Proposal: Fly over adjacent monster ability

[skyspire]

We have now jump boots in the game, which allow you to jump over a monster.

Logically, if there is enough overhead room to jump over a monster, then if you have flight, you should be able to fly over a monster.

I propose this activated ability (only possible while flying):

Fly over adjacent creature.

This allows you to fly over a monster if there is an empty tile behind it.

There can be a turn cost of 2 (your ability to defend attacks is not negatively effected), making monsters able to attack you during flight, but at least flight is capable of making you go just as high as jump boots, adding realism and tactical options. If the monster is too large, it can prohibit overhead flight, just like the restrictions on jump boots.

This adds tactical options with flight, allowing you to fly over an enemy that is attempting to block you. However it is balanced with by the ability for the enemy to attack you during this process.

[dck]

do i really have to tell you about the halberds again

[skyspire]

what do halberds have to do with jump boots and giving a similar (but slower) ability for flight? Forget it, don't answer that.. it's rude to hijack a thread.

[dck]

http://crawl.develz.org/info/inline.php ... m+of+crawl

Your suggestion doesn't add anything to the game but a much more common (and dangerous since it paralyzes you for a bit) ability that detracts from jump, which is an useful and rare item ego.

[skyspire]

Adding realism to the game is common sense and adds to the game positively. The ability does not paralyze you.. your ev and ac are not lowered. Jump would still be a useful ego, as it is instant and adds attack.

Your comments on this thread are pointless and illogical, dck.

[nicolae]

Adding realism to the game is common sense and adds to the game positively.

What does your idea add to the game that jumping doesn't? Realism doesn't count as an answer.

The ability does not paralyze you..

An entire turn where you can't move while monsters beat on you is as bad as paralysis even if it differs in some small way mechanically from literal paralysis. Would you eat in the middle of a fight?

[skyspire]

An entire turn where you can't move while monsters beat on you is as bad as paralysis

You are moving during this turn to a better tactical position. Paralysis lowers your EV to near 0. How is this as bad as paralysis? You are intentionally being a troll or you don't know how to play this game.

Would you eat in the middle of a fight?

Yes, sometimes it is ok to eat an apple during a fight if your starving and you need magic. Or would you rather die?

What does your idea add to the game that jumping doesn't? Realism doesn't count as an answer.

Realism always counts as an answer, but to add to that, you get additional tactical options.

If flying over an enemy allows access to a corridor (instead of being surrounded) then yes, eating an attack from one monster is better than eating attacks from all sides. Is there anyone intelligent reading this thread?

Likewise if you are blocked on a dead end corridor from a monster spawn or whatever reason, this allows another avenue of escape.

I think it is amusing how people get so used to gameplay working one way that they can't think outside of the box about an idea that actually makes the game better.

[duvessa]

You know I might say mean things on this forum every once and a while, but at least if one of my GDD topics gets moved to CYC I don't post the exact same topic again. That's a pretty shitty thing to do even when you're trolling.
In case you need it repeated, Crawl is not a simulation, it is a roguelike game, and realism appears neither as a major or minor design goal, so in the context of Crawl it is never a reason for change in itself. It is sometimes related to clarity but that is clearly not the case here.

[nicolae]

If flying over an enemy allows access to a corridor (instead of being surrounded) then yes, eating an attack from one monster is better than eating attacks from all sides. Is there anyone intelligent reading this thread?

I have to admit, the best thing about when people get ridiculously smug about their shitty ideas in GDD is knowing there's like zero chance their ideas will ever be used.

[skyspire]

You know I might say mean things on this forum every once and a while, but at least if one of my GDD topics gets moved to CYC I don't post the exact same topic again.

I did not post the exact same topic, this is a new topic related to the specifics of a new ability and outlining more details. By clarifying the specifics of the ability I was hoping that it would be considered more seriously.

realism appears neither as a major or minor design goal, so in the context of Crawl it is never a reason for change in itself

This new feature is not only more realistic but adds additional fun tactical options to gameplay. A purpose to any game is to have fun, right?

[skyspire]

I have to admit, the best thing about when people get ridiculously smug about their shitty ideas in GDD is knowing there's like zero chance their ideas will ever be used.

This comment adds nothing and is just an attempt to hijack the thread. It's funny how when people cannot use logic to defend their comments they resort to attacks.

[dck]

Making a level 3 spell that is everywhere allow the effect of an useful boots ego adds nothing to the game because it's a cheap copy of that useful ego whose drawback is not conveying well that for the two turns of duration of the ability you're helpless and things will get to swing at you for free. Most players with any degree of common sense don't ever end up surrounded in these situations (and when they do 2 turns paralysis isn't the best idea), so this option is effectively a death trap for new people who have not learned about positioning yet.
You may think that's okay, it's a "risky move" you may think. It's not, it's a stupid move. It actively detracts from the usage of other tactics and positioning that are actually interesting by allowing virtually every character that isn't Be to go into a mini-paralysis that moves them into a corridor.

Also, the game has absolutely no need to be realistic or have flight that "makes sense" to your ideas of how flight or jump or swim should work. The game has to be coherent within its own context and fun and that's it.
Maybe learn how to play the game and why it works the way it works before reinventing the wheel.

EDIT: seeing how you've already degenerated into calling others stupid because they don't share your enlightened vision I guess this was a waste of words.
rip words, I'm sorry I failed you.

[skyspire]

2 turns paralysis isn't the best idea

Are you stupid or just deliberately trolling? Paralysis reduces your EV to near-0 . This is nothing like paralysis, as you are moving to a better tactical position (just like getting hit by a faster enemy while running from it)

allow the effect of an useful boots ego adds nothing to the game because it's a cheap copy of that useful ego

The jumping boots will always be useful because it is both INSTANT and adds an ATTACK. This proposed flying ability is not instant and does not add an attack. Which I already said, but apparently you don't read.

I am very open to intelligent, logical comments, but, dissapointingly,there have been none on this thread.

[nicolae]

I am very open to intelligent, logical comments, but, dissapointingly,there have been none on this thread.

why do i get the feeling that your operating defintion of "intelligent and logical" is "agrees with me on everything"

[skyspire]

nicolae, I responded logically to your comments related to this thread, but you ignore them. Now instead of contributing something useful to the thread you attempt to hijack it again. Show me the love.

[Tiktacy]

nicolae, I responded logically to your comments related to this thread, but you ignore them. Now instead of contributing something useful to the thread you attempt to hijack it again. Show me the love.

I think your idea had some merit, but unfortunately, GDD despises logical arguments.

[WalkerBoh]

Generally if you want to have people "show you love", you shouldn't respond to everything they say with a personal attack about how stupid and illogical they are.

As for your idea, flight already serves it's own use (flying over water/lava), and jump is already filling the niche you want filled here, and is better balanced and more tactically interesting. In general, the devs are trying to remove redundancies in crawl, not introduce more.

Edit: I know you think your idea differs significantly enough from jump. But if you think about it, it really does not.

[nicolae]

As for your idea, flight already serves it's own use (flying over water/lava), and jump is already filling the niche you want filled here, and is better balanced and more tactically interesting. In general, the devs are trying to remove redundancies in crawl, not introduce more.

And, additionally, the situations suggested where this ability would be useful (getting to a corridor, getting out of a dead end) already have numerous existing solutions: blinking, teleporting, Passwall, jumping, murdering all who stand in your way, and of course the most-overlooked tactic of all, which is not getting yourself in those situations in the first place.

[damiac]

While I could see being against this because it makes jumping less unique, most of the objections in this thread are just trolling, just like the OP said.

If I back into a corridor, forcing a line of enemies to fight me 1v1, but suddenly a single enemy comes from behind, yeah, I'd gladly take 2 turns of getting whacked while getting untrapped over taking however many turns it'll take me to kill that single enemy, while being whacked from both sides. To say that this ability would be useless or a newbie trap is not true. It'd be a situationally useful, and logical extension to flight.

Of course, you could just follow the incredibly useful, oft-repeated advice, and just not get into those situations in the first place. Following that line of thinking, let's remove blink, teleport, heal wounds, curing, swiftness, decks of escape, and anything else along those lines. Those are just tools to be used when you get into a situation you shouldn't have gotten into in the first place. Because if you're any good at crawl, you're omniscient.


TLDR;
I would oppose this on the grounds that it might be too good, especially alongside an already useful and relatively cheap to get spell/ability.

It'd be a neat new tloc spell though, maybe level 3, to allow you to move to the other side of an adjacent monster.

[ontoclasm]

Situations where a tough monster is body-blocking you are good, since they can force you to find a way out, possibly by using consumables or putting yourself in danger. There are already numerous such escape routes available, some of which have been mentioned by others; adding another simply further dampens the danger of the situation.

[johlstei]

It seems unlikely that we are at the ideal number of ways out of this situation right now, there are probably either too many or too few, but I'm leaning towards the former. I kinda think evocable blink is too strong and blink should be level 4 or something.

[nicolae]

Of course, you could just follow the incredibly useful, oft-repeated advice, and just not get into those situations in the first place. Following that line of thinking, let's remove blink, teleport, heal wounds, curing, swiftness, decks of escape, and anything else along those lines. Those are just tools to be used when you get into a situation you shouldn't have gotten into in the first place. Because if you're any good at crawl, you're omniscient.

Well, yes, there are situations where you get stuck in a tricky situation through no real fault of your own. But honestly, it seems like there are a lot of suggestions in GDD where the subtext is "I'm bad at the game, please change the game so I can be less bad without having to learn anything".

Edit: My main disagreement with the idea, mechanically, is that it's like a weaker version of jumping, which a bunch of other people have said as well. But what makes me snippy about it is that the suggestion seems to be motivated almost entirely by a weird idea that the game needs to be Dungeon Crawl: Reality Simulator.

[Kate]

The previous thread on this exact same topic was Yiufed for a reason yes.

(Also the reason it is a bad idea has been pretty clearly explained now too).