Starting Evocables/Assassin Background?

[snow]

It makes little sense that many backgrounds start with books but only one starts with evocables.

I propose that assassins start with cloak of invisibility instead of needles. The cloak is no more powerful than any of the starting books and honestly right now playing an assassin like an assassin is like starting as a fighter and trying to play as a magician.

[and into]

It makes little sense that many backgrounds start with books but only one starts with evocables.

I propose that assassins start with cloak of invisibility instead of needles. The cloak is no more powerful than any of the starting books and honestly right now playing an assassin like an assassin is like starting as a fighter and trying to play as a magician.

I do think there potentially could be more room for backgrounds to start with evocables, but nothing else here makes sense, to be honest. I don't know what "right now playing an assassin like an assassin is like starting as a fighter and trying to play as a magician" means. Assassins start with blowgun and poison needles, plus curare. That's a very powerful weapon right off the bat, and gives you a fair measure of leeway to train the character how you want to, really, including along the lines of however it is that you happen to define "assassin-ness." If you absolutely want to stab people while invisible there is a background that can do *exactly* that already.

That's leaving aside balance issues, namely the fact that cloak of darkness would be extremely powerful at start and is not actually comparable to a level six hexes spell. (EDIT: Well okay I won't be opaque. In case it is unclear: With 0 levels in evocation +Inv gives you 71% chance of invisibility for 2 MP—and there is no such thing as "mis-evocation" effects. If you fail to evoke it, you just lose a turn. Enchanters cannot memorize the spell Invisibility until level 6 at the earliest, and it takes up six spell slots, is affected by armor, and you need to train at least one skill substantially before it is even possibly usable.)

Having assassins start with a potion of invisibility would be fine I guess, but it is also completely unnecessary, as assassin is already a very strong background and doesn't need a buff.

[Tiktacy]

I would win every game if I started with cloak of invisibility.

[dpeg]

Hey, it was not so long ago that Crawl didn't even have the Artificer background That was a pretty cool idea and while more ideas are welcome, it doesn't seem to be so easy to make new backgrounds.

On the original proposal: note that (1) the Assassin starts with strong, but finite resources -- the needles won't last forever; that (2) curare is a very good emergency item; and that (3) evokable invisibility is much stronger in comparison.

[snow]

In Crawl assassins don't do assassinating and enchanters don't do enchanting. The background names are vastly misleading... and to play as an assassin as the rest of the world knows it you have to start as an enchanter or find a form of invisibility. Why does another background, who's supposed to be enchanting, doing all the assassinating? Why not give the assassination enabler to the assassin instead? Also I don't see why having backgrounds start with evocables can't work. If invisibility is too strong early on then scale it better, give more enemies see invisible, or weaken invisibility.

At the very least, if you're not going to add an assassin to crawl, at least rename the needler background to "needler" or something.

[duvessa]

If invisibility is too strong early on then scale it better, give more enemies see invisible, or weaken invisibility.

Or how about this instead: if invisibility is too strong to give to a starting background (it is), don't fucking give it to a starting background.

enchanters don't do enchanting

Hexes are still referred to as "enchantments" in various places in-game.

[snow]

So... we should remove invisibility from enchanters?

[dpeg]

I think the language is unnecessarily hostile, but the point is this: an early ring of invisibility is a godsend for a stabbing-based build. The spellbook gives access to the spell but it takes much longer to actually use it -- it's a longterm investment, not something you can make use of right away.

[duvessa]

So... we should remove invisibility from enchanters?

If invisibility were a level 1 spell, sure.

[rchandra]

So... we should remove invisibility from enchanters?

Now that Cj lost its big spells, and Fireball is L5, I think Invisibility is the only level 6 spell left in starting books. It could go, En would still be very strong and there are many ways to find invisibility later.

[headcrab0803]

The cloak is no more powerful than any of the starting books and honestly

well you dont have access to invisibility untill like 13hex or something

[Tiber]

I once had a game with a ring of invisibility literally within sight of entering the dungeon, and it was indeed very powerful. It is extremely effective just by seeing a sleeping enemy, walking back out of sight, attempting to evoke as many times as you need, and walking up and killing the dude. Very little risk, and not a whole of skill investment. It was definitely more powerful than a book, because starting books don't generally let you kill uniques with ease.

[archaeo]

In Crawl assassins don't do assassinating and enchanters don't do enchanting. The background names are vastly misleading... and to play as an assassin as the rest of the world knows it you have to start as an enchanter or find a form of invisibility. Why does another background, who's supposed to be enchanting, doing all the assassinating? Why not give the assassination enabler to the assassin instead? Also I don't see why having backgrounds start with evocables can't work. If invisibility is too strong early on then scale it better, give more enemies see invisible, or weaken invisibility.

At the very least, if you're not going to add an assassin to crawl, at least rename the needler background to "needler" or something.

The only fantasy world I can think of that uses "assassin" to mean "magic-using enchanter" is maybe Final Fantasy Tactics. Otherwise, the word generally isn't much associated with magic, but is associated with using stealth and guile to incapacitate and kill their target from the shadows. And n.b. the definition of "enchanter," in my dictionary, is "a person who uses magic or sorcery, esp. to put someone or something under a spell," which is pretty clearly what Crawl's En do. Assassins are the non-magical stealth background, which is a niche Crawl should fill, and it makes perfect sense from a flavour perspective, IMO.

I think Invisibility is fairly well-balanced now; if Haste is a level 6 spell, I don't see why Invis shouldn't be as well. Watering it down just so the assassin background gets a buff seems like a crazy reason to do it.

[skyspire]

instead of a cloak of invisibility, why not just give a wand of invisibility? the wand is less powerful because of limited charges, but would give an "assassin" a taste of what is to be an assassin. And hope that a scroll of recharging shows up.

I think wand of invisibility is powerful enough to replace curare and blowgun. Who says that an assassin needs a blowgun, anyway?

Having an assassin become invisible earlier than a Spriggan Enchanter, makes sense, IMHO.

[variouselite]

i think starting with a wand of invis is still too powerful. unless maybe it was limited to say, 3 charges or something. but i think youre wrong about the enchanter/assasin invis issue. an enchanter is a wizard/mage/magic guy who casts spells like invis(and still doesnt start with it), an assassin is a ninja/effective stealthy killer who gets by with stealth and skill. of course invis makes sense for an assassin to get at some point, but to start with i dunno, if so it should be very limited i think.

[and into]

Wand of invisibility is indeed very powerful and with scrolls of recharging around, even starting with "only" three uses of free invisiblity would be really powerful.

To be perfectly blunt: There is no real problem here. Whatever Crawl decides "assassin" to mean, is what it means for Crawl's purposes. What Crawl names "Transmuters" other games might call "Shapeshifters" or something. Since Crawl is Crawl, and not other games, that's not a problem. But aside from the general "what's in a name" point, the argument here is in particular very silly. Assassin is a strong background and doesn't need a buff; the only reason thus far given for any change is due to the fact that apparently some people think that sneaking around, stabbing dudes, and shooting poisonous blow darts are somehow *not* assassin-esque activities. That strikes me as an exceedingly strange argument.

[dck]

Christ how can this thing be still going? As is a fine bg and giving people the arguably best cloak ego in the game for free in D: 1 is a bit much on the insanely overpowered side.

[Igxfl]

We might be getting too hung up on the name "Assassin".

Assassins are the blowgun background. We already have a stabbing background.
If we made Assassin a stabber too we wouldn't have a blowgunner and that would be sad.

[galehar]

The OP has been thoroughly rejected and no interesting proposal or discussion has stem from it. Lock.