"Be godless" should be a possible treasure trove requirement

[nrook]

That is, there should rarely be treasure troves that, rather than requiring consumables of the player, require that they worship no god. This would provide incentive to switch gods, or possibly to abandon your god, raid the trove, then beg forgiveness later. It'd be significantly easier to get into the trove if you're following gods with less deadly wrath, but I think that's okay.

[dpeg]

Whoa, that is radical. I think it's a bit meta-gamey but I could probably be convinced. Would be nice to have some kind of link between the requirement and the rest (I can easily someone wanting to see the proof of a heroic deed, or just goods -- but why would someone demand rejecting gods?) Unfortunately, I couldn't come up with such a link on my own.

[twelwe]

Do it

[ackack]

Whoa, that is radical. I think it's a bit meta-gamey but I could probably be convinced. Would be nice to have some kind of link between the requirement and the rest (I can easily someone wanting to see the proof of a heroic deed, or just goods -- but why would someone demand rejecting gods?) Unfortunately, I couldn't come up with such a link on my own.

The trove is a church of secular <foo>ism.

[Leafsnail]

The Trove of the Smug Demigod

[and into]

Or a treasure room of a saltan/king/shah/emperor who requires you to revere him above any supernatural diety. Swearing fealty to him doesn't affect anything else in game play, but your fealty will not be accepted, nor will you be granted entrance, if you already have a god. ("How can you swear loyalty to King Fancypants when you praise and worship the glory of <foo> above all else?")

[XuaXua]

Trove is all Amulets of Faith lol

"This treasure trove requires the sacrifice of three amulets of Faith, one of which must be worn while you are actively worshiping a god).

[duvessa]

This is mechanically equivalent to setting your piety to 15, unless your god is Lugonu, and considerably more cumbersome (you have to run back to your god's altar). So I think it should just do that instead.

[dpeg]

minmay: Slightly more transparent mechanic: no god when entering the trove, array of altars within the trove. (At least I think that's more transparent.) Exercise for the reader: find a thematic underpinning for *that*.

[Sandman25]

Why godless? "Only worshipers of [3 random gods here, none of them is current for player] can enter the trove" Especially funny when you are DEFE of Vehumet and are given choice of Trog, Jiyva and Dithmengos.

[dck]

Incurring god wrath is already something that should never be done in a game played to win, the trove you propose would basically just not exist for most characters and only in some occasions exist to worshipers of good gods or godless players. It would also be impossible for Dg to enter it.
I'm not particularly in love with the proposal but I think demanding to be godless and then offering an altar to every god as well the regular trove-y stuff would be okay.

[WalkerBoh]

I'm with duvessa. It makes more sense to have something that just reduces you back to 0* with your god (or even acts like 2-3 amulets of faith?). Why make the player abandon and then re-worship their god? Removing piety is still plenty interesting.

[XuaXua]

Hasn't wrath just been reworked so that it's not as ridiculously painful? It's now just diculously painful?

[duvessa]

Wrath is enormously more dangerous now than it has ever been, however it is moot if you just immediately switch back to your existing god, which is exactly what you would do with this trove most of the time.

[XuaXua]

What if changing it so the god won't take you back until post-wrath?

[WalkerBoh]

How is "losing all piety with your god" not a sufficient trove requirement?

[nrook]

"Lose all piety" is less cool than "abandon your god", even if the effect is the same. That doesn't outweigh the downside of having to trek back to an altar to make your peace with the god in question after looting the trove, though. I like dpeg's solution of having altars in the trove. Maybe it's a "primordial temple", lost to time, and its gatekeeper won't let any proselytizers in?

Most characters would switch back to their old god, but I think that's okay; it'll get a few players to make the god switch they were considering sooner rather than later. This way the trove will still be relevant in a different way if wrath becomes less dangerous in the future, too.

[duvessa]

Or maybe the trove portal is profane or blasphemous and something and your god gets really pissed if you use it. I don't think flavour is likely to be a big obstacle here.

[pubby]

There obviously needs to be a "trove god" whose altar is occasionally next to troves and worshiping him allows you to enter the trove for free. It's silly, sure, but solves the problem of players rejoining their old god immediately.

[twelwe]

Just make the trove requirement also destroy (and prevent spawning of) all altars of the god you are worshiping. When someone discovers you can just switch gods and then abandon that god to go back to the first, grunt will patch it so the trove destroys altars of all gods you have worshiped. Do it

[damiac]

Would anyone actually go from max to 0 piety for a treasure trove? Is 5 pots of curing and a randart -5 ring mail really worth it?

[dck]

It's not like there aren't silly trove requirements already. There is no possible situation (unless you are a Fo) in which you would give a trove a stick of fast and you could actually use anything form said trove.

[damiac]

That came up in my last game. I found a trove that wanted a wand of haste(8). I actually had a wand of haste, but obviously I didn't hand it over. Much later in the game, I had haste castable, so if I had some spare recharging scrolls, I might have done it. I had another character who found two wands of hasting, and yet another who knew of a second wand of hasting in a shop.

Odds are low I would have found anything useful, but I wouldn't say there's "no possible situation" that it could work out. On the other hand, I would never abandon my god for this trove, unless I was already going to do it, and it just so happened this trove was in the game. But that's not exactly me making an interesting choice.

The reason I trained charms so high was that I hoped to find deflect missiles, and be able to cast it. That, and I worshipped oki and all my combat skills were at 22 already. Later I found cblink, so I guess that exp would have been better spent on translocations, but I had no way of knowing that at the time.

Later while I was destroying everything in extended, I was killed unfairly by hubris. I can't believe the devs still haven't fixed that, it's insanely OP.

[Arkhan]

There obviously needs to be a "trove god" whose altar is occasionally next to troves and worshiping him allows you to enter the trove for free. It's silly, sure, but solves the problem of players rejoining their old god immediately.

A god of wealth, fame, and mortality would actually be a different enough concept from the other gods of Crawl that it could be a thing of it's own. He gifts piles of gold like Sif and Vehument gift books and spells and gains piety when you collect gold that isn't his (low) and spend gold at shops (high), and especially likes when you read Acquirement and just request gold. At maximum piety you could either sacrifice maximum piety with all gods permanently (to have only 4* available or something) or just have it once a game to summon a trove or bazaar or unlock the trove if it already generated. As a god of mortal fame and reputation he won't accept worship from those who either are under Wrath or Penance at the moment (less harsh?) or who ever worshiped another god at all (more harsh?) and his wrath cancels gold gain and persists up to X amount and restricts max piety with any new god while under his Wrath to like 2* or something until it ends. Or maybe simply the act of leaving him at all will remove maximum piety available to other gods, to discourage worship just for monetary gain only to tarnish his glorious golden reputation by trying to throw him away.
...
Oh, the silliness is strong tonight.

[dpeg]

Would anyone actually go from max to 0 piety for a treasure trove? Is 5 pots of curing and a randart -5 ring mail really worth it?

Ignoring the rhetorical part of the question: what if you were considering god change anyway? If this trove is around, then you would obviously time things so that you pick up the five potions along the way.

[WalkerBoh]

Losing all piety with your god is not nearly as steep as many trove costs often are, especially since god-swapping is not uncommon.

[siprus]

Godless trove should have chance to spawn equipment god's altar. With loot you can't access unless you start worshiping him. (if that suggestion ever goes through)

[damiac]

Would anyone actually go from max to 0 piety for a treasure trove? Is 5 pots of curing and a randart -5 ring mail really worth it?

Ignoring the rhetorical part of the question: what if you were considering god change anyway? If this trove is around, then you would obviously time things so that you pick up the five potions along the way.

So the trove is worthless, unless you're already going to switch gods, then it's a freebie no brainer? I just don't see an interesting choice here, I see two no brainers.

1. I'm not planning to abandon my god: I'm certainly not going to lose all piety for a trove.
2. I'm planning to abandon my god: I might as well grab some free treasure while I'm at it, maybe I'll have to eat a bread ration to pay for the extra travel.

Maybe the idea of piety cost or temporary penance could work, but I really think the "Be godless" requirement is too much. Or maybe I just overvalue 6* of piety.

[dpeg]

damiac: I understand what you mean, but I think it's two black and white. What if emerge out of some branch end with only *** piety? Perhaps a good time to pick up the trove loot? What if you were slightly, but not entirely biased towards god change? Perhaps the presence of the trove will tip the scales?

I am still not saying that this kind of trove quest is crucial but I think it would work. (It should be quite rare.) For troves to work, there have to be some quests that you will fulfill no matter what, others that you don't even attempt to do, and (hopefully) most in between. The godless quest would reasonably often sit in the middle, I'd say.

[TeshiAlair]

Ooh, another crazy idea, tying in with [url={https://crawl.develz.org/tavern/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=11276}]{Rewards for Uniques}[/url], what if a Trove required you to kill a certain number of uniques, or a certain "power level" of uniques (say, the power level of a unique is equal to the D that you found them, so a trove requiring 20 power could be satisfied by a bunch of early uniques or by two late ones). It satisfies the trove "requirement" of being able to achieve it as an active choice. Alternatively, it could generate the target unique based on uniques generated within a +/- 2 dungeon levels to ensure that it would be a tough fight and less RNG dependent.

You could even guarantee some loot- perhaps a guaranteed Lightning Rod if you have to kill Nikola.

[dpeg]

TeshiAlair: This is interesting, but we have to be careful: don't want to punish a player for having killed every single unique already. On the other hand, we don't want to affect generation of future levels either. I think this is what makes it hard to flesh out the idea.

[galehar]

"Bring me the head of Agnes!"

[dpeg]

galehar: Of course! But what if Agnes was killed already, along with everyone else who had a name?
Will the trove simply be open? "Agnes is died, come on in!" I think that's the only way.

[damiac]

Hmm, I see what you mean Dpeg, but I don't think I've ever encountered a trove so early I didn't already have maxed piety. I suppose you're right, where it could help tip the scales of a tough choice if you're already considering switching.

The idea of a "Kill this unique to get in" vault is cool. Of course, you'd have to make it so if you already killed the unique, you can get in (Just like with the ones that require specific runes).

[nicolae]

A god of wealth, fame, and mortality would actually be a different enough concept from the other gods of Crawl that it could be a thing of it's own. He gifts piles of gold like Sif and Vehument gift books and spells and gains piety when you collect gold that isn't his (low) and spend gold at shops (high), and especially likes when you read Acquirement and just request gold

The gold god proposal already does something similar to this, and the rest of the proposal seems rather complex.

What about just using a star (or two) of piety as a trove requirement?

Combine the ideas of killing a unique to get into a Trove and the need for more reasons to kill high-level uniques: have high-level uniques occasionally generate on a level with the entrance to a special Trove that only opens if that unique is dead. (Like, "Mennas' Private Reliquary" or something)

[Arkhan]

He he. "This Trove requires the blood of a powerful warrior to enter. Will you accept it's challenge?"

Upon answering "Y" it could maybe either teleport you to a psuedo-zig arena and yell "Defeat Tiamat in 1 on 1 combat!" or it could just spawn someone right next to you in the dungeon. Upon the unique's death the trove would unlock. It would have to be someone fairly powerful too- not just Grinder or Sigmund, I'm talking guys like Mennas.

Bonus points if it's Boris and you have to go hunt them down again. That sounds awesome, and a lot more fun than "oh boy let's go find a demon blade and hope the enchant scrolls work this time."

[neil]

galehar: Of course! But what if Agnes was killed already, along with everyone else who had a name?
Will the trove simply be open? "Agnes is died, come on in!" I think that's the only way.

I think it makes the most sense for the trove, when it is created (on entering the level), to pick a unique who is either currently alive or hasn't been generated yet. If you killed Agnes between entering the level and finding the trove, then I think you're right, you should be let in. Or maybe the trove could pick someone when you first try to enter, rather than when the level is generated.

[dpeg]

neil: It just occurred to me that we could also simply ask for a number of uniques (this can take into account the number of all uniques generated so far, but doesn't have to -- nobody cares if they are already dead or not).

[duvessa]

I think it makes the most sense for the trove, when it is created (on entering the level), to pick a unique who is either currently alive or hasn't been generated yet.

Then you would just leave uniques alive to increase the chance of being able to enter a trove right away...I don't see what's so bad about picking a unique that's already dead, it's not like troves avoid picking the abyssal rune or horn of Geryon if you already have them (and they definitely shouldn't!).

Also, for implementation, you'd need to pick uniques at the start of the game rather than level generation. I'm worried this has some non-trivial implications: uniques would no longer be placeable in vaults without some kind of weird hack, Boris would need (more) special cases, probably other things I'm forgetting about. Asking for a number of unique kills doesn't completely solve this either: what happens if the game generates fewer uniques than that?

[dpeg]

duvessa: Agreed. This is why I came up with a basket of heads. Loses some flavour, keeps the spirit.

[Leafsnail]

I like the teleport to a 1v1 fight idea, but that should probably be its own portal type.

[TeshiAlair]

Then you would just leave uniques alive to increase the chance of being able to enter a trove right away...I don't see what's so bad about picking a unique that's already dead, it's not like troves avoid picking the abyssal rune or horn of Geryon if you already have them (and they definitely shouldn't!).

That was why I suggested weighting the uniques by something like dungeon level, rather than doing simply number of uniques. This way, leaving a bunch of weak ones alive doesn't really help you that much, and leaving some challenging ones alive still poses a challenge, but now forces you into it if you want to take the trove.

[dpeg]

I think I have been misunderstood. When I said "number of uniques", I meant just that. If the trove asks for 24 dead uniques, then you get in as soon as that's met -- possibly immediately when you stand at the trove's doorfront. Our task to find a number (range) that makes some sense. It can happen that your 3-rune game never produces enough uniques -- that is just like a trove asking for too many scrolls of teleportation. Anyway, all of these are just funny little oddities.

[Leafsnail]

If you included pan lords then any number would be achievable.

[dpeg]

Leafsnail: Yes, just like any number of teleport scrolls could be collected if you go there.

[WalkerBoh]

But really if you're killing tens of pan lords, you don't need anything that's in the trove anyways.

[and into]

Other possible treasure trove requirements:

1.) Deicide. (Purely flavor—requirement is "You have to kill Royal Jelly." Yes, it is redundant with Slime Rune but a lot cooler to flavor it this way, IMO. "Show me the Abyssal/Demonic Rune" still works for a rune requirement.)
2.) "The treasure trove will open only once you have proven your bravery: You must enter this shaft. Be warned: It is a longer shaft than you may be accustomed to. The cowardly shall not be rewarded! The trove will be closed to you forever if you venture lower by any means other than the shaft that lies before you."
3.) "There is a <portal vault name> on this floor. Explore it sufficiently and you may enter." (When you enter, as you explore you get messages about how much you've explored; after sufficiently exploring the message says, "You have proven your bravery! Come collect the reward whenever you wish, hero!") If you have already explored a sufficient amount of the portal vault when you come to the trove, you are already granted entrance. If vault is closed without sufficient exploration.... Tough luck!
4.) Deigenesis. You may only enter if you have proposed X number of gods on Tavern. (jk!)

[duvessa]

Guaranteed uniques I know of: 4 hell lords, 4 pan lords, serpent of hell, Geryon, Ignacio, the royal jelly. So to guarantee access to the trove it can't ask for more than 12 uniques. My average winning game kills 32 uniques.
I don't like the idea of "fixing" this problem by making random pan lords into uniques, either.

2.) "The treasure trove will open only once you have proven your bravery: You must enter this shaft. Be warned: It is a longer shaft than you may be accustomed to. The cowardly shall not be rewarded! The trove will be closed to you forever if you venture lower by any means other than the shaft that lies before you."

Not everyone explores the entire level before going downstairs, and even if they do, what if they hit a different shaft? This trove would be incredibly easy to miss unless you are 1) spoiled about it and 2) keep it constantly in mind everywhere troves generate. And even then you could randomly lose it anyway. I don't think this idea is a good idea unless you are going to announce troves and remove other shafts.

[wheals]

Ignacio isn't guaranteed, there's code to make him appear in half (I think?) of all games.

A possible way to make the shaft one work would be to choose what the cost of the trove would be once you see the entrance (or better, once you see the entry vault since otherwise you could try to get around it in an annoying way). That still might have the problem with running into a shaft afterwards on the same level, though.

[and into]

Guaranteed uniques I know of: 4 hell lords, 4 pan lords, serpent of hell, Geryon, Ignacio, the royal jelly. So to guarantee access to the trove it can't ask for more than 12 uniques. My average winning game kills 32 uniques.
I don't like the idea of "fixing" this problem by making random pan lords into uniques, either.

2.) "The treasure trove will open only once you have proven your bravery: You must enter this shaft. Be warned: It is a longer shaft than you may be accustomed to. The cowardly shall not be rewarded! The trove will be closed to you forever if you venture lower by any means other than the shaft that lies before you."

Not everyone explores the entire level before going downstairs, and even if they do, what if they hit a different shaft? This trove would be incredibly easy to miss unless you are 1) spoiled about it and 2) keep it constantly in mind everywhere troves generate. And even then you could randomly lose it anyway. I don't think this idea is a good idea unless you are going to announce troves and remove other shafts.

Yes, good points, duvessa. But I do think there is potential for various "tests of bravery." Here's (perhaps) a better take on the idea:

Based on your level when you first see the vault, you will be given a test of bravery involving "stepping foot in" some dangerous area, while staying below one character level above where you are now. So if you are at charlvl 15 and X%, before you advance past charlvl 16 and X%, you must set foot at or below some dangerous area. Return in one piece, get access to the trove, you earned it. I like that better than "Donate your vast collection of unused <foo> to get treasure."