Cooler weapon and armor names

Paul J Gans <gans RemoveThis @panix.com> writes:
> Billy Bissette <baines RemoveThis @coastalnet.com> wrote:
> >Eddie Grove <eddiegrove RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote in
> >news:87wspicxcq.fsf@hotmail.com:
>
> >> Timo Pietil?? <timo.pietila RemoveThis @helsinki.fi> writes:
> >>
> >>> Boots could be .
> >>>
> >>> Leather sandals (like Nick proposed)
> >>>
> >>> And with renaming "metal shod" to "iron shod"
> >>
> >> I almost changed my edit file to change those be "clanky" boots.
> >>
> >>
> >> Metal shod boots of stealth are almost as bad as rusty chainmail of acid
> >> resistance.
>
> > What's wrong with rusty metal being resistant to acid?
>
> Basic chemistry? <grin>
>
> I'd like to strongly advocate something only occasionally talked
> about here. Most of you are very experienced Angband and variant
> players. Thus you know what to expect most of the time.
>
> Angband has a "virtual world" feel to it. And that is good, but
> it could be better. It needs a more consistent feel, at least in
> my opinion. There are too many illogical things going on. There is
> too much stuff simply lying around. Some of it on the upper levels
> could be stuff dropped by previous characters (in which case we ought
> to find a skeleton or two every so often to tell us that) but on the
> lower levels where there are all sorts of "intelligent" monsters,
> such stuff would have been picked up long ago.
>
> Various monsters need, I think, rationals too. What weapon would,
> just for example, a kobold skeleton wield? It better be something
> or why should it be able to damage me? And what happens to it
> when I kill the kobold skeleton? And how can I "kill" an already
> dead thing? Should I not need something other than a mace or dagger?
> So I think we need different means of dispatching different sorts
> of creatures.
>
> Further, how would the town level happen to have "good" items in
> its stores? They would be of no use to townsmen unless we imagine
> a thriving business in supplying adventurers. Perhaps that should
> be assumed and some mods made on that basis?
>
> Thus shops that carry food, oil, arrows, etc. Shops that carry
> mass produced ordinary weapons and armor. Shops that carry
> a few reconditioned items presumably brought to the surface by
> other adventurers. And there could be shops where special items
> would be made to order; pay now and in 10,000 turns it will be
> ready for you.
>
> In a decent town with so many valuables around, murdering townspeople
> should be bad for you, but then also, there should be fewer pests
> because they surely would have murdered each other long since.
>
> And, making use of the fact that town is a supply depot for adventurers,
> there could be schools or gurus who would, for a price, teach the newbie
> adventurer some of the secrets of the caves such as magic missile, phase
> door, how to tell a good item from a cursed one, etc. This would be done
> for a price in both gold and in time. The player need not be totally
> aware of all that was learned but would simply "know" some things.
>
> Why might this be good? It would help the newbie get into the game
> while being of lesser value to the experienced who know how to maximize
> things already. (I note that, for example, power diving is NOT known
> to newbies who have, in their first 50,000 games, learn by crawling
> down level by level.)
>
> Could things be rationalized to the point where I could maneuver a
> monster onto a trap? Could the number of monsters who can just
> ignore a trap (at levels near the surface especially) be reduced?
>
> Could some monsters war on other monsters? That way one might
> maneuver them into fighting and one might find "bone fields",
> the remains of a mighty battle, in which plunder (ie. "good" items")
> might be found.
>
> I'll stop now though there are many more things that can be done
> to rationalize the game.
>
> Wait: one more! Why does gold weigh nothing and why can't I leave
> gold at my house?
>
>
> For example,
> murdering townspeople should be bad for you, but then, there should
> be fewer pests because they surely would have murdered each other
> long since.
>
> There should be less stuff lying around. Given that all sorts of
> monsters are roaming all levels, why would much of that stuff not
> have been picked up already?
>
> To compensate for this, monsters who attack with weapons (other than
> tooth, claw, etc.) should often drop usable weapons of the sort
> *they* use. And there should be some rationale to this that
> the player could learn.

Interesting points. I do like the idea of treasure being
decided upon monster creation, and then giving the monster
the option of using what he carries. Wanna Westernesse?
Gonna have to fight a monster wielding Westernesse!

Phil
--
Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all.
-- Microsoft voice recognition live demonstration
 >> Stay informed about: Cooler weapon and armor names 

On 07 Feb 2008 19:48:56 +0200, Phil Carmody
<thefatphil_demunged.TakeThisOut@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>Interesting points. I do like the idea of treasure being
>decided upon monster creation, and then giving the monster
>the option of using what he carries. Wanna Westernesse?
>Gonna have to fight a monster wielding Westernesse!

For monster inventories to work properly in Angband, you'd have to
rebuild the system from the ground up. The player and the monsters are
not designed to function in equivalent ways.

I am also against monster inventories because pretty much every other
roguelike has them and I am against any change to make Angband join the
herd. Being different is good.

--
R. Dan Henry
danhenry.TakeThisOut@inreach.com
Holy Avenger should be a Paladin title,
not an ego item.
 >> Stay informed about: Cooler weapon and armor names 

Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged DeleteThis @yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>Paul J Gans <gans DeleteThis @panix.com> writes:
>> Billy Bissette <baines DeleteThis @coastalnet.com> wrote:
>> >Eddie Grove <eddiegrove DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote in
>> >news:87wspicxcq.fsf@hotmail.com:
>>
>> >> Timo Pietil?? <timo.pietila DeleteThis @helsinki.fi> writes:
>> >>
>> >>> Boots could be .
>> >>>
>> >>> Leather sandals (like Nick proposed)
>> >>>
>> >>> And with renaming "metal shod" to "iron shod"
>> >>
>> >> I almost changed my edit file to change those be "clanky" boots.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Metal shod boots of stealth are almost as bad as rusty chainmail of acid
>> >> resistance.
>>
>> > What's wrong with rusty metal being resistant to acid?
>>
>> Basic chemistry? <grin>
>>
>> I'd like to strongly advocate something only occasionally talked
>> about here. Most of you are very experienced Angband and variant
>> players. Thus you know what to expect most of the time.
>>
>> Angband has a "virtual world" feel to it. And that is good, but
>> it could be better. It needs a more consistent feel, at least in
>> my opinion. There are too many illogical things going on. There is
>> too much stuff simply lying around. Some of it on the upper levels
>> could be stuff dropped by previous characters (in which case we ought
>> to find a skeleton or two every so often to tell us that) but on the
>> lower levels where there are all sorts of "intelligent" monsters,
>> such stuff would have been picked up long ago.
>>
>> Various monsters need, I think, rationals too. What weapon would,
>> just for example, a kobold skeleton wield? It better be something
>> or why should it be able to damage me? And what happens to it
>> when I kill the kobold skeleton? And how can I "kill" an already
>> dead thing? Should I not need something other than a mace or dagger?
>> So I think we need different means of dispatching different sorts
>> of creatures.
>>
>> Further, how would the town level happen to have "good" items in
>> its stores? They would be of no use to townsmen unless we imagine
>> a thriving business in supplying adventurers. Perhaps that should
>> be assumed and some mods made on that basis?
>>
>> Thus shops that carry food, oil, arrows, etc. Shops that carry
>> mass produced ordinary weapons and armor. Shops that carry
>> a few reconditioned items presumably brought to the surface by
>> other adventurers. And there could be shops where special items
>> would be made to order; pay now and in 10,000 turns it will be
>> ready for you.
>>
>> In a decent town with so many valuables around, murdering townspeople
>> should be bad for you, but then also, there should be fewer pests
>> because they surely would have murdered each other long since.
>>
>> And, making use of the fact that town is a supply depot for adventurers,
>> there could be schools or gurus who would, for a price, teach the newbie
>> adventurer some of the secrets of the caves such as magic missile, phase
>> door, how to tell a good item from a cursed one, etc. This would be done
>> for a price in both gold and in time. The player need not be totally
>> aware of all that was learned but would simply "know" some things.
>>
>> Why might this be good? It would help the newbie get into the game
>> while being of lesser value to the experienced who know how to maximize
>> things already. (I note that, for example, power diving is NOT known
>> to newbies who have, in their first 50,000 games, learn by crawling
>> down level by level.)
>>
>> Could things be rationalized to the point where I could maneuver a
>> monster onto a trap? Could the number of monsters who can just
>> ignore a trap (at levels near the surface especially) be reduced?
>>
>> Could some monsters war on other monsters? That way one might
>> maneuver them into fighting and one might find "bone fields",
>> the remains of a mighty battle, in which plunder (ie. "good" items")
>> might be found.
>>
>> I'll stop now though there are many more things that can be done
>> to rationalize the game.
>>
>> Wait: one more! Why does gold weigh nothing and why can't I leave
>> gold at my house?
>>
>>
>> For example,
>> murdering townspeople should be bad for you, but then, there should
>> be fewer pests because they surely would have murdered each other
>> long since.
>>
>> There should be less stuff lying around. Given that all sorts of
>> monsters are roaming all levels, why would much of that stuff not
>> have been picked up already?
>>
>> To compensate for this, monsters who attack with weapons (other than
>> tooth, claw, etc.) should often drop usable weapons of the sort
>> *they* use. And there should be some rationale to this that
>> the player could learn.

>Interesting points. I do like the idea of treasure being
>decided upon monster creation, and then giving the monster
>the option of using what he carries. Wanna Westernesse?
>Gonna have to fight a monster wielding Westernesse!

You could modify that. The monster might not enjoy all of
its magical powers.

--
--- Paul J. Gans
 >> Stay informed about: Cooler weapon and armor names 

R. Dan Henry <danhenry RemoveThis @inreach.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 17:42:05 +0000 (UTC), Paul J Gans <gans RemoveThis @panix.com>
>wrote:

>>Billy Bissette <baines RemoveThis @coastalnet.com> wrote:
>>>Eddie Grove <eddiegrove RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote in
>>>news:87wspicxcq.fsf@hotmail.com:

>>>> Metal shod boots of stealth are almost as bad as rusty chainmail of acid
>>>> resistance.
>>
>>> What's wrong with rusty metal being resistant to acid?
>>
>>Basic chemistry? <grin>

>Easily overcome with a bit of magic.

>>Various monsters need, I think, rationals too. What weapon would,
>>just for example, a kobold skeleton wield? It better be something
>>or why should it be able to damage me?

>Pointy, hard bone fingers?

>>So I think we need different means of dispatching different sorts
>>of creatures.

>It's been done. And I won't say it should not be done again, but it had
>better have a far better reason than "realism".

>>Could some monsters war on other monsters?

>Oh, yes, they could. This is probably the most tedious thing found in
>any Angband variant.

>>Wait: one more! Why does gold weigh nothing and why can't I leave
>>gold at my house?

>Because there are monsters that steal gold. The necessity of those two
>features follow from that fact.

>>There should be less stuff lying around. Given that all sorts of
>>monsters are roaming all levels, why would much of that stuff not
>>have been picked up already?

>Because then you wouldn't have things to find on the floor.

>>To compensate for this, monsters who attack with weapons (other than
>>tooth, claw, etc.) should often drop usable weapons of the sort
>>*they* use. And there should be some rationale to this that
>>the player could learn.

>Thus making Angband like every other major roguelike and thus less
>distinctive and thus with less reason to even exist. Bleh.

>Angband is a game, not a simulation. "Realism" is not a good reason for
>any change that is not completely gameplay neutral.

I take your points, even if I don't totally agree with them.
I'm not advocating "realism". What I'm advocating is some
consistency in the back story.

And don't forget newbies. They enjoy things you no longer do.
That's not a criticism. But it is a reminder that Angband should
have a constant stream of newbies.

--
--- Paul J. Gans
 >> Stay informed about: Cooler weapon and armor names 

R. Dan Henry <danhenry.DeleteThis@inreach.com> wrote in
news:q2cnq3lkbet926uqf1tindnomj9rhevb5v@4ax.com:
> On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 17:42:05 +0000 (UTC), Paul J Gans <gans.DeleteThis@panix.com>
> wrote:

>>Wait: one more! Why does gold weigh nothing and why can't I leave
>>gold at my house?
>
> Because there are monsters that steal gold. The necessity of those two
> features follow from that fact.

Not true, at least in regards to "necessity".

Monsters that steal gold are only a factor for a limited period of
time. That period is small enough, and the amount of theft low enough
within that period, that being able to store gold at home really
shouldn't have much of an impact in the current state of the game.

Monsters that steal would remain some form of annoyance, though
they'd admittedly be much weakened, with only your recent gold
pick-ups being vulnerable. But how much of a factor is stealing
in the grand scheme of things, really?
 >> Stay informed about: Cooler weapon and armor names 

On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 05:52:22 -0000, Billy Bissette
<baines.RemoveThis@coastalnet.com> wrote:

>R. Dan Henry <danhenry.RemoveThis@inreach.com> wrote in
>news:q2cnq3lkbet926uqf1tindnomj9rhevb5v@4ax.com:
>> On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 17:42:05 +0000 (UTC), Paul J Gans <gans.RemoveThis@panix.com>
>> wrote:
>
>>>Wait: one more! Why does gold weigh nothing and why can't I leave
>>>gold at my house?
>>
>> Because there are monsters that steal gold. The necessity of those two
>> features follow from that fact.
>
> Not true, at least in regards to "necessity".
>
> Monsters that steal gold are only a factor for a limited period of
>time. That period is small enough, and the amount of theft low enough
>within that period, that being able to store gold at home really
>shouldn't have much of an impact in the current state of the game.
>
> Monsters that steal would remain some form of annoyance, though
>they'd admittedly be much weakened, with only your recent gold
>pick-ups being vulnerable. But how much of a factor is stealing
>in the grand scheme of things, really?

Small, but banking gold at home would make it irrelevant and gold theft
might as well be removed at that point.

Against that, there is nothing to the proposal but the added tedium of
taking gold from and putting it back in your home to extend time spend
shopping instead of dungeon-diving.

--
R. Dan Henry
danhenry.RemoveThis@inreach.com
Holy Avenger should be a Paladin title,
not an ego item.
 >> Stay informed about: Cooler weapon and armor names 

On 2008-02-08 05:00:04, Paul J Gans <gans RemoveThis @panix.com> wrote:

> I take your points, even if I don't totally agree with them.
> I'm not advocating "realism". What I'm advocating is some
> consistency in the back story.

The backstory is perfectly consistent already. All you have to assume is
that:
* Angband was a filthy rich place before it was conquered by Morgoth and
followers
* Most of Morgoth and followers are too inept to know what to do with the items
on the floor. Any carried items are carried because they "look cool". (There
may also be safeties involved.)
* Deeper levels haven't been combed through as much afterwards.

This was somewhat more evident with Moria, but enough of it makes it through to
Angband.

I personally would like a homeopathically more Nethackish approach to the second
point (e.g., diluted by ten to the thirtieth power), but there are many things
*more* wrong with the AI and object generation than this.
 >> Stay informed about: Cooler weapon and armor names 

On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 05:56:36 +0000 (UTC), Kenneth 'Bessarion' Boyd
<zaimoni DeleteThis @zaimoni.com> wrote:

>* Angband was a filthy rich place before it was conquered by Morgoth and
>followers

Morgoth *built* Angband.

But given Morgoth fell into nihilism, expecting him to have a clean
floor is a bit much to ask.

--
R. Dan Henry
danhenry DeleteThis @inreach.com
Holy Avenger should be a Paladin title,
not an ego item.
 >> Stay informed about: Cooler weapon and armor names 

Paul J Gans <gans.RemoveThis@panix.com> wrote in
news:fogjkv$ja7$12@reader2.panix.com:
> Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged.RemoveThis@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>Paul J Gans <gans.RemoveThis@panix.com> writes:

>>> To compensate for this, monsters who attack with weapons (other than
>>> tooth, claw, etc.) should often drop usable weapons of the sort
>>> *they* use. And there should be some rationale to this that
>>> the player could learn.
>
>>Interesting points. I do like the idea of treasure being
>>decided upon monster creation, and then giving the monster
>>the option of using what he carries. Wanna Westernesse?
>>Gonna have to fight a monster wielding Westernesse!
>
> You could modify that. The monster might not enjoy all of
> its magical powers.

It might be much better to simply cheat, by theming drops towards
monster type.

You gain a connection between monster and item, but you don't have
the problem of forcing the player to worry that every unassuming
monster might by blind luck be wielding a weapon that will kill you
in one round.

To keep a bit of randomness, have the templates only adjust the
weighting of object types, without entirely excluding the unwanted.
After all, an archer may have a sword in his pack and a priest may
have found a mage's spellbook. But do weight heavily towards
certain types and against others.

It would take a pretty large amount of work. You'd need to decide
a template system. You'd need to actually create the templates.
You'd need to rebalance things, as item generation rates would be
completely thrown for a loop. You'd need to code new functions for
item generation.

(For a template system, I see two basic possibilities. The first is
to hand-generate each template, either for each monster, or just for
general types as many monsters would overlap. The second is to
make a system of sub-templates that could be combined automatically
based on the details for any specific monster. For example, an
orc mage's template would be created by combining a generic "orc"
template with a generic "mage" template. This might work well if
the template does not just affect object type, but also various
details. Perhaps, for example, "orc" gave a penalty to the bonuses
on objects. Even "drop good" and "drop great" could be turned into
flags for quality-affecting templated.)
 >> Stay informed about: Cooler weapon and armor names 

R. Dan Henry wrote:
> On Tue, 05 Feb 2008 12:01:37 +0000, Andrew Sidwell <takkaria.RemoveThis@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Andrew Sidwell wrote:
>>> Timo Pietilä wrote:
>>>> Looks to me that we should increase items for cloak, hands and foot
>>>> for at least two each.
>> Suggestions welcome, BTW.

> Balrog bunny slippers (no Balrog sleeps well without his bunny slippers)

OK. Now I'm forced to add those in my "variant".

I make them as artifact.

Timo Pietilä
 >> Stay informed about: Cooler weapon and armor names 

On 2008-02-08 14:38:53, R. Dan Henry <danhenry RemoveThis @inreach.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 05:56:36 +0000 (UTC), Kenneth 'Bessarion' Boyd
> wrote:
>
> >* Angband was a filthy rich place before it was conquered by Morgoth and
> >followers
>
> Morgoth *built* Angband.
>
> But given Morgoth fell into nihilism, expecting him to have a clean
> floor is a bit much to ask.

Somewhere in Angband...

Shagrat: Well, what'll we do with all this Elvish gear, then?

Gorbag: Chuck it on the floor with all the rest.

Nick.
--
"You are judging by social rules, and finding crime. I am considering an
elemental struggle, and finding no crime, just grim, primeval danger." - The
Midwich Cuckoos, John Wyndham
 >> Stay informed about: Cooler weapon and armor names 

Billy Bissette <baines.DeleteThis@coastalnet.com> wrote:
>R. Dan Henry <danhenry.DeleteThis@inreach.com> wrote in
>news:q2cnq3lkbet926uqf1tindnomj9rhevb5v@4ax.com:
>> On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 17:42:05 +0000 (UTC), Paul J Gans <gans.DeleteThis@panix.com>
>> wrote:

>>>Wait: one more! Why does gold weigh nothing and why can't I leave
>>>gold at my house?
>>
>> Because there are monsters that steal gold. The necessity of those two
>> features follow from that fact.

> Not true, at least in regards to "necessity".

> Monsters that steal gold are only a factor for a limited period of
>time. That period is small enough, and the amount of theft low enough
>within that period, that being able to store gold at home really
>shouldn't have much of an impact in the current state of the game.

> Monsters that steal would remain some form of annoyance, though
>they'd admittedly be much weakened, with only your recent gold
>pick-ups being vulnerable. But how much of a factor is stealing
>in the grand scheme of things, really?

My thought was that the weight of gold should count. That would
make carrying large sums difficult, especially later in the game.
Thus to accumulate large sums of money one either has to make
many trips back to town or forego other items.

--
--- Paul J. Gans
 >> Stay informed about: Cooler weapon and armor names 

Paul J Gans <gans RemoveThis @panix.com> wrote in news:foi4lu$d4e$2
@reader2.panix.com:

> Billy Bissette <baines RemoveThis @coastalnet.com> wrote:
>>R. Dan Henry <danhenry RemoveThis @inreach.com> wrote in
>>news:q2cnq3lkbet926uqf1tindnomj9rhevb5v@4ax.com:
>>> On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 17:42:05 +0000 (UTC), Paul J Gans
<gans RemoveThis @panix.com>
>>> wrote:
>
>>>>Wait: one more! Why does gold weigh nothing and why can't I leave
>>>>gold at my house?
>>>
>>> Because there are monsters that steal gold. The necessity of those
two
>>> features follow from that fact.
>
>> Not true, at least in regards to "necessity".
>
>> Monsters that steal gold are only a factor for a limited period of
>>time. That period is small enough, and the amount of theft low enough
>>within that period, that being able to store gold at home really
>>shouldn't have much of an impact in the current state of the game.
>
>> Monsters that steal would remain some form of annoyance, though
>>they'd admittedly be much weakened, with only your recent gold
>>pick-ups being vulnerable. But how much of a factor is stealing
>>in the grand scheme of things, really?
>
> My thought was that the weight of gold should count. That would
> make carrying large sums difficult, especially later in the game.
> Thus to accumulate large sums of money one either has to make
> many trips back to town or forego other items.

You do get another problem with world logic if you do make gold
have weight... Why does whatever source of money you pick up
immediately convert to gold? Whether a pile of copper goins or
a pile of diamonds, when you pick it up, it becomes the appropriate
amount of gold?

You'd also have to add a command to drop specific amounts of
money. As well, automatically picking up money would at least
need to be turned off when you turn auto-pickup off.
 >> Stay informed about: Cooler weapon and armor names