Make all artifacts "special" artifacts

[Magnate]

Originally Posted by Antoine

So would this mean assigning base items to the existing jewelery? Would Narya, for instance, become an art based on a Ring of Flames?

No - base items aren't chosen for "special" artifacts. It currently goes like this:

1. Check for "special" artifact.

2. Choose base item.

3. Check for (a) good (b) great (c) non-special artifact.

All we'd do is fold 3(c) into 1. So for randarts, any base item would be possible for any standart. Ringil could become a ring of flames, and Narya could become a cloak.

[Derakon]

Antoine: No, current "special" artifacts would continue to be generated without base types beyond "ring", "amulet", etc. The same would apply to "ordinary" artifacts too, though.

Basically, instead of generating an item type and then deciding that the quality level of the item should be artifact, we generate an artifact and use its declared base type to describe it.

Regarding Magnate's comments on randarts: currently, randart jewelry/lightsources are always based on standart jewelry/lightsources. That's why there's always 1 randart phial, which is very similar to the standart phial. If we break the special/ordinary artifact delineation, then all artifacts are just artifacts, and they could "cross-pollinate", so to speak -- standarts that are equipment can become jewelry/lightsource randarts, and vice versa. I don't think it'd be valid to say that the randart version of Ringil could be based on a Ring of Flames (since no artifact is based on a specific subtype of jewelry, just on the ring/amulet/lightsource categories), but it would be to say that the randart version of Ringil could be a ring.

[Magnate]

Originally Posted by Derakon

Antoine: No, current "special" artifacts would continue to be generated without base types beyond "ring", "amulet", etc. The same would apply to "ordinary" artifacts too, though.

Basically, instead of generating an item type and then deciding that the quality level of the item should be artifact, we generate an artifact and use its declared base type to describe it.

Regarding Magnate's comments on randarts: currently, randart jewelry/lightsources are always based on standart jewelry/lightsources. That's why there's always 1 randart phial, which is very similar to the standart phial. If we break the special/ordinary artifact delineation, then all artifacts are just artifacts, and they could "cross-pollinate", so to speak -- standarts that are equipment can become jewelry/lightsource randarts, and vice versa. I don't think it'd be valid to say that the randart version of Ringil could be based on a Ring of Flames (since no artifact is based on a specific subtype of jewelry, just on the ring/amulet/lightsource categories), but it would be to say that the randart version of Ringil could be a ring.

Well that depends. The randart generator currently looks through object.txt for a base item, so an immediate implementation would indeed allow specific jewelry items to be chosen as base items. But since it was written, we have now introduced object_base.txt, which is almost certainly a better starting point for a randart generator. When I get to the rewrite, I'll switch to that, which means that the base item chosen would be "ring" rather than "ring of something".

[Derakon]

Ah, my mistake. Thanks for the correction.

I had noticed object_base before but hadn't really investigated it. It looks like a set of templates for different base object types. Very nice for avoiding duplication (e.g. by having to specify that every single bladed weapon can be melted), but how would you propose using it for randarts?

Random thought: if artifacts work as one-off templates applied to base items, then themed artifacts could work by layering templates. Choose a base item. Make a randart template. Apply the template to the item. Now use the resulting output as input (i.e. a new template) to the generator a a few more times. That could give you results like the *thancs (all 2d4 (+4,+6) daggers) or Amrod and Amras (both shortbows with three elemental resistances).

This has more to do with the mechanics of deciding what artifacts look like than it does with deciding when to make them, though.

[Magnate]

Originally Posted by Derakon

I had noticed object_base before but hadn't really investigated it. It looks like a set of templates for different base object types. Very nice for avoiding duplication (e.g. by having to specify that every single bladed weapon can be melted), but how would you propose using it for randarts?

Well, it can't quite be used as-is, but my vague thought is that the less specified about the beginning of a randart, the better. object_base defines tvals but not svals, opening up the possibility of creating artifacts that are not based on any existing svals and have nothing predefined except the flags common to all items of that tval.

It's not immediately clear that that's better than using object.txt though, so it needs some more thought.

Random thought: if artifacts work as one-off templates applied to base items, then themed artifacts could work by layering templates. Choose a base item. Make a randart template. Apply the template to the item. Now use the resulting output as input (i.e. a new template) to the generator a a few more times. That could give you results like the *thancs (all 2d4 (+4,+6) daggers) or Amrod and Amras (both shortbows with three elemental resistances).

This has more to do with the mechanics of deciding what artifacts look like than it does with deciding when to make them, though.

Indeed. My ideas for themed randarts are quite similar, involving one or more templates applied to an empty item. One day the templates will be in an edit file ...