The Ability to Drop Gold in Player-Home

[Calandor]

Does this exist, as an option? If items can be stored, why not gold? Or is the idea to just invest in an expensive item, then sell it later, to avoid wormtongue, smeagol, and the other thieves in the dungeon? Ty.

[PowerWyrm]

Probably because gold is mostly useless in Angband. It's not like you're gonna buy your endgame gear from shops, but mostly find what you'll need. Start playing ironman games, and you'll see why gold is pretty much useless...

In multiplayer Angband, you get a command to drop gold, mainly because items can be traded between characters, so your 1M gold pieces you get at level 50 can be used to buy some nice boots of speed +10 if you don't have any, or a deep book, or even an artifact. In single player game, once you've passed the point of buying CCWs and recall scrolls, you can pretty much squelch gold.

[Derakon]

As for thieves, if you kill them before leaving the level, they'll drop the gold they stole. It's not usually worth going out of your way to do so, though. Honestly the gold theft is far less annoying than the fact that the monster teleports away afterwards.

[Timo Pietilä]

As for thieves, if you kill them before leaving the level, they'll drop the gold they stole. It's not usually worth going out of your way to do so, though. Honestly the gold theft is far less annoying than the fact that the monster teleports away afterwards.

Some monsters steal items. That's a lot more annoying, and potentially even dangerous (you lose your only copy of Godly Insights for example).

Gold rarely means much.

[Spoiler] DEX 18/150 and above stops theft completely.

[Calandor]

Honestly the gold theft is far less annoying than the fact that the monster teleports away afterwards.

Actually they're both annoying, since it's a little unclear whether the char is ready to take on uniques yet, or should even bother, (according to some guides). Whenever I pursue the thieves, they just steal more gold, and they typically regenerate hps quickly, so it may not be worth the trouble, as stated.

So this leads to avoiding the thieves, (at least until a specific char-level) -- but they seem to resurface on every level, and are a constant annoyance in the background, glomming certain rooms in given levels; etc.

'Probably because gold is mostly useless in Angband. It's not like you're gonna buy your endgame gear from shops, but mostly find what you'll need.'

I'd read you could buy certain types of 80k items and similar things, (rarely), from the shops, not for long-term use, but just to prepare for the early-mid levels.

I usually play these types of games by just finding everything, but all guides for angband seem to indicate that this may not be the wisest idea: that instead, specific powers and resistances are useful; even essential, especially for newer players to this specific variant.

[Spoiler] DEX 18/150 and above stops theft completely.

Yes, I'd read that. Also Int at 18/150 or so, gives a huge increase to mana, and spells/per/level. For that reason, I'm trying to prepare the mage for levels 30-32 or so, where stat potions reputedly reside, by stockpiling gold and buying or finding useful items. On the other hand, the longer one waits to dive to early-mid, the fewer level-gains with maxed-out INT and CON, so the fewer total SPs and HPs.

At some point, once I learn what monsters are safe and so on, (and once the minimal requirements for gear are more apparent), I'll probably try 'rushing' new characters to DLs 30/32, so as to gain the maximal benefit from said potions.

Some monsters steal items. That's a lot more annoying, and potentially even dangerous

The idea seems to be to buy an expensive item, leave it in your house, then resell it later, (at a slight loss), if you need the gold later. Then the monsters can't steal it, (unless the rules are subsequently changed).

Start playing ironman games

These seem an arbitrary attempt to make the game more interesting through a specific type of difficulty, which may not necessarily succeed. More specifically, they seem a little too 'arcade-style' or 'console-style' to really appeal: like nintendo rpgs from the 80s, or the equivalent.

[HallucinationMushroom]

I've had the same thought as you regarding gold deposit in the home. I think it would be a logical inclusion for the house, regardless of whether this is optimal play or not. There have been a few times that I wish I had that option myself. Don't hold your breath for it to be included, however.

Since there isn't really anything to buy to resell that is worth anything, I just buy potions/scrolls that will more than likely be useful down the road. I fall on the 'digital hoarder' side of the fence on this one. Any option to cram more stuff in my backpack or home I'm for. I think I still have a six pack of ale in Galadriel's mirror come to think of it... be back in a few hours...

[Calandor]

regardless of whether this is optimal play or not.

Neither optimal, nor sub-par; merely logical.

I've had the same thought as you regarding gold deposit in the home. I think it would be a logical inclusion for the house, regardless of whether this is optimal play or not. There have been a few times that I wish I had that option myself. Don't hold your breath for it to be included, however.

Actually I have a better idea. Since this is a roguelike, after all, there should be a kobold-bank in, say, level 10 or so, of the dungeon, written in Cobol. If your character robs it successfully, then you may store items and gold there, (possibly for a slight 'fee', given the territory). Think of it as a Thieves' Guild test, or entry requirement..

[Carnivean]

The idea seems to be to buy an expensive item, leave it in your house, then resell it later, (at a slight loss), if you need the gold later. Then the monsters can't steal it, (unless the rules are subsequently changed).

This is an old idea. Turn the "No selling" option on, and you'll get more gold than you could possibly ever use. You'll be tripping back to town far less often as well.

[Derakon]

The problem with allowing gold deposits at the home is that it vastly neuters thieves in the dungeon, because no sane player would ever go into the dungeon with more than 0 gold in their wallet. It also means that every time you go to town you have to start with going to the home to withdraw your cash, and end with going to the home to deposit said cash again.

You might as well just change the game so thieves can only steal the money you've found since you last went to town...but that in turn incentivizes returning to town frequently, which is exactly the opposite of what the devs have been aiming towards in the last few versions.

[mushroom patch]

Here's a crazy idea: Remove thieves.

[Carnivean]

Here's a crazy idea: Remove thieves.

Here's a crazy idea: Remove everything but Sauron and Morgoth. In fact, who needs Sauron, remove him too.

[Calandor]

The problem with allowing gold deposits at the home is..

This is all potentially true in theory, but in reality one returns to town when one's inventory space or weight is exhausted, to sort through things, and sell excess junk. This is true of every game, save the very brief. While in town, it makes no sense not to leave gold there as well.

So ultimately the presence of thieves, makes little to no difference here.

The problem with allowing gold deposits at the home is..

This actually encourages frequent trips to town in the first place, as uncertainty concerning thieves in the dungeon, encourages a pack-rat mentality: spending gold frequently on items, rather than saving it for any possible useful reason in the mid-term; 'hoarding' it at home, apparently, rather than 'sharing' with the local thieves' guild; and so on.

The problem with allowing gold deposits at the home is that it vastly neuters thieves in the dungeon, because no sane player would ever go into the dungeon with more than 0 gold in their wallet.

No. It means that the player must balance spending more time in the dungeon, (hence, achieving greater rewards), with greater risk, (of theft of said rewards), therein. This is true for every trip to the dungeon, and will not change, so long as there remain thieves in the dungeon.

The basic point, though, is that being unable to store gold in town, doesn't make sense, where one can already store items in town: it's inconsistent. On returning from the dungeon, the adventurer would, according to reason, drop everything somewhere convenient, and travel light.

Also, the inability to store gold, actually encourages investment in relatively unneeded items, merely to safeguard one's 'hoard', so to speak -- hence, more time spent in town in determining which items to invest it, and so on: more time spent in town.

The problem with allowing gold deposits at the home is that it vastly neuters thieves in the dungeon, because no sane player..

So you're saying that the problem with a banking system, is that it rewards Reason.

The problem with allowing gold deposits at the home is that it vastly neuters thieves in the dungeon, because no sane player would ever go into the dungeon with more than 0 gold in their wallet.

No. It merely sets limits on how much the thieves can steal -- and also rewards players who successfully guard themselves against said thieves, or else confront them.

By contrast, being unable to store gold, merely encourages avoiding thieves altogether -- and hence, refusing to take risks in the dungeon, because one's entire savings are continually at stake, rather than the mere accomplishment of an hour.

exactly the opposite of what the devs have been aiming towards in the last few versions'

It's clear that 'this is what the devs have been aiming for'. The question is: why? -- particularly, given that they're 'the devs'.

This is an old idea.

Old .. and apparently useful.

This is an old idea. Turn the "No selling" option on, and you'll get more gold than you could possibly ever use. You'll be tripping back to town far less often as well.

No. The point is that I'd actually like to confront smeagol and wormtongue as minibosses, as originally intended, before 'the devs' became 'the devs', apparently.

And the rational approach against thieves, is to leave one's valuables somewhere safe.

This is an old idea. Turn the "No selling" option on, and you'll get more gold than you could possibly ever use. You'll be tripping back to town far less often as well.

I considered that, but am unused to just dropping items when out of space, rather than selling them: it's a little counterintuitive. At least if they're sold, they can be bought back, for a brief period, assuming a mistake in initial calculation, ('I actually needed the boots of [+n,+m]'). Drop an item, and it's gone forever.

Here's a crazy idea: Remove everything but Sauron and Morgoth. In fact, who needs Sauron, remove him too.

Yes, the ability to store gold in the player-home, is equivalent to 'removing Sauron'.

Anyhow, this all seems to fall under the category: don't feed the trolls..

Here's a crazy idea

Here's a crazy idea: remove trolls..

[Carnivean]

No. The point is that I'd actually like to confront smeagol and wormtongue as minibosses, as originally intended, before 'the devs' became 'the devs', apparently.

The Developers of Angband have been trying to streamline the game, removing tedious things that don't add to the challenge of the game. Visiting the town to sell items to get gold, and the associated inventory juggling, are not adding anything to the game and add hours of gameplay time that isn't entertaining the player.

This is a case where "the devs" have put a lot of thought into whether following the tropes of the genre is worth it for the game, and decided that it isn't.

Part of the problem you're facing is that you have the idea that the point of the game is to kill everything. It isn't. The point is to defeat Morgoth. Anything else along the way is an optional challenge. Smeagol's invisibility, speed and thievery are extremely hard for the level of character that finds him at his native depth. If you combat him deeper in the dungeon, after having gained levels, equipment and see invisible, he's very easy to beat. The challenge is to work out if he's worth fighting at his native depth (the answer is usually no, he's not worth it) or avoid him.

An extreme example of the fight or flight conundrum is Kavlax. Trying to face Kavlax at his native depth is almost always suicide. He is a vastly more dangerous opponent than anything you'll have encountered to that point. You don't have to beat him to progress.

As to thieves, I find that only Smeagol and novice thieves can actually take gold from me when playing. As I travel down further, I've progressed to the point that nothing can steal from me (except maybe Harowen the Black Hand, but he's a different level of annoyance) before I've dispatched them. Even then it'll probably only be the first novice thief that I find awake. Take them out with ranged attacks (pebbles, oil, arrows or spells) and they can't reach you to grab anything. Keep your stealth high and they won't be awake to move first. Keep your speed at +0 or above and they'll spend minimum time in damaging range. If you can't kill them before they take your gold, avoid them for now. There are infinite monsters in the dungeon to gain experience for killing.

I considered that, but am unused to just dropping items when out of space, rather than selling them: it's a little counterintuitive. At least if they're sold, they can be bought back, for a brief period, assuming a mistake in initial calculation, ('I actually needed the boots of [+n,+m]'). Drop an item, and it's gone forever.

As you progress down the dungeon you find more and more powerful items. Not holding onto items from shallower levels is seldom something to regret. Only artifacts that you've learned the name of are gone forever. Everything else will eventually be found again in the dungeon. Travel down 5 levels and you're likely to find the same item with better bonuses, or a resist/protection. Travel down 20 and you'll find that same item with +stealth, or if it's a weapon with a slay. Travel 50 and it'll have +attacks, +speed or multiple resists/protections.

Not only will you not regret dropping the item, but you'll find you've spent more playing time doing the things that draw us to Angband, like fighting monsters and gaining more powerful loot, and less time staring at your inventory screen and the town. The extra gold from drops and buried treasure is more than enough for you to be able to buy your supplies.

Yes, the ability to store gold in the player-home, is equivalent to 'removing Sauron'.

That comment was not directed at you. mushroom patch suggests removing anything fun from Angband, and I was parodying him, which was all his comment deserved.

[Calandor]

You might as well just change the game so thieves can only steal the money you've found since you last went to town...but that in turn incentivizes returning to town frequently, which is exactly the opposite of what the devs have been aiming towards in the last few versions.

The devs can do as they please. If their game's half-witted, then no one will play it -- or perhaps that's already the case..

[Calandor]

I've had the same thought as you regarding gold deposit in the home. I think it would be a logical inclusion for the house, regardless of whether this is optimal play or not. There have been a few times that I wish I had that option myself. Don't hold your breath for it to be included, however.

I thought there might already be such a hidden feature I'd overlooked -- and if it was so important to add it, as you seem to imply, I'd do so myself -- or choose a game which isn't nonsense. Program your own bitmining scheme, thanks.