Ravenous God


Although the central place for design discussion is ##crawl-dev on freenode, some may find it helpful to discuss requests and suggestions here first.

Mines Malingerer

Posts: 42

Joined: Friday, 17th February 2012, 20:13

Post Thursday, 22nd March 2012, 21:47

Ravenous God

When reading the Werebeast thread it struck me that Lycanthropy would be pretty sweet as a God ability. Given that Crawl also has yet to implement a god of gluttony and strongly dislike the food system as it stand, this is what came to mind. Would it work ingame? If not, how can it be improved upon?

Ravenous God (name pending)

General theme is close to that the Fenrir Wolf of Norse myth - a gargauntuan wolf, bound by the gods to prevent it from eating the world. Feeds off the souls of those worshipping it, in return imparting in them them part of its essence, thus allowing them to consume the body and souls of their enemies in turn. Dog-eat-dog-eat-everything-else if you will.

Gameplay theme is subverting the food system and lycanthropy - the god disdains the player character eating ordinary foods. Instead, when the player character is at very hungry or more it transforms (melding all non-ring/amulet slots) into a demon wolf itself. It can then regain satiety by killing enemies in close combat (by devouring their bodies, souls, essence, the lot of it - even undead and demons). Once the player becomes engorged he reverts back to his ordinary from and scores piety from doing so. With raising piety the wolf form not only becomes stronger in close combat; it also gains an enchanced sense of smell (See Invisible), purity of purpose (Clarity), implacable will (protection from paralyzation) and ravenous Hunger of its patron Deity. Note that the player character actually benefits from fast metabolism, as it allows it to spend more time in wolf form as well as rack up piety quicker. This also means that wielding a ring og hunger becomes beneficial for non-spellcaster characters as they need to burn off the extra satiety before being able to gain piety again. It also means that the player will rapidly starve to death (and get eaten..) should he go for too long without killing anything.

This god should be suitable for mage/druid style characters who want to play high level spells with a low spellcraft skill in in order to abuse spell hunger - fling a few high level spells, then turn into a beast and kill stuff in close combat until mana and satiety has been regained. Of course, Trolls and characters running out of permafood would also benefit from being able to eat all enemies instead of only those dropping corpses.

Short description:

Ravenous God

Gains Piety: Player becoming engorged in beast form (reverting them back to their original one)
Loses Piety: Player eating ordinary food, characters in beast form killing enemies by other means than close combat, naturally over time

Abilities at Piety level:
0 - Soul Hunger, Spirit Gorge, Skill Relocation, Teeth 1, Fangs 1, Fur 1, Fast Movement 1 in beast form, killing enemies in close combat whilst in beast form may regain hp/mp, constant Fast Metabolism 1
* - See Invisible (beast form), Fast Metabolism 2
** - Teeth 2, Fangs 2, Fur 2, Fast Movement 2 (beast form)
*** - Clarity (beast form), Fast Metabolism 3
**** - Teeth 3, Fangs 3, Fur 3, Fast Movement 3 (beast form)
***** - Paralysation Resistance (beast form)
****** - Devour (beast form)

Explanations:

Soul Hunger - Whenever the player is at very hungry or more satiety it transforms into a werewolf (proper werewolf - quadriplegic and nary an opposable thumb to be seen) - no slots except (2) rings and amulets and no weapons or item usage except scrolls or potions (same as Felids). Spellcasting is unhindered.

Spirit Gorge - The player gains satiety from killing enemies in close combat (not sure about amount). No need for butchering corpses - player eats them alive, body and soul.

Skill relocation - when in beast form the players unarmed combat skill is equal to their highest weapon skill (to allow for some flexibility)

Devour - passive chance of instantly killing any enemy attacked in close combat (swallowing them whole)
Last edited by Infinitum on Thursday, 22nd March 2012, 23:33, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar

Tartarus Sorceror

Posts: 1729

Joined: Wednesday, 19th October 2011, 21:25

Location: New England.

Post Thursday, 22nd March 2012, 22:57

Re: Ravenous God

It seems like casting high level offensive spells to weaken up monsters wouldn't work if the god doesn't like killing in any way but in beast form. Maybe casting buffs would work for the spell hunger but many casters don't have very high weapon skill.
What made you happy today?
Shatari wrote:I traded a goat for a Nintendo DS XL, and a ton of games.
User avatar

Dungeon Master

Posts: 332

Joined: Friday, 15th July 2011, 22:43

Post Thursday, 22nd March 2012, 23:00

Re: Ravenous God

I feel like a hunger/food god could be a great opportunity to use the piety mechanic differently from other gods -- most gods, you build up your piety to ****** and try to stay there with most gods, maybe dropping one or two stars with invocations now and then depending on who you have, but generally you take the time to "earn" a god's favor and then keep it as best you can.

What if you had a god who you can gain piety with very rapidly, but also lose very rapidly -- it would feel more like going into a "state" of high piety from time to time, but it would have to be a state that you can't really maintain for more than a couple hundred turns? I feel like that could gel with the ideas you are presenting here.

Like what if you could use an invocation to burn satiation (very) rapidly for piety? And the amount of satiation you get back for killing is small -- enough to maintain the player in a "hungering beast" state for just a little while?

Mines Malingerer

Posts: 42

Joined: Friday, 17th February 2012, 20:13

Post Thursday, 22nd March 2012, 23:30

Re: Ravenous God

Jabberwocky wrote:It seems like casting high level offensive spells to weaken up monsters wouldn't work if the god doesn't like killing in any way but in beast form. Maybe casting buffs would work for the spell hunger but many casters don't have very high weapon skill.


It's poorly worded, but this restriction wouldn't apply to players not in beastform. Editing now, thanks.

Spider Stomper

Posts: 195

Joined: Monday, 25th April 2011, 20:48

Post Friday, 23rd March 2012, 02:53

Re: Ravenous God

So what stops players from mashing 5 until beastform whenever they find a tough monster?

Blades Runner

Posts: 546

Joined: Monday, 20th December 2010, 14:25

Post Friday, 23rd March 2012, 03:45

Re: Ravenous God

Good flavor!

Riffing on the previous comment....

However, it might be boring to wait for hunger to set to to become more powerful. Consider some mechanism to ensure that this doesn't happen. (Vomiting?! hehehe.) Even with fast metabolism 3, going from engorged hungry or whatnot might take a while. It would be cool to have rings of hunger become the most powerful item for Fenririst.

Mines Malingerer

Posts: 42

Joined: Friday, 17th February 2012, 20:13

Post Friday, 23rd March 2012, 11:04

Re: Ravenous God

Well, they would have to waste precious turns finding the enemy whilst the food clock is ticking, and resting uninterrupted is not always an option. Maybe just add some more downsides to being in beast form (other than not having access to weapons/armor/wands), alernatively giving some small amount of piety for killing in non-beast mode in conjunction with accelerating the piety loss over time (this removes flavor though).

Another idea is to remove spell hunger from supplicants and balance this by being permanently silenced in beastform due to not being able to talk (and include the highest magic skill in skill relocation). This would mean the optimal conjurer of [god] is one that mostly ignores spellcasting and can afford to power spam whatever nuke they have access to early and still be able to tear shit up when going into beast mode. It'd also mean that beast mode would be very dangerous to be in since it cuts off most escape options as well as carrying the risk of starving to death. This could be enough to influence player behaviour as it'd make exploration safer out of beast. It'd also mean that spellcasters wouldn't be able to enter or prolong beast voluntarily through spamming spells which is a net positive I think. Simularily, I'm not sure about adding satiation-dumping abilities as Lycanthropy should be difficult to control voluntarily imo (without spell or item hunger the player is reduced to rings of hunger/satiation, which imo is enough).

It goes without mention that balancing this would be a bitch though.

Dungeon Master

Posts: 1531

Joined: Saturday, 5th March 2011, 06:29

Post Friday, 23rd March 2012, 11:52

Re: Ravenous God

Great stuff, this is exactly the kind of thing I was thinking with my "wolf god" suggestion. The Fenrir mythology is pretty neat. The "bound" idea is already occupied by Ashenzari but that's only a reflavouring problem.

I think roctavian's suggestion has a lot of merit - it really emphasises the idea that you are having to continually "feed" the god to maintain piety.

Some comments about abilities:

Soul Hunger: As I said in the werewolf thread, transforming when hungry makes a lot of sense. But making this available basically for free at 0 piety I'm not sure about, it sounds a lot more powerful than the abilities other gods give you to start out, especially alongside Skill Relocation! But if you ensure the 0 piety form is strictly weaker than the player then balance is ok, you'll need to make kills in a disadvantaged situation to gain the piety for a more powerful form.

Spirit Gorge: I'd change this to just "soul consumption" rather than body as well, otherwise you have a hard time justifying why you don't hit Engorged after about two kills. Also leaving no corpses ever is problematic for some characters that might want them for necromancy, unless you flavour this god as against necromancy entirely. I also can't help but think that consuming something's soul should give a benefit other than just satiety, but of course MP or HP would mechanically be identical to numerous gods' passive abilities.

Skill Relocation: I think this is too much. It means your best option is to switch off Unarmed entirely and just train a primary weapon skill. This way you can use the weapon in normal form and unarmed in wereform, effectively getting two skills for the price of one, which is a huge XP saving. If someone is choosing to take this god, they should be aware that they'll need to invest in Unarmed alongside their non-were skills. The god will gel particularly well with transmuters and monks who are training unarmed anyway. Question: What about Transmutation forms, presumably they should be prevented whilst Soul Hunger is active?

Paralysation Resistance: The connection to the theme seems ... tenuous!

Devour: Passive = boring, Instakill = ridiculously overpowered. The player should already get auxiliary attacks in wereform anyway which will be a decent damage bonus. At full piety I'd expect either just some supercharged version of wereform, and/or the ability to change at will instead of only when hungry.

What also seems strange is that a "food god" would encourage you to never use up permafood. Not in terms of flavour - in terms of mechanics. Let me clarify: this facet would let you to store up permafood throughout the whole game, and switch to a different god late-game. This could be Nemelex to sacrifice all that food for instant Decks of Wonder. Or Fedhas to abuse all that fruit. Or any god, and you just want a neverending pile of permafood to do some of the more foodless areas of the game. This could be seen as an additional option given to you by worshipping this god. But I think it would be more interesting if worshipping this god pretty much forced you to consume all permafood, then switching to another god would be a much weightier decision. Wrath could include satiation sapping, and cancelling forms. This would make the wolf god's wrath the most relevant and least broken in the game - you can't just wait it out, you have to continually kill and eat and find permafood. The idea of a "ravenous" god kind of implies eating anything and everything anyway. So perhaps permafood should give no satiety, but a significant amount of piety. You can get the extra satiety you need from kills, and then balance piety so the player wants to top it up using most permafood that you find.

Some new ability ideas:

Scent Hound / Scent of the Hunt: I was about to add this idea in the Werewolf thread but let's throw it in here. With this ability, whilst in wereform you have an incredibly powerful sense of smell, and can "see" the scent trails left by monsters as they move around. Perhaps some types of monster or unique would leave a particularly recognisable scent that you can detect. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scenthound

Blood Curdling Howl: Very loud, causes short-lived fear/paralysis in anyone who hears it, but will of course draw attention to your location.

Feast of the Victorious: In wereform you can eat corpses directly without butchering. Overall takes less turns and gives better satiation than butchering and eating, added bonus you can do it mid-fight if necessary.

The name:

For some reason "Gorgagol" crept to mind, take it or leave it ;)

Dungeon Master

Posts: 1531

Joined: Saturday, 5th March 2011, 06:29

Post Friday, 23rd March 2012, 12:17

Re: Ravenous God

Infinitum wrote:Well, they would have to waste precious turns finding the enemy whilst the food clock is ticking, and resting uninterrupted is not always an option. Maybe just add some more downsides to being in beast form (other than not having access to weapons/armor/wands), alernatively giving some small amount of piety for killing in non-beast mode in conjunction with accelerating the piety loss over time (this removes flavor though).

Another idea is to remove spell hunger from supplicants and balance this by being permanently silenced in beastform due to not being able to talk (and include the highest magic skill in skill relocation). This would mean the optimal conjurer of [god] is one that mostly ignores spellcasting and can afford to power spam whatever nuke they have access to early and still be able to tear shit up when going into beast mode. It'd also mean that beast mode would be very dangerous to be in since it cuts off most escape options as well as carrying the risk of starving to death. This could be enough to influence player behaviour as it'd make exploration safer out of beast. It'd also mean that spellcasters wouldn't be able to enter or prolong beast voluntarily through spamming spells which is a net positive I think. Simularily, I'm not sure about adding satiation-dumping abilities as Lycanthropy should be difficult to control voluntarily imo (without spell or item hunger the player is reduced to rings of hunger/satiation, which imo is enough).

It goes without mention that balancing this would be a bitch though.


Instead of "on demand" satiation dumping, how about: All Satiation loss converts to piety, multiplied by some balancing ratio.

I'm not sure if this will work, at this point I'm just thinking out loud and analysing the consequences:

  • Simply standing around waiting might gain you piety - slowly, because you are also losing piety over time; or you could just make them cancel out so no piety gain at all. But you would have to consume permafood to do so anyway. Mechanically this is just satiation dumping but more boring, so it's not very good.
  • A ring of hunger gains you piety much more quickly, because the over time loss has less impact
  • Trolls have a natural advantage. You could increase the piety over time loss for them if this is a problem.
  • Spamming high hunger spells, certain evocables, vampiric brand, can all get you decent piety
  • Encourages keeping low Spellcasting for the hunger costs
  • Discourages Lich Form

Analysis: achieves the intended effects (consume permafood, feed the god, redefine the food clock). However it's encouraging certain Victory Dancing-esque patterns which aren't remotely defensible. So overall I don't think it's a good idea, still it's an interesting concept.

How this god will interact with some other species needs defining in any case ... I'm talking here about Ghouls, Vampires and Mummies. I haven't really played these races so I don't know enough to comment. The easy solution is to disallow the god for problematic races. The easy way to do that is to say "no undead" which I guess would tie neatly into the necromancy thing I mentioned before. It positions this god as another "nature-aligned" god alongside Fedhas.

Mines Malingerer

Posts: 42

Joined: Friday, 17th February 2012, 20:13

Post Friday, 23rd March 2012, 12:40

Re: Ravenous God

Soul Hunger: As I said in the werewolf thread, transforming when hungry makes a lot of sense. But making this available basically for free at 0 piety I'm not sure about, it sounds a lot more powerful than the abilities other gods give you to start out, especially alongside Skill Relocation! But if you ensure the 0 piety form is strictly weaker than the player then balance is ok, you'll need to make kills in a disadvantaged situation to gain the piety for a more powerful form.


Don't forget that if the player doesn't kill stuff whilst transformed he'll starve to death in short order. That pretty much rules out running away/resting for extended periods which justifies the power surge somewhat from a mechanics standpoint.

Spirit Gorge: I'd change this to just "soul consumption" rather than body as well, otherwise you have a hard time justifying why you don't hit Engorged after about two kills. Also leaving no corpses ever is problematic for some characters that might want them for necromancy, unless you flavour this god as against necromancy entirely. I also can't help but think that consuming something's soul should give a benefit other than just satiety, but of course MP or HP would mechanically be identical to numerous gods' passive abilities.


Oh, it wouldn't need to eat all of the body. Just enough to get to the good parts. Think chunks strewn all over the place a la disintegration =). Justifying is the easy part though as it's supernatural hunger, especially considering the crawl food clock is out of whack anyhow. MP/HP is boring, but something like it is probably needed since resting is dangerous.

Skill Relocation: I think this is too much. It means your best option is to switch off Unarmed entirely and just train a primary weapon skill. This way you can use the weapon in normal form and unarmed in wereform, effectively getting two skills for the price of one, which is a huge XP saving. If someone is choosing to take this god, they should be aware that they'll need to invest in Unarmed alongside their non-were skills. The god will gel particularly well with transmuters and monks who are training unarmed anyway. Question: What about Transmutation forms, presumably they should be prevented whilst Soul Hunger is active?


It'd allow for a wider variety of characters to worship the god (especially with permasilence in beast form). From a flavor standpoint, fighting with your jaws doesn't translate to martial arts either; it's just a game convention we've gotten used to. In any case, it wouldn't be like training 2 skills simultaneously since you would only be able to use one of them at any given time.

Paralysation Resistance: The connection to the theme seems ... tenuous!


Well, it's to go with See Invisible and Clarity: you cannot hide from [god], you cannot throw him off his track and you cannot slow him down. Maybe just provide stasis to keep in line with the crawl naming convention should we decide not to allow consumables in beast form.

Devour: Passive = boring, Instakill = ridiculously overpowered. The player should already get auxiliary attacks in wereform anyway which will be a decent damage bonus. At full piety I'd expect either just some supercharged version of wereform, and/or the ability to change at will instead of only when hungry.

What also seems strange is that a "food god" would encourage you to never use up permafood. [...]


Well, eating outside beast form already bears a hidden piety cost. How about having food/chunks provide progressively smaller amounts of nourishment as you gain piety, symbolising the player becoming less a being of flesh and blood and more of a living avatar of hunger? It'd also force the player to eat more food overall should they want to backtrack.

Some new ability ideas: [...]
They're not bad, but the tracking conflicts with Ash a bit, and I think it's better flavor to avoid Invocations altogether with this god (you worship him by eating, he only cares for you eating, not much more to it really). That said, with being otherwise functionally perma-berserked a few abilities could probably be in order to ease the tedium in beast form.. hum.

Dungeon Master

Posts: 1531

Joined: Saturday, 5th March 2011, 06:29

Post Friday, 23rd March 2012, 13:43

Re: Ravenous God

Infinitum wrote:
Soul Hunger: As I said in the werewolf thread, transforming when hungry makes a lot of sense. But making this available basically for free at 0 piety I'm not sure about, it sounds a lot more powerful than the abilities other gods give you to start out, especially alongside Skill Relocation! But if you ensure the 0 piety form is strictly weaker than the player then balance is ok, you'll need to make kills in a disadvantaged situation to gain the piety for a more powerful form.


Don't forget that if the player doesn't kill stuff whilst transformed he'll starve to death in short order. That pretty much rules out running away/resting for extended periods which justifies the power surge somewhat from a mechanics standpoint.


There's plenty of stuff the player can easily kill (rats, snakes, hobgoblins) so I don't think that's a serious threat. You're giving the player Fast Movement for doing nothing except praying at an altar - this is game breaking.

Infinitum wrote:
Spirit Gorge: I'd change this to just "soul consumption" rather than body as well, otherwise you have a hard time justifying why you don't hit Engorged after about two kills. Also leaving no corpses ever is problematic for some characters that might want them for necromancy, unless you flavour this god as against necromancy entirely. I also can't help but think that consuming something's soul should give a benefit other than just satiety, but of course MP or HP would mechanically be identical to numerous gods' passive abilities.


Oh, it wouldn't need to eat all of the body. Just enough to get to the good parts. Think chunks strewn all over the place a la disintegration =). Justifying is the easy part though as it's supernatural hunger, especially considering the crawl food clock is out of whack anyhow. MP/HP is boring, but something like it is probably needed since resting is dangerous.


What do you mean by "the crawl food clock is out of whack" - can you elaborate on this? It's an area of the game that receives particular attention when it comes to tuning and balance.

I think on the 3rd level of wereform it'd be fun to sometimes have enemies chunked a la disintegration, but for a 0-piety and low-power ability it might seem a little ridiculous. Insta-chunking you have to be slightly moderate with because of Sublimation and Simulacra spells, it's a very useful tool for necromancers. (And conversely, you want to leave some corpses intact for other necromancy spells)

Infinitum wrote:
Skill Relocation: I think this is too much. It means your best option is to switch off Unarmed entirely and just train a primary weapon skill. This way you can use the weapon in normal form and unarmed in wereform, effectively getting two skills for the price of one, which is a huge XP saving. If someone is choosing to take this god, they should be aware that they'll need to invest in Unarmed alongside their non-were skills. The god will gel particularly well with transmuters and monks who are training unarmed anyway. Question: What about Transmutation forms, presumably they should be prevented whilst Soul Hunger is active?


It'd allow for a wider variety of characters to worship the god (especially with permasilence in beast form). From a flavor standpoint, fighting with your jaws doesn't translate to martial arts either; it's just a game convention we've gotten used to. In any case, it wouldn't be like training 2 skills simultaneously since you would only be able to use one of them at any given time.


Which characters in particular are unable to worship this god? Anyone can train Unarmed if they like. Some characters might have a better starting aptitude, but that's all it is - an aptitude. A player choosing this god should be prepared to invest in Unarmed. Anyhow, not all gods should be suitable for all characters.

I don't like permasilence ... werewolves should howl and make all kinds of noise. Lack of scrolls is a serious disability.

Other creatures that fight with their jaws use Unarmed. The definition of Unarmed is "without a weapon", not "martial arts".

It's exactly like training 2 skills simultaneously, because that is literally what it is. In normal form you can swap between a weapon and unarmed; you can cast other transmutations and use unarmed. It's only in wereform that you're restricted to the one skill.

Infinitum wrote:
Paralysation Resistance: The connection to the theme seems ... tenuous!


Well, it's to go with See Invisible and Clarity: you cannot hide from [god], you cannot throw him off his track and you cannot slow him down. Maybe just provide stasis to keep in line with the crawl naming convention should we decide not to allow consumables in beast form.


I somehow didn't notice See Invisible and Clarity on my first read. This is nullifying is a hefty trilogy of dungeon threats. Personally I think See Invisible is the only one you can justify from the theme of "wolf" and none of them are justified from the theme of "food". I think the smell ability is better "tracking" flavour and it provides See Invisible capabilities in a new way - you might be able to detect invisible monsters from their smell trail. This is more interesting than See Invisible, which already has numerous sources. Also, with smell tracking you told me I'm stepping on Ashenzari territory ... umm ... aren't See Invisible and Clarity actually Ashenzari abilities?

Infinitum wrote:
What also seems strange is that a "food god" would encourage you to never use up permafood. [...]


Well, eating outside beast form already bears a hidden piety cost. How about having food/chunks provide progressively smaller amounts of nourishment as you gain piety, symbolising the player becoming less a being of flesh and blood and more of a living avatar of hunger? It'd also force the player to eat more food overall should they want to backtrack.


This could work. Alternatively, piety gain is inversely proportional to how hungry you are.

Infinitum wrote:
Some new ability ideas: [...]
They're not bad, but the tracking conflicts with Ash a bit, and I think it's better flavor to avoid Invocations altogether with this god (you worship him by eating, he only cares for you eating, not much more to it really). That said, with being otherwise functionally perma-berserked a few abilities could probably be in order to ease the tedium in beast form.. hum.


It might conflict slightly but it's certainly not remotely the same as any of Ash's abilities, and interestingly it requires a level of thought on the part of the player to interpret the trails and make use of them. Smelling is themed very well to wolves, tracking, and eating thing (following the sweet scent of food...). Have you heard the research about how 80% of what we taste is actually smell?

I don't really see the problem with invocations, it's just calling on your deity for specific help, it's not "worship" ... and it's an important XP tax to factor into deity decisions (there are very few gods that don't require it). I think there should also be a high-piety "werewolf now" invocation; basically by maximising piety you completely subvert the food clock.

"otherwise functionally perma-berserked" - this is a bad way to be angling your proposal (and currently, it's a pretty accurate statement). If you want a berserker, go Trog. The weregod should try to offer a really distinct and different playstyle to anything else you can find in Crawl.
User avatar

Abyss Ambulator

Posts: 1249

Joined: Sunday, 18th September 2011, 02:11

Post Friday, 23rd March 2012, 14:44

Re: Ravenous God

Sounds interesting, but very similar to this 'God of the Wilds' proposal:
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=715

A merge of the two ideas might be appropriate.
User avatar

Ziggurat Zagger

Posts: 5832

Joined: Thursday, 10th February 2011, 18:30

Post Friday, 23rd March 2012, 15:06

Re: Ravenous God

Blade wrote:Sounds interesting, but very similar to this 'God of the Wilds' proposal:
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=715

A merge of the two ideas might be appropriate.



This is why I think it might be prudent for someone to go into the Gods section of the wiki and grab all the "concepts" and put them into one big page to "pick and choose" to build a god from, rather than bundle them as a single god.
"Be aware that a lot of people on this forum, such as mageykun and XuaXua, have a habit of making things up." - minmay a.k.a. duvessa
Did I make a lame complaint? Check for Bingo!
Totally gracious CSDC Season 2 Division 4 Champeen!

Dungeon Master

Posts: 1531

Joined: Saturday, 5th March 2011, 06:29

Post Friday, 23rd March 2012, 15:19

Re: Ravenous God

Blade wrote:Sounds interesting, but very similar to this 'God of the Wilds' proposal:
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=715

A merge of the two ideas might be appropriate.


There are some very similar themes. Personally, I prefer the overall theme and relative simplicity of the werewolf god. Basically I don't see anything different in the Wilds god proposal that I think would improve this proposal by merging it. (Although it's pretty long and I may have missed stuff, also the wiki version might be slightly different: https://crawl.develz.org/wiki/doku.php?id=dcss:brainstorm:god:propose:wild_beasts_god, if there were specific points about the Wilds god that you were thinking of, tell us which!)

I noticed jpeg said in that thread that 'G' is off-limits for a god name so that scuppers my suggestion :P

Mines Malingerer

Posts: 42

Joined: Friday, 17th February 2012, 20:13

Post Friday, 23rd March 2012, 15:48

Re: Ravenous God

It isn't a god of Wolves (or any other beast) though; it's a primal aspect of hunger. The wolf just happens to be associated with gluttony in northern europe. One example is that the Fenris Wolf in mythology ends up eating the god of wars left hand, the father of the gods and the sun before being put down. Another good one would be the wolf in little red riding hood. Or the proverb "thrown to the Wolves"? That one is founded on an old belief that the only way to shake a pack of hungry wolves in pursuit is to leave someone behind to get eaten (preferrably toddlers).

@Mumra: Again, the Clarity/Stasis is to enforce the player as implacable, primal hunger. And also to somewhat reduce the gameplay tedium of constantly swapping rings/amulet to match encounters.

Dungeon Master

Posts: 1531

Joined: Saturday, 5th March 2011, 06:29

Post Friday, 23rd March 2012, 16:11

Re: Ravenous God

Infinitum wrote:It isn't a god of Wolves (or any other beast) though; it's a primal aspect of hunger. The wolf just happens to be associated with gluttony in northern europe. One example is that the Fenris Wolf in mythology ends up eating the god of wars left hand, the father of the gods and the sun before being put down. Another good one would be the wolf in little red riding hood. Or the proverb "thrown to the Wolves"? That one is founded on an old belief that the only way to shake a pack of hungry wolves in pursuit is to leave someone behind to get eaten (preferrably toddlers).

@Mumra: Again, the Clarity/Stasis is to enforce the player as implacable, primal hunger. And also to somewhat reduce the gameplay tedium of constantly swapping rings/amulet to match encounters.


Good point, I hadn't really thought about the intrinsic wolf/hunger connection, it just seemed to me that the themes worked well together; that connection makes the overall theme really very coherent.

I can kind of make the jump from there to Clarity/Stasis, although I'm not convinced. But it's still the case that See Invisible/Clarity are Ashenzari boons; and Stasis doesn't just prevent paralysis, it also stops teleportation, hasting, and probably some other effects that I forget. Also, what you describe as "gameplay tedium" is actually something that makes the game much more interesting and therefore fun!
User avatar

Abyss Ambulator

Posts: 1249

Joined: Sunday, 18th September 2011, 02:11

Post Friday, 23rd March 2012, 16:13

Re: Ravenous God

I can't think specifically of any ideas from the God of the Wilds that should transfer; I just thought that it would be good for you guys to be aware of its existence.

I think that this idea has a lot of potential and I hope that something comes of it, although that may just be because I really, really like wolves. I don't have anything useful to say about it right now, though. So...yeah.

Mines Malingerer

Posts: 42

Joined: Friday, 17th February 2012, 20:13

Post Monday, 26th March 2012, 18:04

Re: Ravenous God

mumra wrote:I can kind of make the jump from there to Clarity/Stasis, although I'm not convinced. But it's still the case that See Invisible/Clarity are Ashenzari boons; and Stasis doesn't just prevent paralysis, it also stops teleportation, hasting, and probably some other effects that I forget. Also, what you describe as "gameplay tedium" is actually something that makes the game much more interesting and therefore fun!


Well, I tend to think in ZAngband terms where not having constant access to either rConfusion/Free Action tends to lead to quick, sudden death but since this isn't the case in crawl you might very well be right (and in any case vanilla resists are pretty boring).

Anyhow, did some further brainstorming to come up with unique gameplay ideas for abilities suitable for a god of hunger and got to thinking about instead of abilities themed around wolwes, why not embrace the star-eating badassness of the fenrir wolf and theme it partially around black holes? The imagery of a demonic wolf consisting of living, hungry void (or superdense matter, whatever) appeases me and it could make for some interesting abilities centered around gravity and eating light/magic/everything unlucky enough to get in base contact. It could also justify the Kirby school of gameplay where you eat your enemies for temporary gains and leave design space for a future god of beasts. Some musings in-point:

General:
*Character in non-beast form receive no bonuses except that spell hunger is removed (might be impossible to balance, but encourages casters to play the god despite not benefitting from beast form). As piety increases all food items give progressively less nutrition.
*Beast form gains some mutations improving damage in close combat (fangs, claws), sInv and maybe rMut (since these cannot be safely gained otherwise, see below).
*Meld ALL item slots in beast form (including Rings/Amulets). All mutations (including racial bonuses) are removed as well. Max HP is dependent only on fighting skill and character level. Player cannot cast spells or innate abilities (except god abiliites) nor "use" items in beast form.
*All enemies eaten upon being killed in close combat. Player can eat any item in inventory or on the ground (but not use them otherwise). Eating something restores health and may give a temporary resistance/bonus thematic to the object consumed (so a flaming weapon would confer rF+, Executioners confers Haste, Scrolls give their normal effect etc etc. Odds dependent on Piety). Only enemies provide satiation (or at least satiation above sated) however. This would pretty much force players to heavily adopt their playstyle from vanilla Crawl, which is a perk to me.
*Chance to resist all spells cast upon the players (including direct damage ones, odds rise with piety). As with items, this has a chance confers resistances themed to the spell.

Abilities:
(all of these would cost piety but not satiation to keep in theme with the spell hunger or allow the player to artificially prolong beast form)
*Gravital Pull: Pulls all objects and monsters on screen closer to the player. Somewhat similar to Chei's ability, but allows the beast to catch ranged enemies without relying on Haste.
*Absorb light: Devours all light around the player, darkening the screen a la the lantern of shadows and reducing LOS to a minimum. Escape button.
*Singularity Prison: Instantly removes an adjacent enemy (no xp nor loot rewarded). However, should the player become starving in beast mode the enemy (or enemies..) breaks free from within the players body and appears in an adjacent square. Another panic button that may or may not work out depending on if the player can release captured monsters under controlled circumstances or not.

EDIT: Oh yeah, retorts:

Which characters in particular are unable to worship this god? Anyone can train Unarmed if they like.


Anyone not using Unarmed combat exclusively. Whilst players -can- raise 2 weapon skills simultaneously, this is almost never optimal use of XP nobody will do so as long as the option of just sticking to one of them in all situations exist (barring fringe cases like 8 Shortblade for stabs etc). Limiting a god to only monks and transmuters doesn't make game design any favors.

Dungeon Master

Posts: 1531

Joined: Saturday, 5th March 2011, 06:29

Post Monday, 26th March 2012, 18:35

Re: Ravenous God

What I'm not sure about in this proposal is really what the overall intent is with relation to spellcasters. Here I'm not talking about primary spellcasters. This god clearly has an unarmed/melee focus. You simply wouldn't choose this god on a pure magic character.

The subversion of the food clock basically allows a character to keep their Spellcasting skill low; instead they can invest those points in another magic school, or in Unarmed. But by cancelling spell hunger, the character won't get hungry. So how are they going to go into beast mode?

I actually think this god could be perfect for hybrids. You can make yourself hungry by casting some mid-level buffs or hexes, that will drop you into beast form and you can take advantage of the spells you just cast. Feasting at the end of a battle puts you back into normal form and you're ready for the next bout. So I'm coming around to the idea of the spellcasting restriction in beast form; but I'd word it as "can't cast spells" rather than "silence" because an actual silence effect (i.e. it stopped other spellcasters as well) might be too much. I'd also still allow scrolls. However I don't see the intention with having no spell hunger.

Mines Malingerer

Posts: 42

Joined: Friday, 17th February 2012, 20:13

Post Monday, 26th March 2012, 19:07

Re: Ravenous God

Making it so that player's can't intentionally go into beast, basically. Not having full control over when the transformation occurs is more in line with lycanthropy as a trope imo, and encouraging players to wear rings of hunger is pretty amusing. As someone mentioned having to go from Engorged to Very Hungry before going on another rampage might be problematic, albeit either passively increasing the players metabolic rate or giving him more control over it (if not satiation directly) when in "human" form might help alleviate this. Granted the player could always opt mash 5 in non-beast form, but hopefully the disadvantages of beast and risk of starving to death/not having enough time to properly explore floors could help offset this somewhat.

The gameplay dynamic with spellcasters as I see it is to encourage players to put skillpoints into spells (but not spellcasting) for early access to spammable high level spells contrasted with prolonged periods where the player is (functionally) silenced (as opposed to beast being the last buff applied before every major battle). It could open up for some exciting, dynamic, binary gameplay. Also: potential savage, ridiculus, gamebreaking abuse. I prefer to look to the positive side of things though.

Spider Stomper

Posts: 216

Joined: Saturday, 25th December 2010, 20:02

Post Sunday, 1st April 2012, 16:42

Re: Ravenous God

There was a proposal way back on Sourceforge for a god of gluttony that required you to eat your kills all the way to and including the bones in order to sacrifice it to the eternally hungry god.

I can't remember the details now, but i recall back then thinking the level of detail that author put into it was exquisite.
The above post is for entertainment purposes only. If you think anything I ever say is backed by fact, or if you cite things I've said in any argument ever, you are insane.

Mines Malingerer

Posts: 42

Joined: Friday, 17th February 2012, 20:13

Post Monday, 2nd April 2012, 20:44

Re: Ravenous God

Looked around the Dev Wiki but none of the 2 glutton god proposals seemed all that fleshed out (the second has some good backstory tho)? Anyhow collected some loose ideas I had around the thread along with some feedback changes (thanks!). I'll probably post this on the Dev Wiki soonish when I get the energy to format it; any other glaring weaknesses in the design I should be aware of? Is "Ghaur" a good name for a God?

Tl;Dr:
* Turns into "Werewolf" when hungry, eat enemies to regain satiety, turn back at engorged. Food and Spell/Item hunger effects gets progressively smaller and are eventually removed entirely. Dislikes player manipulating foodclock through spell or item hunger; rings of hunger/satiety are OK.
* No equipment in beast form, but can eat enemies in beast form and items to gain their properties (resistances, swimming, flying etc) kirby style.
* No magic or ranged attacks in beast form, but gets a couple of activated abilities themed off black holes to deal with stuff instead.

  Code:
Ghaur

Background: Wolf/Black Hole/Void created from what was left of the nothingness that existed before the world was created.
Wants to eat creation in order to return to this primordial state. Will accomplish this by eating the souls of all living
beings and with them the gods themselves (tie-in to Jivya & TRJ). Currently imprisoned by said gods since they take oh so much
offense by this. Aren't worshipped as such; instead posesses willing supplicants, turning them into living avatars of
himself and granting them great power. Also eats their bodies and souls should they fail to sate his hunger with the essence
of everything else they come upon.

Altar:
* "Nothing" (visually represented by no character in the ASCII version, a white portal in tiles?)
* "You stand before an empty void"
* Not present in the temple, randomly spawns in the upper dungeon       

Piety Gain: Getting Engorged in beast form (reverting back), destroying the royal jelly (eating jivya..)
Piety Loss: Getting hungrier through spells/evocable items, Over time

0 Soul Hunger, Beast Form 1, Devour Essence 1
* Gravity Well
** Beast Form 2
*** Absorb Light, Devour Essence 2
**** Beast form 3
***** Swallow
****** Devour Essence 3

Soul Hunger (when not in beast form)

* Base metabolism rises with piety
* Food restore less nutrition with rising piety
* Progressively less spell/item hunger with rising piety
(These abilities maxes out at 100 piety, ending up at Troll level metabolism/No satiation from food/No spell or evoke Hunger)
* At "Very Hungry" turns into beast form

Beast Form

* Normal metabolic rate
* Melds all slots (including Amulets/rings)
* Aquired/racial mutations are disabled
* Set amount of HP depending solely on character level/fighting skill (as a troll of corresponding level)
* Uses highest weapon skill for attacks (unarmed formula)
* EV depending on dodge skill
* AC depending on armor skill
* Claws 1, 2, 3
* Jaws 1, 2, 3
* Fur 1, 2, 3
* +HP 10%, 20%, 30%
* +MR 1, 2, 3
* Cannot cast spells
* Cannot use items
* Fast Movement 1
* See Invisible
* Resist Mutation 3

Devour Essence
(active in beast form)
* Killed enemies are instantly devoured, replacing lost HP and having a chance of temporarily adding a related resistance
* Devoured enemies restores satiation
* Items may be eaten for effects: Armor/Weapons/Jewelry adds corresponding effects temporarily, scrolls and potions have their
usual effects (Enchant Scrolls temporarily adds to the players to hit/damage, curse scrolls damages the player). Wands zap the
player with between 1-current number of charges (teleport wands always teleport). Eaten items (including food) doesn't add satiation.
* Devour 1 can eat trees and wax walls, 2 can eat diggable walls, 3 can eat shatterable walls
* At "Engorged" Satiety reverts back into normal form

Activated Abilities (Beast Form)

Gravity Well - 1 Piety, 3 Mana
* Drags all enemies on screen closer to the caster (enemies ending this move above lava or deep water destroyed where suitable).

Absorb Light - 5 Piety, 6 Mana
* Darkens the current dungeon floor a la Lamp of Shadows for a couple dozen turns, turns player Invisible for the duration

Swallow - 10 Piety, 9 Mana
* Removes target adjacent enemy. Should the player ever drop down to starving satiety all swallowed enemies are released
simultaneously.
Last edited by Infinitum on Monday, 2nd April 2012, 22:24, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar

Ziggurat Zagger

Posts: 5832

Joined: Thursday, 10th February 2011, 18:30

Post Monday, 2nd April 2012, 22:01

Re: Ravenous God

IronJelly wrote:There was a proposal way back on Sourceforge for a god of gluttony that required you to eat your kills all the way to and including the bones in order to sacrifice it to the eternally hungry god.

I can't remember the details now, but i recall back then thinking the level of detail that author put into it was exquisite.


It's probably in the gods section of the developer wiki with the other 2-3 gluttony god proposals.
"Be aware that a lot of people on this forum, such as mageykun and XuaXua, have a habit of making things up." - minmay a.k.a. duvessa
Did I make a lame complaint? Check for Bingo!
Totally gracious CSDC Season 2 Division 4 Champeen!

Dungeon Master

Posts: 1531

Joined: Saturday, 5th March 2011, 06:29

Post Tuesday, 3rd April 2012, 22:12

Re: Ravenous God

I'll be honest, I think the proposal as it stands has some really fundamental problems. I still love the core concept - but the mechanics just don't seem coherent and I can't imagine how this would be a fun game experience. A god that on a whim removes all your armour, resistances, along with any access to any magic or magical items ... leaving you in such a debilitated state that you are forced to eat your own items just to claw back some of those resistances / status ... and preventing you from leaving that state until you either kill something or eat permafood and damage your piety ... basically sounds like some sort of cruel trickster god, and we already have one of them!

This is partly my fault: I suggested in that other thread you should be beastlike when you're more hungry. That works for a werewolf mutation, because it's supposed to have a slightly cruel aspect. But for a god ability I just don't think it works as a defining aspect, and you have to throw in all this other things to try and balance it.

What I think does work is if being full turns you into a beast. For a start, this just fits better with a god fixated around eating everything - you should want to constantly fill up with food to please your god.

I also think there should be stages of beast form at different hunger levels. Each stage is slightly more restricted but more powerful. The power of those forms also goes up with piety. With each stage your satiation level decreases faster - so it's very hard to maintain Engorged where you have the strongest beast form. You have to constantly kill and eat to stay that way. Resting and healing up fully will probably kick you most of the way back down to normal form. [b]However[b], you are permitted to eat even when Engorged - the food is fed directly to the god - and you gain piety for this.

Some thoughts on other aspects of your proposal:

I don't see why jewellery should be melded - this basically removes any ability to resist anything in the game, except via extremely rare potions. You've proposed "item eating" presumably to mitigate this issue. But there are very few items of resist potion / resist cold / resist pretty much anything else. And the player won't want to eat them because they might need them when they're not in beast form. In any case - it's a potentially interesting idea but the Golem player species (which already have a patch under consideration) has item eating as a core mechanic. Whilst the flavour obviously fits with "world eating", I don't think it sounds right from a purely biological point of view, and in any case the original inspiration for the flavour shouldn't be taken as gospel - it will need some compromise to fit in a good place alongside existing deities and mechanics (e.g. the Ashenzari overlap of "bound god").

I think in this case, the god will benefit from a having a tighter focus - it's about gluttony, as in eating food, not other stuff. This is much easier to understand from the player's point of view, and it puts paid to any questions such as "well, if I can eat artifacts, why can't I just eat the walls as well?" It didn't make sense that

With abilities, I don't see why the god needs two "panic buttons". I don't see why it needs any at all, if it's done right. Very few gods actually have these and they're not very interesting - you shouldn't be panicking, you should be playing well using the god's other more interesting abilities! I still think a smell ability would be highly thematic, and a very defining unique visual feature of this god. Beyond that - I think the important thing is getting the whole beast form progression right as it's an interesting enough thing to carry the proposal on its own.

Regarding those wiki proposals: one of them references a third one by Eronarn which I think is the one IronJelly meant. But I can't find it; might be on sourceforge.

For this message the author mumra has received thanks:
Blade

Mines Malingerer

Posts: 42

Joined: Friday, 17th February 2012, 20:13

Post Tuesday, 3rd April 2012, 22:33

Re: Ravenous God

I think you missed a couple of perks of devour essence - one is the ability to gain resistances by eating enemies (which kinda works since enemies tends to be affiliated with the elemental damage they deal, and there's the aforementioned items to make up for the rest), the other is the ability to eat into walls using it (so eating walls, enemies, items, everything is in). Ordinary food isn't edible at all when in beast form (but neither is the superfast metabolism, so unavoidable starvation should hopefully not happen all that often). I like the transformation-on-hungry mechanic better since it actually forces the player to muck around in human (whatever) form every once in a while, especially in order to fully explore the level before being forced deeper because of the lack of permafood.

I do agree that it isn't a played straight gluttony god any longer, but this isn't an entirely bad thing since the food clock in itself just isn't a good enough feature to stand on its own imo. Also, our werewolfes are different? As for the abilities themselves.. meh. They're there for adding options during gameplay what with removing spells and all, the actual design of them aren't of paramount importance (albeit I do personally like the Black Hole > Moon connection). I'd consider removing scrolls as well (justified in that you have to speak the words in order to release the magic), in which case escape options are very much welcome. Also note that swallow has some other functions such as an emergency food store for starving characters and being generally convenient/thematic, but yeah there are probably be better options out there.

Dungeon Master

Posts: 1531

Joined: Saturday, 5th March 2011, 06:29

Post Tuesday, 3rd April 2012, 23:00

Re: Ravenous God

I missed the bit about resistances from enemies, but it doesn't make much difference. If my resistances have run out and a Pan Lord is firestorming me I don't have time to kill him and eat him, and I can't exactly eat my ring of fire protection since it's melded (and then, I wouldn't have fire resistance when I left beast form).

The transform-on-full mechanic would still leave the player in normal form regularly, because they will rest up and heal, they might have to run away from a fight and get therefore not eat, etc. - and as I said, the satiation rate would increase, so they'd leave beast form pretty quickly if they're not actively killing and eating. This is also helped by the staged beastform - they'll spend relatively little time in full beast form, only really during and immediately after a big fight.

I wasn't bothered about the flavour, what I was saying is that using hunger as the requirement is completely flawed and unfixable. It will quite simply kill players, and nobody will want to worship the god. Don't suggest removing even more options (scrolls) ... it really won't make for that fun of a game, and it certainly won't be Crawl.

Mines Malingerer

Posts: 42

Joined: Friday, 17th February 2012, 20:13

Post Wednesday, 4th April 2012, 15:47

Re: Ravenous God

Well, my core design philosophy is that gods are there mainly in order to change some aspects of the game, force the player to adapt, increase replayability and just make the game plain more interesting. Chei is in my eyes a very well designed god for this reason - it forces players out of their comfort zone of always abusing fast movement. Trog enforces an entire rpg staple (the magicless warrior) all by himself. Ash restricts item swapping, turns the curse system on its head and provides unique advantages no other god does. Contrast with popular gods such as Okawaru or Vehumet which, whilst strong, are ultimately just kind of convenient for supporting the same warrior-mage/mage-warrior strategies employed by almost everyone anyway.

Yes, not having access to 100% protection from everything 100% of the time is a drawback, but not one that cannot be played around - in your example the hypothetical player could wait to tackle the pan vault until being in human form to have a more reliable resistance spread and better escape options. Or run away to eat some Balrugs before heading back. Devour an emergency robe of resistance and soldier on. Or activate Absorb Light whilst running to the closest portal out of there. Eat a wand of Teleportation/Healing/Hasting. Drink a potion of resistance. Gravity Well him up close and Swallow to postpone the problem. Screw the odds and just tab on anyway. Is this as reliable as controlled-blinking twice, reading a scroll of teleport, swap equipment, rest up and casting haste and controlled flight before trying again? No, but it makes for exciting gameplay and, more importantly, it makes for different gameplay.
User avatar

Abyss Ambulator

Posts: 1249

Joined: Sunday, 18th September 2011, 02:11

Post Wednesday, 4th April 2012, 16:08

Re: Ravenous God

Yeah, mumra's right. Eating things for resists is not fun, not strong, and not sustainable. Nobody will choose a god because that god is exciting. They'll choose gods because they get good, well-defined advantages from those choices.

Or they will choose chei or xom because they are masochists.

Dungeon Master

Posts: 1531

Joined: Saturday, 5th March 2011, 06:29

Post Wednesday, 4th April 2012, 17:18

Re: Ravenous God

Infinitum wrote:Well, my core design philosophy is that gods are there mainly in order to change some aspects of the game, force the player to adapt, increase replayability and just make the game plain more interesting.


This is absolutely true. Note the word "some" not "all". If it changes every aspect of the game, you might as well make it a different game...

Note that Trog only stops you using spells - you can still use wands, scrolls, wear magical armour, and even drink those potions which are magical. It would be a pretty boring game if he strictly followed the theme and banned all of those items. You have to be loose enough with the theme to leave plenty of options open to the player, you are just restricting a particular set.

Infinitum wrote:Contrast with popular gods such as Okawaru or Vehumet which, whilst strong, are ultimately just kind of convenient for supporting the same warrior-mage/mage-warrior strategies employed by almost everyone anyway.


"Popular" doesn't mean "well-designed". It's good you mention these two gods because they're both considered by certain dev team members as somewhat boring and in need of improvement. There is already an open implementable for improving Vehumet. The developers certainly aren't going to want any new gods that are simply "convenience for specific playstyle".

Infinitum wrote:Yes, not having access to 100% protection from everything 100% of the time is a drawback, but not one that cannot be played around - in your example the hypothetical player could wait to tackle the pan vault until being in human form to have a more reliable resistance spread and better escape options.


You're implying that you couldn't just suddenly change mid-fight and be screwed. And I think you don't understand how Pan works. You spend a lot of time there, there are infinite levels. When you leave a level through the next portal you don't know where you'll end up - you could be in an empty room, or you could land right in the middle of a group of firestorming Hellions, or in the rune chamber standing next to a Pan Lord. Firestorm is partially irresistible anyway; you definitely want at least a pip of rF to mitigate the part that is resistable, because you'll be dead in about 2 or 3 turns.

This would mean that each time you leave a Pan level you have to be in human form so your resistances come back. What if I'm in beast form with no permafood having cleared the level? There is literally no way for me to return to human.

It's not remotely about "100% protection from everything 100% of the time" (because that's impossible for any character). But having access to a single pip of rF is practically requisite for some branches. Not just Pan - Gehenna and Zot also, and it's nice to have pretty much anywhere in the late game. Sure you can do without it, but it's subjecting yourself to cruel and unusual punishment, there is no way anyone would take this voluntarily.

Infinitum wrote:Or run away to eat some Balrugs before heading back. Devour an emergency robe of resistance and soldier on. Or activate Absorb Light whilst running to the closest portal out of there. Eat a wand of Teleportation/Healing/Hasting. Drink a potion of resistance. Gravity Well him up close and Swallow to postpone the problem. Screw the odds and just tab on anyway. Is this as reliable as controlled-blinking twice, reading a scroll of teleport, swap equipment, rest up and casting haste and controlled flight before trying again? No, but it makes for exciting gameplay and, more importantly, it makes for different gameplay.


- Sometimes there isn't an easy enemy to kill
- I am not eating my robe of resistance (it's melded anyway; you literally can't eat something that is melded). And I don't have a spare robe of resistance for every single level of Pan or Gehenna.
- The portal out of there could get me into deeper trouble
- I am not eating my wand of Healing or Hasting, that is absolutely ridiculous. The most rare and valuable wands in the game and you think players want to trivially waste them on a single use?
- How many potions of resistance do you typically find in a game?
- I really don't want to get that danger any closer to me, I'd rather get out of LOS
- Repeatedly pressing Tab with a random chance of living or dying is not an exciting game, it's a pointless game
- It makes for gameplay so completely different that it's not Crawl any more. If you think it sounds fun, why not just design this separate game where you're a werewolf with no abilities except attacking and eating?

The fact that you're suggesting these options makes me think that you don't really get the core problems I'm pointing at. Let me quote my earlier post:

"A god that on a whim removes all your armour, resistances, along with any access to any magic or magical items ... leaving you in such a debilitated state that you are forced to eat your own items just to claw back some of those resistances / status ... and preventing you from leaving that state until you either kill some things or eat permafood and damage your piety ... basically sounds like some sort of cruel trickster god, and we already have one of them!"


That's a pretty accurate description, right? If so then this proposal needs to be rethought as a) a Xom effect or b) an extremely bad mutation.

Mines Malingerer

Posts: 42

Joined: Friday, 17th February 2012, 20:13

Post Sunday, 8th April 2012, 14:04

Re: Ravenous God

Well, easter came and went and since there haven't been any further discussion I may as well reply to that last post. Now, it isn't that I mind arguing for arguments sake (I enjoy it), but you don't even seem to have put a lot of effort in doing so.

"Popular" doesn't mean "well-designed". It's good you mention these two gods because they're both considered by certain dev team members as somewhat boring and in need of improvement. There is already an open implementable for improving Vehumet. The developers certainly aren't going to want any new gods that are simply "convenience for specific playstyle".


Like this one here. I don't know whether english is your first language or not, but if you're about to argue against something it helps to ensure that you oppose it first.

You're implying that you couldn't just suddenly change mid-fight and be screwed. And I think you don't understand how Pan works. [...]


Or that statement. I've posted what, some 30 posts? It wouldn't take a lot of time on your part to make sure that none of them are YAVP before writing something like that (to save you the bother, I've 15-runed a couple of times. I'm aware of how Pan works). Seeing as your original argument was bemoaning a lack of options in a very specific example (Pan lord spamming non-typical damage spells relative the current level theme, with the PC blundering into it's vault unprepared) and I've given examples of such I'm just going to leave it at that. Strawmen makes for poor conversation material.

The fact that you're suggesting these options makes me think that you don't really get the core problems I'm pointing at. Let me quote my earlier post:


No, it means that I've read your arguments and disagree with them. Which, apparantly, is more than you have considering that your next post following the one you quoted began:

I missed the bit about resistances from enemies


Which kind of makes me wonder why you'd bother to use the same argument again (especially considering I've already replied to it once). But to each his own.

That's a pretty accurate description, right? If so then this proposal needs to be rethought as a) a Xom effect or b) an extremely bad mutation.


Your opinion has been noted.

Ps
I am not eating my robe of resistance (it's melded anyway; you literally can't eat something that is melded).

and I can't exactly eat my ring of fire protection since it's melded

I can only assume you're aware that you can carry equipment in your inventory without equipping it.

PPs
This is partly my fault: I suggested in that other thread

Don't fret.
User avatar

Pandemonium Purger

Posts: 1319

Joined: Monday, 24th October 2011, 06:13

Post Sunday, 8th April 2012, 18:52

Re: Ravenous God

Well, easter came and went and since there haven't been any further discussion I may as well reply to that last post. Now, it isn't that I mind arguing for arguments sake (I enjoy it), but you don't even seem to have put a lot of effort in doing so.


Oh hogwash, you even selectively quoted him on stuff just to make it seem like he didn't make good points. You quoted:

- I am not eating my robe of resistance (it's melded anyway; you literally can't eat something that is melded).


and replied:

I can only assume you're aware that you can carry equipment in your inventory without equipping it.


When he actually wrote:

- I am not eating my robe of resistance (it's melded anyway; you literally can't eat something that is melded). And I don't have a spare robe of resistance for every single level of Pan or Gehenna.


...which completely addresses your reply - a reply you posted, I assume, to get a response that he already made. I don't know if english is your first language, but us natives don't just completely ignore follow-up statements like what I bolded when they're very important to the point. And he's right: NO ONE will eat wands. No one will eat robes of resistance, because no one would carry a second, unless it is your design proposal to carry duplicates of very rare spawns only to consume them for a temporary effect. And not in the way that Nemelex allows you to sacrifice now to benefit later - you need to carry unstackable items to be permanently destroyed, like a wand with a single charge. His strongest point you just avoided completely (oh I'm sorry, you noted it), just because it's easter and no one else replied? Here, I'll quote it a third time because he's absolutely right:

"A god that on a whim removes all your armour, resistances, along with any access to any magic or magical items ... leaving you in such a debilitated state that you are forced to eat your own items just to claw back some of those resistances / status ... and preventing you from leaving that state until you either kill some things or eat permafood and damage your piety ... basically sounds like some sort of cruel trickster god, and we already have one of them!"
seattle washington. friends for life. mods hate on me and devs ignore my posts. creater of exoelfs and dc:pt

For this message the author twelwe has received thanks:
mumra
User avatar

Abyss Ambulator

Posts: 1249

Joined: Sunday, 18th September 2011, 02:11

Post Sunday, 8th April 2012, 19:27

Re: Ravenous God

Sorry, Infinitum, but you've gone from reasonable at the beginning of the thread to ridiculous by the end. Mumra wasn't even trying to argue with you; he was pointing out clear shortcomings of a potentially interesting idea -- that is to say, discussing game design. The point of this forum. To respond in such an overtly hostile, childish, and condescending manner to someone who has been extraordinarily helpful and thoughtful in his responses to you is utterly absurd. When someone points out aspects of a design that are fundamentally flawed, and others support that statement, don't assume that they're all morons and you know the only right way. It's not true, and it makes you look like a fool.

I still think that this god idea has quite a bit of potential. However, if it has any chance of going anywhere, the flaws must be fixed (and here I suggest you reread mumra's posts, because he is entirely accurate in his analysis).

For this message the author Blade has received thanks:
mumra
User avatar

Abyss Ambulator

Posts: 1189

Joined: Friday, 28th January 2011, 21:45

Post Sunday, 8th April 2012, 19:34

Re: Ravenous God

Infinitum wrote:Or that statement. I've posted what, some 30 posts? It wouldn't take a lot of time on your part to make sure that none of them are YAVP before writing something like that



Requiring people to review all of your previous posts before they're allowed to make a response to one of your posts is simply silly, regardless of how many or few posts you may have.
The best strategy most frequently overlooked by new players for surviving: not starting a fight to begin with.

For this message the author TwilightPhoenix has received thanks:
mumra

Dungeon Master

Posts: 1531

Joined: Saturday, 5th March 2011, 06:29

Post Monday, 9th April 2012, 19:02

Re: Ravenous God

Other people have kindly made the main points I was going to make, so I'll try to be brief! I found your response hilarious on many levels but these are the highlights:

"Popular" doesn't mean "well-designed". It's good you mention these two gods because they're both considered by certain dev team members as somewhat boring and in need of improvement. There is already an open implementable for improving Vehumet. The developers certainly aren't going to want any new gods that are simply "convenience for specific playstyle".


Like this one here. I don't know whether english is your first language or not, but if you're about to argue against something it helps to ensure that you oppose it first.


Huh? If you're going to question someone's grasp of the English language, try to make sure your sentence actually makes sense. [Edit] Yes I realise what you're saying and I slightly misunderstood your original point ... this was as much a problem with the way you phrased it and the ambiguity of the point you were trying to make as with the fact that, yes, sometimes people misunderstand each other in a forum when you can't actually speak with the proper inflection on words. Certainly no reason to question whether I am actually capable of reading English.

Also, try to make sure that person isn't in fact an English person who happens to have spent all their life speaking English.

Finally - such comment is extraordinarily offensive to anyone who is genuinely struggling to learn English, perhaps even verging on racism; bringing the discussion down to the level of personal attacks certainly doesn't add any weight to your proposal.

I missed the bit about resistances from enemies


Which kind of makes me wonder why you'd bother to use the same argument again (especially considering I've already replied to it once). But to each his own.


You're having a go at me for missing one tiny point in this somewhat lengthy thread. On the other hand you've managed to ignore every major point that I made.

Let me just give my opinion on how this design process works: If you post a proposal, you are inviting analysis and criticism from other forum users. Of course, nobody's opinion is infallible. That applies equally to your own opinions. If you weren't prepared to even consider very valid criticisms of the subject matter then why post it here in the first place? What you've done is pick out extremely minor points from my responses, and attempted to address them, on the whole in a very unconvincing way. You might not realise but I actually put quite a lot of time and thought into my replies, because I really liked some of the core ideas, and I actually wanted to help make this into something much better than it was. But after a few rounds of this (in the drama god thread as well) when you were still completely avoiding the most important flaws, I got somewhat exasperated; which is why my last response was a slightly ranty list of arguments against your last points. Certainly not all of my arguments apply 100% of the time; but they definitely apply often enough to constitute a glaring problem.

When I post a proposal on here, I expect criticism - in fact, I get slightly worried if there is none. Criticism helps me improve my ideas and refine my overall design process. It also shows that someone cared enough about your idea to point out where it could be improved. I'm also always prepared to completely throw out an idea; recently on ##crawl-dev, kilobyte quoted Sturgeon's law; basically, 90% of ideas are utter crap. What's important is learning how to filter out the 10% of goodness. You cannot possibly always do this by self-analysis, and this is why you need to always take other people's opinions seriously, and always be prepared to doubt your own opinions no matter how good you think they are. Anybody who's done any amount of design should know that what one day seems like a great idea can, after further reflection or receiving feedback, turn out to be a load of rubbish.

Please don't be disheartened by any of this, and please don't get so upset. I was only trying to help (but you'll probably be glad to know I won't be trying any more).

For this message the author mumra has received thanks: 2
FluidDynamite, Jabberwocky

Return to Game Design Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

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