Plans for 4.1 - 4.3

[debo]

That said, the nine classes idea is GREAT!

Make sure each of the ringwraiths has one of these class themes.

[Nomad]

I think, given the existing classes, I'd choose to break a nine-class system down something more like this:

NO MAGIC:

Warrior (pure warrior)
Archer (warrior + archer)
Assassin (warrior + stealth)

ARCANE MAGIC

Mage (pure caster)
Ranger (caster + archer)
Rogue (caster + warrior + stealth)

HOLY MAGIC

Priest (pure caster)
Paladin (caster + warrior)
Druid (caster + archer + stealth)

Plus I'd give each of the archer classes a different missile weapon competency: one slings, one bows, one crossbows.

[Zireael]

Make sure each of the ringwraiths has one of these class themes.

That's just an added bonus

[maboleth]

I just need to figure out how to play with them on my little laptop screen. Well, pretty big as far as laptops go. But I switched to ASCII because tiles were so hard to see. They do look beautiful in the posts, though.

You have many options for tiles on a tiny screen, from Adam Bolt's 16x16 to famous David Gervais' 32x32.
The thing is, Shockbolt could make Angband a 21st century game, played on big screens with amazing graphics. For years Andgband felt and looked the same. I love it and will always love Vanilla + David Gervais tiles, but it's time to refresh and move forward.
We have the designer HERE, to make the stuff for this game. And for free. But unfortunately nobody seems to care.

[mrrstark]

You have many options for tiles on a tiny screen, from Adam Bolt's 16x16 to famous David Gervais' 32x32.
The thing is, Shockbolt could make Angband a 21st century game, played on big screens with amazing graphics. For years Andgband felt and looked the same. I love it and will always love Vanilla + David Gervais tiles, but it's time to refresh and move forward.
We have the designer HERE, to make the stuff for this game. And for free. But unfortunately nobody seems to care.

Shockbolt's stuff does look good. But, as another poster stated, they lack definition and are hard to read in-game. This was also a problem in Tome4.

If Shockbolt's tiles could be fixed to:

• make foreground more distinct from background ('pop')
• make types-of-things readable with a glance
• make shadow direction and perspective consistent so things look like they're all on the same perspective-plane

Then I think we'd see his art picked up in lots of games and look awesome. He definitely has a recognizable style.

[MattB]

You have many options for tiles on a tiny screen, from Adam Bolt's 16x16 to famous David Gervais' 32x32.
The thing is, Shockbolt could make Angband a 21st century game, played on big screens with amazing graphics. For years Andgband felt and looked the same. I love it and will always love Vanilla + David Gervais tiles, but it's time to refresh and move forward.
We have the designer HERE, to make the stuff for this game. And for free.

All agreed.

But unfortunately nobody seems to care.

Wrong.

[Nick]

You have many options for tiles on a tiny screen, from Adam Bolt's 16x16 to famous David Gervais' 32x32.
The thing is, Shockbolt could make Angband a 21st century game, played on big screens with amazing graphics. For years Andgband felt and looked the same. I love it and will always love Vanilla + David Gervais tiles, but it's time to refresh and move forward.
We have the designer HERE, to make the stuff for this game. And for free. But unfortunately nobody seems to care.

Sorry for not responding to this earlier - it has been on my mind. I will post my thoughts on tiles in a separate thread soon.

[maboleth]

Well I'm very glad that Nick and others responded and we will move forward with this.

@mrrstark I think a good deal of tiles can already be used as-is. And thus, make a pure Shockbolt 64x64 set. Currently it's been mixed with upsized David Gervais' tiles. However, I do agree what you said about perspective and items (generic scrolls come to mind). BUT as long as Shockbolt is here and devs are willing to utilize his work and let him know, I do believe he could work with the team to fix all issues and create the missing stuff.
I don't know him personally but so far the guy proved to be dedicated to roguelike games and has an amazing talent. Let's not waste it.

[Jungle_Boy]

I think, given the existing classes, I'd choose to break a nine-class system down something more like this:

NO MAGIC:

Warrior (pure warrior)
Archer (warrior + archer)
Assassin (warrior + stealth)

ARCANE MAGIC

Mage (pure caster)
Ranger (caster + archer)
Rogue (caster + warrior + stealth)

HOLY MAGIC

Priest (pure caster)
Paladin (caster + warrior)
Druid (caster + archer + stealth)

Plus I'd give each of the archer classes a different missile weapon competency: one slings, one bows, one crossbows.

I had been thinking along similar lines for classes. I broke it out into melee/ranged/caster and no magic/arcane/holy. This gives 8 classes, a no magic caster would be tough, and I don't think it would be very hard to implement with the addition of a couple extra flags to be used in the edit files. The classes would be:

No magic:
Warrior (melee) - as current but worse at shooting and with minimum range hit penalty.
Marksman (ranged) - adept with any ranged weapon, pretty bad with anything else. Benefits would be, no minimum range, extended shooting distance, increased critical hits with ranged weapons.

Arcane:
Mage (caster) - as current, with minimum range hit penalty
Ranger (ranged) - less good at melee, minimum range hit penalty
Rogue (melee) - as current more melee focused, minimum range hit penalty

Holy:
Priest (caster) - as current, minimum range hit penalty
Holy archer (ranged) - needs a better name, proficient with crossbows, benefits associated with them.
Paladin (melee) - as current, minimum range hit penalty

Possible 9th class:
Scholar - can cast magic from both schools but only store books. Not sure how viable it would be.

[fizzix]

Holy archer (ranged) - needs a better name, proficient with crossbows, benefits associated with them.

On retrospect, I'm thinking one range-based class is enough. I do think it's a bit stifling that the current ranged class is limited to bow-expertise. I think a single focused ranged-melee class is probably good. Let them be good at both bows and crossbows and reasonable at throwing (which should be where slings fit in).

The no-spells, spellcaster is naturally an anti-magic class. Innate resistances, high saving throws, half damage to pure magic effects (magic missle, mana bolt, mana storm) Casters within N squares have increased fail chances on spells. Basically it will play like a tank class.

[Derakon]

I would much rather have a small number of highly-distinct classes than a large number of poorly-differentiated classes. Don't try to shoehorn in 3 classes per magic realm if you can't come up with good ideas for them.

Conceptually an antimagic class sounds plausible, but make certain it doesn't outshine the warrior, and not just by being worse at fighting. Nuke their device skill, give them restrictions on what they can equip, give them failure rates on scrolls, something.

[wobbly]

While we're mentioning warriors I'm going to throw in the idea of giving them their racial stealth bonus/penalty ( or half there race stealth bonus/penalty) so that hobbit warriors become more like non-magic hobbit rogues & elf warriors have better stealth to make up for being such scrawny warriors. The actual numbers would take a bit of fidding, but I thought I'd throw the idea out there.

Edit: Looking at the current no.'s the human priest is as stealthy as an elven warrior which doesn't sit quite right for me.

[Ingwe Ingweron]

I'm in favor of a Monk class, somewhat of the Shaolin variety, that eschews all armed combat. We need to fix fists so that damage has a little variability (e.g., a few critical hits and something other than every punch or kick doing exactly the same damage number), maybe include a chance to stun an opponent like a mystic does, and provide for acid, flame, frost, etc., type gloves to provide a little extra damage when using fists, even though they don't brand weapons. Gloves dripping with acid ought to provide a little bit of damage when you hit someone with them! And just imagine, fists of flame! Maybe add some magical healing abilities, due to their meditation abilities, free-fall, etc.

This isn't that crazy. A win can be had using only fists, and it was quite liberating to play not having to even think about picking up weapons. It is a difficult "class" to play, but the challenge is fantastic!

[Jungle_Boy]

I would much rather have a small number of highly-distinct classes than a large number of poorly-differentiated classes. Don't try to shoehorn in 3 classes per magic realm if you can't come up with good ideas for them.

Conceptually an antimagic class sounds plausible, but make certain it doesn't outshine the warrior, and not just by being worse at fighting. Nuke their device skill, give them restrictions on what they can equip, give them failure rates on scrolls, something.

I am definitely in favor of highly distinct classes whatever the number happens to be. I find that even the classes we have now are far too similar at higher levels.

[Nick]

I am definitely in favor of highly distinct classes whatever the number happens to be. I find that even the classes we have now are far too similar at higher levels.

I think this is largely a consequence of the fact that Angband depends so heavily on equipment for the character's power.

I have, in conjunction with my creative consultant, had some thoughts on this, but they have suffered from scope creep, so I'll start another new thread at some point to discuss.