"Nick is going to butcher the game"

[Pahasusi]

I have the feeling that the both the forum majority and the large silent group is behind these changes and there's a very small loud minority that are opposing them.

I think there are a lot of us who feel that Angband the game is diminished by having a mismatched lore. For me and my cousin, ever since the 90's, Angband has been about Tolkien and Morgoth. It's called Angband! You are supposed to slay Morgoth! What are the other things doing there?

I for one want the ever-evolving Angband with more cohesive background.
I haven't shed any tears on any of the removed monsters - most of them have always irked me.

I also don't want FAangband! I want Angband, one town, one dungeon. This is that Angband.

Tangar, you keep repeating that there are people who like the old Angband. It is not going away. Just download and play. If you so strongly feel about some specific "perfect version of Angband", just start maintaining it!
Or like others have suggested, fork Angband and call it MVband (MultiVerseband) so that everyone knows it has a bit of everything.

Let the rest of us enjoy current maintainers work, which is shaping up to be very nice. Also very Angband.

[Philip]

One final rebuttal to all these points (it will be easy, as they are the same points they have always been, and since the rebuttals have never been challenged, they can also remain identical) and then I will be done with this.

The lore you want to preserve is not ancient angband lore. A fair amount of it was added in the JLE patch, for example. The fact that you do not know this would seem to undermine your point, but then again, the existence of the JLE patch already does it on its own, by proving that you can in fact change the lore of the game and the game will remain angband.

You not knowing that krakens were never in angband (whether anyone has proposed adding them is irrelevant) or whether kobolds have been removed (though likely, they'll be renamed, not removed) is in fact also bad for your argument, and your attempt to spin it is quite weak.

The reason (well, a reason) Nick has to ban you is that you are an asshole who is making this community a worse place to be. This has nothing to do with freedom of speech or unpopular opinions, and everything to do with your conduct.

Many of us still have access to the development process (for example, Derakon and I got the literal opposite change to mobile jellies implemented than the one Nick was originally going with). Consider why that is, perhaps? As for your old and respectable members of the community, I do somewhat wonder about your qualifications to identify either of those qualities, given your knowledge about the game's history, and your apparent social skills.

I will now be blocking tangar, because I cannot really fathom a circumstance under which I would want to read anything he writes. I may undo this later (I did with dos350, eventually). I mention this mostly because it's an option that there is cause to use here so rarely that others may not even be aware of it.

[tangar]

Angband Vanilla vs Tolkien's Angband

OK. Enough.

Enough of what..? Enough of discussion and freedom of speach on Angband forums?

No matter what you say, tangar, the new changes will stay in effect, and they will become part of Angband.

Of course they are. 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:

I myself after reading this thread feel that it's really pointless for me to participate in V-discussions anymore; it's pointless to try and save certain monsters from destruction, it won't save V

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).

I have listened patiently to everything you have had to say, on this thread and others. I have responded in detail to all the points in your "last message about this topic".

Yep, I've read your answers and they sounds like 'to mill the wind'. You just repeat your mantra. In my 'last word' I said everything which I wanted and I become silent as I promised - because there was nothing to add.

And now, month past from my 'last word' and for that time more people came there, people who share my point of view and do not agree with you.. So now I have to say something again. And I hoped for constructive dialogue, but you and your adepts just want shut me up. Very good way of communication, sir.

I have listened while you lay down the law on what is supposed to be in Angband and what isn't in a remarkable display of arrogance (you apparently feel entitled to dictate to everyone else what should be in a game you don't even play)

This is a lie and you know it. I've answered to it there: http://angband.oook.cz/forum/showpos...0&postcount=38

and ignorance (to pick just two examples, krakens have never been in Angband, and kobolds still are).

Yep, krakens are from TomeNET, based at old Vanilla version which also got some more DnD monsters from other variants. And krakens (and other great DnD stuff) should be at Angband, it's not only mine POV. Devs should enrich game's lore, not delete parts of it. But with your 'tolkien'-purification I doubt krakens or other cool stuff would ever appear..

Considering kobolds: you are going to butcher them a bit later, together with gnomes:

Races

• Gnome: Here we have a problem. This is a D&D race with nothing in common with anything in Middle Earth, except in as far as they're derivative of both hobbits and dwarves. Also "gnome" was Tolkien's name for the Noldor for a long time. Need to go.
• Kobold: Just no.

But from now on, I am not going to read or respond to anything you have to say, on any topic.

What could I say. It's very "productive" approach lol You are truly the community hero.. Some time ago, before you started the butchering I've left this message:

Nick, it's great to see how you 'observing' & 'scouting' at different 'battlefields' I'm learning a lot from how you look at things, trying to be unaffected and to look from the point of view of the game itself, impersonal; and at the same time being open to community. Really cool approach for maintaining the project. Respect!

// sorry for offtopic

Now I see that I was mistaken. It's alright. Mistakes makes us stronger, we should learn stuff from them..

You are free to keep post
ing here (although I could ban you, and probably have sufficient reason)

Oh, so nice words, thank you very much to make everything clear (about your personality) DD

... But actually I shouldn't use 'DD' smiles right now - it's not funny, but pretty sad... Very disappointing (without sarcasm)..

Ok, lets take a look. Which reason to ban me? That I'm not worshipping you? Good point!

and others are free to respond to you in any way they see fit. But you will have no effect on anything I do to Angband.

There wasn't any effect. Actually there is no effect from anyone. You are doing what you planned long time ago, alone. You implement 'minor' stuff which other people suggest to you to have 'visibility' that you listen people. But really it doesn't important to you, you have you own design (FFAngband -> Vanilla) and you follow it.

I should also point out that the changes I have made are not set in stone, and some of them may well be reverted before 4.2. The reason I have put them out so early and so openly is so I can get sensible, constructive feedback from the many excellent people here who care about and actually play the game. And anyone who has been paying attention will have noticed that I have already reverted a number of changes. But any suggestion you have to make will be completely ignored.

As I said in the beginning, > month ago:

I myself after reading this thread feel that it's really pointless for me to participate in V-discussions anymore; it's pointless to try and save certain monsters from destruction, it won't save V

I have a discussion in this thread only to show that there are still exist people who cares about Vanilla and it's lore. And look - there are such people. Even among your 'majority' - there are a lot of "it's sad that dark elves are gone". Do you care about it? Nope - you have 'a plan' and made decision for all people long time ago: most of the community do not care about lore so it wasn't really hard to implement your 'idea'. And a few who cares - you do not care about them. You got the PLAN!

I am very aware of the relative power I have here as accepted maintainer, forum moderator and someone with write access to the Github repository, and have been cautious about misusing it. But this has now reached the point where you are derailing the positive discussions which are necessary to proceed with the plans for 4.2 in a way that will leave the actual players of Angband happiest. The time has come to make it clear that your contributions will no longer be considered.

They won't be considered only by you. Also after some time there would be another maintainer and I hope that your 'lore' changes would be reverted...

I still don't understand why you want to ruin V-lore so much. You've created FAAngband - pure-Tolkien variant. Why not to continue work with it if you hate DnD lore? Why to mess Vanilla lore?

You said that I got 'remarkable display of arrogance'. But maybe it's your problem? Nobody asked to touch Vanilla lore. You are famous for creating the most 'heavy'-lore (FAAngand) variant and now bring your Tolkien obsession to V 'for the greater good', no matter what. Remarkable display of arrogance, I'll say.

For what it's worth, I am confident that takkaria would be happy for me to say on behalf of both of us that Derakon was completely correct. This is not surprising; he has been involved with Angband since pretty much the start, has made major contributions to the game, and actually listens to what people say.

Ok, so you could read Takkaaria mind, apparently. Good job. But the thing is:

even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth (Gandhi).

At the end I wanna add that among this forum there are people that simply fear to have disagreement with you, Nick. I don't wanna tell the names, cause it would be bad act on their privacy, but it's old and respectable members of community. The name of this topic "Nick is going to butcher the game" is a quote from discord chat with one of them, it's not my words (but I agree with them). This people say very harsh words about stuff you are doing with V (much more hursh then stuff I'm saying). But at this forum they do not critisize you. Why? Now I think I understand. I'm kinda 'new' at this forum, but this people are there for years and they knew you better, than I am. They wasn't as naive as I am:

trying to be unaffected and to look from the point of view of the game itself, impersonal// sorry for offtopic

They knew that everything depends on you and if they would argue - you would 'ban' then / ignore their suggestions / won't give access to development process, like you did it to me right now.

Now I see how stuff works there. At last. Thanks for an enlightenment.

[Nick]

Sorry, but it's just demagogy. The topic of this discussion: lore changes in 'Vanilla Angband'; problem: maintainer currently transforming 'Vanilla Angband' to something new, I would call it like 'Tolkien Angband'. And you are speaking about this topic vice versa.. Is it just trolling? Quite counterproductive.

OK. Enough.

No matter what you say, tangar, the new changes will stay in effect, and they will become part of Angband.

I have listened patiently to everything you have had to say, on this thread and others. I have responded in detail to all the points in your "last message about this topic". I have listened while you lay down the law on what is supposed to be in Angband and what isn't in a remarkable display of arrogance (you apparently feel entitled to dictate to everyone else what should be in a game you don't even play) and ignorance (to pick just two examples, krakens have never been in Angband, and kobolds still are). But from now on, I am not going to read or respond to anything you have to say, on any topic.

You are free to keep posting here (although I could ban you, and probably have sufficient reason), and others are free to respond to you in any way they see fit. But you will have no effect on anything I do to Angband.

I should also point out that the changes I have made are not set in stone, and some of them may well be reverted before 4.2. The reason I have put them out so early and so openly is so I can get sensible, constructive feedback from the many excellent people here who care about and actually play the game. And anyone who has been paying attention will have noticed that I have already reverted a number of changes. But any suggestion you have to make will be completely ignored.

I am very aware of the relative power I have here as accepted maintainer, forum moderator and someone with write access to the Github repository, and have been cautious about misusing it. But this has now reached the point where you are derailing the positive discussions which are necessary to proceed with the plans for 4.2 in a way that will leave the actual players of Angband happiest. The time has come to make it clear that your contributions will no longer be considered.

For what it's worth, I am confident that takkaria would be happy for me to say on behalf of both of us that Derakon was completely correct. This is not surprising; he has been involved with Angband since pretty much the start, has made major contributions to the game, and actually listens to what people say.

[mrfy]

new game isnt angband
some branch not angband
old ver not angband cos its the living angband we care about

Of course it's Angband. Have you tried it?

Sure feels like Angband to me. A bit more challenging version.

[dos350]

new game isnt angband
some branch not angband
old ver not angband cos its the living angband we care about

[tangar]

Nick appears to have little interest in doing this, and takkaria even less.

It's appears that you could read minds. Wow. I've just proposed an idea and you already know others people opinions about it

I don't believe anyone here would object to someone making a new Angband and calling it whatever they like.

Sorry, but it's just demagogy. The topic of this discussion: lore changes in 'Vanilla Angband'; problem: maintainer currently transforming 'Vanilla Angband' to something new, I would call it like 'Tolkien Angband'. And you are speaking about this topic vice versa.. Is it just trolling? Quite counterproductive.

[Derakon]

Nick, Takkaria and community?

Nick appears to have little interest in doing this, and takkaria even less. I know I don't want to be bothered, either. But anyone in the community is more than welcome to step up and make the game that best adheres to their own vision.

I'm not sure about that hypothetical 'them'. It would be the same community, why not? But there would be two versions of the game: pure Tolkien Angband for Tolkien fans and oldschool Vanilla Angband with DnD stuff and mixed universe for people who like traditional Angband setting.

Yes, this is all correct. All that is missing is someone willing to do the work. Come on in, the water's fine! For all the arguing going on in this thread, I don't believe anyone here would object to someone making a new Angband and calling it whatever they like.

[tangar]

Who's going to maintain "Angband I" under your proposal?

Nick, Takkaria and community?

More importantly, what's stopping them from stepping up and saying "I'm branching Vanilla at 4.1, anyone who wants to keep the old monsters and classes can play my game instead"? Hell, they can also call it "Angband" and force us to use descriptors like "Nick's Angband" and "Hypothetical Alternative Maintainer's Angband" if they want. Moreover, they can do that at any time.

I'm not sure about that hypothetical 'them'. It would be the same community, why not? But there would be two versions of the game: pure Tolkien Angband for Tolkien fans and oldschool Vanilla Angband with DnD stuff and mixed universe for people who like traditional Angband setting.

Nick could make his dream (make Angband pure Tolkien) come true and everyone would be still happy.

Maybe this is bad idea. I just wanna to continue brainstorm. Please discuss, critisize/approve this idea.

[Sideways]

Angband 2-3-4 aren't just version numbers; the change from Angband 2.9.3 to Angband 3.0.0 was at least as big as what Nick is doing... and introduced much of the D&D-themed content in the first place.

[Derakon]

Who's going to maintain "Angband I" under your proposal? More importantly, what's stopping them from stepping up and saying "I'm branching Vanilla at 4.1, anyone who wants to keep the old monsters and classes can play my game instead"? Hell, they can also call it "Angband" and force us to use descriptors like "Nick's Angband" and "Hypothetical Alternative Maintainer's Angband" if they want. Moreover, they can do that at any time.

[tangar]

It's version number, nothing more. So it's still Angband (I) aka 'Vanilla', there is no Angband II or III or IV (yet).

So if Nick wanna purge D&D influence and change Angband to pure-Tolkien game (which means complete overhauling of Angband _lore_) - maybe new game should be Angband II?

Or different approach - a lot of people like to play FAAngband ( First Age Angband ), made by Nick and pure-Tolkien. Current Angband purging from DnD and having Tolkien-focus makes vanilla something like Second(Third?) Age Angband.

Maybe Nick should just clean _all_ DnD influence and make pure-Tolkien Angband (variant), call it Angband II or ...AAngband? So Vanilla would stay Vanilla, with DnD stuff, as it was for 30 years. Just a rhetorical question...

[Gwarl]

Why not just create Angband 2? Leave vanilla as it is and create 'new' game, with new lore. Because after this major lore changes it looks like a new game to me. Like Moria vs Angband.

We're already on Angband 4

[wobbly]

Interesting read, particullary as I play some of those roguelikes. While I've never played CDDA I've certainly read the drama around it elsewhere. It gets a little, ah... heated.. to put it mildly.

I too have played the new version and it also still looks like V to me, complete with action packed worm mass battles, snoozy snakes, plate mail clad kobolds (these somehow escaped the butcher's foul clutches). Perhaps Nick should of saved himself some drama and posted a list of monsters that didn't change? I don't miss drow which for me were ..bzzt.. light wand. I feel the dwarfs have more flavour. I liked gnome mages (butc.....) but hey not to the extent of being upset about the name change.

I also like trees. Who doesn't?

I am the lore!

[Thraalbee]

I have tested a lot with different classes. It still feels like Angband to me. Also finally more difficult without silly nerfs. Sure, I cant see how Etten is an improvement from Ettin and I miss the dark elves. But I like the new dwarves and trees ... and in general think this is making Angband more interesting. And there will be tweaks and changes, ie better before released
So I'm back playing this again rather than FrogComPosband