Temple of The Roguelike Forums
Game Discussion => Classic Roguelikes => Topic started by: Eudoxus on August 22, 2010, 04:41:27 AM
-
I've spent a couple afternoons playing each of Nethack, Angband, and ADOM. In other words, I really don't know much about any of these games (or any hardcore roguelike for that matter). :P I would like to choose one of them to learn really well, but I'm having trouble deciding which one. By the way, I really hope that this question isn't asked so often on these forums so as to be really annoying to you all. I tried searching for similar threads, but couldn't find what I was looking for.
How would you describe the differences between Nethack, ADOM, Angband, and Crawl? Do you have any insight that could help me choose between these games? Does one of them have better replay value? Is one of them mechanically richer? Or is it impossible to make a recommendation without knowing my Myers-Briggs score? thanks for listening!
-
In my opinion Crawl has the best replay value, try that one. If you need reasons why visit their site and read about their philosophy on roguelikes. Try to give some minor roguelikes a shot as well check out Prospector, Frozen Depths and Rogue Survivor.
-
Thanks a lot for the recommendations. I couldn't really find anything about the philosophy/design goals of Dungeon Crawl on Linley's website, though a quick Google search led me to the Stone Soup website. The philosophy section in Stone Soup's manual makes the game sound fantastic. So, I guess I should play the Stone Soup version, as apposed Linley's version 4.0.0, right?
Prospector also looks really cool. It reminds me of Star Control 2, which is probably my favorite game of all time. Thanks again!
-
Yeah, stick to Stone Soup.
As another long shot, since you mention Star Control II, you might be WELL served to look into Transcendence and Lost in Flatspace II.
-
My 2 cents:
It depends on what you like the most to do.
If you like farming, go for Angband.
If you want a 100% tactics game and don't give a damn about story, immersion, etc then Crawl Stone Soup is the game for you.
Nethack is a very cool game with lot of funny and absurd logics, inside jokes, etc; too much for someone but if this is what you're searching for then it's your game.
Adom (my personal favourite among the 4 games you mentioned) contains both the aspects (partially) and has a very immersive story and world.
Oh and if you loved Doom don't forget to try also DoomRL.
-
Any game that's reminiscent of SC2 is certainly worth checking out, thanks Getter. And thanks a bunch for the descriptions, Skeletor, that was exactly the kind of thing I was looking for. I've been playing a lot of Crawl this past last week, and I'm really enjoying it. The user interface is spectacular. I'll have to give ADOM another try, though, since I really like the idea of an immersive story and world. When I played before, I must have died before I got a chance to experience much of the story.
-
ADOMs story is not that grand. Its kind of like "Go down that hole and defeat Chaos". It does have a few NPCs though, that give you side quests and the like .
-
If you like farming, go for Angband.
I've recently been playing Angband again for a while, but the first few levels were kind of odd - either very deadly for new characters or quite boring. I have never been very deep into the game. Will this become better later?
-
ADOMs story is not that grand. Its kind of like "Go down that hole and defeat Chaos". It does have a few NPCs though, that give you side quests and the like .
Maybe you are right, but the complexity of the world with all of its elements and their possible interactions, and always new things to discover makes Adom the deepest roguelike I ever played.
If you like farming, go for Angband.
I've recently been playing Angband again for a while, but the first few levels were kind of odd - either very deadly for new characters or quite boring. I have never been very deep into the game. Will this become better later?
No. Angband is all about maxing attributes, getting all kind of resistances, best items, etc in a long and dull grinding process.
BTW looks like there are some decent variants (e.g. UnAngband) who add many things to the vanilla game and are worth a try.
-
Well, I usually like item management and equipment optimization, but what I've seen in Angband there is way too much time spend with running through corridors until getting another interesting item.
Andrew Doull is a quite sharp thinker, so UnAngband should include a whole lot of good ideas. I'll take a look, thanks for the suggestion :)
-
ADOMs story is not that grand. Its kind of like "Go down that hole and defeat Chaos". It does have a few NPCs though, that give you side quests and the like .
Maybe you are right, but the complexity of the world with all of its elements and their possible interactions, and always new things to discover makes Adom the deepest roguelike I ever played.
Yeah I agree. However, ADOM also is the most "static" roguelike of the ones listed. I want to say ADOM is my favorite, because it's the one I got closest to when I played it alot, however after a while it gets abit boring to "create characters" (You just want to get past lev10 again in a hurry) so atm. it is Crawl Stone Soup. Oh and Legerdemain! (Google it, www.roguelikefiction.com or something) :)
-
IMO among these roguelikes Angband is the only one that can be safely played unspoiled.
There is A LOT of hidden and not-so-easy-to-figure-out-on-your-own content in ADOM.
But I guess it can be won unspoiled after many attempts.
After all it's not that hard when you get used to it.
There are A LOT of things that have SIGNIFICANT impact on your ability to win in DCSS.
There are A LOT of hidden and completely undocumented mechanics.
If you have natural affinity to math and statistics, probably you can figure it out on your own.
But I sourcedived a lot to understand WHY THE HELL MY TROLL CAN'T HIT THINGS!
I had to do some not-so-obvious choices after calculating hidden parameters.
Developers claim that there are people who ascend unspoiled.
Well. I can even believe this. Because in DCSS you rely A LOT on MIGHTY GOD RNG!
Basically by trying and trying and trying (and dying and dying and dying) you can
finally get character with some awesome near-starting equipment who is more or less safe from
so-loved-by-DCSS sudden death. Why so much about dcss?
It's freaking addictive :)
I have quite contradictory love-hate feeling toward DCSS.
And there is big difference between simple ascension and all runes ascension :)
Can't actually say much about Nethack, since I never ascended there.
But from what I read from various posts about it, there are a lot
things that almost require spoilers.
RLs to consider:
FrozenDepth
IVAN
DoomRL
-
What are the nonobvious things you did?
-
What are the nonobvious things you did?
Once I entered wiz mode and checked what weapon of available is best for my troll,
the best was ... katana. Not so good katana from my point of view.
Not some spiked club nor mildly enchanted tripple sword, but katana.
Can you imagine troll with katana?
The way skill leveling works is also very counterintuitive.
If exp pool is empty, you can kill your enemies by any convenient way.
But once you've got some exp in a pool, you often need to do some funny things,
if you want to increase your skills.
Have you tried to learn spellcasting by troll?
Kill things, read scroll, kill things read scroll.
I can't call all this 'natural behaviour'.
-
Katana is best because of the speed I assume?
They do explain the skill levelling in the docs, I think it's actually a pretty realistic system. Consider that a troll wouldn't naturally be good at spellcasting - he'd have to put some extra effort into it, especially if he started as a berserker or fighter. So reading scrolls makes sense as a way to practice beginner spellcasting.
The skill system is one of the things that keeps me coming back to Crawl to get murdered.
I always make a point of saving exp and levelling up in Traps & Doors at least to 4 because it becomes a lifesaver.
-
Katana is best because of the speed I assume?
Who knows. Melee damage, attack speed and hit rate are hidden parameters.
You can only gain some vague empirical knowledge about them.
Or use wizmode :)
They do explain the skill levelling in the docs, I think it's actually a pretty realistic system. Consider that a troll wouldn't naturally be good at spellcasting - he'd have to put some extra effort into it, especially if he started as a berserker or fighter. So reading scrolls makes sense as a way to practice beginner spellcasting.
IMO if troll want to learn spellcasting, he should concentrate on this... Why he MUST interupt his learning by tearing off some limbs from poor nearby kobolds?
How it helps learning spellcasting? Where is logic here?
Probably at first there were only combat skills. Fighting, weapon skills, armor, dodge.
All this skills can be trained in combat only. Even traps disarming involves some risk.
But spellcasting is different. Leaving 'train by use' as it is for spells leaves wide opening to munchkinism.
Than this (IMO) not-so-smart exp pool system was invented...
I don't really mind 'gain level, spend points' system. It's not logicall at all.
But it does not force you to do stupid and unnatural things.
-
That's a good point. I think it's ultimately a hangover from the original Dungeons and Dragons, which introduced the system of gaining experience by killing things, experience which then automatically improves skills not involved in killing.
Which brings up an interesting question: what WOULD be a better skill system? A system in which an unintelligent troll fighter could practice spellcasting without having to kill anything? Where would the experience come from?
I don't have answers.
-
Interesting discussion!
What about the Adom system?
The more you cast spells, the more you become proficient in casting them.
-
That happens in Crawl too but only when you've already got the spells skill and you've got XP in your skills bank. Xecutor is talking about the weirdness of going from level 0 to level 1 in a skill by using XP earned from killing.
-
In Adom you improve casting skills without needing to kill enemies, and this makes sense.
This solution could be implemented even in Crawl; no scumming could be possible because of the hunger raise induced by casting spells.
-
In ADOM you could wander in the mountains for years and years with your Elf, killing Lone Red Dragons until you had a pile of genie rings that reached to the sky. I guess what I mean is ADOM is a game that also lets you play Angband if you want, Chaos Points notwithstanding.
I'm not saying that there ADOM's a bad game - I think it's a great game. But Crawl works hard to keep grinding to an abosolute minimum, and the XP --> skill system is an integral, elegant part of that. I do agree that it's hard to wrap one's head around at first.
And heck, Skeletor, you would have Crawl abandon the Mummy Necromancer? Isn't he like your cousin? Jerk.
-
That happens in Crawl too but only when you've already got the spells skill and you've got XP in your skills bank. Xecutor is talking about the weirdness of going from level 0 to level 1 in a skill by using XP earned from killing.
No. It's not about lvl0->lvl1 only.
It's about all skills that are not used often.
If you want to cast haste, you need enchantment at relatively high level.
But if you don't need any other enchantment, you need to do cast something meaningless
every time there is exp in the pool.
Have you ever tried to train fighting with caster?
Kill powerful foe with spell. Return to dungeon, find some weaklings,
swing with sharp piece of metal at them (you don't even need to kill them, just attack).
Repeat. At what point this isn't some perverted form of grinding? :)
Adom spells have limited amount of usages.
You need to read spellbook again to replenish usages.
But if you want some spell at helpful level, you can just train it.
Without need to do something stupid.
Just make sure, that you have enough books with this spell.
In DCSS
1) there is mummy (btw mummy of sif muna is amazing, you can get it to mid game).
2) there are spells that do not cost hunger at all at some point.
I don't really know why they didn't make training of combat spells by damaging
enemies and training of non-combat spells by usage only.
-
No. It's not about lvl0->lvl1 only.
It's about all skills that are not used often.
If you want to cast haste, you need enchantment at relatively high level.
But if you don't need any other enchantment, you need to do cast something meaningless
every time there is exp in the pool.
No, you just have to cast an enchantment spell when there's XP in the pool - and that spell can be haste. No need for meaningless spells.
Have you ever tried to train fighting with caster?
Kill powerful foe with spell. Return to dungeon, find some weaklings,
swing with sharp piece of metal at them (you don't even need to kill them, just attack).
Repeat. At what point this isn't some perverted form of grinding? :)
I guess I don't see that as unrealistic or weird. A skilled magician gets battle experience while using magic, then tries physical combat on weaker enemies, because he's not sure of his new skill yet. And because skills can level up pretty quickly when you've got a big XP pool, it doesn't take that long - not grinding.
Example: I usually play an MDFi and aim to get a crossbow. These rarely show up before DL 10. When I get one, I wait till I have a big XP pool then I make sure I shoot the bow as often as possible, plunging all those points into the crossbow skill.
Also, you can turn off skills on the (m) screen, which means they won't train when you don't want them to, saving points for the skills you do want.
I don't really know why they didn't make training of combat spells by damaging
enemies and training of non-combat spells by usage only.
Non combat spells are trained by usage but the points that go into that training come from combat. The points have to come from somewhere - where if not combat, which is what Crawl is about?
-
No. It's not about lvl0->lvl1 only.
It's about all skills that are not used often.
If you want to cast haste, you need enchantment at relatively high level.
But if you don't need any other enchantment, you need to do cast something meaningless
every time there is exp in the pool.
No, you just have to cast an enchantment spell when there's XP in the pool - and that spell can be haste. No need for meaningless spells.
No. You can't. Haste is high level spell. And miscast effect can be not very pleasant.
You need to pump a lot of exp into enchantment before you will be able to cast haste more or less reliably.
Have you ever tried to train fighting with caster?
Kill powerful foe with spell. Return to dungeon, find some weaklings,
swing with sharp piece of metal at them (you don't even need to kill them, just attack).
Repeat. At what point this isn't some perverted form of grinding? :)
I guess I don't see that as unrealistic or weird. A skilled magician gets battle experience while using magic, then tries physical combat on weaker enemies, because he's not sure of his new skill yet. And because skills can level up pretty quickly when you've got a big XP pool, it doesn't take that long - not grinding.
IMO grinding is effortless action that grant you some reward.
I can kill draconians with my caster. But I can't even try to engage in close combat with them.
I kill pack of draconians in zot, return to dungeon, find someone more or less harmless,
and pump exp into fighting. Repeat. And it takes a lot of time to pump fighting to a level
when I will be able to use it with more or less serious opponents, to avoid long trips.
Worst thing in this - I don't really need fighting!
I don't want to fight with sword! I'm spellcaster!
But training fighting is the only way to increase hp.
And with hp below some threshold you can't enter several areas without risk of being instakilled.
Example: I usually play an MDFi and aim to get a crossbow. These rarely show up before DL 10. When I get one, I wait till I have a big XP pool then I make sure I shoot the bow as often as possible, plunging all those points into the crossbow skill.
That's bad example. Actually pure fighters usually do not care about exp pool and such at all.
You just kill thing. With sword or crossbow - it doesn't matter.
Firing crossbow when there are some points in exp pool doesn't hinder too much,
fighter are tough enough to withstand a few extra punches, and you don't need to
find specific enemy for that.
Pure specialized casters are nearly the same.
But both pure fighters and pure casters are very dependent of equipment.
Even in order to simply win with 3 runes you need some serious luck.
Also, you can turn off skills on the (m) screen, which means they won't train when you don't want them to, saving points for the skills you do want.
Add 'almost' there. Even turned off skills can consume exp from pool time to time.
I don't really know why they didn't make training of combat spells by damaging
enemies and training of non-combat spells by usage only.
Non combat spells are trained by usage but the points that go into that training come from combat. The points have to come from somewhere - where if not combat, which is what Crawl is about?
And that is what I don't like in crawl the most.
Imagine that you decided to learn how to make macrame.
You got book with lessons and some threads.
You successfully completed couple of lessons.
Your progress suddenly stops. You can't do new tricks, no matter how hard you try
and how much time you practice.
Now you need to take swatter and kill a few flies.
After killing them, you can make new tricks easily.
Where is logic here?
Putting logic aside (there is no much logic in fireball anyway), game forces me to do boring actions
to overcome some artificial barriers. They call this 'balance'. I call this 'bullshit'.
Both words start with 'b'.
-
No. You can't. Haste is high level spell. And miscast effect can be not very pleasant.
You need to pump a lot of exp into enchantment before you will be able to cast haste more or less reliably.
That still makes sense to me. To get better at enchanting you practice enchanting.
IMO grinding is effortless action that grant you some reward.
I can kill draconians with my caster. But I can't even try to engage in close combat with them.
I kill pack of draconians in zot, return to dungeon, find someone more or less harmless,
and pump exp into fighting. Repeat. And it takes a lot of time to pump fighting to a level
when I will be able to use it with more or less serious opponents, to avoid long trips.
Worst thing in this - I don't really need fighting!
I don't want to fight with sword! I'm spellcaster!
But training fighting is the only way to increase hp.
And with hp below some threshold you can't enter several areas without risk of being instakilled.
I have to take your word for this as I've never been in Zot and I rarely play spellcasters. However it still sounds realistic to me. I wouldn't go up against Mike Tyson without practicing on some weaker dudes first.
That's bad example. Actually pure fighters usually do not care about exp pool and such at all.
You just kill thing. With sword or crossbow - it doesn't matter.
Firing crossbow when there are some points in exp pool doesn't hinder too much,
fighter are tough enough to withstand a few extra punches, and you don't need to
find specific enemy for that.
The example illustrates my point that the XP pool system is not a major hindrance if you pay attention. I can get five levels in crossbows in a very short time, before being sent to the Abyss and slaughtered as usual. Also fighters have to make sure they practice traps, and evocations, and get a couple levels in spellcasting, all of which requires XP pool managment. Again, it's realistic: if I'm wandering around the dungeon I am going to have to put conscious effort into learning certain skills.
Pure specialized casters are nearly the same.
But both pure fighters and pure casters are very dependent of equipment.
Even in order to simply win with 3 runes you need some serious luck.
This I agree with.
Add 'almost' there. Even turned off skills can consume exp from pool time to time.
I almost did but didn't revise before posting. They do consume some but it's much slower.
And that is what I don't like in crawl the most.
Imagine that you decided to learn how to make macrame.
You got book with lessons and some threads.
You successfully completed couple of lessons.
Your progress suddenly stops. You can't do new tricks, no matter how hard you try
and how much time you practice.
Now you need to take swatter and kill a few flies.
After killing them, you can make new tricks easily.
Where is logic here?
Putting logic aside (there is no much logic in fireball anyway), game forces me to do boring actions
to overcome some artificial barriers. They call this 'balance'. I call this 'bullshit'.
Both words start with 'b'.
Have you considered that all games are artificial barriers.
-
That still makes sense to me. To get better at enchanting you practice enchanting.
I don't mind practicing at all.
I dislike the fact that in order to practice you need some exp in exp pool.
Even for practicing non-combat skills.
It's clear that in order to cast high level enchantment you have to
practice on low level for quite some time.
But what connection have haste with killing monsters?
Why I MUST kill monsters for, say, casting swiftness to become "practice enchantment"?
If I don't kill monsters than by casting swiftness I'll just waste my mana and won't
improve in enchantments a bit.
I have to take your word for this as I've never been in Zot and I rarely play spellcasters. However it still sounds realistic to me. I wouldn't go up against Mike Tyson without practicing on some weaker dudes first.
Once again. I don't mind practicing on weak dudes!
It's very reasonable (except for a fact that I don't really need that fighting skill at all).
But in order for this practice to be of any effect, I need to kill pack of strong
monsters with my powerful spells. Why?
What is connection between killing mobs with spells and practicing fighting skill with sword?
And as I stated, you need to find some bad ass monsters for a high level character
to gain some serious exp in the pool. And than find some weakling at the other end of dungeon...
It's just time consuming and not a single bit difficult.
Have you considered that all games are artificial barriers.
But almost always there is a fun way to overcome these barriers.
That's what games are about. Overcoming barriers in a FUN way.
If all you need is to press button 1500 times in order to progress further, that's not fun at all (IMO).
-
I don't mind practicing at all.
I dislike the fact that in order to practice you need some exp in exp pool.
Even for practicing non-combat skills.
It's clear that in order to cast high level enchantment you have to
practice on low level for quite some time.
But what connection have haste with killing monsters?
Why I MUST kill monsters for, say, casting swiftness to become "practice enchantment"?
If I don't kill monsters than by casting swiftness I'll just waste my mana and won't
improve in enchantments a bit.
Let's go back to your troll character. He doesn't start out with spellcasting skill, so there's got to be a mechanism for him to learn spellcasting. Are you suggesting that troll berserkers be able to cast spells right off the bat? What would that look like?
Once again. I don't mind practicing on weak dudes!
It's very reasonable (except for a fact that I don't really need that fighting skill at all).
But in order for this practice to be of any effect, I need to kill pack of strong
monsters with my powerful spells. Why?
What is connection between killing mobs with spells and practicing fighting skill with sword?
And as I stated, you need to find some bad ass monsters for a high level character
to gain some serious exp in the pool. And than find some weakling at the other end of dungeon...
It's just time consuming and not a single bit difficult.
You could always start practising the skill early on, not leaving it till you reach zot. Surely you can do it in the lair or the hive or some other corpsefest. And the connection, as I see it, is that general experience in combat, which stands for experience in dungeoneering in general, gives you the savvy to know WHAT you need to practice You can't walk into a dungeon as a newly graduated mage and expect to pick up a claymore.
But almost always there is a fun way to overcome these barriers.
That's what games are about. Overcoming barriers in a FUN way.
If all you need is to press button 1500 times in order to progress further, that's not fun at all (IMO).
Try a different class/race combo. OR...suggest how Crawl could be improved. What would the ideal skill system look like?
-
OR...suggest how Crawl could be improved. What would the ideal skill system look like?
I second this. IMO the Crawl system is the best I know of. Well, at least the three general rules it is based on: (1) increase skills by practice, (2) you need to spend your XP pool to practice skills, (3) XP is gained by killing powerful monsters.
The first rule: (1) increase skills by practice. The alternative is (1') when you choose at level up what skills you want to increase, as in e.g. ADOM. I think (1) is much more logical. (1') means that you increase your skill even if you have never used it, you just think that it seems useful some time in the future.
The second rule: (2) you need to spend your XP pool to practice skills. What are the other options?
(2a) you cannot practice skills at all. That makes sense actually. You have practiced adventuring for several years, and you should not expect that another week in Dungeon of Zot will make any difference. But that's not what we want.
(2b) you can practice for free. Then you just stand in one place at the beginning of game and raise all your skills to maximum. That's boring, the game would be better then if it just assumed that your PC has done this before entering Dungeon of Zot and already has this great skills. That will make the whole skill system useless and boils down to 2a.
Sure, it is a bit illogical that practicing does not work when your pool is empty. What do you think is logical? I think the system is the best when it encourages you to spend some time practicing and some time doing real fighting. But it needs to forbid you from spending too much time practicing. Crawl system does this very well.
(2c) the limit on your skills is based on your general XP level, not on your XP pool. This is less logical and you lose diversity. All characters will max out all their skills and look the same.
(2d) you can practice your skills just for practice (that is, without gaining anything useful except skill increase), but it takes time and thus costs you food, which is a valuable resource. That seems to make sense, but I think it could not work so well in practice (you would probably require some very unnatural food requirements if you want this balanced, like requiring lots of food for increasing skills when at high level, so you cannot get high level in the beginning of the game, and this in turn would mean that you could not practically raise your skills by just using them for real battle).
(3) we surely don't want players to get XP by doing uninteresting things. Getting XP by defeating powerful monsters has its problems, but this option seems the best we have. There have been lots of threads about what possible other mechanisms of getting XP. Seems everyone would like to have something else, but we don't have clear ideas how to achieve that.
-
Let's go back to your troll character. He doesn't start out with spellcasting skill, so there's got to be a mechanism for him to learn spellcasting. Are you suggesting that troll berserkers be able to cast spells right off the bat? What would that look like?
Once again. I DON'T MIND PRACTICING!
For a troll to learn spell casting he need to read N scrolls.
Right now he need pack of scrolls to the left and pack of kobolds to the right.
Read one scroll, smack one kobold. That's oddest way to learn spellcasting.
You could always start practising the skill early on, not leaving it till you reach zot.
I can't! Early on spellcasters are so weak, that attempt to practice fighting with
regular dungeon critters can end up with death.
And I'll repeat myself again - I'm practicing fighting as a mage only to gain hp.
Not to gain fighting skill itself.
If there was a way to pump max mana to some reasonably high value,
so virtual hp of a mage with guardian spirit will be on the comparable level of hp of
a fighter, than mage wouldn't need to practice fighting.
Try a different class/race combo. OR...suggest how Crawl could be improved. What would the ideal skill system look like?
IMO combat related skills should be trained in combat (only).
Without usage of exp pool. Or with faster training when exp pool is used.
Of course using high level skill to kill low level monster shouldn't train skill at all.
However lvl27 mage should be able to train fighting to, say, lvl13 or so, without need of exp pool.
I mean training in a dungeon on regular monsters.
Further training should be possible only with exp pool or on higher level monsters.
Things are difficult with non-combat skills. For example enchantments.
And especially spellcasting in general.
Probably just casting enchantment spell should train both enchantment and spellcasting.
But up to some level. Level 1 spells up to skill level 3, level 2 up to 5 or so, and so on.
If char have spellcasting 20 and enchantments 1, casting low level enchantments should
train enchantments without exp pool, but spellcasting should be trained (if turned on)
only if there is exp in the pool.
Low level mages won't be able to train some skill in a quiet corner because of hunger.
When hunger cost of spell will drop to zero, this spell won't train anything anyway.
If mage have some supply of food and decides to burn it for training enchantments, why prohibit this?
Armor skill, dodging, stealth, should be trained directly by current exp value of a monster you are dealing with.
Traps should probably provide exp value that depends on depth.
Btw weapon skills in adom are trained by usage only.
And level up value of non-combat skills that are not used at all is very small, and become 0 at some point without training.
In M&M skills leveling was performed by trainer. You pay money, trainer rises your skills :)
In IVAN everything is training by usage.
But there is harsh autoleveling system.
The stronger you get, the nastier monsters are generated in next level.
-
I know I sound boring but I personally really like the Adom system: every time you perform an action, there is a little chanche your related skill can improve, regardless of things like Crawl exp pool. This is after all enough realistic and doesn't force the player to behave innaturaly.
And heck, Skeletor, you would have Crawl abandon the Mummy Necromancer? Isn't he like your cousin? Jerk.
Haha, good one ;D
-
One more example.
Player is Ice Elementalist wielding crossbow.
His Ice Magic and Crossbow skills are both level 10 filled to 99% exp till next level.
Exp pool is empty.
There are Saint Rjoka and ordinary orc in front of player.
Player throws icicle at Saint Rjoka and kills him. Nothing happens to his Ice Magic skill.
Than player fires bolt (with crossbow) at head of almost helpless orc and blows his head into pieces.
Nearly effortless action. That somehow levels Crossbow skill up. Why?
Where is logic in this?
IMO: Properties of good skills/exp system:
1) Сonsistency. It shouldn't defy laws of common logic.
2) Fluent? It shouldn't force player to do unnatural things to progress.
3) Balanced.
In order to achieve (really?) 3, Crawl somewhat fails at 1 and 2.
-
One more example.
Player is Ice Elementalist wielding crossbow.
His Ice Magic and Crossbow skills are both level 10 filled to 99% exp till next level.
In this example, Crawl is right and just in punishing this foolish player because Crossbows are a waste of skill points if you have destructive, direct damage at your willworking fingertips.
Seriously though, what are you saying? The XP -> skill system is straightforward once you learn it, and the devs have gone to reasonable lengths in order to tweak it. I understand that it's not your preferred method of character advancement, but it seems like you're splitting hairs with these examples. Is it supposed to be self evident that one should advance in skill when shooting at Saint Roka but not at the weak Orc? I don't see it that way.
Let me give YOU an example of XP gain versus XP allocation.
We're all nerds here. We all remember how terrifying the prospect of eternal virginity was, right? (All due respect to the remaining virgins; it happens, put yourself out there, etc etc.)
So you were a virgin. The prospect of ever losing your virginity seemed incredibly daunting - and much of this had to do with the fact that you had NO IDEA how to have sex. You had no skill levels in lovemaking. You were so worthless at sex that even low-level harlots scoffed at you. But eventually you found a special someone who, after an epic battle, consented to make love with you anyhow.
Chances are high that you were terrible in bed regardless of how much you cared for this person. You simply had no idea what you were doing. But you still had sex! A major accomplishment, one giving you 1000XP.
But it wasn't just like you suddenly knew how to have sex after that one experience. It was more like a door had been opened for you and now you were able to practice fruitfully. It was a slow process, fueled by optimism and the inertia of being genuinely cared for by someone... but hopefully... after many attempts... some of them with subsequent low-level harlots... you gained a few skill levels in sex by SPENDING that inertia you'd gained from that one special experience with that special someone.
Crossbows shmossbows. Crawl Represent!
I know I sound boring but I personally really like the Adom system: every time you perform an action, there is a little chanche your related skill can improve, regardless of things like Crawl exp pool. This is after all enough realistic and doesn't force the player to behave innaturaly.
Skeletor, you don't need to convince me that ADOM is incredibly engaging. I literally threw my computer away because I'd been spending too much time playing that goddamn game... stupid Kelevaster.... that was like 9 years ago though
-
Nice analogy...I'd modify it by saying that before achieving that first strike, you had to kill a bunch of kobolds first to build up the XP pool, then spent the XP practicing approaches, dates, etc.. Actually bedding down for the first time represents going from Sex Skill 0 -> Sex Skill 1.
Now I am getting a crazy good idea for a roguelike....hmmm...
-
Serial Monogamist?
-
SEX DUNGEON
-
I'm sure there's a pornographic code page from somewhere back in the BBS days.
-
Actually I was thinking about a real-life roguelike. Like Passage but a roguelike. Levels of dungeon would be years or stages of life, you'd start out in a playpen practicing basic hand-eye co-ordination, by level 20 you'd be on car driving skills and so forth...Death would be inevitable but there could be some sort of afterlife concept, perhaps one that differed depending on the religion you chose.
-
I definitely find the Crawl skill system to be odd, at least conceptually, but I also think that it's really fun. It's weird to think about being able to use a skill many times without ever getting any better at it, like when you put a skill on hold. That said, I've never cared that much about how realistic a game is, provided it has fun internal logic. And, for what it's worth, Crawl is the first roguelike that I've ever really gotten addicted to.
Many moons ago I used to play a bunch of the tabletop RPG L5R, usually with the same DM. The DM made a house rule that was a bit of a compromise between Z's general rules (1) and (1') that I really liked. The rule was this: before you could spend experience points to buy a level 1 skill, you had to role play your character becoming interested and attempting to learn the skill. In other words, introducing new skills to your character took some extra effort. I could see something like this working in a roguelike, where you use Z's rule (1) for getting lvl 1 skills and using (1') for raising skill levels above 1.
Switching gears here, I'm curious to know how many serious attempts there have been to make a roguelike with a randomly generated storyline. ADOM is the only one I know of.
-
ADOM doesn't have a randomly generated storyline - everything in it is hard-coded.
From what I've heard GearHead 2 has an extremely good random story and quest system, but I've never tried it out myself. There are probably other examples out there...
-
Gearhead is a really underrated game, and the combat/customization of mecha is not to be missed. It really feels like a polished, turn-based mecha strategy game. The faction system is fun, though it seems to amount to a lot of grinding. Nonetheless, once in a while I find myself slogging through yet another search and destroy mission for the Silver Knights because I want to be promoted. There are definitely balance issues.
The randomly generated story isn't much to brag about, IMO. It can be summed up as: Stop [RANDOMNAME] from [STEALING/DESTROYING] the [ITEM/PLANET] from [FACTION]. More of a "wacky mad libs" thing than anything else. I'm not disparaging the work at all; I'm just saying it's a far cry from a real-feeling plot.
-
If you're still looking for a good roguelike, Mage Guild is a lot of fun and easy to pick up and play. It even has a unique leveling system that doesn't require picking fights or grinding like you guys were talking about earlier.
-
If you're still looking for a good roguelike, Mage Guild is a lot of fun and easy to pick up and play. It even has a unique leveling system that doesn't require picking fights or grinding like you guys were talking about earlier.
Yeah, totally forgot about this one.
And I'll definitely add Brogue to the list!
-
It's weird to think about being able to use a skill many times without ever getting any better at it, like when you put a skill on hold.
This is actually realistic...if you think about it you only really get better at something when you put your full attention on it with a clear intention to practice and improve. If you just noodled around on a violin, you'd never really learn to play well, even if you noodled for eight hours a day. True skill comes with hard practice.
-
True skill comes with hard practice.
With interruptions for a bloody massacre. Very realistic, yeah.
Exp pool of Dexter must be constantly full.
I wonder what skills he is training with all this exp...
-
What, you don't go on killing sprees between violin practice sessions? I thought everyone did that.
-
IMO: Properties of good skills/exp system:
1) Сonsistency. It shouldn't defy laws of common logic.
2) Fluent? It shouldn't force player to do unnatural things to progress.
3) Balanced.
In order to achieve (really?) 3, Crawl somewhat fails at 1 and 2.
I've thought about this and it's wrong.
1) "Common logic" in your usage means real-world logic. But all of Crawl, and all roguelikes, violate reality. Consider the healing system: you can stand still and go from 1% health to 100% health in minutes. According to common logic you'd be hospitalized for months. So if logic matters, roguelikes are not the game of choice for you.
The only logic a roguelike needs is internal logic - consistency with itself. Crawl has that.
2) "Unnatural" is just a disguised restatement of 1), and therefore not a separate criterion.
3) "Balance" is not a real goal. The real goal of a game is fun. And fun being a matter of personal taste means that not everyone will like the same game. Crawl obviously has very wide appeal. It's one of the most popular roguelikes. Therefore its game systems are successful, in that they create fun for players of the game.
-
IMO: Properties of good skills/exp system:
1) Сonsistency. It shouldn't defy laws of common logic.
2) Fluent? It shouldn't force player to do unnatural things to progress.
3) Balanced.
In order to achieve (really?) 3, Crawl somewhat fails at 1 and 2.
I've thought about this and it's wrong.
1) "Common logic" in your usage means real-world logic. But all of Crawl, and all roguelikes, violate reality. Consider the healing system: you can stand still and go from 1% health to 100% health in minutes. According to common logic you'd be hospitalized for months. So if logic matters, roguelikes are not the game of choice for you.
The only logic a roguelike needs is internal logic - consistency with itself. Crawl has that.
2) "Unnatural" is just a disguised restatement of 1), and therefore not a separate criterion.
3) "Balance" is not a real goal. The real goal of a game is fun. And fun being a matter of personal taste means that not everyone will like the same game. Crawl obviously has very wide appeal. It's one of the most popular roguelikes. Therefore its game systems are successful, in that they create fun for players of the game.
I guess Xecutor point is that a wizard who is challenging some random kobold with his boxing gloves just after defeating a blue dragon with fireballs *is* illogic and unnatural even in a roguelike.
I really like DCSS but I have to say I agree with him. BTW I'm sure the game will be improved a lot in future; developers are very active and caring for what the players want. Xecutor, why don't you tell them your problem?
-
IMO: Properties of good skills/exp system:
1) Сonsistency. It shouldn't defy laws of common logic.
2) Fluent? It shouldn't force player to do unnatural things to progress.
3) Balanced.
In order to achieve (really?) 3, Crawl somewhat fails at 1 and 2.
I've thought about this and it's wrong.
1) "Common logic" in your usage means real-world logic. But all of Crawl, and all roguelikes, violate reality. Consider the healing system: you can stand still and go from 1% health to 100% health in minutes. According to common logic you'd be hospitalized for months. So if logic matters, roguelikes are not the game of choice for you.
The only logic a roguelike needs is internal logic - consistency with itself. Crawl has that.
2) "Unnatural" is just a disguised restatement of 1), and therefore not a separate criterion.
3) "Balance" is not a real goal. The real goal of a game is fun. And fun being a matter of personal taste means that not everyone will like the same game. Crawl obviously has very wide appeal. It's one of the most popular roguelikes. Therefore its game systems are successful, in that they create fun for players of the game.
1) do not confuse laws of physics/physiology/etc and logic.
2) unnatural behavoiur can be very logical. but still unnatural.
3) unbalanced games are usually not fun. balance flaws are exploited and that ruins (at least) some portion of fun.
-
I think the best skill up system is one where you just choose which skills you want to improve when you level up/clear a stage/meet some other goal. My reasoning is that roguelikes are largely about challenge, and not at all about immersion. Playing as effectively as you can (as in using the best ability for any given situation instead of using weaker abilities to improve them) is important. Being realistic in that sense is not important.
-
I dunno about that. I shy away from the micromanagement of letting the player pick skills and abilities on each level-up. That's a subgame that I don't care much for, and for a lot of players it isn't fun. I like class skills by level a lot. Simple and done to death because it works. Choose a class at game start and it predetermines what you get on level up for many of your primary skills throughout the game. Maybe there are options along the way where you choose to concentrate on a subclass, and a "branching" class tree. But even that's too much micromanagement for a lot of players.
That said, I like for the characters to accumulate buffs and intrinsics during play which differentiate them, and I like at least some of those buffs and intrinsics to reflect the kind of challenges that the character has overcome and the methodology the character's used to do it, while the rest can be the random luck-of-the-draw of items found. With class/level determining truly essential skills, these buffs can be for optional stuff that has an impact on play style without being necessary for survival.
So, all together, I favor a mixed approach. Truly essential things should be automatic (including not-enough of some things for player comfort, which is part of the essential challenge of some classes). A lot of very useful optional things should be awarded for thematic playstyle, to support players who are trying to play some sort of thematic character or develop a particular individual strategy. And finally, there should be enough luck-of-the-draw to prevent characters from being exactly alike and present each with opportunities and challenges the others don't face.
So, does that, um, "embrace the power of AND" enough?
Bear
-
1) do not confuse laws of physics/physiology/etc and logic.
2) unnatural behavoiur can be very logical. but still unnatural.
3) unbalanced games are usually not fun. balance flaws are exploited and that ruins (at least) some portion of fun.
1) Your examples were of violations of realworld laws. The Crawl skill system is perfectly logical: it assumes a set of axioms (kills give xp, certain actions practice certain skills), and adheres to those axioms with complete consistency.
2) Again, unnatural means "violates realworld laws".
3) Crawl is fun, and therefore balanced, for some but not for others. May it ever be thus.
-
I'm an Angband player myself, but if you can find the older (3.14, i think) version of Lost Labyrinth, it's a nice, easy diversion from getting punished by DCSS...well I get punished, but i suck. :D
Please excuse me going off topic, but btw, SC2 is available as Freeware under the name, "The Ur Quan Masters". It's the 3D0 enhanced version.