Proposal: Gnoll should be "simple" race


Although the central place for this kind of discussion is on the CDO wiki, some may find it helpful to discuss potential requests and suggestions here first.

Mines Malingerer

Posts: 30

Joined: Thursday, 24th May 2018, 16:47

Location: UK

Post Tuesday, 29th May 2018, 12:38

Proposal: Gnoll should be "simple" race

Hello,
currently Gnoll appears as an "intermediate" race. I suggest to move it to the "simple" column.

I understand that not being able to focus your most important skills is a problem for better players, but that's already something complete newbies may take a while to take advantage of. Moreover newbies tend to try lots of new things, and sometimes like a randart so much that they start training the corresponding skill from zero spreading their point to thinly.

So Gnolls are a great starting race: you can try anything you want (and Gnolls have no armor limitations), pick any spellbook and cast any new spell you find. If you find a nice randart you can switch to it. And so on: basically I think new player's strategy is naturally a good fit for Gnolls (and viceversa).

I'm not a great player (only finished twice: DrTm and GnFE, and got very far with GrEE) and yet I quickly mastered Gnoll and soon finished a game with it.

For this message the author Antares has received thanks: 8
duvessa, hannobal, Hellmonk, Majang, nago, sdynet, Stairdancer, VeryAngryFelid

Spider Stomper

Posts: 234

Joined: Thursday, 25th October 2012, 03:19

Post Tuesday, 29th May 2018, 22:47

Re: Proposal: Gnoll should be "simple" race

Not to confuse the matter, I agree with you - except I feel that for experienced players, the not being able to focus skills isn't really much of a problem. It's outweighed by the enormous aptitudes and getting synergy out of having a bit of everything. Gnolls feel pretty easy to me *and* they are simple.

For this message the author svendre has received thanks: 2
Hellmonk, nago

Blades Runner

Posts: 539

Joined: Saturday, 12th December 2015, 23:54

Post Tuesday, 29th May 2018, 23:50

Re: Proposal: Gnoll should be "simple" race

I have Gn as the 5th best species in the game fwiw
Remove spell hunger.

For this message the author Hellmonk has received thanks:
nago

Temple Termagant

Posts: 8

Joined: Wednesday, 6th January 2016, 05:10

Post Wednesday, 30th May 2018, 03:19

Re: Proposal: Gnoll should be "simple" race

I probably agree with your main point more than I disagree with it, but I'm not sure winning one game with gnoll counts as mastery.
User avatar

Ziggurat Zagger

Posts: 3961

Joined: Wednesday, 23rd October 2013, 07:56

Post Wednesday, 30th May 2018, 06:38

Re: Proposal: Gnoll should be "simple" race

Hellmonk wrote:I have Gn as the 5th best species in the game fwiw

Gn is my best species with 1/1=100% wins :)
HOFEMDHeHuReMDHuHOCjDsHuNaCjHuHuSENeGEFEMDBeDDFiHOWzVpVMHuEEHEMoDEHuDDAsHaBeKoAK
CeVMMfWnMiAKTeAMDrIEFoVMVSFiMuVMGhGlVpMoHaWrSpWzOgGlTrMoCeWnMfBeMiSkDrEEGrFiFoGlDgEnFeNe
OpGlHuSuDDArHaCKSpAEGrTmDgFEDsCjGhMoHuVMHaAMBaEnHuMoHOWnDsWzDDHuDgWnGnBeFeIEMiEnMfCj

For this message the author Sprucery has received thanks:
nago

Mines Malingerer

Posts: 30

Joined: Thursday, 24th May 2018, 16:47

Location: UK

Post Wednesday, 30th May 2018, 09:41

Re: Proposal: Gnoll should be "simple" race

Pekkekke wrote:I probably agree with your main point more than I disagree with it, but I'm not sure winning one game with gnoll counts as mastery.

Fine. What's a good word for "I don't die before Lair and get consistently to Swamp/Pit"? Anyway this seems OT, and more of a lawyery point.

Ziggurat Zagger

Posts: 5640

Joined: Tuesday, 30th October 2012, 19:06

Post Wednesday, 30th May 2018, 16:27

Re: Proposal: Gnoll should be "simple" race

So the current definition of "basic" isnt "powerful" but rather "doesn't have any complications which make it an unusual race to play"

In terms of its *typicalness* gnolls are not basic, but, particularly in regards to the early game they have a lot of simplicity, you dont have to think about what to train, can use anything you come across, and are above the power curve at least through the lair (probably a bit beyond)

Some additional complexity arises in that your lack of specialization means making decisions about which spells to memorize, and which equipment to use is more complicated, but i think by in large that is balanced by the simplicity around training.

So the real question is do we want the racial categories to represent ease of play, or typicalness of play.
Spoiler: show
This high quality signature has been hidden for your protection. To unlock it's secret, send 3 easy payments of $9.99 to me, by way of your nearest theta band or ley line. Complete your transmission by midnight tonight for a special free gift!

Mines Malingerer

Posts: 30

Joined: Thursday, 24th May 2018, 16:47

Location: UK

Post Wednesday, 30th May 2018, 20:40

Re: Proposal: Gnoll should be

Siegurt wrote:So the current definition of "basic" isnt "powerful" but rather "doesn't have any complications which make it an unusual race to play"

In terms of its *typicalness* gnolls are not basic, but, particularly in regards to the early game they have a lot of simplicity, you dont have to think about what to train, can use anything you come across, and are above the power curve at least through the lair (probably a bit beyond)

I agree with your definitions. But I think what you (an expert player) consider typical is not a concept that a beginner would understand. Because it doesn't force the player to make and commit to choices that they hardly understand, e.g. choosing between different weapon types or how to divide XPs among skills, it's a simpler race to play.

In comparison to Gnolls, Draconians seem a lot harder to use, imho. For a start you never know which colour you will get. Moreover Draconians can't use either armor or helmets, giving the character less slots that could offer protections (not to mention DrTm that would also lose protections from unique weapons, gloves, or shields). Finally there's more things for players to learn to use, like the breath attack.

So aside from Gnolls being powerful, my main point is that they are both simple and a especially well matched to beginner players who don't know what is and isn't typical in dcss.

For this message the author Antares has received thanks:
Pekkekke

Ziggurat Zagger

Posts: 5640

Joined: Tuesday, 30th October 2012, 19:06

Post Thursday, 31st May 2018, 06:12

Re: Proposal: Gnoll should be

Antares wrote:
Siegurt wrote:So the current definition of "basic" isnt "powerful" but rather "doesn't have any complications which make it an unusual race to play"

In terms of its *typicalness* gnolls are not basic, but, particularly in regards to the early game they have a lot of simplicity, you dont have to think about what to train, can use anything you come across, and are above the power curve at least through the lair (probably a bit beyond)

I agree with your definitions. But I think what you (an expert player) consider typical is not a concept that a beginner would understand. Because it doesn't force the player to make and commit to choices that they hardly understand, e.g. choosing between different weapon types or how to divide XPs among skills, it's a simpler race to play.

In comparison to Gnolls, Draconians seem a lot harder to use, imho. For a start you never know which colour you will get. Moreover Draconians can't use either armor or helmets, giving the character less slots that could offer protections (not to mention DrTm that would also lose protections from unique weapons, gloves, or shields). Finally there's more things for players to learn to use, like the breath attack.

So aside from Gnolls being powerful, my main point is that they are both simple and a especially well matched to beginner players who don't know what is and isn't typical in dcss.


I'm not especially arguing that "expected-ness" is the *best* measure of what should go in that category, I'm just saying that that's how things are now.

I think it's perfectly reasonably to argue that "easiest to play" (in either powerful-ness or less-decision-ness varieties) should be the measure of what goes in the 'simple' category, and was attempting to clarify that shifting the type of criteria used would make gnolls fit naturally into the category of "simple"
Spoiler: show
This high quality signature has been hidden for your protection. To unlock it's secret, send 3 easy payments of $9.99 to me, by way of your nearest theta band or ley line. Complete your transmission by midnight tonight for a special free gift!

For this message the author Siegurt has received thanks:
Antares

Return to Game Design Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Berder, PseudoLoneWolf, Stonar and 5 guests

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by ST Software for PTF.