Against Piety Decay


Although the central place for design discussion is ##crawl-dev on freenode, some may find it helpful to discuss requests and suggestions here first.

Abyss Ambulator

Posts: 1233

Joined: Wednesday, 23rd April 2014, 21:57

Post Sunday, 16th May 2021, 19:27

Against Piety Decay

Is there a good reason to keep piety decay in the game?

The main effect it has currently is that it punishes auto-exploring, because that is fairly turn-wasteful.
To a lesser extent it also encourages some thought to go into stashing inrequently used items, like some potions and scrolls, in more accessible places.

It also means that players who auto-explore experience gods as weaker, with less access to their piety consuming abilities.

I would propose to get rid of all piety decay, and if necessary, to reduce piety gain, and/or increase ability costs.


Disclaimer
I usually auto-explore. Seeing messages telling me that "X god ability is no longer available", purely because the algorithm checked all the little nooks and crannies in Lair, feels annoying.

For this message the author 4Hooves2Appendages has received thanks: 2
Majang, Nekoatl

Mines Malingerer

Posts: 35

Joined: Wednesday, 5th February 2014, 19:07

Post Wednesday, 19th May 2021, 17:21

Re: Against Piety Decay

I agree. I think time based punishments (hunger -> now zot clock, piety decay, summon/necro timeouts, even status buff/drain timers) are only a feasible thing to balance around if the game takes a consistent amount of time to play in a comfortable fashion.

Autoexplore is by far the only reasonable way to play the game and it is more or less what the levels are designed around. Roguelikes without autoexplore often have maps that are 1/10 or less the size (e.g. Nethack) or do not expect you to clear the map ever (e.g. Cogmind). Manually clearing or at least mostly clearing a crawl map given the absurd average size and complexity without heavily relying on autoexplore is torturously slow. Everyone already has this experience in their back pocket somewhat: if you are shafted in early game, want to find a timed portal and don’t have ?mapping, or clearing a rune floor you probably have very sparingly autoexplored. That is a slow process always but not necessarily a bad thing. I like that sometimes the game needs to be played manually like that even. However, the vast majority of the game is NOT spent in such a tense situation where you would even need to get close to optimally clearing a floor. And doing so is an incredibly large mental tax for something that ends up being trivial anyway (enjoy spending 5 mins planning your moves on D:4 so that you have optimal positioning and a clear escape route against that goblin and ooze you just encountered). Thus in those situations (most of the game) hitting the o key is a no-brainer (literally) and it’s not a bad thing per se that it is set up like this.

The problem is when the game disproportionately punishes use of it, because it goes without saying that while it is real-time and brainpower light, it is turncount heavy. Thus this more or less mandatory thing has its use punished by any turncount based system. Sometimes this seems like the intent (timed portals) and that can actually be interesting, mostly it seems like a terrible idea to punish autoexplore though, given its necessity.

Now, I don’t know of a good alternative to propose, but I would start by asking “what are you trying to punish with that?” It is likely aimed at overly cautious or slow play, like resetting fights a lot, but it ends up also punishing all the things you mentioned as well. A more direct punishment - or in cases like piety where simply no punishment could work - may be in order.
limboring→optimal sanity = 0

For this message the author Veras has received thanks: 2
andrew, Majang

Spider Stomper

Posts: 200

Joined: Friday, 13th December 2019, 01:33

Post Wednesday, 19th May 2021, 17:36

Re: Against Piety Decay

Also --- does piety decay even matter in realistic situations? Yes, I suppose if one is right at a breakpoint then one could go below it backtracking or something; but then one gets it back in the next nontrivial fight. I'd rather just have somewhat slower gain.
User avatar

Mines Malingerer

Posts: 39

Joined: Friday, 11th November 2016, 02:35

Post Thursday, 20th May 2021, 17:53

Re: Against Piety Decay

I'd say piety decay is not a good mechanic. As said, it conflicts with auto-explore and it doesn't promote an interesting choice at all.

For this message the author Deso has received thanks:
andrew

Spider Stomper

Posts: 200

Joined: Friday, 13th December 2019, 01:33

Post Thursday, 20th May 2021, 20:19

Re: Against Piety Decay

And possibly confuses newbies who are led to think it matters?

Shoals Surfer

Posts: 306

Joined: Sunday, 11th September 2016, 17:21

Post Saturday, 22nd May 2021, 11:39

Re: Against Piety Decay

It matters sometimes, though typically not very much. Probably most impacted are slow-regenerating characters that incorporate abilities with piety costs into their core strategy and are exceptionally interested in gift acquisition. But, it's clearly not a necessary piece of the design puzzle, considering multiple gods and one species have no piety decay whatsoever.

Spider Stomper

Posts: 200

Joined: Friday, 13th December 2019, 01:33

Post Sunday, 23rd May 2021, 01:43

Re: Against Piety Decay

So ghouls actually need to use deity actives noticeably less often? I've never noticed that but could be.

Slime Squisher

Posts: 346

Joined: Monday, 12th September 2016, 16:25

Post Tuesday, 25th May 2021, 16:33

Re: Against Piety Decay

Veras wrote:Autoexplore is by far the only reasonable way to play the game and it is more or less what the levels are designed around. Roguelikes without autoexplore often have maps that are 1/10 or less the size (e.g. Nethack)


FWIW, NetHack's maps are 80x21, 30% the size of Crawl's 80x70. They just seem smaller because you don't peer at them through a tiny window.
Ascension reports with too many words since 2016.

Return to Game Design Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by ST Software for PTF.