Terrain

[Nick]

Current Angband terrain is essentially

• floors
• walls
• doors
• stairs
• shops

Variants have other types of terrain; I have been used for a while now to FAangband and Oangband terrain, trees, lava and water being the most prominent.

I would like to consider the possibility of adding terrain types to Angband. Some of the features that new terrain types might have (aside from thematic niceness) include

• Breaking line of sight, but still being passable
• Taking longer for the player and/or some monsters to move through
• Hurting the player and/or monsters
• Being passable under some circumstances and impassable under others
• Slowing or speeding player/monsters
• Making player/monsters easier or harder to hit with spells/missiles/melee
• Offering combat bonuses or penalties

What do people think about any of this?

[Patashu]

Obligatory 'Brogue's terrain system is awesome' post.

[Nick]

Obligatory 'Brogue's terrain system is awesome' post.

What's awesome about it (apart from pretty)?

[nppangband]

I would like to consider the possibility of adding terrain types to Angband. Some of the features that new terrain types might have (aside from thematic niceness) include

• Breaking line of sight, but still being passable
• Taking longer for the player and/or some monsters to move through
• Hurting the player and/or monsters
• Being passable under some circumstances and impassable under others
• Slowing or speeding player/monsters
• Making player/monsters easier or harder to hit with spells/missiles/melee
• Offering combat bonuses or penalties

What do people think about any of this?

Sounds like something some awesome variants have already done.

It seems good, although I will say that, for the amount of effort we put into the NPP terrain system, we didn't get as much out of it as we thought we would. It is nice to see more variety in the dungeon.

There are all kinds of cool combat and movement penalties and bonuses happening while somebody is playing NPP, but it is hard to explain to the player in mid-game that they get a +15 to hit bonus if they are native to a certain terrain, or they move 10% more efficiently. Because the player doesn't know it is happening, they don't get much enjoyment out of it. We have never really solved that problem.

[Nick]

There are all kinds of cool combat and movement penalties and bonuses happening while somebody is playing NPP, but it is hard to explain to the player in mid-game that they get a +15 to hit bonus if they are native to a certain terrain, or they move 10% more efficiently. Because the player doesn't know it is happening, they don't get much enjoyment out of it. We have never really solved that problem.

This is a really good point. Any introduction of new terrain into V would I think have to be gradual, and try to make clear exactly how new features behave.

[buzzkill]

Sounds like something some awesome variants have already done.

That was my first thought. Second was, get the terrains that are already there working first (after the rewrite). I'm thinking about doors in particular.

There are all kinds of cool combat and movement penalties and bonuses happening while somebody is playing NPP, but it is hard to explain to the player in mid-game that they get a +15 to hit bonus if they are native to a certain terrain, or they move 10% more efficiently. Because the player doesn't know it is happening, they don't get much enjoyment out of it. We have never really solved that problem.

Yep. The NPP terrains are plentiful and are pretty to look at. It's fun to set stuff on fire but I mostly don't what if any effect most have.

[Antoine]

I think that if you are going to have terrains they should be dungeony terrains - not outdoorsy terrains like forest or swamp.

I also think you should be cautious about introducing terrains that block LOS or prevent monster movement, as these are likely to take a lot of effort to implement.

A.

PS The inside of a vault is kind of a different terrain type at present, isn't it?

[Malak Darkhunter]

I really enjoy the cracks of lava and chambers of water that is in Sangband, the small copes of trees are okay to and break los. Themed levels of forest or sandy terreain seems kind of confusing to me( must be the wide open spaces). But I think Angband could use some new terrain features, and this gives food for thought for new types of vaults as well. "Terrained Vaults" anyone?

[Derakon]

There are two things that terrain adds to the game. The first is flavor; the second is tactical decision-making. Flavorful additions are pretty much going to get rubber-stamped around here so long as they're done well, I suspect. Making tactically-significant terrain is trickier.

For example, say you have a terrain that gives the entity standing in it penalties to-hit and to-damage (say, because they're snared by webs). Okay, how is the player going to make use of this? It could be helpful in one-on-one fights, but against groups there's basically no tactical shift you could present (under the current rules system) that would convince the player to step out of their cubbyhole. So such "tactically significant" terrain would functionally amount to randomly giving the player a bonus or penalty depending on how their cubbyhole happened to be affected by the terrain.

In short, I'm all for tactically-significant terrain if it's done well, but that doesn't amount to coming up with some tile modifiers and then slapping them down in the dungeon at random. Well, such modifiers could still be interesting in the early game, before being in LOS of multiple monsters becomes so suicidal.

THAT SAID, here's some brainstorming:

* Regions where sight lines are drastically curtailed (and symmetrically so). Functionally if either the player or a monster is standing in this region, then the "Halve view and spell distances" option would be toggled (or even moreso if already set). This would need to take over an entire room at minimum.

* Regions where every source of damage deals exactly 10% of the target's HP (or similarly; the point being that if you take damage, you take a proportionate amount of your max HP, and the same holds for monsters). Ideally should be symmetrical somehow.

* Traps that simulate magical turrets are in some variants (NPP? Un?) and should be copy-able pretty straightforwardly. They have a view cone that rotates each turn, and they fire on creatures in that cone with their designated element. IMO should not ever be hidden though.

* Regions that pull points from one of the player's stats to feed into another. E.g. while you're in this area, your INT is dropped 5 and your WIS is bumped 5, or vice versa. Possibly beneficial, possibly not, depending on your class and circumstances.

Paramount to this kind of setup is having a way to inform the player of what's going on. One possible approach is to make such terrain effects recallable, i.e. if you use the / command on the terrain token in question, then it will tell you what effects the token has. So e.g. you 'l'ook at a tile, it says "You see a Pink Mist of Madness (recall?)", you choose to recall, it says "While standing in this terrain, you are automatically given the Berserk and Haste statuses, but your spells suffer an additional 20% failure rate." Or whatever.

[clouded]

One thing to keep in mind is that while Angband has an appeal in its excess (game scope, resistance system, large scale fights and so on) it also has an appeal in its minimalism (starkness of the dungeon, monster design, general game flow). I like FA wilderness for what it is and I'm fine with O/FA dungeon only terrain, being very sparse and almost entirely confined to making vaults a little prettier.

But from the little I've played NPP definitely seems the wrong way to do terrain - tons of it all over the place, lots of random rules about it which still end up being pretty meaningless, looks ugly. Sorry to say but Sil is also an example of not doing it very well in my view, chasms give very little gain in general gameplay but add a bunch of weird complexity while appearing all over the place in game renowned for minimalism.

Another thing is that terrain, being static might encourage you to draw as many monsters as you can to them. If there are 'good zones' in the dungeon you would obviously want to fight anything there if it is reasonable to do so. Additionally bad terrain is only interesting if monsters are around and then usually only relevant if there is a lot of it.

[Patashu]

What's awesome about it (apart from pretty)?

It has concepts of

-Flammability. Short and tall grass, fungus, bridges, wooden barricades and doors, etc can all catch on fire and spread fire, and then become burned out afterwards. Because fire is commonly available to both you and certain enemy types and even incorporated into traps and puzzles, it matters all the time.

-LOS manipulation. Tall grass can be pushed through but blocks sight. Chasms, water and lava allow sight across terrain you might not be able to cross (or they might not be able to cross). Crystaline walls are solid but translucent, and in some cases temporary, other cases able to reflect magic from their surface. Statues are solid but transparent too.

-Atmospheric lighting. Stuff like lava, fire, some enemies, glowing cave fungus and crystaline walls give off light. And since the dungeon gradually but noticably becomes darker as you progress down, it looks very cool and begins to matter more and more. You can also throw a potion of shadows to create a cloud of anti-light to hide inside of and throw off pursuants.

-Adding and removing escapes. Bridges can lead you and monsters across chasms and water, but can be burned down. Potions of descent can create a chasm for you, enemies or allies. Some monsters can't cross water/lava/chasms, while others can, and you can swim, or use magical items to get across these gaps. You can create temporary walls with obstruction, and remove them with digging and shattering.

-I haven't played much since it was added, but I believe there are now one-use plants that can be whacked to release healing gas, so you're encouraged to explore, fall back, etc to replenish your resources, especially since the food clock is rather strict. Having a REASON to go to or back to a room is a very cool aspect. BUT, at the same time, it's also one use, so there's no huge 'I have to fight every fight in this room' aspect to it.

-And yes, it's very pretty~

I guess I'm missing some other stuff too, like spider webs and the various gasses, that kind of count as terrain too. But yeah, Brogue is worth playing if you're curious about how terrain can matter in a roguelike.

[Malak Darkhunter]

I kind of feel like too much terrain (as in Un) can be very confusing, Angband I think should retain a "clean" looking dungeon, added terrain should be interesting but not overly complicated. In some variants walking through water while enemy are in the room slows you down, and also slows them down...lava burns you, this is simple to understand but also interesting. I would encourage "keep it simple, keep it safe" . Room descriptions are interesting but I barely pay attention to them, glyphs and messages on walls are also kind of interesting without creating to much clutter.

here is a neat idea for Vault type doors " Glyph sealed doors" that cause some status effect or summoning if they are bashed into.

[buzzkill]

-And yes, it's very pretty~

But most of it, if not all of it works because there is no Brogue town. If a player had unlimited supplies of magic mapping, levitation, etc. it would all become meaningless. In Angband, because of limitless supplies, it would all be meaningless.

Traps in Brogue work only because there is no 100% fail-safe detection (well, there is, but it rare enough that we'll just pretend it doesn't exist. You might get one or two magic maps in a long game.) and often no form of magical detection at all is available to the player. I could go on and on with dozens of similar examples, but there is no need to. It's obvious to anyone who has played, and would be far easier for a novice to grasp through playing rather than lengthy a text explanation.

[Patashu]

But most of it, if not all of it works because there is no Brogue town. If a player had unlimited supplies of magic mapping, levitation, etc. it would all become meaningless. In Angband, because of limitless supplies, it would all be meaningless.

Traps in Brogue work only because there is no 100% fail-safe detection (well, there is, but it rare enough that we'll just pretend it doesn't exist. You might get one or two magic maps in a long game.) and often no form of magical detection at all is available to the player. I could go on and on with dozens of similar examples, but there is no need to. It's obvious to anyone who has played, and would be far easier for a novice to grasp through playing rather than lengthy a text explanation.

Right. Almost everything about Brogue only works because it is very tight and puts limits on all your resources, all hinging on the existence of an unescapable food clock.

[Nick]

One thing to keep in mind is that while Angband has an appeal in its excess (game scope, resistance system, large scale fights and so on) it also has an appeal in its minimalism (starkness of the dungeon, monster design, general game flow).

This fits very well with my view. I am inclined to think actual terrain features should be very simple but distinct from each other, and allow gameplay to emerge from that and good dungeon design rather than setting up complex interactions. This is something that Angband and Sil already do very well.

The Brogue ideas are interesting - some of them fit with what I'm already thinking, and others certainly have potential (I like the atmospheric lighting idea).

As to Derakon's effects ideas, I see them as belonging not so much with terrain as with location and traps (which as of the restructure are not terrain). In a similar vein we could allow trapped doors.

In fact, come to think of it, maybe locked/jammed doors would be better handled as basic doors with a "trap" applied. Hmmm.