Elements, resistances and side effects

[Nick]

Current situation

There are 4 types of elements:

1. The "basics": Acid, Electricity, Fire, Cold. Damage cap 1600, temporary and permanent resistance available, each of which cuts damage by 2/3 (stacking to 8/9 with both). Immunity also available.
2. "High" resists: Light, Dark, Sound, Shards, Nexus, Nether, Chaos, Disenchantment. Damage caps 500ish, permanent resistance available cutting damage by a variable amount (can be as little as 1/7). Some side effects (Light and Dark cause blindness, etc), all prevented by the resistance.
3. Poison: Damage cap 800, temporary and permanent resistance like the basics, no immunity, side effect poisoning.
4. Unresistables: Time, Force, Inertia, Gravity, Plasma, Water, Ice, Mana. Damage caps 1-200, no resistances, some side effects.

Note that the damage caps are for breaths only, not spells and that some side effects are avoidable by protections (pStun avoids stunning from Sound, etc).

So a player who double resists the basics or poison faces about the same damage from those as from the unresistables; damage from high elements can be greater.

What should change?

Suggestions include:

• It should be simpler to understand
• It should be more consistent
• Permanent resistances should stack in some manner
• Unresistables should be reduced or removed
• It should remain possible to get a "complete set of resistances"

My opinions

My response is, as usual, to remind everyone that the code restructure happens first (maybe that should be my sig).

After that, I like buzzkill's idea of displaying percentage resistances on the character sheet, regardless of whether the system changes at all. I was going to also recommend adding detail to the help, before going and having a look and finding that it's already there.

I am not in favour of changing to incremental or percentage resistances - yet. I'd like to see how some other things play out first.

As far as consistency goes, I think the important thing is to make effects make sense. Looking at ice for example, it is cold, hard and spiky. So cold effect + cutting seems like a reasonable outcome.

One thing that I am very much in favour of is ensuring that the elements remain distinct from each other. I believe this is fairly well done at the moment, but there are a few places where the effect is not very distinctive - force and plasma are the obvious culprits here. Hounds are quite a good barometer for this issue - every kind of hound should make the player feel different.

I am also rather a fan of the concept of unresisted or powerful attacks having extra side-effects - for example (from O) strong unresisted cold draining CON, or strong dark attacks inducing fear in the absence of pFear. Or disenchantment removing magic effects like haste

[molybdenum]

• It should be simpler to understand
• It should be more consistent

A few more thoughts about consistency:

• Electricity/lightning: pick one name for these.
• Cold/frost: use one name for these, keeping in mind ice (if that's staying).
• Air/poison/cloud: use one name, since there is connection (air hound, stinking cloud/cloudkill).

• Permanent resistances should stack in some manner

I think it's fine that permanent resists don't stack; either you have it or you don't. What might be a bit confusing is the interaction between permanent and temporary resists. Perhaps it's just another case of naming, where another term/concept could be used for temporary resists (even though the mechanics are the same).

• Unresistables should be reduced or removed

Unresistables should stay as well. In a lot of those cases, they have status effects. Perhaps it might make sense to create an entire set of effect resistances (not unlike how pStun, pConf, pBlind, and such were pulled out). So, instead of resisting shards, you might have a resistance to cuts. The player would still get general damage from shards, but if they have cut resistance, they have a decreased chance of actually getting the cut status.

As far as consistency goes, I think the important thing is to make effects make sense. Looking at ice for example, it is cold, hard and spiky. So cold effect + cutting seems like a reasonable outcome.

One thing that I am very much in favour of is ensuring that the elements remain distinct from each other. I believe this is fairly well done at the moment, but there are a few places where the effect is not very distinctive - force and plasma are the obvious culprits here. Hounds are quite a good barometer for this issue - every kind of hound should make the player feel different.

Unless I'm misunderstanding, I don't think that force and plasma are similar. If anything, force and nexus could be merged into a general displacement effect, since all nexus does now is teleport. Disenchantment and acid are similar in effect on objects; maybe disenchantment becomes a higher level acid attack (disintegration?) with some other effects. As mentioned in the other thread, you could merge gravity and inertia, as well as nether and time.

Also, cutting and poison are too similar. They both do damage per turn and impair regeneration. The only difference is that cutting has different levels. Perhaps poison could damage hunger (if that sticks around) or reduce max HP (until cured).

I am also rather a fan of the concept of unresisted or powerful attacks having extra side-effects - for example (from O) strong unresisted cold draining CON, or strong dark attacks inducing fear in the absence of pFear. Or disenchantment removing magic effects like haste

Why not just make dark always have a side effect of fear? That would make it distinct from light, which would still blind.

[Magnate]

Current situation

There are 4 types of elements:

1. The "basics": Acid, Electricity, Fire, Cold. Damage cap 1600, temporary and permanent resistance available, each of which cuts damage by 2/3 (stacking to 8/9 with both). Immunity also available.
2. "High" resists: Light, Dark, Sound, Shards, Nexus, Nether, Chaos, Disenchantment. Damage caps 500ish, permanent resistance available cutting damage by a variable amount (can be as little as 1/7). Some side effects (Light and Dark cause blindness, etc), all prevented by the resistance.
3. Poison: Damage cap 800, temporary and permanent resistance like the basics, no immunity, side effect poisoning.
4. Unresistables: Time, Force, Inertia, Gravity, Plasma, Water, Ice, Mana. Damage caps 1-200, no resistances, some side effects.

Note that the damage caps are for breaths only, not spells and that some side effects are avoidable by protections (pStun avoids stunning from Sound, etc).

So a player who double resists the basics or poison faces about the same damage from those as from the unresistables; damage from high elements can be greater.

Very nice summary - with such a good grasp of V you should think about becoming maintainer ...

It should be simpler to understand

I've always shared the general view that this is desirable - but looking at the way you've set it out neatly, if we leave aside the anomaly of poison there are three broad categories of element that are pretty simple to understand: basic, high and unresistable.

This makes me wonder whether we could achieve much of what we want quite simply: make poison either a proper common basic resist, or a proper lower-damage higher resist, and then make the damage reduction from high resists consistent (say, 1/3 or 1/2).

It should be more consistent

I agree that variable resistance to higher elements is painful and doesn't add more than it detracts. I don't think there are too many other inconsistencies left now that we've properly separated resistance to damage from protection against side effects. (It takes a little thought to understand that resistance grants you protection from that element's side effects but not to the same effect from a different source, but makes sense once you get there.)

Permanent resistances should stack in some manner

I'm sure you (and many others) are aware of this, but let's keep it spelled out: this is an issue about equipment slots and inventory management, not about gameplay. Monster damage can be balanced around whatever quantum of resistance we expect @ to have - whether this comes from one source or two or ten is irrelevant. What it does affect is how often resists appear, and on what types of items (and other sources), etc.

I'm in favour of stacking because I like more complexity in the equipment subgame, but others don't want that. As ever it will be hard to please everyone.

Unresistables should be reduced or removed

I rarely disagree with you, but I think the principle of there existing unresistables is important. I know that more resists would make for more equipment choices, but if everything was resistable I think we would lose an important dimension of the game's flavour. Gravity hounds are one of the most iconic features of the game.

It should remain possible to get a "complete set of resistances"

Pace the unresistables, I agree that it should be possible to obtain a complete set of resistances to the *effects* of all resistable elements. What I don't like is the idea that it should be possible to achieve completely optimised resistance to all forms of damage. I like the idea that you could always improve your damage resistance against one element if you were prepared to give up something else.

My response is, as usual, to remind everyone that the code restructure happens first (maybe that should be my sig).

Mos' def'.

[Antoine]

IMO poison should do more of its damage on a DOT basis (which would involve poisoning doing more damage per round).

A.

[Nick]

I should have made this clearer - the suggestions I mentioned were other people's, not mine. My opinions (non-committal and weaselly as they are) are in the last part of the original post.

I will edit that.

[MattB]

since all nexus does now is teleport.

I'm sure my paladin had a WIS/INT scramble in 3.5dev the other day...

[Nomad]

I'm in favour of stacking because I like more complexity in the equipment subgame, but others don't want that. As ever it will be hard to please everyone.

And to summarise my much more rambly response to this from the other thread, I'm anti-stacking because I always play randarts and the equipment subgame for those is complicated enough already; making it more so would push it from satisfyingly difficult to frustrating and unrewarding.

I'm also in favour of making things more consistent and intuitive, but not of removing unresistables or merging different elements into each other; the long list of attacks and resistances is a big part of Angband's unique flavour for me.

[LostTemplar]

equipment subgame for those is complicated enough already

Sadly I never can understand such a reasoning like this, probably we should split Angband in two games: One for optimizers, and one for others.

Just to say, some people never ever try to "optimize". You play, grow up, win when you can. No place for optimization. No grinding. No boredom. IMHO, optimization in any way is bad, it frustrates optimizers in form of "grinding", and it frustrates others in form of "all the ladder winners are the same". If characters will be improvable indefinitely it will be much better game.

[Nomad]

Sadly I never can understand such a reasoning like this, probably we should split Angband in two games: One for optimizers, and one for others.

Just to say, some people never ever try to "optimize". You play, grow up, win when you can. No place for optimization. No grinding. No boredom. IMHO, optimization in any way is bad, it frustrates optimizers in form of "grinding", and it frustrates others in form of "all the ladder winners are the same". If characters will be improvable indefinitely it will be much better game.

No grinding involved - I'm just talking about the "optimisation puzzle" of deciding which combination of equipment out of the ones you've gathered on your descent is best to wear. Excessive complexity makes it hard to compare one kit to another and get any satisfaction out of having found something better than you had before.

[fizzix]

AFAIK, unless you're playing my custom version, Nexus still does stat scramble. I'm pretty sure this hasn't been pulled into V (and probably shouldn't given the dislike of this.)

What changes, if any, are relevant in this topic for the core-ui split.

[molybdenum]

I'm sure my paladin had a WIS/INT scramble in 3.5dev the other day...

Indeed, you are right. I thought that had been turned off. In that case, the stat swapping part could just be moved into chaos.

[MattB]

Current situation

There are 4 types of elements:

1. The "basics": Acid, Electricity, Fire, Cold. Damage cap 1600, temporary and permanent resistance available, each of which cuts damage by 2/3 (stacking to 8/9 with both). Immunity also available.
2. "High" resists: Light, Dark, Sound, Shards, Nexus, Nether, Chaos, Disenchantment. Damage caps 500ish, permanent resistance available cutting damage by a variable amount (can be as little as 1/7). Some side effects (Light and Dark cause blindness, etc), all prevented by the resistance.
3. Poison: Damage cap 800, temporary and permanent resistance like the basics, no immunity, side effect poisoning.
4. Unresistables: Time, Force, Inertia, Gravity, Plasma, Water, Ice, Mana. Damage caps 1-200, no resistances, some side effects.

I think these categories make perfect sense if you think of them as follows:

- Things I can attack my finger with in my own kitchen
I can freeze, heat, electrify and acid-burn my finger in my own kitchen

- Things I can attack my body, but not my finger, with in my own kitchen
I.e. poison

- Things I can't effectively hurt my finger, or my body, with in my own kitchen
Namely Chaos, Nether, Nexus, Disenchantment, Light, Dark and Sound (my kitchen radio doesn't go very loud).

- Things that exist in my kitchen, but I can't control in any way
Gravity, Plasma, Force, Time, Inertia and, er, mana. (This Linnean approach proves, once and for all, that Water should become a higher resist and Ice should be done away with, or just become a combined Cold and Shard attack).

Dammit! Shards, I forgot about that. It should obviously become a basic resistance. There, sorted. Simple.


EDIT: Added Nexus and Inertia

[Tregonsee]

I think (although may have been said in the last post) that if one can resist cold and shards, then one should be able to resist ice. There may be a few other cases that would apply in a like manner.

[m0stlym0nk]

Not going to lie to ya, I really love the existing resistance system, and always thought it one of the cool, defining and distinguishing characteristics of Angband.

There's a lot to like:

I like how the model, by avoiding percentages, communicates that there is a whole lot more game to worry about once you resist something. The percentage model, like diablo, is servicable, but it draws excessive number-counting focus on a resistance. I dislike feeling like I'm playing a spreadsheet. A straight up "you now resist this" says "... and lordy, there's a lot more to focus on thereafter! get to it!"

Further, binary resists act as a very satisfying achievement/milestone (in the conventional usages of the words, not in the X-Box sense). Bam! You now resist Fire! Sheboom! You now resist that spooky sounding Nether! Very satisfying, and on to the next!

The temporary resists you can get for the low subset is really what adds a new dimension and makes the whole feature really distinctive and cool. And, importantly, temporary bonus resists are a key and fundamental part of class differentiation. Play a priest, and you will not be double-resing Electricity, etc. This is very cool, and a very substantial way to make classes feel different.

Further, I really dig the idea that there is a damage/attack type that reduces your HP, but also has the additional axis of status ailments, debuffs, and reductions associated with them.

Put it all together and you have a really unique and satisfying system of attack types and resistance. Top notch, in my book.

But I admit it has a couple rough edges.

• Double res lows is a challenge to communicate to a player.
• You can only resist something once from equipment (binary no stacking), which may not always be immediately clear to a new player.
• A couple attack types are not quite consistent in naming (free action / paralysis, and perhaps other "says X, does Y" instances).

I have a sneaking suspicion that it's the above points of potential confusion that gets many people thinking of revamps to the resistance system. If that's the case, then the problem really is one of eduction and presentation, and not an issue of the underlying system itself (one that, as mentioned I think rocks and is a core characteristic of the Angband experience).

If so, what would be some better ways to clarify and present the whole model? It seems like we have three areas to communicate: left bar of main window, text scroll, and the character info page. I think there's lots of room (figuratively and literally) to communicate how things worth either explicitly or by implication.

As a small example, looking at the phrasing we use for, saying, quaffing a potion that gives you resistance to heat - as opposed to the phrasing we use for things that give you the basic item-based single resist.

Similarly on the "just the phrasing" theme, would categorizing lows when we refer to them aid the player in understand the "lows" concept? IE, you find a Shield of Resistance. Instead we call it a Shield of Elemental Resistance or somesuch: ie, we introduce a new vocabulary that we can then use elsewhere consistently to subtly teach the player / organize for the player the different aspects of resistances. This can get wordy of course ("Potion of Resist Elemental Fire") , but perhaps a language/vocabulary review/strengthening can address some of this.

Or, does the awesome alternate character stats page that shows the resistance/ability/etc matrix actually get players misinterpreting the non-stacking aspect of resistances? Is there an alternate or enhanced way to communicate the issue more clearly?

[Derakon]

My plan for Pyrel here is to have a resistance grid shown in the left-hand sidebar at all times:



A resistance that is "colored in" is permanently resisted; the plan is to make them boxed if the player has temporary resistance, and bolded for immunity (though I grant this is not yet implemented). This better-communicates the quaternary nature of Angband resistances (nothing/permanent/temporary/immunity). Additionally, mousing over the resistance grid ought to tell the player how much damage they take from that element (e.g. "You take only 1/3rd normal damage from fire"). When the player puts on an additional resistance source and a) sees no change in the grid, and b) sees the mouseover tooltip tell them the same thing, they should be able to figure out that resistances don't stack.

EDIT: also, gravity shouldn't be in the grid; ignore that.