Faulty magic objects
Radomir Dopieralski
underground dungeons exposed to all kinds of evil auras and
magic interferences may in result degrade and become
unreliable is very appealing. The fact that there are so
many interesting ways in which magic items may "fail", from
simply doing nothing, through discharging all their charges
in one go, exploding, applying the effect on the user
instead of the monsters, having side effects, to doing a
complete opposite of what was expected, makes the temptation
even greater.
There is however a side effect to this: the game becomes
much more random and less tactical, you can be unfairly
killed by an artifact that you planned to use to save
yourself. Depending on your game, this can hurt it.
I was thinking of a different way of determining whether
a magical object should fail or not, one that is still
exciting and leads to unexpected results, but at the same
time lets you plan a little better. Potions and scrolls
are an excellent example of such a mechanic: unidentified
they are unreliable and dangerous, but once identified,
can be used in the most cunning schemes. But it's somehow
unsatisfying in case of backfiring magic items.
I began to think about various unreliable and moody everyday
objects you have to put up with: the flush handle in your
toilet that detaches if you pull it too strongly, the
operating system that requires regular reinstall, your door
lock that only works when you don't push your key all way
in, your script that deletes all your files if one of their
names starts with a minus character, etc. They don't fail
randomly. They fail in certain situations, but can be used
safely and reliably as long as you discover and remember
their quirks.
So here are some ideas for such situations:
* zapping wand in a specific direction
* using magic item with a magic ring in your hand
* while wearing cursed armor
* when hungry, confused, etc.
* when the target is too close or too far
* in the dark
* at first use
* when used more than once in a row
* when used right after another magic item
* when low on hp, when with full hp
* when low on mana/full mana
* when wielding specific kind of weapon
* when certain kind of item is in backpack
Now, item that has one of those quirks can be marked with
'unreliable' or 'suspicious', but it's up to the player to
discover how to actually use it safely. Obviously this only
makes sense for multi-use items, unless applied to whole
classes of them (e.g. all healing potions turn into poison
when consumed after booze...).
--
Radomir Dopieralski, http://sheep.art.pl
Ray Dillinger
> I began to think about various unreliable and moody everyday
> objects you have to put up with: the flush handle in your
> toilet that detaches if you pull it too strongly, the
> operating system that requires regular reinstall, your door
> lock that only works when you don't push your key all way
> in, your script that deletes all your files if one of their
> names starts with a minus character, etc. They don't fail
> randomly. They fail in certain situations, but can be used
> safely and reliably as long as you discover and remember
> their quirks.
I like this idea. I've been implementing magic items with
individual quirks for effect, but hadn't thought of them in
terms of accumulated wear and damage. I would like for there
to be visual clues - some kind of identifiable physical
damage on the object, or an obvious "field repair" - as a
tipoff that it's prone to possible malfunction or quirk.
Of course this sort of implies that magic items you find (or
most of them anyway) can be damaged during play and acquire
little quirks like this, or that you may sometimes be able
to make "field repairs" to reduce their severity (like Ron
Weasly's taping together his half-broken wand in "Chamber
of Secrets" - Ron was able to use it, though not reliably;
when Lockhart tried to snatch and use it, it backfired on
him.)
On finding a magic carpet with the fringe all burnt off on
the left side, you might discover that it can no longer make
right turns - but it can make 3 lefts in succession, so
it just takes an extra couple turns to go right - and it is
otherwise useful.
Or a fire wand gouged with tooth and claw marks - might work
fine, but doesn't take a charge very well, and loses a charge
or two every night. You go on using it, but you'd rather have
a better one of course.
I've already got a sword whose bonus to hit and damage depends
on your hunger level - the hungrier you are the more dangerous
the sword is. But that isn't a quirk which arises from damage,
that's how the thing was designed and enchanted on purpose.
It's a subtle enchantment. Killing things with it gives you
a little nourishment, but just carrying it around makes you
get hungry fast.
Bear
Antoine
> So here are some ideas for such situations:
> * zapping wand in a specific direction
> * using magic item with a magic ring in your hand
> * while wearing cursed armor
> * when hungry, confused, etc.
> * when the target is too close or too far
> * in the dark
> * at first use
> * when used more than once in a row
> * when used right after another magic item
> * when low on hp, when with full hp
> * when low on mana/full mana
> * when wielding specific kind of weapon
> * when certain kind of item is in backpack
>
> Now, item that has one of those quirks can be marked with
> 'unreliable' or 'suspicious', but it's up to the player to
> discover how to actually use it safely.
That would be a lot of fun :)
But I think it would work better for spells than for magic items.
A.
Billy Bissette
$742e...@news.sonic.net:
You could make it such a thing. For example, it could be the
enchantment on the sword draws energy from you. As the
enchantment weakens, it becomes less efficient and must draw more
energy. Or perhaps the enchantment is actually keeping the
nurishment leeching nature of the sword in check, and thus as it
becomes damaged, the leeching nature of the sword becomes less
controlled and thus more dangerous to the user.
Ebyan "Nolithius" Alvarez-Buylla
"Antoine" <antoine....@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:a9ce33a7-4957-43e6...@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
On that note, you can have the special effects occur when you overextend
yourself by casting a spell that is too powerful for your level, or a spell
that requires more mana than you have; this way, the user explicitly chooses
the risk.
--Ebyan "Nolithius" Alvarez-Buylla
eidr...@hotmail.com
<Nolith...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Antoine" <antoine.from.r...@gmail.com> wrote in message
A thought...
All words of power, magical materials, locations, and so forth that
would go into both spells and magic items will have not just a single
effect but a cluster of effects with different levels of power, with
the highest one being the "primary" effect. Spells and magical
effects have a certain amount of power required to do anything (due to
the non-magical nature of reality, or something similar), so most of
the lesser effects are never noticed, as their power level is below
the manifestation threshold. However, as the wizard (or item) pumps
more arcane power into the effect, both the primary and lesser effects
are magnified, meaning that more and more side-effects will start to
manifest.
Likewise, a location will have certain favored effects and certain
effects that are harder to produce.
For example, perhaps an enchanted emerald would have a primary effect
of Light, with minor effects of Earth and Poison. Under normal
circumstances, when activated it will just produce green light, the
primary effect. However, if the gem were overloaded with energy, it
might also cause earth tremors and perhaps make nearby people (even
the user) fall ill.
If brought into a swamp (which favors Poison, Water, and Darkness
effects), it might produce little or no light, but ooze venom even
with a normal activation. And in a Wild Magic zone, any given
activation might produce any or all of the primary and secondary
effects, or other effects at complete random.
Or, if a Venom wizard or a Geomancer used the emerald as a focus for
his spells, it would give him a boost in power, although not as much
as a Light Mage would get (since that is the gem's primary effect).
Needless to say, such a system would require a lot of background
programming to make all of the materials and locations properly
integrated into the magic system, which might be more trouble than it
was worth.
inuga...@gmail.com
item spell. Don't want your weapons or armor stolen off your body?
Curse it and it'll stick, unable to be taken away by thieves. Running
away? Wand of Digging sure is useful, yet it doesn't get rid of the
problem. Curse it. Now it's a Cursed Wand of Digging, a Wand of
Undigging if you wish to name it according to its change. Zap it and a
wall of dirt will form. Just hope you can uncurse it before you
suffocate in the small confines of the tomb you created. For the more
malicious zapper, zap it down a hallway with foes and let dirt form
between their ranks and let them suffocate.
Radomir Dopieralski
> Running
> away? Wand of Digging sure is useful, yet it doesn't get rid of the
> problem. Curse it. Now it's a Cursed Wand of Digging, a Wand of
> Undigging if you wish to name it according to its change. Zap it and a
> wall of dirt will form. Just hope you can uncurse it before you
> suffocate in the small confines of the tomb you created. For the more
> malicious zapper, zap it down a hallway with foes and let dirt form
> between their ranks and let them suffocate.
Actually there was something like that in Larn, I think it wass called
"wand of mud to stone", and it let you build walls and turn monsters into
statues (that's where Hack and Nethack got their statues from, btw).
Perdurabo
<Nolith...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Antoine" <antoine.from.r...@gmail.com> wrote in message
I had the thought of allowing something like this in Kharne.
Basically, its like the old metamagic feats in DnD 3.x - you can cast
a maximum damage fireball but it costs 150% of the normal cost of your
mana. Or you can cast a double damage fireball but it has a 50% chance
to fizzle. Etc Etc.
The problem I came across is how to construct a suitable interface for
this that doesn't require a heck of a lot of mouse-clicking.
Best,
P.
dominik...@gmail.com
You either loot them from tough (even unique) monsters or simply buy
them, guaranteeing they're in good shape. Same applies to potions. I
was thinking of making potions rare and expensive. OTOH, the PC will
have the possibility to brew potions from certain ingredients like
herbs, minerals, certain monster corpses...
Then there's something that was used in Neverwinter Nights: a "use
magic device" skill. It might influence the way the magical items
work. When low, the chances to cause an undesired effect raise,
especially with more powerful items.
Thirdly and lastly, in some games there's always a chance of failing
to cast a spell which diminishes as the PC gains XP or becomes
otherwise more proficient with using a specific spell. Same might
apply to magical items. Unless you learn to use it from someone/
somewhere (a book?) and use the item a few times, chances of failing
to trigger it might be greater.
Just some loose thoughts, maybe you find them appealing...
Mingos.
David Damerell
>Actually there was something like that in Larn, I think it wass called
>"wand of mud to stone", and it let you build walls and turn monsters into
>statues (that's where Hack and Nethack got their statues from, btw).
I doubt it. Larn is 1986; Andries Brouwer Hack is 1984.
--
David Damerell <dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> flcl?
Today is Second Mania, January.
Ray Dillinger
> OTOH, the PC will
> have the possibility to brew potions from certain ingredients like
> herbs, minerals, certain monster corpses...
I have not yet seen a roguelike game in which this was a good
feature that preserved game balance and made the game more fun.
Maybe you can do better; I'm just saying, I've never seen this
not suck.
Bear
r.sh...@gmail.com
Crawl's Fulsome Distillation does not suck.
Radomir Dopieralski
> Quoting Radomir Dopieralski <ne...@sheep.art.pl>:
>>Actually there was something like that in Larn, I think it wass called
>>"wand of mud to stone", and it let you build walls and turn monsters into
>>statues (that's where Hack and Nethack got their statues from, btw).
> I doubt it. Larn is 1986; Andries Brouwer Hack is 1984.
You are right, my mistake: Hack didn't have statues, they were added
in NetHack (1987).
s
p
o
i
l
e
r
And the same as in Larn, there was a random chance of getting a spellbook
when you break a statue -- coincidence?