is much better than 3.1, 3.2 or 3.3. It still is easier than 3.0.9, but it is more convenient to play without being ridiculously easy, so it is my new favorite of the versions." - Timo Pietila
Magnate is offline  
Old November 1, 2011, 02:43   #4
Jungle_Boy
Swordsman
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 434
Jungle_Boy is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magnate View Post
I think I'm the wrong person to make the final call on this, because I actually like the flavour of all the pointless names (the ones which tell you stuff you can see about dice etc.), and I also don't mind the name not telling me everything. Ho hum.
Yea, I don't mind the name not telling me everything and I don't really mind the names for bonuses that can be seen. My problem I think is the disconnect between the name and the capabilities of the item. For instance a sharp dagger of slaying sounds awesome but could be (+1,+2). IMO that is not a sharp dagger of slaying! Or a tough cloak of protection [1,+1], not really that tough or protecting to me.

If we are going to have a sharp dagger of slaying make it be like (+4,+6) or something. Something to be excited about not just a one or two point improvement.
__________________
My first winner: http://angband.oook.cz/ladder-show.php?id=10138
Jungle_Boy is offline  
Old November 1, 2011, 08:24   #5
Magnate
Angband Devteam member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: London, UK
Posts: 5,054
Magnate is on a distinguished road
Send a message via MSN to Magnate Send a message via Yahoo to Magnate
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jungle_Boy View Post
Yea, I don't mind the name not telling me everything and I don't really mind the names for bonuses that can be seen. My problem I think is the disconnect between the name and the capabilities of the item. For instance a sharp dagger of slaying sounds awesome but could be (+1,+2). IMO that is not a sharp dagger of slaying! Or a tough cloak of protection [1,+1], not really that tough or protecting to me.

If we are going to have a sharp dagger of slaying make it be like (+4,+6) or something. Something to be excited about not just a one or two point improvement.
Fair enough - so what names would you want for one or two point improvements?
__________________
"3.4 is much better than 3.1, 3.2 or 3.3. It still is easier than 3.0.9, but it is more convenient to play without being ridiculously easy, so it is my new favorite of the versions." - Timo Pietila
Magnate is offline  
Old November 1, 2011, 10:12   #6
buzzkill
Prophet
 
buzzkill's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Indiana, USA
Posts: 2,939
Donated: $8
buzzkill is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by magnate View Post
fair enough - so what names would you want for one or two point improvements?
" "
__________________
www.mediafire.com/buzzkill - Get your 32x32 tiles here. UT32 now compatible Ironband and Quickband 9/6/2012.
My banding life on Buzzkill's ladder.
buzzkill is offline  
Old November 1, 2011, 11:07   #7
Nomad
Knight
 
Nomad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 958
Nomad is on a distinguished road
Yeah, I think affix names on items that only have minor plusses to hit, dam or AC are kind of distracting and meaningless. For instance, you can have "Tough Gloves of Protection [1, +2]", which are the same as "Tough Gloves [1, +2]", and "Gloves of Protection [1, +2]" - all of which can potentially lose their enchantment and end up indistinguishable from "Gloves [1,+0]" yet still keep the names.
Nomad is offline  
Old November 1, 2011, 13:25   #8
fizzix
Prophet
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Madison, Wisconsin, US
Posts: 2,999
fizzix is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nomad View Post
Yeah, I think affix names on items that only have minor plusses to hit, dam or AC are kind of distracting and meaningless. For instance, you can have "Tough Gloves of Protection [1, +2]", which are the same as "Tough Gloves [1, +2]", and "Gloves of Protection [1, +2]" - all of which can potentially lose their enchantment and end up indistinguishable from "Gloves [1,+0]" yet still keep the names.
This goes to an idea that Magnate and I had separately to distinguish between magical bonuses and craftsmanship bonuses. The idea would be that there is a difference between tough gloves which is a bonus due to good craftwork and gloves of protection which are enchanted.

Let's say that you had tough gloves of protection that were [1, +2, +2] where the first +2 was craftwork and the second was enchantment. If you were to get hit by acid monsters they could change the glove to [1, -1, +2] but make it no worse. Similarly, if you were to hit a disenchantment monster he could make your gloves [1, +2, +0] but no worse.

In the acid case, the equipment name should probably change to 'damaged'. In the enchantment case, it should lose the affix.

Then if you wanted to you could bring back restore item scrolls. These would repair only acid-damage. Enchantment scrolls would work no differently than now, except that they could add the 'protection' affix if appropriate.

As for renaming, the craftwork titles are fine. The enchantment titles should go something like Magical (+1-+5) Enchanted (+5-+10), Protection (>+10) with similar ideas for weapons.
fizzix is offline  
Old November 1, 2011, 15:22   #9
Nomad
Knight
 
Nomad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 958
Nomad is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by fizzix View Post
Let's say that you had tough gloves of protection that were [1, +2, +2] where the first +2 was craftwork and the second was enchantment. If you were to get hit by acid monsters they could change the glove to [1, -1, +2] but make it no worse. Similarly, if you were to hit a disenchantment monster he could make your gloves [1, +2, +0] but no worse.
That seems a little unnecessarily over-complicated to me. Wouldn't it be simpler just to have the craftwork bonuses increase base AC? Distinguish "Tough Gloves [3,+0]" from "Gloves of Protection [1,+2]".
Nomad is offline  
Old November 1, 2011, 15:55   #10
Derakon
Prophet
 
Derakon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 8,378
Derakon is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nomad View Post
That seems a little unnecessarily over-complicated to me. Wouldn't it be simpler just to have the craftwork bonuses increase base AC? Distinguish "Tough Gloves [3,+0]" from "Gloves of Protection [1,+2]".
That works so long as acid then goes after the base AC value of the armor. Restoration scrolls could then take the item back to the base AC of a standard item of that type -- so your Tough Gloves [3] went to Damage Gloves [0] which get repaired to Gloves [1].
Derakon is offline  
 


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
Some thoughts about spells Timo Pietilš Vanilla 26 October 23, 2011 12:49
S thoughts Philip Variants 5 June 19, 2011 16:30
Un 0.64 thoughts Therem Harth Variants 13 November 14, 2010 17:47
My thoughts on 3.1.1 TJS Vanilla 2 August 14, 2009 04:20
3.1.0 thoughts TJS Vanilla 11 January 15, 2009 16:39


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:10.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.