Show Posts
1
Traditional Roguelikes (Turn Based) / Re: Shadow of the Wyrm v0.6.1 "Riquier"(formerly Savage Lands)
« on: June 04, 2017, 01:47:26 AM »
I must say I really am enjoying Shadow of the Wyrm. I've yet to win partly because I seem to have an almost masochistic inclination towards squishy races and classes. My graveyard is littered with scores of Fae Sages who got one shot diving the dungeon or taking on the graveyard before they levelled up and got any HP at all! That said I thought I'd share a few thoughts:
1. At some point the mechanical obscurity of this game needs to come down a couple of notches. I feel this is most important for combat and magic skills as understanding roughly what these do to rolls is quite important for building successful characters in any roguelike. This is especially important for more complex skills such as duel wield. I learnt via experimentation and use of the W command that you really must use a dagger or short blade in your off-hand at least up to ~30 skill, which is where my current wood elf rover is at. To do this in a more natural mannr than simply dumping statistical information in an in-game or external guide, you could always include prompts such as 'You feel awkward wielding two large weapons in each hand. Try using a smaller weapon (until you gain more skill with this fighting style - assuming the penalty can be eliminated with more skill). Indeed, non-combat skills could simply take the short descriptions they currently have in the guide and make them viewable in-game.
I do realise you are in an early stage of development so this is a low priority suggestion but it is the first one that strikes me whenever I play Shadow of the Wyrm and one of the more pressing annoyances when playing/testing.
Oh on a similar note, you may want to make it slightly clearer when certain actions are going to be dangerous/fatal. For example, a very promising Dwarf Noble (currently top of my score board and I think my only L12 char) came to a rather ignoble end when he accidentally committed suicide stepping out of a certain window. A small clarifying note added on to the current prompt such as 'The fall looks a long way' would make it much clearer to the player that they are not going to survive stepping out the window without a source of flight. OTOH if it is always unsurvivable, even with a source of flight, then you may want to eliminate it entirely as it then has no gameplay or story purpose and is simply a source of frustration for newer players. I have no idea if there are any other such situations at the moment as I haven't really roamed off the home island yet.
2. From a historical perspective (and indeed the perspective of an actual fencer IRL), your weapon categories for swords seem a little odd. A broadsword is classed as a long blade while the longer, potentially significantly longer, rapier is classed as a short blade? You could capture a distinction along the line cutting versus thrusting blades if you really want to distingush between two categories of swords but personally I would argue this distinction should be dropped entirely.
The reason for this all one-handed swords have broad similarities in technique and use (as well as marked differences depending on exact blade characteristics, combat conditions (eg. civilian or battlefield, armoured vs. unarmoured opponents etc.) and whether the weapon was predominantly cut or thrust or equal) in use so short swords don't really exist as a distinct category to long swords. There are simply shorter and longer swords. You certainly could make a distinction between 1 handed and 2 handed swords as these are different categories of weapons that perform different battlefield roles and require fundemental differences in technique to use correctly.
A distinction between cut and thrust weapons would be interesting (as they could have different damage profiles, cause different status effects etc.) but might cause some problems categorising weapons. Rapiers are clearly thrust dominant weapons but, contrary to common belief, possessed razor-sharp cutting edges used to inflict distracting or impeding minor wounds (especially to the unprotected face and sword arm of the opponent) to set up a killing thrust later on. Likewise, classic cutting swords, such as the Ancient Greek kopis or pretty much any variant of cavalry sabre, were routinely used for thrusting attacks when the opportunity arose. Indeed, in the 18th and 19th centuries there was much debate over whether sabres should be used to cut or thrust in the charge. Such a category could end up feeling as arbitary as the current distinction between short and long blades.
On that note there should be no weight difference between a rapier, a broadsword and a longsword/arming sword. Those weapons all weighed roughly the same weight and it was about 1 kg (10lbs in game). Longswords designed for two-handed use (either partially or fully) would weight up to 2kg, sometimes more in the case of later evolutions such as the Doppelhander, but these would be captured under 'greatsword' within the game. Thus, as the game seems to penalise duel-wielding two long blades, a character should end up duel-wielding a rapier/broadsword/arming sword and a dagger/main gauche/sword breaker or whatever other companion weapons you might have (including things such as laterns or touches if these get added) not a broadsword and a rapier as my current character is. I feel, if the game engine would allow it and it's not ridiculous to do, that a distinction based on weight would be the best way to determine the penalty. So a lighter 'short sword' or hachet type weapon would be useable without penalty whereas larger weapons in the same category would not be.
Does the game already do this? I noticed my light rapier (2lbs) has the smallest target number, 54 base 48 mod , my woodsman's axe (6lbs) has a target number 83 base 66 mod and my briar axe (10lbs) has 86/70. Bear in mind I have like 20 skill in axes and no skill in short blades (and 20 skill in long blades if the rapier is actually classed as a long blade).
Now some questions
1. Is the starting dungeon infinite? I've gone down several levels past Siriath with no signs of it petering out.
2. Are there crafting stations for the other skills such as wandcraft and bowyering? My rover could really do with being able to make a bow as he can't buy one and throwing rocks is a bit undignified for a master archer!
3. Why do rovers not have the combat skill (which I understand generally improves melee combat ability) when they start with two melee weapons and are thus, to start, a melee-oriented class with good skills for using ranged combat as an adjunct to melee combat?
4. What, in broad terms, does levelling up the magic stats do? Do it simply give bonuses to hit chance and damage as levelling up weapons does?
5. Do sages learn additional Primordial spells or are they stuck with Shadow Flame? I've got Sages up to L5 or 6 without seeing any new Primordial spells?
6. Is learning Old Runic simply a matter of levelling up literacy once you acquire it or will certain characters never be able to learn it at all? Can characters who start without skill in magic or literacy potentially still learn cantrips from spellbooks?
I think that's it for now...
Hope this is at least interesting! Thanks for the awesome game so far. I look forward to its further development!
1. At some point the mechanical obscurity of this game needs to come down a couple of notches. I feel this is most important for combat and magic skills as understanding roughly what these do to rolls is quite important for building successful characters in any roguelike. This is especially important for more complex skills such as duel wield. I learnt via experimentation and use of the W command that you really must use a dagger or short blade in your off-hand at least up to ~30 skill, which is where my current wood elf rover is at. To do this in a more natural mannr than simply dumping statistical information in an in-game or external guide, you could always include prompts such as 'You feel awkward wielding two large weapons in each hand. Try using a smaller weapon (until you gain more skill with this fighting style - assuming the penalty can be eliminated with more skill). Indeed, non-combat skills could simply take the short descriptions they currently have in the guide and make them viewable in-game.
I do realise you are in an early stage of development so this is a low priority suggestion but it is the first one that strikes me whenever I play Shadow of the Wyrm and one of the more pressing annoyances when playing/testing.
Oh on a similar note, you may want to make it slightly clearer when certain actions are going to be dangerous/fatal. For example, a very promising Dwarf Noble (currently top of my score board and I think my only L12 char) came to a rather ignoble end when he accidentally committed suicide stepping out of a certain window. A small clarifying note added on to the current prompt such as 'The fall looks a long way' would make it much clearer to the player that they are not going to survive stepping out the window without a source of flight. OTOH if it is always unsurvivable, even with a source of flight, then you may want to eliminate it entirely as it then has no gameplay or story purpose and is simply a source of frustration for newer players. I have no idea if there are any other such situations at the moment as I haven't really roamed off the home island yet.
2. From a historical perspective (and indeed the perspective of an actual fencer IRL), your weapon categories for swords seem a little odd. A broadsword is classed as a long blade while the longer, potentially significantly longer, rapier is classed as a short blade? You could capture a distinction along the line cutting versus thrusting blades if you really want to distingush between two categories of swords but personally I would argue this distinction should be dropped entirely.
The reason for this all one-handed swords have broad similarities in technique and use (as well as marked differences depending on exact blade characteristics, combat conditions (eg. civilian or battlefield, armoured vs. unarmoured opponents etc.) and whether the weapon was predominantly cut or thrust or equal) in use so short swords don't really exist as a distinct category to long swords. There are simply shorter and longer swords. You certainly could make a distinction between 1 handed and 2 handed swords as these are different categories of weapons that perform different battlefield roles and require fundemental differences in technique to use correctly.
A distinction between cut and thrust weapons would be interesting (as they could have different damage profiles, cause different status effects etc.) but might cause some problems categorising weapons. Rapiers are clearly thrust dominant weapons but, contrary to common belief, possessed razor-sharp cutting edges used to inflict distracting or impeding minor wounds (especially to the unprotected face and sword arm of the opponent) to set up a killing thrust later on. Likewise, classic cutting swords, such as the Ancient Greek kopis or pretty much any variant of cavalry sabre, were routinely used for thrusting attacks when the opportunity arose. Indeed, in the 18th and 19th centuries there was much debate over whether sabres should be used to cut or thrust in the charge. Such a category could end up feeling as arbitary as the current distinction between short and long blades.
On that note there should be no weight difference between a rapier, a broadsword and a longsword/arming sword. Those weapons all weighed roughly the same weight and it was about 1 kg (10lbs in game). Longswords designed for two-handed use (either partially or fully) would weight up to 2kg, sometimes more in the case of later evolutions such as the Doppelhander, but these would be captured under 'greatsword' within the game. Thus, as the game seems to penalise duel-wielding two long blades, a character should end up duel-wielding a rapier/broadsword/arming sword and a dagger/main gauche/sword breaker or whatever other companion weapons you might have (including things such as laterns or touches if these get added) not a broadsword and a rapier as my current character is. I feel, if the game engine would allow it and it's not ridiculous to do, that a distinction based on weight would be the best way to determine the penalty. So a lighter 'short sword' or hachet type weapon would be useable without penalty whereas larger weapons in the same category would not be.
Does the game already do this? I noticed my light rapier (2lbs) has the smallest target number, 54 base 48 mod , my woodsman's axe (6lbs) has a target number 83 base 66 mod and my briar axe (10lbs) has 86/70. Bear in mind I have like 20 skill in axes and no skill in short blades (and 20 skill in long blades if the rapier is actually classed as a long blade).
Now some questions
1. Is the starting dungeon infinite? I've gone down several levels past Siriath with no signs of it petering out.
2. Are there crafting stations for the other skills such as wandcraft and bowyering? My rover could really do with being able to make a bow as he can't buy one and throwing rocks is a bit undignified for a master archer!
3. Why do rovers not have the combat skill (which I understand generally improves melee combat ability) when they start with two melee weapons and are thus, to start, a melee-oriented class with good skills for using ranged combat as an adjunct to melee combat?
4. What, in broad terms, does levelling up the magic stats do? Do it simply give bonuses to hit chance and damage as levelling up weapons does?
5. Do sages learn additional Primordial spells or are they stuck with Shadow Flame? I've got Sages up to L5 or 6 without seeing any new Primordial spells?
6. Is learning Old Runic simply a matter of levelling up literacy once you acquire it or will certain characters never be able to learn it at all? Can characters who start without skill in magic or literacy potentially still learn cantrips from spellbooks?
I think that's it for now...
Hope this is at least interesting! Thanks for the awesome game so far. I look forward to its further development!