Angband.oook.cz
Angband.oook.cz
AboutVariantsLadderForumCompetitionComicScreenshotsFunniesLinks

Go Back   Angband Forums > Angband > Vanilla

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old October 4, 2010, 21:18   #11
Timo Pietilš
Prophet
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Climbing up from hole I just dug.
Posts: 4,096
Timo Pietilš is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Derakon View Post
My main problem with doing away with trap detection is that it leaves the game more open for "Whoops, something you could not have known about killed you." Right now that's largely limited to things like warriors, priests, and paladins who venture into drolem country without generic-monster detection and get really unlucky. I.e. the current unavoidable-instadeath rate is small.
I'd say our current instadeath rate is zero with patience. And that is a problem. You need to artificially increase your danger level to make game challenging. We need more challenge that cannot be countered by patience.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Derakon View Post
If we're going to increase it, I'd rather it be by something suitably impressive (e.g. ancient dragon popping up at 800'), not by the player blundering into a teleport trap and getting dropped in the middle of some gravity hounds that he purposefully avoided earlier.

If you plan to just do away with trap detection and replace it with trap noticing, then trap noticing needs to have equivalent reliability -- basically, that means that traps are automatically seen once you step next to them. Or else traps need to have zero instadeath capability. No teleport, no summons, no paralyze.
I have no problem with removal of teleport and summoning. Paralyzation however is not fatal in current vanilla unless you are into middle of monsters without FA.

I would like to see traps having some meaning. Not just some arbitrary random grid somewhere with a trap, so that you would not need to look for them all of time. They should be there to protect things. Mechanical guardians. In other words they should be way rarer and positioned so that you don't just wander in them. Vault entrances, perimeter defenses, alerting monsters. Maybe even thematic traps that tells you something about inhabitants of the dungeon. Place webs in corridors near spiders. Arrow-traps with rangers and orcs. Boulders with giants. If you die to that, then that did what it was there for.
Timo Pietilš is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 4, 2010, 21:26   #12
Timo Pietilš
Prophet
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Climbing up from hole I just dug.
Posts: 4,096
Timo Pietilš is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiburon Silverflame View Post
I think these last couple comments beg this question:

What purpose do we want traps to serve in the game?

Without that as a basis, we're wandering around in the dark.
That is the "meaning" part of the thread. What are they there for. I'd say they should be there for flavor and added danger and for smart person with some experience maybe work as a alert: "there is a trap, so there must also be something why it is there".

Our current traps are meaningless waste of time. Too easy to detect and disarm and too deadly to ignore. Kind of like aggravation, you either aggravate or not, you detect traps and not get hit by them or you don't detect and get hit by them. There is no mid-way.
Timo Pietilš is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 4, 2010, 22:54   #13
Tiburon Silverflame
Swordsman
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 405
Tiburon Silverflame is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Too easy to detect and disarm and too deadly to ignore.
Too easy to detect: true.
Too deadly to ignore: false.

SOME traps *can be* deadly, but NO traps do enough damage to you (directly) to be considered deadly. The two we fear are summoning and teleport; these can immediately put you in a terrible position, facing considerable opposition that can kill you. Traps that paralyze or confuse can also be an issue.

But because there was no uniform concept, we've got a lot of very minor traps as well, that, as you note, are meaningless time-wasters.

So this is why we need to go back all the way to square 1, and start with the question I posed. The answer is the basis for all others:

--what kinds of traps do we want?
--how hard should they be to locate?
--how common should they be?
--how hard should they be to disarm?
--how much damage can they do, or conditions can they inflict?
Tiburon Silverflame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 4, 2010, 23:04   #14
d_m
Angband Devteam member
 
d_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Philadelphia, PA, USA
Age: 39
Posts: 1,516
d_m is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiburon Silverflame View Post
Too easy to detect: true.
Too deadly to ignore: false.
I think what Timo meant was that since some of the traps are too dangerous to ignore (as you point out: summoning and teleportation) you can't afford not to detect traps, because you'll hit the "deadly" ones.
__________________
linux->xterm->screen->pmacs
d_m is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 5, 2010, 00:19   #15
nullfame
Adept
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 165
nullfame is on a distinguished road
I think new trap effects would be interesting and more damage by level.

Maybe remove the trap destruction spell from books and/or make the consumables more rare? That would force people to disarm more. I don't disarm summoning traps. I think twice about teleport and trap doors. If there were more interesting side effects and disarming was more of an issue I think that would make traps more of a challenge.
nullfame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 5, 2010, 00:56   #16
Timo Pietilš
Prophet
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Climbing up from hole I just dug.
Posts: 4,096
Timo Pietilš is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by d_m View Post
I think what Timo meant was that since some of the traps are too dangerous to ignore (as you point out: summoning and teleportation) you can't afford not to detect traps, because you'll hit the "deadly" ones.
Correct. You can ignore the known non-lethal ones, but you can't ignore them all which means you need to detect them.
Timo Pietilš is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 5, 2010, 01:19   #17
Hariolor
Swordsman
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 289
Hariolor is on a distinguished road
What should traps be? IMO traps should be situation-enhancers. Either by creating ingame incentives or "quests" (fix the status effect), or by consuming resources that @ would rather spend elsewhere (HP/MP/consumables/time).

They should be detectable without magic, based on class and skill (I very much like some of the LoS ideas mentioned earlier), and there should always be *some* traps that can only be detected by magic, and some that can only be detected by searching. I think this would challenge all classes more evenly and would force caution while eliminating the "press A to not die" effect.

Direct-damage traps are best left in places where there are also baddies, as are paralysis, blindness, etc. The idea is that these traps are only useful if there's something lurking to finish off the job. I can imagine the later S-types being particularly fond of using traps to soften up their prey (driders, areana (sp?), etc). A direct-damage trap in an area without baddies is basically useless, consuming only turns and/or potions and/or MP necessary to heal. A minor inconvenience but in their current incarnation not really very intimidating.

The other traps should be ones that cause long-term effects that are harder to get rid of by simply consuming a few CCW. The idea would be that accidentally hitting one of these would provide a new immediate goal, much in the way running out of food/torchlight/?recall/etc can cause an @ to give up on what s/he was doing and focus on that for awhile. I find these diversions are fun and add to the experience of the game.

A few ideas for trap effects:

any of Paralysis/Blindness/Darkness/Slowing (combined with summoning...?)

Stoneskin (as the current mixed blessing effect)

Blink (like being stuck wearing a ring of teleport until cured)

Teleport 10 levels up/down

Drain all charges on inventory items

Render one inventory slot (semi)permanently unusable

Erase all mapping/detection of current level

Decoy ESP (grants ESP but also includes many false positives, like hallucination but less completely crazy)

Randomly swap all stats (reversable!)

Change all monsters currently on level to one randomly chosen symbol (maybe excluding monsters in vaults - if possible)
Hariolor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 5, 2010, 03:01   #18
Nomad
Knight
 
Nomad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 958
Nomad is on a distinguished road
I guess one way you could remove detection without making it too lethal is to restrict the locations where traps can be generated - say if random traps only occur in the squares next to room doorways and around floor objects. That way their placement would seem more intelligent, and players would know where to stop and search if they're playing cautiously, but it wouldn't be very practical to do it every single time.

Alternatively, maybe restrict traps so they only occur in rooms, never hallways, and tweak the 's' search function so that it searches all squares in LoS rather than just the adjacent ones. (Maybe with lower odds of spotting traps in more distant squares?) That way the existing searching skill becomes a more fallible, localised form of detection that everyone can use to varying degrees of effectiveness.

Or, hell, just make the existing detection spells fallible. Instead of flawlessly detecting all traps every time, each trap within the field of the spell has a percentage chance of being detected. (Maybe based on your device/spell fail rate?) I would actually support all forms of detection working like this: the spell shows you most of what's around you, but you can't be fully sure that's all that's there. If you're really nervous, cast the spell multiple times for an improved picture.
Nomad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 5, 2010, 09:18   #19
Pete Mack
Prophet
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 5,385
Donated: $40
Pete Mack is on a distinguished road
Traps should be obstructions--you should be able to detect them, but you should have to work to avoid them. In particular, traps that affect architecture (pits and trap doors) should not be removed by disarming. (From here I will call all such traps "pits".)

The idea here is that you can walk onto a square with a detected pit, but you can't do much when standing on that square.
Some examples:
* Walking onto a pit requires a DEX- and DISARM- determined save against falling into the trap.
* If you are standing on a pit and you take damage from a monster, you will fall into the pit.
* If you are standing above a pit, and your DEX is less than some limit (say 18/200) your only guaranteed move is to move off of it. Spell casting will have some DEX-determined failure rate, where failure means you fall into the trap. Disarming an adjacent trap is also problematic.
* Melee is right out, and taking damage from a monster means that you will fall into the pit.

Given this model, there are any number of possible modifiers
* Total burden makes failure rate higher.
* Berserk Strength makes failure rate 100%.
* iron spikes can "jam" a trap so that spell failure rates are lower.
* If you are "in" a pit trap, you can't attack monsters, but they can attack you. You must climb (or ?Phase) out of the pit to get back into the fight. Climbing out of the pit has a finite chance of failing on each turn.

This doesn't change things for most traps, but it means they can slow you down fatally in hallways, and can block you from getting into (or out of!) a vault without *destruction*.
Pete Mack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 5, 2010, 14:20   #20
grumbleguts
Scout
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 27
grumbleguts is on a distinguished road
An interesting ability along with disarm (D) would be (J) jump over. which puts you the square beyond the trap a two square jump which costs 2 moves worth of food and only works next to traps. This way traps can be avoided in corridors without the risk of setting them off but requires a roll-check for success,
grumbleguts 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
traps gfx fyonn Vanilla 4 September 25, 2010 03:09
Setting traps barna10 Variants 1 August 16, 2010 12:16
Unangband - Traps Whelk Variants 3 August 1, 2010 20:46
Give a meaning to object colors fph Vanilla 7 May 3, 2009 18:29
Traps Zero Vanilla 10 January 22, 2008 16:06


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:35.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.