Let us choose gods from the start

[PowerOfKaishin]

Jiyva and Gozag aside, is there any real reason why the player can't just choose their god from the onset?

I don't want to wait until the ecumenical temple 7 dungeon levels down to start building piety for one of the many gods who need high piety to be useful in lair. We should be able to start building piety from the get go. We can already do this with Trog and Lugonu, and while Lugonu can't be worshipped conventionally, there's no reason why Trog should get this bonus and not other gods.

I propose that the player spawns in the ecumenical temple and then descends into the dungeon from there. The main dungeon would then spawn all of the normal altars somewhere from d:1 to d:9. You can go back to the temple any time you like, provided you don't mind walking up a bunch of stairs.

You could also do some interesting shenanigans during the ascension as well, by having some sort of endgame boss battle in the temple.

[Sprucery]

Just for your information: we used to have at least Priests of Zin, Paladins of the Shining One, Death Knights of Yredelemnul, Chaos Knights of Makhleb. All these were removed because having to adapt to what altars you find and when was considered better by the devs. Xom, Trog and Lugonu are special cased and you can easily find old discussions on this matter if you wish...

[goodcoolguy]

Choosing gods based on where they appear in the dungeon is a key source of variability in crawl played to win. If anything, you're given too much choice about your character from the start, not too little.

[dynast]

Choosing gods based on where they appear in the dungeon is a key source of variability in crawl played to win. If anything, you're given too much choice about your character from the start, not too little.

Too bad it doesnt really work that way because, as kaishin mentioned, some gods requires you to build piety while some others dont, heck, some gods even require you to train invo, meanwhile some gods offer you benefits upon joining(gozag's gold distraction/free potion, hep's perma ally).

To me it feels more like a trap to worship not the god that you are planning to because of earlyness and you should only do that out of desperation(you are not going to make it to the next floors otherwise), least you handcap yourself.

With that said, i believe this could be fixed by giving the * piety you get when you worship from the faded altar to normal altars.

[dowan]

Crawl played to win is played with a BE, so you're objectively wrong. If you didn't pick BE you weren't really trying to win, or you would have made a better background choice.

[dynast]

Cant tell if memeing or being serious.

[goodcoolguy]

Choosing gods based on where they appear in the dungeon is a key source of variability in crawl played to win. If anything, you're given too much choice about your character from the start, not too little.

Too bad it doesnt really work that way because, as kaishin mentioned, some gods requires you to build piety while some others dont, heck, some gods even require you to train invo, meanwhile some gods offer you benefits upon joining(gozag's gold distraction/free potion, hep's perma ally).

To me it feels more like a trap to worship not the god that you are planning to because of earlyness and you should only do that out of desperation(you are not going to make it to the next floors otherwise), least you handcap yourself.

Have to disagree. For gods that give you something right away, it's especially important to take them early if they're available. On the other hand, the fact that Gozag or Uskayaw starts doing their thing immediately when you pick them up on d:9 doesn't do anything for you if you're dead on d:6.

@dowan: Actually,

[dynast]

Sure, i didnt say you had to worship a specific god at d:9, i was just giving a example of early power god.

Say, if half the gods give you early access to their powers and half of them dont, then it doesnt matter if the "no early power" gods shows up early, does it?

[PowerOfKaishin]

Cant tell if memeing or being serious.

Pretty sure he's memeing. He's mocking the concept that only optimal play is considered desirable by pointing out that there's only one best race-class combination and any optimal player would pick that.

I personally would like to play the game being able to build piety from the getgo with whatever not-optimal god I want.

[Wahaha]

Wouldn't this make the game more boring?

[Rast]

It would certainly make the game a lot easier.

[Arrhythmia]

Maybe you should try worshipping a different God then the one you were planning on. There's a lot of good ones!

[goodcoolguy]

Sure, i didnt say you had to worship a specific god at d:9, i was just giving a example of early power god.

Say, if half the gods give you early access to their powers and half of them dont, then it doesnt matter if the "no early power" gods shows up early, does it?

You raise an interesting point: If you know gods that are going to do something for you immediately will generate, why should you ever take a god that won't?

My only real answer is that with a d:1 or d:2 altar, as long as the god is doing something by *, you're reasonably likely to get ahead taking that god vs. waiting 2-7 floors for one that does something immediately. Of course, it may be less than that, but you have to play the odds. For gods who will reliably do nothing for a long time, for example Ashenzari, new gods that help immediately are a serious problem.

My take here is that I need more time to process these newer gods, Gozag included.

[Abominae]

Is this a good time to push for Slime Knight again?

I really want Slime Knight...

[Sprucery]

I really want Slime Knight...

So do I but unfortunately it's not going to happen.

[yesno]

i generally like going into the game not knowing which gods i will find and when, but yeah if there were going to be any new zealot background ever, Slime Knight would be fun. Too bad.

[dpeg]

Jiyva and Gozag aside, is there any real reason why the player can't just choose their god from the onset?

Yes.

Won't happen.

[ydeve]

Is "more zealots" on the will-not-do list? If not, please put it there.

[PowerOfKaishin]

Jiyva and Gozag aside, is there any real reason why the player can't just choose their god from the onset?

Yes.

Won't happen.

You say yes and then don't give me the reason.

If it's because the player is supposed to adapt to the altars that spawn, then why does the player have the ability to choose their own class and race?

To my knowledge, it's because we're allowed to select how we play the game. With the obvious exception of Demigods, god choice is just as important if not moreso than the other two choices and defines the player's game just as much. If there are no restrictions on race and class there shouldn't be any on god choice either (and locating the altar is a form of restriction, especially if the god comes too late to be useful by lair).

[CanOfWorms]

You say yes and then don't give me the reason.

If it's because the player is supposed to adapt to the altars that spawn, then why does the player have the ability to choose their own class and race?

To my knowledge, it's because we're allowed to select how we play the game. With the obvious exception of Demigods, god choice is just as important if not moreso than the other two choices and defines the player's game just as much. If there are no restrictions on race and class there shouldn't be any on god choice either (and locating the altar is a form of restriction, especially if the god comes too late to be useful by lair).

the only thing this line of reasoning is going to lead to is the removal of backgrounds tbh

[ydeve]

viewtopic.php?f=17&t=17518
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=14125
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=13734

[PowerOfKaishin]

the only thing this line of reasoning is going to lead to is the removal of backgrounds tbh

Pretty sure dpeg and the other devs aren't dumb. There would be a massive community backlash if this happened.

[ydeve]

the only thing this line of reasoning is going to lead to is the removal of backgrounds tbh

Pretty sure dpeg and the other devs aren't dumbasses. Massive community backlash if this happened.

Since when did devs care about community backlash? Remember MD removal?

[PowerOfKaishin]

the only thing this line of reasoning is going to lead to is the removal of backgrounds tbh

Pretty sure dpeg and the other devs aren't dumbasses. Massive community backlash if this happened.

Since when did devs care about community backlash? Remember MD removal?

No. I've only been playing crawl for a year.

[Arrhythmia]

Pretty sure dpeg and the other devs aren't dumbasses. Massive community backlash if this happened.

Since when did devs care about community backlash? Remember MD removal?

No. I've only been playing crawl for a year.

There was a "massive community backlash" when a popular race, Mountain Dwarf, was removed back in .10. The dev team gave nary a shit and kept making crawl.

[CanOfWorms]

you should read the comments to this post

[dynast]

Can choosing a early god even be categorized as adapting? It feels more like a gamble, or refusing to gamble. Its like when you pick up a mace and decide "im gonna train these", im not adapting to maces, i am making a gamble that maces will carry me through the game as i find upgrades. It is adapting when i train maces, come across a polearm and switch to those instead. What i mean is that "adapt" doesnt seem to fit in the player's god choice.

If the idea is to keep the "gamble or no gamble" aspect of choosing god, then keep as it is, if it is not, if the player is supposed to make a meaningful choice when choosing a god, then make all gods have benefits upon joining, so that they become more appealing.

[dpeg]

I thought everything was already said before, but perhaps this is not so.

In Crawl, there are three main aspects of a character: species, background, god (including lack of god). The first two are chosen at game start, and this is the first reason why it's good that the other one is not. (Barring the three remaining zealot backgrounds, which I will not discuss here.)

On many characters, picking a god is the first major strategic decision. I know that a lot of players start their games with a fixed god in mind. ("This game, I will be a DEFE of Vehumet.") For them, this strategic decision has already been made at game start, and I can see how you can then end up with a proposal as that of that OP. There is no way we can change that (or them), but I believe it is better to offer a chance to adapt. This is offered through overflow altars and a potentially late (and incomplete) Ecumenical Temple.

Another reason in favour of the current system: reaching the Temple and/or picking a god is an important milestone, especially for players who don't (regularly) win.

Two aspects which are different from the OP's drift, and should be discussed or dealt with separately:

1. Trog the strongest god, Berserker the strongest background: someone should take a heart and nerf Trog. This can be achieved in the numbers.
2. Some gods offer benefits immediately, and others don't. It is wrong to believe that immediate gain always trumps later gains, but this is a separate discussion.

Finally, I want to mention how the god game could be changed in a completely different way. I am not advocating for them, because I think the current system works reasonably well, but it's something that would also make a game.

a. Delay god gain: move overflow alters deeper (say D:5-12) and the Temple as well.
b. Don't guarantee the temple gods in each game.

[duvessa]

DCSS is home to two mutually exclusive ideas:
1. god choice should be an interesting decision where you try to maximize your character's chance of survival (this is the only way that altars can make more sense than having players choose a god at the start)
2. gods do not need to be balanced against each other (this is the only way you can possibly defend the existence of gods like trog/fedhas/kiku, and on the other side, chei/xom/qazlal)

It is self-evidently absurd to believe in both at once. If the gods are unbalanced, then by definition god choice is not an interesting decision. But the devteam consists of a mixture of people who believe 1., and people who believe 2., otherwise the game wouldn't be hosting both of these contradictory ideas at once for 10 years.
Until this is addressed, FRs to choose a god from the start (to the disdain of 1. people) will keep appearing and be hard to dismiss, and FRs to buff or nerf gods (to the disdain of 2. people) will keep appearing and be hard to dismiss.

[Sprucery]

If the gods are unbalanced, then by definition god choice is not an interesting decision.

I disagree. If I find Okawaru on D:1, for example, there is an interesting decision to make, even if Trog/Fedhas/Kiku are better (I don't know when I would find them). (Of course Chei/Xom/Qaz are for challenge games.)

[infinitevox]

I really want Slime Knight...

So do I

[PowerOfKaishin]

If the gods are unbalanced, then by definition god choice is not an interesting decision.

I disagree. If I find Okawaru on D:1, for example, there is an interesting decision to make, even if Trog/Fedhas/Kiku are better (I don't know when I would find them). (Of course Chei/Xom/Qaz are for challenge games.)

This is a corner case. Duvy's implication is that for playing optimally, an early D:1 altar is one of the only few situations in which you would not choose a top tier god (Trog, Fedhas, Maklehb).

[Sprucery]

To make god choice more interesting, the Temple should have fewer gods and the guaranteed spawning range for all altars could be D:15 instead of D:9.

I'm not a fan of "all gods don't exist in a given game" because players should be allowed to pick a certain god (when I've won all species and backgrounds I want to win all gods).

[all before]

Duvessa is right. It doesn't make sense for gods to be both a strategic decision and a difficulty setting.

Making a version of crawl where the gods were balanced would be a massive undertaking. On the other hand, owning up to the fact that gods aren't supposed to be balanced and removing the strategic decision element wouldn't be so difficult. It would mean getting rid of overflow vaults and updating Temple so that it included all the gods. For what it's worth, this would preserve dpeg's desire that the Temple be an important milestone.

[crate]

On the other hand, owning up to the fact that gods aren't supposed to be balanced and removing the strategic decision element wouldn't be so difficult. It would mean getting rid of overflow vaults and updating Temple so that it included all the gods.

I don't follow. I like not finding all altars at the same time.

[dynast]

God decision based on survival is not really a decision, because that normally means you are picking the earliest altar that showed up(you made the decision of picking a early god, you did not chose which god).

[Shard1697]

Multiple altars usually show up before temple

[dynast]

Multiple altars usually show up before temple

Do you choose which ones will show up? Do you know when they will show up?

[Siegurt]

Multiple altars usually show up before temple

Do you choose which ones will show up? Do you know when they will show up?

Yes, but typically you can choose among several options before the temple, if not the entire pantheon, if your first choice is not among them, you might actually adapt to one of those instead.

The difference between your first and say, fourth, choice isnt enough to really call it a "difficulty level" and the difference between a d2/3 altar and waiting for the temple is often (but not always) enough to make up the difference.

Personally i thing that is a good thing.

[duvessa]

If the gods are unbalanced, then by definition god choice is not an interesting decision.

I disagree. If I find Okawaru on D:1, for example, there is an interesting decision to make, even if Trog/Fedhas/Kiku are better (I don't know when I would find them). (Of course Chei/Xom/Qaz are for challenge games.)

This is a corner case. Duvy's implication is that for playing optimally, an early D:1 altar is one of the only few situations in which you would not choose a top tier god (Trog, Fedhas, Maklehb).

If altars are not all found at the same time, then either you have the player find them in an almost random order (the current situation), in which case an interesting survival decision is vanishingly rare, or you have the player find them in a predetermined order (worst gods first, best gods last), in which case you are really just trying to balance the gods and turn to option 1.

In a hypothetical crawl where most gods are balanced, I fail to see the value of "challenge gods" any more than "challenge weapon classes" or "challenge magic schools". I disagree that it would be a massive undertaking to give Crawl's gods a semblance of balance, it only looks like that because nobody has tried it yet. Most gods are offenders due to one of:
- overpowered * abilities (trog, kiku, fedhas)
- excessively crippling conducts (chei, xom, qazlal)
- worse version of existing god (beogh < yred < kiku)
- during some or all of the game, doesn't actually do anything useful (ash, beogh, sif, veh, xom, zin, tso)
None of these require overhauls to fix except the third, you can get mostly-balanced versions of most existing gods by changing existing abilities (move piety levels at which they become available, nerf some ally-summoning invocations), and toning down chei/qazlal conducts.
If you're hoping to make beogh/yred/kiku all worthy of existing at once, or fix xom, then yes, I admit those things will be hard.

[dynast]

Yes, but typically you can choose among several options before the temple

You tipically can choose which god you want. If you dont go for the god you want then you have no telling, no basis whatsoever to judge when you should pick a god other than "as soon as possible", in which case you dont have a way to actually choose any god. You either choose your god, or you dont.

[yesno]

a lot of the time i see like 4 altars on d:2 or d:3, so in that case, if i am going for early worship, then i am choosing from a subset of 4 gods, which i think is OK.

[dynast]

If i see a couple altars together on any floor and none is the god i wanted on that run, yet i pick one of them i did not choose the god i wanted on that run.

[yesno]

perhaps, dynast, in crawl, as in life, we do not choose the god we want~

[all before]

It's a subjective decision whether the game should make gods like backgrounds and races (no attempt at balance) or like weapon classes and S-branches (which at least theoretically should be balanced, even if the game currently fails to do so). Crate really enjoys finding altars in different orders, great. Other people seem not to, whatever. But it's objectively bad for the game to try make gods fill both functions at once.

Given that, it's an easier reform to remove "strategic" choices from gods (which aren't really strategic because some gods are massively better than others) and make them like races and backgrounds, than to balance gods one by one. If I were a programmer, and wanted to get rid of the objective problem, I'd much rather update the vault files for the different Temple layouts than have to come up with and implement new, balanced versions of each of the gods.

[Shard1697]

If i see a couple altars together on any floor and none is the god i wanted on that run, yet i pick one of them i did not choose the god i wanted on that run.

No, but you still made a choice. 2 choices, actually: early god now instead of holding out for a game later, and then a choice between the subset of early gods you were provided with. I like that sort of choice.

[dynast]

No, but you still made a choice. 2 choices, actually: early god now instead of holding out for a game later, and then a choice between the subset of early gods you were provided with. I like that sort of choice.

What if before that i went past a single altar on a floor above? Or another lone altar before i explored into the next one? wow, so many choices, so little meaning. Playing the game under a different god is interesting, the choices that leads you to it, are not.

[Shard1697]

wow, so many choices, so little meaning.

I strongly disagree!

[crate]

I still don't see why finding gods in a different places is "an objective problem", even assuming that gods are like races and backgrounds (which is what I've always assumed anyway). There's a piece of your reasoning somewhere that I really don't understand and I would like you to explain what I am missing.

I mean, backgrounds already kind of work the way gods do, right? You get a starting set of equipment (analogy: no god, or whatever your zealot background has), and then based on what you find in the dungeon you end up in a place that may not be where you intended to end up when you started the game (pick a god). Is that also unacceptable? What's the link I'm missing?

[all before]

I assume the point of spreading out altars across the dungeon is to create the sense of a strategic choice. Do you want this god now, or will you hold out for a more suitable god later? That would be ok if the gods were better balanced, or the game placed better gods at lower depths, or in some other way were designed around this kind of strategic religious choice. But it isn’t. If a player comes across a d:2 trog altar, it’s always in their best interest to take it if they want to win. Maybe this is just a matter of how the game communicates its design to players, but it doesn’t seem good that a feature developers have essentially made a choice between easier and harder modes is presented as if it were a strategic choice to be made in the game.