Experience, leveling, stats, etc...
Konstantin Stupnik
Russian roguelike forum is currently down, so I'll try to explain/
discuss here idea that I've got recently ...
With my poor english. Sorry in advance for possible mistakes.
I was playing dcss and while trying to find something in docs I
encounetred
paragraph about anti-grinding/munchkin idea behind crawl...
But if you think about it, crawl is VERY munchkinish is it's own way.
Kill stuff in some effecient way, that do (semi)meaningless actions to
pump earned exp into desired skills...
When 'effecient way' and 'desired skills' is the same thing,
than you are lucky, and don't need to care about this...
But IMO that's only the case for basic combinations.
I do understand where this mechanics comes from.
'Train by use' thingy is really hard to balance for non-combat magic
and non-combat skills.
Hmm.. I'm afraid I can't write down whole chain of thoughts that lead
me
to the following statement, but it's not too complex anyway.
Statement:
Experience for killing things is the way to grinding,
and greatly reduces possible playstyles of the game.
The same goes to stats gain via levelup.
By 'different playstyles' I don't mean 'different ways to kill mobs'.
But playstyles that allow you to win by not killing (or getting rid of
them by
some other means) monsters at all or at minimum.
However level of character gives player sense of progress.
What can replace experience + level up?
For example - money, trainers and cetifications!
To become Level 5 Fire Mage, levels of skills of character must
meet some criteria. And probably some kind of exam.
To train your skill you need to follow trainer's instructions.
Hm. It's hard to explain...
For offensive skills and spells you can be asked
to kill/damage enemies of corresponding level.
For healing type of abilities you can be asked
to heal damage received from enemies of corresponding level.
Similar for defensive abilities.
Most difficult is utility abilities that can't be
directly associated with combat and enemies.
Like haste.
For example they can be trained in some dungerous environment.
But since killing in not the only option,
and basically you don't really gain something
from killing every monster you meet,
there are a lot of possibilities for non-violent chars.
Imagine stealth/rogue type of character that is moving
around dungeon and stealing money/items from mobs.
Merchant type character that sells booze to goblins,
bribing guards, hiring mercs and bodyguards.
Gambler style character that plays games of chance
with dungeon monsters and wins their money and items.
Even combat oriented classes do not always
have to solve problems with force if they
gain NOTHING from killing, say, guards of some boss.
Uh.. It's too late. And it doesn't help to write in foreign language
at all...
Once again my thoughts are too vague...
Why I can read and understand english quite well,
but when it comes to writing...
Main thesises:
- no experience at all
- skills level up via traners and taining (mini quests?)
- character level up via some kind of exam/certification
- no stats from level ups, only from items
- (much) more than one way to earn money
Probably this kind of mechanics is more suitable for
a game with overworld/wilderness, like ADOM.
If it's skill not clear what I mean, ask questions, I'll try to answer.
David Ploog
> I was playing dcss and while trying to find something in docs I
> encounetred paragraph about anti-grinding/munchkin idea behind crawl...
Since I wrote most of that section, I should also reply.
> But if you think about it, crawl is VERY munchkinish is it's own way.
> Kill stuff in some effecient way, that do (semi)meaningless actions to
> pump earned exp into desired skills...
Yes.
> When 'effecient way' and 'desired skills' is the same thing,
> than you are lucky, and don't need to care about this...
> But IMO that's only the case for basic combinations.
This is somewhat true, but even so we have been making this part ("victory
dancing" etc.) less painful than it used to be.
> I do understand where this mechanics comes from.
> 'Train by use' thingy is really hard to balance for non-combat magic
> and non-combat skills.
Indeed. We have removed one skill (Divinations spells) which had no
real combat component at all.
> Statement:
> Experience for killing things is the way to grinding,
> and greatly reduces possible playstyles of the game.
I don't think this is the core of the problem. Gaining experience for
killing is a good measure if you are content with staying true to the
"dungeon crawl" cliche. It is true that you cannot achieve some cool
things within this system but it is not the basic problem.
> The same goes to stats gain via levelup.
I also disagree here. In Crawl, you gain 9 stat increases from levelups. I
cannot see how that leads to grinding.
> By 'different playstyles' I don't mean 'different ways to kill mobs'.
But for me (when I wrote that section, and also now), 'different playing
styles' means exactly that. I consider all of the following as interesting
and different styles:
* a melee fighter, using bows occasionally
* a dedicated bow user, with spell support
* a conjurer, i.e. most kills from damage spells
* a summoner, getting kills from temporary allies
* a stabber, relying on stealth and perhaps magic
> But playstyles that allow you to win by not killing (or getting rid of
> them by some other means) monsters at all or at minimum.
Within Crawl, we're happy to restrict to killing. There is one playing
style I'd really like to include in DCSS which falls outside the killing
scheme, and that's thief play. And here it's true that stealing (in
whatever way) does not work well when you get xp only from kills. (And I
hope that we can get thief play into the game with a new god.)
> However level of character gives player sense of progress.
> What can replace experience + level up?
> For example - money, trainers and cetifications!
> To become Level 5 Fire Mage, levels of skills of character must
> meet some criteria. And probably some kind of exam.
> To train your skill you need to follow trainer's instructions.
> ...
You can do all of this, but I don't see why your system would be a priori
better (or worse) than what Crawl currently uses.
> But since killing in not the only option,
> and basically you don't really gain something
> from killing every monster you meet,
> there are a lot of possibilities for non-violent chars.
You assume that everyone wants non-violent characters. We don't! (But
we're happy to allow for some exceptions, as the thief above or pacifist
healers.)
Here is what I think the skills/experience system (in Crawl) achieves:
* Experience is limited. You may want to advance many skills, but you
will have to make choices.
* You can change your career, e.g. depending on what you find.
* Different choices will lead to very different games.
And here is what I consider the most annoying aspects of current Crawl:
1. Tedious resting (regaining mana/health) all the time.
2. Meaningless battles (e.g. travel interrupted by a rat).
3. Victory dancing (what you mentioned).
Of these, I can see solutions for 2 and 3, but I am stuck with 1.
David
Konstantin Stupnik
>> The same goes to stats gain via levelup.
>
> I also disagree here. In Crawl, you gain 9 stat increases from levelups.
> I cannot see how that leads to grinding.
But max hp and max mana depends on level.
It is generally good to be of a higher level to be on a safer side.
You are likely to clean all relatively safe parts of branches and
dungeon before diving deeper. Simply because risk of diving
early do not have any kind of reward.
But statement above wasn't about dcss in particular.
That's about general 'level up and gain stats' scheme.
DCSS was like starting point of a chain of thoughts about
'train by use', experience and levels.
> You can do all of this, but I don't see why your system would be a
> priori better (or worse) than what Crawl currently uses.
I'm trying to think out DIFFERENT mechanics,
that can cover more different play styles,
while keeping wide range of kill styles too.
> You assume that everyone wants non-violent characters. We don't! (But
I assume that SOME people may want non-violent chars.
Several types of them.
> And here is what I consider the most annoying aspects of current Crawl:
> 1. Tedious resting (regaining mana/health) all the time.
> 2. Meaningless battles (e.g. travel interrupted by a rat).
> 3. Victory dancing (what you mentioned).
>
> Of these, I can see solutions for 2 and 3, but I am stuck with 1.
What about increase of hp/mp regen speed during continuous rest?
Like every few turns without taking damage and monsters in sight
increase regen values by some percent.
Ido Yehieli
>
> And here is what I consider the most annoying aspects of current Crawl:
> 1. Tedious resting (regaining mana/health) all the time.
> 2. Meaningless battles (e.g. travel interrupted by a rat).
> 3. Victory dancing (what you mentioned).
>
> Of these, I can see solutions for 2 and 3, but I am stuck with 1.
I'm afraid it will require you to fork it into "David's Dungeon Crawl",
because existing players will be reluctant to accept the best
solution(IMHO):
Remove resting and regenerate hp & mana only from
potions/scrolls/spells/etc.
-Ido.
Krice
wrote:
> That's about general 'level up and gain stats' scheme.
The only way to be sure is to remove experience, but you
probably will also have to let high fantasy go and use
monsters that average adventurer can kill or avoid. The
idea of D&D style experience is simply becoming a godlike
hero who can kill greater dragons with a stick +1.
David Ploog
> David Ploog wrote:
>
>>> The same goes to stats gain via levelup.
>>
>> I also disagree here. In Crawl, you gain 9 stat increases from levelups. I
>> cannot see how that leads to grinding.
> But max hp and max mana depends on level.
> It is generally good to be of a higher level to be on a safer side.
> You are likely to clean all relatively safe parts of branches and
> dungeon before diving deeper. Simply because risk of diving
> early do not have any kind of reward.
This is only a problem if the game is not tight enough: all resources
should be very limited, so that players have to make choices. This
includes items and monsters (source of xp).
>> You assume that everyone wants non-violent characters. We don't! (But
> I assume that SOME people may want non-violent chars.
> Several types of them.
Of course. I replied because you directly referred to Crawl's philosophy
section and my point here is that the experience system is a good idea if
you're willing to stay to dungeon crawls. This is a self-imposed
limitation: it is fun to go beyond that and then you'll obviously want
either something different than xp or else hand out xp for non-killing
actions as well. It may be a good idea to look into some CRPGs (Ultima,
Wizardry etc.) -- these games face exactly the same problem.
>> And here is what I consider the most annoying aspects of current Crawl:
>> 1. Tedious resting (regaining mana/health) all the time.
>> 2. Meaningless battles (e.g. travel interrupted by a rat).
>> 3. Victory dancing (what you mentioned).
>>
>> Of these, I can see solutions for 2 and 3, but I am stuck with 1.
>
> What about increase of hp/mp regen speed during continuous rest?
> Like every few turns without taking damage and monsters in sight
> increase regen values by some percent.
Yes, something like this can be done but it wouldn't change the fact that
players need to (manually) rest after encounters. As it is, I see only two
potential solutions: (1) no innate healing (this was discussed at length
some time ago around here) or (2) make waiting less attractive (e.g.
increase hunger cost considerably).
David
Martin Read
>it is fun to go beyond that and then you'll obviously want either
>something different than xp or else hand out xp for non-killing actions
>as well. It may be a good idea to look into some CRPGs (Ultima,
>Wizardry etc.) -- these games face exactly the same problem.
Morrowind would be the best bet. Most CRPGs still *mostly* provide XP as
a reward for acts of violence.
--
\_\/_/ turbulence is certainty turbulence is friction between you and me
\ / every time we try to impose order we create chaos
\/ -- Killing Joke, "Mathematics of Chaos"
Martin Read
>I'm afraid it will require you to fork it into "David's Dungeon Crawl",
>because existing players will be reluctant to accept the best
>solution(IMHO):
>
>Remove resting and regenerate hp & mana only from
>potions/scrolls/spells/etc.
It would be easier to write a new game from scratch than convert Crawl
to that model.
Pender
wrote:
>
> Main thesises:
> - no experience at all
> - skills level up via traners and taining (mini quests?)
> - character level up via some kind of exam/certification
> - no stats from level ups, only from items
> - (much) more than one way to earn money
>
> Probably this kind of mechanics is more suitable for
> a game with overworld/wilderness, like ADOM.
>
> If it's skill not clear what I mean, ask questions, I'll try to answer.
When I designed Brogue, I decided that the true test of a character's
competence was his ability to explore dungeon levels. If he could find
a way to explore levels without killing monsters -- for example, by
teleporting them away, or keeping them at a distance with
obstructions, or sneaking around them -- he deserved to succeed.
So, in Brogue, nearly all character advancement happens by finding
items; after all, randomly placed items are a reward for exploring a
dungeon level. The victory condition involves finding a particular
item at a certain depth, not killing a particular monster. Strength is
gained only through potions of strength. Characters become more
powerful primarily by finding and using Scrolls of Enchantment, which
are basically skill points that can be invested in weapons, armor,
staffs and rings. Brogue does have an experience point system from
killing monsters, but the progression is so steeply exponential that
experience level is in practice a function of current depth.
I've been happy with this system, but it does require some adjustment
from the players. I've heard a lot of players who wondered about how
many levels they have to gain before their strength goes up, or who
made a point to track down and kill every monster on the level to farm
XP. I've also gotten some complaints about items being underpowered
when they are supposed to be underpowered before the player invests
skill points in them (i.e. before they are enchanted several times).
Because of that sort of philosophical misunderstanding, I am
considering removing the experience system from my game altogether. It
would be a radical step for a roguelike, which is why I haven't done
it yet, but I think it will work. At least, it will work in the sense
that players who "get" the game will understand the change and
appreciate it, and hopefully the change will cause a revelation for at
least a few players who are stuck in the XP-grinding mindset. On the
other hand, players who cannot conceive of a roguelike without XP will
probably spend their skill points unwisely and conclude that the whole
game boils down to "dumb luck" of whether you find "good items" -- but
I'm willing to lose those players.
konijn_
wrote:
> David Ploog <dpl...@mi.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
> >it is fun to go beyond that and then you'll obviously want either
> >something different than xp or else hand out xp for non-killing actions
> >as well. It may be a good idea to look into some CRPGs (Ultima,
> >Wizardry etc.) -- these games face exactly the same problem.
>
> Morrowind would be the best bet. Most CRPGs still *mostly* provide XP as
> a reward for acts of violence.
I remember buying the largest house I could find ( or burglaring in
it, details, details ) and practice my fireball skills like there was
no tomorrow, enjoying the special effects in all their glory. Point is
that I got really good in fireballs ( evocation ? ) without facing any
danger, not sure that was the greatest part of the game.
T.
Darren Grey
wrote:
> Main thesises:
> - no experience at all
> - skills level up via traners and taining (mini quests?)
> - character level up via some kind of exam/certification
> - no stats from level ups, only from items
> - (much) more than one way to earn money
>
> Probably this kind of mechanics is more suitable for
> a game with overworld/wilderness, like ADOM.
Or with guilds you can join, like Omega.
Interesting that you mention ADOM actually, since it does a lot of
what you say. Experience levels in ADOM give you skill advances and
extra HP, but not much more. Character strength is much more based on
item finds and practical training. All weapon types and spells have
an associated skill level that increases with use (and improves
effectivity in those areas), and 'Skills' (which can all be increased
simply through use and training) count for a great deal. Stats are
not increased purely by levelling, but must be trained up, or
increased through eating appropriate corpses or magical herbs and
potions. The game has been beaten by several people without any
kills, with the biggest obstacle being low HP. If you take ADOM's
system and make HP dependant on a Health skill instead of on
experience level then hte xp system would be nigh redundant.
However, there are big problems with making a system that has no
discrete levels and makes everything purely based on training.
There's a lot of examples of this in ADOM itself, as well as in other
games such as the Ultimas, Morrowind, and many online RPGs that use
this mechanic. The grinding becomes much much worse, since players
then start performing repetitive actions instead of playing the game
normally. Or start using very single skill possible against an enemy
before killing it, to make sure they get the most training out of it.
It's very hard to stop this sort of thing, and extremely hard to keep
all the skills and so on balanced. There's a certain elegance to
discrete experience levels, and to making rewards based on further
exploration (which is what the killing is all part of).
Anyway, point is there are ways but everything's flawed in the end.
You can only hope to get a decent enough balance that people can play
and enjoy it naturally. As David Ploog said, some people prefer the
killing - indeed, many enjoy roguelikes for the pure dungeon crawling
fun. I personally think other options are always nice to have, but
they shouldn't necessarily be easy.
--
Darren Grey
Brian Ramsay
> from the players. I've heard a lot of players who wondered about how
> many levels they have to gain before their strength goes up, or who
> made a point to track down and kill every monster on the level to farm
> XP.
> On the other hand, players who cannot conceive of a roguelike without XP will
> probably spend their skill points unwisely and conclude that the whole
> game boils down to "dumb luck" of whether you find "good items" -- but
> I'm willing to lose those players.
Oops. That explains a lot. I am definitely of the "kill every
monster" persuasion; next time I will try just exploring and see what
happens.
Brian
Aaron M.
<c338bfb5-03b1-40b0...@o12g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>,
Pender <pende...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Because of that sort of philosophical misunderstanding, I am
> considering removing the experience system from my game altogether. It
> would be a radical step for a roguelike, which is why I haven't done
> it yet, but I think it will work. At least, it will work in the sense
> that players who "get" the game will understand the change and
> appreciate it, and hopefully the change will cause a revelation for at
> least a few players who are stuck in the XP-grinding mindset. On the
> other hand, players who cannot conceive of a roguelike without XP will
> probably spend their skill points unwisely and conclude that the whole
> game boils down to "dumb luck" of whether you find "good items" -- but
> I'm willing to lose those players.
I'd look forward to seeing an XP-and-level-less roguelike, or
XP-and-level-less RPG in general. It would remove the grind, voluntary
or otherwise, of monster hunting for experience. It would also make
pacifist or stealth-based characters viable since you don't have to
worry about kills for training.
I'm also interested in seeing how an XP-less roguelike works out because
I myself am considering a game without experience. If someone tries out
the idea before I do, I have less playtesting to do. ;)
In article
<671d5a4b-9588-4705...@j8g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,
Krice <pau...@mbnet.fi> wrote:
> The only way to be sure is to remove experience, but you
> probably will also have to let high fantasy go and use
> monsters that average adventurer can kill or avoid.
You have to be careful about balance and difficulty of course.
Adventurers would not be able to rely on farming in shallower dungeon
levels if they face an enemy that's too hard.
Gheerax IV
> On 26 heinä, 11:38, Konstantin Stupnik <konstantin.stup...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> That's about general 'level up and gain stats' scheme.
>
> The only way to be sure is to remove experience, but you probably will
> also have to let high fantasy go and use monsters that average
> adventurer can kill or avoid.
Not necessarily. Using items and/or skills to boost player capabilities
(including health) is an alternative to using levels.
Zelda games have heart containers and Metroid games have energy tanks,
for example -- a get-items mechanic for raising max HP.
Then there are games like Quake that limit you to 100 health aside from
temporary boosts. Then again, such games rely on the player being able to
manually dodge attacks as well as upgrade their damage dealing capability
(the latter by finding better weapons). Adding dodgeable attacks *that
aren't just a random chance of being hit* to a roguelike might be
nontrivial. It *could* be done: add projectile "monsters" that just
travel in a straight line and "die" if they hit anything, dealing damage
if it's the player. They will generally be faster than the player. If the
player is caught in a narrow passage or a crossfire they are likelier to
get hit. Unlike Quake, the result will probably be a more chess-like
play, thinking carefully about where to move so as to avoid being
"checkmated" into having to eat some damage.
Elsewhere in this thread there were comments about two other issues:
1. Resting to recover health/mana. An alternative is health packs or
equivalent being reasonably common. One could also put healing pools or
some similar structures in, which restore the player to full health when
touched. Of course if combat occurred near one it could be abused, so
monsters would have to avoid the health pools (in-game justification
could be that it's toxic to them even though it's beneficial to you) to
force you to engage them without any of the pools being too near at hand.
(Or the game could rely on ambushing an exploring player to damage them
when pools are distant.)
2. Skill-based play also lends itself to grinding; someone mentioned
casting fireball over and over in an empty room. Requiring damaging
attacks be performed on monsters to gain skill points might help a
little, but the problem remains. (Secret of Mana, anyone? Level grind AND
skill grind in each of 8 magical realms.) Power increase through
"practicing" skills is going to be grind-inducing by its nature, but
there are two alternatives:
a. Skill increases are by training in dojos (or whatever you want to
call them) dedicated to the art. The only thing you might "grind" for
them is money, and if monsters don't drop money and there's no selling/
not much money in selling monster-dropped items, it becomes exploration
rather than grind. Further, even if the game eventually lets you max
every skill, before you enter your first area of any given danger level
you'll have had some maximum amount of money from exploring the areas
reachable without passing through areas of that danger level, and thus
some maximum amount of skill points apportioned. And this keeps money
relevant in the late game, which is a problem of its own for many
roguelikes.
b. "Skill" increases are via finding mystical items. Perhaps
accumulating rubies makes fire magic more powerful. As with a. above, and
especially if monsters don't drop the relevant item types, ties skill
increases to exploration and does so even more directly. The two can be
combined, e.g. with ruby count capping fire magic skill but dojos
training it, or simply by having rubies boost fire magic skill and having
rubies not only in the dungeon but occasionally for sale in stores,
allowing money to be parlayed into skill points at times.
Ido Yehieli
>
> I'm also interested in seeing how an XP-less roguelike works out because
> I myself am considering a game without experience. If someone tries out
> the idea before I do, I have less playtesting to do. ;)
Actually if you don't restrict yourself to "major" RLs there are many
XP- and level-less RLs and you can find many of them among the 7DRLs*
(which in general tend to be more experimental).
* you can give one of mine a try: code.google.com/p/cryptrover/ <- Crypt
Rover has only immediatly-usable power ups and no xp or levels.
purplearcanist
> 1. Tedious resting (regaining mana/health) all the time.
> 2. Meaningless battles (e.g. travel interrupted by a rat).
> 3. Victory dancing (what you mentioned).
>
> Of these, I can see solutions for 2 and 3, but I am stuck with 1.
>
> David
As a solution to 1, consider adding an auto-rest function to auto-
explore. ;)
Ido Yehieli
Actually, wouldn't making eating regenerate hp&mana actually be pretty
much the same as this solution?
-Ido.
Gerry Quinn
berlin.de>, dpl...@mi.fu-berlin.de says...
> I don't think this is the core of the problem. Gaining experience for
> killing is a good measure if you are content with staying true to the
> "dungeon crawl" cliche. It is true that you cannot achieve some cool
> things within this system but it is not the basic problem.
I think "dungeon crawl" (I mean the phrase, not the game of that name)
is a broader category than you make out. Exploration-based character
advancement is IMO perfectly compatible with games of this type, and
has the advantage of allowing thief-like play, which surely is a big
plus given the original tropes of the roguelike genre.
I think in fact the biggest problem may be that which Pender alludes to
elsewhere in the thread when he talks about Brogue - many players
expect to be rewarded for killing monsters they could have avoided
(aside from any loot rewards, or the reward of making an area safer).
I got some comments like that about my game Lair of the Demon Ape which
awards character levels in perhaps the most simplistic fashion of all -
you gain a character level when you go downstairs to a new dungeon
level. (This works in Lair because as in the original Rogue, you can't
go back to a previouas level.)
As somebody said, their are quite a few smaller roguelikes which have
character advancement coming from something other than killing. The
important thing is that the different mechanics in a game -
advancement, regeneration, loot, etc. must come together in a coherent
gameplay experience. But there are a lot of workable combinations.
- Gerry Quinn
Ray
> On Sun, 25 Jul 2010, Konstantin Stupnik wrote:
>> 'Train by use' thingy is really hard to balance for non-combat magic
>> and non-combat skills.
> Indeed. We have removed one skill (Divinations spells) which had no
> real combat component at all.
>> Experience for killing things is the way to grinding,
>> and greatly reduces possible playstyles of the game.
> I don't think this is the core of the problem. Gaining experience for
> killing is a good measure if you are content with staying true to the
> "dungeon crawl" cliche. It is true that you cannot achieve some cool
> things within this system but it is not the basic problem.
I'm of the opinion that experience rewards and how to get them should
probably depend on class. It's entirely reasonable to me that a fighter
should get xp for killing things whereas a thief should get xp for
exploring and plundering.
DCSS doesn't really have this option because it has taken a stance that
"character class" isn't a game mechanic beyond selection of initial
equipment. Character differentiation comes about only because of the
nonlinear way earned experience points are allotted between different
skills by use, at different levels of advancement. The skills/experience
system is well designed and well tuned, IMO, but does enforce the
"killing stuff is the only important thing" view of character
advancement.
> Within Crawl, we're happy to restrict to killing. There is one playing
> style I'd really like to include in DCSS which falls outside the killing
> scheme, and that's thief play. And here it's true that stealing (in
> whatever way) does not work well when you get xp only from kills. (And I
> hope that we can get thief play into the game with a new god.)
It is not reasonable, IMO, for thief play to require a "god of thieves."
If you're adding something to the game in order to make character
advancement via thief play possible, then it's a thief character class,
almost by definition. Why not just call it one?
> Here is what I think the skills/experience system (in Crawl) achieves:
> * Experience is limited. You may want to advance many skills, but you
> will have to make choices.
> * You can change your career, e.g. depending on what you find.
> * Different choices will lead to very different games.
Is the "thief god" consistent with these goals and choices?
> And here is what I consider the most annoying aspects of current Crawl:
> 1. Tedious resting (regaining mana/health) all the time.
> 2. Meaningless battles (e.g. travel interrupted by a rat).
> 3. Victory dancing (what you mentioned).
>
> Of these, I can see solutions for 2 and 3, but I am stuck with 1.
You can eliminate tedious resting to regenerate mana/hp by making
mana/hp regenerate via a different mechanic instead; potions, kills
made with a vampiric weapon, eating food, etc... Anything that
doesn't involve standing there resting. It will require rebalancing,
but it's do-able.
Bear
Martin Read
>It is not reasonable, IMO, for thief play to require a "god of thieves."
>If you're adding something to the game in order to make character
>advancement via thief play possible, then it's a thief character class,
>almost by definition. Why not just call it one?
Because race, religion, and skills are what define your character's role
in Crawl. All other roles in the game are defined this way, so having one
role that's defined by your class rather than your race, religion, and
skills would be far more jarring than having a "god of thieves". A game
where your character class is magic isn't Crawl.
David Damerell
>Ido Yehieli <ido.y...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>Remove resting and regenerate hp & mana only from
>>potions/scrolls/spells/etc.
>It would be easier to write a new game from scratch than convert Crawl
>to that model.
Um. Given deep dwarves, I think it's fair to say Crawl could amble in that
direction in baby steps.
--
David Damerell <dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> Kill the tomato!
Today is Second Mania, July.
Tomorrow will be Second Aponoia, July.
Ray
> Ray <be...@sonic.net> wrote:
>>If you're adding something to the game in order to make character
>>advancement via thief play possible, then it's a thief character class,
>>almost by definition. Why not just call it one?
> Because race, religion, and skills are what define your character's role
> in Crawl. All other roles in the game are defined this way, so having one
> role that's defined by your class rather than your race, religion, and
> skills would be far more jarring than having a "god of thieves". A game
> where your character class is magic isn't Crawl.
That... was sorta my point. Isn't this god inconsistent with the way
all the extant gods in the game work? I mean, no *other* gods strongly
favor play that would otherwise be a complete fail in the game. No
*other* god has followers of only one professional calling. No *other*
god needs to "fix" the experience system to allow their followers to
advance. So, I'm looking at this one, and thinking it sure looks like
a means to put a thief character class in the game without actually
admitting that that is what has been done.
Consider the game mechanics. Player makes a choice at or near the
beginning of the game, check. Different rules of advancement and
experience apply after that point, check. The different rules strongly
favor a particular fantasy character archetype, check. I say it doesn't
matter if you call it a "god" or not. If we judge it by its game
mechanics, what you're looking at here is a character class.
Bear
Robert Uhl
>
> I'm of the opinion that experience rewards and how to get them should
> probably depend on class. It's entirely reasonable to me that a
> fighter should get xp for killing things whereas a thief should get xp
> for exploring and plundering.
One option is that whenever the character gets a critical success when
using a skill he also gets some chance of increasing that skill. Thus a
fighter who spends his time fighting gets better at fighting while a
thief who spends his time casting spells...gets better at casting
spells.
--
Robert A. Uhl
David Ploog
> Martin Read wrote:
>> Ray <be...@sonic.net> wrote:
>>> If you're adding something to the game in order to make character
>>> advancement via thief play possible, then it's a thief character class,
>>> almost by definition. Why not just call it one?
>
>> Because race, religion, and skills are what define your character's role
>> in Crawl. All other roles in the game are defined this way, so having one
>> role that's defined by your class rather than your race, religion, and
>> skills would be far more jarring than having a "god of thieves". A game
>> where your character class is magic isn't Crawl.
>
> That... was sorta my point. Isn't this god inconsistent with the way
> all the extant gods in the game work?
I don't think so. Gods add to characters in a way which can be completely
skew to standard game mechanics. Examples are Elyvilon (pacification
mechanic and (volountary) playing style) and Nemelex (hoover & decks
playing style).
> I mean, no *other* gods strongly favor play that would otherwise be a
> complete fail in the game.
You may phrase it like that, but my point of view is different: gods allow
to bend the game rules in interesting ways (ideally flavour and gameplay).
Strictly speaking, your statement does not make sense, because that "play"
is currently not possible. Less strictly speaking, what about a game where
you only use Evocations and cards? Formally possible without a god, but
obviously only worth of undertaking with Nemelex Xobeh.
> No *other* god has followers of only one professional calling. No
> *other* god needs to "fix" the experience system to allow their
> followers to advance. So, I'm looking at this one, and thinking it sure
> looks like a means to put a thief character class in the game without
> actually admitting that that is what has been done.
You're fighting windmills. Elyvilon is a god who provides a way to get
experience without killing (admittedly, pacification is similar to killing
since a monster will disappear, but these are far from the same). The
Berserker background is defined by starting with Trog. The thief god will
just combine these properties.
> Consider the game mechanics. Player makes a choice at or near the
> beginning of the game, check. Different rules of advancement and
> experience apply after that point, check. The different rules strongly
> favor a particular fantasy character archetype, check. I say it doesn't
> matter if you call it a "god" or not. If we judge it by its game
> mechanics, what you're looking at here is a character class.
You can define "character class" in any way you want -- it is not what
DCSS does. In fact, recently we have replaced the term "class" by
"background".
I believe in the thief god because it (is a misnomer and) will allow all
stealth builds (i.e. not just "thieves") to benefit from it. This is
something not present right now (the question "which god should my
stealthy character?" gets asked all the time) and it can be done in a way
that is much subtler than just boosting stealth etc.
Ultimately, this is a question about traditions (meanings of "role",
"class", "god") and of taste. The thief god may or may not come, and may
or may not work out, but after having (re)designed a few gods I feel
competent enough to state the basic idea (xp (or piety) for spotting
monsters instead of killing them, piety (or xp) for exploration or picking
up items) has potential.
David