The Tavern

I remember back when I ran across the game, vamp weapons were extremely confusing. You get messages about "an empty sense of dread", or "Full or higher", and whether you "really" want to wield and unwield ... it all seems sort of intimidating. And it's all about some kind of food consumption which in recent revisions seems to be contempted by most -- I'm one of few people who thinks gourmand is a cool amulet.

So it seems like the one item of food consumption (or gourmand, or being undead) to switch is not a huge impediment to play, and yet you have all these confusing messages and special rules about it. And it doesn't really make any sense to link hunger for monsters' blood to hunger for food anyway! I don't think any of it is mentioned in the instructions either, since it's such a trivial issue... Wouldn't it make more sense to strip all this crap out and make vampiric weapons just like any other?

no substantive feedback; it's just really funny to see a post about food with your username. Now I want a drumstick.*

[*] fwiw, my answer: no, not really. If hellcrawl is any indication, readily-swappable vampiric weapons do not break the game.

edit: the word you want is "contemned," not "contempted." knowing weird verb constructions like that is one of the few concrete benefits my humanities degree has afforded me; forgive the pedantry.

If they need this kind of lag before you can wield them and a disincentive to unwield them, vamp weapons should just disable you for one to two turns when you equip them, and then require you to throw a die to unwield them or waste the action. Fluff this as a hex effect intrinsic to the weapon. Vamps immune.
This way you keep the tactical effects of current mechanics, and remove the food element, which is only relevant for a few specific builds (spriggans mages, and maybe a few others in hell).

Honestly, I don't get why there's a need for penalties at all. I mean, I know a quicker way to heal than vamp weapons: use something that can HURT the monster, get it dead, then hit "5". Problem solved! They're "alts" for dealing with the rare weak non-undead non-demonic non-whatever monster you run across, yeah, but only in the same way that electrocution weapons are, only less well. I usually don't have one and I don't think the food thing is the reason, though obviously aggravation *does* count against carrying things. (But I mean, even a mummy doesn't often use one unless it's the first powerful artifact or something)

Chicken, you are seriously undervaluing the power of vamp weapons in the three rune game.

Of course the food thing is a dumb attempt to balance vamp.

Vamp weapons aren't that good. Against susceptible monsters, speed, antimagic, and yes probably even electrocution, are a lot closer to game-breaking than vamp is.

If you still want to stop players from swapping vamp weapons in combat for whatever reason, make them torment you on wield/unwield, done. It fits the theme and everything.

Duvessa, you seem to be referring to theoretically optimal crawl where every battle is 1v1 with time to 5 up afterwards. Sure, use antimagic in those.

In pitched battles against hordes, the healing from vamp brand is amazing. As long as your damage_dealt * .3 > damage received, you can only die to extreme damage spikes.

Or, if there really needs to be something against swapping in-combat, make vamp weapons like gourmand: they require some time for attunement before the vamp effect starts kicking in.

Sprucery wrote:Or, if there really needs to be something against swapping in-combat, make vamp weapons like gourmand: they require some time for attunement before the vamp effect starts kicking in.

I like this proposal, it's simple and effective.

Sprucery wrote:Or, if there really needs to be something against swapping in-combat, make vamp weapons like gourmand: they require some time for attunement before the vamp effect starts kicking in.

Or have it take x-y HP from the wielder on wield "it requires your essence to function." so there is still some initial cost.

Gourmand-like is not enough as it does not prevent you from using vampiric vs draconians and then switching to antimagic or vorpal vs orb of fire.
Make vampiric weapon have instrinsic fragile attribute.

Sprucery wrote:Or, if there really needs to be something against swapping in-combat, make vamp weapons like gourmand: they require some time for attunement before the vamp effect starts kicking in.

This really could be applied to all brands, with a gradual build-up towards a greater final result.

VeryAngryFelid wrote:Gourmand-like is not enough as it does not prevent you from using vampiric vs draconians and then switching to antimagic or vorpal vs orb of fire.

What's wrong with that? After all, you wouldn't get vampiric effect against the next draconian pack.

MainiacJoe wrote:
Sprucery wrote:Or, if there really needs to be something against swapping in-combat, make vamp weapons like gourmand: they require some time for attunement before the vamp effect starts kicking in.

This really could be applied to all brands, with a gradual build-up towards a greater final result.

Depends on whether the goal is to stop weapon-swapping in general or just to keep being bad for weapon swapping as a specific downside of vampiric weapons. I was under the impression that people are focusing on the latter and that other forms of weapon swapping are still intended to be perfectly viable options.

Sprucery wrote:
VeryAngryFelid wrote:Gourmand-like is not enough as it does not prevent you from using vampiric vs draconians and then switching to antimagic or vorpal vs orb of fire.

What's wrong with that? After all, you wouldn't get vampiric effect against the next draconian pack.

I usually don't fight draconian packs after fighting an orb of fire, I usually go upstairs to restore HP and that means gourmand-like would be functionally identical to current vampiric brand.
If it's not clear, I believe vampiric is the most overpowered thing in the whole game, it's the only item which can make my "DEFE" become "MiBe", abandoning all spells and wearing the heaviest body armour because it is at least as powerful but saves much real time, many key presses and in-game turns.

Maybe the attunement should be based on experience gained instead of time. But how to balance it then between early game and late game (very long time in early game vs. immediately attuned in late game)...

if free vamp weapon swapping were overpowered then wouldnt undead gain a huge benefit from it

Sprucery wrote:Maybe the attunement should be based on experience gained instead of time. But how to balance it then between early game and late game (very long time in early game vs. immediately attuned in late game)...

There are already too many things that are experience-gated.

I'm with duvessa on this - vamp weapons are good but not head-and-shoulders above everything else everywhere. I don't think they need a special downside.

Honestly, the hunger thing is historical. Vampiric weapons used to have a really nasty constant hunger effect - IIRC it put a normal-consumption character into Troll territory or worse. It was changed to the current system because the old one just incentivized players to wield them during fights and then promptly unwield them. But the fact remains that vampiric weapons having a hunger effect at all is just a flavor decision from the really early DCSS or pre-DCSS days. It should go.

VeryAngryFelid wrote:I usually don't fight draconian packs after fighting an orb of fire, I usually go upstairs to restore HP and that means gourmand-like would be functionally identical to current vampiric brand.
If it's not clear, I believe vampiric is the most overpowered thing in the whole game, it's the only item which can make my "DEFE" become "MiBe", abandoning all spells and wearing the heaviest body armour because it is at least as powerful but saves much real time, many key presses and in-game turns.

You really think the difference between OP and balanced is having to spend a turn or two eating food to swap weapons? If it's OP, it should be nerfed directly instead of remaining tied into the terrible, horrible, no good, very bad food system.

archaeo wrote:You really think the difference between OP and balanced is having to spend a turn or two eating food to swap weapons? If it's OP, it should be nerfed directly instead of remaining tied into the terrible, horrible, no good, very bad food system.

I am not sure. Either you haven't read my messages before replying or my English is much worse than I thought

I was trying to nerf vampiric brand into oblivion via making it FRAGILE. The weapon is automatically destroyed even for undead species as soon as it is unwielded.
Though I realize devs are not going to do it so I thanked duvessa's post with "cast self-torment on wield/unwield" idea despite I disagree with another part of his post where he claims the brand is not that great.

It's interesting that people like Rast have used vamp so effectively. But ... I think this still doesn't relate to SWAPPING. I mean, either you're on a level with lots of soft cuddly critters to suck the blood from, whether by sword or spell, or you're on a level full of skeletons and mummies and demons and such where you are hard pressed even to find enough chunks to munch on. The swapping is just annoying when it comes to little bits like wield-identifying your loot. If vamp actually needs to be turned down for 3-rune divers, then nerf it some subtle way that doesn't involve special swap rules. Make it 0.25 instead of 0.3, for example. You could do 2.0 if you really wanted. I mean, you have all these arbitrary numbers to play with and yet the solutions people think of too often seem to involve some special, arbitrary rule that restricts how people play instead of giving them a chance to try this and that.

The Tavern

Is there a reason for vamp weapons to require Full?

Is there a reason for vamp weapons to require Full?

Re: Is there a reason for vamp weapons to require Full?

Re: Is there a reason for vamp weapons to require Full?

Re: Is there a reason for vamp weapons to require Full?

Re: Is there a reason for vamp weapons to require Full?

Re: Is there a reason for vamp weapons to require Full?

Re: Is there a reason for vamp weapons to require Full?

Re: Is there a reason for vamp weapons to require Full?

Re: Is there a reason for vamp weapons to require Full?

Re: Is there a reason for vamp weapons to require Full?

Re: Is there a reason for vamp weapons to require Full?

Re: Is there a reason for vamp weapons to require Full?

Re: Is there a reason for vamp weapons to require Full?

Re: Is there a reason for vamp weapons to require Full?

Re: Is there a reason for vamp weapons to require Full?

Re: Is there a reason for vamp weapons to require Full?

Re: Is there a reason for vamp weapons to require Full?

Re: Is there a reason for vamp weapons to require Full?

Re: Is there a reason for vamp weapons to require Full?

Re: Is there a reason for vamp weapons to require Full?

Re: Is there a reason for vamp weapons to require Full?

Re: Is there a reason for vamp weapons to require Full?