On 17.01.2022 23:15, Chris Bowers wrote:
> I've always been under the impression that me playing without pets is a handicap as pets are so powerful.
>
> But what if that's wrong?
>
> What if actually PLAYING with pets is a handicap?
>
> Pets
>
> Downsides:
> 1. Take up your food making starvation/low food an issue.
Depends on the type of the pet. Depends also on your "pet management".
> 2. Twice as many turns to accomplish things (or more).
Not sure what you mean here. Most time pets operate in parallel.
> 3. Picks up items you might not want picked up.
Add: Erases engravings you want to be kept intact. (NH-343 at least.)
> 4. May attack peacefuls that you don't want attacked.
> 5. Death of pet (if relied on) leaves you in precarious position.
Add: Dislocated (by trapdoors, level-teleporters) pets leave you...
> 6. Wild goose chases after pets can lead to precarious situations.
Not sure what you mean here.
> 7. Frustration with pets can lead to bad play.
> 8. Death of pet can lead to negative mental attitude of the player.
Both are personal (non-game) psychological effects that depend on
the player alone. Another attitude could instead be: "Pets come and
go, who cares.", "Let them support me as long as they are there."
"Thank them for the time ('thanks for all the fish'), if they go."
>
> Upsides:
> 1. Curse testing by pet.
Add: Food testing. (Mainly for newbies.)
> 2. Stealing from shops.
> 3. Ability to kill peacefuls with no consequences to alignment/murder.
> 4. Soaks up damage, effectively increasing your HP.
> 5. Twice as many attacks on monsters (one attack by you, one attack by pet every turn.)
> 6. Aids in evasion/running away from dangerous monsters.
Including: block monster in corridors from approaching, and dancing
around them in open are to avoid melee contact with monsters.
> 7. Polymorph trap/wand/spell can turn them into a powerful ally/monster.
> 8. Keeps your level low and thus the level of monsters you face low.
> 9. Super helpful for the Protection racket.
>
> Petless upsides: 1. Because of having more food, ability to altar
> camp longer and greater probability of attaining a usable artifact
> weapon earlier, thus drastically increasing survival rate.
Yes, and that's why you should develop some tactics. Like locking the
pet in a niche or in another room.
OTOH, it may kill dangerous (e.g. poisonous) monsters for you and such
corpses won't be eaten by the (initial, domestic) pets.
>
> 2. Because of having more food, the extra food consumption by spell
> casters is much easier to manage.
>
> 3. Because of having more food, waiting on a staircase to heal up is
> much more viable.
>
> 4. Because of having more food, the extra food consumption for
> digging out vaults (and getting more protection) is much more
> manageable.
The last points are all about food. The right approach would be (IMO)
to invest in food management instead. Altar-camping, IME, will always
stress your food reserves. Before I altar-camp I try to find a food
(or general) store (if only in mine town), or plunder Sokoban first.
It's not wrong what you say, probably just not addressed in the best
way, if not having a pet is your answer to solve the issue.
>
> 5. Stealing from shops is usually unnecessary because of #4, negating
> the advantage of stealing from shops. Most items which are useful
> (safe scrolls, special boots/cloaks/gloves) are inexpensive.
For these "inexpensive" items you need some means to BUC-ID them; so
we're again at pets. But I generally disagree here. Finding and using
items to your advance is the key to proceed and survive in Nethack.
Tools, amulets and rings, wands, scrolls and potions, all important,
and the pets not only get these for you, they also BUC-test the items
right away.
>
> 6. The dungeon is dangerous. The longer you are in the dungeon, the
> more likely hood a YASD or other improbable death is to happen.
> Ascending in 1/3 the time reduces YASDs and rare deaths by 2/3rds.
This makes no sense to me. Staying longer, advancing not too fast,
means that you can prepare yourself better. But it depends on the
actual game, the role played, the findings, how you proceed, where
to slow down or camp, when to go forth and back, or whether to only
hurry forward.
>
> 7. Reduced time in the dungeon means that blessed spellbooks will not
> go blank before you finish the game.
A game may require 40000 or 120000 turns, spells last 20000 turns,
you can re-read the books quite often. (The only books I blanked
in the process had been books from bones heap (IIRC) and books in
an extinctionist game that lasted much longer.)
>
> 8. Pets will not go feral and attack you. You will not accidentally
> ever kill your pet. Powerful polymorphed pets, (which can be a
> danger) will not go feral.
Pets often get just peaceful. If it gets hostile either just kill
it (there's no penalty, AFAICT) or throw a fortune cookie at it.
Also throwing e.g. a food ration at a horse or a tin at a dog/cat
will pacify these (without making them tame in this case).
>
> 9. You don't have to worry about using artifacts like Cleaver and
> Stormbringer, which are very powerful.
This is a problem of the artifact and how you manage and handle it.
With these weapons you will also have problems with peacefuls if
you haven't learned to handle them appropriately.
>
> 10. Pets will not pick up and lose/use/take items that you don't want
> them to take.
Add extreme case (been there): My pet picking up my filled BoH
and getting disintegrated along with my bag by a black dragon.
>
> 11. Trips to an altar to curse test are fine because you have
> additional food. Priests completely negate the advantage of curse
> testing with a pet.
>
> 12. Elbereth doesn't protect your pet from strong monsters, if you
> have no pet, you only need to worry about protecting yourself. You
> don't need to worry about "getting away with your pet".
You can flee and come back later to get your pet. Really no issue.
>
> 13. You are self reliant and thus suffer no penalty when your pet
> dies, and are not vulnerable when your pet dies.
This is a weak argument. You have always the responsibility to stay
alive. You have to develop, with or without aid of your pet(s).
The only implicit (valid) thing to consider is that you don't get
the experience for monsters killed by your pet. But it's also a
factor that monsters don't get that difficult if you are of not
that high experience level.
>
> So my conclusion is, what if actually HAVING a pet is the challenge
> game, and not having one is easier?
I certainly wouldn't formulate it that way. Rather say, it's a
challenge in NH to make a sensible decision whether the role
you're actually playing should acquire pets or not, and that
it's yet more a challenge to do a proficient pet management,
including primarily to keep the pets alive, but also the other
aspects mentioned above (like handling them at altars, etc.).
>
> Another consideration is that some of the weaker classes (tourist,
> healer, archaeologist) NEEDS a pet for the early levels. I can
> certainly agree with that. However I don't think any of the other
> roles need pets, and might be stronger without them.
No need to be dogmatic or formulate it in a black/white schema.
Pets fight for you so you are always "stronger" with them. And
I ascended also those healers where the pet dies from a falling
rock trap on dungeon level 1. The point is that beyond fighting
they serve a couple purposes, and they do that for every role.
Janis