The Tedium of Regeneration

[daggaz]

Regeneration is tedious. So much so that people write their own code to automate the function outside of the game interface proper. It is especially bad when you first learn it, when your spell power often means you will probably need several casts per rest, especially if you are using it as a support spell on a melee character.

Proposal: Some kind of sacrificial cost to make regeneration permanent. Repel Missiles got redone to reduce tedium, but the mechanic used there doesnt work here. So instead, the first time you cast regeneration, it should cost you some hitpoints and mana, which are permanently removed. Then the player is given a permanent, unremovable intrinsic (and still stackable with other sources of regen), and the spell automatically unwinds from memory. Maybe this could cost a point of Int, too...

This introduces several choices: The spell is low level, but the sacrificial cost is static, so should the player pay a greater percentage cost now for the power, or wait until it is easier to afford? Also, the spell would influence god choice more strongly, as you would be under the permanent influence of a necromantic spell. Maybe a god who disapproves flays it from your body, sacrifice wasted, or maybe they refuse the player for all time.

[Pollen_Golem]

Trog would have to flay it from your body too...
What if regeneration is a toggable spell that reduces your max MP considerably while it's on, letting your max MP bounce back to normal when you toggle it off? Spell power can determine rate of regen instead of duration. I'm not necessarily saying it's a good idea, it just sounds comparatively reasonable.

[adozu]

could regenerate be coded to just not expire while resting? i mean, you are already resting so mp used don't matter much and you still get the hunger penalty. not particularly consistent but very much tedium-saving.

[byrel]

Charms rework is coming in 0.18 from what I hear. Something like MP toggle with a slot system.

[KoboldLord]

There is no reason for Regeneration to ever turn off. The mp and nutrition costs are not relevant basically ever, so it might as well be a passive buff that just works in exchange for the three spell slots. It could be argued that the turn spent casting it could be a relevant consideration in certain circumstances, such as pillar-dancing a speed 10 monster, but this could be corrected by simply having it not work when there are hostile monsters on-screen and for a few turns thereafter. This would solve most of the problems with the spell all at once.

[tasonir]

There is no reason for Regeneration to ever turn off. The mp and nutrition costs are not relevant basically ever, so it might as well be a passive buff that just works in exchange for the three spell slots. It could be argued that the turn spent casting it could be a relevant consideration in certain circumstances, such as pillar-dancing a speed 10 monster, but this could be corrected by simply having it not work when there are hostile monsters on-screen and for a few turns thereafter. This would solve most of the problems with the spell all at once.

I usually use regeneration for in-combat healing, so turning it off whenever there's a monster in sight seems terrible to me. An MP toggle/slot system sounds interesting, depending on the details. I'd like to see something where most characters can get one perm charm slot fairly easily, and for a decent cost (high int, high spellcasting, high training in charms?) you could get a second slot, possibly even a third. Probably 2 perm charms is enough, although if you did have a third I'd probably find some way to sneak phase shift (technically not a charm, but it is) in there.

[Pollen_Golem]

passive buff that just works in exchange for the three spell slots...This would solve most of the problems with the spell all at once.

so never turning off? You introduce the issue of there being no penalty (three spell slots is nothing) for better-than-troll healing, where all you need to do is find the spell and, if necessary, a potion of brilliance. So a bigger trade-off is necessary.

or #JustRemoveIt

[Greyr]

So another roguelike I occasionally indulge in is ToME. In ToME there is a whole slew of passive buff spells that reduce your maximum MP when active. Now, I'm not saying it will work within the framework of Crawl, but imo, they work very well in ToME (despite a lot of spells being completely broken, that's irrelevant )

[Siegurt]

Regeneration - Reimagined:

Corpse Drain: <Necromancy/Charms level 3>
When cast all, all corpses start generating an aura of necromancy, while you are standing within this aura you gain a number (say 3?) of hps per turn for each aura you are standing in.

Increased spellpower increases the duration and size of the necromatic aura.

Once a corpse has been subjected to this spell, it becomes 'dessicated' and ineligible for the spell in future.

--

[bcadren]

Regeneration - Reimagined:

Corpse Drain: <Necromancy/Charms level 3>
When cast all, all corpses start generating an aura of necromancy, while you are standing within this aura you gain a number (say 3?) of hps per turn for each aura you are standing in.

Increased spellpower increases the duration and size of the necromatic aura.

Once a corpse has been subjected to this spell, it becomes 'dessicated' and ineligible for the spell in future.

--

So Powered by Death, the spell; instead of Regen, the spell? I mean I'm not saying it's a bad idea. It'd make the most common use in extended (5ing in Hell) go away near completely and would make the spell near unusable by normal necromancers (Animate Dead or Heal Faster; Most people will choose Animate Dead).

[Siegurt]

Regeneration - Reimagined:

Corpse Drain: <Necromancy/Charms level 3>
When cast all, all corpses start generating an aura of necromancy, while you are standing within this aura you gain a number (say 3?) of hps per turn for each aura you are standing in.

Increased spellpower increases the duration and size of the necromatic aura.

Once a corpse has been subjected to this spell, it becomes 'dessicated' and ineligible for the spell in future.

--

So Powered by Death, the spell; instead of Regen, the spell? I mean I'm not saying it's a bad idea. It'd make the most common use in extended (5ing in Hell) go away near completely and would make the spell near unusable by normal necromancers (Animate Dead or Heal Faster; Most people will choose Animate Dead).

Well, I didn't say it spoiled Animate dead, you'd just have to heal before casting it.

[duvessa]

So another roguelike I occasionally indulge in is ToME. In ToME there is a whole slew of passive buff spells that reduce your maximum MP when active. Now, I'm not saying it will work within the framework of Crawl, but imo, they work very well in ToME (despite a lot of spells being completely broken, that's irrelevant )

Actually ToME4's sustain system works really badly in various ways. Some are because of terrible code design (you can put on stat boosting equipment, start a sustain, then take off the equipment and the sustain will still have the power from the higher stats) but others are inherent to the system's concept. In particular, many sustains are optimal to turn off when exploring and approaching then turn on during every fight (berserker is a good example, as is almost every other instant sustain, and many non-instant ones that have any sort of drawback).
If Crawl implements this system, it needs to accept that it only works if all sustains meet at least one of two conditions:
1. Doesn't have a drawback.
2. Can't be turned off. This is what daggaz is proposing for regeneration.
In addition, you need to accept that you no longer have anything resembling the spell success mechanic. The closest you can get is to multiply the charm's power by the "success rate", or making it only have an effect on success% of turns, but then you're just using the same number for something that's really completely different (this system would make 10% fail regeneration only 90% as good as 0% fail regeneration, when in reality they are basically the same in the status quo).
Most charms already meet condition 1, or essentially meet it - for example, regeneration having a food cost has never mattered.

[Greyr]

What if that sustained charm spells were more dependent on spell power than their counterparts? Make the spell success relevant by making the spells near useless without a decent spell power. Charms could use a nerf anyway... Even if the player uses heavy armor/quaffs a brilliance for the sole purpose of casting said spell, a considerable XP would still be needed to make casting the spell worth it.

tl;dr NEUTER CHARMS

[milski]

TOME is also a really terrible example of a bunch of hidden mechanics, automatic deaths without player interaction, and a ton of trap choices that just sort of suck, along with a large number of interesting abilities clouded by an even larger number of straight numerical buffs.

I mean, the "have charms take slots and MP" idea isn't bad, but I think TOME's design philosophy is the exact opposite of Crawl's in almost every way.

[duvessa]

I think TOME's design philosophy is the exact opposite of Crawl's in almost every way.

As someone who has vaguely followed ToME4 for years, I assure you that it does not have a "design philosophy" in any meaningful sense.

[Pollen_Golem]

making the spells near useless without a decent spell power.

Repel/Deflect missiles works like that because even if you cast it, the chance for it to unravel with each shot is relatively high at low spell power.

[KoboldLord]

I usually use regeneration for in-combat healing, so turning it off whenever there's a monster in sight seems terrible to me. An MP toggle/slot system sounds interesting, depending on the details. I'd like to see something where most characters can get one perm charm slot fairly easily, and for a decent cost (high int, high spellcasting, high training in charms?) you could get a second slot, possibly even a third. Probably 2 perm charms is enough, although if you did have a third I'd probably find some way to sneak phase shift (technically not a charm, but it is) in there.

In-combat healing *is* one of the two main problem cases with regeneration. Fixing that would be a good thing, even if it makes things a little harder overall.

[Pollen_Golem]

One of the main problems? But that's its primary function! What, do you think regeneration should only be good for speeding up out-of-combat recovery? It would rarely make any difference then and few would bother with it, so it would need a huge buff like giving 8 hp per turn if it only activates when you haven't been seeing monsters for 12 turns or whatever you had in mind.

[Quazifuji]

One of the main problems? But that's its primary function! What, do you think regeneration should only be good for speeding up out-of-combat recovery? It would rarely make any difference then and few would bother with it, so it would need a huge buff like giving 8 hp per turn if it only activates when you haven't been seeing monsters for 12 turns or whatever you had in mind.

Yeah, that's been my thinking. A lot of the suggestions in this thread seem aimed at making regeneration less tedious to use when resting at the expense of it being useful in combat, but using it while resting is an incredibly lame and uninteresting case. If either of those two use cases is gonna be removed, it should be the resting one. Make it only work in combat. Then the problem of tediously casting it to speed up resting is gone because it doesn't help then anyway, and in combat it still costs a turn and 3 mana.

[The Ferret]

Not being able to turn off Regen (and other proposed sustains) and taking the MP-cap hit would be a significant nerf to early game characters (esp. those with poor Spellcasting aptitutde), especially characters who use both spells and divine abilities extensively.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding the proposal though.

In Regeneration's case, what if the extra hunger cost was raised high enough to make it more than if you had just rested? That would make it combat-only without any stupid kludges. (Should other sources of Regen have the same cost, making it effectively as if you were resting with a ring of hunger and without Regen? Troll fast metabolism would have to be tweaked to rebalance too.)

[daggaz]

Not being able to turn off Regen (and other proposed sustains) and taking the MP-cap hit would be a significant nerf to early game characters (esp. those with poor Spellcasting aptitutde), especially characters who use both spells and divine abilities extensively.

That is one of the primary interesting choices as outlined in the OP: the spell is useful and may save your life, but it will cost more percentage-wise for an early character. Do you pay the toll now or risk waiting until it is more easily affordable? In this way, regen is no longer a no-brainer.

In Regeneration's case, what if the extra hunger cost was raised high enough to make it more than if you had just rested? That would make it combat-only without any stupid kludges.

You might be overestimating the power of hunger here, severely. Also we should probably wait to see what changes are in store before brainstorming any "fixes" based on this rotten mechanic.

[Sprucery]

Regeneration - Reimagined:

Corpse Drain: <Necromancy/Charms level 3>
When cast all, all corpses start generating an aura of necromancy, while you are standing within this aura you gain a number (say 3?) of hps per turn for each aura you are standing in.

Increased spellpower increases the duration and size of the necromatic aura.

Once a corpse has been subjected to this spell, it becomes 'dessicated' and ineligible for the spell in future.

--

This would make you to want to lure monsters to corpses so that you can benefit from the aura already during the fight.

[ion_frigate]

Here's a suggested rework: The spell, instead of having a duration, has a spellpower-based chance of ending for every HP it gives you. The intensity of regeneration is based on tension, fading to zero at sufficiently low tensions (so you can't just kite a rat around for regeneration). This would be easy to communicate to the player by a status light that changes shade based on tension, fading to grey if you aren't getting any regeneration at the moment.

This would make the spell give you short but intense bursts of regeneration during more dangerous combat. It also adds a nice random factor to said combats. The total amount of healing you get, on average, would be independent of tension, so it wouldn't be gameable that way. It would still be optimal to re-cast the spell every time it breaks once you're out of combat, just like with Repel Missiles, but that's a lot less tedium than the current system.

[tabstorm]

Is there honestly any point to sitting and casting regen when nothing is onscreen, instead of just holding 5 down? Just holding 5 probably uses less realtime.

[Pollen_Golem]

you can be worried about wandering or spawning monsters, especially if you get teleported on an uncleared level, especially if you have very few HP left.

[duvessa]

piety decay

[Siegurt]

Regeneration - Reimagined:

Corpse Drain: <Necromancy/Charms level 3>
When cast all, all corpses start generating an aura of necromancy, while you are standing within this aura you gain a number (say 3?) of hps per turn for each aura you are standing in.

Increased spellpower increases the duration and size of the necromatic aura.

Once a corpse has been subjected to this spell, it becomes 'dessicated' and ineligible for the spell in future.

--

This would make you to want to lure monsters to corpses so that you can benefit from the aura already during the fight.

Perhaps the corpses should only benefit you if they are 'fresh' enough, rather than being used up when you cast the spell (Which is more similar to the way augmentation works), I'd like you to be able to get enough healing that it's useful in combat, or immediately after combat, but so it's not a useful thing to continually cast out of combat, and once you've left the immediate area it's not valuable to return. (I guess corpses could more directly expire if they ever leave your LOS)

[kuniqs]

Would it make sense to just not reduce spell duration when no monsters are in view?

[tasonir]

Is there honestly any point to sitting and casting regen when nothing is onscreen, instead of just holding 5 down? Just holding 5 probably uses less realtime.

Piety decay isn't a problem for those enlightened Chei-folk, but in all cases the less time you spend with low health the less time you have for additional monsters to wonder into your LOS. Usually a slow drip of wandering monsters isn't much threat, although if you happen to be really low (<50%) even one nasty monster can be a problem.

As for using tension to determine regen rate and giving it a % chance to fail based on spellpower, I'd be up for trying it. I'm a bit worried about it failing often after a few points of healing when right now you can cast it 1-2 times and basically always have it for the entire fight, assuming the fight doesn't go longer than ~20-30 turns, but it could probably stand the nerf.

Minor tweak, tension is generally considered imbalanced, I'd have it use the same scale as Ru's sac courage, which seems to work well: 1 point for each yellow monster, 3 points for a red, nothing for grey/white monsters (nasty, trivial, etc whatever the names for the colors are). And then some formula like .2hp/10 aut per point, so if you had two yellow monsters and a red, you'd get your current 1hp/10 aut. Less monsters less healing, huge swarm and you'll be regenerating several hp a turn. This will of course greatly increase the chance that the spell ends, so it's not without drawback. Plus all those monsters are deadly.