Sil : Suggestions

[sudaj]

To have the self knowledge information appear as past messages.

[bron]

have the self knowledge information appear as past messages.

+1 to that. I don't think it should go in the history log, but putting that info in with the messages seems useful (and harmless).

[bron]

A suggestion I've thought about before, but that hit me again during the most recent competition: I'd like it if "Zone of Control" had "Follow-Through" as one of the possible pre-requisites (in addition to the existing set). It seems to make sense (to me at least), and would allow character to get the skill without needing to invest in either Finesse or Polearm Mastery (and why Polearms anyway?). It seems odd that the seemingly related skill "Whirlwind Attack" has Follow-Through as a pre-requisite, but Zone of Control does not.

[Derakon]

For "why polearms", presumably because they have the most reach out of all of the melee weapons and thus the greatest potential to react to enemies getting close to you. Imagine trying to approach someone who has a spear when they can keep the spear pointed at you at all times. You're not going to get as close as if they were armed with a sword.

[taptap]

Follow through is already overused as a requirement and I have trouble to imagine Zone of Control as wild swinging (Follow-through).

+ 1 to the proposal regarding self knowledge. I wasted so many charges by mistakenly touching the keyboard before finishing reading.

[Scatha]

I'm not sure if Follow Through would be a better pre-requisite for Zone of Control than Finesse. They're both already used as major pre-req abilities.

However, as Finesse is a pre-req for Follow Through, it would be quite odd if they were both pre-reqs for the same ability, so it would be a mistake to add Follow Through without removing Finesse.

[bron]

For "why polearms", presumably because they have the most reach out of all of the melee weapons and thus the greatest potential to react to enemies getting close to you. Imagine trying to approach someone who has a spear when they can keep the spear pointed at you at all times. You're not going to get as close as if they were armed with a sword.

Sure, which is why you get a free hit when an enemy approaches you if you are armed with a polearm (and know polearm mastery). But you don't get the free hit just by *knowing* the skill, you have to actually wield a polearm. Similarly, I could imagine getting Zone of Control with Polearms as a pre-requisite if you were actually wielding a polearm, but that is not a requirement.

edit: actually, that's not a bad idea. If polearm-mastery gave you ZOC in addition to the free-hit while wielding a polearm (only), that might make up for the difficulties of using polearms. It might be *too* powerful, but it's an interesting notion.

[bron]

However, as Finesse is a pre-req for Follow Through, it would be quite odd if they were both pre-reqs for the same ability, so it would be a mistake to add Follow Through without removing Finesse.

I don't really agree. You can get Follow Through without taking Finesse. So you'd have to take *both* Power and Follow Through to get Zone of Control, or else Finesse (with or without Follow Through).

Broadly speaking, there is a "finesse" branch to the melee tree of skills, and a "power" branch. Follow-Through sort of splits the difference, having possible pre-requisites from both branches. I think Zone of Control should do the same, but I agree that it is more of a finesse thing than a power thing, so it's not unreasonable to require more power-branch pre-requisites to get it.

[locus]

I see Zone of Control as more of a big weapon thing. A 6' sword is going to do a better job of controlling space than a 6" dagger. It's a little weird that it should be finesse-tree at all, and power tree needs more useful stuff IMO.

[BlueFish]

A few situations I think should gradually become easier after failure, turn by turn: moving in a certain direction while confused, escaping from pits, and escaping from webs.

As it stands, pits present a reasonable possibility of insta-death for low evasion, high protection builds, long before that low evasion and high protection becomes otherwise non-viable. Pits just make the build less fun.

[locus]

Can't you just take off your armor to climb out of the pit? Not that the interface really guides you toward doing so, and not that that's always safe to do, but.

[BlueFish]

The insta-death situation depends on monster(s) being next to you, pummeling you, so spending a turn taking off your armor for a marginally greater chance of escaping, and less survivability to the pummeling, is maybe a neutral tradeoff at best.

Why, have you ever actually done that to escape a pit while getting attacked by monsters?

[taptap]

A few situations I think should gradually become easier after failure, turn by turn: moving in a certain direction while confused, escaping from pits, and escaping from webs.

As it stands, pits present a reasonable possibility of insta-death for low evasion, high protection builds, long before that low evasion and high protection becomes otherwise non-viable. Pits just make the build less fun.

No real opinion on the proposal, just: If you have some turns time to react it isn't instant. At least you can try some of the available options: staff or song of freedom (this magical pit removal is not very well known I guess), dexterity (pit) or strength (web) potion or free action (web only?) instead. (Or staff of majesty / trumpet of terror / Elbereth to push opponents away. Or trumpet of blasting downwards.) And you probably have high enough strength to escape from webs anyway.

As I regularly play the other end of the spectrum I found the genuine instant deaths are on offer there. Via entrancement (way more dangerous if you rely on evasion) or via chest traps it is fairly easy to die in a single round.

[BlueFish]

You present a good list of possibilities to escape from a pit but a small fraction of them (generally zero) are available at the time pits come into depth. At that point it's just about rolls.

I'm trying to introduce into our vocabulary the idea of "insta-death" carried out over multiple turns. An insta-death instigated by a single event (such as falling into a pit) which starts a succession of low-probability saving throws, or maybe we should just say death throes.

It's pretty viable and fun to survive with high protection and low evasion (like 3 or so) at 300'. Not sure when pits come into depth - maybe 250 or 300, no later.

but if you hit a pit while you're being chased by orcs, that's bad luck for you. And not a fun end to your game.

It would still be reasonably survivable if you got +1 to your escape check for every failed attempt though. And perfectly flavorful. You're just gradually escaping.

[half]

I'm trying to introduce into our vocabulary the idea of "insta-death" carried out over multiple turns. An insta-death instigated by a single event (such as falling into a pit) which starts a succession of low-probability saving throws, or maybe we should just say death throes.

An inescapable death?

If enough people think this issue with pits is a problem, we could implement something like your solution. We already have situational bonuses/penalties and number of attempts so far could be one. It would require savefile changes and would make pits/webs quite a lot less bad for low evasion players (perhaps too easy?). I'm not sure. I generally like it if playstyle leads to different things being big challenges and requiring different adaptations (e.g. a source of Freedom for low-evn characters) so am reluctant to over-smooth things out. Another simple option could be to start pits occurring a little deeper.