"Nick is going to butcher the game"

[wobbly]

The ancient brown yeek breathes confusion. You die.

Not sure what changes you made but the Sangband version is a hedge mage with the confusion spell. I'm planning on using them for jb.

[tangar]

Right now (year later after discussions happened above) I'm porting new Angband monsters to my variant (which based at PWMAngband which already ported V monsters).

There is a very elegant way to preserve legacy and port new stuff. Lets take brown yeek as example:

Instead of just replacing brown yeek with new (and awesome!) monster terrified yeek - I've just added new terrified yeek near by and made brown yeek appear with higher `rarity' (and also made him a bit more dangerous).

It means that most of the time player will meet new terrified yeek, but sometimes, in very rare cases, they will meet brown yeek which will be as 'ego-monster' (my old dream, suggestion: http://angband.oook.cz/forum/showthread.php?t=9280 ). Meeting brown yeek - will be quite nostalgic for some players ..and the same way - not boring (lore explanation: brown yeeks are yeeks from ancient times, so they've become a bit stronger due evolution hehe)

So instead of removing legacy monsters - I've made them a bit more powerful and at the same time very rare to meet. But there are there!

The same thing to groups; eg some new boss has:

friends:50:2d6:terrified yeek:servant

we make it:

friends:45:2d6:terrified yeek:servant
friends:5:2d6:brown yeek:servant

Nice compromise It keeps a respect to all previous maintainers and community who introduced their monsters in old times... Just reduce chance to spawn them and that's it.

[Glorfindel]

I would also like to thank both Nick and tangar for concluding this mess like gentlemen, and to congratulate them on it. This thread has been grim reading, perhaps made even less comfortable by my taking it all in a day, as I read through the various threads on people's ideas for the next edition of Angband, but I am relieved to see it end on this note. I hope it's over, anyway.

[Mondkalb]

So Nick, should we be referring to you as 'Huge Nick' now?

Nick "The Butcher" will do.

[gglibertine]

So Nick, should we be referring to you as 'Huge Nick' now?

[Antoine]

Well spoken Tangar

[tangar]

Angband: time to move on

*Sigh*
I'm sorry about that post. It was Monday morning, I was feeling kind of grumpy, and you popped up accusing someone else of being counterproductive and it just all got a bit much.

No problem, no harm done. It's cool to have freedom of speech and I hope it would stay the same at this wonderful forums.

After all - we all wish good to Angband. There is no enemies, we all on one side, just have different vision on matters.

I'm sorry if my crude English language was offencive, I got two properties - hot temper and straightforwardness - which mixed together sometimes bring troubles. Sorry for that.

But still it's fun to have this discussion, even if everything predetermined. We all let off steam a bit there, in this topic.. So we could move forward without hidden disrespect. It's good that we 'purged' ourself, put all thougths and feelings to this basket.

I wish good luck with current Angband updates. I'll still continue to play 'old' lore version of the game, but I would continue to look into new updates and would be glad to take new interesting monsters to my variant (or maybe Powerwyrm would include them to PWMA - as my variant is based at PWMA).

This discussion gave to me some new experience and knowledge, I hope that I'm not alone in this positive aquirement and this conversation gave some positive stuff (along with negative, there is no way to deny it) to the community.

Kind regards,
Tangar

[Conker]

Tangar has made a couple of good points, though he's a poor spokesman for his cause. English not being his native language is probably only part of that, as Nick intimated.

As far as the main point goes - I'll miss some of the monster names and things I 'grew up' with, but I can't really argue for them beyond a childish sort of nostalgia and perhaps antipathy toward unnecessary change. And Derakon's point about Angband dying the moment it stops changing is entirely correct. So we probably shouldn't indulge our nostalgia beyond the point of simply being cautious and remaining open to preserving a few things that people pop up to say they are particularly attached to.

In terms of the bestiary, it's strange... the points people make about D&D being the standard, and being 'generic' and not quite fitting in certain places are all entirely sound. And yet whenever I play a game that has strange esoteric names for things that 'should' be standard, I find it vaguely annoying. As if they're trying to force me to start caring about their particular brand of lore where they call an elf a Foreststrider and a troll a Shmoop, and I resent it. And I know it's silly - they're perfectly entitled to try and make their settings a bit unique. Hell, looking at it logically, it's laudable that they're doing something even slightly different. Yet I still find myself rolling my eyes at it. 'For goodness' sake, can't we just have copper, silver and gold coins instead of your Dinars and Septimes and Moons?'.

That's probably just me being much more interested in combat and mechanics than story, though. The more recognisable and even 'generic' things are, the quicker and easier I can slot them into place on my mental map of the battlefield and work out what to do next.

Anyway, the main reason I posted this was to say kudos to Nick for his last post. We all fall below our own standards from time to time, but it takes a decent bloke to apologise for it when he doesn't have to.

[MWGE]

Spam bots deserve banning.
Everyone else, who is polite, deserves to be heard.
Though being heard as ever does need to come with a modicum of listening.
If ones point of view is divergent from the main, then so be it.
I'm glad no one is banning Tangar (or DOS). It would be a loss.
I wouldn't mind if he accepted that his point of view wasn't in general shared though and that others do think/care about the matter as much as he does.
In any event...Glad he's not being banned but I think Nick is doing a great job as maintainer. The good thing about V is that it lives and breathes. That's important. If it goes "back" at some point so be it. I shall see what happens then as will everyone else i'm sure.

On another note Nick... RED RED RED

[Ingwe Ingweron]

As for banning Tangar, I've already self-banned him. I no longer read a single thing he posts.

[mrfy]

For what it's worth, though I've made a few pro-this and con-that comments in other threads, I'm definitely in favor of the recent changes. Thanks for putting in all the work!

Same here. I'm excited with the changes, it has made the game more interesting.

[dos350]

this isnt about winning, its about angband,,

i think that honestly dehumanizing opposition is only making us hurt more,,,
if everyone wants all the change so much, why are things getting reverted in other thread?

im not trying to abuse anyone, but i feel ignored and abused: dehumanized

all for the game i love so its worth it, but before u complain that som1s persuasive skills are low, consider that they are trying to preserve a very special thing, not insult u~ why so defensive?

[Chud]

For what it's worth, though I've made a few pro-this and con-that comments in other threads, I'm definitely in favor of the recent changes. Thanks for putting in all the work!

[Derakon]

Put another way, tangar, your Diplomacy roll (or I guess in D&D 5e it'd be a Persuasion roll) failed. And this isn't one of those situations where you can just keep trying over and over again.

Tone matters.

[Nick]

Nick would be glad to find reasons to ban me and I don't wanna give it to him too easily.

*Sigh*

I'm sorry about that post. It was Monday morning, I was feeling kind of grumpy, and you popped up accusing someone else of being counterproductive and it just all got a bit much.

I'm not looking for an excuse to ban you, the only accounts I've ever banned here have been spambots and I'm not planning to change that. I understand you're saying what you're saying because the game is important to you. You have every right to say it, and airing different points of view is good.

I'd like you to at least try and see it from my point of view, though. I've been maintaining the game for a few years now, and I've had a fairly coherent plan that I've been very public about all along. That said, I'm also listening to constructive feedback and adjusting things as I go along. So it's frustrating for me to have you repeat the same points in the same way regardless of what I say about it.

Also, I think I need to repeat that I'm not removing all D&D things from the game, and I'm not trying to make it all pure Tolkien lore. I have had specific reasons for removing the things I have removed; that doesn't mean I'm right or I can't be persuaded otherwise. Dark elves seem to be a particularly sore point, and my reason there is that there were two conflicting types of dark elves in the game - the D&D drows, and Eöl and Maeglin. This seems jarring to me. But even then, I would have been (and would still be) open to having my mind changed on that if it had been approached in a constructive manner (as people like Grotug, who is clearly also not happy with everything I'm doing, have done).

So the problem I have is not that you are pushing back on my changes, or that you are disagreeing with what I say. It's the way you are doing it, and I don't mean the fact that you're not a native English speaker. The fact that you titled this thread what you did (apparently quoting someone who was too scared of me to even post here) is a representative example of this.

So, to be clear, you're free to say what you like and I will try to be patient and not rise to the bait. But I would appreciate it if you tried to consider where other people are coming from a bit more.