Inventory thoughts

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Aaron Mandelbaum

unread,
Feb 1, 1995, 8:25:41 PM2/1/95
to
In article <BENH.95F...@linc.cis.upenn.edu> be...@linc.cis.upenn.edu (Ben Harrison) writes:

>My first thought is that the code would be greatly simplified, and
>perhaps the "playability" increased, if the "aux weapon" was
>"replaced" by a "bow" slot.

If I'm not a mage, I generally keep a digging tool in the aux slot. I use it
more. It's *supposed* to be more like an inventory slot -- just the item you
can get to easiest, like the shoulder and belt slots in Omega.

>My second thought is that perhaps if "player speed" was limited to,
>say, "base speed + 4" at any time, then we could take out the STUPID
>requirement that "only one ring of speed can be active". So a player
>could use any combination of things to reach "max speed", such as
>{Ringil, Ring of Speed + 1, Boots of Speed, Haste Self} or {Boots of
>Speed, Ring of Speed + 1, Ring of Speed + 1, Cubragol}, etc.

I fail to see how a speed limit is any less stupid than the 1 ROS limit.
And rings are considerably easier to find than any of the other sources
(except haste).

>Note that my example above proposed that the object in the "bow slot"
>should have the same benefits as, say, the armor in the "shoe" slot.
>That is, wielding Cubragol as the "bow weapon" would increase the
>player speed.

Gah! Wha! I think that would only increase the amount of time spent looking
for specific items... I don't think that's a good idea.

>I have some more suggestions (along the lines of Omega), but these are
>the two most "annoying" ones that need to be discussed first...

>--- Ben ---

--
Aaron Mandelbaum

Ben Harrison

unread,
Feb 1, 1995, 2:00:20 PM2/1/95
to

I have had some thoughts on "inventory" that I thought I would share,
since I do not feel that major changes should be made to Angband
without at least some supportive feedback...

My first thought is that the code would be greatly simplified, and
perhaps the "playability" increased, if the "aux weapon" was

"replaced" by a "bow" slot. That is, when you wield a bow, it
automatically goes into the "bow slot", from which location it allows
you to always first the appropriate ammo without "switching weapons"
and such. I mean, if a mage can hit with a sword and then read a
spell, it seems that perhaps bows should be a little "easier" to use.
As it stands now, the "aux weapon" is really just an "extra inventory
slot", since the "x" key can be "replaced" with "w" + "2" or "w" + "1"
(in 2.7.X) if the primary and secondary weapons have been inscribed
with inscriptions including "@1" and "@2" respectively...

My second thought is that perhaps if "player speed" was limited to,
say, "base speed + 4" at any time, then we could take out the STUPID
requirement that "only one ring of speed can be active". So a player
could use any combination of things to reach "max speed", such as
{Ringil, Ring of Speed + 1, Boots of Speed, Haste Self} or {Boots of
Speed, Ring of Speed + 1, Ring of Speed + 1, Cubragol}, etc.

Note that my example above proposed that the object in the "bow slot"


should have the same benefits as, say, the armor in the "shoe" slot.
That is, wielding Cubragol as the "bow weapon" would increase the
player speed.

I have some more suggestions (along the lines of Omega), but these are

Guy Evans

unread,
Feb 2, 1995, 8:18:12 AM2/2/95
to
In article <BENH.95F...@linc.cis.upenn.edu> be...@linc.cis.upenn.edu (Ben Harrison) writes:
>>>>> "Ben" == Ben Harrison <be...@linc.cis.upenn.edu> writes:
Ben> My second thought is that perhaps if "player speed" was limited
Ben> to, say, "base speed + 4" at any time, then we could take out the
Ben> STUPID requirement that "only one ring of speed can be active".
Ben> So a player could use any combination of things to reach "max
Ben> speed", such as {Ringil, Ring of Speed + 1, Boots of Speed, Haste
Ben> Self} or {Boots of Speed, Ring of Speed + 1, Ring of Speed + 1,
Ben> Cubragol}, etc.

Rings of speed are common; boots of speed are rare (consider how often you
see rings of speed and boots of speed in the black market). Mid-level
characters who (in the present speed system) only had 1 speed item
(probably a bought ring of speed), would now always have at least two
(probably 2 bought rings of speed!). Finishing characters who (in the
present speed system) had 2 speed items (boots of speed and typically ring
of speed) would now have 3 speed items. It would make the game
significantly easier at the later levels. Also, I can't see why limiting
max speed is any less stupid than saying only one ring of speed works.

The ring of tulkas used to act as a ring of speed that worked with a normal
ring of speed. It was taken out soon after it was added since it made the
game to easy.

Ben> Note that my example above proposed that the object in the "bow
Ben> slot" should have the same benefits as, say, the armor in the
Ben> "shoe" slot. That is, wielding Cubragol as the "bow weapon" would
Ben> increase the player speed.

See above. Also note that Cubragol seems to turn up more frequently than
boots of speed. The last combination { Boots of speed, ring of speed +1,
ring of speed +1, cubragol} is particularly stunning. The list of items is
fairly common, under the present system the player has only 2 permament
speed items he can use now he has 4!

Guy


Randy Hutson

unread,
Feb 2, 1995, 10:58:06 AM2/2/95
to
Ben Harrison (be...@linc.cis.upenn.edu) wrote:

>My first thought is that the code would be greatly simplified, and
>perhaps the "playability" increased, if the "aux weapon" was
>"replaced" by a "bow" slot.

I haven't pondered on this much, but I initially like this idea.

>My second thought is that perhaps if "player speed" was limited to,
>say, "base speed + 4" at any time, then we could take out the STUPID
>requirement that "only one ring of speed can be active". So a player
>could use any combination of things to reach "max speed",

No, I don't like this at all. Not unless rings of speed were made even
rarer and boots of speed were made a bit more common (maybe). I agree
that the 1 ROS limit is just an arbitrary way of preventing the player
from becoming too powerful, but I think it's necessary to keep the game
from becoming too easy to win too quickly.

>Note that my example above proposed that the object in the "bow slot"
>should have the same benefits as, say, the armor in the "shoe" slot.
>That is, wielding Cubragol as the "bow weapon" would increase the
>player speed.

I like this even less for the same reason.

The underlying problem here is that speed is currently simply too
powerful. You currently need a speed item to survive very long past
2500 ft. and one or two more to take on Morgoth. The game really
degenerates into a treasure hunt for Boots of Speed towards the end.
And having the speed advantage over most monsters mean that you can
kill them safely using the pillar trick. Quoting from the spoiler
file strategy.guide:

:By far the best way to deal with most of the uniques is the pillar trick.
:Indeed, this is so effective I think it's a bit unbalancing. Fighting Tiamat
:at speed 3 in an open space is difficult. Fighting Tiamat at speed 4 by
:chasing her around a pillar turns out to be pathetic. Perhaps this should
:be reworked.

And using the pillar trick on Tiamat is pathetic. I've killed her once
without using it (just to have an idea of what it was like to really
fight her), but that was with the super-weapon Belthronding (x5) and
arrows of Dragon Slaying.

I recall reading that Topi introduced new speed code into Zangband and
removed the arbitrary 1 ROS restriction. Can someone elaborate further
on this? This sounds like a very good idea to me. You should really be
able to use all of the speed items you can wear; these arbitrary
restrictions are just stopgap measures to deal with the problem of speed
being too powerful.

-----

Randy Hutson - ra...@picard.tamu.edu

Aaron Mandelbaum

unread,
Feb 2, 1995, 9:36:16 PM2/2/95
to
In article <3gqvee$m...@news.tamu.edu> ra...@picard.tamu.edu (Randy Hutson) writes:

>I recall reading that Topi introduced new speed code into Zangband and
>removed the arbitrary 1 ROS restriction. Can someone elaborate further
>on this? This sounds like a very good idea to me. You should really be
>able to use all of the speed items you can wear; these arbitrary
>restrictions are just stopgap measures to deal with the problem of speed
>being too powerful.

I love Topi's new speed, even without a speed item to actually try out that
part... just the fact that carrying 0.1 lb over your weight limit no longer
halves your speed is a big plus... :)

>Randy Hutson - ra...@picard.tamu.edu

--
Aaron Mandelbaum

Bernd Wiebelt

unread,
Feb 3, 1995, 3:09:58 AM2/3/95
to
Ben Harrison (be...@linc.cis.upenn.edu) wrote:

: I have had some thoughts on "inventory" that I thought I would share,


: since I do not feel that major changes should be made to Angband
: without at least some supportive feedback...

[Some things about using the aux-weapon-slot as bow slot deleted]

There are two problems with that:
a) the aux-weapon-slot can be used for the digging-tool, too.
This is very important for low-level characters (and a common
reason for their deaths, hitting Grip or Fang with a
shovel (1d1)...)
b) Missile weapons are *VERY* powerful. This would be a major
change, since all charactes typically using misile-weapon
won't have to spend an extra turn to switch weapons when
the enemy draws near.

Note: I am not against it, this is just for discussion.

Just another thing that springs to my mind:
Would it be possibly to use *fixed* letters for the
inventory. So one can always A)ctivate at least his
equipment with the same letter-sequence.
(e.g. using always "Ag" or something for the light-artifacts)


: My second thought is that perhaps if "player speed" was limited to,


: say, "base speed + 4" at any time, then we could take out the STUPID
: requirement that "only one ring of speed can be active". So a player
: could use any combination of things to reach "max speed", such as
: {Ringil, Ring of Speed + 1, Boots of Speed, Haste Self} or {Boots of
: Speed, Ring of Speed + 1, Ring of Speed + 1, Cubragol}, etc.

: Note that my example above proposed that the object in the "bow slot"
: should have the same benefits as, say, the armor in the "shoe" slot.
: That is, wielding Cubragol as the "bow weapon" would increase the
: player speed.

Limiting speed is a thing that would make the game more
challenging. In fact, I think that the player should only
temporarily be able to match the speed of Morgoth, that is
base+3 if I'm correct. So only base+2 should be allowed by
using equipment, and the extra boost can only be reached
by quaffing a potion of speed or using a rod/staff.
So, everyone can get to max-speed by using two rings
of speed. This eliminates to some extend, the need to find
ringil to win the game, which was always a pain, I guess.

On a side note, it is much fun to see people bashing monsters
with cubragol only for the sake of the speedbonus. I would not
like to remove that.

--
intel inside - | Bernd Wiebelt at Humboldt-University of Berlin
but can it divide? | EMail: wie...@mathematik.hu-berlin.de

James Dunson

unread,
Feb 3, 1995, 3:13:13 PM2/3/95
to
In article <3gqvee$m...@news.tamu.edu>,
Randy Hutson <ra...@picard.tamu.edu> wrote:
...

>I recall reading that Topi introduced new speed code into Zangband and
>removed the arbitrary 1 ROS restriction. Can someone elaborate further
>on this? This sounds like a very good idea to me. ...

I've been playing Zangband revently, and I definately like it.
It's based on a variety of things, including Angband--, so it has
all the "Amber" stuff in it, which I am not jumping up and down about,
but IMHO it dosen't distract too much, so I don't really care.
Basically, the speed "quantum" has been reduced to 1/10 its previous
size; ie, in Zangband, to get the benefit of a traditional ROS(+1),
you need a ROS(+10). This means you might, say at mid-advanced levels,
have a ROS(+4) and a ROS(+8) for a total speed of +12, roughly equivelent
to a traditional speed of +1.2. The other part of this is that monster
speeds are both what would be non-integer in the old system (ie, a monster
might have a speed of +3, say, which would equate roughly to +0.3), and
variable per individual monster - even the members of an "appears in groups"
may be a few points different than each other.
Various other bits now also work much better, such as encumberance,
which can adjust your speed in much smaller increments.
On a related note, it also has the "inscribe 0-9" inventory shortcuts,
which I also find useful. Another neat factor is that if you have a
missile weapon in either your primary or secondary weapon slot, there
is a slightly greater chance that missile ammo generated will be the
right "type" for the weapon; between the two of these, I tend to always
have a missile weapon as secondary, and inscribe "1" on both my primary
weapon and digging tool, so I can type "w1" to switch back and forth.
(I tend to use "0" for ammo, so to sling something to death is simply
*tXt0t0t0...)
** James **
--
James R Dunson
jdu...@vtopus.cs.vt.edu

Phil Yellott

unread,
Feb 3, 1995, 3:44:08 PM2/3/95
to
I think the simplest way to do the quiver/bow thing is to let you
shoot an arrow from INVEN_AUX if you have a bow in INVEN_WIELD.
It should not ask you for what to shoot, just a direction (if not targeted).
This seems to be the simplest to both code and use, IMHO.

Opinions?

Also, I have added (from ADnD or wherever) the rate of fire of the missile
weapons. (2 for slings and bows, 1 for xbows). I have given rangers
(and hobbits, for now) skill bonuses with bows (only bows) that basically
are bonuses to hit based on dex, if class = ranger or race = hobbit.

This lets everyone use the same rate of fire, no favoritism.

Opinions?

I have added bows, slings, and xbows of ammunition, that do not need ammo.
Good point: no ammo needed. Bad point: cannot use special ammo types.
They are about 1/2 as common as bows of damage or accuracy.

Any Input?

Phil Yellott
phily...@delphi.com

Ben Harrison

unread,
Feb 3, 1995, 8:32:24 AM2/3/95
to

Some introductory comments:

A little known fact about ANgband 2.7.X (my fault, I really need to
make a list of all the changes) if that there are some slight
modification to existing commands/etc.

First of all, if you inscribe any object with the inscription "@1" or
"@2" up to "@9", then any time you are asked to select an item for
which that item is a legitimate choice, you can simply type "1" or "2"
etc. So having inscribed my arrows with "@5", I can then fire an
arrow at the current target with "f55" (the second "5" meaning "use
the current target").

Second, the "F" command will not only refill a lantern from a flask,
but it will also "refuel" a torch by using an existing torch. Kind of
like wielding the new torch and throwing the old one away, but without
having to wait until the first torch ran out of fuel.


Above, wie...@pearson.mathematik.hu-berlin.de (Bernd Wiebelt) writes:

>Ben Harrison (be...@linc.cis.upenn.edu) wrote:

>: I have had some thoughts on "inventory" that I thought I would share,
>: since I do not feel that major changes should be made to Angband
>: without at least some supportive feedback...

>[Some things about using the aux-weapon-slot as bow slot deleted]

>There are two problems with that:
>a) the aux-weapon-slot can be used for the digging-tool, too.
> This is very important for low-level characters (and a common
> reason for their deaths, hitting Grip or Fang with a
> shovel (1d1)...)
>b) Missile weapons are *VERY* powerful. This would be a major
> change, since all charactes typically using misile-weapon
> won't have to spend an extra turn to switch weapons when
> the enemy draws near.

>Note: I am not against it, this is just for discussion.

I agree. Missile weapons are very powerful. So are wands of dragon
breath. And orb of draining. And even magic missile spells. But it
does not take a turn to "prepare to cast spells" or whatever. I never
understood why I had to "prepare" my bow before using it. Nor why
bows were even considered a weapon, since they don't really act like
one. In my opinion, bows and missiles should be something that you
have to buy or find at an enchanted level, as opposed to "building"
one by repeated enchant spells. But that mostly applies to missiles.

>Just another thing that springs to my mind:
>Would it be possibly to use *fixed* letters for the
>inventory. So one can always A)ctivate at least his
>equipment with the same letter-sequence.
>(e.g. using always "Ag" or something for the light-artifacts)

See my comments about the "@" invetory tagging system above.

>: My second thought is that perhaps if "player speed" was limited to,
>: say, "base speed + 4" at any time, then we could take out the STUPID
>: requirement that "only one ring of speed can be active". So a player
>: could use any combination of things to reach "max speed", such as
>: {Ringil, Ring of Speed + 1, Boots of Speed, Haste Self} or {Boots of
>: Speed, Ring of Speed + 1, Ring of Speed + 1, Cubragol}, etc.

>: Note that my example above proposed that the object in the "bow slot"
>: should have the same benefits as, say, the armor in the "shoe" slot.
>: That is, wielding Cubragol as the "bow weapon" would increase the
>: player speed.

>Limiting speed is a thing that would make the game more
>challenging. In fact, I think that the player should only
>temporarily be able to match the speed of Morgoth, that is
>base+3 if I'm correct. So only base+2 should be allowed by
>using equipment, and the extra boost can only be reached
>by quaffing a potion of speed or using a rod/staff.
>So, everyone can get to max-speed by using two rings
>of speed. This eliminates to some extend, the need to find
>ringil to win the game, which was always a pain, I guess.

First of all, I never understood why "temporary" bonuses were any
different from "permanent" ones. But that stated, I withdraw my
previous comments and restate them, using "base + 3" instead of
"base + 4". This would greatly reduce the "search" for speed items,
and yet still "reward" them, since having three perma-speed items
would reduce the need for "tempoarary speed bonuses".

>On a side note, it is much fun to see people bashing monsters
>with cubragol only for the sake of the speedbonus. I would not
>like to remove that.

The "hitting monster code" contains at least 20 lines dedicated to
making sure that wielding a bow does not make it easier to damage
monsters, and all kinds of crazy stuff like that.

By the way, has anyone noticed that one of the best weapons to wield
is probably a "Seeker Bolt of Fire (5d5)", for MANY attacks/round?

I would like to consider making "missiles" illegal weapons, on the
theory that the only reason they do the damage they do is because they
have been "thrown". Or add in a "chance of breaking" for the current
weapon. Just imagine... "You hit the urchin. Your Long Sword
'Ringil' shatters!" <-- that is a joke, of course...

--- Ben ---


Martian

unread,
Feb 3, 1995, 8:51:21 PM2/3/95
to
be...@linc.cis.upenn.edu (Ben Harrison) writes:

==My first thought is that the code would be greatly simplified, and
==perhaps the "playability" increased, if the "aux weapon" was
=="replaced" by a "bow" slot. That is, when you wield a bow, it
==automatically goes into the "bow slot", from which location it allows
==you to always first the appropriate ammo without "switching weapons"
==and such. I mean, if a mage can hit with a sword and then read a
==spell, it seems that perhaps bows should be a little "easier" to use.

Sounds good. I'm often in doubt whether I should use my bow and lose a turn,
or bash. And when I use a bow, I every now and then forget to switch back,
and back a dragon on its head with a bow.

==As it stands now, the "aux weapon" is really just an "extra inventory
==slot", since the "x" key can be "replaced" with "w" + "2" or "w" + "1"
==(in 2.7.X) if the primary and secondary weapons have been inscribed
==with inscriptions including "@1" and "@2" respectively...

This is not true for Angband 2.6.2 and before. Aux weapons cannot be stolen
or destroyed by fire/acid, while weapons in the inventory can. Perhaps you
changed this in 2.7.x? Furthermore, I think reducing the amount of keystrokes
is important. It's a lot easier to type 'X' than 'w2' or 'w1' (if you can
remember what you inscribed the weapon to). Specially since one changes weapons
rather often, keystrokes are (in my opinion) important.

==My second thought is that perhaps if "player speed" was limited to,
==say, "base speed + 4" at any time, then we could take out the STUPID
==requirement that "only one ring of speed can be active". So a player
==could use any combination of things to reach "max speed", such as
=={Ringil, Ring of Speed + 1, Boots of Speed, Haste Self} or {Boots of
==Speed, Ring of Speed + 1, Ring of Speed + 1, Cubragol}, etc.

No. Rings of Speed are too common compared with other speed items to justify
this. It might work out if there are some drawbacks, perhaps a ring of speed
could wear out, or have a chance of getting broken by acid/lightning even
when worn?

==Note that my example above proposed that the object in the "bow slot"
==should have the same benefits as, say, the armor in the "shoe" slot.
==That is, wielding Cubragol as the "bow weapon" would increase the
==player speed.

Again a too powerful addition I think. The whole game already deals in getting
enough speed items, I think we should think about removing some of the speed
necessaraties; not more ways of increasing your speed.

Abigail

Daniel J Barkalow

unread,
Feb 3, 1995, 9:26:36 PM2/3/95
to
Not actually related to the letter of the previous article, but to the
title and theme...

How about allowing you to store other things besides weapons in the extra
slot? Obviously some things would be odd (like armor hanging from your
belt) but if you interpret it as the stuff you carry, but have handy, it
makes some sense. The reason is that I more often want to switch to my
acid resistant boots (for example) instead of my high AC boots than one
weapon over another (since there are obviously more non-weapon slots than
weapon slots). Since there is no real advantage to having something in
particular in the extra slot, this would just be a convenience.

I also agree about the fixed slot letters, but add that the important
change is making "A" refer to the inventory letter, rather than the
"activatable" letter.

Another thing is: prohibit store-keepers from buying inscribed items; you
probably don't really want to sell them, and you can remove the
inscription if you decide you need to. I'm sick of selling my ammo,
because I forget I don't want to sell all of the weapons besides what I'm
wielding.

-Daniel
*This .sig left intentionally blank*

Randy Hutson

unread,
Feb 4, 1995, 5:50:44 PM2/4/95
to
In article <BENH.95F...@linc.cis.upenn.edu>,

Ben Harrison <be...@linc.cis.upenn.edu> wrote:

>By the way, has anyone noticed that one of the best weapons to wield
>is probably a "Seeker Bolt of Fire (5d5)", for MANY attacks/round?

The "old" Angband had code which fixed attacks per round to 1 for
missile ammunition. It also decremented the number of arrows after each
attack. 2.71 does neither. I'm unclear if this feature is intentional
or not.

>I would like to consider making "missiles" illegal weapons, on the
>theory that the only reason they do the damage they do is because they
>have been "thrown".

Well I'd definitely rather see them be illegal over keeping the system
in 2.71 as it is. You're right. a 0.2 lb. Seeker Bolt of Fire (5d5) makes
quite a weapon in Angband 2.71! Now if the setup in 2.71 is temporary
(unintentional), then I'd still rather that they be made illegal as
weapons. I only wield arrows to enchant them. Unfortunately, I sometimes
forget to unwield them. The result is dead street urchins and lost
enchanted arrows for me.

Billy Tanksley

unread,
Feb 4, 1995, 6:09:38 PM2/4/95
to
In article <BENH.95F...@linc.cis.upenn.edu> be...@linc.cis.upenn.edu (Ben Harrison) writes:
>Second, the "F" command will not only refill a lantern from a flask,
>but it will also "refuel" a torch by using an existing torch. Kind of
>like wielding the new torch and throwing the old one away, but without
>having to wait until the first torch ran out of fuel.

I really like this. I hate having to throw away torches with usable
light in them that are just-- dangerous.

>I would like to consider making "missiles" illegal weapons, on the
>theory that the only reason they do the damage they do is because they
>have been "thrown". Or add in a "chance of breaking" for the current
>weapon. Just imagine... "You hit the urchin. Your Long Sword
>'Ringil' shatters!" <-- that is a joke, of course...

Not a chance of breaking, that doesn't work (try playing the current
version of Omega). Instead, a chance of having its strength reduced.
Once the strength goes to zero, the item shatters _and does extra damage
to everything near it_. Most arrows have a VERY low base strength, so
they shatter as soon as they hit (just like they do now).

Lemme make the process clear: 1) item hits monster, does its normal
damage. 2) item rolls to see how much damage to take. 4) if item is
destroyed, it applies damage (using whatever multipliers it may have) to
everything in contact with it. Should 'everything in contact' mean just
the wielder (if any) and the target, or should it mean everyting on every
adjecent square?

Of course, there needs to be a simple way to repair weapons, so Ringil
doesn't shatter in your level 50 hands.

The biggest problem with this, as I see it, is that the savefile would
have to be extensively changed to support the max_str and cur_str
fields. We could get around that by simply having the str be a single
field, assumed to be equal to some convenient value (probably an array in
the code) at savefile reloading. That would be a hack, but would work if
you didn't want to touch the savefile...

>--- Ben ---
-Billy

Would it be a good idea to add a rock remover breath attack to Angalacon
the Black? It seems that he had the hottest breath of any dragon, second
only to the fires at Mt. Doom (and that only because of massive magic).
It seems like fun... :)

Bernd Wiebelt

unread,
Feb 7, 1995, 12:37:53 PM2/7/95
to

Ben Harrison (be...@linc.cis.upenn.edu) wrote:
: >b) Missile weapons are *VERY* powerful. This would be a major

: > change, since all charactes typically using misile-weapon
: > won't have to spend an extra turn to switch weapons when
: > the enemy draws near.

: I agree. Missile weapons are very powerful. So are wands of dragon


: breath. And orb of draining. And even magic missile spells. But it
: does not take a turn to "prepare to cast spells" or whatever. I never

That's a point. But it was always such fun for me to find out
I had bashed a harmless monster for several rounds with my bow,
wondering why it would not die...

: First of all, I never understood why "temporary" bonuses were any


: different from "permanent" ones. But that stated, I withdraw my
: previous comments and restate them, using "base + 3" instead of
: "base + 4". This would greatly reduce the "search" for speed items,
: and yet still "reward" them, since having three perma-speed items
: would reduce the need for "tempoarary speed bonuses".

Hmmm. To clarify:
Resistances (the one's the player has) can take three states:
- permanent immunity. This can only be gained for a few threats,
such as fire, cold and so on. And you get immunity only from several
artifacts. Well I lied. Probably "globe of invulnerability" does
the same thing, too.
- permanent resistance. This reduces damage to 33% (mostly, may
vary). Note that two permanent resitances do not add, that is
wearing both, a shield of resist cold and a chain mail of resist cold
does still reduce damage only to 1/3.
- temporary resistance. This does same as permanent resistance,
mostly. Quaffing two potions of resist fire won't protect better,
too.

The nice thing is: permanent and temporarily resistance *do* add.
In fact, they multiply, so wearing a shield of resist fire and
quaffing a potion of resist fire reduces damage to 1/9.

Timo Nousiainen

unread,
Feb 8, 1995, 4:20:06 AM2/8/95
to

>Limiting speed is a thing that would make the game more
>challenging. In fact, I think that the player should only
>temporarily be able to match the speed of Morgoth, that is
>base+3 if I'm correct. So only base+2 should be allowed by
>using equipment, and the extra boost can only be reached
>by quaffing a potion of speed or using a rod/staff.
>So, everyone can get to max-speed by using two rings
>of speed. This eliminates to some extend, the need to find
>ringil to win the game, which was always a pain, I guess.

Actually, I think speed should not affect travel speed as it is now.
Also, I think Morgoth wasn't that fast... Imagine Morgoth fighting
Fingolfin (was it fingolfin?), I personally got the idea that Fin was
too fast for Morgoth and lost because got tired and slipped to the hole
Grond made... Is it said somewhere in tolkien's books that M was that
fast? I think he is fast in Angband only because of the current speed
system. So, maybe we should change speed so that it increases the number
of attacks instead of travelling speed, or at least, its effect on
travel speed is lower, say, speed+1 is no effect, speed+2 and +3 is +1
to move, and +4... is +2 to move. Of course, monsters should be checked
for changes, but this at least would prevent from pillar trick (unless
you are a lot faster than your enemy, which sounds realistic to me) and
in general most hit-and-run tactics that prevent slower mobs from
hitting you.

Timo Nousiainen

Adam Wiggins

unread,
Feb 8, 1995, 7:23:49 PM2/8/95
to
>: >b) Missile weapons are *VERY* powerful. This would be a major
>: > change, since all charactes typically using misile-weapon
>: > won't have to spend an extra turn to switch weapons when
>: > the enemy draws near.
>
>: I agree. Missile weapons are very powerful. So are wands of dragon
>: breath. And orb of draining. And even magic missile spells. But it
>: does not take a turn to "prepare to cast spells" or whatever. I never
>
>That's a point. But it was always such fun for me to find out
>I had bashed a harmless monster for several rounds with my bow,
>wondering why it would not die...

Heh, my favorite is when I take out an entire orc pit with my bow
and then go, "hmmm, that took a bit longer than it seems like it
should have..." :)

>Hmmm. To clarify:
>Resistances (the one's the player has) can take three states:
>- permanent immunity. This can only be gained for a few threats,
> such as fire, cold and so on. And you get immunity only from several

Yep, you can get all the base ones from the Rings of Power, and
immune acid from Thorin. I usually cruise around with nenya and
narya in my inventory at the lower levels, and quickly switch it
with one of my rings whenever I'm fighting something with a real
nasty breath weapon (like Gothmog or the Taresque).

> artifacts. Well I lied. Probably "globe of invulnerability" does
> the same thing, too.

Not exactly. GoI simply blocks any attack of under 9000 points of
damage. I don't find it that useful though; it doesn't last very
long, costs a fair amount to cast, and by the time you have the
spell you probably already have double-resist everything, plus
immune to one or two, plus 600 or so hps.

...Boone

Randy Hutson

unread,
Feb 11, 1995, 9:14:33 AM2/11/95
to
In article <3ha2c6$e...@plootu.Helsinki.FI>,

Timo Nousiainen <tpno...@cc.Helsinki.FI> wrote:
>Also, I think Morgoth wasn't that fast... Imagine Morgoth fighting
>Fingolfin (was it fingolfin?), I personally got the idea that Fin was
>too fast for Morgoth and lost because got tired and slipped to the hole
>Grond made...

(I would have liked to have posted a paragraph from the Silmarillion detailing
Fingolfin's encounter with Morgoth, but that might violate a copyright.
I think it's OK to reproduce small sections for "review", but I'm not sure.)

Your account is accurate. In summary, Morgoth tried many times to hit
Fingolfin, but Fingolfin jumped out of the way. Eventually, Fingolfin
tired and stumbled on the debris caused by Grond, and Morgoth killed him.

>Is it said somewhere in tolkien's books that M was that
>fast?

Not that I recall, but he may well have been very fast - Fingolfin just
may have been faster.

>I think he is fast in Angband only because of the current speed
>system.

I suspect this is the case as well. Speed is very powerful in Angband,
and Morgoth should be powerful.

>So, maybe we should change speed so that it increases the number
>of attacks instead of travelling speed, or at least, its effect on
>travel speed is lower, say, speed+1 is no effect, speed+2 and +3 is +1

Fortunately, Ben is addressing this issue. I'm not certain if his proposal
will eliminate the possibility of using the pillar trick, but I suspect
that it may make using the pillar trick infeasible.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages