Depth vs. Complexity

[fizzix]

I believe Sil has already done many of these.

Seriously, while there are problems with the sil system it's a great starting point. I would seriously consider scrapping the V combat system in pyrel and building off of Sil's system.

Linearizing gains with stats is a big issue and certainly one that we can certainly do irrelevant of the rest. Note that you can get higher order polynomial functions from combining several linear stats. For example, with HP if you have a linear scaling with level and CON, you get a quadratic relation. If you add in damage reduction from armor (effectively raising HP), you get a cubic relation. If you want to recreate V with linear systems you could do it but you'd rescale the CON to extend to higher values and make the high end armor have large CON bonuses (end level rings would be something like +20 CON because instead of going from 18-150 to 18-200 it needs to go from 40-60 for the equivalent HP gain). In other words, there's no reason that gear bonuses can't be non-linear, but stats -> effects should be linear if possible.

However, this is a massive rescaling effort and we need to pick our start and endpoints at the beginning and then base everything off of that. Do we want player HP to start at 10 and max at 100, 500, 1000? What about enemy HP. Right now the game is very asymmetric, should we keep it that way, or should monsters have roughly the same HP as players? We should decide these things first and then figure out what the scales should be for everything.

I'm personally a fan of striving for symmetry, because it's silly to have a difference between the way a player deals damage and the way a monster deals damage (as is currently the case.) This means removing multiple blows entirely and rethinking how monsters attack. Again, another big change. Make sure the points at the beginning and the end match up and then fill in everything in the middle. It would also mean scrapping all the hard work Derakon and Magnate have done in v4 combat, so it's hard for me to push for it too much.

Parity in stats is also important. That doesn't exist now at all, and it should. I really would like to either adopt Sil's 4 point system with Grace replaced by Magic, or a 5 point system where you separate out magic power from spell points into different stats and ignore the priest-mage divide where one uses WIS and one uses INT.

Then we need to think hard about how we deal with things like stat-potions and the like. These are notoriously difficult to balance. Maybe stat-potions give N points and the player gets to choose where they go. Maybe you get them from special drop items from bosses, or on level ups (i'm actually a big fan of stat-gain on level up).

As an aside here are a list of simple concepts that we can base a full game off of.

• Hit points
• Spell points
• Strength (controls how much damage you do with a weapon)
• Dexterity (controls how easy it is for you to hit with a weapon/avoid a hit)
• Magic power (controls how much damage you do with spells and devices)
• Saving throws (controls how likely it is for you to resist an effect.*)
• Weapon damage
• Armor damage reduction
• Armor evasion increase
• Elemental resistances (I prefer damage amounts over percentages.)

* I think saving throws should work as follows, the effect rolls a die and if it's higher than your saving throw, you succumb. if it's lower, you do not. High enough saving throw = immunity from weaker effects. I think this is superior to either competing dice rolls or having the player roll against a static value.

Anyway, that's probably enough for now.

[Derakon]

I just watched this episode of Extra Credits, which talks about the relationship between depth and complexity in videogames. I recommend taking a look, but it can be readily summarized:

Good games have simple rulesets (little complexity), but get a lot out of those rules (high depth).

Complexity turns away players, especially if the rules aren't well-explained or if the player needs to know all of the rules before they can really start playing the game. So even if your complex game is very deep, you'll be limiting your audience to those players that are willing to come to grips with the complex system. This may not be a problem depending on your goals as a developer, but it's worth keeping in mind when you decide how your systems should work.

Now to turn this towards Angband: Angband could be a much more simple game than it is. There's lots of weird little gotchas in the rulesets that create complexity without really increasing depth. What can we get rid of to make the game more accessible / streamlined without losing depth? What can we do with our existing rules to increase depth without increasing complexity? Some brainstorming:

• Unify the element damage system. Make all resists behave the same way, make all elements have the same damage cap, remove the temporary/permanent stacking system (or make all resists stack, regardless of type). Keep different elements interesting by regulating access to their resistances and how severe their side-effects are. For example, attacks using the "basic four" elements are very common, so their resistances are comparatively valuable -- so you make sure that gear that is generated with those resistances is rare and/or not usually paired with other useful abilities.
  
• Simplify the combat system. There's a number of valid possible formulae to use, but the bottom line is that the player ought to be able to reasonably predict how changes in gear will affect their performance. The way that gear relates to the numbers shown in the 'I' screen (in Vanilla) is very opaque.
  
• Relatedly, decide on a basic formula for stat checks and use it the same way everywhere. Searching, using magic devices, being stealthy, resisting spells, hitting opponents, etc. should all use the same system.
  
• Add a unified-use key. Do we seriously still not have one? Sure the specific-item-type keys are useful (especially for keymaps), but there's no need to front-load that complexity; let the player learn the basic use-item key at the start and then they can learn about 'a'im wand etc. when they need to.
  
• Linearize the stat system (so that raising a given stat by +1 always has the same effect, whether it's from 8-9 or 39 to 40). Of course this will have far-reaching ramifications for the player power curve, but the current system of accelerating returns at the very top is really weird. Surely there are better ways to encourage a strong focus in a specific stat.
  
• While we're at it, get rid of the 18/X syntax. This is added complexity for zero gain in depth!

I believe Sil has already done many of these.