More thoughts on v4

[Jungle_Boy]

I'm enjoying playing v4, it seems much tougher than V and while I may not like the change I think it is probably for the good, just means I run through characters even faster than before. I did find a couple small issues and had some thoughts on affix naming.

I learned a staff of slow monsters by slowing an invisible unknown monster. This bug was mentioned before and I thought it was fixed perhaps it's shown up again. Unfortunately I don't remember what version of v4 it was since it's on my other computer.

This is a very small issue but See Invisible still had a ? in the 'C'haracter scren for my new weapon even though I fought invisible monsters so the item obviously did not grant see invisible.

I got the "It glows!" message upon wielding an item that I already knew had the 'golden' affix.

I've noticed a couple items whose names are too long to fit in the equipment screen.

I've found it is possible to deduce that an item has another more valuable affix because the known affix does not show up in the name.

My suggestion on naming is this: any affix whose effects can be seen in the 'i'nventory screen should not be in the name. It could still be shown in the 'I'nspect screen though. This includes, number of die, number of sides, to-hit and to-dam modifiers, weight modifiers, and AC and light radius modifiers as well as stats. All this info is easily visible already and when you have it in the name you can end up with things like a Tough Cloak of Protection [1,-1] after a couple rounds with an acid hound. This looks bad and gives a disconnect between what the item name implies and actual properties. I think if something is going to be in the name it should be something that cannot be removed and it should be significant. a dagger that is (+0,+1) does not qualify as 'Sharp' in my book, it's just a dagger that has one less knick in the blade. If you want to have these modifiers still in the name make them only apply to boni of at least +5, that would also help reduce the number of names you need to come up with.

Another possible suggestion that could help with naming and too long names is to make the name only one affix rather than a prefix and a suffix. If you have affixes of equal power call it a dagger of slays or armor of resists.

[Jungle_Boy]

One more thing I just found and it may be working as intended. It's possible to get a light with the 'of Brightness' affix twice and it does stack. In my current game I found a lantern in the Black market with radius 4 light and everburning!

[Magnate]

One more thing I just found and it may be working as intended. It's possible to get a light with the 'of Brightness' affix twice and it does stack. In my current game I found a lantern in the Black market with radius 4 light and everburning!

That is intended, but it's a little more common than it should be just at the moment ;-) (this is because we need a few more different affixes available on lights ...)

Thanks for your reports - there are a few issues remaining to be sorted out with pseudo-ID - it doesn't work too well with rune-based ID (but it's playable).

The one about learning effects on unseen monsters is intentional - you are assumed to be able to hear them slow down! (A bit silly I know, but that's what was decided at the time.)

Being able to deduce that a more valuable affix is on the item is also intentional. But there's still no magic bullet for naming items with more than two affixes - I'm still mulling this over. I think I'm the wrong person to make the final call on this, because I actually like the flavour of all the pointless names (the ones which tell you stuff you can see about dice etc.), and I also don't mind the name not telling me everything. Ho hum.

[Jungle_Boy]

I think I'm the wrong person to make the final call on this, because I actually like the flavour of all the pointless names (the ones which tell you stuff you can see about dice etc.), and I also don't mind the name not telling me everything. Ho hum.

Yea, I don't mind the name not telling me everything and I don't really mind the names for bonuses that can be seen. My problem I think is the disconnect between the name and the capabilities of the item. For instance a sharp dagger of slaying sounds awesome but could be (+1,+2). IMO that is not a sharp dagger of slaying! Or a tough cloak of protection [1,+1], not really that tough or protecting to me.

If we are going to have a sharp dagger of slaying make it be like (+4,+6) or something. Something to be excited about not just a one or two point improvement.

[Magnate]

Yea, I don't mind the name not telling me everything and I don't really mind the names for bonuses that can be seen. My problem I think is the disconnect between the name and the capabilities of the item. For instance a sharp dagger of slaying sounds awesome but could be (+1,+2). IMO that is not a sharp dagger of slaying! Or a tough cloak of protection [1,+1], not really that tough or protecting to me.

If we are going to have a sharp dagger of slaying make it be like (+4,+6) or something. Something to be excited about not just a one or two point improvement.

Fair enough - so what names would you want for one or two point improvements?

[buzzkill]

fair enough - so what names would you want for one or two point improvements?

" "

[Nomad]

Yeah, I think affix names on items that only have minor plusses to hit, dam or AC are kind of distracting and meaningless. For instance, you can have "Tough Gloves of Protection [1, +2]", which are the same as "Tough Gloves [1, +2]", and "Gloves of Protection [1, +2]" - all of which can potentially lose their enchantment and end up indistinguishable from "Gloves [1,+0]" yet still keep the names.

[fizzix]

Yeah, I think affix names on items that only have minor plusses to hit, dam or AC are kind of distracting and meaningless. For instance, you can have "Tough Gloves of Protection [1, +2]", which are the same as "Tough Gloves [1, +2]", and "Gloves of Protection [1, +2]" - all of which can potentially lose their enchantment and end up indistinguishable from "Gloves [1,+0]" yet still keep the names.

This goes to an idea that Magnate and I had separately to distinguish between magical bonuses and craftsmanship bonuses. The idea would be that there is a difference between tough gloves which is a bonus due to good craftwork and gloves of protection which are enchanted.

Let's say that you had tough gloves of protection that were [1, +2, +2] where the first +2 was craftwork and the second was enchantment. If you were to get hit by acid monsters they could change the glove to [1, -1, +2] but make it no worse. Similarly, if you were to hit a disenchantment monster he could make your gloves [1, +2, +0] but no worse.

In the acid case, the equipment name should probably change to 'damaged'. In the enchantment case, it should lose the affix.

Then if you wanted to you could bring back restore item scrolls. These would repair only acid-damage. Enchantment scrolls would work no differently than now, except that they could add the 'protection' affix if appropriate.

As for renaming, the craftwork titles are fine. The enchantment titles should go something like Magical (+1-+5) Enchanted (+5-+10), Protection (>+10) with similar ideas for weapons.

[Nomad]

Let's say that you had tough gloves of protection that were [1, +2, +2] where the first +2 was craftwork and the second was enchantment. If you were to get hit by acid monsters they could change the glove to [1, -1, +2] but make it no worse. Similarly, if you were to hit a disenchantment monster he could make your gloves [1, +2, +0] but no worse.

That seems a little unnecessarily over-complicated to me. Wouldn't it be simpler just to have the craftwork bonuses increase base AC? Distinguish "Tough Gloves [3,+0]" from "Gloves of Protection [1,+2]".

[Derakon]

That seems a little unnecessarily over-complicated to me. Wouldn't it be simpler just to have the craftwork bonuses increase base AC? Distinguish "Tough Gloves [3,+0]" from "Gloves of Protection [1,+2]".

That works so long as acid then goes after the base AC value of the armor. Restoration scrolls could then take the item back to the base AC of a standard item of that type -- so your Tough Gloves [3] went to Damage Gloves [0] which get repaired to Gloves [1].

[takkaria]

That works so long as acid then goes after the base AC value of the armor. Restoration scrolls could then take the item back to the base AC of a standard item of that type -- so your Tough Gloves [3] went to Damage Gloves [0] which get repaired to Gloves [1].

This is exactly what came up in the discussions around Repair Item before they went away again. Adjusting base AC++.

[Magnate]

This is exactly what came up in the discussions around Repair Item before they went away again. Adjusting base AC++.

Ok, happy to make quality prefixes affect base AC instead of +AC - that's easy enough. Making acid damage or disenchantment change the name is going to be hugely painful, but in principle I agree that the quality affix should change with acid damage, and the enchantment suffix (protection or whatever) should change with disen. It should be possible to combine that logic with whatever naming solution we end up choosing.

[fizzix]

That seems a little unnecessarily over-complicated to me. Wouldn't it be simpler just to have the craftwork bonuses increase base AC? Distinguish "Tough Gloves [3,+0]" from "Gloves of Protection [1,+2]".

Yes, indeed. Things get a little fuzzier when you talk about craft/magical bonuses to weapons. The dice can't really handle to-hit changes.

[takkaria]

Yes, indeed. Things get a little fuzzier when you talk about craft/magical bonuses to weapons. The dice can't really handle to-hit changes.

Can weapons really have a non-magical bonus to hit? Discuss. (3 marks)

[Magnate]

Can weapons really have a non-magical bonus to hit? Discuss. (3 marks)

I think so. There is precedent in other RPGs for non-magical weapon enhancement, from superior craftsmanship, being manifest in to-hit bonuses. One way to think of it is e.g. the sharpness of swords: a less sharp sword might glance off clothes/armour without wounding, where a sharper one will cut through and draw blood.

So I am not seeing +hit/+dam as purely magical (in the way that +AC is if we separate craftsmanship and magical along the base AC / +AC axis).