Angband.oook.cz
Angband.oook.cz
AboutVariantsLadderForumCompetitionComicScreenshotsFunniesLinks

Go Back   Angband Forums > Angband > Vanilla

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old June 29, 2015, 13:24   #151
Estie
Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,650
Estie is on a distinguished road
It is possible to use the existing infrastructure for melee damage and "simply" apply its benefits to spell damage in some way. For example, a ring of damage +8 also increases magic missile damage by +8 (yes it would be imbalanced if done exactly this way; ideas first, balance after they are decided).

This would change the price to pay from "a new set of useless items" to "unintuitive mechanics". Whatever it is people imagine makes spellcasters more powerfull is not usually the same that makes swordfighters better.
Estie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 29, 2015, 14:45   #152
Carnivean
Knight
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 526
Carnivean is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Estie View Post
Whatever it is people imagine makes spellcasters more powerfull is not usually the same that makes swordfighters better.
Tropes around mages and increasing magical power usually involve "artifacts" such as crystal balls or amulets or charms, or more usually a staff. All the wizards in the LOTR movies had nice wooden staves, even the tiles in game show blue mages wielding staves.

Angband currently uses staves to store specific spells, which is also a trope, but less common that the staff as source, booster or anchor of the mage's power. I'd prefer to see the current staves turned into a different spell storage device, and mages given staves to hold in the melee slot. This would power their magic in various ways (focus for cast %, power for damage boost, etc) while preventing them from turning into melee guys at various points in the game. This would be Nick's arcane magic realm, where the player is a pure wizard. Other realms could work differently, with Nature being more buff related and melee attack oriented (thus fitting more to the Ranger class).
Carnivean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 29, 2015, 14:51   #153
debo
Veteran
 
debo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,369
debo is on a distinguished road
Y'all really should have played the most recent competition.
__________________
Glaurung, Father of the Dragons says, 'You cannot avoid the ballyhack.'
debo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 29, 2015, 21:00   #154
Tibarius
Swordsman
 
Tibarius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Germany
Age: 50
Posts: 399
Tibarius is an unknown quantity at this point
re Carnivean

Yeah, +1 from me!

Maybe abolish spell books and store spells in a staff? And you can only cast those spells the currently wielded staff holds. Ideas first
Tibarius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 29, 2015, 21:59   #155
Thraalbee
Knight
 
Thraalbee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 550
Thraalbee is on a distinguished road
Things I like for High mage in the current poscheng compo:
1) Any Wizardstaff will reduce mana consumption so this becomes preferred weapon for mage
2) Eat Magic (regain mana from rods/staves) eliminates boring tele+wait and is well balanced against !Mana which is much better especially later in the game
3) Gravity bolt/breath enables a mage to keep many monsters out of melee range
4) Reflection (chance to deflect bolts) protects some monsters as well as player with certain items/artifacts

The key events however were finding book 3 and then book 4. Maybe it would be more fun if more granular and the order of spells received were more randomized?
What if instead the player would get new spells one-by-one through searching a new terrain type, bookshelf (mage), alternatively praying at new terrain type, altar (priest)?
The results from a search/prayer would be either "you find nothing of value/get no reaction" or "you find/receive a new spell."
New spells has to be transcribed into spellbooks carried in the inventory to become usable (spell limits apply as usual).
I am thinking we would still have four (poscheng) flavours of empty spellbooks but would allow some customization so that some spells could be transcribed into any of two or more book flavours whereas others would only fit in one specific flavour.
Shelves/altars could have one or more "uses" like forges in Sil with default 1 for most of them, but a grand altar or super shelf could allow more than one attempt.
The town would have a basic shelf/altar service with the minimum set of spells always available

The advantage is that you need to play with what you have. Today you only use the best spells of each book. Also it makes rising in power more granular.
Thraalbee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 29, 2015, 22:54   #156
Estie
Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,650
Estie is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thraalbeast View Post
3) Gravity bolt/breath enables a mage to keep many monsters out of melee range
This is the second and, as I see it , more profound aspect than giving mages more tools to play with:

The defensive properties, unlike melee damage, do not allow for much variance. I think changing this would be a good idea: noobs who dont understand still buy basic armor with their first money even though the effect is little; why not change it to the state where you DIE in melee unless you have sufficient protection ?

Breath weapons that kill you off screen abound, and thats needed to keep the difficulty up; why not have melee be more dangerous than ranged combat ?

Imagine an orc 1-hitting a low level character in melee unless same character has a certain amount of AC. You are wearing a robe +0 and nothing else, you die; you wear armor giving ~20 AC, you lose 1/2 health.

The gamplay could revolve around warriors trying to get enough armor to survive, and mages avoiding melee with their superior utility. Surely having a ?phase land you near a deadly melee monster isnt as bad as getting breathed at offscreen for instant death ?

I think that allowing defense to matter beyond a simple shopping list of "need to cover for endfight" would be a good idea. Offense is currently the only variable, you can kill M in 20 or 50 turns depending on gear, as long as you have to survive a couple of his actions its fine. So require a certain amount of defense to survive, but more is better. He has melee and ranged attacks. Require a certain amount of AC to survive 1 round of melee, and a certain amount of resistance to survive his ranged spells. Have the required AC/resists in the available loot, but have them compete with the offensive mods that reduce the duration of the fight.
Estie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 29, 2015, 23:13   #157
Derakon
Prophet
 
Derakon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 8,951
Derakon is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Estie View Post
Imagine an orc 1-hitting a low level character in melee unless same character has a certain amount of AC. You are wearing a robe +0 and nothing else, you die; you wear armor giving ~20 AC, you lose 1/2 health.

The gamplay could revolve around warriors trying to get enough armor to survive, and mages avoiding melee with their superior utility. Surely having a ?phase land you near a deadly melee monster isnt as bad as getting breathed at offscreen for instant death ?
How is this not a complete power upgrade for mages? They never get into melee (so needn't dedicate anything much to armor anyway) and monster ranged attacks are nerfed? Contrarily, how is this not a complete nerf for warriors and other characters that must engage in melee? They must dedicate far more of their equipment/consumables to defenses without gaining much of anything in return.

I mean, a hypothetical system which overhauls everything could of course make melee (even more) dangerous and nerf ranged attacks, but we need to be careful when we propose one-off changes to the existing system that we aren't just tilting the balance in favor of certain classes and to the detriment of others.

In any event, monsters capable of one-shotting the player, by any means, must be loudly signposted somehow. In general, though, if we're overhauling everything then I would tend to favor making one-shot deaths far more rare in general, to the extent that you have to be making an effort to get in over your head. Ideally the game should be lost over the course of several turns (and should be visibly lost as such, i.e. the player is taking more damage than they can mitigate) rather than all at once.
Derakon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 30, 2015, 03:00   #158
Estie
Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,650
Estie is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Derakon View Post
How is this not a complete power upgrade for mages? They never get into melee (so needn't dedicate anything much to armor anyway) and monster ranged attacks are nerfed? Contrarily, how is this not a complete nerf for warriors and other characters that must engage in melee? They must dedicate far more of their equipment/consumables to defenses without gaining much of anything in return.

I mean, a hypothetical system which overhauls everything could of course make melee (even more) dangerous and nerf ranged attacks, but we need to be careful when we propose one-off changes to the existing system that we aren't just tilting the balance in favor of certain classes and to the detriment of others.

In any event, monsters capable of one-shotting the player, by any means, must be loudly signposted somehow. In general, though, if we're overhauling everything then I would tend to favor making one-shot deaths far more rare in general, to the extent that you have to be making an effort to get in over your head. Ideally the game should be lost over the course of several turns (and should be visibly lost as such, i.e. the player is taking more damage than they can mitigate) rather than all at once.
What ?
Monsters who can 1-shot you from off screen without warning have been in the game since ever; but if if they can do so in _melee_ range, it needs to be warned against ?

Seriously, reconsider your stance.

Anyway, my point is that it should be possible to protect against melee insta gibb by gettig AC, which makes AC valuable unlike in the current game. _OR_ use phase door and hope (with some reliability) to not land next to monster.

In the long run, mage needs to be able to survive 1 round of melee. Barely. That lays out the amount of AC protection, does it not ?

Edit: typo
Estie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 30, 2015, 03:07   #159
Derakon
Prophet
 
Derakon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 8,951
Derakon is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Estie View Post
What ?
Monsters who can 1-shot you from off srreen without warning have been in the game since ever; but if if they can do so in _melee_ range, it needs to be warned against ?

Seriously, reconsider your stance.
I'm not a fan of one-shot ranged deaths either, note. They're kind of difficult to disentangle from everything else, but they're not a great design concept. Hence why I said that any deaths the player experiences really ought to be the culmination of several turns of things going wrong in obvious ways.

Quote:
Anyway, my point is that it should be possible to protect against melee insta gibb by gettig AC, which makes AC valuable unlike in the current game. _OR_ use phase door and hope (with some reliability) to not land next to monster.
AC is valuable. It's just not obviously valuable. The difference between 100 and 200 AC would be quite noticeable if you spent the time to compare them, but nobody's going to do that, and it's hard to calculate the difference by hand. It's very easy to calculate how valuable, say, fire resistance is -- take the monster's HP, divide by 3: that's the damage without resistance. Divide by 3 again: that's the damage with resistance. Very binary, simple, relatively easy to optimize for. How valuable is increasing your AC by 10? By 50?

We had discussions awhile back about making most armor slots give no AC value (and basically just being items you could attach abilities to), with the goal being of making AC more "chunky" and thus easier to quantify. Still worth considering IMO.

Quote:
In the long run, mage needs to be able to survive 1 round of melee. Barely. That lays out the amount of AC protection, does it not ?
The thing I wanted to see clarified was how this proposed change affected the relative balance of the difference classes. If melee is made more lethal and ranged is made less lethal, then classes that can avoid melee get a significant effective power boost.
Derakon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 30, 2015, 04:20   #160
Estie
Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,650
Estie is on a distinguished road
1_shot: the drolem is going to get you, unless you have poison resist. Getting poison resistance is hard, grind at low depth before descending. You dont want to and prefer to risk it ? Ok. Your choice.

My vision: The orc is gonna get you in melee, unless you have AC. Getting AC is easy for warrior, just buy a leather armor and stuff in the shop; its hard for mage, you can wear heavy armor but you dont want to because its penalizing your offense (in more ways than the current -mana). Again, the choice is yours, face orcs and hope for a bar chain mail to drop or descent with only a leather armor and face trolls who kill you in melee unless you have bar chain mail.

In this game, the only real threat is the 1-shot. While I dont like it on principle, same as you, I dont see how to keep a challenge without this threat hovering over the character.

I propose to include melee combat into the 1-shot range; as for now, its only breath weapons which threaten it. You can protect against 1-shot breath by means of resist; I want to be able to protect against melee 1-shot by means of AC. Furthermore, I want warrior to have AC as a matter of course and be able to enter a room filled with a bunch of physical damage enemies; whereas a mage should be reluctant to do the same and rather rely on mobility to avoid such a scenario.

As for the balance between warrior and mage, I am not worried at all. In ToME2, I found the sorceror easy to the point of ridiculous, "op", but other people didnt; their play style had them favour high hit point classes. I think its fine to just modify and see what happens, and if somehow the majority of people find one way (melee and defense vs ranged + avoid melee) vastly superior, then its time to think about adjustments.
Estie 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
Angband Philosophy I: Player choice Nick Vanilla 48 July 8, 2014 15:14
The magic of the unknown Therem Harth Development 7 May 1, 2013 01:19
Question: Angband magic visual effects? Darksshades Vanilla 7 May 11, 2010 04:35
Poison resistance in Z+Angband (Death magic) nalfeshnee Variants 2 January 29, 2009 20:59
Sangband magic K.I.L.E.R Variants 1 June 10, 2007 12:37


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:00.


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