melee hit probability

[Timo Pietilä]

Indeed, they should just use spoilers.

Maybe a bit shorter version: Dying is a poor choice.

IOW you should learn from each death what was that poor choice you made. Don't blame something else.

Ignorance (about monster abilities) should not matter, but rules of the abilities could maybe be a bit more transparent so that you don't have to learn everything in hard way.

Also the huge difference between basic 4 & poison and rest of the elements is something that should be fixed, so that newbie that has learned that resistance for fire reduces damage by 2/3 doesn't get surprised when resistance to high-elements don't follow that same rule.

Of course learning those should not take much time even as it is, but every one of the rule changes that are not clear can be nasty surprise.

IMO monsters should be mystery, but rules should be clear.

[mushroom patch]

Dying from ignorance is a poor choise.

Indeed, they should just use spoilers.

[Tibarius]

re: Derakon ... jumps to ancient / great wyrms

Thanks for explaining Derakon. I agree that those steps are great, yet the power curve is exponential if i see it right. And there will always be Monsters that bear a great threat to the Player if he encounters those Monsters without having the Equipment/power to handle such Monsters. Basically i would compare that with the Speed. If you Encounter a quick (maybe even invis) Monster with huge melee damage, that can kill you as easily as an breath attack if you are still normal speeded (and maybe unable to see invis Monsters). I think that is part of the game design / mechanics and we will hardly be able to avoid this Problem at all. The Player can Encounter too hard Monsters as Long as he has not reached the top Level of power (Equipment). I do not consider that "a broken System".

[Timo Pietilä]

I'd only agree if you added the qualifier "willful", i.e. "willful ignorance". Remember, you can't know what you don't know.

That's one lesson you must learn ASAP in angband: any unknown monster might be able to single-shot you. It's better to learn that earlier than later. Once you learn that and how to adjust your playing for it, game turns surprisingly easy.

[AnonymousHero]

Dying from ignorance is a poor choise.

I'd only agree if you added the qualifier "willful", i.e. "willful ignorance". Remember, you can't know what you don't know.

[Timo Pietilä]

It would allow new players a lot of info (breath damage caps, breath damage lowered by HP, etc) so they can die by poor choices as opposed to dying to ignorance constantly.

Dying from ignorance is a poor choise.

[bio_hazard]

Change "Rod of Probing" to "Stone of Lore", still takes up an inventory slot, but gives automatic full knowledge for any monster looked at or inspected in telepathy range without taking up a turn to activate.

[Derakon]

I am sorry to ask for an Explanation Derakon: I am not able to see what exactly is broken at the current System.

Players should not be killed by massive damage that they could not have expected to be as large as it is. In particular the jumps from mature to ancient dragons, and from ancient to great wyrm, are both huge.

[debo]

In any case, there's plenty of time to think this over - there are several other properly broken things that need fixing first (traps, object ID, lack of rockets, etc).

Totally agree!!!!

[Nick]

I think we can all agree that the current system is broken at some level.

I think I'm with Tibarius here.

The question of how much information to give when is IMHO not one that has a factual answer. There is a spectrum of possibilities, and none of them are going to make everyone 100% happy. So rather than "the system is broken" it's "you can't please everyone" - as usual

In any case, there's plenty of time to think this over - there are several other properly broken things that need fixing first (traps, object ID, etc).

[Tibarius]

re Derakon: broken system

I am sorry to ask for an Explanation Derakon: I am not able to see what exactly is broken at the current System.

[mushroom patch]

I think you should just go with the monsters descriptions for free option and stop pretending it's cheating. If you can get it from spoilers, you should be able to get it from the game. Then you're down to the issue of whether players are curious enough to read all the descriptions.

I think there are other issues to work through before seriously considering procedural monsters. I would recommend rethinking how stealth and unwary monsters work, with a view to moving toward something more like Sil and crawl where they move around and do things. As long as monsters are optional for good players, it doesn't really matter what they do and mysterious ones will simply be ignored.

[Derakon]

There's a very good reason that the recent arc of roguelike development has tended toward streamlining and smoothing the rough edges. It's been hobbled by obscurantism for so long, often under the guise of the "magic" you reference. I think people are a lot less impressed by the mysteries of the theory of large deviations as applied to damage rolls and what kinds of breath weapons the 723rd type of monster they've encountered has than some seem to think.

I think we can all agree that the current system is broken at some level. The question is how to fix it? We can:

* give everyone full monster memory all the time. This loses some of the "discovery" fun of the game, but is guaranteed to work so long as people are willing to read the info on each new monster they see, and understand what they're reading.

* Use a "rune-based ID system" for monster memory, and add monsters as needed so people have a chance to experience each potentially-fatal attack in a "safe" situation before they encounter the really big guns for the first time. Harder to implement than the above, but still has some discovery process, albeit on a systemic level rather than a per-monster level.

* Some third option...?

In any case, solving this problem would allow us to play around with procedurally-generated monsters, which has a lot of potential for keeping the game fresh even for veterans.

[mushroom patch]

I think in the era of DOS shareware, there was something to the "roguelikes are for the children, we teach the children" perspective, but the modern roguelike player is not a kid playing off a three and a half inch floppy on his Dad's office 286 he brings home for the weekends. People have less aggravating alternatives than learning which 50 of the 1000 monsters in angband can one-shot their character by getting one-shot 50+ times. Even if they're looking for the retro charm of games from the 80s and 90s.

I totally understand what you mean by the magic of roguelikes and I felt it myself, but I was eight then.

There's a very good reason that the recent arc of roguelike development has tended toward streamlining and smoothing the rough edges. It's been hobbled by obscurantism for so long, often under the guise of the "magic" you reference. I think people are a lot less impressed by the mysteries of the theory of large deviations as applied to damage rolls and what kinds of breath weapons the 723rd type of monster they've encountered has than some seem to think.

[Carnivean]

And it would be a lot handier for more experienced players that looking at the edit files

You're proposing streamlining the game experience, but you're eliminating the joy of finding something new. If everyone knows everything about everything from the start, then the game is a chore of choosing the right tactic at the right time, several thousand times over.

I find this also applies to mushroom patch's objection to changing the combat system (paraphrasing).

The game loses something of the magic of playing it when things are removed.

Experienced players mostly use randarts to counteract knowing everything about the game. Random monsters, with a rune-based id style, would add a layer of gameplay that complete monster memory would take away. If done right, you remove the death by ignorance, without subtracting anything from the game.