Whatever happened to 'restore artifact'?

[Egavactip]

In any event, regarding enchantment: the player at the end of the game is a once-in-an-era hero. They are not a once-in-an-era craftsman. The two require totally different skills. If you take your grand masterpiece weapon that was some legendary smith's life's work, and you go and get it banged up, you'll need to go back to that legendary smith, or someone of similar skill, to get it fixed.

That is not a meaningful response.

[Egavactip]

My argument is that disenchantment is actually a great strategic and tactical element in the game. I like it. It forces me to think about maintaining my storage (and it adds a whole lot more complexity/difficulty to the No Shops game mode, btw). I also don't see why we should be so attached to our equipment and shouldn't adapt it to the circumstances of the game as we do with all other things, with a little more depth than just "replace with something better". Not always we get to the end game with the gear we wished. We know this. So why can't we accept that the game is also constructed around the possibility of losing the gear we wish?

No strategic or tactical element would go away. People try to avoid in the early and mid-games when stat loss when stat regain is not-easy-but-possible. I cannot imagine that players would somehow not treat artifacts as precious even if there were a not-easy-but-possible way to repair severely damaged ones.

As far as "we" is concerned, what you get out of a game is not necessarily what others get out of a game, so please do not presume. Games in Angband should be lost, IMO, by bad decisions or by bad luck (i.e., dying in the game), but not by the game architecture. By that I mean that Angband forces players to discard artifacts as part of the game. Therefore players have to make decisions in which they will have to throw away artifacts that otherwise could have been used as replacements for damaged artifacts. The way Angband is now, a player can severely be screwed by having a key artifact (and we all know that some end up being crucial to winning) damaged beyond usefulness, with the only available substitutes already having been discarded and thus permanently lost. To me, that is neither poor decision-making by the player nor the fickle finger of fate so much as it is a weakness in the game system that can end up screwing players.

I think that a reasonable way can be found to fix this.

Another point I like to make is that the proposed alternative seems fine at first sight. But it really is dependent on your luck on finding such scrolls(?) that would allow you to recover your artefact. To that you would add the random element of it actually working. Which means this is just and simply a grind element that is being added to the game. Why should this be good? By the time you run into enough disenchants that warrant you wanting to use such a useful recovery scroll, that piece of equipment is probably in an already bad state enough you are being forced to running around on something else. How is that different from simply not having that ability to magically recover an artefact and just deal with the fact you have to use something different?

There has not been only one proposed alternative. And you seem to forget that there would be a grind either way--if an artifact is rendered useless and a player has no substitute, then a grind must occur in order to find something that can possibly substitute--perhaps a much worse grind.

[Egavactip]

But, fine. I will take your argument at face value and instead argue that just because you have a pattern, that doesn't mean you shouldn't have exceptions.

I don't mind exceptions. I mind meaningless exceptions that create problem.

[Egavactip]

The disenchantment problem is not a problem at all.

1) Once you aware of how bad it is, you start to think twice and avoid/deal with it.
2) Even if your lovely shield get badly disenchanted, there is always another shield. There are so many endgame quality shields around.
3) Disenchantment becomes common at higher levels, where you usually find one or two items which provides resistance to it, the balance is there.

C'mon guys, it is really a minor thing.

I disagree that it is a minor thing. Just because it is not important to you does not mean that it is not important to others.

[Ingwe Ingweron]

It demonstrates that this is a hard game and that winning it is an achievement. It teaches the player to watch out for bad things happening. It encourages the player not to get all hung up on the exact plusses on their gear. It makes a good story afterwards.

That's just off the top of my head

Hear! Hear! +1 for me. I think disenchantment is just fine as it is. The obsessive part of me likes Estie's idea of ?Enchantment (of its various sorts) having some possibility of enchanting back up something above +15 if it started above that, but that's only an anal retentive desire. Disenchantment is actually quite manageable and there are plenty of items that give rDis.

In the early game, watch out for Mim and his kin. If I'm lucky enough to have rDis early, then I cheerfully take them on head-on. Otherwise, I still usually go after them, but from a distance or with gear that I don't care much about disenchanting. The only worry is if I've somehow found The Trident of Wrath or some other end-game quality weapon. I jealously guard these from disenchanters by swapping weapons or just avoiding the engagement. And disenchater bats or molds are fairly toothless. Sure they might get a -1 on something, but it's rare, especially for really good artifacts which have their own saving throw to resist.

In the late game, I work to plug that rDis hole, if not permanently, than at least with a swap like an Amulet of Weaponmastery, so that I can take on Saruman, Sauron, Nighcrawlers (or is it Nightwalkers, I swear, I never can remember that one).

The upshot for me is, disenchantment isn't broken, so let's not "fix" it.

[Derakon]

That is not a meaningful response.

What? Why not? We're talking legendary artifacts here, the grand culmination of some craftsman's life's work. Why should we assume that there is an easy mechanism for them to be fixed? Fantasy abounds with stories of how hard it is to fix the broken legendary artifact. Science fiction analogously has the "ancient technology that still works but we don't know how, and we can't fix it if it breaks" type of thing. The fact that these items can't be replaced or repaired is a big part of what makes them special.

[Nick]

Games in Angband should be lost, IMO, by bad decisions or by bad luck (i.e., dying in the game), but not by the game architecture. By that I mean that Angband forces players to discard artifacts as part of the game. Therefore players have to make decisions in which they will have to throw away artifacts that otherwise could have been used as replacements for damaged artifacts. The way Angband is now, a player can severely be screwed by having a key artifact (and we all know that some end up being crucial to winning) damaged beyond usefulness, with the only available substitutes already having been discarded and thus permanently lost.

I think this is overstating the case.

I actually think disenchantment is a well-designed and well-balanced feature. There are a few early, avoidable monsters which use it, which gives the player warning what it does. Then there are tougher monsters like Mim and his sons who will definitely disenchant gear if you melee them; this is telling the player that this is a serious thing to watch out for. There are a couple of fairly early breathers (chaos and balance drakes) which warn that it's not only a problem for melee. Then in mid to late game there are enough monsters which disenchant that it becomes almost necessary.

So nobody is forced to discard artifacts. If you choose to melee a disenchanter or face a monster with disenchantment breath without having the resistance, you pay a penalty. That penalty is not very heavy for a single occurrence. It gets heavier for multiple occurrences. This seems to me pretty much in line with most of the mechanics in the game.

It is fundamental to the game that bad things can happen to your character, and a big part of the art of learning to play is to learn to avoid those things. The game becomes unfair and dispiriting if bad things (too often) happen in a way that the player has no control over. I believe currently the player has sufficient control over whether their gear gets disenchanted - but by all means prove me wrong.

[Ingwe Ingweron]

Games in Angband should be lost, IMO, by bad decisions or by bad luck (i.e., dying in the game), but not by the game architecture. By that I mean that Angband forces players to discard artifacts as part of the game. Therefore players have to make decisions in which they will have to throw away artifacts that otherwise could have been used as replacements for damaged artifacts. The way Angband is now, a player can severely be screwed by having a key artifact (and we all know that some end up being crucial to winning) damaged beyond usefulness, with the only available substitutes already having been discarded and thus permanently lost. To me, that is neither poor decision-making by the player nor the fickle finger of fate so much as it is a weakness in the game system that can end up screwing players.

On the contrary, it isn't game architecture that causes a player to have to discard damaged artifacts, rather it is entirely caused by bad decisions made by the player. If @ engages monsters that disenchant with gear that is *Important* to player and without rDis, then it's the player's fault if the gear gets messed up. Player could have made other decisions, like swapping in a less precious weapon or armor for the battle with a disenchanter, or could have avoided the engagement altogether.

[Estie]

It is not too hard to avoid getting ones artifacts disenchanted. It was also not too hard to win in the Zephyr-flood days. That doesnt mean either is a good feature.

The reason I dont like either is that they break the risk-reward balance. Yes, you can throw masses of monsters with the most agressive attack form that dont sleep etc etc at the player and not give him jack for defeating them, but ultimately the game is better if the reward - loot and XP - approximately matches the challenge.

Stupid low level bats becoming a major threat just because you found your first endgear artifact is similarly twisted, though of course nowhere near the same scale as hounds used to be. Someone above said the whole matter was irrelevant, and I tend to agree. I chimed in because aparently the mods found it relevant enough to make changes.

[Egavactip]

It is fundamental to the game that bad things can happen to your character, and a big part of the art of learning to play is to learn to avoid those things. The game becomes unfair and dispiriting if bad things (too often) happen in a way that the player has no control over. I believe currently the player has sufficient control over whether their gear gets disenchanted - but by all means prove me wrong.

I have "learned to play" and have won the game multiple times, yet I still think there should be a way to re-enchant artifacts. I disagree that players have sufficient control over whether their gear gets disenchanted--and if one is playing with randarts, even at high character levels, rdisenchant might be available only with a swap.

[Egavactip]

On the contrary, it isn't game architecture that causes a player to have to discard damaged artifacts, rather it is entirely caused by bad decisions made by the player. If @ engages monsters that disenchant with gear that is *Important* to player and without rDis, then it's the player's fault if the gear gets messed up. Player could have made other decisions, like swapping in a less precious weapon or armor for the battle with a disenchanter, or could have avoided the engagement altogether.

I did not say that the game architecture causes a player to have to discard damaged artifacts, I said that the game architecture forces a player to discard artifacts (like crazy!), so that there may not be a replacement for a specific artifact that gets damaged. And this is NOT "entirely causes by bad decisions made by the player." I don't know what wonderful Angband world you live in in which characters are guaranteed 100% rDis all the time, but it is not the Angband world I download. Nor can players always avoid engagements altogether.

You need to stop blaming the player for the game's problem.

[Nick]

I disagree that players have sufficient control over whether their gear gets disenchanted--and if one is playing with randarts, even at high character levels, rdisenchant might be available only with a swap.

So currently the only things aside from artifacts that give RDisen are "Weaponmastery, Shields of Preservation, and a few high-end DSMs. We could think about introducing something else - maybe (like for RPois) a ring, starting at about dungeon level 50-60?

[Egavactip]

So currently the only things aside from artifacts that give RDisen are "Weaponmastery, Shields of Preservation, and a few high-end DSMs. We could think about introducing something else - maybe (like for RPois) a ring, starting at about dungeon level 50-60?

I hadn't thought of that, but it might be worth considering.

[debo]

IMO: the ring of pedantry. Depth 5, rdisen+, rfire- rcold- relec- rpois-

[debo]

Also I thought 4.0 lets you redefine home size via constants file now, doesn't it? So you can keep alot more arts at home in case one of the three monsters with disenchantment in the endgame biffs your favorite shiny thing?