preserve and no id

[PowerDiver]

Currently, with preserve on, the only way to permanently destroy an artifact is to identify it and drop it. With learn-by-use, items are not considered identified until you learn all of their properties. That can take a while.

Should artifacts no longer regenerate based upon something else? On pseudo? On failed destroy command? On failed destruction from Orb of Draining?

Should the player be able to play games where you identify what you want to not reappear, but drop without id if you don't want it now but might want it later? This is a real issue in ironman.

I've added an option, after you fail to destroy an artifact, to mark it ignored for the rest of the game [equivalent to squelch] and for that to stop preserve from regenerating the artifact. This is a partial solution, but it's probably not a good solution.

[Magnate]

Currently, with preserve on, the only way to permanently destroy an artifact is to identify it and drop it. With learn-by-use, items are not considered identified until you learn all of their properties. That can take a while.

Should artifacts no longer regenerate based upon something else? On pseudo? On failed destroy command? On failed destruction from Orb of Draining?

Should the player be able to play games where you identify what you want to not reappear, but drop without id if you don't want it now but might want it later? This is a real issue in ironman.

I've added an option, after you fail to destroy an artifact, to mark it ignored for the rest of the game [equivalent to squelch] and for that to stop preserve from regenerating the artifact. This is a partial solution, but it's probably not a good solution.

What's wrong with just leaving it on the floor? Is this just about taking a turn to drop it? Oh no, sorry, it's about taking ages to get full ID.

I don't think players should be able to drop artifacts without IDing them and have them regenerated later, if pseudo is going to enable them to work out which artifact it is. That's meta-ID without in-game-ID, and IMO is an abuse of preserve mode - even in ironman.

Are you trying to remove magical ID altogether? If not, then I see no problem with requiring ID to get rid of unwanted artifacts. If so, then I guess allowing it to be regenerated if it wasn't fully IDd is a small price to pay for such an advance.

[Pete Mack]

He's saying the same thing that you are: artifacts that are known to be artifacts should not regenerate. He's also pointing out that in ironman, there's also a strong incentive not to waste identity on something about which you already have a good deal of knowledge; if you are playing with normal artifacts, you may already even know exactly what you are looking at.

[Donald Jonker]

He's saying the same thing that you are: artifacts that are known to be artifacts should not regenerate. He's also pointing out that in ironman, there's also a strong incentive not to waste identity on something about which you already have a good deal of knowledge; if you are playing with normal artifacts, you may already even know exactly what you are looking at.

Problematically, he's swimming against the tide. He's "not supposed" to know what item he's looking at until it's ID'd, even though he does. Deactivating preserve any earlier than full ID is going to come across as a half-cheat.. putting a square peg in a round hole. Doing it at pseudo works but doesn't exactly fit. (By the way, does attempting to destroy an artifact trigger a {special} feeling? Seems like it should.) Seems to me that the only way out is to ramp up the generation of dungeon ID or allow the non-magical identification of artifacts (the latter being something I'm sure no one else believes in ).

Edit:

I've added an option, after you fail to destroy an artifact, to mark it ignored for the rest of the game [equivalent to squelch] and for that to stop preserve from regenerating the artifact. This is a partial solution, but it's probably not a good solution.

Isn't this more equivalent to just destroying the artifact?

[PowerDiver]

Problematically, he's swimming against the tide. He's "not supposed" to know what item he's looking at until it's ID'd, even though he does. Deactivating preserve any earlier than full ID is going to come across as a half-cheat.. putting a square peg in a round hole.

Artifacts are fixed like unique monsters. The only difference is that no one bothered to implement artifact memory, so you're stuck with your own memory or a spoiler sheet. Of course you're supposed to know everything about an artifact you have learned before, just as you remember what you learned about unique monsters in previous games. If you want something else you play randarts.

Preserve should be about when you find it, or notice it, or perhaps when you pick it up, not when you identify it. The link to identify is the square peg.

Isn't this more equivalent to just destroying the artifact?

The requirements of the rgra community are inconsistent and impossible. So long as you say "it cannot be destroyed" and then ignore it using different terminology, you are doing as well as is possible.


I think you should recognize artifacts on pickup, and receive immediate full id when you recognize standarts. I also think you should be able to "destroy" artifacts. I cannot see any of that happening any time soon.


My best solution in the current framework is to recognize artifact names upon being "sensed", and to have that define status with respect to preserve. Thankfully weak pseudo is gone. Anything else that disengages preserve can be defined to mark the item as sensed, including but not limited to the id spell. I suggested in a different thread the idea that artifacts should be immediately sensed as special upon wield.

[Marble Dice]

Do I understand you correctly in that this thread is about preventing the somewhat obscure and counter-intuitive meta-game that would result from using preserve mode in the situation where the player can recognize a standart before preserve mode does?

What would make the most sense to me is:
1) Artifacts are marked {special} on pseudo (already happens)
2) Artifacts are marked {special} on wield (in an ID-by-use system)
3) Artifacts are marked {special} on failed [k]ill attempt
4) Artifacts are preserved unless they are identified or marked as {special}

I wouldn't mark artifacts {special} if you fail to break them with acid or what have you, since egos can protect from that. Perhaps certain item types can't have an ego with ignore_acid, so the player would be able to recognize an artifact without the game knowing in that situation, but I don't know what items/artifacts, if any, would be susceptible to that exploit.

Now that I think about it though, removing an artifact's preservation will necessary add it to the list of "seen" artifacts, and thus as soon as you find a {special} item you could go into the artifact list to find out what it is. Is that true? I guess that's why you suggest recognizing artifacts on pickup?

If you did recognize artifacts on pickup or on {special} mark (just the name, not the properties) you could only possibly gain extra information on their properties in a standart game, and only then through use of spoilers, and even then it would only actually make a difference for item types that have multiple artifacts, like daggers. Even currently if you know you have an artifact dagger, then figuring out if it's Nim, Nar, or De is pretty trivial. Not sure if there's other situations where it's not so trivial, but it sounds like revealing artifact name on pickup probably wouldn't actually reveal much more if any information than 3.1.0b already does (and again only with spoilers). And in a randart game it won't make any difference at all.

[Pete Mack]

@Marble dice -- the seen list doesn't work quite like that. It requires that the artifact no longer exist (because the player left the level) before it shows up as known.

[PowerDiver]

Do I understand you correctly in that this thread is about preventing the somewhat obscure and counter-intuitive meta-game that would result from using preserve mode in the situation where the player can recognize a standart before preserve mode does?

It's not obscure at all, if you play with limited id. In a limited id context, I have used Sting for maybe 10 fully explored dLevels [playing ironman] without gaining id because I never encountered light breathers or whatever. If I then drop it, should it regenerate later just because I never learned that last resistance? IMO the answer should be no. Perhaps you disagree. My question is what should be the dynamic with respect to preserve in this situation, and how do you generalize?

[buzzkill]

Maybe I'm over-simplifying this, but why not just treat the ID of standarts differently in ironman mode vs. the regular game.

[bebo]

This actually seems the right place for .......... wait for it .......... wait for it ........... requesting artifact memory!

(sorry, been watching too much how i met your mother lately...)

[Marble Dice]

If I then drop it, should it regenerate later just because I never learned that last resistance? IMO the answer should be no. Perhaps you disagree. My question is what should be the dynamic with respect to preserve in this situation, and how do you generalize?

The me, the answer is also no.

Basically I think if you can determine an item in your inventory is an artifact, then it shouldn't regenerate. I thought preserve was about savings those artifacts that spawned but you didn't encounter, so if it reaches your inventory then preserve mode should no longer apply.

So some form of:
1) Artifacts can be sensed from failed [k]ill, pseudo, wield, etc and will be marked {special} or have their names (only) revealed
2) Sensed artifacts no longer regenerate

[PowerDiver]

if it reaches your inventory then preserve mode should no longer apply.

IMO it's not fair to have preserve no longer apply without the player being informed. To me, to do this right, that means the char should notice artifacts on pickup. I'm not aware of anyone agreeing with me on this premise so far. Are you the first?

[PowerDiver]

This actually seems the right place for .......... wait for it .......... wait for it ........... requesting artifact memory!

This is surely the wrong place. Any thread started by me is in the context of a belief that standard artifacts should fully self-id when they are sensed.

Nevertheless, the work I've done on learning should be polished reasonably soon, and once it is done it will be straightforward to keep track of which properties the player knows [including negative knowledge] about standard artifacts.

[Marble Dice]

I would expect to see a {special} tag before removing preserve mode protection. When I say "if it reaches your inventory" I'm talking about something you know is an artifact, namely something that's been flagged via pseudo (already in inventory), use-by-ID wield (was in inventory at some point), attempted kill, ?ID, etc.

Sensing that an artifact is {special} as soon as you [g]et it - this would advance the player's knowledge without spending time (pseudo) or taking some kind of risk (wield, attempted destroy). Having said that I don't feel strongly about not marking artifacts {special} as soon as you pick them up, especially if it would simplify some other problem.

Full ID on standarts when recognized - sounds pretty cool to me, but then again I play with full spoiler files, since I've already seen it all on previous savefiles. I've come this close to hacking a fully-revealed non-cheating monster memory in 3.1.0b multiple times (it's trivial, I know).

I think we agree but why do you need {special} on pickup? What's wrong with breaking preserve on {special} and only marking {special} on pseudo, wield, ?ID, [k]ill?

[will_asher]

I think you should recognize artifacts on pickup, and receive immediate full id when you recognize standarts. I also think you should be able to "destroy" artifacts. I cannot see any of that happening any time soon.

For what it's worth, I agree with these things.

What I don't agree with is going though all this trouble to implement ID by use. I don't see what's wrong with using scrolls or staffs of identify.

If a weapon has rLite and the player is wielding this weapon, and he is breathed on by a light hound:
How does he know which wielded equipment item has rLite?
How does he even know that he is resisting the breath because of equipment? Maybe the hound hiccupped and the breath was a dud. Maybe the character thinks he just got lucky. Maybe the character made a warding sign with his fingers and he thinks that it protected him. Maybe the character thinks he is building up resistance by exposure. (*that is not a suggestion, BTW)
I think something we forget too often is that the "@" isn't the player. You are the player, the "@" is the player character who isn't supposed to know that he's inside a game. (He doesn't see an "@" when he looks in the mirror.)

This isn't to say that I'm against all forms of nonmagical ID. If a weapon burns a monster, the character is probably going to figure that his weapon has the ability to burn monsters (even if the brand is really coming from a ring). If a weapon doesn't burn a monster, the PC shouldn't know for sure that it doesn't have a fire brand. Who's to say that a weapon which can burn monsters will always burn monsters?
I'm not suggesting having equipment whose powers sometimes work and sometimes don't. I'm only saying that the player character does not know the limitations of the BRAND_FIRE flag or any of the limitations of the game he is in.

I'm also not saying that I think the .txt files are spoilers. In a role-playing game like DND, meta-gaming is bad. In a roguelike computer game like Angband, there's nothing wrong with a little meta-gaming.