How to get rid of the no-selling option

[Antoine]

Currently "no-selling" means that that you get nothing from selling stuff. If you remove that you are not talking about no-selling.

You are right in a literal sense, but do you see what I'm trying to do?

The idea is that if you choose never to sell stuff then you get bigger gold drops. If you change your mind and sell something, then your bigger gold drops go away. So instead of activating the option in a menu, you implicitly activate it by your behaviour.

A.

[Mikko Lehtinen]

Actually, many people do seem to like id-by-use, if it was done better.

But isn't selling to shops for identify almost always better than id-by-use for low-level potions and scrolls? It's both automatic and safe.

As long as the mechanic stays in the game, id-by-use would not get any use, even if it was made super interesting. Low-level characters would sell unidentified scrolls and potions to shops, and high level characters would use spells or staves to identify, just like today.

[Mikko Lehtinen]

The idea is that if you choose never to sell stuff then you get bigger gold drops. If you change your mind and sell something, then your bigger gold drops go away. So instead of activating the option in a menu, you implicitly activate it by your behaviour.

There's one problem: telegraphing the mechanic to the player. Having an option is clearer.

[Timo Pietilä]

Actually, many people do seem to like id-by-use, if it was done better.

But isn't selling to shops for identify almost always better than id-by-use for low-level potions and scrolls? It's both automatic and safe.

IMO ultimately whole ID by spells should go away. Everything should be identified by use or by characters accumulating knowledge.

"Safe" is not quite safe if you sell scroll of *acquirement* to shop early. Or potion of experience. You can't buy it back, not with low level char.

[Timo Pietilä]

You are right in a literal sense, but do you see what I'm trying to do?

The idea is that if you choose never to sell stuff then you get bigger gold drops. If you change your mind and sell something, then your bigger gold drops go away. So instead of activating the option in a menu, you implicitly activate it by your behaviour.

A.

I don't care if my gold drops would be half of normal game with no-selling. I would still prefer it over selling game. Having bigger gold drops is not the point of the setting. Point is that you can't sell anything for money, which removes the temptation to lug around stuff completely.

[Starhawk]

You are right in a literal sense, but do you see what I'm trying to do?

The idea is that if you choose never to sell stuff then you get bigger gold drops. If you change your mind and sell something, then your bigger gold drops go away. So instead of activating the option in a menu, you implicitly activate it by your behaviour.

A.

I think that's a pretty smooth idea, myself. Well done.

[DaviddesJ]

You are right in a literal sense, but do you see what I'm trying to do?

The idea is that if you choose never to sell stuff then you get bigger gold drops. If you change your mind and sell something, then your bigger gold drops go away. So instead of activating the option in a menu, you implicitly activate it by your behaviour.

I understand that this is what you are proposing, but I don't understand why you think anyone would like it better than what we have now.

While "realism" is not the only important aspect of Angband, it's hard to visualize why selling less stuff in town would mean that you would find more gold in the dungeon.

[AnonymousHero]

"Safe" is not quite safe if you sell scroll of *acquirement* to shop early. Or potion of experience. You can't buy it back, not with low level char.

Excellent point. Hadn't thought of that -- although I think I've experienced the "acquirement" version of this semi-recently. Given the more "extreme" randomness of early consumables in Angband 3.5 (wip) this might actually become more common.

You are right in a literal sense, but do you see what I'm trying to do?

I don't think there's any doubt -- it's definitely a clever idea... which is predicated on false premises (AFAICT based on other posts).

[Mikko Lehtinen]

Given the more "extreme" randomness of early consumables in Angband 3.5 (wip) this might actually become more common.

Extreme randomness for consumables is really fun. I'm been playtesting it for Halls of Mist. It might be problematic with Angband's infinite levels, though, allowing players to grind for good potions on shallow levels.

In Sangband, using unidentified consumables has an increased effect. For example, drinking a restore potion unidentified increases your stat! This mechanic seems to work really well, and I don't see why it couldn't be adopted for Vanilla.

[DaviddesJ]

In Sangband, using unidentified consumables has an increased effect. For example, drinking a restore potion unidentified increases your stat! This mechanic seems to work really well

So does this mean you can only do it once, and then you know what that potion does and you can't get this boosted benefit again? Or does it mean that you can do this any number of times? Neither of those seems to fit "really well". It seems like it's just punishing you for using identification. And it totally breaks plausibility. I can see how you can imagine that using a magical effect on a potion to identify it could change its potency. But how could it change the potency of other potions of the same type? What is the benefit of this?

[Mikko Lehtinen]

So does this mean you can only do it once, and then you know what that potion does and you can't get this boosted benefit again? Or does it mean that you can do this any number of times? Neither of those seems to fit "really well". It seems like it's just punishing you for using identification. And it totally breaks plausibility. I can see how you can imagine that using a magical effect on a potion to identify it could change its potency. But how could it change the potency of other potions of the same type? What is the benefit of this?

You can only do it once per potion or scroll type, when you use the first one unidentified.

Yes, it's punishing you for using identification or selling un-id:d consumables to shops. That's because identify by use is more fun. Of course it's also risky, and bigger risks should have bigger rewards.

Plausibility? Perhaps: "Magic gains strength from being mysterious." If this explanation was offered to me in a faery tale, I wouldn't blink. And in real world, what people believe afffects the potency of drugs, and this has been proven scientifically.

BTW, Leon Marrick made another identification experiment in Sangband, too. Mushrooms can't be identified by Identify effects, they have to be eaten.

[DaviddesJ]

Yes, it's punishing you for using identification or selling un-id:d consumables to shops. That's because identify by use is more fun.

Ugh. Seriously?

If that's really "more fun", why not get rid of identify scrolls/magic? Or just have it not work on potions?

This certainly illustrates how you're never going to make a game that different people all like.

[Mikko Lehtinen]

Heh, yeah. But I think Sangband is pretty good at balancing things for both kinds of people. Id by use and Identify are both viable tactics, I'm not sure which one is better.

[Tregonsee]

[QUOTE=AnonymousHero;84087]Excellent point. Hadn't thought of that -- although I think I've experienced the "acquirement" version of this semi-recently. Given the more "extreme" randomness of early consumables in Angband 3.5 (wip) this might actually become more common.
[QUOTE]


(wip)?

[AnonymousHero]

(wip)?

wip = work in progress