Enhance skill descriptions to reveal secret mechanics

[XuaXua]

It is my understanding that Unarmed skill is hindered by wearing armour. The unarmed skill description, when viewed through the skill menu, says nothing about this, but IMHO it should.

I know there are other skills like this. I'm not asking for a numeric statistical reveal, but just general guidance to help the player. Shouldn't this be enhanced in some fashion?

[Marbit]

Do armour obstaculizes attacks with all weapons or just with UC?

[some12fat2move]

Do armour obstaculizes attacks with all weapons or just with UC?

I know there is a tiny accuracy penalty for all melee attacks, but this is so tiny it is pretty much unnoticeable. For UC, attack delay is affected as well.

[jejorda2]

I don't understand why the description for the unarmed skill is where this information should go, or why you think unarmed skill is reduced. Strength has an effect on the damage of unarmed attacks, and heavier armour reduces the frequency of unarmed attacks, but you don't suggest that the description of strength should be changed to say that strength is reduced when heavier armour is worn.

[Marbit]

I know there is a tiny accuracy penalty for all melee attacks, but this is so tiny it is pretty much unnoticeable. For UC, attack delay is affected as well.

If the penalty is so small... why not remove the penalty entirely? It would simplify the game and not much would change.

[Senban]

This is a general issue for melee fighters. Crawl's number crunching is formidable - this is not a game that's going to see a crowd funded pen 'n' paper release anytime soon. That said, it would be really nice to work towards a parity of information flow between spell-casting* and physical combat.

As is, the effects of things like guaranteed damage reduction, enchantment having no direct relation to the weapons base stats, on-weapon enchantment being crunched at a different point in the equation to ring of slaying bonuses all add up to being not just bewildering but directly misleading (at least in terms of what a certain noob would have taken for granted without extensive wikiing.)
Even just listing things like the skill level at which you will hit min delay and telling you the stats for throwing weapons anywhere would be a start.

*which may be flawed, as the Spell Lab thread shows, but does the job of guiding you in the right direction.

[wheals]

This is a general issue for melee fighters. Crawl's number crunching is formidable - this is not a game that's going to see a crowd funded pen 'n' paper release anytime soon. That said, it would be really nice to work towards a parity of information flow between spell-casting* and physical combat.

As is, the effects of things like guaranteed damage reduction, enchantment having no direct relation to the weapons base stats,

Eh? I'm not really sure what you mean by that.

on-weapon enchantment being crunched at a different point in the equation to ring of slaying bonuses

This isn't true and I'm fairly sure hasn't been for many versions.

all add up to being not just bewildering but directly misleading (at least in terms of what a certain noob would have taken for granted without extensive wikiing.)
Even just listing things like the skill level at which you will hit min delay

The game does tell you what the min delay with a weapon is, and the manual tells you what the effect of weapon skill on delay is. A player can be expected to put that information together.

and telling you the stats for throwing weapons anywhere would be a start.

Why isn't "this missile is better than smaller missiles" good enough? You never have to calculate the exact damage an attack will do.

[Senban]

Eh? I'm not really sure what you mean by that.

Enchantment and base stats?
Dagger = Accuracy rating: +6 Damage rating: 4 Base attack delay: 100%
Shortsword = Accuracy rating: +4 Damage rating: 6 Base attack delay: 110%

A 0/+2 Dagger does not work out interchangeable damage and accuracy wise with a +2/0 short-sword.

The game does tell you what the min delay with a weapon is, and the manual tells you what the effect of weapon skill on delay is. A player can be expected to put that information together. [...] Why isn't "this missile is better than smaller missiles" good enough? You never have to calculate the exact damage an attack will do.

Manual digging and guesswork are fair enough, but I think my basic point about the information flow being more helpful with spell casting than it is with physical combat does still stand.

[wheals]

It seems pretty clear to me that the Base Damage and the enchantment/slaying are going to work in not quite the same way, but you might have a point there.

[Senban]

It seems pretty clear to me that the Base Damage and the enchantment/slaying are going to work in not quite the same way, but you might have a point there.

My initial assumption was that they would be - I don't want to reduce the point to something that specific though.
The general idea I'm getting at is that more information specific to the skills, stats & gear that your character is using just now would be nice to see at some point, with the information in terms of spell power, failure and hunger levels available to casters being the model to follow.

[XuaXua]

Why isn't "this missile is better than smaller missiles" good enough? You never have to calculate the exact damage an attack will do.

Last I checked, unless it changed with thrown weapon reform, even that lowly amount of text doesn't even exist.

[crate]

my basic point about the information flow being more helpful with spell casting than it is with physical combat does still stand

The game actually gives you less information for spells than it does for melee weapons.

[duvessa]

It's easier to figure out what spells do by experimentation, though, in my opinion. The effect of skill is pretty clear, and except for a very small number of spells such as airstrike, spell damage is much stabler than melee or missile damage.

Base accuracy is the same as accuracy enchantment/slaying, by the way (at least on melee weapons).

[johlstei]

If that's true then I kind of think base accuracy should go away and it should just be shown in the accuracy slaying column. So exec axes drop as -6/0 by default.

EDIT: I guess you'd have to add it to the maximum enchant bonus for that weapon too, and it becomes hidden information, so maybe not.