"Nick is going to butcher the game"

[Pete Mack]

I had always assumed the Mirkwood Elves were svartalfar (via myrkalfar alternate name.) Dark elf is a less interesting name, but is surely the same base?

[Voovus]

It could, but I'm reluctant to close it because

1. I don't like any closing down of discussion and
2. I think this sort of discussion would just move to a new thread; if this one is still here then it might keep this from spreading to other threads.

If you have a more specific reason for wanting it closed, let me know, by PM if you wish.

There has been plenty of interesting material here, but in its current form this thread appears to be generating more negative emotions than helpful dialogue.

There could probably be a good discussion on "what you'd like Angband lore to look like in 5 years time", provided it focuses on the bright future rather than on the ongoing (contraversial) changes - otherwise it's likely to deteriorate into the rather unhelpful "Nick is going to butcher the game" vs "go and make your own variant".

There could be a philosophical discussion on what makes Vanilla Vanilla. (Again, with no reference to the ongoing changes.)

There could even be a serious discussion on how the community would like Vanilla maintenance to work. (But I'm not convinced this is a good idea. I might slip on the ring if things head that way...)

[tangar]

I think you rather overestimate your persuasive abilities. You're not going to win this one.

Ok, repeating in 100500 time in this thread:

...Nick, you've won this 'dispute' from the beginning. I said about it in several posts in this thread - I'm among minority and this discussion won't change anything:

The goal of this discussion is to show that there are people who cares about Vanilla and it's lore and to spread the truth, not to change your mind (it was clear from the beginning that it's impossible).

Next.. Considering this:

You also don't really respond to what other people say in any meaningful way, which means that replying to you or reading what you have to say follows the law of diminishing returns...

I respond to all messages which require my answer, I don't flame/flood without meaning, just to say something. My 10 points just a good example, that I have a concept behind my words, it's not just bla-bla-bla as other side got (but you are free to post there your 10 points, if you could write them lol).

Also I do not reply to stuff with I approve and agree, like this one:

One of the advantage of some of the more DnD and mythology based monsters is that when a new player sees them, they instantly know what it is that they are encountering. Anyone who has played Dungeons and Dragons, Everquest, Elder Scrolls, or Warhammer, or who is familiar with Norse mythology is likely to have a good grasp of what they are looking at when they see a creature named "Dark Elf Archer", even if the dark elf in question doesn't quite mesh with the Tolkien dark elves. You can't expect the same level of built-in knowledge with some of the more obscure bits of the legendarium - many players aren't going to know who the Stonefoots or the Blacklocks are.
The monsters from Greek mythology have a similar built-in understanding. Through cultural osmosis, most players will have some idea of who Medusa is and what she is capable of, even if they aren't familiar with the story of Perseus.

By avoiding these cultural touchstones, less experienced players will have a harder time pulling these creatures in to the theater of the mind, reducing immersion.

This is the very right point and described much better than I could do it with my crude English language. But I won't jump out of bushes every time when some one would post good ideas - so 'establishment' won't blame me for 'taking too much space' in this thread. Nick would be glad to find reasons to ban me and I don't wanna give it to him too easily.

(PS Nick isn't 'purging' D&D influence from Angband. The game as a whole is clearly very influenced by early D&D.

Heh. If there was a vote with this simple question, something like:

Do you want to remove 'Dark Elves' from the game?

I doubt there would be majority for this decision (without Nick artificially forcing it). People like DnD stuff which you, guys, removing right now. And you know it! But argue with your position means to choose 'enemy side' - Nick proclaimed me as 'unwanted' person and kinda his enemy (are there anyone else at this forums who is 'banished' by him like me?), threatened to ban and said that he want to close this thread. It's clear signal from Nick: "if you do not support me - you are going to be hunted down". 'Tolkien-puritists' lobby prevail there.

So people just swallow 'dark elves' changes. Even if they liked this monsters

[Derakon]

(PS Nick isn't 'purging' D&D influence from Angband. The game as a whole is clearly very influenced by early D&D. And I'm sure if anyone else had made the effort to create new monsters for Angband or incorporate ones from other non-clashing bestiaries, and they made sense from a balance perspective, and people liked them, they'd have a fair chance of being included. No one has though!)

I think my favorite "recent" addition to the monster list is the bronze golem. Those things are pretty scary-sounding, despite the terse description: "A gigantic four-armed animated bronze statue of demonic shape, glowing with great heat."

There's a bunch of monsters in variants ripe for the picking, if someone wanted to review the monster lists and find the ones that seemed the most "Vanilla-like".

[takkaria]

This is yet another point to add to previous 9 points which in my 'last word'. So now it's now 10 reasons to save Vanilla Angband lore.

I think you rather overestimate your persuasive abilities. You're not going to win this one. You also don't really respond to what other people say in any meaningful way, which means that replying to you or reading what you have to say follows the law of diminishing returns...

(PS Nick isn't 'purging' D&D influence from Angband. The game as a whole is clearly very influenced by early D&D. And I'm sure if anyone else had made the effort to create new monsters for Angband or incorporate ones from other non-clashing bestiaries, and they made sense from a balance perspective, and people liked them, they'd have a fair chance of being included. No one has though!)

[tangar]

Angband: why DnD influence is good

I find it hard to believe that you make this suggestion with a straight face. The most popular - by what measure? Famous - maybe in that everyone has heard of Dungeons and Dragons - but not the actual details of the bestiary, which tends towards being quite generic as has been pointed out above.

The good thing about DnD and other tabletop fantasy RPG universes that they are truly 'evolving' - evolving in a good way, becomming richer. As Derakon said before about Moria vs Angband:

Angband was basically "maximalist Moria" when it first came out. Moria has 50 levels? Angband has 100! You can beat Moria at around clvl 30? In Angband you can go all the way up to clvl 50! Moria has warrior, rogue, paladin, mage, and priest? Angband has rangers too and everyone (except the warrior) gets twice as many spellbooks! Moria has ego items? Angband has artifacts! Moria has 150 monster types (or however many it was)? Angband has 500, and some of them are unique!

'DnD' (by this acronym in current discussion I mean not only DnD, but actually all pool of fantasy pen-and-paper role-playing games) also going this way, constantly. It provides more and more content! Each next edition (for example, classic DnD itself got already 5th editions) gives something new. And it's fun to have new stuff, especially when it make sense!

Not all introducted in new table-top games editions stuff is good, but it's Angband advantage - to choose what to take; some monsters could make Vanilla Angband lore better, more rich and exiting.

At the same time - Tolkien lore is STATIC. I'm sorry, guy, but Tolkien is dead. He won't write new stuff and won't 'create' new monsters. His universe is quite brilliant, but it was created long time ago, dozens of years before DnD appeared (not speaking about PC RPG games). Tolkien's bestiary can not evolve, it's 'canonic' and 'Tolkien's heritage' protect his lore from any changes or 'evolvement' - which is pretty silly (as all attempts of copyright forces to restrain other peoples creative).

So while Vanilla Angband is open to new 'DnD' (and other pen-n-paper fantasy worlds) influence and take ideas from it - it's great advantage. Restricting game to pure-Tolkien and wiping DnD stuff from it - not only removes 30 years flavour which everybody get used for, but also makes game more 'STATIC'!. So when you speak about 'evolving' - it's not evolving, guys, but a building a border; whats Nick doing:

1) wiping DnD stuff
2) making pure-Tolkien border around what left in there

Yep, it's new high fence around Angband lore. It's like stuff which Saruman made to Isengard - from diverse beautiful land with trees - he put everything in 'order' by cutting trees down and made his land covered with similar grey stone - the same thing Nick is doing with Angband lore right now.

So despite of some opinions in this thread - I'm not after making Angband static - vice versa! But it should be enrichment, taking all the best from fantasy worlds; not restrictions by one universe. Of course, each new addition should be discussed - how it would fit into the present lore (so we won't have rockets in Vanilla lol).

Vanilla Angband traditional lore - mixed Universe. It's pretty special - with the 'core' of Tolkien (Nazguls, hobbits, Azog etc) and with RICH DnD flavour around it. And it's fun to play with such game. It's not boring as some other 'pure' Tolkien games and it's evolving! Without DnD it would be boring static.

Angand Vanilla is: Tolkien 'core' enriched with proper DnD stuff. Dark elves, kobolds, gnomes and other old fellas - fits good in it, there is no need to wipe them!

This is yet another point to add to previous 9 points which in my 'last word'. So now it's now 10 reasons to save Vanilla Angband lore.

p.s.
I again wanna repeat quote from my first message in this thread:

How come that I'm as a huge Tolkien fan (damm I even runned in the forests with wooden sword in real life) - do not like current Angband tolkienization? Because it's a conflict of interests - Tolkien lore VS Angband lore. Sorry, but Angband is not a fanfic Tolkien website to bend it like this. In Angband 'game' it's lore and traditions more precious then Tolkien heritage.

[AmyBSOD]

My NetHack variant has quicksand terrain (called "shifting sand" after the stage in Super Mario 64), and if the player walks into it there's a yes/no prompt whether they really want to step in (unless confused or stunned, then there is no confirmation). Flying makes the player immune, but otherwise the player will have exactly three turns to move back to a non-shifting-sand tile or die. Magical breathing doesn't help, because as soon as the player is completely submerged they're essentially "buried".

What I didn't do, though, was to make some stat check or other effect that hinders the player's escape from the quicksand. Movement still works normally, unlike sinking in lava where the player has to succeed at some stat check to pull themselves out in time.

[Nick]

Sandtrap, now that's a good idea!

+ to shots, surely

[wobbly]

Trying to think which roguelike has quicksand. Ragnarok I think?

[Grotug]

It's true, sandtrap, one great benefit of lurking is you don't get pulled down into the mire of internet arguments! Sandtrap, now that's a good idea!

Maybe it'd be quicksand, though. Basically it'd stop you in your tracks. If you tried to walk in any direction a message would read "you are sinking! The sand reaches up to your knees!" Every time you try to move, a new message lets you know that "you are sinking! The sand is at your waste!" Keep trying to move and the situation just gets worse. "You are sinking! The sand is at your chest!" "You are sinking! The sand is reaches up to your neck!" And finally... "You are sinking! You cannot breathe! The sand is over your head!" Followed by a visit to your tombstone.

Sufficient dexterity and/or strength would be the only way you'd be able to work yourself free from it. Basically, the more DEX or STR you had the greater the chance you'd free yourself. You'd need something like 18/80 of one of them or 18/40 of both to have a 100% chance of freeing yourself each time you try. And even then you'd only be able to get free of it if you were trying to move onto a tile that was not quicksand. You would need much more STR/DEX to drag yourself through consecutive quicksand tiles.

It could actually be a terrain type rather than a trap, so that you'd see it before you step on it. You'd be prompted any time you attempt to step on it (unless you had feather falling, which would protect you from it completely). A 'Y' response would allow you to step on it, any other keypress would be registered as an 'N'. If you were confused or blinded, you would not receive such a prompt.

If you were trying to cross a bog of quicksand, say 5 tiles, you'd need much more strength and/or dexterity in order to pass without sinking. Feather falling would allow you to pass over the tiles without sinking, but you'd still use an extra turn to pass from one tile to the next.

If you tried reading ?phase door or using _Teleportation while stuck, you'd get a message like "the sand keeps you from moving!"

It would be interesting to figure out how it would affect other critters. Most early creatures would probably be thwarted by it pretty badly. It would present some interesting tactical situations. If you were to confuse a stegocentipede that you were trying to escape from, and the stegocentipede was at the edge of a quicksand bog, there'd be a good chance he'd stumble onto the quicksand, at which point he might have a 50/50 chance of freeing himself. But, if in his confusion, he moved away from the good tiles and further into the bog, then his chance of making his way out of the quicksand bog would be drastically reduced, or at least it would take him a long time to free himself once his confusion wore off. Maybe he'd be strong enough to break free eventually (he does move quickly after all).

It would require a lot of coding. The more stuck in the bog you are, the more strength/dexterity would be required to free yourself. If you were only up to your knees, you'd need less str/dex to free yourself. Deeper denizens would merely be slowed down by it, without the danger of being swallowed up. For example, you could imagine Ar Pharazon being hampered by it, but not in any real danger of dying. I guess an umber hulk would destroy the bog as he passed through it, converting sand tiles where he passed through them to be normal. @ would be happy if he could get a saber tooth tiger to stumble into a sand pit. It might be a similar situation for him as the La Brea tar pits.

I'm thinking quicksand pits might start showing up around DL15 and start becoming rare after DL53.

Tar pits could be another terrain type found deeper in the dungeon. They might start showing up around DL48. Basically a much more brutal version of a quicksand pit, with very few monsters being able to pass through without getting stuck. If Angband ever does get more terrain types, new spell types would need to be introduced to help @ pass over them safely (maybe some casters could get temporary flight).

On an unrelated side note. How come Angband doesn't have Oliphaunts? Or have the mumaks been renamed?

[Youssarian]

The Republican party of 1860 holds almost the opposite positions it does today. Is it not still the Republican party?

We used to call people doctors that used leeches and other horrible methods to cure your illness. Now they use modern medicine. Are they still doctors today or are they something else? Would we even call people who had that title doctors, now?

Angband is not the same as it was when it was first made (thank you for creating this wonderful thing!). Do we not all accept it as Angband?

Angband originally had no tiles. Yet now people play with a selection of different tilesets. Do we not still think our game is Angband even though my home isn't number 8 anymore when I play.?

We will have dwarves instead of elves. And maybe the dragons will change or some Uniques will come and go. But the game plays the same. We enjoy - each in our own way - of delving into the pits to secure our small town from the horrors of the monster Morgoth and saving the world.

Nick freely gives his time and vision to the game and listens to us. I believe if we all disliked the things he is doing, he would stop and reconsider. But instead of fighting the tide of change, join it to help preserve the best parts while making the weaker parts better.

[sandtrap]

regular player irregular poster here

Sure. I just thought it was an interesting data point. It was as high as 700 a month last year for a few months. Used to be higher.

The forum software reckons there are 207 active members here too, even if a lot of them don't post.

Lurker here I be. Learning much is to be had by all through lurking.

[takkaria]

'Evolve'? Evolving - it's to add more famous and fun monsters from DnD universe, the most popular and interesting fantasy bestiary atm.

I find it hard to believe that you make this suggestion with a straight face. The most popular - by what measure? Famous - maybe in that everyone has heard of Dungeons and Dragons - but not the actual details of the bestiary, which tends towards being quite generic as has been pointed out above.

But now it's vice verse - cutting off and purging DnD influence from Angband. It's not evolving, but transforming one game (Vanilla Angband) to another (Tolkien's Angband).

It's transforming Angband 4.2 into Angband 4.3 (or 5). By a similar token, previous transformations have been from Vanilla Angband (3.1.2v2) to Easy Angband (3.2), and, depending who you ask, either A. from Boring Dungeon Angband (3.4) to Vanilla Angband (3.5) or B. from Vanilla Angband (3.4) to Too-Many-Special-Rooms-Angband (3.5). Of course, all of them were Angband, and all of them remain Angband. Just as Nick's Angband is the same as takkaria's Angband while also being different, so was Geoff Hill's Angband different to (and the same as) Ben Harrison's Angband.

Since yours is a point about the metaphysics of identity, you might benefit from grappling a bit with the ship of Theseus.

[tangar]

Angband is not a game with specific content. It is rather a game with specific intent.

Different people have different opinions. If you, personally, do not bother about 'content' (and 'lore') - it's your right. But there are people who actually cares about it and love it.

So if you (and others) do not care about 'the names' - why then change game's fiction which was there for 30 years? If you do not care - do not touch stuff which other people care about!

The intent of the game is not changing, even if the content of the game evolves.

'Evolve'? Evolving - it's to add more famous and fun monsters from DnD universe, the most popular and interesting fantasy bestiary atm. But now it's vice verse - cutting off and purging DnD influence from Angband. It's not evolving, but transforming one game (Vanilla Angband) to another (Tolkien's Angband).

[olivertheorem]

Angband is not a game with specific content. It is rather a game with specific intent.

The intent of the game is not changing, even if the content of the game evolves.

I was going to say something along these lines a couple days ago, but Pahasusi put it much more succinctly than I would have.