Make door closing take longer than opening

[smock]

If it took 11 or more aut to close a door, then players could not repeatedly close a door after a monster opened it. This is an unspirited, boring way to heal HP to full, get enough MP to blink away, get rid of contamination, etc, to plan an escape or buff or health to defeat the monster.

Of course, reducing the time to open a door would have the same effect.

[XuaXua]

Sometimes you can't do this, other times monsters wander by.

[pratamawirya]

The "monster double action" already prevents such tactic, doesn't it?

[evilmike]

The "monster double action" already prevents such tactic, doesn't it?

Monster energy randomization stops this eventually, yes. You can only "door dance" for so long, unless it's a slow monster. But there aren't many slow door users.

[smock]

Hm. I can often heal quite a bit before the monster manages to get the extra door-opening turn.

If you can get out of LOS while door dancing (which seems like a good name for the tactic) then it seems to work better. I just door danced while out of LOS and the monster simply forgot about me and wandered off. At least that's what it seemed like. Perhaps I misattributed a LOS-door exploit to a purely door exploit?

These details aside, I think it would still be good to prevent door dancing entirely because it has such a silly feel to it. As much as I love the Three Stooges, I don't think eye-poking and the hand-blocking of eye poking should have a place in crawl. Door dancing makes no more sense to me than does eye-poking. I mean, either you close the door and hold it there and the monster can't get it open because you're stronger or you are jamming it closed with your boot, or the monster holds/jams the door open and you can't close it. (I suppose either of these behaviors could be implemented.) Multiple successive door openings/closings has a very silly flavor.

[Blade]

ya it's like when you hold a door shut from one side irl and a police officer is on the other side trying to push it open

This discussion has been had before and the general consensus was that it was fine. I don't think it needs to be talked about again. Basically, door-dancing is a somewhat useful but limited mechanic that makes perfect sense within crawl gameplay and doesn't really need any sort of adjustment.

[smock]

Thanks for that reference, Blade. I hadn't seen it.

In my opinion that discussion did not reach any of the conclusions you claim about door dancing. The thread seemed to degenerate into some odd discussion of what tactics are "cheap".

Perhaps the consensus you refer to was reached in another discussion?

[Blade]

The primary point is that it's just another tactic, like pillar dancing or going upstairs away from an enemy. Door dancing is primarily an early-game tactic that really doesn't work very well in a lot of circumstances, but is somewhat useful when it does work. It is not strong enough to need a nerf (besides, it already got a significant nerf with energy randomization), and is a minor enough thing that there really isn't much need to think about it at all.

One thing to note: if you can close a door on an enemy, that means you have at least a square of separation. Running to the stairs in that case is usually a good idea.

[XuaXua]

Still think a high success Apportation use should be able to close doors.

[pratamawirya]

Still think a high success Apportation use should be able to close doors.

That's interesting, but wouldn't that make Apportation too powerful, considering it's only a level 1 spell?

[XuaXua]

Still think a high success Apportation use should be able to close doors.

That's interesting, but wouldn't that make Apportation too powerful, considering it's only a level 1 spell?

With level 1 Transloc, you don't have a good chance of moving items. Conceivably, closing doors reliably would require a higher success rate on Apportation, which would require a higher Tloc skill.

[cerebovssquire]

Apportation is already ridiculously useful for nearly all characters. Door opening from a distance would be extremely powerful: you could check what's behind it to flee very quickly and without being threatened by the monsters behind the door, and for long-ranged spellcasters (Ice Storm, Orb of Destruction and some clouds come to mind) it would become an absolute no-brainer-spell of considerable power.
In other words a single spell would become a tool helpful for not dying, for stealing runes, and for planning attacks, do all three of these jobs very well, and on top, it would be a single-school level 1 spell. This is a horrible idea especially considering how common the spell is. If you want to go through doors you need a L5 earth or a L4 earth/tmut spell, for good reasons.

[jejorda2]

What if strength determined the speed you use doors? Maybe 16/STR turns?

[sardonica]

It seems to me that making apportation more powerful would be a really bad idea, because anybody learns it if they can already, and it costs very very little (IE troll berserkers can cast it).

[mageykun]

I think we've already had the conversation that apportion does not equal wholesale telekinesis. It does one very specific thing, not a range of things. This is the reason apportion and portal projectile are not the same spell. At the very least an interaction with doors remotely would need to be separate spell, higher level, and somehow balanced to overcome the ways it altars current tactics and risks radically in favor of the player (assuming it can be, something I'm personally skeptical of). This is off topic anyways.

What if strength determined the speed you use doors? Maybe 16/STR turns?

That assumes that the biggest problem in getting a door open and shut is the mass. Since monsters without hands or sufficient intellect can't just knock doors open, we have to assume there's some kind of latching mechanism, which would suggest a dex check. Or, heck, an int check if they're puzzle latched doors. This is a dungeon crawl after all. :p

Personally, I'd say blade got it right. Door-dancing is occasionally useful when it works, but it's not prevalent or useful enough to merit a nerf.

[Eji1700]

Actually I always thought the ability to barricade or lock a door might be an interesting feature, but i'm not sure it'd fit in well.

Door dancing as it stands is kinda....silly, but it works, and I wouldn't say it's totally failsafe or gamebreaking.

[TwilightPhoenix]

I think, the best thing that can be done about this is to have Donald reference door dancing, something like...

Donald says, "I ran into this guy who kept closing a door in my face. I hate that."

[pratamawirya]

I think, the best thing that can be done about this is to have Donald reference door dancing, something like...

Donald says, "I ran into this guy who kept closing a door in my face. I hate that."

The text improvement team should read this.

[pratamawirya]

The wiki introduced me to door dancing, and yeah, it is definitely one proof that the wiki is a bad place.

[Deimos]

I dont know, I see no harm in making door closing take longer.

The concept itself is ridiculous. It feels like an exploit regardless of whether it is or not. It would take next to no effort to implement a fix (Assuming there is nothing in the game that relies on door dancing and that closing and opening a door are both separate actions as far as the code is concerned.).

Sure, small issue on the plate of faults, but now that it has been brought up I see no reason not to take a tiny bit of time and change it.

[BlackSheep]

Except that many of us see no reason *to* change it. I don't think it feels like an exploit at all, anymore than I think running in circles or running upstairs is an exploit.

[Grimm]

I think, the best thing that can be done about this is to have Donald reference door dancing, something like...

Donald says, "I ran into this guy who kept closing a door in my face. I hate that."

The text improvement team should read this.

Unique speech isn't currently in the transifex resource database. Best to take it straight to the devs.

[smock]

Door dancing is functionally almost identical to pillar dancing. Even in how it is claimed to be much more effective than it actually is.

Also, both work much better with regeneration than without.

Has anyone else had the experience with door dancing with a monster out of LOS works very well?

I don't remember any commenters noting downsides with my original proposal other than "it's not a problem in the first place." I can't think of how it would hurt, even if it would only reduce door dancing. So, who thinks that the door-open door-close game is a good part of the game that should be retained or encouraged? Apparently, several of us do, which really confuses me.

[BlackSheep]

I think it's a fair approximation of the idea Eji1700 mentioned. You should be able to struggle to keep a door closed. In a turn-based environment, a simple implementation of that concept is door dancing.

And I'm sorry, but "I can't think of how it would hurt" is not an argument.

[smock]

My prose was unclear. I meant to communicate this: "I can't think of how it would hurt, and it would help by reducing door dancing".

Eji1700 does indicate a good way to re-flavor door dancing. If the messages "You close the door." and "The foo opens the door" were changed to "You struggle to close the door as the foo tries to open it" or something, then at least the door dancing would not have a silly flavor.

Do consider trying to door dance a monster that is out of LOS. Monsters out of LOS often forget about you before they gets that random extra action. This feels like an exploit to me. (Then again, I feel like running up stairs is something of an exploit.) Standard door dancing is plain old silly flavored.

[mageykun]

My prose was unclear. I meant to communicate this: "I can't think of how it would hurt, and it would help by reducing door dancing".

It would make door dancing less effective, yes. The question is whether it needs to be. Several people (myself included) seem to be of the opinion that the help isn't necessary.

How could it hurt? I've heard it said that the most dangerous situation in a roguelike is opening a door or descending a staircase- since you don't know what's on the other side and there aren't enough resources to be fully prepared for everything, every time. We've all experienced opening a door, finding something unexpectedly dangerous, and then slamming the door and running. Slowing down the slam would give ranged attackers a little longer to blast you before LOS is blocked and you've taken off.

More generally, it would impair the ability to use doors tactically. A door you can shut is more interesting than a door that's only worth opening.

Eji1700 does indicate a good way to re-flavor door dancing. If the messages "You close the door." and "The foo opens the door" were changed to "You struggle to close the door as the foo tries to open it" or something, then at least the door dancing would not have a silly flavor.

...I'm actually not sure that would work. The door closing takes place on your turn. The door opening takes place some time after. There's a time/turns delay between the two. I'm not sure the messaging system supports something as complex as combining discrete actions across different turns. The logic for that would certainly be a mess, and you'd need some way to account for things happening in between closing and shutting without messing up the message order. Really, it'll be a lot of ugliness, if it's even possible. It's not worth correcting an excruciating minor flavor text complaint.

Do consider trying to door dance a monster that is out of LOS. Monsters out of LOS often forget about you before they gets that random extra action. This feels like an exploit to me. (Then again, I feel like running up stairs is something of an exploit.) Standard door dancing is plain old silly flavored.

...I really don't understand this one. You're outsider of LOS, running from something. You shut doors you pass through as you run, so it can't be sure which way you went, or catch a glimpse of you through the open door when it / if it catches up. I don't see how this can be qualified as dancing, or an exploit. It's just using your environment to cover your retreat.

[smock]

...I really don't understand this one. You're outsider of LOS, running from something. You shut doors you pass through as you run, so it can't be sure which way you went, or catch a glimpse of you through the open door when it / if it catches up. I don't see how this can be qualified as dancing, or an exploit. It's just using your environment to cover your retreat.

Thanks for your thoughts!

I was talking about something different. Suppose you open a door and you found a centaur in a room and you want to retreat. Do two things: close the door and move to a square that will have the centaur out of LOS when it opens the door. When the centaur opens the door, close it again. In a few turns it will forget about you and wander off (if it doesn't get that extra action first). I've found this tactic to be more effective against monsters that are fast or ranged. Also, is it often safer than running because who knows what's down the hallway: better to stay where you are.

Also, if I understand correctly, a hasted player should be guaranteed to win at this version of door dancing. (I have never tried this.)

[galehar]

Good point. I guess when you close a door, it should refresh the memory of all the monsters going after you and seeing the door.

[BlackSheep]

While you're at it, make monsters check modified stealth rather than just the stealth skill.

[smock]

Good point. I guess when you close a door, it should refresh the memory of all the monsters going after you and seeing the door.

Yes, that would prevent the "out of LOS door dancing" exploit and be good for game play. Good call. The flavor of door dancing would still be not so good, but at least it would be useless tactically.