Main | My View | View Issues | Change Log | Wiki | Tavern | News
  

Viewing Issue Simple Details [ Jump to Notes ] [ Wiki ] [ View Advanced ] [ Issue History ] [ Print ]
ID Category Severity Reproducibility Date Submitted Last Update
0002470 [DCSS] FR: Gameplay Balancing minor N/A 2010-09-05 00:26 2012-07-07 14:22
Reporter OG17 View Status public  
Assigned To neil
Priority normal Resolution done  
Status resolved   Product Branch 0.8 ancient branch
Summary 0002470: Wax is too picky and misleading about melting
Description What does and doesn't melt wax feels pretty arbitrary. Bolt of fire/fireball is a good starting point, I think, in that lower-level spells melting wax would make it uninteresting - but at the same time, as wax really doesn't play much of a role in the game, and as players have little difficulty in bypassing it when it does appear, increasing the number of effects that can melt it isn't going to cause balance problems.

The flame breath mutation and red draconian/dragon breath are functionally identical to bolt of fire, so they should melt wax as it does. The throw flames DS mutation also should, if only for flavor - it may be single-target, but it's also "of Gehenna."

Spell-wise, fire storm should melt the heck out all the wax it touches, and ring of flames should cut through it like a knife - if you're casting either of these spells, wax is hardly an obstacle to begin with. However, I'd actually suggest that bolt of magma no longer melts wax, as it's thematically weak and seems to be there only because bolt of fire is.

Also, using "the wax appears to soften slightly" for weak flame attacks suggests that repeated castings will be effective - it should be replaced by something like "the wax seems unaffected" or "the softened wax quickly hardens."
Additional Information
Tags No tags attached.
Attached Files

- Relationships

-  Notes
(0007928)
minmay (reporter)
2010-09-05 02:34

 For the message, I suggest "the wax softens slightly, then hardens again."
(0008020)
Porkchop (reporter)
2010-09-06 16:28

 This is actually a big deal for our new players, they will sit there and unload wands of flame because of these misleading messages. Something clear along the lines of 'no affect' would be ideal.
(0008021)
felixnothus (reporter)
2010-09-06 16:38

 Heh, yeah, I can attest to the fact that's what I wound up doing for a while, took me about 10 minutes to get that nothing was going to happen and I'd need a better spell
(0008026)
b0rsuk (updater)
2010-09-06 17:09

 It's worth mentioning a fireball only affects a single square of wax.
(0008034)
OG17 (reporter)
2010-09-06 19:52
edited on: 2010-09-06 19:52

 Fireball only affects a single tree, too. I figured that it's mechanical and not really intentional here, since AOE stuff does weird things with the targetted square sometimes. It'd be great if it was fixed and all, though.
(0009207)
Mental Mouse (reporter)
2010-11-05 00:30

 Amen! It would be nice if Conjure Flame either could melt it, or got treated as an invalid cast, say "the wax suffocates your flame", rather than the current "not strong enough to melt wax".
(0009212)
OG17 (reporter)
2010-11-05 02:46

 You can't cast conjure flame on occupied squares, so these wall/wax/tree/whatever messages shouldn't even exist.
(0009218)
Ashenai (reporter)
2010-11-05 15:37

 Couldn't Conjure Flame melt adjacent wax squares? It seems odd and arbitrary that it should be unable to melt wax because of a technicality.
(0009224)
OG17 (reporter)
2010-11-05 20:26

 It'd be "odd and arbitrary" if it did, I think, as it doesn't damage adjacent monsters and this wax isn't going to be scared by a little residual heat.
(0009240)
Nobody (reporter)
2010-11-08 01:36

 Personally, I'd kind of like for the wax-melting/tree-burning thing to be based on damage dealt (maybe around 20-25?) rather than specifying spells. Wouldn't change much, except for increasing the other high-level fire spells' utility and making it possible to [melt/burn] more than one relevant object at a time. And giving scrolls of immolation another situational use.
(0009244)
Ashenai (reporter)
2010-11-08 11:22

 I agree with Nobody, making stuff modular instead of specifying a list of Allowed Tools is always a good thing.
(0009292)
user308
2010-11-16 09:12

 Some good ideas here.

It would be neat if wax showed up in other places - maybe certain types of badass demons could create lairs out of green or purple wax (or even block players in, who'd have to destroy the wax or teleport to get out.)

Maybe sometimes you'd find gold or items encased in the wax.
(0009293)
MrMisterMonkey (reporter)
2010-11-16 10:45

 There are already vaults with gold and items in wax, but they are horribly spoilery, so perhaps you haven't noticed.
(0009296)
user308
2010-11-16 17:36

 What do you mean by "spoilery"? And where are all these vaults I keep hearing about? Should I be digging randomly through the dungeon or searching for secret doors along every wall?
(0009299)
MrMisterMonkey (reporter)
2010-11-16 20:47

 Spoilery as in unspoiled players probably aren't going to guess that some odd wax formations in the dungeon and a Hive:2 reveal loot when melted.
(0014492)
Mental Mouse (reporter)
2011-09-03 14:16

 Bump. I don't think it's too bad that some wax formations hide loot (there are also some treasure vaults behind non-obvious secret doors), but perhaps some of them should have monsters as well, or instead.
(0018791)
neil (administrator)
2012-07-07 14:22

 Wax, what's that?

- Issue History
Date Modified Username Field Change
2010-09-05 00:26 OG17 New Issue
2010-09-05 02:34 minmay Note Added: 0007928
2010-09-06 16:28 Porkchop Note Added: 0008020
2010-09-06 16:38 felixnothus Note Added: 0008021
2010-09-06 17:09 b0rsuk Note Added: 0008026
2010-09-06 19:52 OG17 Note Added: 0008034
2010-09-06 19:52 OG17 Note Edited: 0008034
2010-11-05 00:30 Mental Mouse Note Added: 0009207
2010-11-05 02:46 OG17 Note Added: 0009212
2010-11-05 15:37 Ashenai Note Added: 0009218
2010-11-05 20:26 OG17 Note Added: 0009224
2010-11-08 01:36 Nobody Note Added: 0009240
2010-11-08 11:22 Ashenai Note Added: 0009244
2010-11-16 09:12 user308 Note Added: 0009292
2010-11-16 10:45 MrMisterMonkey Note Added: 0009293
2010-11-16 17:36 user308 Note Added: 0009296
2010-11-16 20:47 MrMisterMonkey Note Added: 0009299
2011-09-03 14:16 Mental Mouse Note Added: 0014492
2012-07-07 14:22 neil Note Added: 0018791
2012-07-07 14:22 neil Status new => resolved
2012-07-07 14:22 neil Fixed in Branch => 0.11 development branch
2012-07-07 14:22 neil Resolution open => done
2012-07-07 14:22 neil Assigned To => neil

Mantis 1.1.8[^]
Copyright © 2000 - 2009 Mantis Group
Powered by Mantis Bugtracker