INT and WIS in Angband: A starting point for the discussion

[Mikko Lehtinen]

Cool! Yeah, I want to hear some different ideas, not influenced by previous posters. And I wanted to give people a chance to read this thread and to form their own opinion before the definitions start coming.

[Mikko Lehtinen]

Derakon, different editions of D&D have quite different definitions/descriptions. You don't necessarily have to treat AD&D (?) definitions as "official" even if Angband was originally inspired by it.

[Derakon]

Mikko: oh, certainly not. I'm just providing context, and pointing out that there's some inherent difficulty in keeping the original meanings for the stats while also making them meaningful for everyone.

[Hajo]

In Angband it often wasn't obvious to me if a skill or action will depend on WIS or INT. Actually it still isn't, I just learned some facts while playing and know them now.

Personally I think three stats are enough to make a game interesting, roughly "body", "mind" and "social".

From a players point of view, it's important to know which action will depend on which stat. It might be obvious to a DnD veteran that shooting depends on DEX, but it wasn't for me when I came to the game first. When trying to shoot a bow in real life, I wasn't challenged so much for my dexterity, but rather strengh and mental focus which I'd map to INT. Since such experiences don't tranfser well to games, the games should make clear which skilsl depen on what - e.g. does "searching" depend in INT, WIS or DEX? I still don't know, but I'd guess WIS.

For players it's definitely easier to guess the important stats for their characters and way of playing if there are more distinct and fewer stats.

[takkaria]

does "searching" depend in INT, WIS or DEX? I still don't know, but I'd guess WIS.

Trick question you asked yourself there! It doesn't depend on any of them AFAIK.

[Estie]

Well...int and wis roles kindof suffer from the fact that, while they do help with the respective spell schools, there is the overriding of class that prevents non-class from using relevant spells.

With dex, it helps with attacks, wether you are warrior or mage. With int, it helps mage (and mage-related) only; no warrior ever gets better chance for red spells, nor priest, regardless of their int score. They are just prohibited from ever using any of the spells. Period.

This is the reason why int and wis are of less relevance than str and dex; allowing everyone to use all spells would fix it, but I dont think that is necessarily a good idea. I am ready to accept that int and wis are important only for relevant class and everyone else doesnt care much.

[Derakon]

Would it be reasonable to merge INT and WIS into a single stat? Then it would at least be important to 5 out of 6 of the classes, instead of only 2-3 out of 6.

[fizzix]

Would it be reasonable to merge INT and WIS into a single stat? Then it would at least be important to 5 out of 6 of the classes, instead of only 2-3 out of 6.

I've been in favor of this approach for a while. 4 core stats, str, dex, con, mind. Do we really need more?

[Estie]

I've been in favor of this approach for a while. 4 core stats, str, dex, con, mind. Do we really need more?

It wouldnt make the game worse or anything, but it also wouldnt be any kind of improvement imo. If the maxime is to create a situation where as many class/race combos as possible care as close as possible for the same item properties, then yes, but I see no reason whatsoever to move in that direction.

This change would reduce the types from 5 to 3 - warrior, mage, sub-mage, priest, sub-priest to warrior, pure caster, sub-caster. So what ?

Edit: to clarify: a mage finding boots with 10 speed and 10 wis is good reason for a post of dismay on the forum, but not bad for the game as a whole.

[Antoine]

Id rather see both caster classes use Int for spell failure and number of spells, and Wis (rename to Power or Magic) for mana. This would create interesting choices.

But this would require rebalancing as casters would need to advance two stats rather than one. Probably need to make the progression earlier, ie 17 Pow gives a wizard more SP than 17 Int used to.

Also,.I think Int should help with identification - from pseudo id speed, right up to *Id* on pickup once you hit 18/150. And low Int should make scrolls unreliable.

And I think Pow/Mag should affect saving throws much more strongly than Wis does at present. And it should affect device power too.

[takkaria]

Id rather see both caster classes use Int for spell failure and number of spells, and Wis (rename to Power or Magic) for mana. This would create interesting choices.

But this would require rebalancing as casters would need to advance two stats rather than one. Probably need to make the progression earlier, ie 17 Pow gives a wizard more SP than 17 Int used to.

Also,.I think Int should help with identification - from pseudo id speed, right up to *Id* on pickup once you hit 18/150. And low Int should make scrolls unreliable.

And I think Pow/Mag should affect saving throws much more strongly than Wis does at present. And it should affect device power too.

I like these idas, with the exception of low Int making scrolls unreliable - all that does is set a minimum INT everyone has to have. Merging together INT/WIS loses the potential for more interesting character builds.

I especially like INT controlling ID stuff for some reason.

[eMeM]

For me it's not important how many stats we have. I want a tactical choice between strong/dumb mage or weak/wise one. Right now there is not much difference.

Also,.I think Int should help with identification - from pseudo id speed, right up to *Id* on pickup once you hit 18/150. And low Int should make scrolls unreliable.
.

Fast pseudo ID used to be one of few warriors advantages. Mage/priest don't need it because they can ID anything anyway. Even if it sounds good to have INT or WIS affect it, why change it?

[Antoine]

Reason for non caster classes to consider putting a bit of effort into mental stats

[eMeM]

I mean in recent versions warriors lost their advantage over other classes with pseudo ID. This was a change I didn't like (don't get me wrong I like fast ID). Now we have a proposal to make auto ID disadvantage over others. Why make it easier for casters who already have ID spells and harder for warriors?

IMO it's obvious that warriors should be better in weapon armor identification, mages in magic devices identification, rangers in bows and ammo etc.

[Estie]

I mean in recent versions warriors lost their advantage over other classes with pseudo ID. This was a change I didn't like (don't get me wrong I like fast ID). Now we have a proposal to make auto ID disadvantage over others. Why make it easier for casters who already have ID spells and harder for warriors?

IMO it's obvious that warriors should be better in weapon armor identification, mages in magic devices identification, rangers in bows and ammo etc.

Having int score affect speed of id doesnt necessarily disadvantage warriors. You can still give them a major bonus for being warriors; this could create a hierarchy of intelligent warrior > dumb warrior > intelligent mage > dumb mage.

However, I dont see where this would take any effect. By the time the int potions appear, my warriors tend to run with a stack of id staves anyway, and they drink int potions wether it benefits id or no; before that, favoring int over any other combat-improving property would reduce the combat effectiveness, and so not be done regardless. When saying "I want warriors to put emphasis on int", I would very much like to know what exactly they are supposed to replace with int. The damage ring ?