Elemental staves

[Piu]

Right now there are plenty of staves with quite similar mechanic behind. So, fire\cold\earth\air\poison\death - practicaly do same thing - corresponding resist and damage(school\evoks).

As far as I can understand basics of game disign and philosophy section of crawl's manual - this is wrong. Perfectly for 1 mechanic we need 1 item. So, first of all I suggest:

- to unite fire and cold staves to staff of temperature;

- to unite earth and air staves to staff of extremes (name still in development).

Due negative crosstraining this will bring nearly no change to gameplay. Elemental damage dealt with melee would go from max skill. As for resists - I suppose same mechanic would do. So fire mages will get their +rF and earth their lack of rElec. In case of tie - give both resists or none (I'd voted for none)

[njvack]

Wait, what? Elemental staves may be a little mechanically opaque, but how are they against Crawl design philosophy?

Reducing the number of them also means that when you find a staff, it's more likely to be useful to you; I think their current level of randomness is pretty appropriate.

[evilmike]

I don't think these staves are all that similar. They use different skills, and more importantly have different damage types. The staves all use the same underlying mechanic (magic school + evocations), but the different damage types is an extremely important difference. Plus, they enhance different schools of magic and give you different resists. These are already the most differentiated melee weapons in the game.

You are oversimplifying this by stating "for 1 mechanic we need 1 item". Each of these staves play differently by the fact that they are good vs some enemies, and useless vs others. The only exception is the staff of earth... but this actually works in its favour, by being the only enchancer staff that works against everything (and also is the only one that checks AC, meaning it does less damage overall).

Having a separate staff for each of these skills also serves as an incentive for players to train that skill. Find an early staff of fire? Maybe you'll be more inclined to train fire magic instead of ice. This is an interesting feature of Crawl gameplay and it deserves to be kept.

[Piu]

Wait, what? Elemental staves may be a little mechanically opaque, but how are they against Crawl design philosophy?

Reducing the number of them also means that when you find a staff, it's more likely to be useful to you; I think their current level of randomness is pretty appropriate.

Being FE and finding cold staff will not make you any good. Same for most elements.

And as for philosophy: " It is no good to provide dozens of weapons with different names (and perhaps even numbers) if, in the end, they all play the same."

[Kate]

The enhancer staves are a good example of one of the few types of weapon that really don't play the same at all, for the reasons evilmike already explained. The distinction between different enhancer staves is a big one. The distinction between, say, a battleaxe, a great mace and a great sword is pretty insignificant though, and there's certainly a lot of room for improvement there.

[Piu]

to evilmike

I do not suggest to leave behind all but three staves by number of mechanic types used. (active+enchancer\evokable\passive)

But I think, that current situation is incorrect, because of 6 similar weapons you wouldn't use except you've already invested plenty of exp to corresponding magic school and evoks.
And I'm trying to find ways to solve it.

[Piu]

so we should merge rings of fire and rings of ice too?

If we are talking only about game design - yes. They have same mechanic with opposite sign. And are useless for anyone but elementalist right after finding rC\rF ring.
But it's hard to fix it right now without getting problems with early resists of non-mage players.

Btw, mechanic of negative crosstraining efficiently solves problem of resists.
FE wouldn'n wear cold staff for +rC due negative enchancer for fire magic. And vise versa.

[jejorda2]

Evoke the ring to switch from Ice to Fire. Evoke the staff to shift your grip and hit with the end that uses your element. Maybe that should just be an unrand, though. If you're not wielding a shield, you get an off-hand attack with the opposite brand? That's probably silly, as it would be nearly the same as upping the base damage.

[njvack]

Being FE and finding cold staff will not make you any good. Same for most elements.

... unless you find it early-ish, or have been focusing on conjurations over fire, or have also found a great Ice book...

In any of those cases, the staff might convince you to switch to cold.

[galehar]

But I think, that current situation is incorrect, because of 6 similar weapons you wouldn't use except you've already invested plenty of exp to corresponding magic school and evoks.
And I'm trying to find ways to solve it.

And I'm trying to find ways to understand you but I can't. You're not making any sense. What is it you're trying to solve?

[KoboldLord]

And I'm trying to find ways to understand you but I can't. You're not making any sense. What is it you're trying to solve?

Looks to me like he just wants to increase the chance of getting exactly the loot he wants, by having whatever loot spawns first change into exactly what he was hoping for.

I can't think of any other reason a person would want an item to serve multiple wildly different functions in a context-sensitive manner without any decision-making on the part of the player, as has been proposed.

Next, I suppose, spellbooks should be changed so the next one that spawns always has exactly the spell the player is looking for. We can implement a mind-reading algorithm to determine whether the player wants greater power within their focus or more versatility outside their focus.

[One-Eyed Jack]

As far as I can understand basics of game disign and philosophy section of crawl's manual - this is wrong. Perfectly for 1 mechanic we need 1 item.

Where, exactly, are you locating anything resembling that maxim even vaguely?

There are 20+ items that, when wielded, increase (usually) the damage that a character does to monsters in melee combat. Should these be pared down to one?

[Piu]

to KoboldLord:
No.

to One-Eyed Jack:
Almost every weapon in game have it's uniqueness. For example Axes:
Hand axe (7,3,13); - starting weapon
War axe (11,0,16); - best 1-handed
Broad axe[1.5] (14,-2,16); - 1.5 handed
Battleaxe[2] (17,-4,17); - 2handed, easy to find
Executioner's axe[2] (20,-6,20) - best 2 handed, hard to find.

Differences between types of weapons lies deeper, in numbers and formulaes. Like Axes are for strong normal races, M&F for dexterious small or strong big races, etc. Well, I think this is quite unclear right now and I'm looking forward to "special" attacks from https://crawl.develz.org/wiki/doku.php? ... pon_reform

to galehar:
Similarity of enhancer staves. I consider it wrong to have 6 items with same purpose, mechanic and effects. And usually you would use only one of them even if you have all 6.
For example I see no point to separate staff of fire and staff or cold. There is no situation in the game when you want both of them at the same time.

to evilmike:
>>Having a separate staff for each of these skills also serves as an incentive for players to train that skill. Find an early staff of fire? Maybe you'll be more inclined to train fire magic instead of ice. This is an interesting feature of Crawl gameplay and it deserves to be kept.

I've never met staff earlier than D:7. It's too late for icemage to switch. And you cannot learn school without having spellbook with corresponding spells.
It is spellbooks which helps you to made decision, not the enchancers.

[rchandra]

an IE is unlikely to switch to fire or vice versa (though freezing cloud/fireball are both great and it's entirely possible for an elementalist to grab the other one). However, if you have a wizard, or enchanter who's looking for an offensive option, a staff can help make that decision.

[KoboldLord]

Almost every weapon in game have it's uniqueness. For example Axes:
Hand axe (7,3,13); - starting weapon
War axe (11,0,16); - best 1-handed
Broad axe[1.5] (14,-2,16); - 1.5 handed
Battleaxe[2] (17,-4,17); - 2handed, easy to find
Executioner's axe[2] (20,-6,20) - best 2 handed, hard to find.

Those all have the same function, with slightly different numbers. Weapons lower on the list are pretty much strictly better than weapons higher on the list, and you should switch to the better weapon when one turns up pretty much regardless of your game situation. The sharp bits go in the other guy.

Staves, by contrast, actually have different functions. Most conjurations-focused casters train at least two magic skills for this purpose, and a few train three. They need to weigh the spell power boost, the resistance, the melee damage, and also the benefits of wizardry or energy to make that decision. Choosing between a staff of fire, a staff of conjurations, and a staff of energy is almost never going to be a no-brainer.

Yes, your fire mage can find a staff of cold that will be absolutely useless. Nobody cares. Loot isn't guaranteed to be useful, and good luck wouldn't have any meaning if you couldn't have bad luck too.

Differences between types of weapons lies deeper, in numbers and formulaes. Like Axes are for strong normal races, M&F for dexterious small or strong big races, etc. Well, I think this is quite unclear right now and I'm looking forward to "special" attacks from https://crawl.develz.org/wiki/doku.php? ... pon_reform

No, you can actually pretty much ignore the impact of strength and dexterity on weapon damage. Axes are strongly biased towards being two-handed, while maces & flails are biased towards being one-handed. You make your decision based on availability of good early-game brands, the desirability of a shield, and existing sunk costs. Str/dex weighting is irrelevant in every case.

[pratamawirya]

Dude, going by your logic, allowing the same weapon type (hand axe, broad axe, mace, etc) to have different brands (flaming, freezing, holy, etc) is wrong too.

[One-Eyed Jack]

Differences between types of weapons lies deeper, in numbers and formulaes. Like Axes are for strong normal races, M&F for dexterious small or strong big races, etc.

Like how staves of earth are better for DD? Or how staves of fire are useless against enemies with rF+++? Staves rely on brands to deal damage almost completely, which means that even beyond their enhancer effects they produce a more interesting paradigm than normal weapons (some risk, high skill investment [staves, maybe evo, magic skill] in exchange for synergy with magic and high damage output).

Similarity of enhancer staves. I consider it wrong to have 6 items with same purpose, mechanic and effects. And usually you would use only one of them even if you have all 6.

We have a triple sword, an executioner's axe, and a great mace. All of them operate on an identical mechanic (in almost exactly the same manner). Although they have some minor difference in power, they are certainly more like each other than a staff of fire vis-a-vis a staff of cold (they don't affect different spell sets and they don't do rF+/rC+ resistable damage which makes them roughly equally suited to fighting all different types of monsters). And, "usually you would use only one of them" on basically any character.

[BlackSheep]

This discussion seems to have meandered.

[Midpoint]

I'm with evilmike – this is a misinterpretation of "one mechanic – one item." If we had enhancer short swords, enhancer maces, enhancer etc. so that they only varied in base type and in a trivial way, then we might have an issue. I don't think having different items which affect different spell schools and give different branded damage is redundant or confusing in the slightest.