Angband 4.1.3

[RayW]

ERROR or Feature?

Loaded the 4.1.3 today, started to run and found that my UP stairs look like WALLS from out of LOS, and DOWN stairs look like UP stairs from outside LOS. Both maps seem to be the same. Also tried to create a new character and had the same issue. Oh, and had the errors "Can not read file '64x64.png'" and "cannot initialize graphics".

Win 7 PRO, ADAM BOLTS TILES, 1x1, enhanced graphics (on or off does not matter).

R

[wobbly]

Probably an old issue: "the foo is cloned, the foo speeds up". Which foo? There's 2 now. Not sure on best wording.

[MattB]

Hi all,

Just wanted to drop by and say how much I’m enjoying 4.1.3.
There are changes that I thought I’d love, and do so. There are some that I thought I’d hate, but actually love. There are some I’m not mad keen on. But overall, in my humble opinion, it’s a better game for all the hard work of you, Nick, and all the community here who are less lapsed than I.

I’ve run ten characters of different races and classes so far, with no wins (which kind of pleases me, despite half of them getting into the bottom half of the dungeon), although I’ve a particularly promising half-troll warrior on 75 right now.

In short, I just wanted to remind the people who make this game great that there are thousands of people out there who enjoy this game on a daily basis who don’t necessarily take the time to let you know that on this forum.

Thanks as ever,

Matt

[Ed_47569]

+1 from me. Thanks Nick for all the hard work. I've been playing since 2.7.8 in the 1990s and it's great to see the game continually improving.

[Thraalbee]

Recharging is broken?

1) I can recharge wands as much as I want. Never an explosion except perhaps on 2nd or 3rd consecutive charge without emptying the wand first.

2) Also, if I have a stack of n wands, a single charge spell will charge every single wand in the stack as if the spell was cast on that particular wand. So basically you get n-1 iterations of your spell for free (no mana cost or game turns lost)

Observed with a gnome mage. Tried in wizard mode too at level 30.

[And thanks for the good work! I AM enjoying the new version]

[Nick]

1) I can recharge wands as much as I want. Never an explosion except perhaps on 2nd or 3rd consecutive charge without emptying the wand first.

2) Also, if I have a stack of n wands, a single charge spell will charge every single wand in the stack as if the spell was cast on that particular wand. So basically you get n-1 iterations of your spell for free (no mana cost or game turns lost)

Observed with a gnome mage. Tried in wizard mode too at level 30.

Is this in 4.1.3, or latest master? I've lost track a little of exactly what I changed when.

[Thraalbee]

4.1.3 release. This, in combo with Mana Tap and Fast Cast makes this a much bigger issue than it would have been before.

[Grotug]

I admit that I haven't tried playing any of the new classes in the latest build (last several months I've been playing 4.1.2-dirty) but I have a suggestion for a tweak to the ID system.

We lost identify an object's details in favor of rune-id, which seems to be a big hit with everyone, me included. What hasn't been a hit with me is losing the ability to id potions and magical devices using identify scrolls; and thus being forced to use them as they were intended to be used (ie, running around trying to find a weak monster to aim the wand I found to be sure that it isn't TO). So my proposal is to complicate the id system (ewwww!!!) in order to have my cake and eat it to, so to speak; that is to say, a hybrid of the old system and the new system. I propose that:

potions do not automatically id when you quaff them unless their ability is revealed when quaffed. ie: if you quaff a Coagulated potion of !Neutralize Poison when not poisoned or a Crimson potion of !CCW when you are at full health without any ailments, then the potions will read like it used to "Coagulated potion {tried}" and "Crimson potion {tried}". So potions would be consistent with the way wands and staffs are id'd now: that is, only successful use of a potion or scroll, staff, wand or rod will reveal what it does. (Currently, a monster has to be in LoS of @ if Confuse Monster staff is going to be id'd by use). It makes sense to have potions and scrolls consistent to staves, wands and rods in how they are id'd. And maybe a class or race could have the native ability of identifying potions or scrolls the way mages identify magical devices? but I digress....

I propose two types of ID: rune-id, just the way it currently is (runes, as I understand it, are all the resistances, abilities and other things on the character's resistants sheet found on equipment, as well as curses), and then object characteristics that aren't runes, such as all scrolls, potions, wands, staves, rods, and characteristics on equipment that aren't runes (such as activations) are id'd not with rune-identify but with object-identify. So you'd have two scrolls: rune-identify scroll and object-identify scroll (might need a better name).

So if you find a scroll in a vault and you're concerned it might be teleport level, *destruction*, or deep descent, but you don't want to ignore it as it might be banishment, mass ban or *acquirement*, then you can id it with an object-id scroll or spell if you have, but not with a rune-id scroll or spell. Same goes for potions, wands, staves and rods.

I guess it isn't really necessary to break up identify into two classes; I suppose you could just implement the changes and keep one identify that identifies everything in the runeish way identify works now, even though the *destruction* quality of a staff of *destruction* isn't really a rune. Another minor tweak that might want to be implemented is if you find an unknown staff and try to identify it with a scroll or spell, you might only identify that it heals 50 hitpoints. You'd have to read another identify scroll to find out it also protects you from evil. Only when you've id'd both of the staff's 'runes' would you know that it's a staff of holiness. I suppose it makes sense to extend rune id to mushrooms as well: you read a scroll of identify on a mushroom of emergency and all you learn about it is that it resists fire. If you read a scroll to identify a mushroom of debility all you learn is that it reduces STR or you learn it reduces CON, or you learn that it restores mana. But if you learn it restores mana, and then you come across a staff of the magi, would you then see on the staff that it restores mana, but not see that it restores INT (unless you ID'd that somewhere else?)

So maybe runes should be extended to staves, mushrooms and magical devices, not just equipment. Although quaffing potions probably shouldn't learn runes found elsewhere (ie. learning the potion of resist poison probably shouldn't mean you now identify resist poison wherever you find it, as it would mean you learn rPois too early).

Thoughts?

[Monkey Face]

I would like to see more ID by use work across items. So when you read a scroll of detect invisible, you'll then know which staff is also detect invisible and so forth.

Regarding the idea that the scroll/potion has to have an effect before it is ID'd by use, I think it should also ID if you are resisting the effect or the effect it cures. Thus, if a kobald drinks a potion of poison or neutralize poison, it is ID'd, even though it has no effect. Otherwise under you proposal, 2 ID object scrolls will need to be wasted on it.

[Sky]

I agree with Grotug.

[fph]

Otherwise under you proposal, 2 ID object scrolls will need to be wasted on it.

Not necessarily; you can always sell/donate items to shops to identify them. Often it's the most convenient thing to do for objects that seem useless. Should I waste a ?id on that wand that didn't make a big boom when I pointed it at a monster? Nope, I'd rather sell it.

[fph]

Played a couple of rangers which both got obliterated around dlvl50. Some observations on the new ranger spells:

* Satisfy Hunger at clvl 3 seems very early and unnecessarily cheap. Basically the ranger never has to touch any food, not even the ration they start with.
* Cure & Resist poison are OK, but they feel like a duplicate and overall kinda meh. They make the traditional kobold ranger combo a bit less powerful.
* I didn't get to the point where I could cast Cover Tracks and Decoy reliably. They seem interesting concepts but I have to get used to how they work (and this is a good thing, because it adds variety).
* There are a lot more junk spellbooks in the dungeon with the new magic system. It is a bit confusing at first that I can only read a very limited subset of the nature books, even if they have the right color, but I guess it's just me being used to the old Angband. Maybe it would be a good idea to add "It can only be read by XXX class" to spellbook descriptions, or an explicit "you cannot read this book". EDIT: or, even, auto-squelch out-of-class town books on character start.
* I noticed it now especially but probably it's already an old change: in the olden days, stairs used to come mainly inside rooms; now they are either in special rooms or at the end of dead-end corridors. This makes dungeon exploration a bit less fluid for me, because I have to go to the end of corridors even when it looks clear that I am not interested in where they end, and also because stairs tend to be clustered inside special rooms (often there's like 5 or 6 of them in the same special room) instead of more evenly scattered around the dungeon.

[Sky]

It's my humble opinion of non-contributor that Angband needs a 4.1.4 rollback that includes the latest fixes but keeps the original classes (including the ranger's and items shooting bonus), and then move these to Angband 5.0

[wobbly]

Regarding spellbooks, the colours are set by the class rather then the realm, so it's still possible to have 8 book colours even though there are only 4 realms.

[fph]

It's my humble opinion of non-contributor that Angband needs a 4.1.4 rollback that includes the latest fixes but keeps the original classes (including the ranger's and items shooting bonus), and then move these to Angband 5.0

Don't get me wrong --- I like the new system. I'm just giving feedback and suggestions to improve it.