[3.3.0] opinions and comments

[Estie]

Maybe make them better versions of slaying rings? Currently if I need to choose between ring of damage and slaying I almost always choose damage. If the slaying ring would have also resist and activates for double-resist, that might change.

Problem with branding rings is that they make big dice extra attack weapons too powerful, even if the brand would be a weak (x2) one.

Im not really worried about big dice weapons with extra attacks; those dont exactly grow on trees; rare is the game where I see one of those.

However, maybe this is an idea:

Would it be feasible to introduce temporary branding, as a buff ? A spell-like ability that asks for a melee or ranged weapon as input and adds branding property to that weapon for a certain number of game turns.

- The elemental rings would get this activation instead of their elemental damage effect, applying to a (the wielded ?) melee weapon.

- There is the ranger spell and the priest spell which is similar and noone seems happy about; those could turn into spells with the same effect. Maybe have the ranger version apply to ranged weapons only and priest to melee ?

- There is an artifact activations which brand bolts - Cubragol - unless that got changed recently. Cubragol would fire brand itself temporary. Any branding procedures of missiles can be removed/replaced with branding the launcher instead.

Unfortunately, it would be great to have the effect noted as active on the status bar which is already stuffed.

Dunno, what you think ?

[Magnate]

Great minds think alike. Temporary brands have been on my to-do list for a long time - but there was no mechanism for objects to have temporary flags. There still isn't - but we're a lot closer now.

[Derakon]

Why does the object need to get the brand? Can't that be applied to the player instead? I mean, I suppose that would open you to e.g. activating Cubragol then switching to Umbar, but I don't see that as a huge concern.

What can we do with temporary object flags that we can't do with temporary player flags?

[Magnate]

Why does the object need to get the brand? Can't that be applied to the player instead? I mean, I suppose that would open you to e.g. activating Cubragol then switching to Umbar, but I don't see that as a huge concern.

What can we do with temporary object flags that we can't do with temporary player flags?

Er, keep them attached to the object. We don't want activating Cubragol to brand Pain, now do we?

(Yes you could work around that with player flags, but it would be an ugly hack. Temporary object flags would be sensible, and aren't hard to implement now. It's just a case of encapsulating them.)

[kurie]

Perhaps we could kill two birds with one stone? I propose altering the functionality of up-and-down stat potions as follows:

- If the stat that the potion is intended to raise is not currently at max, then restore it to max -- a la the old-style restoration potions -- with no additional effects or penalties.

- If the stat that the potion is intended to raise is currently at max, then increase the max (and current) of that stat, and lower another random stat, as per currently functionality.

In this fashion, these potions would serve two purposes simultaneously: restoration, if and when it's needed; or the poor man's stat gain potion, as intended.

I think this is a capital idea!

[Derakon]

I think this is a capital idea!

And I think that potions shouldn't change their effects based on the player's state. The fact that stat gain first restores is plausible (it puts you at your peak condition, and then some), but having a swap-stat potion forgo the swap in favor of just restoration if the stat that would be increased has been drained just doesn't make any sense to me.

Much of this discussion seems to me to have a subtext of "Restoring stats is too easy/hard", though. Before we argue about potential changes, we should first determine if change is needed.

[kurie]

<snip>

Much of this discussion seems to me to have a subtext of "Restoring stats is too easy/hard", though. Before we argue about potential changes, we should first determine if change is needed.

Before I can form a final opinion I am going to continue to play the game in it's current incarnation. It's not a bone jarring change, to be sure. It's just going to force me to play differently. But the discussion is good

[Max Stats]

Much of this discussion seems to me to have a subtext of "Restoring stats is too easy/hard", though. Before we argue about potential changes, we should first determine if change is needed.

I have no issues whatsoever with the new stat restoration handling. I like it that ID-by-use of Mushroom of Debility is easier to deal with now (since early on a level gain is normally not far off).

If anything is going to be done, I would support making Mushrooms of Vigor more evenly distributed so they can be found deeper.

[bio_hazard]

My first game with 3.3.0

I haven't played much since 3.1.2 so there is a lot of new stuff to enjoy here:

My first character- a hobbit rogue... I'm now ~DL 27 @ CL 22...

Wanted to sell my short sword for a dagger at start-up, but nothing lighter than a rapier in the weapon shop!

I enjoy the level feelings, but I kind of wish they were more exuberant. On my first "there may be something worth looking for" or whatever the good item message is- got white dragon scale mail ~600'. I figured it was worth exploring but didn't get the same kind of rush that you might with "You have a Superb Feeling" or whatever. I guess I hadn't realized dragon scale had been nerfed to quite that degree. Really- shouldn't it give better AC than crappy leather armor? I now carry it around just for the activation, but it gives identical AC to an elvenkind armor I found later...

I'm deeper than 1200', and have yet to find ANY EGO WEAPON. No melee, no missle, no ammo. This sucks.

Found a couple of artifacts so far, the Phial, and a cloak (forgot which, it's the one with SI, FA, Resist Fear).

Stat potions have been OK. I think I've found 3 brawn, 2 toughness, and 2 contemplation. I've only been stat-drained once, got my dex brutalized by a poltergeist when I got blocked in a corridor by a bunch of orcs and wolves, and my ?phase kept landing me in the same corridor. Very convenient to have that restored on level up.

Stores in town have always had enough consumables.

I like the new names for the low-level humans.

Dungeon levels have generally been pretty nice. Enough monsters to make it interesting but not enough that I can't get to stairs or pick my battles. I got one "maze" level so far- it was an interesting just as a change from the regular layout, although to be honest I think it would be better if the map were not revealed, or there was something valuable and/or dangerous in there somewhere.

One complaint- it seems like monsters rarely show up on the dungeon-wide map (the one pulled up by shift-m or control-m, can't remember which). At least with objects it gives you the # steps N/S,E/W, but with the monsters, if they are off screen but within detect radius, I have no way to tell which direction they are in. Not sure if this is intended, or just some issue with the subsampling needed to represent things on the dungeon-wide map, but I don't like it.

Overall, the game has been enjoyable (mainly for finding the new things), but kind of slow. Would be more enjoyable if I'd managed to find a decent weapon by now.

[Xaxyx]

And I think that potions shouldn't change their effects based on the player's state.

Potions already change their effects based on the player's state. Stat gain potions give you only 1 point if your stat is below 18, but a random percentage if it's 18 or more, often net gaining you more "steps" in your stat. Thus, the efficacy of the potion is changed based on what your current stat is.

Perhaps less relevantly, potions can often have reduced or no effect depending on a player's state, oftentimes resulting in not even successfully identifying the potion's type when it's quaffed.

Now that I think about it, my suggestion for the additional functionality for up-and-down potions is, ironically, an accidental throwback to how strength-gain potions worked in Rogue. If memory serves, when you drank a strength-gain potion in Rogue while your current stat was below max, you would only restore a point of strength, rather than increasing the max. Thus, it behooved you to save your strength-gain potions until you were lucky enough to first find a restoration potion.

[Derakon]

Potions already change their effects based on the player's state. Stat gain potions give you only 1 point if your stat is below 18, but a random percentage if it's 18 or more, often net gaining you more "steps" in your stat. Thus, the efficacy of the potion is changed based on what your current stat is.

Perhaps less relevantly, potions can often have reduced or no effect depending on a player's state, oftentimes resulting in not even successfully identifying the potion's type when it's quaffed.

So what happened to the drain effect of the stat-swap potions? That's the part I'm objecting to losing.

I quibble with your other examples, too. Obviously there's nothing a healing potion can do if you're already at perfect health. Meanwhile the nonlinear returns on stats above 18 are kinda wonky and conventional wisdom has it that the stat slopes should probably be smoothed out -- thus I'd call this more of a bug (or at least an undesirable edge case) than a precedent.

[Xaxyx]

So what happened to the drain effect of the stat-swap potions? That's the part I'm objecting to losing.

The same thing that happened to the additional steps your stat didn't gain when you drank that stat gain potion with a score of 17 or less. Gone with the wind.

I quibble with your other examples, too. Obviously there's nothing a healing potion can do if you're already at perfect health.

Healing potions have several beneficial effects, the least of which, arguably, is the health restoration. Cure bleed, cure poison, cure confusion, cure stun, cure blindness, can all be provided by some or all of the various healing potions. But if you happen to not be suffering from these effects, then that part of the potion's effect is lost. The reverse is true as well: if you drink a healing potion to remove a malady while at full health, you've lost the health gain.

It didn't have to work this way, either. Consider the precedent of the Potion of Heroism. This potion does three distinct things: heals you; cures you of fear; and gives you an anti-fear buff for a duration. There's no reason why the various healing potions couldn't have provided similar temporary protections.

And then of course, we have the Potion of Life, which provides everything the other healing potions provide, AND restores life levels, AND restores stats. Talk about a multi-function potion! Or better still, the Potion of *Enlightenment*, which lights and reveals the level (good trick for a potion, lighting faraway rooms), identifies all of your items, and then, for no particularly good reason, restores and increases both Int and Wis.

Meanwhile the nonlinear returns on stats above 18 are kinda wonky and conventional wisdom has it that the stat slopes should probably be smoothed out -- thus I'd call this more of a bug (or at least an undesirable edge case) than a precedent.

Tomato, tomato. If anything, the percentage gains have been increased in recent version updates. I'd hardly call this accidental or unintended, conventional wisdom notwithstanding. No, the real wonkiness is the supposition that the theory behind the construction of potion functionality (and mushroom, for that matter) is some collection of straight and narrow principles that delineate what they can and cannot do. Either we should set some fixed principles and change the deviant potions to match, or accept that Vanilla's array of potions is a tad wild 'n' wooly and use that fact as an opportunity to provide useful, interesting tools for spelunkers.

[Derakon]

Okay, you're missing my point here, and I can't tell if you're doing so intentionally or not. I apologize for any unwarranted irritation in the following text.

We have a potion that does A, B, and C, where A is "restore a specific stat", B is "raise that same stat", and C is "drain a random other stat". Then we have a potion that does X, Y and Z, where X is "restore hitpoints", Y is "cure poison", and Z is "cure confusion".

Now, clearly there are situations in which any one of these actions can't occur. A can't occur if the stat in question isn't drained. B can't occur if it's already maxed out. And C can't occur if the stat to be drained is at its minimum (in Angband anyway; in D&D this would just outright kill you, but this isn't D&D). X can't occur if you're at maximum health, Y if you aren't poisoned, and Z if you aren't confused. In any of these situations, the logical default behavior is to simply skip that portion of the potion's effects, while performing the other effects. Is this really up for debate?

Now, you want to introduce a different behavior, which is for the first potion to do A, or if A cannot be performed, to do B and C. Do you see how this is a completely different scenario from the one currently in force? In the current regime, the only reason to skip a sub-effect of a potion is if that sub-effect literally cannot be applied. In your suggested regime, you are skipping a completely applicable sub-effect because another sub-effect can be applied. This makes zero intuitive sense.

[Xaxyx]

Okay, you're missing my point here, and I can't tell if you're doing so intentionally or not. I apologize for any unwarranted irritation in the following text.

I'm just as stubborn as you are, is all. Carry on.

We have a potion that does A, B, and C, where A is "restore a specific stat", B is "raise that same stat", and C is "drain a random other stat". Then we have a potion that does X, Y and Z, where X is "restore hitpoints", Y is "cure poison", and Z is "cure confusion".

Cure Light Wounds works on cuts and blindness, if you'd prefer a concrete example. But I follow you.

Now, clearly there are situations in which any one of these actions can't occur. A can't occur if the stat in question isn't drained. B can't occur if it's already maxed out. And C can't occur if the stat to be drained is at its minimum (in Angband anyway; in D&D this would just outright kill you, but this isn't D&D). X can't occur if you're at maximum health, Y if you aren't poisoned, and Z if you aren't confused. In any of these situations, the logical default behavior is to simply skip that portion of the potion's effects, while performing the other effects. Is this really up for debate?

I"m always game for a good debate. So far we're on the same page, though. Your point is that for these examples, the effects are configured in parallel, rather than in series. Effect B either works or it doesn't, irrespective of whether effect C works or not, and vice versa. Right. Got it.

Now, you want to introduce a different behavior, which is for the first potion to do A, or if A cannot be performed, to do B and C. Do you see how this is a completely different scenario from the one currently in force?

Different, yes. Completely, no. Potions of Contemplation already have five different modes of operation, insofar as that which stat is drained when you quaff one is random. I.e., it works differently, each time you drink one. And that's not even within the player's control; here, the dice reign supreme. All I'm doing is proposing a sixth mode, one that is under the player's control. Assuming he knows what he's drinking, anyway.

In the current regime, the only reason to skip a sub-effect of a potion is if that sub-effect literally cannot be applied. In your suggested regime, you are skipping a completely applicable sub-effect because another sub-effect can be applied. This makes zero intuitive sense.

Ah yes, intuitiveness, the hallmark of Angband. Surely this is the motivation behind the design of the aforementioned *Enlightenment* potion; Time Hound breath; and my personal favorite, ye olde Wand of Wonder.

You're entitled to your opinion and your point of view. I award you ten points for your devotion to your perceived cause. But really, why do you care? So what if we introduce the concept of the modal potion? Is that truly so bizarrely foreign to every other wacky aspect of Angband life that you're offended to the very core of your being?

Can I take a left turn, and at least petition that you consider acknowledging that my solution does provide the raw functionality requisite to satisfy the current desire of some players to have a simpler, more reliable method of restoring lost stats? Can I then goad you into comparing the potential benefits of providing such a solution against the horrific affront my potion model makes against supposed Angband canon?

[Derakon]

I recognize that some players want restoration potions. Hell, they may even come back and that wouldn't bother me much. But they should come back as restoration potions, not by co-opting the stat-swap potions.

And yeah, probably we're making too big a deal out of this. I'm more peeved by the apparent communications failure between us than I am about the desire for stat restoration.