[evilhack] A +5 helm of brilliance without significant effect?

[Janis Papanagnou]

Got a +5 helm of brilliance from a sacrifice in EvilHack but
without any significant effect in spell-casting proficiency?

Without any helm:
St:13 Dx:9 Co:15 In:8 Wi:18 Ch:16

a - healing 1 healing 36% 1%-10%
b - extra healing 3 healing 43% 1%-10%
c - stone to flesh 3 healing 68% 1%-10%
d - detect treasure 4 divination 100% 51%-75%

And with the blessed +5 steel helm of brilliance:
St:13 Dx:9 Co:15 In:13 Wi:23 Ch:16

a - healing 1 healing 35% 1%-10%
b - extra healing 3 healing 35% 1%-10%
c - stone to flesh 3 healing 62% 1%-10%
d - detect treasure 4 divination 100% 51%-75%

Might not be a good choice to use a steel helmet for that.
Or what's the point here with such a divine gift?

Janis

[Keith Simpson]

Janis, were you wearing body armor at the time? And if so, what kind? And what role were you playing? See https://nethackwiki.com/wiki/EvilHack#Other_Changes (2nd bullet point).

[Janis Papanagnou]

On 25.03.2023 15:25, Keith Simpson wrote:
> On Thursday, March 23, 2023 at 1:51:40 PM UTC-4, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
>> Got a +5 helm of brilliance from a sacrifice in EvilHack but
>> without any significant effect in spell-casting proficiency?
>>

>> [...]

>
> Janis, were you wearing body armor at the time? And if so, what kind?

At that time I recall to have inspected what happens if I remove my
body armor; the percentages went down to 0% in _both_ cases, without
and with that helm; there's therefore even less a point to wear the
+5 helm of brilliance for the spell-casting effect. With body armor
there's at least a few percent point gain, but that helm was thus
only marginally useful.

One of my general criticism, from current experiences, is that you
have to invest a lot of time and (identifying) equipment (or must
be overly lucky) to get advantageous items and properties but the
effects even of highly magic items is often just negligible or can
not be used in the many random (often fatal) [even early-game]
situations.

> And what role were you playing?

Sorry, I cannot remember.

Janis

[Keith Simpson]

On Saturday, March 25, 2023 at 11:55:59 AM UTC-4, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
> > And what role were you playing?
> Sorry, I cannot remember.
>
> Janis

Based on what spells you have there, looks as if you were a healer. By experience level 3, you'd be at 0% failure rate for all three of the healing spells listed with a wisdom of 18. And as a primary caster, wearing body armor wouldn't have any negative effect on spellcasting for level 1-3 spells. Looks to me as if you're wearing some other bits of armor that you shouldn't be. Metallic gauntlets perhaps, or a shield of reflection? You'd have the same problem playing vanilla NetHack in this particular situation.

FYI - being gifted a steel helm of brilliance is great - steel doesn't rust, and it's slightly lighter than iron. Plus a helm of brilliance doesn't impart any kind of spellcasting penalty because of its material.

I understand your criticisms, but I disagree with them. It's a variant, you should expect all sorts of things to be altered or different. There's going to be a learning curve. The discovery process is part of the fun factor.

[Janis Papanagnou]

On 26.03.2023 03:06, Keith Simpson wrote:
>
> Based on what spells you have there, looks as if you were a healer.
> By experience level 3, you'd be at 0% failure rate for all three of
> the healing spells listed with a wisdom of 18. And as a primary
> caster, wearing body armor wouldn't have any negative effect on
> spellcasting for level 1-3 spells. Looks to me as if you're wearing
> some other bits of armor that you shouldn't be. Metallic gauntlets
> perhaps, or a shield of reflection? You'd have the same problem
> playing vanilla NetHack in this particular situation.

The point was that the difference with a "+5"(!) on Wis/Int is
negligible, obviously.

>
> FYI - being gifted a steel helm of brilliance is great - steel
> doesn't rust, and it's slightly lighter than iron. Plus a helm of
> brilliance doesn't impart any kind of spellcasting penalty because of
> its material.

It looked like the +5 gain wasn't able to significantly compensate
restrictions of any other item. (And because of that I inferred
that it must have been the steel or a change in implementation
was the reason for that. - But anyway, the point above remains.)

>
> I understand your criticisms, but I disagree with them. It's a
> variant, you should expect all sorts of things to be altered or
> different. There's going to be a learning curve. The discovery
> process is part of the fun factor.

The design changed a lot, fair enough, but I disagree that these
changes are fun [to me], as I experienced them in the past weeks.

If too many differences are there - and I already reported quite
some that cannot really be grasped by in-game hints or understood
by logic or common sense - there's not much fun factor remaining.

Janis