Persistent world? Yes or no?

[Endorya]

I have mixed feelings regarding having a persistent worlds in roguelike games. What I like about it is that you can actually bind yourself to that world, meaning that you can continuously explore it by each time you are born in it, allowing yourself to memorize and feel familiar with it. I also like to witness your last actions from previous characters unfold, to build consequences at the world's present time.

This is all nice but also feels like exploiting. When you die exploring a certain area you will unconsciously carry this knowledge to your next character, i. e. this will let the player prepare his next character accordingly to that specific area containing a specific type of danger that could only be dealt in a specific way.

This could be solved by terraforming a new world each time the player creates a character so that the player feels the world as new as we once felt Earth in our real lives but I really don't know how people would think about this. Maybe I should let the player choose if he wants to reincarnate in the same planet?

What do you think of this?

[Anvilfolk]

Should be relatively trivial to change behaviour, so just allow it at first.

If the world is large enough, perhaps you could have the next character be far enough away that it doesn't make a difference?

[Vanguard]

This is all nice but also feels like exploiting. When you die exploring a certain area you will unconsciously carry this knowledge to your next character, i. e. this will let the player prepare his next character accordingly to that specific area containing a specific type of danger that could only be dealt in a specific way.

I don't see it as exploiting at all.  If you discover that thrown potions can function as weapons on one character, are you exploiting if you use that tactic on future characters?

The player will always have access to information their avatar "shouldn't" have.  It isn't a problem and there's no reason to worry about it.

[requerent]

This is all nice but also feels like exploiting. When you die exploring a certain area you will unconsciously carry this knowledge to your next character, i. e. this will let the player prepare his next character accordingly to that specific area containing a specific type of danger that could only be dealt in a specific way.

I don't see it as exploiting at all.  If you discover that thrown potions can function as weapons on one character, are you exploiting if you use that tactic on future characters?

The player will always have access to information their avatar "shouldn't" have.  It isn't a problem and there's no reason to worry about it.

That's a difference between universal mechanics and generation specific details. If you've already played a particular Seed before and know what to do, it is cheating.

[Endorya]

I don't see it as exploiting at all.  If you discover that thrown potions can function as weapons on one character, are you exploiting if you use that tactic on future characters?

I really don't think that learning that a potion can be used as a weapon can be compared to knowing offhand what lingers inside a particular cave that know one ever visited. I don't believe you are exploiting the game by doing that but simply learning how to play it. Otherwise, everything we do a second time could be considering cheating.

Take the a chess game as an example. You become a better chess player by playing it over and over until you start to build your own tactics and traps; this is not cheating but learning to play effectively. If you were to play a chess game in which you already knew your opponent movements you would be cheating and this can be compared to knowing offhand what lies inside a cave or how and when a certain scripted event triggers. For permadeath this makes the whole difference.

[Endorya]

That's a difference between universal mechanics and generation specific details. If you've already played a particular Seed before and know what to do, it is cheating.

Agreed.

[Endorya]

If the world is large enough, perhaps you could have the next character be far enough away that it doesn't make a difference?

That could be a solution but what if the player keeps spawning in that world? There would be a time it would spawn near a place he has been there before, unless I would check for all previous birth places and tell the player the world has been too exploited. Or! I could terraform a new planet for each game. 

[requerent]

It depends a lot on the setting. If the player represents an expression of a society more so than an individual character, then persistence is fine. Especially if dungeons are also "players" that change to express the hellish nature of influential energies (or something).

[Vanguard]

I really don't think that learning that a potion can be used as a weapon can be compared to knowing offhand what lingers inside a particular cave that know one ever visited.

Why's that?  Because your character wouldn't know what's in the cave?  The player will always have access to information their character wouldn't.

If that kind of foreknowledge breaks your game in some way, you shouldn't go with a persistent world.

[Xecutor]

You can offset creation of the new character in time (of the world).
So that the world evolved a little during this time.
New monsters will appear in the cave where previous character died,
old traps could be already triggered, and new traps could be created.

[kraflab]

You can offset creation of the new character in time (of the world).
So that the world evolved a little during this time.
New monsters will appear in the cave where previous character died,
old traps could be already triggered, and new traps could be created.

This is the direction I was thinking in.  Let the world be "similar" but not identical.  Alternatively, you could formulate this idea as knowledge being passed down from the last generation, but the details getting mucked up a bit.  Mix up a lot of familiar terrain with some things that are new so that the player still sees roughly the same world, but can still be unsure of what's around the next corner.  You'll have to be smart about keeping everything however "near" to the original you want to be as many generations pass.

[Endorya]

You can offset creation of the new character in time (of the world).
So that the world evolved a little during this time.
New monsters will appear in the cave where previous character died,
old traps could be already triggered, and new traps could be created.

That's a very nice idea. I think that will solve my problem.
Thanks a ton!

[wire_hall_medic]

You can offset creation of the new character in time (of the world).
So that the world evolved a little during this time.
New monsters will appear in the cave where previous character died,
old traps could be already triggered, and new traps could be created.

That was my reaction as well.  Keep the geography, but respawn the surprises; items, monsters, traps.

[Azathotep]

If the player is going to be playing the same map over and over again you might as well hand-craft the map? given handcrafted maps tend to be better than procedurally generated ones [citation needed].

[Endorya]

If the player is going to be playing the same map over and over again you might as well hand-craft the map? given handcrafted maps tend to be better than procedurally generated ones [citation needed].

The player is going to play on the same map over and over until he decides he wants to generate a new world.