[Crawl] newbie questions
Rick Frankum
This week I downloaded 4.0 b26. I've been playing roguelikes
for a number of years, mainly Angband variants but also ADOM
and Nethack. I can't get the hang of some stuff in Crawl.
Is there an 'extended drop' command? I've been collecting
armor & weapons until I detect curse on them, and want to drop
a bunch of them at once.
How does skill advancement work? I've seen advice on 'turning
off' the skill, this means changing the text color to dark grey,
right? Why do turned-off skills advance? And what do the numbers
on the skills screen mean?
I don't particularly like using magic-users (I'm much more a melee
style player), but I haven't gotten very far with fighters at all.
Am I doing something wrong? I've gotten a seventh-level character
once, but I keep finding some orc or other meany with a halberd that
clobbers me, even when I have a nifty ego weapon. And of course
that means the bones levels get nasty...
Is there any reward to killing uniques? Seems like most of the time
they have really crummy equipment. I wish they would drop food
or a guaranteed good item, or something.
Is there a 'destroy item' command? Can you sell things to shops? Is
there any actual use for those identified bad potions and scrolls, or
should I just remember where they are so I don't keep picking them up
again and again?
Thanks for the help,
--Rick
Darshan Shaligram
> Is there an 'extended drop' command?
No, unfortunately.
> How does skill advancement work?
When you have free experience, anything you do that practises a skill
pumps some of that experience into the skill. If you've turned off the
skill, the amount of free experience that goes into the skill is much
less (and that skill advances much more slowly, of course).
> And what do the numbers on the skills screen mean?
The numbers are the skill levels, and the numbers in parentheses are a
measure of how much work you have to do to move on to the next skill
level. A skill of 3(0), for instance, is close to improving to 4(9).
> I don't particularly like using magic-users (I'm much more a melee
> style player), but I haven't gotten very far with fighters at all.
IME, magic users are far easier to play than fighters in Crawl. Crawl's
magic system is brilliant, so I'd actually advise trying spellcasters
(specifically conjurers) before fighters.
> Am I doing something wrong? I've gotten a seventh-level character
> once, but I keep finding some orc or other meany with a halberd that
> clobbers me, even when I have a nifty ego weapon.
You may want to train Throwing as well, when playing fighters...
> Is there any reward to killing uniques?
Satisfaction. I feel glee that verges on the savage when I bump off
Sigmund, or Ijyb. Late game uniques are rather less interesting,
although I have less than fond memories of Xtahua and Boris.
> Seems like most of the time they have really crummy equipment.
And sometimes they have good equipment, such as Sigmund wearing a robe
of fire resistance (met him with a fire elementalist, of course), or
Ijyb with a wand of lightning. I think I like them better with crummy
equipment.
> Is there a 'destroy item' command? Can you sell things to shops?
No and no.
> Is there any actual use for those identified bad potions and scrolls,
> or should I just remember where they are so I don't keep picking them
> up again and again?
If you know the Evaporate spell, you can use bad potions to create nasty
clouds around monsters that you don't like the look of.
--
Darshan Shaligram dars...@aztec.soft.net
us...@domain.invalid
Thanks for the answers!
Darshan Shaligram wrote:
> Rick Frankum <fra...@slimy.com> writes:
>>And what do the numbers on the skills screen mean?
>
> The numbers are the skill levels, and the numbers in parentheses are a
> measure of how much work you have to do to move on to the next skill
> level. A skill of 3(0), for instance, is close to improving to 4(9).
So the skill levels go up but the measures go down? How unintuitive.
I guess the skills 'train' at different times, like dodging getting
checked when you dodge a blow and spellcasting getting checked when
you cast something. How does the game decide whether to add points
to the Fighting skill or the (for example) Maces sub-skill? And how
does the XP->work measure calculation get done?
> IME, magic users are far easier to play than fighters in Crawl. Crawl's
> magic system is brilliant, so I'd actually advise trying spellcasters
> (specifically conjurers) before fighters.
What's so brilliant about the magic system? I've seen a few people
praise it, but it doesn't seem much better than *band (lots of spells
in one book) or ADOM (cast spells to level them up).
I might give it a try - I've gotten a little farther with fighting
mages (Crusaders and Death Knights). But as I say, I like fighting
better than magic, so perhaps if the game is balanced pro-mage then
it's not the game for me.
> You may want to train Throwing as well, when playing fighters...
I generally do throw stuff, though I don't see how I can meaningfully
'train' any skill since I die so quickly. I generally turn off most
skills except two or three (fighting, dodging, and throwing I generally
keep on). Is it beneficial to turn off all skills but one? I've
found that I lose skills that way.
>>Is there any actual use for those identified bad potions and scrolls,
>>or should I just remember where they are so I don't keep picking them
>>up again and again?
>
> If you know the Evaporate spell, you can use bad potions to create nasty
> clouds around monsters that you don't like the look of.
Can you use Throwing to use bad potions to your advantage, like you can
in *band or Nethack?
I just recently found the Temple. Can you sacrifice items at altars?
I've tried 'p'raying but can't understand the use of it. And does the
game require you to convert to a god, or is an atheist win as difficult
as a non-athiest win?
--Rick
Martin Read
<us...@domain.invalid> wrote:
>What's so brilliant about the magic system? I've seen a few people
>praise it, but it doesn't seem much better than *band (lots of spells
>in one book) or ADOM (cast spells to level them up).
Right. It's like this.
Each spell depends on one or more specific magic skills (e.g.
Conjuration, Fire, etc.), and on Spellcasting and Intelligence.
Casting spells practices the applicable skills. So, casting fire spells
makes you better at fire magic, casting conjurations makes you better at
conjurations, and any spell trains your Spellcasting skill.
Also, *most* spells are not purely based on an elemental skill, but on an
elemental skill plus conjuration or enchantment or transmutation.
For instance, casting Throw Flame (Fire/Conjuration) also trains your
ability to cast Throw Frost (Ice/Conjuration), Stone Arrow (Earth/
Conjuration), Magic Dart (Conjuration), Fire Storm (Fire/Conjuration),
Venom Bolt (Poison/Conjuration), etc, because all of these spells are
Conjurations.
>I just recently found the Temple. Can you sacrifice items at altars?
>I've tried 'p'raying but can't understand the use of it. And does the
>game require you to convert to a god, or is an atheist win as difficult
>as a non-athiest win?
You can win the game as an atheist. It's probably easier if you aren't
an atheist, though. The gods give you some rather nifty powers and
other gifts. (In particular: spellcasters should probably *always* adopt
the worship of Sif Muna or Vehumet.)
'p'raying means that you have your god's attention; things you do while
praying are done "in your god's name", sort of. To sacrifice, you must
be praying at an altar (except corpses, which can be sacrificed
anywhere) and use the 'D'issect command while the item you wish to
sacrifice is on the altar.
m.
--
\_\/_/| Martin Read - my opinions are my own. share them if you wish.
\ / | eine answeringmachine fuer letzte fragen als selbstschussanlage
\/ | stuhl. letztendlich letztmalig eine hecke brennender buesche
------+ -- Einstuerzende Neubauten, "Sie"
Lauri Vallo
> Darshan Shaligram wrote:
> So the skill levels go up but the measures go down? How unintuitive.
> I guess the skills 'train' at different times, like dodging getting
> checked when you dodge a blow and spellcasting getting checked when
> you cast something. How does the game decide whether to add points
> to the Fighting skill or the (for example) Maces sub-skill? And how
> does the XP->work measure calculation get done?
Usually you get about half of the points to your fighting skill. Often
people counter this by turning off their weapon skill to up fighting.
All of the races learn each skill at a different rate so that affects
too. It's the usual: humans are normal at everything, elves suck in
fighting.
There's a table of all those on my site.
> > IME, magic users are far easier to play than fighters in Crawl. Crawl's
> > magic system is brilliant, so I'd actually advise trying spellcasters
> > (specifically conjurers) before fighters.
I disagree. Many of my mages have met their end in the mines. Low hit
points combined with dodging make it nasty.
> What's so brilliant about the magic system? I've seen a few people
> praise it, but it doesn't seem much better than *band (lots of spells
> in one book) or ADOM (cast spells to level them up).
>
> I might give it a try - I've gotten a little farther with fighting
> mages (Crusaders and Death Knights). But as I say, I like fighting
> better than magic, so perhaps if the game is balanced pro-mage then
> it's not the game for me.
You should try fighters, gladiators and berserkers that start wearing
some armour and with some armour skill. Fighter/mages are hard to get
started unless you're a demigod or demonspawn with high stats.
> > You may want to train Throwing as well, when playing fighters...
>
> I generally do throw stuff, though I don't see how I can meaningfully
> 'train' any skill since I die so quickly. I generally turn off most
> skills except two or three (fighting, dodging, and throwing I generally
> keep on). Is it beneficial to turn off all skills but one? I've
> found that I lose skills that way.
I on the other hand wouldn't train throwing, unless I have to pick up
something for jellies. It's important to concentrate on few skills.
I don't think you lose skills by doing that, unless you hit the cap
for the exp pool. But that's 20000 :)
> > If you know the Evaporate spell, you can use bad potions to create nasty
> > clouds around monsters that you don't like the look of.
>
> Can you use Throwing to use bad potions to your advantage, like you can
> in *band or Nethack?
Nope.
> I just recently found the Temple. Can you sacrifice items at altars?
> I've tried 'p'raying but can't understand the use of it. And does the
> game require you to convert to a god, or is an atheist win as difficult
> as a non-athiest win?
Yeah you can sacrifice items, but first you must decide which god you
want to worship. After deciding (there should be short descriptions,
check http://koti.mbnet.fi/lava/crawl/crawl-gods-chart.html for every
detail) you can just drop the stuff on the altar and pray.
An atheist win would be more difficult.
It's slightly annoying in the beginning having to pray before fighting
with some gods, but later on the prayer will last longer and the good
will outweight the bad. Demigods are a special case in that they can't
worsip any other god than themselves.
> --Rick
Lauri Vallo
Mark Mackey
>to the Fighting skill or the (for example) Maces sub-skill?
It checks both (there's only a certain chance that a skill is trained
when it's used: it's not guaranteed).
> And how
>does the XP->work measure calculation get done?
Complicated. In general, the higher your level in a skill, the more xp
you'll need to train it.
>What's so brilliant about the magic system? I've seen a few people
>praise it, but it doesn't seem much better than *band (lots of spells
>in one book) or ADOM (cast spells to level them up).
There is a large range of spells, which actually do *different* things
(rather than Bolt of Fire, Strong Bolt of Fire, Bolt of Really Nifty
Fire, Bolt of Stronger Fire Than The Strong Bolt of Fire etc). Spells
such as Sublimation of Blood (converts a slain enemy's flesh into mana
for you to use) or Death Channel (when you kill an enemy in melee it is
automatically raised as an undead servant for you) give a flavour. In
many of the *bands the spells are a bit samey, and by the late game you
have so much mana you can macro a key to 'fire bolt nearest baddie' and
just lean on it until all nearby enemies are dead. In Crawl even a
high-level mage has a very limited amount of mana available and has to
be prepared to run if surrounded. On the flip side some of the
high-level spells can have awe-inspiring effects (there are very few
creatures which will survive a Fire Storm hit).
The interaction of the spell system with the skill system puts a nice
twist on magic specialisation: you can either focus in on one type of
magic and get *very* good at it, or you can spread your skills around a
bit and have more options open.
>I might give it a try - I've gotten a little farther with fighting
>mages (Crusaders and Death Knights). But as I say, I like fighting
>better than magic, so perhaps if the game is balanced pro-mage then
>it's not the game for me.
Crtawl is less forgiving in the early game than many other roguelikes.
Fighter-types aren't really that hard, but the strategy for playing them
is a little more cautious. If you routinely wander around the dungeon at
half-hp with no means of escape then you will die young. Rest up when
you can, and if you meet a nasty who is taking off more hp than you like
*run away* (or, better, teleport away. Scrolls of teleport are dead
common).
>I generally do throw stuff, though I don't see how I can meaningfully
>'train' any skill since I die so quickly. I generally turn off most
>skills except two or three (fighting, dodging, and throwing I generally
>keep on). Is it beneficial to turn off all skills but one? I've
>found that I lose skills that way.
The skill that a fighter needs above all else is his weapon skill.
Choose a weapon and stick with it unless you have a *very* good reason
not to. Fighting, Dodging and Armor are all also useful. In general,
leave all or most of your skills turned on: the one you'll spend xp on
are the ones you use, after all.
You can train a specific skill, however. If you kill a more-dangerous
monster and have xp left in your pool, you can make sure that the next
skill you use is one you want to advance. For example, if you flatten an
imp, are left with 10xp in your pool and want to train Throwing, spend a
couple of turns tossing daggers at a wall until you've used all 10xp.
It'll all have gone into Throwing.
>
>Can you use Throwing to use bad potions to your advantage, like you can
>in *band or Nethack?
No. Quick rationale: potions only have effect if swallowed, so pouring
them over a hobgoblin will just piss him off :).
>I just recently found the Temple. Can you sacrifice items at altars?
You can, but only some gods like this.
>I've tried 'p'raying but can't understand the use of it.
In Nethack, praying to a god is asking the god for help. In Crawl, it's
the other way round: you pray to a god when you want to give the god
something. For example, some gods (like Vehumet and Makhleb) like
dedicated kills, so any creature that you kill while praying is an
offering to that god and boosts your piety. Others like corpse
sacrifices, which involves 'D'issecting the corpse while praying. Others
like objects, which (as in Nethack) are sacrificed by dropping them on
an alter and praying.
Once you've pleased your god enough, it may grant you abilities or
items. What it won't do, in general, is save you if you 'p'ray to it.
>And does the
>game require you to convert to a god, or is an atheist win as difficult
>as a non-athiest win?
Atheist wins are certainly possible (and in fact Demigods can't worship
another god). Life is usually easier with a god on your side, but you do
have to spend some effort keeping a god happy. Seriously pissing off
your god can kill you in very short order.
--
Mark Mackey
The Association for the Advancement of Dungeon Crawling
Hints, tips and spoilers
http://www.swallowtail.org/crawl/
Tina Hall
[sacrificing]
> 'p'raying means that you have your god's attention; things you
> do while praying are done "in your god's name", sort of. To
> sacrifice, you must be praying at an altar (except corpses,
> which can be sacrificed anywhere) and use the 'D'issect
> command while the item you wish to sacrifice is on the altar.
Now I'm confused. Don't you mean while the corpse is on the
altar? If I pile up a bunch of items on an altar, then pray,
they're gone, and I thought the god takes them. If I have to pray
first, then drop some junk, then dissect, I'm not sure it'd even
have an effect (dissect an orcish leather armor, 80 stones,...?).
Tina (Faithfully using the gods as waste-bin.)
Tina Hall
[gaining skills]
> Usually you get about half of the points to your fighting
> skill.
I don't believe that. My Human Fighter had almost three times his
fighting value in weapon skills - axes and maces&flails added
together - and hadn't turned off either. Considering that the
axes were almost twice the fighting alone, at a point where
they'd gain points even slower, it'd have make even less sense if
fighting really got 50% (Fighting was 14, Axes 24, M&F 16).
> > > IME, magic users are far easier to play than fighters in
> > > Crawl. Crawl's magic system is brilliant, so I'd actually
> > > advise trying spellcasters (specifically conjurers) before
> > > fighters.
>
> I disagree. Many of my mages have met their end in the mines.
> Low hit points combined with dodging make it nasty.
I disagree with that. If you need dodging and Hp, you seem to be
closing up and fighting instead of casting spells. That's the
problem.
> You should try fighters, gladiators and berserkers that start
> wearing some armour and with some armour skill. Fighter/mages
> are hard to get started unless you're a demigod or demonspawn
> with high stats.
Even then, they don't start with enough Mana to take down
monsters from afar without a lot of lucky hits.
> I on the other hand wouldn't train throwing, unless I have to
> pick up something for jellies.
I wouldn't train it even then. I think it's a waste in whatever
roles start with the skill, and turn it off straight away.
> It's slightly annoying in the beginning having to pray before
> fighting with some gods, but later on the prayer will last
> longer and the good will outweight the bad.
That you have to wait longer to be able to butcher your next meal
doesn't seem all that nice to me.
Tina
Lauri Vallo
>> Usually you get about half of the points to your fighting
>> skill.
>
>I don't believe that. My Human Fighter had almost three times his
>fighting value in weapon skills - axes and maces&flails added
>together - and hadn't turned off either. Considering that the
>axes were almost twice the fighting alone, at a point where
>they'd gain points even slower, it'd have make even less sense if
>fighting really got 50% (Fighting was 14, Axes 24, M&F 16).
I didn't think enough when I said that. What I meant to say is that
it's half of what you gain in the weapon skill. But yeah, maybe a
little lower than that too.
>> I on the other hand wouldn't train throwing, unless I have to
>> pick up something for jellies.
>
>I wouldn't train it even then. I think it's a waste in whatever
>roles start with the skill, and turn it off straight away.
Yepyep. The thing is that when you meet a jelly it's tricky getting
the exp somewhere else at that point.
Tina Hall
> Tina Hall wrote:
> >> Usually you get about half of the points to your fighting
> >> skill.
> >
> >I don't believe that. My Human Fighter had [...]
>> (Fighting was 14, Axes 24, M&F 16).
>
> I didn't think enough when I said that. What I meant to say is
> that it's half of what you gain in the weapon skill. But yeah,
> maybe a little lower than that too.
Ah, right. 'Half' fits my vague memory of the order of gaining
those skills (and considering it needs more points the higher the
skill is).
[throwing for jellies]
> >I wouldn't train it even then. I think it's a waste in
> >whatever roles start with the skill, and turn it off straight
> >away.
>
> Yepyep. The thing is that when you meet a jelly it's tricky
> getting the exp somewhere else at that point.
It'd not make much sense training for jellies alone. By the time
you meet them, you might have some nifty wand to take care of
them, or just leave the buggers behind... I prefer to use my Exp
for something I need more often, or just want to be able to do (I
rather like lots of Evokations, and it's even been useful on
occasion).
Tina
Rick Frankum
Lauri Vallo wrote:
>>>IME, magic users are far easier to play than fighters in Crawl.
> I disagree. Many of my mages have met their end in the mines. Low hit
> points combined with dodging make it nasty.
I just got a character there and was slaughtered. I guess a
battlemage strategy is not the best idea.
> You should try fighters, gladiators and berserkers that start wearing
> some armour and with some armour skill. Fighter/mages are hard to get
> started unless you're a demigod or demonspawn with high stats.
My latest try is a gladiator who found an artifact plate mail
on L2. :) No resistances or powers, but it does add to my
accuracy, and hey, it's plate mail. :)
>>>You may want to train Throwing as well, when playing fighters...
> I on the other hand wouldn't train throwing, unless I have to pick up
> something for jellies.
My idea was training it up enough to use a poison blowgun, but I
have yet to find a non-cursed blowgun. I figured throwing poisoned
darts at monsters and then running away would soften them up for
eventual combat.
> Yeah you can sacrifice items, but first you must decide which god you
> want to worship. After deciding (there should be short descriptions,
> check http://koti.mbnet.fi/lava/crawl/crawl-gods-chart.html for every
> detail) you can just drop the stuff on the altar and pray.
So I've started a couple of religious characters after discovering
the ^ command, and I have yet to find a god that might work well.
I don't see any short descriptions available for the various
deities until you decide on one, maybe I'll have to find a
spoiler site (but not one with all the details. ;)
> Lauri Vallo
--Rick
Rick Frankum
>>I disagree. Many of my mages have met their end in the mines.
>>Low hit points combined with dodging make it nasty.
>
> I disagree with that. If you need dodging and Hp, you seem to be
> closing up and fighting instead of casting spells. That's the
> problem.
The mage I was using (a Conjuror?) didn't have any spells for
evasion. Perhaps I went into the Mines too early? Do you
generally go in as soon as you find it, or is diving a couple
more levels in the main dungeon preferable to gain XP before
you tackle it?
I'm totally not used to the lack of evasion in this game.
Teleport scrolls I can get the hang of (though I don't like
the delay), but... I can't think of any other roguelike
where going up or down stairs takes an action. I hate it
when monsters get free attacks!
>>I on the other hand wouldn't train throwing, unless I have to
>>pick up something for jellies.
>
> I wouldn't train it even then. I think it's a waste in whatever
> roles start with the skill, and turn it off straight away.
Do you never play thieves? Or if so, how do you manage without it?
Are wands in Crawl mostly simple offensive beams? The ones I've
seen have proved to be (fire, lightning, slowing, and I think a
polymorph), so I guess instead of throwing stuff I can start
using wands. I tend to play packrat and not use magic until
I need to, though, which means my Nethack characters all end
the game with tons of unused wands.
[praying and sacrifice]
> That you have to wait longer to be able to butcher your next meal
> doesn't seem all that nice to me.
Yeah, I just tried that. I'm really disappointed with not being
able to eat in this game! It seems like every corpse I find
makes me either sick or poisoned. I can survive it, but staying
hungry is really annoying. Maybe sacrificing is a better option
than trying to eat a corpse and failing to sate my hunger.
> Tina
--Rick
Rick Frankum
>>What's so brilliant about the magic system? I've seen a few people
>>praise it, but it doesn't seem much better than *band (lots of spells
>>in one book) or ADOM (cast spells to level them up).
>
> There is a large range of spells, which actually do *different* things
> (rather than Bolt of Fire, Strong Bolt of Fire, Bolt of Really Nifty
> Fire, Bolt of Stronger Fire Than The Strong Bolt of Fire etc).
I'll take your word for it. All I've seen so far has been the low-level
spells of "Bolt of ice/iron/magic/fire/poison". And the second spell
in the books I've seen has been "strong bolt of the above".
I've never played mages because I've found it's generally too much
trouble to keep track of which spells I have and what they all
do. It doesn't seem like Crawl is any different, and then there's
the added trouble of finding a place to stash spellbooks.
Don't get me wrong -- I'm sure there are lots of good things about
Crawl's magic system, but I don't think it's different enough
to attract me. Which leads me to another newbie question.
Is there a class/race combination in Crawl that works like a
Chaos Mutant? One where you get powers/abilities without having
to choose from a list?
> The interaction of the spell system with the skill system puts a nice
> twist on magic specialisation: you can either focus in on one type of
> magic and get *very* good at it, or you can spread your skills around a
> bit and have more options open.
This is certainly a twist, but is it any better than a system where
you choose to be a specialist by class?
And for that matter, since the skill system is so powerful in Crawl,
is there really a need for all the varying specialist wizards? If
you're a Conjuror can't you become just as good as a Fire Elementalist
simply by casting lots of fire-based spells?
> Crtawl is less forgiving in the early game than many other roguelikes.
> Fighter-types aren't really that hard, but the strategy for playing them
> is a little more cautious. If you routinely wander around the dungeon at
> half-hp with no means of escape then you will die young. Rest up when
> you can, and if you meet a nasty who is taking off more hp than you like
> *run away* (or, better, teleport away. Scrolls of teleport are dead
> common).
This I've learned by experience. Still, there aren't enough
escape options as I'm used to, and I'm generally forced into guessing
potions in the midst of battle. Hoping for a Speed potion is
kind of rough. Ah well, for the game to have individual character
isn't a fault, even when it's disagreeable to me.
Is there any point to running from critters? I haven't played with
the fast races yet (centaur and spriggan?), but I haven't seen dungeon
features yet where I could reliably use the pillar trick. Usually
in *band I run to get out of the open (which works in Crawl too),
but there's also times when I find doors to hide behind or lock
(esp in Nethack and ADoM), which doesn't seem to be a viable option
in this game.
--Rick
Lauri Vallo
> Is there a class/race combination in Crawl that works like a
> Chaos Mutant? One where you get powers/abilities without having
> to choose from a list?
If what you mean is that the abilities are random, Demonspawn gain
lots of mutations as they level up and Xom is known to mutate his
followers sometimes.
> And for that matter, since the skill system is so powerful in Crawl,
> is there really a need for all the varying specialist wizards? If
> you're a Conjuror can't you become just as good as a Fire Elementalist
> simply by casting lots of fire-based spells?
Yep, that's what can happen. You just start out with a different
spellbook and slightly different skills. Whatever suits your tastes.
Wouldn't it be boring if you always started out without skills? :)
> Is there any point to running from critters? I haven't played with
> the fast races yet (centaur and spriggan?), but I haven't seen dungeon
> features yet where I could reliably use the pillar trick. Usually
> in *band I run to get out of the open (which works in Crawl too),
> but there's also times when I find doors to hide behind or lock
> (esp in Nethack and ADoM), which doesn't seem to be a viable option
> in this game.
There is. The pillar tactic is very useful. I find it's almost always
required at some point. There might not be single pillars around, but
anything you can run around will do. When you are all healed up after
running you can try your chances with the oppponent again. Do this as
many times as you can until you get hungry, then you might want to
look for stairs up and eat there if you can get some bats to distract
the chaser. Teleporting or zapping a wand are the next things to try.
If nothing else works, heal up for the last time and eat with the
something whacking at you.
>I just recently found the Temple.
When you pray at the altars you should see the descriptions.
Mackey has them all here: http://www.swallowtail.org/crawl/gods.shtml
[throwing]
>Do you never play thieves? Or if so, how do you manage without it?
Thieves are more of a challenge class IMO if you stick with the
traps&doors and throwing skills. You'll have to train fighting and
weapon skills too as a thief, but these just distract from them.
Stealth and stabbing are more useful, but I'm not convinced yet that
you can win with them as the highest skills.
>It seems like every corpse I find makes me either sick or poisoned.
The meat that makes you sick isn't always foul. You had bad luck and
the bacteria got there first.
Good luck! :)
Tina Hall
> Mark Mackey wrote:
> > There is a large range of spells, which actually do
> > *different* things (rather than Bolt of Fire, Strong Bolt of
> > Fire, Bolt of Really Nifty Fire, Bolt of Stronger Fire Than
> > The Strong Bolt of Fire etc).
>
> I'll take your word for it. All I've seen so far has been the
> low-level spells of "Bolt of ice/iron/magic/fire/poison". And
> the second spell in the books I've seen has been "strong bolt
> of the above".
See. It really is a much stronger spell. :)
Unlike (what I've been told about...) Angband, a weak spell won't
get all that much stronger when you grow tougher, there's a limit
to how much damage a spell can do. You'll need to 'update' sooner
or later.
> I've never played mages because I've found it's generally too
> much trouble to keep track of which spells I have and what
> they all do.
Is that all that different from knowing what your weapon/armor
does?
Telling your spells apart isn't all that difficult, you only
start with one, then add those you want. The description in the
book tells you roughly what it does.
There's a limit to how many spells you can learn, anyway. Not
only from the game (21 plus Selective Amnesia?), but depending on
your spell points. You get one point per XL and two points per
spellcasting skill. You have to have at least the level of the
spell in XL to learn it (which is only noticable early on).
Thus, as a Fire Elementalist for example, you start with Flame
Tongue, then add Throw Flame when you reach XL:2, then you have
to wait for your spell points to add up (and gain the XL) to
learn Sticky Flame. You have to decide whether you want to learn
Conjure Flame some time in between, because that early you don't
have the spell points to learn both - that and Sticky Flame.
Later on, either when you worship Sif Muna or when you find the
spell of Selective Amnesia, you can deliberately forget spells,
like that rather useless Flame Tongue, to free spell points.
All in all, you'll not get too many spells to worry about, in any
case. :) You'll have a few selected but pointed spells that you
all use. Much different than Nethack, where you can just learn
every spell you find and only use a dozen out of 40.
> It doesn't seem like Crawl is any different, and then there's
> the added trouble of finding a place to stash spellbooks.
The Temple. No monsters will generate there (... I'm told and can
confirm it for most of the game; haven't seen it after getting
the Orb and wonder whether that might be different then).
> Is there a class/race combination in Crawl that works like a
> Chaos Mutant? One where you get powers/abilities without
> having to choose from a list?
I don't quite know what you mean by Chaos Mutant. A Demonspawn
Wanderer might be what you're looking for, random skills at the
start for the Wanderer, and random (supposedly) useful mutations
(occasionally, at level gain) for the Demonspawn.
If you then want to get really random, you can worship Xom, who
will do all sorts of things with/for you, not always pleasant or
helpful, and certainly not predictable. :)
> > The interaction of the spell system with the skill system
> > puts a nice twist on magic specialisation: you can either
> > focus in on one type of magic and get *very* good at it, or
> > you can spread your skills around a bit and have more
> > options open.
>
> This is certainly a twist, but is it any better than a system
> where you choose to be a specialist by class?
Yes. You're free to do as you please. In Nethack you're
restricted by your max skills, here you can come up with some
nifty combination that wouldn't be possible otherwise. Like
Darshan's recent Summoner, who went and barbequed half the
dungeon, or my own less recent Summoner, who went and hid behind
self-made walls.
> And for that matter, since the skill system is so powerful in
> Crawl, is there really a need for all the varying specialist
> wizards? If you're a Conjuror can't you become just as good
> as a Fire Elementalist simply by casting lots of fire-based
> spells?
That's what usually happens with Conjurers anyway. I think I've
complained about that a while ago, though I want more different
starting spells, not less specialized roles.
Of course if you start with the other book of conjurations,
you'll have difficulties with fire magic, as that has ice magic.
<g>
With lots of conjuration skill, you can cast all sorts of
conjuration spells rather well, though, no matter what else any
given spell needs (see Darshan's recent Summoner, again, who
started casting Crystal Spear with no Earth skill).
> Still, there aren't enough escape options as I'm used to, and
> I'm generally forced into guessing potions in the midst of
> battle.
Quaff potions when you find them, the next of that kind you find
is identified (healing potions seem to be rather common). Read
scrolls when you go down to the next level (incase one is
forgetfulness), if you feel unstable, go back up to the level you
already know the layout of.
> Is there any point to running from critters?
Yes, especially if there's only one, do the pillar dance.
> I haven't played with the fast races yet (centaur and
> spriggan?),
Afaik, spriggans are even faster than centaurs. (Someone posted
the relative speeds here not too long ago.)
> but I haven't seen dungeon features yet where I could reliably
> use the pillar trick.
They're everywhere. You don't need a one-square-sized spot, just
a bit of free standing wall, for example. Anything that you can
run around in circles.
> Usually in *band I run to get out of the open (which works in
> Crawl too), but there's also times when I find doors to hide
> behind or lock (esp in Nethack and ADoM), which doesn't seem to
> be a viable option in this game.
A fun game is hiding behind a door and close it, the kobold opens
it, you close it <repeat>, until you're healed up or the kobold
loses interest (and comes around the next corner <g>). Only works
when there's only a lone monster, of course, otherwise one will
open the door and the next steps in.
What works too is taking them one by one up the stairs. Like you
go down to DL:2 and find a horde of ugly gnolls. They usually
have different distances to you, so one will close up first, take
it upstairs and fight it there as best you can, then heal up and
get the next one. You can of course chose a different stair and
just try to evade the gnolls entirely, until you're tougher.
Alternately, you go down a stair that's in a dead end, and find a
horde surrounding you. Go back upstairs; there'll be only one or
two monsters in sight, the others are behind the walls, you can
get rid of your present company and ignore the rest (just go down
again and continue on), or seek them out one by one.
Tina
Tina Hall
> My idea was training it up enough to use a poison blowgun, but
> I have yet to find a non-cursed blowgun. I figured throwing
> poisoned darts at monsters and then running away would soften
> them up for eventual combat.
Assassins start with one, I think.
> So I've started a couple of religious characters after
> discovering the ^ command, and I have yet to find a god that
> might work well. I don't see any short descriptions available
> for the various deities until you decide on one, maybe I'll
> have to find a spoiler site (but not one with all the details.
> ;)
You can pray at an altar to read the description. You can then
answer 'no' on whether you want to join. You get two prompts,
even, roughly: 'Want to join?', 'Really want to join?', so don't
worry about buying the cat in the sack. :)
Alternately, there's some listing on Mark Mackey's page of what
the various gods want from and do for you. Not sure whether
you've looked there yet: http://www.swallowtail.org/crawl/
Tina
Tina Hall
> Tina Hall wrote:
> > I disagree with that. If you need dodging and Hp, you seem
> > to be closing up and fighting instead of casting spells.
> > That's the problem.
>
> The mage I was using (a Conjuror?) didn't have any spells for
> evasion. Perhaps I went into the Mines too early?
Maybe. A spellcaster shouldn't do any fighting unless he knows he
wins, and that only if he wants to train fighting to get more Hp.
I've seen a post here from a player who turned fighting off,
even.
In other words: You do the real killing with spells. Anything
else is just playing around (like against plants, or monsters
that you've out-grown and can afford to close up to).
If you're weak, start with Mephitic Cloud; let those nasty orc
priests and orc wizards stumble around in confusion, then kill
them at your leisure. (Of course mephitic cloud also works fine
against ogre and hounds, for example, in the normal dungeon, down
to a certain depth.)
If you see anything tougher than that and plain orcs, and even
these give you problems, leave (optionally scream first). Orc
warriors aren't that bad (just confuse them, too), but an ugly
scare for a weak character. If they don't bother you, you should
worry about ork knights (light cyan) and then about orc warlords
(dark red), and orc sorcerors (dark gray). They aren't all that
common, but can be a nasty surprise to find around the next
corner when you thought you can beat the Mines without much
trouble.
> Do you generally go in as soon as you find it, or is diving a
> couple more levels in the main dungeon preferable to gain XP
> before you tackle it?
It depends more on my equipment and abilities. If I go in, I
don't wander around blindly, I stay around the stairs. Either
pick some out from the stairs before they close up, then go back
up to regenerate mana, <repeat> or take a few up (provided I've
got the AC/EV to survive that well) and then move away and try to
line them up for a bolt spell.
> I'm totally not used to the lack of evasion in this game.
You've got an entire stat for evasion. ;)
If you can't run, try to keep the monsters away (see above,
Mephitic Cloud is very nice for early characters).
> Teleport scrolls I can get the hang of (though I don't like
> the delay), but... I can't think of any other roguelike
> where going up or down stairs takes an action. I hate it
> when monsters get free attacks!
Um, you get that in Nethack too, on occasion.
[throwing and jellies]
> > I wouldn't train it even then. I think it's a waste in
> > whatever roles start with the skill, and turn it off
> > straight away.
>
> Do you never play thieves? Or if so, how do you manage
> without it?
I've tried a few thieves, an accidental SETh (typo at starting
the game) that I wasn't particularly happy about playing anyway,
and 4 DGTh that didn't even have any throwing skill. None got
anywhere interesting.
Thieves aren't really for me.
> Are wands in Crawl mostly simple offensive beams? The ones
> I've seen have proved to be (fire, lightning, slowing, and I
> think a polymorph), so I guess instead of throwing stuff I can
> start using wands.
There are other wands that are good for you, too: healing,
hasting, teleport, invisibility, digging, that I know of.
Not all offensive wands have a beam, many just affect the first
monster they hit.
> I tend to play packrat and not use magic until I need to,
> though, which means my Nethack characters all end the game with
> tons of unused wands.
Crawl is a bit different there, you can use the wands to good
effect, even if only to train evocations. Good for all that misc
stuff lying around. Mainly I want it incase I find some cards. No
idea whether it also helps the effect a wand has on a monster.
There are some with increasing effect, like flame, fire and
fireball. Read the description of what it does.
> [praying and sacrifice]
> > That you have to wait longer to be able to butcher your next
> > meal doesn't seem all that nice to me.
>
> Yeah, I just tried that. I'm really disappointed with not
> being able to eat in this game! It seems like every corpse I
> find makes me either sick or poisoned.
Watch out what poisons you and remember them - not every monster
does that (don't eat kobolds, for a start). If you're a naga,
you're poison resistant (they also see invisible and can spit
poison, but they're slow, and can't wear boots of course).
The green coloured snakes are save to eat, as are green and brown
frogs, bats, and the plain (brown) rats.
Sickness isn't that bad, just don't run around sick with only
half your hitpoints, better wait until you're better, if there
aren't any monsters in sight.
> I can survive it, but staying hungry is really annoying. Maybe
> sacrificing is a better option than trying to eat a corpse and
> failing to sate my hunger.
You need to eat chunks of meat; there isn't enough proper food to
live off alone. Your best friend is an amulet of the gourmand,
with which, for some reason (bug?) you have to wait until your
chunks are rotten before you eat them, but then you won't get
sick (provided you wear the amulet). Even without such an amulet,
at least eat those monsters that don't poison you (unless you
have poison resistance, then eat them, too). They don't sicken
you every time.
Tina
Mark Mackey
Rick Frankum <fra...@slimy.com> wrote:
>
>And for that matter, since the skill system is so powerful in Crawl,
>is there really a need for all the varying specialist wizards? If
>you're a Conjuror can't you become just as good as a Fire Elementalist
>simply by casting lots of fire-based spells?
The 'classes' in Crawl affect your starting skill levels, your starting
stats and your starting equipment. That's all: there is no other
difference.
>This I've learned by experience. Still, there aren't enough
>escape options as I'm used to, and I'm generally forced into guessing
>potions in the midst of battle. Hoping for a Speed potion is
>kind of rough. Ah well, for the game to have individual character
>isn't a fault, even when it's disagreeable to me.
It's a deliberate design decision to make escape much less possible
than in Angband. Once you're past a certain point in Angband, you can
only die if (a) you're not cautious enough, or (b) a monster kills you
from full hp in one round. Crawl ends up with far more
shitshitSHITwhatamigonnado!!! moments as a result :).
>Is there any point to running from critters? I haven't played with
>the fast races yet (centaur and spriggan?), but I haven't seen dungeon
>features yet where I could reliably use the pillar trick.
Running away/the pillar trick works fine in Crawl. However, it's use
differently: you won't actually get away from the monster, but you can
keep it from hitting you for long enough to get some hp back.
This is a good reason not to wander around Encumbered.
Rick Frankum
>>The mage I was using (a Conjuror?) didn't have any spells for
>>evasion. Perhaps I went into the Mines too early?
>
> If you're weak, start with Mephitic Cloud;
Aha! Okay, I'll keep that in mind if I ever play a spellcaster
again. Is it a low-enough level spell that a fighter-mage can
learn it before they hit the Mines?
> them at your leisure. (Of course mephitic cloud also works fine
> against ogre and hounds, for example, in the normal dungeon, down
> to a certain depth.)
Am I reading that right? Does it stop working against ogres and
hounds after a certain depth? That doesn't make sense at all.
>>Do you generally go in as soon as you find it, or is diving a
>>couple more levels in the main dungeon preferable to gain XP
>>before you tackle it?
>
> It depends more on my equipment and abilities.
Okay... so what do you recommend having before you try it, then?
Just having enough spell points/skills?
>>Teleport scrolls I can get the hang of (though I don't like
>>the delay), but... I can't think of any other roguelike
>>where going up or down stairs takes an action. I hate it
>>when monsters get free attacks!
>
> Um, you get that in Nethack too, on occasion.
Just checked, you're right. Though it seems to be just arriving
on a level that allows a monster a free move, not leaving one.
Maybe I'm confusing the timing in Crawl too, but I tried to
escape the Mines and got hit two or three times for my troubles.
> Thieves aren't really for me.
Gotcha. I hope you realize that most of my posts here are
on the theme of "mages aren't really for me." I'm willing
to give it a few more tries, though, to see if there's a fun
aspect to the spellcasting system that has escaped me thus far.
But don't take it personally if I continue to dislike magic-use. ;)
> There are other wands that are good for you, too: healing,
> hasting, teleport, invisibility, digging, that I know of.
Most of those I don't consider good... It's been quite a while
since I've played Nethack, though, so I'm in a "ditch the
heal monster wand ASAP" mindset.
This reminds me of another minor annoyance - I haven't found
a whole lot of ID scrolls in this latest game. Is there a
low-level scroll that does a mass ID? Or any kind of pseudo-ID?
> Not all offensive wands have a beam, many just affect the first
> monster they hit.
Thinking of game balance, I think this is a bias toward mages, since
fighters seem to have no multi-monster attacks in the game. In
other roguelikes I use wands to kill weak but annoying monsters
in the back ranks, this doesn't seem to be an available option in
Crawl.
>>Yeah, I just tried that. I'm really disappointed with not
>>being able to eat in this game! It seems like every corpse I
>>find makes me either sick or poisoned.
Let me clarify this. Poison I can figure out, sickness is
a bother but survivable; what pisses me off is that I stay
hungry. Corpses seem to be hard enough to find without
making them ineffectual.
So here's an idea for a feature that would make me happier:
(that's as good a reason as any for a feature suggestion, right?)
Give a way to stop sickness. I've figured that healing potions
cure sickness, but how about making regular fruit do it? Then
you'd have a reason to pick up those bundles of grapes and
strawberries.
Two caveats to this, as a newbie: 1)I eat fruit as soon as I
see it because I don't think it's nutritious enough to keep
an inventory space, and 2) I don't think there's another way
to decrease that sickness timeout. If I'm wrong on either
of these points, I wouldn't mind a spoiler.
> Watch out what poisons you and remember them - not every monster
> does that (don't eat kobolds, for a start). If you're a naga,
> you're poison resistant (they also see invisible and can spit
> poison, but they're slow, and can't wear boots of course).
Is not wearing boots a problem? I haven't seen any ego armor
yet that isn't a randart. Is there some equivalent to boots
of speed that is a must-have item in Crawl?
> Tina
--Rick
Rick Frankum
> Rick Frankum <fra...@slimy.com> wrote:
>
>>My idea was training it up enough to use a poison blowgun, but
>>I have yet to find a non-cursed blowgun. I figured throwing
>>poisoned darts at monsters and then running away would soften
>>them up for eventual combat.
>
> Assassins start with one, I think.
You're probably right, I know I started a sneakish-type character
that had one. But that doesn't help my current blowgun-challenged
platemail-wearing Gladiator. ;)
> You can pray at an altar to read the description.
Heh. Is the fact that I need to read this in a newsgroup
a good enough indication that it's not documented well?
Or maybe it's because I'm not creative enough.
Two suggestions, then, and again I may have missed
this in the game:
a) Give a leading message when you enter. "Welcome to the
Ecumenical Temple! Press 'p' while standing on an altar if
you're curious about piety."
b) When you e'x'amine the altar, give a prompt for a longer
description.
[Is it even worth making suggestions on the newsgroup? Should
I just go to Sourceforge and add a requested feature instead?]
> Alternately, there's some listing on Mark Mackey's page of what
> the various gods want from and do for you. Not sure whether
> you've looked there yet: http://www.swallowtail.org/crawl/
I have, but I'd prefer to learn in-game and without spoilers.
I've read a few of the 'hint' pages and have seen more than
enough spoilers on the newsgroup, but I wanted to try something
different in this game and not read all the spoilers first. :)
> Tina
--Rick
Rick Frankum
> Rick Frankum wrote:
>
>>Is there a class/race combination in Crawl that works like a
>>Chaos Mutant? One where you get powers/abilities without having
>>to choose from a list?
>
> If what you mean is that the abilities are random, Demonspawn gain
> lots of mutations as they level up and Xom is known to mutate his
> followers sometimes.
Well, that's a start. Is there anything like the Samurai/Ninja
from Hengband, where you have a large amount of powers but gain
one per level in order?
[you can see I haven't spent a lot of time memorizing the different
classes...]
[running]
> There is. The pillar tactic is very useful. I find it's almost always
> required at some point. There might not be single pillars around, but
> anything you can run around will do. When you are all healed up after
> running you can try your chances with the oppponent again. Do this as
> many times as you can until you get hungry, then you might want to
> look for stairs up and eat there if you can get some bats to distract
> the chaser. Teleporting or zapping a wand are the next things to try.
> If nothing else works, heal up for the last time and eat with the
> something whacking at you.
Monsters heal roughly as fast as characters, right? So if (as in
my current game) you don't have a teleport scroll and you are
unlucky enough to get ambushed by a big baddie, the pillar trick
only works to give you a couple more tries to do an unmatched
fight? In Angband I use the speed system to wear down an opponent,
I guess this is different.
>>It seems like every corpse I find makes me either sick or poisoned.
>
> The meat that makes you sick isn't always foul. You had bad luck and
> the bacteria got there first.
This is a figure of speech, right? Is sickness-inducing meat a simple
percentage check, or is it time-based like rotting?
> Good luck! :)
I think I'll need it. Thanks.
--Rick
Rick Frankum
> Rick Frankum <fra...@slimy.com> wrote:
>>I've never played mages because I've found it's generally too
>>much trouble to keep track of which spells I have and what
>>they all do.
>
> Is that all that different from knowing what your weapon/armor
> does?
Actually, yes. With weapons I bash things. :) I'm usually
bad at remembering I have wands or ranged weapons, too...
> Telling your spells apart isn't all that difficult, you only
> start with one, then add those you want. The description in the
> book tells you roughly what it does.
So here's another interface annoyance: I want to check what every
spell in a book does. I'm currently doing a 'r'ead, '?' to find
the key of the book, hit that key, then the spell, and then it
kicks me back to the beginning. Wouldn't it be more convenient
to return back to the spell listing?
> All in all, you'll not get too many spells to worry about, in any
> case. :) You'll have a few selected but pointed spells that you
> all use. Much different than Nethack, where you can just learn
> every spell you find and only use a dozen out of 40.
I can't remember a game where I used more than four (teleport
and ID, plus detection). Shows you my preferred style. :)
>>It doesn't seem like Crawl is any different, and then there's
>>the added trouble of finding a place to stash spellbooks.
>
> The Temple. No monsters will generate there
The downside seemingly being that I'll starve on the way lugging
stuff up and down. I'm sure that's not as bad as I see it
with my inexperienced eyes, but since the Temple is on level 4 and
I'm now eight levels down in the Lair...
> I don't quite know what you mean by Chaos Mutant. A Demonspawn
> Wanderer might be what you're looking for, random skills at the
> start for the Wanderer, and random (supposedly) useful mutations
> (occasionally, at level gain) for the Demonspawn.
Probably will be my next try. Maybe I'll do another mage in between.
Do you have a suggestion for what specialization? Is Conjuration
good, as Darshan suggested?
>>This is certainly a twist, but is it any better than a system
>>where you choose to be a specialist by class?
>
> Yes. You're free to do as you please. In Nethack you're
> restricted by your max skills, here you can come up with some
> nifty combination that wouldn't be possible otherwise. Like
> Darshan's recent Summoner, who went and barbequed half the
> dungeon, or my own less recent Summoner, who went and hid behind
> self-made walls.
Sorry, I wasn't thinking of Nethack at the time I wrote that.
Specialized wizards in NH (or slash'em, anyway) start with
different resistances and can get different powers (Fire Mages
can wear Fire Dragon Scale and polymorph into a Red Dragon, or
somesuch). It's not so much a skill issue IMO. I can see,
though, where Crawl allows much more flexibility.
> A fun game is hiding behind a door and close it, the kobold opens
> it, you close it <repeat>, until you're healed up or the kobold
> loses interest (and comes around the next corner <g>).
I've done that in Angband too (though it's tougher with the
relative speeds). I wouldn't call it a 'fun game', with the
amount of typos I make. :)
> What works too is taking them one by one up the stairs. Like you
> go down to DL:2 and find a horde of ugly gnolls. They usually
> have different distances to you, so one will close up first,
This happened when I entered the Mines, except that they all
closed in together...
> Alternately, you go down a stair that's in a dead end, and find a
> horde surrounding you. Go back upstairs; there'll be only one or
> two monsters in sight, the others are behind the walls,
Is that what happens? I was wondering why monsters seemed to
disappear when I went up stairs. Is it guaranteed that they'll
be somewhere on the level, they don't end up *in* the walls?
> Tina
Anyway, thanks again for the help, hope I'm at least offering
some points of interest for the discussion.
--Rick
R Dan Henry
<ma...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> declared:
>The 'classes' in Crawl affect your starting skill levels, your starting
>stats and your starting equipment. That's all: there is no other
>difference.
Actually, there is. Class also determines if you start with religion and
which one.
--
R. Dan Henry, who is not a new AT&T Wireless customer
because they couldn't activate his phone in *4* days.
rdan...@earthlink.net
George Bush is my President, not my spokesman.
Tina Hall
> Tina Hall wrote:
[blowgun]
> > Assassins start with one, I think.
>
> You're probably right, I know I started a sneakish-type
> character that had one. But that doesn't help my current
> blowgun-challenged platemail-wearing Gladiator. ;)
Why would a Gladiator bend to such sneaky tactics? ;)
> > You can pray at an altar to read the description.
>
> Heh. Is the fact that I need to read this in a newsgroup
> a good enough indication that it's not documented well?
If you want to complain about the provided default documentation,
I'm all with you. (Been playing with the thought that, once I
find some time, and gather enough clue, I'll try to improve that
and offer the result to the DevTeam.)
> Or maybe it's because I'm not creative enough.
Nah, I had the same problem a few months ago.
> [Is it even worth making suggestions on the newsgroup? Should
> I just go to Sourceforge and add a requested feature instead?]
No idea. At least some of the Crawl DevTeam do read this ng,
though.
> > Alternately, there's some listing on Mark Mackey's page of
> > what the various gods want from and do for you. Not sure
> > whether you've looked there yet:
> > http://www.swallowtail.org/crawl/
>
> I have, but I'd prefer to learn in-game and without spoilers.
Hmmm... If you expect Dylan-style spoilers, you won't find them
there. I consider even those tagged 'SPOILER' rather mild,
leaving me with almost more questions than they answer.
What you get there is an elaboration of the in-game text, telling
you what the god wants (whether sacrifices, butchering, objects,
special killings) and what you might get out of it. What objects
any god considers valuable isn't mentioned, and some abilities
are somewhat obscure, at least to me.
Tina
Tina Hall
> > If you're weak, start with Mephitic Cloud;
>
> Aha! Okay, I'll keep that in mind if I ever play a
> spellcaster again. Is it a low-enough level spell that a
> fighter-mage can learn it before they hit the Mines?
Yes, it's only level 3. I'll help much sooner than in the Mines,
too.
> > them at your leisure. (Of course mephitic cloud also works
> > fine against ogre and hounds, for example, in the normal
> > dungeon, down to a certain depth.)
>
> Am I reading that right? Does it stop working against ogres
> and hounds after a certain depth? That doesn't make sense at
> all.
No, at a certain depth you'll find other critters, and less
hounds and ogre. Some of the monsters are poison resistant,
against which Mephitic Cloud does you no good. The hounds and
ogre were only examples, you can use it against centaurs, too, as
another example.
> >>Do you generally go in as soon as you find it, or is diving
> >>a couple more levels in the main dungeon preferable to gain
> >>XP before you tackle it?
> >
> > It depends more on my equipment and abilities.
>
> Okay... so what do you recommend having before you try it,
> then? Just having enough spell points/skills?
I don't know any definite values, just a feeling of 'now I can go
and have a look there'. A good bolt spell to take out the
monsters, for example, and AC+EV (added together) at least 15, is
a rough guess at this 'feeling'. Sometimes I just meet something
too tough in the normal dungeon, so I go back up and see whether
the Orcish Mines aren't that bad (they're not, really).
Once you've been there a few times, you should feel more familiar
with the Mines, and get your own feeling of when you can enter
and when not. :)
If you have poison resistance (or are careful without and have a
good bunch of healing potions), you can head into the Lair first.
Same strategy, though; stay around the stairs and flee if things
look tough. You'll find more non-sickening monsters there.
> Maybe I'm confusing the timing in Crawl too, but I tried to
> escape the Mines and got hit two or three times for my
> troubles.
Makes sense, though. You're running away, after all.
> > Thieves aren't really for me.
>
> Gotcha. I hope you realize that most of my posts here are
> on the theme of "mages aren't really for me." I'm willing
> to give it a few more tries, though, to see if there's a fun
> aspect to the spellcasting system that has escaped me thus
> far. But don't take it personally if I continue to dislike
> magic-use. ;)
No problem. I just like the distance of spells, like letting
monsters run around confused, burning, poisoned, let others do
the fighting, knowing where the enemy is, banish them into the
Abyss, or run away with better speed. All pretty much along the
lines of "Stay away from me, you evil smelly <monster>!".
Just regenerating, carrying more and evading traps due to
levitation/flying, or getting mana from chunks of meat that I'm
too full to eat is nice, as well.
If you prefer to close up and whack the buggers, and don't want
too many special abilities (the above is only from my limited
experience and memory; there's more), spellcasters aren't for
you.
> > There are other wands that are good for you, too: healing,
> > hasting, teleport, invisibility, digging, that I know of.
>
> Most of those I don't consider good... It's been quite a
> while since I've played Nethack, though, so I'm in a "ditch
> the heal monster wand ASAP" mindset.
Eh, the healing/hasting/invisibility is better to use on
yourself. :) (Invisibility and speed is just temporary, unlike in
Nethack where one zap will speed/hide you for the rest of the
game.)
> This reminds me of another minor annoyance - I haven't found
> a whole lot of ID scrolls in this latest game. Is there a
> low-level scroll that does a mass ID? Or any kind of
> pseudo-ID?
No-ish. There are scrolls of detect curse, which will reveal all
cursed-statuses in your inventory, with that you can try out the
uncursed stuff. Special properties will be revealed immediately
(except with some obscure rings), and weapon to-hit and to-dam
will be revealed while using the weapon (sooner or later).
There's a spell of identify, but that needs at least moderate
divination skill.
> > Not all offensive wands have a beam, many just affect the
> > first monster they hit.
>
> Thinking of game balance, I think this is a bias toward mages,
> since fighters seem to have no multi-monster attacks in the
> game.
Depending on what god you worship, that's not entirely true.
Makhleb (one of the chaotic gods) provides some nice effects and
helpers, for example.
> In other roguelikes I use wands to kill weak but annoying
> monsters in the back ranks, this doesn't seem to be an
> available option in Crawl.
No, here you can use wands to kill the ugly front buggers too. I
was just (as in today) surprised to find a meagre wand of frost
almost killed an ugly orc sorceror that I met in the Elvish
Halls, who resisted my fire spells. Three or four zaps while it
closed up and a whack with my sword killed the misfit. I'm still
wondering whether that had anything to do with my Evokation
skill, though.
As comparison, I think you could empty an entire wand of magic
missile on an master lich, without much effect. (That's my
impression, anyway.)
> >>Yeah, I just tried that. I'm really disappointed with not
> >>being able to eat in this game! It seems like every corpse
> >>I find makes me either sick or poisoned.
>
> Let me clarify this. Poison I can figure out, sickness is
> a bother but survivable; what pisses me off is that I stay
> hungry. Corpses seem to be hard enough to find without
> making them ineffectual.
Normally there shouldn't be a problem. I did have some serious
troubles some time this game, but that was only by being
completely unlucky with finding no proper food in the Orcish
Mines, and I run back and forth a lot, dragging everything but
large rocks to the Temple. There's always a lot of junk in the
Orcish Mines, which I had to leave this time to get later, and
use a scroll of acquirement on food. In other games I didn't have
these problems, quite the opposite.
> So here's an idea for a feature that would make me happier:
> (that's as good a reason as any for a feature suggestion,
> right?) Give a way to stop sickness.
There is. The amulet of the gourmand will prevent sickness in the
first place.
Wearing a ring of sustain ability will prevent your stats from
going down while sick. Royal Jelly and potions of restore ability
will set them back up to normal.
> I've figured that healing potions cure sickness, but how about
> making regular fruit do it? Then you'd have a reason to pick
> up those bundles of grapes and strawberries.
Um, you should take them anyway, and eat them first when you get
to starving (in a fight or otherwise). Don't eat them straight
away on finding.
>> If you're a naga, you're poison resistant (they also see
>> invisible and can spit poison, but they're slow, and can't
>> wear boots of course).
>
> Is not wearing boots a problem?
Not really. I've just once had boots of running that were rather
nice. I've seen a few naga bardings (usually when not playing a
naga) that might have had nifty abilities, too.
In general, any armor you can't wear means less AC, though.
Enchant armor scrolls don't only seem to be rather rare, they
also hardly work with armor that's already at +2 or higher. (At
least the armor doesn't explode.)
> Is there some equivalent to boots of speed that is a must-have
> item in Crawl?
No.
Tina
Martin Read
Rick Frankum <fra...@slimy.com> wrote:
>Lauri Vallo wrote:
>> If what you mean is that the abilities are random, Demonspawn gain
>> lots of mutations as they level up and Xom is known to mutate his
>> followers sometimes.
>
>Well, that's a start. Is there anything like the Samurai/Ninja
>from Hengband, where you have a large amount of powers but gain
>one per level in order?
Not that I can recall. Powers come from mutations or from faith in a
God.
>> The meat that makes you sick isn't always foul. You had bad luck and
>> the bacteria got there first.
>
>This is a figure of speech, right? Is sickness-inducing meat a simple
>percentage check, or is it time-based like rotting?
Some corpses are "contaminated", which gives them a percentage chance of
making you Sick. Rotten chunks always make you Sick, unless they do
something worse.
Ghouls don't get Sick from rotten chunks, indeed they rather like them.
Amulets of the gourmand make you immune to Sickness from rotten chunks
but not from fresh contaminated chunks.
Tina Hall
> >>I've never played mages because I've found it's generally
> >>too much trouble to keep track of which spells I have and
> >>what they all do.
> >
> > Is that all that different from knowing what your
> > weapon/armor does?
>
> Actually, yes. With weapons I bash things. :)
Weapons also provide intrinsics and special abilities. Don't you
remember whether you've got poison resistance from your dagger
before closing up to a snake?
> I'm usually bad at remembering I have wands or ranged weapons,
> too...
All you need to do to remember is look. Doesn't cost you any in-
game time, either. Since hasty play will only kill you anyway,
you might as well take the time, and get used to checking what
you've got. :)
> > Telling your spells apart isn't all that difficult, you only
> > start with one, then add those you want. The description in
> > the book tells you roughly what it does.
>
> So here's another interface annoyance: I want to check what
> every spell in a book does. I'm currently doing a 'r'ead, '?'
> to find the key of the book,
I press 'r' for read, then automatically get a listing of all
readable items. Init.txt entry:
auto_list = true
There's an explanation on it in the init.txt itself.
Unfortunately it doesn't work with casting spells and using
abilities, but at least it does work for wield (doesn't list
unusual items you might want to wield, like chunks of meat or
wands), quaff, wear,...
> hit that key, then the spell, and then it kicks me back to the
> beginning. Wouldn't it be more convenient to return back to
> the spell listing?
Maybe. Might just turn the inconvenience upside down, so that you
have to press escape whenever you just wanted to check on one
particular spell. Usually you don't read all descriptions,
because after a while you know some spells. You don't check all
weapons for their to-hit and to-dam, once you got used to some,
either, do you?
> > All in all, you'll not get too many spells to worry about,
> > in any case. :) You'll have a few selected but pointed
> > spells that you all use. Much different than Nethack, where
> > you can just learn every spell you find and only use a dozen
> > out of 40.
>
> I can't remember a game where I used more than four (teleport
> and ID, plus detection). Shows you my preferred style. :)
There are more varied spells in Crawl, I think. There certainly
are more spells. There might even be something you like. :)
[where to stash (books)]
> > The Temple. No monsters will generate there
>
> The downside seemingly being that I'll starve on the way
> lugging stuff up and down.
I haven't starved that way, yet. :)
Anyway, what I forgot to mention (thought to, but then the mind
wandered off) is that you can use side-branches that you've
cleared, too. Nothing will happen on a level where you are not,
afaik.
I haven't seen any monster that's interested in books, anyway.
> I'm sure that's not as bad as I see it with my inexperienced
> eyes, but since the Temple is on level 4 and I'm now eight
> levels down in the Lair...
<shrug> I've been running back there (DL:6) from the bottom of
the Lair, the Swamp, the Snake Pit, the Hive, the Elvish Halls,
and now the Vault on DL:14, in my current game.
The travel command makes that much nicer, though I've done it
without in another game too, creating short paths between stairs,
though I did create an intermediate stash near the Vaults and
some other, earlier branch in that game.
> > I don't quite know what you mean by Chaos Mutant. A
> > Demonspawn Wanderer might be what you're looking for, random
> > skills at the start for the Wanderer, and random
> > (supposedly) useful mutations (occasionally, at level gain)
> > for the Demonspawn.
>
> Probably will be my next try. Maybe I'll do another mage in
> between. Do you have a suggestion for what specialization? Is
> Conjuration good, as Darshan suggested?
Darshan's posts don't seem to get here lately, so I don't know
what he might have said about conjurations.
Wizards are nice. Summoners have an easier live, though, if you
do remember to call in monsters and let them do the fighting.
Push the rats and bats between you and the nasties, and keep your
distance. Sticks to snakes is ok (wield clubs or arrows, scythes
are made of wood, too, as I found out the bad way), scorpions are
even nicer, though at the beginning a lot of them aren't
friendly. Later you get such interesting spells as Shadow
Creatures and Horrible Things. The latter are my favorite:
tentacled monstrosities and abominations. Tentacled monstrosities
is what you normally meet in the endgame, but the summoned ones
are on your side and available much earlier.
Summoner's ghosts are mean, though, because they get an
assortment of colorful rats where you only got plain ones.
If you prefer to keep the Whack'Em strategy, how about a
Crusader? They get some enchantment spells that'll assist you,
but you don't have to remember to use offensive spells to get rid
of the monsters.
> Sorry, I wasn't thinking of Nethack at the time I wrote that.
> Specialized wizards in NH (or slash'em, anyway) start with
> different resistances and can get different powers (Fire Mages
> can wear Fire Dragon Scale and polymorph into a Red Dragon, or
> somesuch).
You can polymorph into a dragon in Crawl, too. Start as a
Transmuter to build up that skill from the beginning. You can get
other resistances from spells, too, either directly or
indirectly.
In Nethack, all you need to polymorph into a dragon is its scale
and some means of polymorph, though, you don't need to play
Slash'EM for that. Slash'EM does have the advantage of more
variety, though, something that's even more so in Crawl.
> > A fun game is hiding behind a door and close it, the kobold
> > opens it, you close it <repeat>, until you're healed up or
> > the kobold loses interest (and comes around the next corner
> > <g>).
>
> I've done that in Angband too (though it's tougher with the
> relative speeds). I wouldn't call it a 'fun game', with the
> amount of typos I make. :)
I think the image hilarious, in any case. :)
> > Alternately, you go down a stair that's in a dead end, and
> > find a horde surrounding you. Go back upstairs; there'll be
> > only one or two monsters in sight, the others are behind the
> > walls,
>
> Is that what happens? I was wondering why monsters seemed to
> disappear when I went up stairs. Is it guaranteed that
> they'll be somewhere on the level, they don't end up *in* the
> walls?
Don't know about guaranteed, that's just my observation.
> Anyway, thanks again for the help, hope I'm at least offering
> some points of interest for the discussion.
If it didn't interest me, I'd not read it in the first place,
never mind reply. :)
Tina
R Dan Henry
Tina...@railroad.robin.de (Tina Hall) declared:
>Eh, the healing/hasting/invisibility is better to use on
>yourself. :) (Invisibility and speed is just temporary, unlike in
>Nethack where one zap will speed/hide you for the rest of the
>game.)
How does one zap a wand at oneself in Crawl?
R Dan Henry
Tina...@railroad.robin.de (Tina Hall) declared:
>Rick Frankum <fra...@slimy.com> wrote:
>> Tina Hall wrote:
>
>[blowgun]
>> > Assassins start with one, I think.
>>
>> You're probably right, I know I started a sneakish-type
>> character that had one. But that doesn't help my current
>> blowgun-challenged platemail-wearing Gladiator. ;)
>
>Why would a Gladiator bend to such sneaky tactics? ;)
A Gladiator ought to go for a serious missile weapon, a bow or crossbow.
Bows have the advantage of being easier to get, as you'll meet centaurs
soon enough.
Rick Frankum
> On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 20:45:00, in a fit of madness
> Tina...@railroad.robin.de (Tina Hall) declared:
>
>>Eh, the healing/hasting/invisibility is better to use on
>>yourself. :) (Invisibility and speed is just temporary, unlike in
>>Nethack where one zap will speed/hide you for the rest of the
>>game.)
>
> How does one zap a wand at oneself in Crawl?
The same way, I suspect, that I've been accidentally throwing
darts at myself - use '.' for the target. I believe in Angband
the target is selected by default when you hit 't', and '.' is
used to fire at it. I've had to adjust to this in Crawl, where
you use 'p' for some reason I don't understand.
--Rick
Rick Frankum
> Rick Frankum <fra...@slimy.com> wrote:
>>Tina Hall wrote:
>>>Rick Frankum <fra...@slimy.com> wrote:
[Mines strategy]
> If you have poison resistance (or are careful without and have a
> good bunch of healing potions), you can head into the Lair first.
> Same strategy, though; stay around the stairs and flee if things
> look tough. You'll find more non-sickening monsters there.
I'm not too worried about finding tough monsters on the levels
themselves - it's getting surrounded a couple moves after I take
the stairs that bothers me. I'll need a few more games, I think...
> No problem. I just like the distance of spells, like letting
> monsters run around confused, burning, poisoned, let others do
> the fighting, knowing where the enemy is, banish them into the
> Abyss, or run away with better speed. All pretty much along the
> lines of "Stay away from me, you evil smelly <monster>!".
That point about 'letting others do the fighting' reminds me: if
you're a Summoner do you have the same problems with your pets
following you in Nethack? Having to stop for them all the time,
your own critters picking up useful items, etc?
> Just regenerating, carrying more and evading traps due to
> levitation/flying, or getting mana from chunks of meat that I'm
> too full to eat is nice, as well.
All things I'm aware of in other games, which is why I asked
what's better about the magic system in Crawl. The main
advantages seem to be the magical skill system and the customizable
spell list, and of course the shortness of mana which creates urgency.
Was it a design decision to make Crawl so un-munchkin? In
Nethack it's hard to get armor over +5 and in *band the numbers
of hitpoints range into the thousands. This feel in Crawl of
"it's a roguelike on a really small scale" permeates the game,
from the shortness of mana to the small variety of items. My
opinion only, of course, but it seems to have gotten a disproportionate
amount of attention on the roguelike newsgroups, given its small
size.
>>>There are other wands that are good for you, too: healing,
>>>hasting, teleport, invisibility, digging, that I know of.
>>
>>Most of those I don't consider good... It's been quite a
>>while since I've played Nethack, though, so I'm in a "ditch
>>the heal monster wand ASAP" mindset.
>
> Eh, the healing/hasting/invisibility is better to use on
> yourself. :)
I'm currently used to Angband variants, where you can't target
yourself, so wands of this type turn into squelchbait.
And of course, it's a matter or playing style, but I generally
end up identifying things when I'm in a desperate situation,
and almost none of these would get me out of a jam.
Knowing that there are these wands, though, makes me think
that IDing wands in advance should be a priority...
>>This reminds me of another minor annoyance - I haven't found
>>a whole lot of ID scrolls in this latest game. Is there a
>>low-level scroll that does a mass ID? Or any kind of
>>pseudo-ID?
>
> No-ish. There are scrolls of detect curse, which will reveal all
> cursed-statuses in your inventory, with that you can try out the
> uncursed stuff. Special properties will be revealed immediately
> (except with some obscure rings), and weapon to-hit and to-dam
> will be revealed while using the weapon (sooner or later).
Another thing that's good to know. I'm currently running around
with four or five pieces of unknown jewelry, a staff of something,
and two or three weird tools that I don't know what they do. One
was an Efreeti in a bottle, and another I've just ID'ed to be a
Disc of Storms. Are all tools like that just spellcasting
paraphernalia? If so I can ditch them without guilt.
>>In other roguelikes I use wands to kill weak but annoying
>>monsters in the back ranks, this doesn't seem to be an
>>available option in Crawl.
>
> No, here you can use wands to kill the ugly front buggers too.
That wasn't the point - in Angband you can target behind the front
ranks, because rods & wands pass by the front ranks. So I can
take out that summoner in the rear instead of having to wait
and get pounded on until I reach him. But if the Crawl wands
are mostly shots rather than beams, I'm back to running
away.
>>Let me clarify this. Poison I can figure out, sickness is
>>a bother but survivable; what pisses me off is that I stay
>>hungry. Corpses seem to be hard enough to find without
>>making them ineffectual.
>
> Normally there shouldn't be a problem.
It's not a problem in that I'm still surviving, it is
a pesky annoyance that makes itself known whenever
I stop to eat.
But this discussion has turned from 'tips for survival'
to a critique of some design decisions. Are you just telling
me to like the game as it is? Or are you trying to play
devil's advocate and shoot down a badly-reasoned suggestion?
Your contrariness is a bit confusing to me.
>>So here's an idea for a feature that would make me happier:
>>(that's as good a reason as any for a feature suggestion,
>>right?) Give a way to stop sickness.
>
> There is. The amulet of the gourmand will prevent sickness in the
> first place.
But it's pretty rare, isn't it? I've only found three amulets
in the week I've been playing.
> Wearing a ring of sustain ability will prevent your stats from
> going down while sick. Royal Jelly and potions of restore ability
> will set them back up to normal.
Stat loss is a relatively small disadvantage of sickness. I consider
the obstruction of healing to be the worst disad with regard to
survival, and the remaining hunger status the worst with regard
to strategy.
>>I've figured that healing potions cure sickness, but how about
>>making regular fruit do it? Then you'd have a reason to pick
>>up those bundles of grapes and strawberries.
>
> Um, you should take them anyway, and eat them first when you get
> to starving (in a fight or otherwise). Don't eat them straight
> away on finding.
In the first place, why not? If nutrition is a strict timeout,
it doesn't matter when I eat them. Whether I'm hungry or
bloated, my nutrition status drops a the same rate.
In the second place, what's so bad about starving that you'd
need to stop in the middle of a fight to eat? I've been in
starving mode for a few dozen turns, and have never starved
to death. Why be paranoid about it?
In the third place, grapes and strawberries don't seem
to have enough nutrition to make it worth an extra
inventory letter. I've had to eat four or five to
change my "hungry" status to normal. If there's no
other benefit, then I just don't see them as useful.
(keep in mind that I'm playing a 20+ str character,
so I'm running out of inventory letters far more often
than being burdened)
And finally, I think overall the game suffers from
a lack of complexity and I'd like to add some. But
maybe I've been spoiled recently by playing all the
wilder Angband variants.
> Tina
--Rick
Mark Mackey
Rick Frankum <fra...@slimy.com> wrote:
>> There are other wands that are good for you, too: healing,
>> hasting, teleport, invisibility, digging, that I know of.
>
>Most of those I don't consider good... It's been quite a while
>since I've played Nethack, though, so I'm in a "ditch the
>heal monster wand ASAP" mindset.
Umm, different game. Wands of healing and hasting are among the best
items in the entire game, and are correspondingly rare. Wands of
teleport and invisibility come a close second.
Mark Mackey
R Dan Henry <rdan...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>Actually, there is. Class also determines if you start with religion and
>which one.
True, of course. Good point.
Miles Bader
> But this discussion has turned from 'tips for survival'
> to a critique of some design decisions. Are you just telling
> me to like the game as it is? Or are you trying to play
> devil's advocate and shoot down a badly-reasoned suggestion?
> Your contrariness is a bit confusing to me.
It seems like you jumped right in and started `critiquing' crawl without
much actual experience playing it. Every game has its own style and
techniques, and it takes some playing to get used to them.
There's a reason why crawl is so popular on this group: It's an
incredibly fun game, well balanced and much deeper than it may appear at
first glance.
So, sure ask questions, but maybe hold off a bit before criticizing it
merely for being different from angband.
-Miles
--
Next to fried food, the South has suffered most from oratory.
-- Walter Hines Page
Miles Bader
> But this discussion has turned from 'tips for survival'
> to a critique of some design decisions. Are you just telling
> me to like the game as it is? Or are you trying to play
> devil's advocate and shoot down a badly-reasoned suggestion?
> Your contrariness is a bit confusing to me.
It seems like you jumped right in and started `critiquing' crawl without
Darshan Shaligram
> Rick Frankum <fra...@slimy.com> wrote:
[...]
> > Is there some equivalent to boots of speed that is a must-have
> > item in Crawl?
> No.
Well, there *are* boots of running, which are very nice to have, but
they're not a must-have.
For that matter, speed boots aren't a must-have in NetHack, either (I
understand speed is absolutely vital in late-game Angband, though).
--
Darshan Shaligram dars...@aztec.soft.net
Darshan Shaligram
[...]
> Was it a design decision to make Crawl so un-munchkin?
I believe so, yes, if by un-munchkin you mean well-balanced. :-)
> In Nethack it's hard to get armor over +5 and in *band the numbers of
> hitpoints range into the thousands. This feel in Crawl of "it's a
> roguelike on a really small scale" permeates the game, from the
> shortness of mana to the small variety of items.
You may have a point in the lesser number of items, but the shortness of
the mana is a good thing.
> My opinion only, of course, but it seems to have gotten a
> disproportionate amount of attention on the roguelike newsgroups,
> given its small size.
Yes, that's your opinion. You'll want to play far more Crawl to judge it
- at the moment you seem to be comparing it to other games, (primarily
Angband) and wondering why Crawl isn't like those other games.
[sickness from eating chunks of meat]
> Stat loss is a relatively small disadvantage of sickness. I consider
> the obstruction of healing to be the worst disad with regard to
> survival, and the remaining hunger status the worst with regard to
> strategy.
Contaminated chunks of meat, when they make you sick, give you no
nutrition. It's not that sickness itself prevents you from getting
un-Hungry. If you chop up, say an ogre, and the first chunk makes you
Sick, don't let that stop you from chowing down on the other chunks.
> And finally, I think overall the game suffers from a lack of
> complexity and I'd like to add some. But maybe I've been spoiled
> recently by playing all the wilder Angband variants.
Maybe you just haven't played enough Crawl. Maybe it's just not your
game.
--
Darshan Shaligram dars...@aztec.soft.net
R Dan Henry
Tina...@railroad.robin.de (Tina Hall) declared:
>Summoner's ghosts are mean, though, because they get an
>assortment of colorful rats where you only got plain ones.
Colored rats I can handle. The horde of demons (including the sun demon
that killed me -- first thing I even knew there *were* sun demons)
called up by my Chaos Knight ghost that never got such help in life,
that I couldn't. RIP, another me.
Tina Hall
> Tina...@railroad.robin.de (Tina Hall) declared:
> >Eh, the healing/hasting/invisibility is better to use on
> >yourself. :) (Invisibility and speed is just temporary,
> >unlike in Nethack where one zap will speed/hide you for the
> >rest of the game.)
>
> How does one zap a wand at oneself in Crawl?
The same way you zap a wand at something else, just target
yourself instead of a monster. With '.' or 'del'.
(You do know that you don't have to align yourself and the
monster in a straight line, but can even target around corners,
yes?)
Tina
Tina Hall
> Tina...@railroad.robin.de (Tina Hall) declared:
> >Rick Frankum <fra...@slimy.com> wrote:
>>> But that doesn't help my current blowgun-challenged platemail
>>> -wearing Gladiator. ;)
> >
> >Why would a Gladiator bend to such sneaky tactics? ;)
>
> A Gladiator ought to go for a serious missile weapon, a bow or
> crossbow. Bows have the advantage of being easier to get, as
> you'll meet centaurs soon enough.
Why not start as a fighter, then? They start with throwing skill.
(What exactly does that do, anyway?)
Tina
Tina Hall
> Tina Hall wrote:
> [Mines strategy]
> > If you have poison resistance (or are careful without and
> > have a good bunch of healing potions), you can head into the
> > Lair first. Same strategy, though; stay around the stairs
> > and flee if things look tough. You'll find more
> > non-sickening monsters there.
>
> I'm not too worried about finding tough monsters on the levels
> themselves - it's getting surrounded a couple moves after I
> take the stairs that bothers me. I'll need a few more games,
> I think...
If you are surrounded after a couple of moves, you should have
seen them coming, and just taken a few back up with you to take
care of more privately.
> That point about 'letting others do the fighting' reminds me:
> if you're a Summoner do you have the same problems with your
> pets following you in Nethack? Having to stop for them all
> the time, your own critters picking up useful items, etc?
There are magic whistles in Nethack.
There's a spell of Recall in Crawl, and the friends don't wander
about as randomly, but try to stay close to you (which can be
another annoyance, if you don't want them that close for some
reason). You displace them without problems (no stopping like in
Nethack). Some monsters pick up stuff, like imps, which is why I
didn't use them. My guess is, that intelligent monsters pick up
stuff and use some if they can (to what extend is yet unknown to
me), animals don't. You needn't worry about your rats and hounds
to drag around stuff. Shadow Creatures bring their own gear,
that'll stay when they get killed.
Kikubaaqudgha (_the_ god for Necromancers) and Yredelemnul (the
god for wannabe-Necromancers that don't want to learn spells) can
bestow the ability to recall your undead slaves.
> > Just regenerating, carrying more and evading traps due to
> > levitation/flying, or getting mana from chunks of meat that
> > I'm too full to eat is nice, as well.
>
> All things I'm aware of in other games, which is why I asked
> what's better about the magic system in Crawl.
The system isn't quite the same as the range of spells available.
> Was it a design decision to make Crawl so un-munchkin?
What's munchkin?
> In Nethack it's hard to get armor over +5 and in *band the
> numbers of hitpoints range into the thousands. This feel in
> Crawl of "it's a roguelike on a really small scale" permeates
> the game, from the shortness of mana to the small variety of
> items.
Small variety? That's Nethack. Crawl has much more diverse and
more importantly random artifacts. You don't always end up with
the same boring kit no matter what you play.
I can't follow you on the 'roguelike on a really small scale'.
> My opinion only, of course, but it seems to have gotten a
> disproportionate amount of attention on the roguelike
> newsgroups, given its small size.
I don't understand what you mean here.
> I'm currently running around with four or five pieces of
> unknown jewelry, a staff of something, and two or three weird
> tools that I don't know what they do.
You can stash the tools for now, you need evocation skill to make
any good use of them.
> One was an Efreeti in a bottle, and another I've just ID'ed to
> be a Disc of Storms. Are all tools like that just spellcasting
> paraphernalia? If so I can ditch them without guilt.
There are also packs of cards that can do all sorts of things.
> That wasn't the point - in Angband you can target behind the
> front ranks, because rods & wands pass by the front ranks. So
> I can take out that summoner in the rear instead of having to
> wait and get pounded on until I reach him. But if the Crawl
> wands are mostly shots rather than beams, I'm back to running
> away.
From what I remember of Angband, you get hordes of monsters all
bunched up. In Crawl the horde isn't that big, and the
spellcasters shouldn't be too hard to pick out, in between the
scattered plain monsters. Lightning and draining have beams,
though, for example.
> But this discussion has turned from 'tips for survival'
> to a critique of some design decisions. Are you just telling
> me to like the game as it is? Or are you trying to play
> devil's advocate and shoot down a badly-reasoned suggestion?
> Your contrariness is a bit confusing to me.
Hm? If your problems seem to be just a lack of experience to deal
with a situation, I try to suggest how to better meet it, from my
own limited experience. Like food, it isn't as bad as it might
seem at the beginning.
With Roguelikes, sometimes newbies turn up demanding
(exaggerated) a wand of wishing on every square, to make the game
easier. That's beside the point of the game, though, they're
meant to be difficult. Crawl is rather more difficult than
Nethack, too.
There are a lot of different roguelikes. Of those I know I
definitely don't like two (Angband and Adom). The difficulties
vary in each game, so everyone can pick out the style they like.
If there's too much you don't like, the game isn't for you.
>> The amulet of the gourmand will prevent sickness in the first
>> place.
>
> But it's pretty rare, isn't it? I've only found three amulets
> in the week I've been playing.
I've found one relatively often.
> > Wearing a ring of sustain ability will prevent your stats
> > from going down while sick. Royal Jelly and potions of
> > restore ability will set them back up to normal.
>
> Stat loss is a relatively small disadvantage of sickness.
Depending on whether you're decaying anyway. <g> One of my
characters got killed through stat-loss.
[fruit]
> > Um, you should take them anyway, and eat them first when you
> > get to starving (in a fight or otherwise). Don't eat them
> > straight away on finding.
>
> In the first place, why not?
Because you gain nutrition that you might better use later.
Without the amulet of the gourmand, you can't eat chunks of meat
when not hungry (unless your race preferes raw or even rotted
meat). You might meet a monster that you then can't eat before
its meat is rotten, because you're not hungry due to eating that
strawberry, thus you effectively lost nutrition.
In other words:
My way: I wait for the chunk of meat and keep the fruit for
later.
Your way: you eat the fruit and can't eat the chunk of meat due
to not being hungry; it rots before you do get hungry again.
In the end, I've got a fruit in my pack for later, you don't, and
I might even have a higher nutrition (don't know the relative
values).
In a fight, you need a quick snack, not something that'll take
ages to gulp down while you're being pummeled.
> If nutrition is a strict timeout, it doesn't matter when I eat
> them. Whether I'm hungry or bloated, my nutrition status drops
> a the same rate.
The filling up is limited to what you may eat with what hunger
status...
> In the second place, what's so bad about starving that you'd
> need to stop in the middle of a fight to eat?
Once you're starving, you don't have much time left before you
die.
> I've been in starving mode for a few dozen turns, and have
> never starved to death. Why be paranoid about it?
I've been told it can happen much quicker, depending on what you
do. (This is a bit vague to me, too. I don't remember what
circumstances speed starving.)
> In the third place, grapes and strawberries don't seem
> to have enough nutrition to make it worth an extra
> inventory letter. I've had to eat four or five to
> change my "hungry" status to normal.
That's quite a lot of nutrition, IMO. You get a whole bunch of
them, after all, and you only need to eat one, and continue on to
find a monster to eat.
> And finally, I think overall the game suffers from
> a lack of complexity and I'd like to add some. But
> maybe I've been spoiled recently by playing all the
> wilder Angband variants.
Then you'd be better of with Nethack. ;) Crawl has its own style,
and some people happen to like it just the way it is, or close
to. What would you say if I complained about the things I don't
like in Angband? "Don't play it, then." seems the best solution.
:)
Tina
David Damerell
>What's munchkin?
A term from tabletop roleplaying. Gamers are divided into four types,
whose prelidictions can be summarised like this;
Real Men fight Red Dragons.
Real Roleplayers trick the Ogres.
Loonies tell dirty jokes to Green Slime.
Munchkins do whatever gives the most experience points.
Real Men use two-handed swords, maces, heavy crossbows.
Real Roleplayers use rapiers, throwing daggers, sword-breakers.
Loonies use rubber chickens, spitbuckets, feathers on sticks.
Munchkins use whatever does the most damage.
--
David Damerell <dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> Distortion Field!
alienbraincookies
>> in *band or Nethack?
>Nope.
So the only way to use bad potions in that way is through evaporate?
abc
R Dan Henry
Tina...@railroad.robin.de (Tina Hall) declared:
>R Dan Henry <rdan...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 20:45:00, in a fit of madness
>> Tina...@railroad.robin.de (Tina Hall) declared:
>
>> >Eh, the healing/hasting/invisibility is better to use on
>> >yourself. :) (Invisibility and speed is just temporary,
>> >unlike in Nethack where one zap will speed/hide you for the
>> >rest of the game.)
>>
>> How does one zap a wand at oneself in Crawl?
>
>The same way you zap a wand at something else, just target
>yourself instead of a monster. With '.' or 'del'.
>
>(You do know that you don't have to align yourself and the
>monster in a straight line, but can even target around corners,
>yes?)
Yes, but various attempts to target myself with 'obvious' keys such as
'5' have failed. I'll try '.', although I thought I had. Maybe I was
using a dead wand then and only thought I hadn't targeted myself.
Tina Hall
> Tina Hall <Tina...@railroad.robin.de> wrote:
> >What's munchkin?
>
> A term from tabletop roleplaying. Gamers are divided into four
> types, whose prelidictions can be summarised like this;
>
> Real Men fight Red Dragons.
> Real Roleplayers trick the Ogres.
> Loonies tell dirty jokes to Green Slime.
> Munchkins do whatever gives the most experience points.
>
> Real Men use two-handed swords, maces, heavy crossbows.
> Real Roleplayers use rapiers, throwing daggers,
> sword-breakers.
> Loonies use rubber chickens, spitbuckets, feathers on sticks.
> Munchkins use whatever does the most damage.
Hmmm... I don't quite get the Real Men/Roleplayers, but find even
back then I was at least a part-time Loony. (Vague ideas of doing
lots of damage, I ended up clutching my chair-leg for good luck
and just irritating the opponents, and often our own people, but
that was more due to random character selection and finding what
I'd ended up with - some kind of jester/trickster - isn't
supposed to like bloodshed.)
Anyway, now I wonder how to apply that to the game itself, and
can't find a way that fits. Any suggestions?
Tina
Mark Mackey
Tina Hall <Tina...@railroad.robin.de> wrote:
>
>Anyway, now I wonder how to apply that to the game itself, and
>can't find a way that fits. Any suggestions?
Munchkin in a roguelike context means (to me at least) a game in which
your stats and equipment are *the* most important factors in the game.
Angband tends to be munchkin because once you have good enough stats and
have found the right equipment virtually nothing can hurt you, and
because you need to spend *ages* looking for just the right piece of
equipment to fill our your resistances. Nethack is less munchkin because
even a really buff character needs to be played carefully, and because
a 500hp character will die just as easily as a 200hp character if you
stop paying attention :)
David Damerell
[Munchkins]
>Anyway, now I wonder how to apply that to the game itself, and
>can't find a way that fits. Any suggestions?
Munchkins prefer games with big numbers in. A munchkin would rather have
1,000 hitpoints and be hit for 100 damage than 10 hitpoints and be hit for
1.
Munchkins also like to outclass the opposition. Crawl's rather arbitary
victimisation of the player is not their kind of thing.
R Dan Henry
Tina...@railroad.robin.de (Tina Hall) declared:
>R Dan Henry <rdan...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 20:47:00, in a fit of madness
>> Tina...@railroad.robin.de (Tina Hall) declared:
>> >Rick Frankum <fra...@slimy.com> wrote:
>
>>>> But that doesn't help my current blowgun-challenged platemail
>>>> -wearing Gladiator. ;)
>> >
>> >Why would a Gladiator bend to such sneaky tactics? ;)
>>
>> A Gladiator ought to go for a serious missile weapon, a bow or
>> crossbow. Bows have the advantage of being easier to get, as
>> you'll meet centaurs soon enough.
>
>Why not start as a fighter, then? They start with throwing skill.
>(What exactly does that do, anyway?)
If you aren't going in for spells, you need some form of ranged attack,
and wands can't be relied on for frequent use (they are very nice for
the tough situations, but for that very reason, you want to use them
sparingly). I'm not sure of the exact effects of Throwing, but it seems
to be a general "ranged attack" skill.
R Dan Henry
<dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> declared:
>Tina Hall <Tina...@railroad.robin.de> wrote:
>>What's munchkin?
>
>A term from tabletop roleplaying. Gamers are divided into four types,
>whose prelidictions can be summarised like this;
>
>Real Men fight Red Dragons.
>Real Roleplayers trick the Ogres.
>Loonies tell dirty jokes to Green Slime.
>Munchkins do whatever gives the most experience points.
>
>Real Men use two-handed swords, maces, heavy crossbows.
>Real Roleplayers use rapiers, throwing daggers, sword-breakers.
>Loonies use rubber chickens, spitbuckets, feathers on sticks.
>Munchkins use whatever does the most damage.
Real Men worship Trog. They have to being Troll Berserkers.
Real Roleplayers worship Zin or the Shining One.
Loonies worship Xom.
Munchkins worship Sif Muna and restore from backup savefile if they get
a book they already had.
Real Men play Angband.
Real Roleplayers play Crawl.
Loonies play Nethack.
Munchkins play Angband with worm masses edited to give 5000 experience
points each.
Rick Frankum
> Rick Frankum <fra...@slimy.com> wrote:
>>I'm usually bad at remembering I have wands or ranged weapons,
>>too...
>
> All you need to do to remember is look. Doesn't cost you any in-
> game time, either. Since hasty play will only kill you anyway,
> you might as well take the time, and get used to checking what
> you've got. :)
That's certainly true. I guess I *have* been spoiled by Angband
munchkinism (where you can afford to be sloppy if you have a
few HP to spare).
> auto_list = true
Aha! Thank you. I skipped right by it in the init file.
Though I think I'd have to program my own roguelike to have
a non-aggravating interface. NH comes closest, I think. It
gives the letters as hints if you remember them, as in (abdfg or ?)
and also doesn't take you out of the game when you hit ?. I've
only used auto_list for a couple games, but it's still kind
of jarring to lose the map on every other command.
Do most people use this feature? I'd like to see what the
rest of the group thinks.
>>hit that key, then the spell, and then it kicks me back to the
>>beginning. Wouldn't it be more convenient to return back to
>>the spell listing?
>
> Maybe. Might just turn the inconvenience upside down, so that you
> have to press escape whenever you just wanted to check on one
> particular spell. Usually you don't read all descriptions,
> because after a while you know some spells. You don't check all
> weapons for their to-hit and to-dam, once you got used to some,
> either, do you?
I don't think that's a great analogy - when I find a huge stash
of weapons at once, I do certainly check them all.
Do you use the 'check one spell' feature a lot? If so, then
the interface makes sense. If even spellcaster players don't
use it...
> Anyway, what I forgot to mention (thought to, but then the mind
> wandered off) is that you can use side-branches that you've
> cleared, too. Nothing will happen on a level where you are not,
> afaik.
I'm assuming you're talking about monster creation? I'm pretty
sure monsters move even if you're off-level. Can anyone tell
me for sure? Usually I'll spot a monster in the distance and
jump upstairs to rest, and when I go back down they've travelled
five or six squares to be on the other side of the stairs.
>>Probably will be my next try. Maybe I'll do another mage in
>>between. Do you have a suggestion for what specialization? Is
>>Conjuration good, as Darshan suggested?
> If you prefer to keep the Whack'Em strategy, how about a
> Crusader? They get some enchantment spells that'll assist you,
> but you don't have to remember to use offensive spells to get rid
> of the monsters.
I'll give it a try. I was looking at an Enchanter but they don't
seem to start off easily.
> In Nethack, all you need to polymorph into a dragon is its scale
> and some means of polymorph, though, you don't need to play
> Slash'EM for that.
Fire mages in slash'em get the *ability* to polymorph. That
was my point, that different classes in NH are much different,
whereas in Crawl they're mostly differentiated (I think) by
what books they find first.
> Tina
--Rick
Rick Frankum
> Rick Frankum <fra...@slimy.com> writes:
>>In Nethack it's hard to get armor over +5 and in *band the numbers of
>>hitpoints range into the thousands. This feel in Crawl of "it's a
>>roguelike on a really small scale" permeates the game, from the
>>shortness of mana to the small variety of items.
>
> You may have a point in the lesser number of items, but the shortness of
> the mana is a good thing.
I never said it wasn't. Nor do I think it's necessarily a bad thing to
have a small number of items.
>>My opinion only, of course, but it seems to have gotten a
>>disproportionate amount of attention on the roguelike newsgroups,
>>given its small size.
>
> Yes, that's your opinion. You'll want to play far more Crawl to judge it
> - at the moment you seem to be comparing it to other games, (primarily
> Angband) and wondering why Crawl isn't like those other games.
Yes, I am comparing it to other games. But I'm not saying Crawl
is bad because it's not imitating. What I'm asking about is
the reasoning behind the design. So far I've heard a whole lot
of tips about how to play the game, but relatively little actual
opinion about what's enjoyable about it.
I don't think comparison between roguelikes is necessarily a
criticism. If someone, for example, were to tell me that
they love the variety of ways you can die in NetHack, I wouldn't
want to ask the Crawl devteam to imitate it.
Specifically in the case of sickness from corpses, I had little
trouble figuring out how to deal with it. I don't, however,
see a reason for it. I've heard a lot of tips on how to
get around the problem, but very little about why it's a
good idea, design-wise. Two design issues usually
apply, conservation of resources and the pacing of the game,
and I think the prevalence of sickness interferes with
both. This point was actually brought up before by another
person (the "starvation again" thread), and I thought this
was a rather small suggestion to improve the matter.
>>And finally, I think overall the game suffers from a lack of
>>complexity and I'd like to add some. But maybe I've been spoiled
>>recently by playing all the wilder Angband variants.
>
> Maybe you just haven't played enough Crawl. Maybe it's just not your
> game.
Both could be true. But looking at the posts on this newsgroup, maybe
it's just that the players of Crawl aren't interested in discussion
of the design. I only see one suggestion for a new (class) idea in
Crawl,
Could be I'm just better off looking at r.g.r.development...
--Rick
Rick Frankum
> Rick Frankum <fra...@slimy.com> wrote:
>
>>Tina Hall wrote:
>>That point about 'letting others do the fighting' reminds me:
>>if you're a Summoner do you have the same problems with your
>>pets following you in Nethack? Having to stop for them all
>>the time, your own critters picking up useful items, etc?
>
> There are magic whistles in Nethack.
I didn't mean to criticize either, just wondered if there
were something radically different in Crawl. Something
like commanding your pets, or moving them explicitly, or
such. But from what you say, it seems to be the same
kind of system.
>>>Just regenerating, carrying more and evading traps due to
>>>levitation/flying, or getting mana from chunks of meat that
>>>I'm too full to eat is nice, as well.
>>
>>All things I'm aware of in other games, which is why I asked
>>what's better about the magic system in Crawl.
>
> The system isn't quite the same as the range of spells available.
You're confusing me here. You pointed out that the fun thing
about the magic system was the stuff you can do, now you're
saying that the spells you can do aren't tied to the magic system?
>>Was it a design decision to make Crawl so un-munchkin?
>
> What's munchkin?
I think others have answered pretty well. Concentrating
on the numbers and optimization. In Angband this would
be picking the right stuff to get all the resistances,
in Nethack it's picking up an ascention kit.
With Crawl, it seems like anything you get can be useable,
and a +2 makes a lot of difference. I agree, it's well-balanced,
and it's probably more interesting in the long run since it caters
to different playing styles. It just surprised me.
>>In Nethack it's hard to get armor over +5 and in *band the
>>numbers of hitpoints range into the thousands. This feel in
>>Crawl of "it's a roguelike on a really small scale" permeates
>>the game, from the shortness of mana to the small variety of
>>items.
>
> Small variety? That's Nethack. Crawl has much more diverse and
> more importantly random artifacts. You don't always end up with
> the same boring kit no matter what you play.
You're confusing variety of items with game balance. Nethack
has a huge amount of stuff you can use (heck, you can even
wield a can opener), but some are far and away better than
others. Hence, munchkin.
> I can't follow you on the 'roguelike on a really small scale'.
Well, here's the thing. All the plusses are small in number,
there are very few dungeon features (altars and shops, plus
vaults?), the game design seems like it's just getting started
(no light sources, LOS is odd, etc). If you check some of the
*really* in-progress beta roguelikes, some of them aren't much
worse. This is version 4 of the game, right? Has adding new
ideas been actively discouraged or something, or is it
that Linley Henzell had a conviction against adding bloat?
>>My opinion only, of course, but it seems to have gotten a
>>disproportionate amount of attention on the roguelike
>>newsgroups, given its small size.
>
> I don't understand what you mean here.
It's not a criticism. I'm just surprised the game has so many
fans.
>>But this discussion has turned from 'tips for survival'
>>to a critique of some design decisions. Are you just telling
>>me to like the game as it is? Or are you trying to play
>>devil's advocate and shoot down a badly-reasoned suggestion?
>>Your contrariness is a bit confusing to me.
>
> Hm? If your problems seem to be just a lack of experience to deal
> with a situation, I try to suggest how to better meet it, from my
> own limited experience. Like food, it isn't as bad as it might
> seem at the beginning.
I'm sorry, then, that I'm mixing my thoughts. I should have mentioned
the suggestion in a new thread.
It seems you are just telling me to like the game as it is. OK.
> With Roguelikes, sometimes newbies turn up demanding
> (exaggerated) a wand of wishing on every square, to make the game
> easier. That's beside the point of the game, though, they're
> meant to be difficult. Crawl is rather more difficult than
> Nethack, too.
That certainly is exaggerating. I thought it was a reasonable
suggestion. I still don't see the reasoning behind all the
varieties of food in Crawl if there are no other tangible
differences but nutrition value, though. I suspect that there
is more to a good strategy than carrying huge amounts of food
and eating corpses.
> There are a lot of different roguelikes. Of those I know I
> definitely don't like two (Angband and Adom). The difficulties
> vary in each game, so everyone can pick out the style they like.
> If there's too much you don't like, the game isn't for you.
Maybe that's why nobody is suggesting new features. "If you want that
feature, try a different game!" :)
>>>The amulet of the gourmand will prevent sickness in the first
>>>place.
>>
>>But it's pretty rare, isn't it? I've only found three amulets
>>in the week I've been playing.
And three AoGourmand in the past five games. I see Crawl's RNG
has a sense of humor too. ;)
> Then you'd be better of with Nethack. ;) Crawl has its own style,
> and some people happen to like it just the way it is, or close
> to. What would you say if I complained about the things I don't
> like in Angband? "Don't play it, then." seems the best solution.
If I were on the devteam, I'd listen. If you had reasonable
suggestions, I'd think about implementing it. Even just as
a player, I would imagine what the game might be like with
a different system. Or I'd try to give a reason why the
game was like that. "Like it or lump it" seems a little
harsh to me.
I am actually curious why you don't like ADOM. It's a fun
game, IMHO.
> Tina
--Rick
Chip Bell
news:bkvogvkd1om0ev1oq...@4ax.com:
> Real Men play Angband.
> Real Roleplayers play Crawl.
Real Roleplayers play ADOM.
> Loonies play Nethack.
Loonies play Alphaman.
Tina Hall
[On Life, RPGs and Everything...]
> Real Men worship Trog. They have to being Troll Berserkers.
So far, so well.
> Real Roleplayers worship Zin or the Shining One.
Why that?
> Loonies worship Xom.
Heh. :)
> Munchkins worship Sif Muna and restore from backup savefile if
> they get a book they already had.
Why that? They all turn up sooner or later, anyway. (Besides, I
doubt wanting to do most damage is equal to cheating.)
> Real Men play Angband.
> Real Roleplayers play Crawl.
> Loonies play Nethack.
Nono, you've got that the wrong way round, and Real Men play
Adom. ;)
> Munchkins play Angband with worm masses edited to give 5000
> experience points each.
I do get the impression that you don't much like Munchkins. ;)
Tina
Arien Malec
news:bkvogvkd1om0ev1oq...@4ax.com:
> Real Men play Angband.
> Real Roleplayers play Crawl.
> Loonies play Nethack.
> Munchkins play Angband with worm masses edited to give 5000 experience
> points each.
That can't be right, since many of the Crawlers here are ex/also NHers. I'd
say that Loonies play Nethack until they decide that NH is too munchkin,
and then play Crawl. :-)
Arien
Tina Hall
> I didn't mean to criticize either, just wondered if there
> were something radically different in Crawl. Something
> like commanding your pets, or moving them explicitly, or
> such. But from what you say, it seems to be the same
> kind of system.
Well, you can yell at them to attack a specific monster, which
you can't do in Nethack.
> > The system isn't quite the same as the range of spells
> > available.
>
> You're confusing me here. You pointed out that the fun thing
> about the magic system was the stuff you can do, now you're
> saying that the spells you can do aren't tied to the magic
> system?
I was talking about why I like to play spellcasters. I like them
in other games that have a different system, too. Others have
pointed out the value of Crawl's spellcasting system in better
words than I could.
> > I can't follow you on the 'roguelike on a really small
> > scale'.
>
> Well, here's the thing. All the plusses are small in number,
> there are very few dungeon features (altars and shops, plus
> vaults?), the game design seems like it's just getting started
> (no light sources, LOS is odd, etc).
From what I've read here, the 'no light' is a deliberate
decision. It's one I whole-heartedly agree with. It removes a
bother so you can concentrate on the really important matters. :)
> Has adding new ideas been actively discouraged or something, or
> is it that Linley Henzell had a conviction against adding
> bloat?
Afaik Linley Henzel has left the project alltogether and there's
a DevTeam now that does bug-fixes and tries to clean up the
source. Don't know what they think about adding new stuff, now or
in the future.
Since the source is free, you could of course implement any ideas
yourself and see whether players like it, if you have the
knowledge.
> It seems you are just telling me to like the game as it is.
> OK.
No. You either like it or not, that's up to you.
> > There are a lot of different roguelikes. Of those I know I
> > definitely don't like two (Angband and Adom). The
> > difficulties vary in each game, so everyone can pick out the
> > style they like. If there's too much you don't like, the
> > game isn't for you.
>
> Maybe that's why nobody is suggesting new features. "If you
> want that feature, try a different game!" :)
Nah. New features are suggested, but they don't all fit into the
same game.
> >>But it's pretty rare, isn't it? I've only found three
> >>amulets in the week I've been playing.
>
> And three AoGourmand in the past five games. I see Crawl's
> RNG has a sense of humor too. ;)
Hehe. :)
> > Then you'd be better of with Nethack. ;) Crawl has its own
> > style, and some people happen to like it just the way it is,
> > or close to. What would you say if I complained about the
> > things I don't like in Angband? "Don't play it, then." seems
> > the best solution.
>
> If I were on the devteam, I'd listen. If you had reasonable
> suggestions, I'd think about implementing it. Even just as
> a player, I would imagine what the game might be like with
> a different system. Or I'd try to give a reason why the
> game was like that. "Like it or lump it" seems a little
> harsh to me.
It isn't meant as harsh as it sounds, that's just me at war with
words.
There are degrees of agreement/disagreement with a game.
Depending on how they balance on a scale, I like or don't like
any particular game. There are few things that I don't like about
Crawl and a lot of things I do like. I'm just a player and as
such I don't have to explain why things are as they are,
especially if it's something that doesn't bother me.
Trying to make one game more like another seems a little
pointless, as you could just play the other game. The changes
suggested should fit the game, and be sparked by playing the
game, not from somewhere outside where things are done
differently alltogether.
<sigh> I'm no good with putting my thoughts into words, others
have said pretty much the same in a far more coherent way.
(Consider yourself blessed for not talking to me face to face,
it'd be even less clear what exactly I'm trying to say. ;P )
> I am actually curious why you don't like ADOM. It's a fun
> game, IMHO.
Too restricted. You have to chose your paths by which others get
blocked. I don't like that.
Tina
Tina Hall
> > auto_list = true
>
> Aha! Thank you. I skipped right by it in the init file.
> Though I think I'd have to program my own roguelike to have
> a non-aggravating interface.
You could adjust those with a free source to your liking.
> NH comes closest, I think. It gives the letters as hints if
> you remember them, as in (abdfg or ?)
I never saw that as useful. I either know I've got a wand of
lightning on 'l', or I don't. If I do, I don't need the letters,
if I don't, I have to see what's what anyway.
> and also doesn't take you out of the game when you hit ?.
Out of the game? I have to admit I never press '?' (too
bothersome to move my hand and press shift as well, '*' is handy
on the number pad), so I don't know what happens.
> I've only used auto_list for a couple games, but it's still
> kind of jarring to lose the map on every other command.
You either see the map or your inventory. What do you expect?
> >>hit that key, then the spell, and then it kicks me back to
> >>the beginning. Wouldn't it be more convenient to return
> >>back to the spell listing?
> >
> > Maybe. Might just turn the inconvenience upside down, so
> > that you have to press escape whenever you just wanted to
> > check on one particular spell. Usually you don't read all
> > descriptions, because after a while you know some spells.
> > You don't check all weapons for their to-hit and to-dam,
> > once you got used to some, either, do you?
>
> I don't think that's a great analogy - when I find a huge
> stash of weapons at once, I do certainly check them all.
You check every dagger for the to-dam and to-hit with 'v'?
> Do you use the 'check one spell' feature a lot? If so, then
> the interface makes sense. If even spellcaster players don't
> use it...
Now that I know a few spells, I only read the descriptions of
some to refresh my memory.
> > Anyway, what I forgot to mention (thought to, but then the
> > mind wandered off) is that you can use side-branches that
> > you've cleared, too. Nothing will happen on a level where
> > you are not, afaik.
>
> I'm assuming you're talking about monster creation?
Monsters plundering/eating stashes, rather.
> I'm pretty sure monsters move even if you're off-level. Can
> anyone tell me for sure? Usually I'll spot a monster in the
> distance and jump upstairs to rest, and when I go back down
> they've travelled five or six squares to be on the other side
> of the stairs.
They might just be moved there when you re-enter the level. It'd
be a bit resource-eating if the game did indeed calculate every
level you've ever been to on every move you do.
> > In Nethack, all you need to polymorph into a dragon is its
> > scale and some means of polymorph, though, you don't need to
> > play Slash'EM for that.
>
> Fire mages in slash'em get the *ability* to polymorph.
So do doppelgangers and ice mages, and lycanthropes just morph
every now and then. I don't really see the value of these
abilities, as anyone can do that sooner or later (and it's not
all that easy for early intrinsic polymorphers anyway). In my own
games, I usually forgot all about it.
> That was my point, that different classes in NH are much
> different, whereas in Crawl they're mostly differentiated (I
> think) by what books they find first.
In Nethack you're restricted to what you start out as, something
I never liked much. Despite that, they all end up pretty much the
same in the end.
You're also restricted in what you may or may not do - which is
one thing I definitely don't like - because of those easily upset
gods.
Tina
R Dan Henry
Tina...@railroad.robin.de (Tina Hall) declared:
>R Dan Henry <rdan...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>[On Life, RPGs and Everything...]
>> Real Men worship Trog. They have to being Troll Berserkers.
>
>So far, so well.
>
>> Real Roleplayers worship Zin or the Shining One.
>
>Why that?
They have the strictest behavioral restrictions.
>> Loonies worship Xom.
>
>Heh. :)
>
>> Munchkins worship Sif Muna and restore from backup savefile if
>> they get a book they already had.
>
>Why that? They all turn up sooner or later, anyway. (Besides, I
>doubt wanting to do most damage is equal to cheating.)
Munchkins are about trying to "win" a role-playing game, where that
isn't the right concept and trying to maximize all their values, whether
that's appropriate to the character or not. The original list has
"Munchkins use whatever has the most pluses" over and over again. To
"not get" roguelikes on the same scale as a Munchkin doesn't get RPGs,
you need to savescum, so I had to get that in, and Sif Muna seems the
most abusable.
>> Real Men play Angband.
>> Real Roleplayers play Crawl.
>> Loonies play Nethack.
>
>Nono, you've got that the wrong way round, and Real Men play
>Adom. ;)
Real Men don't like ADOM because you're not supposed to kill cats.
>> Munchkins play Angband with worm masses edited to give 5000
>> experience points each.
>
>I do get the impression that you don't much like Munchkins. ;)
Actually, Munchkinism isn't bad in a roguelike, because the problem with
Munchkins in a role-playing game is that they Just Don't Get It. But the
basics of Munchkinism -- maximizing abilities as much as possible and
trying to "win" are quite appropriate in roguelikes, where the people
trying to role-play are the ones not clear on the concept.
OTOH, the type of personality that results in Munchkinism is likely to
be a "cheat code collector" in computer games and savescum roguelikes.
R Dan Henry
Tina...@railroad.robin.de (Tina Hall) declared:
>Rick Frankum <fra...@slimy.com> wrote:
>> I'm pretty sure monsters move even if you're off-level. Can
>> anyone tell me for sure? Usually I'll spot a monster in the
>> distance and jump upstairs to rest, and when I go back down
>> they've travelled five or six squares to be on the other side
>> of the stairs.
>
>They might just be moved there when you re-enter the level. It'd
>be a bit resource-eating if the game did indeed calculate every
>level you've ever been to on every move you do.
That, and the move they made when you left the level (you don't see
that, just the messages from attacks). Changes are purely due to the
fact that using stairs takes time in Crawl. The best place is on the
stairs to or from a side dungeon with nothing around when you leave the
level. Those levels with all the stairs up/down grouped together are
good, too. (So you don't accidentally come up the wrong stairs and have
to walk halfway across the dungeon to reach your cache.
David Damerell
>Munchkins are about trying to "win" a role-playing game, where that
>isn't the right concept and trying to maximize all their values, whether
>that's appropriate to the character or not. The original list has
>"Munchkins use whatever has the most pluses" over and over again.
Although the better quartets have something else.
Real Men like to pilot WarHammers, Thunderbolts and Awesomes; and enjoy
attacking fortified positions.
Real Roleplayers like Spiders and Ostscouts, and like to spy out the
enemy deployments.
Loonies; "Wee hee! I'm in a Locust! Shoot at me!"
Munchkins like 100-ton custom Clan assault 'Mechs, and like to be ordered
to destroy the enemy.
Brent Ross
// Actually, Munchkinism isn't bad in a roguelike, because the problem with
// Munchkins in a role-playing game is that they Just Don't Get It.
Roguelikes are ROLL-playing games... a certain level of twinkiness
and min-maxing is required to do well.
Munchkins will go to extremes with this however: I've seen a
player rolling 6 different windows for extreme stats for his
Angband character (millions upon millions of rolls to get one).
However, he was also being a roleplayer at the same time: he was
only taking blue-eyed, blonde elven princesses (which meant even
more autorolling).
I've also seen a player role drunks in the Angband town to buy
a Blue Dragon Scale Mail (from the Black Market) at the start
of the game.
Another player I know was an expert Angband farmer and had
fully developed systems for it... how to set up the dungeon
to avoid attacks from behind, macros to keep the character fed
periodically while maintaining MP, and which breeders were best
at easch level and what progression to take to get to Clvl 45
without having to think or pay attention. Originally he would use
the in game macros and wedge down a key with a piece of paper.
However, this would tie up a public terminal for long periods
of time... so eventually he started using "screen" (the unix
application) macros, which allowed him to detach the game and
log off while the game would keep running (it was also a bit
faster... clear worms and other invisible breeders are also the
farmers best friends since the game doesn't have to draw them).
All this farming technology was developed at the cost of several
characters (a fair number were high level (some Clvl45), and
died because they had XP but not equipment or feel for the deep
dungeon and dove to fast)... it took quite a while for him to
get his first Angband win and we taunted him a lot.
These are Munchkin behaviour without breaking the rules.
// But the
// basics of Munchkinism -- maximizing abilities as much as possible and
// trying to "win" are quite appropriate in roguelikes, where the people
// trying to role-play are the ones not clear on the concept.
Depends... I typically roleplay in roguelikes after I've won
them once. Challenge games are largely about roleplaying: is your
character literate? does he believe in dieties? does he eat meat?
what are his ethical and moral stands? To compensate for this
you often need to do some min-maxing on something else since
you are still trying to win... when it becomes extreme meta-game
playing and number crunching is where it wanders into Munchkinism.
I also know people who roleplay and haven't won... they still
seem to have a lot of fun and understand that they're just making
life difficult, so they don't seem to be missing the point.
Brent Ross
Rick Frankum
> Rick Frankum <fra...@slimy.com> wrote:
>>Aha! Thank you. I skipped right by it in the init file.
>>Though I think I'd have to program my own roguelike to have
>>a non-aggravating interface.
>
> You could adjust those with a free source to your liking.
I certainly could, at that. In fact, I just checked the
sourceforge crawl5 page and downloaded the source. Munchkinville,
here I come! ;)
Seriously, though - is the sourceforge page for real? I didn't
check the CVS dates but there aren't any forum or news articles.
Seems like it's just one guy doing the development? Or am I
in the wrong place completely?
>>NH comes closest, I think. It gives the letters as hints if
>>you remember them, as in (abdfg or ?)
>
> I never saw that as useful. I either know I've got a wand of
> lightning on 'l', or I don't. If I do, I don't need the letters,
> if I don't, I have to see what's what anyway.
It's a personal style issue, I guess. IMHO the thing to
consider in an interface isn't whether a feature is 'useful'
but whether it gets in the way.
Was that just a spurious example, or do you adjust your
inventory letters to match the features of your items?
That's an interesting approach to it.
I use the feature mostly when I'm dropping stuff in a hurry
(but not urgent enough to do extended drop). Or when I
have a choice of random potions.
>>and also doesn't take you out of the game when you hit ?.
>
> Out of the game? I have to admit I never press '?' (too
But if you're using auto_list, it's the same thing. Getting
an inventory choice blanks the screen and shows your inventory.
> bothersome to move my hand and press shift as well, '*' is handy
> on the number pad), so I don't know what happens.
I've played on a laptop for the past three years - I've forgotten
what the number pad is like.
>>I've only used auto_list for a couple games, but it's still
>>kind of jarring to lose the map on every other command.
>
> You either see the map or your inventory. What do you expect?
Both, like in almost every other roguelike. That is, showing
the inventory on the top right side, and the map in the background,
so to speak. As I said before, I frequently forget that I'm
carrying wands or potions, and it's nice when I'm reminded of them
to see if they could be used. Something like "Oh! I've got a wand
of stinking cloud! Wonder if that monster is too close..."
[and yeah, I realize I could just hit ESC, sue me for being petty]
>>I don't think that's a great analogy - when I find a huge
>>stash of weapons at once, I do certainly check them all.
>
> You check every dagger for the to-dam and to-hit with 'v'?
So that's not a good analogy either. :( Look at it this way -
for someone who doesn't know the spells at all, it's better to
drop back to the book after examining a spell because he might
be looking one-by-one. For someone who does know the spells...
you got me there. I guess there's no way to measure which
happens more, statistically. My feeling would be that
if you're only looking at one spell, it's infrequent enough
that another keystroke wouldn't be a bother. Maybe
it would be in the way too.
>>I'm pretty sure monsters move even if you're off-level. Can
>>anyone tell me for sure? Usually I'll spot a monster in the
>>distance and jump upstairs to rest, and when I go back down
>>they've travelled five or six squares to be on the other side
>>of the stairs.
>
> They might just be moved there when you re-enter the level. It'd
> be a bit resource-eating if the game did indeed calculate every
> level you've ever been to on every move you do.
I'd thought so too, but the monsters move a lot more than I
expect. Mr. Henry is probably right, though, that they're
moving on the way up as well. Still feels like they move
too far.
> In Nethack you're restricted to what you start out as, something
> I never liked much. Despite that, they all end up pretty much the
> same in the end.
Sounds like Crawl's skill system is a good fit, then. I do think
it does a better job than Sangband (both the new and old versions),
and I can't compare it to ADOM since I haven't played that game
in a while. Are there any other skill-based roguelikes?
I just think it's funny that you don't feel there are too many
classes in Crawl. I guess they're not exactly 'restrictive'.
> You're also restricted in what you may or may not do - which is
> one thing I definitely don't like - because of those easily upset
> gods.
Huh? Apart from sacrificing on the wrong altars or eating people,
I don't recall much that upsets them. Am I misremembering?
> Tina
--Rick
R Dan Henry
<fra...@slimy.com> declared:
>Sounds like Crawl's skill system is a good fit, then. I do think
>it does a better job than Sangband (both the new and old versions),
>and I can't compare it to ADOM since I haven't played that game
>in a while. Are there any other skill-based roguelikes?
GearHead, (s)CthAngband, and to a large extent ToME (was PernAngband).
Tina Hall
> Seriously, though - is the sourceforge page for real? I
> didn't check the CVS dates but there aren't any forum or news
> articles. Seems like it's just one guy doing the development?
> Or am I in the wrong place completely?
No idea.
> > I never saw that as useful. I either know I've got a wand of
> > lightning on 'l', or I don't. If I do, I don't need the
> > letters, if I don't, I have to see what's what anyway.
>
> It's a personal style issue, I guess. IMHO the thing to
> consider in an interface isn't whether a feature is 'useful'
> but whether it gets in the way.
I don't quite understand that. How can a feature get in the way?
> Was that just a spurious example, or do you adjust your
> inventory letters to match the features of your items?
> That's an interesting approach to it.
I like to have my items on the same specific letters. The first I
do in a game is adjust them. Started that in Nethack, and now do
that in Crawl too, though the system and the reason for it
differs for most things. (In Nethack, I want the stuff I use
often close to the left hand for easy reach, in Crawl I want the
stuff I carry around for one reason or another on capital
letters, so new stuff is more easily picked up and dropped. I'm
out of capital letters, though. <g>)
> I use the feature mostly when I'm dropping stuff in a hurry
> (but not urgent enough to do extended drop). Or when I
> have a choice of random potions.
Extended drop? That's Nethack, right?
> >>and also doesn't take you out of the game when you hit ?.
> >
> > Out of the game? I have to admit I never press '?' (too
>
> But if you're using auto_list, it's the same thing. Getting an
> inventory choice blanks the screen and shows your inventory.
Out of the game meant DOS prompt to me.
What would I want to see the screen for when I look at my
inventory? I can't read both at the same time, anyway. :)
> >>I've only used auto_list for a couple games, but it's still
> >>kind of jarring to lose the map on every other command.
> >
> > You either see the map or your inventory. What do you
> > expect?
>
> Both, like in almost every other roguelike.
None that I know of. Adom, Angband, Nethack and Crawl have the
inventory spread across the map when looking at it.
> >>I don't think that's a great analogy - when I find a huge
> >>stash of weapons at once, I do certainly check them all.
> >
> > You check every dagger for the to-dam and to-hit with 'v'?
>
> So that's not a good analogy either. :(
That's the analogy I meant right away. After a while you know
what a dagger does, just as after a while you know what a spell
does. There are loads of weapons (or items in general) and there
are loads of spells....
> Look at it this way - for someone who doesn't know the spells
> at all, it's better to drop back to the book after examining a
> spell because he might be looking one-by-one.
That's only at the beginning. After a while you'll just remember
some of it. Even I do, and I've got just about the worse sponge
memory possible (all squishy and dripping).
> For someone who does know the spells... you got me there. I
> guess there's no way to measure which happens more,
> statistically.
Logically it should be the latter, because once you start using
spells, you'll get used to some. Do you want to get back to the
'v'iew which item prompt after checking what any item does?
Someone new to the game looks at their stuff more often, too.
> > In Nethack you're restricted to what you start out as,
> > something I never liked much. Despite that, they all end up
> > pretty much the same in the end.
>
> Sounds like Crawl's skill system is a good fit, then. I do
> think it does a better job than Sangband (both the new and old
> versions), and I can't compare it to ADOM since I haven't
> played that game in a while. Are there any other skill-based
> roguelikes?
No idea what other roguelikes there are at all. (I'd like some
recommendations on other interesting ones.)
> I just think it's funny that you don't feel there are too many
> classes in Crawl. I guess they're not exactly 'restrictive'.
They make a good attempt at being varied. Only some are rather
closer than I'd like, most are very different.
By closer I mean the Wizard/Conjurer/Fire or Ice Elementalists,
and Gladiator/Fighter (where I hardly see any difference at all).
The other related classes like Conjurer/Reaver, Enchanter/
Crusader, Venom Mage/Stalker are nicely scaled (? fumbling for
the right word here; one's more a mage, the other more fighter to
start with). I like that.
> > You're also restricted in what you may or may not do - which
> > is one thing I definitely don't like - because of those
> > easily upset gods.
>
> Huh? Apart from sacrificing on the wrong altars or eating
> people, I don't recall much that upsets them. Am I
> misremembering?
Sacrificing the wrong corpse, or killing the wrong monsters isn't
liked either, for example. Nethack's sense of 'Chaotic' doesn't
make any sense at all. Random killing isn't allowed, and as
excuse people give the reason that your god wouldn't like his
followers killed (which is what an evil god wouldn't like,
chaotics should randomly cheer at or frown upon it), and then
you're not allowed to sacrifice your pet (because then your god
suddenly isn't evil but good). That's only examples. Slash'EM is
even worse, where you can play Lycanthropes and Vampires, and
some explanations on them claim they're evil, and still you're
not allowed to be that. It suffers from serious confusion about
what's Chaotic and what's Evil.
Tina
Brent Ross
Rick Frankum <fra...@slimy.com> wrote:
// I certainly could, at that. In fact, I just checked the
// sourceforge crawl5 page and downloaded the source. Munchkinville,
// here I come! ;)
//
// Seriously, though - is the sourceforge page for real?
The sourceforge page is for the next version, which is largely
a rewrite. It's not the game you're currently playing (yet).
The current version's source is a tangled mess. Most bugs are,
in fact, mistakes made by people adding some small feature or game
fix... without understanding the systems are their side effects.
Even patches that have been "tested for extended periods" are
suspect... most recent bugs have been active for several years!
Brent Ross
Rick Frankum
This entire post didn't make much sense to me. May I ask
for some clarification?
Brent Ross wrote:
> In article <ASzPa.1831$Fk4.2...@news1.rdc1.ky.home.ne.jp>,
> Rick Frankum <fra...@slimy.com> wrote:
> // I certainly could, at that. In fact, I just checked the
> // sourceforge crawl5 page and downloaded the source. Munchkinville,
> // here I come! ;)
> //
> // Seriously, though - is the sourceforge page for real?
>
> The sourceforge page is for the next version, which is largely
> a rewrite. It's not the game you're currently playing (yet).
Well, yeah. But that doesn't answer my question - is it
being written? It doesn't seem active from the sf page itself.
> The current version's source is a tangled mess.
What language is Crawl 4 written in, anyway? I gather
Crawl 5 is a rewrite in C++; the docs for Crawl 4 mention
djgcc (a C/C++ compiler), so was there a switch?
> Most bugs are,
> in fact, mistakes made by people adding some small feature or game
> fix... without understanding the systems are their side effects.
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. Are you referring
to Crawl 4's "tangled mess"? (I find it hard to imagine Linley
Henzell not understanding the system he wrote, unless he was a
complete amateur, and the game disproves that) Or is this
meant as a warning to people like me who may want to play
with the source? (if so, you've just proved to me how
resistant to suggestions this group is) Or maybe I'm just
reading between the lines too much.
> Even patches that have been "tested for extended periods" are
> suspect... most recent bugs have been active for several years!
Where can I find a bug listing for Crawl 4, then?
> Brent Ross
--Rick
Rick Frankum
> Rick Frankum <fra...@slimy.com> wrote:
>>>I never saw that as useful. I either know I've got a wand of
>>>lightning on 'l', or I don't. If I do, I don't need the
>>>letters, if I don't, I have to see what's what anyway.
>>
>>It's a personal style issue, I guess. IMHO the thing to
>>consider in an interface isn't whether a feature is 'useful'
>>but whether it gets in the way.
>
> I don't quite understand that. How can a feature get in the way?
Forcing more keystrokes than is necessary (it's arguable, I know),
or acting in an unexpected way, especially one that contradicts
existing behavior.
Here's an example (possibly unique to my system, I haven't tried
any other platform). The 'ESC' key is generally used to cancel
a command, right? When I do '?' to see a list of commands
I get one screenful, then another screenful appears regardless
of which key I hit, even if I hit ESC.
(I'd rather not debate whether this is a 'bug' or 'feature',
thankyouverymuch)
> I like to have my items on the same specific letters. The first I
> do in a game is adjust them. Started that in Nethack, and now do
> that in Crawl too,
Sounds like an awful lot of work. Do you have macros for it?
>>I use the feature mostly when I'm dropping stuff in a hurry
>>(but not urgent enough to do extended drop). Or when I
>>have a choice of random potions.
>
> Extended drop? That's Nethack, right?
Yes. If you recall, we were talking about the inventory letter
hints, which are also Nethack.
>>But if you're using auto_list, it's the same thing. Getting an
>>inventory choice blanks the screen and shows your inventory.
>>>>I've only used auto_list for a couple games, but it's still
>>>>kind of jarring to lose the map on every other command.
>>>
>>>You either see the map or your inventory. What do you
>>>expect?
>>
>>Both, like in almost every other roguelike.
>
> None that I know of. Adom, Angband, Nethack and Crawl have the
> inventory spread across the map when looking at it.
Is this a system difference? As I said before, Crawl blanks
the screen (ie erases the map) when it brings up an inventory
for me. Am I missing another init setting or something?
>>For someone who does know the spells... you got me there. I
>>guess there's no way to measure which happens more,
>>statistically.
>
> Logically it should be the latter, because once you start using
> spells, you'll get used to some. Do you want to get back to the
> 'v'iew which item prompt after checking what any item does?
> Someone new to the game looks at their stuff more often, too.
I'm not so sure about your logic - if you really get used to
the spells, you wouldn't have to look *any* up. But I do think
you've successfully defused my annoyance in the matter, and
you've made a good case for returning to the game instead of the
command menu. Remind me to give you a free chobo(sp?) sometime.
> Sacrificing the wrong corpse, or killing the wrong monsters isn't
> liked either, for example. Nethack's sense of 'Chaotic' doesn't
> make any sense at all. [...] It suffers from serious confusion about
> what's Chaotic and what's Evil.
You're right on this, though I hazily recall that a few of these
behaviors are explicitly different if the character is Chaotic.
>
> Tina
--Rick
Mark Mackey
Rick Frankum <fra...@slimy.com> wrote:
>
>Well, yeah. But that doesn't answer my question - is it
>being written? It doesn't seem active from the sf page itself.
The rewrite was largely being tackled by one person, and he's been
fairly quiet for a while. My impression is that it's going to be a
*long* time before the 'new' version is released, if ever: the rewrite
seems (unfortunately) to be heading in the direction of blue-sky nifty
data structures and "look what I can do with C++ templates!" rather than
concentrating on just rewriting the existing Crawl algorithms in a more
maintainable way.
>What language is Crawl 4 written in, anyway? I gather
>Crawl 5 is a rewrite in C++; the docs for Crawl 4 mention
>djgcc (a C/C++ compiler), so was there a switch?
Crawl 4 is written in C, with some C++ thrown in. It needs a C++
compiler, but is not object-oriented in any meaningful sense of the
word.
>I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. Are you referring
>to Crawl 4's "tangled mess"? (I find it hard to imagine Linley
>Henzell not understanding the system he wrote, unless he was a
>complete amateur, and the game disproves that)
Linley hasn't worked in a serious way on the Crawl code for a number of
years. My impression is that he wrote most of the basics of Crawl before
he'd learned C properly: there's no consistent use of data structures,
no defines for constants etc. The fighting code is one 1000+ line
subroutine, which is sufficiently complicated that the sorts of spoilers
which have been produced for Nethack (what is the effect of having 15
DEX rather than 10?) just aren't possible in Crawl. Large parts of the
code are very fragile, in the sense that it's very difficult to clean
them up in any meaningful manner without introducing many new and subtle
bugs. If you don't believe me, download the source and see if you can
work out how the dungeon and item data structures work :).
Much of the effort that's been put into Crawl by its maintainers since
Linley stopped working on it have been spent rewriting significant parts
of it in an attempt to make it more maintainable. There was a large
discussion last year on the devteam mailing list on what to do about
this: there was some consensus that a complete rewrite mught be needed,
but probably not enough general impetus to get this done.
> Or is this
>meant as a warning to people like me who may want to play
>with the source? (if so, you've just proved to me how
>resistant to suggestions this group is) Or maybe I'm just
>reading between the lines too much.
No, you're more than welcome to fiddle with the source. What the
maintainers are paranoid about are patches that people produce with e.g.
code for 5 new classes, a nifty enhancement to the skill system and some
better code for handling dropping items over water. In the past, such
changes have led to the Crawl maintainer having to spend literally
months tracking down obscure bugs which were introduced because the
patch author didn't understand the item stacking code quite well enough.
IMHO the current Crawl code needs another few hundred hours of developer
time rewriting existing bits of code for stability before any
significant game changes. The devteam seem to agree: this is why the
current version of Crawl has been in 'beta' for several years now.
>Where can I find a bug listing for Crawl 4, then?
In Brent's head? I can't remember who's got the baton at the moment...
Brent Ross
// for some clarification?
//
// Brent Ross wrote:
// > In article <ASzPa.1831$Fk4.2...@news1.rdc1.ky.home.ne.jp>,
// > Rick Frankum <fra...@slimy.com> wrote:
// > // I certainly could, at that. In fact, I just checked the
// > // sourceforge crawl5 page and downloaded the source. Munchkinville,
// > // here I come! ;)
// > //
// > // Seriously, though - is the sourceforge page for real?
// > The sourceforge page is for the next version, which is largely
// > a rewrite. It's not the game you're currently playing (yet).
//
// Well, yeah. But that doesn't answer my question - is it
// being written? It doesn't seem active from the sf page itself.
There were some updates a short while back.
// > The current version's source is a tangled mess.
//
// What language is Crawl 4 written in, anyway? I gather
// Crawl 5 is a rewrite in C++; the docs for Crawl 4 mention
// djgcc (a C/C++ compiler), so was there a switch?
It's essentially C code that only compiles under C++. There is
also some new stuff that makes use of C++.
// > Most bugs are,
// > in fact, mistakes made by people adding some small feature or game
// > fix... without understanding the systems are their side effects.
//
// I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. Are you referring
// to Crawl 4's "tangled mess"? (I find it hard to imagine Linley
// Henzell not understanding the system he wrote, unless he was a
// complete amateur, and the game disproves that)
At the time Linley wrote it, his experience was in BASIC.
Crawl was his first C++ program and it showed. He had read a
C++ book up to the parts on enumeration and pointers but didn't
see any use for them. Get a copy of version 3 and you'll see
code that's not only badly formated, but uses magic numbers
for everything (often in really evil ways) and uses arrays of
size one for the purposes of call by reference (the pointer is
hidden in this notation). We still occasionally find errors where
enumeration was done wrong (ie the Troll AC bonus was +SP_HIGH_ELF
for a while). I'm sure his C++ coding is a lot better now.
// Or is this
// meant as a warning to people like me who may want to play
// with the source? (if so, you've just proved to me how
// resistant to suggestions this group is) Or maybe I'm just
// reading between the lines too much.
You're reading too much into the lines. It's more of a
statement on why we don't accept or add features. It's hard
enough to maintain the current features right now... the code
is such a mess that submitted patches are often filled with
several unwitting mistakes and require a lot more work to add
than simply running patch. If everyone who wanted to submit
patches to crawl 4 were allowed to, the code would quickly go
from barely maintainable to hopelessly unbalanced and broken.
We're trying to get from preleases to an actual release and so
we have a freeze on new features.
// > Even patches that have been "tested for extended periods" are
// > suspect... most recent bugs have been active for several years!
//
// Where can I find a bug listing for Crawl 4, then?
I currently keep it on my machine. It keeps getting too long,
and certainly never shrinks given the amount of suspect usage
I find everywhere I look. The end result is that I currently
suspect every system in the game is filled with them, and single
bug reports often get sucked into "look at foo system" just to
keep the list short. "Crawl 4" is pretty close to the bug list.
Brent Ross
Miles Bader
> At the time Linley wrote it, his experience was in BASIC.
> Crawl was his first C++ program and it showed.
Heh. The last time I looked at the crawl source, it definitely looked
like it was written by someone that didn't have much experience with
C/C++ yet -- e.g. using type `char' for (usually x-y coordinate)
function parameters, something which is (1) pointless, (2) feels
`weird', and (3) often non-portable (due to signed-ness issues).
-Miles
--
Freedom's just another word, for nothing left to lose --Janis Joplin
Jason Corley
ITYM SlashEM.
--
***************************************************************************
"You turn off the light and turn on the dark, you turn off the dark and
turn on the light --- positively marvillainous!" ---Krazy Kat, 1921
Jason D. Corley | End...@thecircus.org.uk | AIM: Concordancer
Tina Hall
[features getting in the way?]
> Here's an example (possibly unique to my system, I haven't
> tried any other platform). The 'ESC' key is generally used to
> cancel a command, right? When I do '?' to see a list of
> commands I get one screenful, then another screenful appears
> regardless of which key I hit, even if I hit ESC.
Same here, also when you look at a pile with ';', you can't -
literally - escape. It goes on until it says 'Too many items.'.
> (I'd rather not debate whether this is a 'bug' or 'feature',
> thankyouverymuch)
I'd say it's annoying, and can't see how it could be a feature.
> > I like to have my items on the same specific letters. The
> > first I do in a game is adjust them. Started that in
> > Nethack, and now do that in Crawl too,
>
> Sounds like an awful lot of work.
Less than having to check what random letter an item has, and
having to use shift with every little club picked up and dropped
elsewhere.
> Do you have macros for it?
How that? The items don't even always start on the same letters,
never mind those found.
> > None that I know of. Adom, Angband, Nethack and Crawl have
> > the inventory spread across the map when looking at it.
>
> Is this a system difference? As I said before, Crawl blanks
> the screen (ie erases the map) when it brings up an inventory
> for me.
Yes, just like every other roguelike I know. At least part of the
map is gone when looking at the inventory.
> Am I missing another init setting or something?
What for?
> >>For someone who does know the spells... you got me there. I
> >>guess there's no way to measure which happens more,
> >>statistically.
> >
> > Logically it should be the latter, because once you start
> > using spells, you'll get used to some. Do you want to get
> > back to the 'v'iew which item prompt after checking what any
> > item does? Someone new to the game looks at their stuff more
> > often, too.
>
> I'm not so sure about your logic - if you really get used to
> the spells, you wouldn't have to look *any* up.
So, then you don't. You can press ESC after just reading a book
to find out the spells in it. You don't have to select a spell.
> Remind me to give you a free chobo(sp?) sometime.
Bribes? ;) What's a chobo?
Tina
Bruce
> Real Men play Angband.
Oh my. That can't possibly be right.
--
Bruce Labbate | Yur rube is young and handsome,
shiftless layabout | So new to your bedroom floor.
| You know damn well where you'll go.
| - Jeff Buckley
Brent Ross
Bruce <sol...@gehennom.net> wrote:
// R Dan Henry <rdan...@earthlink.net> deserves a cookie for saying:
// > Real Men play Angband.
//
// Oh my. That can't possibly be right.
It's not as munchkin as some of the variants and allows for things like
"12d6 + 1000" points of damage per melee round (dwarfing the player's
own HP or any magic spell)... that's prime Real Man (tm) bait.
Brent Ross
Graeme Dice
<snip>
> How does skill advancement work?
Exercise the skills when you have free experience points to put into
them
>I've seen advice on 'turning
> off' the skill, this means changing the text color to dark grey,
> right? Why do turned-off skills advance? And what do the numbers
> on the skills screen mean?
Turned off skills advance four times more slowly than turned on skills.
The numbers are indicators of how long you have to wait for the next
level advancement.
> I've gotten a seventh-level character
> once, but I keep finding some orc or other meany with a halberd that
> clobbers me, even when I have a nifty ego weapon. And of course
> that means the bones levels get nasty...
Only your character is saved as a ghost, so the thing that killed you
won't be around when you encounter him again.
> Is there any reward to killing uniques? Seems like most of the time
> they have really crummy equipment. I wish they would drop food
> or a guaranteed good item, or something.
They tend to give you larger experience rewards, and they do carry
better equipment than average members of their race.
Graeme Dice
Graeme Dice
<snip>
> > Um, you should take them anyway, and eat them first when you get
> > to starving (in a fight or otherwise). Don't eat them straight
> > away on finding.
>
> In the first place, why not? If nutrition is a strict timeout,
> it doesn't matter when I eat them. Whether I'm hungry or
> bloated, my nutrition status drops a the same rate.
It is not a strict timeout at all. Every action uses a different amount
of food. Swinging a sword uses less than casting a spell in most cases,
but both actions use more than walking around.
> In the second place, what's so bad about starving that you'd
> need to stop in the middle of a fight to eat? I've been in
> starving mode for a few dozen turns, and have never starved
> to death. Why be paranoid about it?
Starving reduces your to-hit by close to 5, makes you completely unable
to cast spells or use special abilities, and is very close to the point
where you start to faint.
Graeme Dice