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

[Antoine]

The Int/id thing is a side issue really, my main proposal was to.take the leap to.having 2 spell stats for caster classes

A.

[Estie]

About 2 stats for caster classes - what about reversing the roles of each stat for the different colour casters. So for red, int gives spellpower and wis mana pool, for green the other way round ?
I dont know how much I like int giving mana reserves, but I like it probably more than int affecting priest spell power.

[Nick]

So at one point I was looking at 2 spell stats for casters in FA, pretty much as follows:

            Mana Stat
            INT     WIS

Fail  DEX   Mage    Druid
Stat  CHR   Necro   Priest

Note that FA has four caster classes (Mage, Druid, Priest, Necromancer) and four associated half-caster classes (Rogue, Ranger, Paladin, Assassin). So the idea was basically retain INT and WIS in their roles as governing mana, but use DEX and CHR to govern failure rates.

It's really nice and symmetric, but in practice it just didn't seem to work so well.

[Derakon]

The other suggestion I've seen is for INT to determine the number of spells you can learn, while WIS determines your mana pool. The only issue I have with that is that characters would generally try to be as stupid as possible while still learning the spells they need, but that's still an improvement over the current system, where holy casters are as stupid as possible, period, and arcane casters as unwise (foolish?) as possible.

[Antoine]

The other suggestion I've seen is for INT to determine the number of spells you can learn, while WIS determines your mana pool. The only issue I have with that is that characters would generally try to be as stupid as possible while still learning the spells they need,le.

I think Int could reasonably cover number of spells and failure rate?

The main issue with this proposal is that it would require a long hard look at the artifact list

A.

[Derakon]

Well, that's true of any change that makes both INT and WIS needed by both types of caster.

[Antoine]

Well, that's true of any change that makes both INT and WIS needed by both types of caster.

Quite. Also egos and race/class bonii

[kaypy]

So the idea was basically retain INT and WIS in their roles as governing mana, but use DEX and CHR to govern failure rates.

It's really nice and symmetric, but in practice it just didn't seem to work so well.

Un did this as well. It wound up being weird where I would try to start a mage with 18 Int but then never ever bother increasing it because after that first missile + detect combo, it was frankly a dump stat.

[Estie]

How about this:

For red casters: int determines everything as before, except manapool, which is guarded by wis. In addition, int provides a multiplier for all damage spells (similar to str for a warrior, and this might or might not replace the level dependent dam increase of spells). Non-damage spells like detect traps arent affected by this multiplier.

For green casters: wis determines everything as before, including manapool. In addition, int score guards a damage multiplier for damage spells same as for red casters (mostly OoD, but that is important enough to want more int; possibly have heal amount also be affected).

I fear by making both int and wis desirable, the half-casters might be adversly affected; they now have to bother with 5 stats (before it was 4 and that was bad enough).

[Antoine]

For half casters, my feeling was that theyd prioritise Wis and let Int slide a bit - so theyd have dicey fail rates but plenty of sp.

Along with more generous progression - ie the same number of sp at lower spell stat than before - this should keep half casters viable...

A.

[wobbly]

Along with more generous progression - ie the same number of sp at lower spell stat than before - this should keep half casters viable...
A.

It's always been my feeling that the smaller stat gaps should matter more, rather then what feels to me like hard-cut of lines in stats. It makes stats spread less of an issue for half-casters for one & also leads to more possible choices of stat spread.

As for intelligence & warriors it's hard to make it matter in a way that makes sense without changing to cunning like in Tome (critical chances) or learning like in skill-based RPGs. The 1 place where intelligence most matters on a warrior tends to be handled by the player not by the game mechanics.

[Antoine]

I think it is a key design decision in V that you can get away with low off stats - ie a Warrior with 4 Int is hardly worse off than one with 17 Int, all else being equal? Would the devs agree?

[MattB]

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

I'm with you there.
It would be a definite improvement, IMHO.

[fizzix]

I think it is a key design decision in V that you can get away with low off stats - ie a Warrior with 4 Int is hardly worse off than one with 17 Int, all else being equal? Would the devs agree?

I'm not sure there was a key part to this design decision. And regardless, whatever the original motivation was, it's been lost through many changes in leadership. So even if it was purposeful when it was designed, it's not clear that it still is.

[DaviddesJ]

From a players point of view, it's important to know which action will depend on which stat.

I think it doesn't really seem important. You know from your player screen how good you are at using magical devices. Why is less important. If you want to know how your stats are affecting your abilities, for the purpose of equipping different items that raise different stats, you can always just try the items and see what effect the stat changes have on your abilities. As long as the game is directly displaying your abilities to you, it's not really much of an issue to understand in detail how they are determined. Lots and lots of other game mechanisms are more important to understand.