I suspect a lot of the house shuffling phenomenon is based on outdated understanding of the game. We now know/it is now the case that having pConf among many other formerly "essential" resistances is totally unnecessary to win, even if you're going fast and winning with underleveled characters, etc. Agonizing over equipment, what to throw away, etc. is really a nonissue -- you just don't have to do it. Cover your base resistances + darkness, maybe poison and disenchantment, get speed, stealth, AC, and stats on your equipment, play carefully, and you're good.
Increasing home size
Collapse
X
-
-
I suspect a lot of the house shuffling phenomenon is based on outdated understanding of the game. We now know/it is now the case that having pConf among many other formerly "essential" resistances is totally unnecessary to win, even if you're going fast and winning with underleveled characters, etc. Agonizing over equipment, what to throw away, etc. is really a nonissue -- you just don't have to do it. Cover your base resistances + darkness, maybe poison and disenchantment, get speed, stealth, AC, and stats on your equipment, play carefully, and you're good.
EDIT: Just to clarify: Removing the home size limit would at least remove the boring/tedious bit of inventory shuffling required for those who cannot help hoarding "too much". At least then you could limit equipment shuffing to when you, the player, want to do it rather than at arbitrary points in time when you've just raided a vault and suddently have way too much equipment to store in the home. At least one could just dump it and deal with it later. And again: This works absolutely fine in Entro/Poscheng, so I don't see why it wouldn't work in Vanilla.
(Yes, I am saying that players should be protected from themselves, in a sense. This is a big part of good game design.)Comment
-
I agree with you, actually, re: design. On the other hand, the current situation can be defended by saying that optimal play does not require the tedium you're talking about. That's an important point, imo. Tedium is at its worst when it's optimal play. If it's not, well, you can't spend too much time thinking about the silly things a player might do (there's just too much possibility there), you just try not to encourage them.Comment
-
I agree with you, actually, re: design. On the other hand, the current situation can be defended by saying that optimal play does not require the tedium you're talking about. That's an important point, imo. Tedium is at its worst when it's optimal play. If it's not, well, you can't spend too much time thinking about the silly things a player might do (there's just too much possibility there), you just try not to encourage them.Comment
-
I agree with you, actually, re: design. On the other hand, the current situation can be defended by saying that optimal play does not require the tedium you're talking about. That's an important point, imo. Tedium is at its worst when it's optimal play. If it's not, well, you can't spend too much time thinking about the silly things a player might do (there's just too much possibility there), you just try not to encourage them.
AFAIUI the Angband development philosophy is usually "let players play how they want". This was the impression I got from the Roguelike Radio epsidoe many of them did. (I'm paraphrasing, but I believe one example that was brought up was something along the lines of "if you want to dig away every single wall tile on Dlvl 1, then go for it.".)
It's for precisely this reason that I see the home size limit as an arbitrary and pointless restriction, in addition to the annoyance factor of not just being able to dump stuff and sort it out later (once you get past a certain point in the game). If I wanted to restrict my usage of the home (even given infinte room), I could do that in a game where the home was infinite. I couldn't do it the other way round.
Anyway, I think everybody's opinion/position has probably already been established, so I guess we'll just have to wait and see what the dev team decides .Comment
-
Yeah, I agree. There's no good reason not to make home infinite balance-wise and it would lighten some players' psychic load to lift the limits. I screw around with home too much myself and have to remind myself not to worry too much about middling artifact armor and such.Comment
-
-
AFAIUI the Angband development philosophy is usually "let players play how they want". This was the impression I got from the Roguelike Radio epsidoe many of them did. (I'm paraphrasing, but I believe one example that was brought up was something along the lines of "if you want to dig away every single wall tile on Dlvl 1, then go for it.".)
In the 4.0beta code, you can easily change store inventory size in the constants.txt edit file. Making it larger (and no other changes) makes no difference to anything except the home size. There is some slight UI weirdness, which I will look at fixing at some point. When we are making gameplay changes again, home size can certainly be up for consideration - but given the preceding, is it really necessary?
BTW, for those who regularly play with a larger map window, I really recommend changing the town to about 40 rows x 50 columns - it looks much better.One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.Comment
-
Well a seasoned adenturer would surely find a potion making still useful. Besides, there are probably some interesting recipe books and materials that can be found in the dungeon, if one knows what to look for.
Speaking of materials, a rogue could probably use a crafting table to create/repair trap kits for later use
Another one that comes to mind is a crystal ball that can ID all of your items if you are in town.
Also could have a bed that would provide some temporary benefit from sleeping in it.Comment
-
You can also make you home smaller if you want. I briefly considered playing a homeless thrall in FA as a challenge game. It would be just ever so slightly less masochistic than an ironman thrall. But the way the game is structured that would deny me any recall points, so I quickly decided it would be much too tedious. Setting your home size to zero in V would, if I understand things correctly, give you a somewhat more reasonable challenge game if you didn't want to go full ironman.Comment
-
You can also make you home smaller if you want. I briefly considered playing a homeless thrall in FA as a challenge game. It would be just ever so slightly less masochistic than an ironman thrall. But the way the game is structured that would deny me any recall points, so I quickly decided it would be much too tedious. Setting your home size to zero in V would, if I understand things correctly, give you a somewhat more reasonable challenge game if you didn't want to go full ironman.Comment
-
"Nietzsche breathes philosophy...<more>
You are struck by metaphysical nihilsm...<more>
You come to the realisation that there might be no objects."Comment
-
Comment
Comment