I completely agree with TheMeInTeam here. Super Mario Bros and Crawl have different item systems because they are inherently different styles of game. But even completely disregarding that, let's look at some other classics to compare, shall we?
Castlevania has items that you pick up, carry, use repeatedly, and then maybe drop when you find something else you like. Sounds similar to Crawl. More modern versions of Castlevania - you know, the ones that most people actually enjoy playing (almost every single one of them since SotN, for example) - have an even more extensive itemization scheme that almost perfectly matches Crawl with the sole difference of not having a max inventory size. Hmm.
The Legend of Zelda, in every single one of its iterations without exception, has the player finding new items to make their character stronger and able to take on new threats. Imagine that. You can't drop them here in exchange for other items, but that's simply because the item system isn't enslaved to the whims of RNG. (EDIT: After looking at this again, I completely forgot to even account for Breath of the Wild, which DOES have you acquiring, using, dropping, and trading weapons who are beholden to RNG.)
Final Fantasy, in every single one of its iterations without exception, has the player finding new items to make their character(s) stronger and able to take on new threats. Imagine that.
Metroid, in every single one of its iterations without exception, has the player finding new items to make their character stronger and able to take on new threats.
See where I'm going with this?
If you're going to compare Crawl to other games of an entirely different genre you can at least choose something to compare it to that makes sense. Items are a primary source of character power in a vast majority of game series of major acclaim with the exception of most platformers because why does a platformer need an equipment list when all you do is run and jump? Temporary powerups take the place of permanent character upgrades because that's the kind of game that the developer decided to make in that case.
Frankly, I'm already inclined to disagree with your opinions because you state that you're an optimal elite pro player as if that's some kind of measurement of fact. It isn't. All it means is you think your opinions are better than someone else's because you said so.
tealizard wrote:No amount of silly quibbling will make the argument that most or all or even a substantial fraction video games have items remotely resembling crawl items hold water and I will not entertain your attempts.
First of all, that's incredibly rude. Second of all, you refuse to entertain any further conversation at the first sign of someone disagreeing with something the mighty tealizard has deigned to impart upon us mere mortals. If you can't defend an idea beyond even basic questioning, it's not a good idea.
On top of that, you've still failed to explain why items are bad. You've only served to present yourself as an ass. I could have accepted something like "relying on random items for character power progression sucks because you can't be sure what you'll find, and it's possible to die simply because you didn't find the right thing". I disagree with the statement - part of the draw of roguelikes for myself and many others is the inherent randomness which leads to replayability, and as a result of that sometimes you just get boned - but it could have at least led to further discussion on the topic. Instead you've thrown a tantrum and explained nothing.
I hope you have a nice day and I hope you can come back to this discussion with something of substance. My intention here isn't to fight with you, only to understand the point that you're trying to make.