Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Gr3yling

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 12
Early Dev / Re: The Temple of Torment
« on: January 18, 2014, 11:53:49 PM »
So, funny story.  Apparently every time you hit the "e" key in the most recent version of The Temple of Torment, it gives the PC 500 exp.  I tested all classes in standard and some of them in hardcore, and this was true for all the PC's I tried it with.

Not that I'm complaining.  Heck,  I got my warrior up to level 101 in about 5 minutes.

Design / Re: Class restrictions
« on: January 18, 2014, 09:44:48 PM »
I see.  But in a system where classes have a main stat it doesn't make sense to give one of them a special benefit the others don't get.  If the rogue is strong in combat and can pick locks while fighters and wizards are strong in combat and can't pick locks, why be anything other than a rogue?  On the other hand, if fighters can break chests and wizards can cast unlock, everyone can get pasts locks and the whole locking mechanic is just a waste of time.

So, are you saying that lock picking and other non-combat application of PC abilities should be removed entirely?  I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, I just don't understand what you are getting at here.

Design / Re: Class restrictions
« on: January 18, 2014, 07:57:47 AM »
I always found it kind of silly that manual dexterity and footwork seem to be the same stat. I saw a tabletop RPG once that had Mind, Arms, Feet, Body, Eye etc...those were the stats. So Arms affected hitting with swords, Eye with bows and other ranged stuff, Feet/Legs was dodge, Mind was magic and what not, Body ended up being the HP stat.

That's a cool idea, and it fits well with a system for localized damage.  I have thought about using a setup like that before, but for some reason decided that I didn't like it.  Maybe I was being too picky.

Design / Re: Class restrictions
« on: January 18, 2014, 07:54:32 AM »
Why is it necessary or desirable for your ability to operate a crossbow to have anything to do with your ability to bypass a lock?  There are already literally thousands of games with the same set of stats that do the same kinds of things.  Let's try out some different concepts.

My suggestions were given based on the system that I thought Aukustus was planning to use.  In his original post, Aukustus only mentioned 3 attributes.  He did not make any reference to skills or other modifiers (except equipment).  So, I made the assumption that he wanted all PC abilities to be derived only from those 3 attributes and equips.  Maybe that assumption was incorrect, but based on the context that he gave, I think it was a fairly rational one.

How were you planning to determine the PC's ability to perform actions like lock picking, Aukustus? 

Design / Re: Are required resistances fun?
« on: January 16, 2014, 06:21:45 AM »
It's also absolutely possible to beat Brogue without any of them.  They're nice effects that allow for different tactics without making your success excessively dependent on the item generator.  That's the way it should be.

Just out of curiosity, what about luck in other aspects of play?  Isn't success in most roguelikes heavily luck dependent?  I mean, "hardcore" players (not me) seem to like the idea that you can lose a new character to a fireball trap.  Isn't it pretty widely accepted that you are a the mercy of luck in many ways when you play a roguelike?

Design / Re: Class restrictions
« on: January 16, 2014, 06:18:01 AM »
Or saying that a super coordinated rogue [edit]wouldn't[edit] be good with a broadsword.

Yes because in this case the rogue is only super coordinated when it comes to using bows of some kind.  Strength, Dexterity, and Intelligence could always be renamed to Fighting, Archery, and Magic if it made you feel better.

This does limit the ability of those attributes to be applied to other situations, though.  You wouldn't say that a rogue was able to use his archery to pick a lock, or that a warrior's fighting could be used to carry more weight.

There's a reason terms like "strength" or "dexterity" keep coming up in these types of discussions.  People aren't just thinking of some sort of abstract quantity of "warriorishness" or "roguishness", they're imagining a warrior as being strong and a rogue as being dexterous, respectively.  Those are the qualities that a lot of people associate with those professions.

Every concept in a game isn't completely abstract and arbitrarily defined.  You can't just say "call these quantities whatever you want",  because the names we give them have an entrenched meaning that makes them understandable and familiar.

Anyway, I don't think it would be terrible if you gave +1 to damage with all melee weapons per 2 points of dexerity, so that even if a PC wasn't very strong, being agile was still somewhat of an advantage.  Although it still wouldn't be as effective as brute force, in this case.  Bows might also have strength requirements, since draw weights could be very high, as far as I know.  I admit my knowledge about medieval weapons is very limited, though, so I could be wrong.

Anyway, Aukustus, I do think you've got some really solid ideas, I was just curious what you thought about my question.

Design / Re: Are required resistances fun?
« on: January 16, 2014, 02:35:19 AM »
Player resistances are good because they make items and monster danger multi dimensional (how dangerous a monster is depends on what resistances you have).  But a runic item can achieve the same thing while also changing the tactics you use.
In some cases, like corrosion resistance, they can even make the game less interesting because they remove the tactical meaning of corrosive monsters.
In games where the right set of resistances is practically required for ascending characters, resistances are no longer interesting because it is not having a resistance that makes one interesting..

But all of this is irrelevant if they make the game more fun, so I'd like to hear from people with more experience.  Are they fun?

Oh, gosh, is nobody going to mention the Tower of Eternal Flames in ADOM?  That's the first thing I think about when I think of required resistances.  I know that it is actually possible to survive it without complete fire immunity, but I sure find it to be really hard.

I think that you should be able to achieve complete corrosion resistance, but there should be tradeoffs that you make it get it.  So, if you were acid immune and your equipment couldn't be corroded away, you couldn't also be fire immune and be safe from having it burned, or something.

The rune system you mentioned is interesting, because you could say that the effects of runes "diluted" each other.  So, a really powerful acid resistance rune might give you 100 percent corrosion resistance, but if you added a fire resistance rune you would have 50 percent resistance to acid and 50 percent resistance to fire. 

Those numbers may be way to high, but you get the idea.


And apparently, Vanguard already said pretty much the same thing:

"There's also the option where increasing a resistance lowers one or more other resistances"


Design / Re: Class restrictions
« on: January 16, 2014, 02:24:10 AM »
Strength adds 1 point to melee damage, dexterity adds 1 point to ranged damage and intelligence adds 1 point to spell damage.

I think that's a really good idea.  It's extremely easy to understand and has a kind of symmetry.

I do have some questions, though.  Would dexterity have no effect on the warrior's fighting abilities and would strength have no effect on the rogue's?  I just feel kind of weird about having a hulking warrior who doesn't get any damage bonus when using a dagger.  Or saying that a super coordinated rogue [edit]wouldn't[edit] be good with a broadsword.

Design / Re: Class restrictions
« on: January 16, 2014, 02:19:08 AM »
At this point a short sword sells for 7gp and one scroll of recall costs 80gp. With a maximum of 26 inventory slots of which about a maximum of 7 goes to worn equipment. So there's 19 slots for other stuff. Potions and other necessary general stuff take about 5 slots. So 14 slots of junk doesn't give much money at this point. Sometimes there might be only a few items per level.

I think that's really sound logic.  I like that solution. 

I think Krice is right that if there are hunger/corruption clocks are present they will probably make players think twice about picking up everything and taking it back to town, unlike in a game like diablo.  For example, ADOM doesn't even have town portal scrolls, so you don't want to spend a lot of time backtracking to a shop and increasing the PC's exposure to background corruption unless you have a good reason.

So, I think backtracking should be possible, but I think there probably should be an associated cost (just like there should be a cost associated with pretty much everything the PC does).

I have wondered before if maybe each item the PC picks up, even small ones, should slow them down a little bit, rather than having a threshold carrying capacity where they are "encumbered."  This way it is no longer a no brainer to pick up junk, even if you can sell it for a little bit of profit. 

Design / Re: Class restrictions
« on: January 15, 2014, 06:39:41 AM »
Also, letting shops buy from the player is a bad move.

I think this depends on how abstract your game world is going to be too, though.  It would probably seem like kind of an arbitrary restriction in ADOM if you couldn't sell (or sacrifice, for that matter) items that you didn't want.

Sometimes it is okay to include things in your game just because players might expect them or like them.  Letting people sell items isn't going to wreck the game.

You break both of those rules when you give out cash for dragging junk around.  Make every item useful for every class.

What about just having a somewhat realistic carrying capacity?  It seems like making the player choose between carrying an item that is intrinsically useful to them and one that is beneficial only because it can be sold does still involve management of risk versus reward.

If they don't have a fairly limited carrying capacity, players will still carry a ton of stuff around, whether they can sell it or not.  So, I think what we are getting into here is fundamentally an issue of prioritization, whether you can pawn your items or not.  By limiting inventory, you bring that type of prioritization to the forefront.

Or don't spawn items the player's class can't use. 

How would you determine this?  If you had a really flexible system, wizards might be able to use swords and warriors might be able to do some spellcasting.  How do you know that the items you are choosing not to spawn aren't things the player might want or need?

It's easier to balance a game where the player has a lot of restrictions on how they can play their character, I agree, but I like the idea of giving the player options.

I heard somebody won third place in the ToME module contest!  Congratulations, Zireael!

Just out of curiousity, what's the 20 page paper on?

Design / Re: An old wild west roguelike? Ideas.
« on: December 31, 2013, 12:40:39 AM »
I finished the battleship clone.  I don't want to brag, but it's probably the best game ever.  It has everything: 






1 Race(s)!

1 Classes(s)!

A total of 1 race-class combination(s)!!!

Really the only thing left is to decide what to call it.  I'm torn between "Rogue Battleship" and "BDOM" (that stands for Battleship Domains of Mystery, for those who were wondering).

The next version will, of course, add raptors as a mount type.


Zirael, I voted for VotE in the ToME modules contest, by the way. 

The categories you could rate the modules in were innovation, fun, and Polish. I gave you a really high rating in Polish, because you seem really good at it.  I mean, you even have posts on your blog that are written completely in Polish.  So you must pretty much be a Polish expert.

That particular criteria does seem kind of unfair to people who speak languages other than Polish, though.  Oh well.
Seriously, I just wanted to let you know that I did vote for your module.  Hope you do good in the contest.

Design / Re: An old wild west roguelike? Ideas.
« on: December 29, 2013, 01:27:48 AM »
The sprites are looking good, AlexPT.  Keep it up.

So, I'm still dutifully trying to learn python.  One of the assignments in the tutorial I'm using is to program a battleship clone.  The playing field in this version of the game is a series of lists. 

So, this made me wonder, are the playing fields in most roguelikes also represented with lists?  Just curious. 

Early Dev / Re: Ultima Ratio Regum development feedback
« on: December 03, 2013, 10:14:56 PM »
Your games looks very beautiful, Ultima.  It really is ascii art.  Just wanted to say that I am impressed with it.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 12