My variant development journal

[CJNyfalt]

I'm not knowledgeable about the inner workings of Angband so bear with me.

If I'm understanding this correctly, you want to categorize the 'races' (I don't remember what you chose to call them) so can assign them a set of base attributes that are common to all, correct?

Why not just have a beast or hybrid class that has no base attributes. You can throw all the odd balls in there and define them the old way, though that may be a bit hackish if even possible.

Wouldn't making 'undead' an attribute instead of a class make thing easier? Then things that are strictly undead like ghosts or wraiths could be categorized by themselves as 'ghost-like', and undead whatevers would simply fall into their base category.

Well, I could but I don't want to, since I don't like having one-monster odd-balls.


More changes done:
- Lightning jaws & Stone serpents are now 'E' instead of 'J'.

- I removed also Manticores and Shambling mounds.

- I decided to keep Minotaurs and icky things at least for a while.


some thoughts about future changes:

- I want to remove the oaths, since I would prefer other methods of limiting characters.

- Gaining stats. I will remove potions. So far I see the following methods of gaining stat points:
a. The player gains stat points they can allocate freely.
b. The player gains in stats related to skills they have increased.
c. The player gains stat points that are allocated randomly.
Each methods have benefits and drawbacks, so I would like to hear some feedback on them.

- Spell realms. The WoW organization of six realm types (fire, cold, nature, arcane, holy, shadow) seems attractive to me right now. The would decrease the number of books in each realm, and allow for a more Z-like magic schools.
This would give three pair of opposites fire-cold, nature-arcane and holy-shadow, allowing a character to have three strong spell realms or six weak ones.

[buzzkill]

I'm not knowledgeable about the inner workings of Angband so bear with me.

If I'm understanding this correctly, you want to categorize the 'races' (I don't remember what you chose to call them) so can assign them a set of base attributes that are common to all, correct?

Why not just have a beast or hybrid class that has no base attributes. You can throw all the odd balls in there and define them the old way, though that may be a bit hackish if even possible.

Wouldn't making 'undead' an attribute instead of a class make thing easier? Then things that are strictly undead like ghosts or wraiths could be categorized by themselves as 'ghost-like', and undead whatevers would simply fall into their base category.

[Pete Mack]

Some of the monsters I'm having a hard time to classify and make up my mind about:
- Weres
- Griffons, Hippogriff, Harpy, Minotaurs
- Undead whose catergory isn't clear: Undead mystic, Undead beholder, nightwalker, nighstalker, nightwing, dreadlord
and several others.

This is why the whole categorization thing is a problem--these are all either hybrids (Weres & Griffon,etc), or are an "ex" thing. As in a nightwing is an ex-parrot.

[CJNyfalt]

What about bringing back the old Venus Flytrap?

The idea has potential. However, I will not add it now, and I might make it a trap instead of monster.

Some of the recent changes made:
- Removed the following monsters: Drider, Jabberwock & the Tarrasque.
- Colbran changed to from 'g'olem to 'E'lemental.
- Dracolisk reworked into Greater Basilisk, breaths & flying flag removed.

Some of the monsters I'm having a hard time to classify and make up my mind about:
- Weres
- Mind flayer
- Griffons, Hippogriff, Harpy, Minotaurs
- Undead whose catergory isn't clear: Undead mystic, Undead beholder, nightwalker, nighstalker, nightwing, dreadlord
and several others.

[buzzkill]

What about bringing back the old Venus Flytrap?

[CJNyfalt]

Monsters removed:
- Chimera
- Gorgimera, both was three-headed freaks.
- Half-orc
- Half-troll, no half-breeds wanted. (I will handle the player race naming later.)

Monster tweaks I will do today:
- Undead and construct versions of monsters will loose flags associated with living versions of them. (DRAGON, ANIMAL, ORC, TROLL, GIANT) So, a drolem and dracolich will not have the DRAGON flag, a colossus will not have GIANT flag, and so on.
- MULTIPLY flag will be replaced my FRIENDS flag.

Other monsters that will probably be removed:
- Drider
- Icky things. (Unless someone can make a good explanation what they're supposed to be.)
- Dracolisk
- Memory moss. (Amnesia is gone, it's one of two plant monsters)
- Shambling mound. (The other plant monster)

[CJNyfalt]

Dracoliches - and dracolisks - are dragons primarily, certainly as far as the player is concerned, because their major danger is their breath. Undead aren't expected to breathe for 300+ HP damage.

On the other hand, drolems are 'g' not 'D', and I'm sure players can learn to watch out for 'L's.

[CJNyfalt]

Slime mold as in the thing you eat? Wasn't "slime mold" just a place holder for fruit-name-of-your-choice in Nethack? Maybe you should just change it to 'Banana'

Yes, but also a monster in Sangband. Yes.

[Daniel Fishman]

Dracoliches - and dracolisks - are dragons primarily, certainly as far as the player is concerned, because their major danger is their breath. Undead aren't expected to breathe for 300+ HP damage.

In Vanilla, Ogres have F:GIANT but not F:ORC so I would classify them as giants.

[PaulBlay]

I went with 'D', and also made all demons '&'.
Also made slime molds 'm' as the rest of the molds instead of ','.

Slime mold as in the thing you eat? Wasn't "slime mold" just a place holder for fruit-name-of-your-choice in Nethack? Maybe you should just change it to 'Banana'

[CJNyfalt]

I would tend to think 'D' is better (I'd rather over estimate the threat than underestimate it). However that depends on what you intend to do with the letter you don't use.

I went with 'D', and also made all demons '&'.
Also made slime molds 'm' as the rest of the molds instead of ','.

Managed to reduce the non-grouped to 95, the trickiest ones are left.

Some examples of things I need to decide:
- What to do with freaks like griffins, minotaurs, dracolisks, ...?
- Should undead versions of orcs, dragons, trolls and animals still have the same flag as the living version?
- Should dracolichs be 'L' instead of 'D'?
- Are ogres ORC or GIANT or neither?

I'm also considering to replace all MULTIPLY flags with FRIENDS.

[PaulBlay]

I'm trying to decide which letter to use for dragons: 'd' or 'D'?

I would tend to think 'D' is better (I'd rather over estimate the threat than underestimate it). However that depends on what you intend to do with the letter you don't use.

[CJNyfalt]

- 'Z': They are animals and hounds, so it looks like they should belong in group 'Canis' and use letter 'C'. Would this be reasonable, or will this change cause great screams of anguish?

Since no one spoke up, all hounds now use letter 'C', and townspeople use letter 'p'.

I'm trying to decide which letter to use for dragons: 'd' or 'D'?

Also, Ogres are flagged as both giants and orcs. In my opinion they're neither, so I will probably remove those flags from them.

I have still to add groupings for 305 monsters, of which the biggest remaining groups are probably dragons, demons, jellies, molds and elementals.

[PaulBlay]

Works fine with skeletons and zombies, but what about intelligent undead who keeps their mind?

Intelligent undead still have their minds, and probably souls (albeit possibly in a handy container nearby ;-). So spells that affect minds / souls could presumably have some effect on them. The 'unnatural driving force' thing doesn't change though, it's just that there's someone behind the steering wheel. Looked at that way intelligent undead are probably closer to the original being than animated skeletons and such but it's still a tricky call.

[CJNyfalt]

Thanks for the valuable comments.

I think that priest spells and such establish that there is at least one more plane than the prime material plane. Having spells / monsters draw their power from other planes also provides a good 'explanation' for how magic 'works' in the game.

Using the 'directions' metaphor you can have. Up to good, down to evil. Compass directions to Fire / Earth / Water / Air. And possibly an extra dimension for Dark/Negative vs Light/Positive planes. Pick and choose to taste.

A possible scheme yes, I will consider it.

Unnatural creatures are more monster than animal. You wouldn't expect a "charm animal" spell to work on a werewolf, nor would you allow a druid to have a werewolf as his animal familiar. (To pick a metaphor).

More like a human affected by magic, then.

I'll go with my previous answer here. Undead are "bodies animated by unnatural forces". So the unnatural forces seem more essential than the materials being worked on (skeletons, corpses etc.)

Works fine with skeletons and zombies, but what about intelligent undead who keeps their mind?

It's not that unlikely. If you say that hounds naturally evolved (or were magically endowed with) the ability to draw energy from other planes then which element they end up with is a matter of 'direction'. You could postulate an "ur-hound" that could breathe attacks of every element but then split into the different species. I imagine that specializing in one element gives you stronger attacks than being a generalist. Also you would probably be vulnerable to your own, and your friend's, attacks (ouch!).

Sounds reasonable.

I have nearly finished classifying all animals, but two groups still gives me a bit of trouble.

- 'Z': They are animals and hounds, so it looks like they should belong in group 'Canis' and use letter 'C'. Would this be reasonable, or will this change cause great screams of anguish?

- 'w': Worm masses. Worms are difficult to classify (for more details look at worms in wikipedia), so here the question is: What kind of worms?