Rune-based ID

[fph]

Luckily that particular example is less drastic since Nexus is no longer a permanent stat swap with this branch.

But for stuff like the sticky cursed items, stat swap potions, etc. I certainly agree. Nick's proposed change (IE you know a minimum set of runes based on character level) seems like it would help with this somewhat.

I don't think there is anything wrong in identifying stat swap potions by use only, their effect is not as critical as nexus. -1 CON, +1 INT? Not the end of the world, you can survive another 10 levels.

[nikheizen]

We need some ID means other than ID-by-use. Currently you have to risk being hit by nexus breath to learn nexus resistance, unless you have an artifact that is known to have it (but that is unfair to new players and won't work in randart games).

Luckily that particular example is less drastic since Nexus is no longer a permanent stat swap with this branch.

But for stuff like the sticky cursed items, stat swap potions, etc. I certainly agree. Nick's proposed change (IE you know a minimum set of runes based on character level) seems like it would help with this somewhat.

[yyt16384]

We need some ID means other than ID-by-use. Currently you have to risk being hit by nexus breath to learn nexus resistance, unless you have an artifact that is known to have it (but that is unfair to new players and won't work in randart games).

[Monkey Face]

I haven't tried rune based ID yet but I'm looking forward to it. I do have one question, though. Is there a place to go to see which runes you've already identified in a given game? Maybe similar to monster and object knowledge using the ~?

[Derakon]

How is this not going to make players waste time?

Have this discussion in one of the innumerable threads about what to do with identification. There has been more than ample opportunity and you can feel free to make a new one if you want to argue about how the game should work. This thread is about how to do rune-based ID, and I (and others I am sure) would rather it not get sidetracked.

Please understand, I'm not trying to shut you down; I'm trying to shut you down here, because this is not the right place for the conversation you're trying to have.

[Egavactip]

How is this not going to make players waste time?

[Nomad]

All right, two things.

1. Proposed scheme to fix having lots of gear with unknown runes:
   • Set a character level for which the ID game is over - I'm thinking 30, but it should probably be put in constants.txt
   • Calculate

     (total number of runes in the game) x (character level) / 30

     and that's the standard number of runes for a character of that level to have learned
   • If the character is below the standard number, they learn runes of wielded objects until they run out of such runes or reach the standard number
   
   So the player can learn by actual use, or by being sufficiently advanced.

Maybe some variant of this ID by clevel should be used for flavored items too.

Sounds good! Maybe instead of a single constant, you could make it a class-based value in class.txt, so that different classes master ID at different rates?

Or for an alternative scheme, how about ID on level up? Every time the character reaches a new (maximum) character level, there's a percentage chance of identifying each unknown rune or flavour on any items that they're carrying. (Maybe based on clevel+WIS for runes and clevel+INT for consumables?) That way you'd be rewarded for lugging unknown items around with you, without having to faff with wield-testing everything when you level to see if you've got any ID points left. There could be class-based level caps for the two separate ID categories, so that, say, warriors might get full auto-ID of runes at clevel 30 but have to wait till clevel 35 for auto-ID of consumables, while it's vice versa for casters and rogues get both types of auto-ID early.

[spara]

That sounds like a plan to try out, Nick.

Another note. I've got a trident of mysterious powers I'm trying to get acquainted with. The problem is that it seems that the resist/etc statuses (C-h) don't update. I've been burnt, confused and poisoned, and yes, it's possible that those go through a resist, but I doubt it, yet the status page still shows the possibility for all those resists. Also ESP is listed as one of the possibilities, yet that could safely be removed.

In short, does the status (C-h) page remove question marks from verified properties?

If it doesn't, it probably should. Would make rune hunting a bit easier for the brain.

[Nivra]

I like that a lot, Nick.

[Nick]

All right, two things.

1. There will be a comp on this - debo talked me into it by the simple method of not listening
2. Proposed scheme to fix having lots of gear with unknown runes:
   • Set a character level for which the ID game is over - I'm thinking 30, but it should probably be put in constants.txt
   • Calculate

     (total number of runes in the game) x (character level) / 30

     and that's the standard number of runes for a character of that level to have learned
   • If the character is below the standard number, they learn runes of wielded objects until they run out of such runes or reach the standard number
   
   So the player can learn by actual use, or by being sufficiently advanced.

Maybe some variant of this ID by clevel should be used for flavored items too.

[Derakon]

To concretize the problem, I made quite a nice find on DL1:



Now I know what the hidden property is, so I know what to do to reveal it. And in this case an uneducated player might make some assumptions about the icy nature, but that's probably wishful thinking. If the property is something like slay, then it would be next to impossible to reveal the rune. And if you have like 5 weapons that have something to reveal, then it's pure chance, you have the correct one in hand.

I would say that something is needed to a) hint the player about the nature of the hidden rune or b) the hidden rune should reveal itself over time or c) there needs to be spell/scroll/shrine/shopkeeper (anything starting with 's' ) to help with the rune.

Perhaps runes could have categories, and you could identify categories in addition to individual runes? So instead of just knowing nothing about the rune vs. knowing everything about it, you could know "this is a defensive rune" or even "this rune provides resistance to an element". You'd learn the categories as soon as you identify a rune within the category -- thus, having learned that Nimthanc has a cold brand, you'd be able to recognize any future rune that has a brand or slay as being a rune that enhances your offense in some way.

That would at least narrow down the amount of required experimentation, as each rune would no longer require you to do every single possible interaction with it. Offensive runes just require hitting the right targets, protective ones require being attacked in the correct way, etc.

Potential categories:
* Slays+brands
* Elemental resists
* Status immunities (pBlind, etc.)
* Sustains
* ?

You can gloss this as runes that fall into the same category are structurally similar when visually examined.

EDIT: indeed, you could potentially have multiple categories for a rune, so if you recognize one electricity-themed rune then you can tell if other runes are electricity-themed (thus, learning any of brand, resistance, immunity gives you information about the other two). That might be overcategorization, but I think it'd be worth experimenting with. Remember that the original goal of rune-based ID was to make the identification process less tedious, so I don't think we need to worry about giving away information too easily.

[spara]

To concretize the problem, I made quite a nice find on DL1:



Now I know what the hidden property is, so I know what to do to reveal it. And in this case an uneducated player might make some assumptions about the icy nature, but that's probably wishful thinking. If the property is something like slay, then it would be next to impossible to reveal the rune. And if you have like 5 weapons that have something to reveal, then it's pure chance, you have the correct one in hand.

I would say that something is needed to a) hint the player about the nature of the hidden rune or b) the hidden rune should reveal itself over time or c) there needs to be spell/scroll/shrine/shopkeeper (anything starting with 's' ) to help with the rune.

[Ingwe Ingweron]

The implementation has been around for literally less than two days. Can you hold off a bit on the doomsaying until it's had a few iterations of playtesting? We've had millions of arguments about what if anything to do about identification; this is an extended experiment in one of the potential options.

+1 here. I find the concept of rune-based ID to be very good. Once runes are known, it sure makes game play smoother. My frustrations are in the difficulty (and in some cases, apparently, the impossibility) of learning some of the runes. When mechanisms are put in place to reduce those frustrations, I think rune-based ID will be fantastic.

[Derakon]

I just have to say that this whole things sounds like a really poorly-conceived notion. It seems pretty awful.

The implementation has been around for literally less than two days. Can you hold off a bit on the doomsaying until it's had a few iterations of playtesting? We've had millions of arguments about what if anything to do about identification; this is an extended experiment in one of the potential options.

[Egavactip]

I just have to say that this whole things sounds like a really poorly-conceived notion. It seems pretty awful.