Display a monster's HD next to its name.

[PowerOfKaishin]

An ettin and a two-headed ogre are the same thing, right? Definitely not to the experienced player, but to the untrained eye it's not an obvious distinction even with x->v.

A monster's HD should go next to its name when the "[monster] comes into view" message rears its ugly head, displayed as its level. ie. "A level 12 ettin comes into view" The player can compare the level of any given monster to the levels of the other monsters they are fighting.

This would make it much simpler to gauge how strong something is without having to look at the description, which doesn't tell me everything anyway. Certainly "it looks extremely dangerous" is an obvious flag but extremely dangerous monsters tend to not be extremely dangerous at later parts of the game. A level is straight to the point and the player can easily draw a comparison using the levels of the other creatures they've been fighting.

It's also incredibly simple as it uses only one stat and rarely inaccurate as monster power and deadliness both scale with hit dice.

If there's a comparison to be drawn between monster hit dice and player levels (which are different; the max level is 27, Cerebov has 21 hit dice), perhaps their level could instead be converted into player levels to allow players to gauge a monster's strength without actually comparing it to other monsters.

[and into]

Unfortunately, while there is some correlation between the two I suppose (more than random), HD is not a good predictor of how dangerous an enemy is.

[njvack]

An ettin and a two-headed ogre are the same thing, right? Definitely not to the experienced player, but to the untrained eye it's not an obvious distinction even with x->v.

Well, they do have different names and (presumably) different tiles, so I think it's pretty reasonably for even untrained players to guess there's a difference. Especially now that there are a lot(!) fewer monsters that are basically identical except for slight damage tweaks.

I would definitely like to be able to see some of the things that are different between monsters with different HD -- spell power is the one that comes to mind -- but I don't know that exposing HD directly is a very good way to do it.

Honestly, I suspect that "HD is an invisible magic number that changes a bunch of subtle and non-subtle things about monsters" probably causes a bunch of design and code strife, and it might be better to replace that number with a set of data attributes that can be changed per-monster. But doing that sounds like "fun."

[PowerOfKaishin]

An ettin and a two-headed ogre are the same thing, right? Definitely not to the experienced player, but to the untrained eye it's not an obvious distinction even with x->v.

Well, they do have different names and (presumably) different tiles, so I think it's pretty reasonably for even untrained players to guess there's a difference. Especially now that there are a lot(!) fewer monsters that are basically identical except for slight damage tweaks.

I would definitely like to be able to see some of the things that are different between monsters with different HD -- spell power is the one that comes to mind -- but I don't know that exposing HD directly is a very good way to do it.

Honestly, I suspect that "HD is an invisible magic number that changes a bunch of subtle and non-subtle things about monsters" probably causes a bunch of design and code strife, and it might be better to replace that number with a set of data attributes that can be changed per-monster. But doing that sounds like "fun."

Well sure, they are different, but the untrained players aren't going to know what the difference is past different tiles and names, including the parts that actually matter.

I was under the impression that having hit dice made monster generation significantly easier, especially in the main dungeon and lair.

[CanOfWorms]

hellions and tormentors are hd 7. hill giants are hd 11. should players be led to believe hellions and tormentors are "easier" than hill giants

I also don't see why we can't just use the existing danger descriptor to begin with

[dowan]

Where does the existing danger descriptor come from? I had assumed it was HD, and thus, basically useless, as pointed out here.

[CanOfWorms]

the danger descriptor is based off

• HD
• max HP
• the spells the monster knows
• whether or not the monster has fast regeneration
• the monster's speed
• if the monster is fast, whether it has a "strong" melee attack (over 30 max damage)
• whether or not the monster can equip items
• whether or not it's a zombie

(see exper_value() in mon-util.cc for the details)

this is then compared against the player's current experience level (see mons_threat_level() in mon-util.cc)

[duvessa]

the danger descriptor is worse than useless IMO

[dowan]

OK, so the danger descriptor is more than just HD, good to know. It probably could use some adjustment though, because some "easy" stuff can be scarier than "extremely dangerous" stuff sometimes.

[Sprucery]

the danger descriptor is worse than useless IMO

Why?

[arandomperson12]

HD is important for some spells, such as ensorcelled hibernation and dazzling spray.

[VeryAngryFelid]

I.e. monsters use HD to determine spell power and spell power determines damage etc.

[duvessa]

the danger descriptor is worse than useless IMO

Why?

it has essentially no correspondence to the actual danger of the monster; it leads unspoiled players into thinking it corresponds to some kind of useful property, but they're unlikely to guess that said property is experience value compared to your XL

[Sprucery]

the danger descriptor is worse than useless IMO

Why?

it has essentially no correspondence to the actual danger of the monster; it leads unspoiled players into thinking it corresponds to some kind of useful property, but they're unlikely to guess that said property is experience value compared to your XL

I don't know, whenever I see an 'extremely dangerous' monster it seems that it actually is pretty dangerous.

[Lasty]

Monster danger level is tied directly to monster XP value. I don't think it's consistently useful, but we can tweak things until it gets more useful. When the "smart" xp-deciding logic fails, there's a multiplier you can manually adjust to make a monster give more or less XP. I don't think anyone has done a comprehensive XP audit of monsters in a long time, if ever, but someone probably should.

[VeryAngryFelid]

I think danger level of a monster will be character-specific anyway. A character with Silence spell can laugh at Deep Elf Annihilator, a stabber with Invisibility can laugh at Deep Elf Blademaster etc.

[Shard1697]

Both spells are hexes, though, so if you have one you can often have both.

[VeryAngryFelid]

Both spells are hexes, though, so if you have one you can often have both.

Yes, I usually try to get both. My point was that there are characters who have no Silence vs annihilator and no Invis vs Blademasters and for them the monsters are extremely dangerous.