The Ability to Drop Gold in Player-Home

[wobbly]

Nothing beats drinking a bad bottle of genuine champagne then bitching about how bad it is. Bonus points for spending extra.

[mushroom patch]

Because it's authentic.

[Derakon]

But Nick, if you change the source so that it suits your tastes, you're no longer playing a game with the pedigree and imprimatur of the original.

...I think this is sarcasm?

Anyway, if you don't like a game and you have the power to change it, then change it. Why should you play something you don't like?

[mushroom patch]

But Nick, if you change the source so that it suits your tastes, you're no longer playing a game with the pedigree and imprimatur of the original.

[Nick]

The good thing about an open source game like Angband is that you can take the current source and change it so it suits you better. Many people have done this. One of the reasons that the major restructure was recently completed (modulo the outstanding bugs that PowerWyrm keeps finding) is to make that process easier. Doing this is a constructive way of handling any fundamental objections you might have with the game. Many current features have entered the game after being successful in variants.

Of course, discussion on the forums is also good for the game. But please try and keep it civil.

[mushroom patch]

If their game's half-witted, then no one will play it -- or perhaps that's already the case..

Big if true.

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.

No, I don't, you're just wrong about what's fun, i.e. you have bad taste re: video games.

If you change that slightly to "remove gold stealing thieves" I'm tempted to agree. Replace them with item-stealing thieves. Gold theft is annoying, but not much else. Item theft OTOH can be really bad, which increases tactical depth of the game making thieves something that requires different approach than rest of the monsters.

Yeah, item theft is good.

[debo]

This is a really good thread.

[HallucinationMushroom]

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.

I don't think it is so important to add it... I was just saying that I've been down your train of thought before. Also, I noticed you had few posts, so I was also trying to be friendly.

In many years of playing, there have been maybe a small handful of times where I had surplus gold early in the game, with no real thing to buy and bad dexterity. A very rare combination. But, by all means, code it!

[Timo Pietilä]

Here's a crazy idea: Remove thieves.

If you change that slightly to "remove gold stealing thieves" I'm tempted to agree. Replace them with item-stealing thieves. Gold theft is annoying, but not much else. Item theft OTOH can be really bad, which increases tactical depth of the game making thieves something that requires different approach than rest of the monsters.

Smeagol would need tweaking, because invisible, fast, bazillion HP monster that appears so soon that you can't possibly kill it that steals items would be way too annoying and dangerous.

[Carnivean]

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..

Wow, that's about as insulting as you can be to a bunch of volunteers that have been doing their best to make a game that players want to play, based on years of detailed discussion and thought.

Remind me why they, or anyone on this forum, should be inclined to help you?

[quarague]

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.

Slightly off the main topic but this is not true. The amount of HPs and SPs you character has after maxing out INT, CON and level does not depend on the INT and CON you had when leveling up. IIRC the game makes all the rolls for SP and HP gain at character creation, so already at this point the exact amounts of HP the char is going to have with a given amount of CON at a given level is fixed.

[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.

[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..

[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]

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..