Brainstorm for a new starting background: The Escapist

[danr]

My other post about the Wizard book got me thinking about magic playstyles and I think I've spotted a niche that would actually create a new playstyle.

The basic concept is using magic to avoid encountering monsters. This is totally different from every other background which all basically give you ways of engaging with monsters.

Spells I'm thinking about:

Swiftness
Silence
Flight
Control Teleport
See Invisible
Passwall
Dig
Summon Butterflies
Blink
Projected Noise
Invisibility
Cause Fear
Darkness
Passage of Golubria
Blink
Apportation


Obviously, not all of those spells, just the right 5-6 of them.

Is anyone intrigued?

The risk is that the class would have too easy a time of escaping, but they would still need to find ways of engaging with those things that just can't be avoided. Each game might be radically different depending on what means of engagement is found. It would be a bit like playing a Wanderer but with a bit of a safety net.

I'm not sure if this would be a really weak background or game-breakingly bad. It would depend on what mix of spells, and possibly also adjusting stats downward - it might have lower than average stats, which is why this person has developed all these ways of hiding and escaping and sneaking. Could make for some interesting and hairy speed-runs - can you get the Orb without killing a single monster?

[danr]

Or it could be called Lurker or Skulker.

To clarify the concept a bit more: This character would start with no offensive or even defensive skills - no dodging, no fighting, no weapon skill, no weapons, no armour. They might have a good level of stealth though, or start with an elven cloak.

[crate]

Warper seems to fit this general idea of being more escapable but not having great offense.

[Deimos]

It should have a spell called Yahtzee that reviews your past actions actions and then violently criticizes your ability to play.

[danr]

Warper seems to fit this general idea of being more escapable but not having great offense.

Yeah but a warper still starts with both a melee weapon and darts, and portal projectile, as well as shroud of golubria which is a melee buff. This would start with no means of attacking or even disabling monsters other than unskilled, unarmed combat and no way of directly defending against monsters, just avoiding them to start with. They would obviously have to find something to do that with, which might suggest that Apportation should be their starting spell.

There are essentially these basic ways of dealing with monsters, in order:
- avoid them
- disable them / hinder them
- kill them at range
- kill them in melee
- escape from them

This class would be most focused on #1, which no class currently is, not even Warper, but would also have some ability to escape (passwall?). Could also start with scrolls or wand of teleportation. I guess one more spell to add to the list would be teleport other.

It would, like Warpers, likely have a number of Tloc spells, but we currently have a number of classes that have a number of conjurations, and a couple that do hexes / charms. This would have a different focus in Tloc, it would be to avoid battle, not to assist in it.

The concept could also be the basis of a species, in fact it might work better for that - be highly restricted in the ability to use weapons / armour, even more than felids, but have certain racial abilities along the lines of the spells above for avoiding direct engagement.

But I still like the spellbook idea.

Another interesting thing about this class is it would be a way for players to practice the art of avoidance, which is one of the main reasons players die - not knowing that discretion is the better part of valour. That would be the motto of this character class and thus help players to understand these tactics better.

It would truly be a unique class.

[danr]

Okay, this is a bit embarrassing - I started working on my concept for the starting book, and it started looking an awful lot like the Book of Burglary.

Revised proposal:

A Class that starts with the Book of Burglary. No weapons, but an elven cloak. The skills would be:
- Stealth
- Traps & Doors
- Spellcasting
- Translocations

Similar to the Wizard in being widely spread across magic schools, but less offensive / defensive, and would emphasize Dex a bit more over Int?

I'm trying to think of a name that says "burglar" but also "magic-user". Are there magical thieves in any body of lore? Arcane Burglar? Arcane Spy? Secret Agent?

[danr]

Infiltrator? Invasionist? Bypasser?

[danr]

I'm just trying it in Wiz mode - I started a Wizard Halfling, forgot Magic Dart by ripping up the Wizard Book and created a Book of Burglary and adjusted the skills a bit.

The first bit was hairy until I found a weapon (a spear), now it basically feels like a melee start, but I wonder how it will go as I level up and get access to the other spells in the book.

It definitely feels though like this character could develop in a lot of different directions depending on what altars, books and weapons are generated.

[cerebovssquire]

This would be a horribly weak class that would need more luck than any other one. It would also be a good speedrun choice (especially if you find a good enough branded weapon early that you can move on quickly). We're going to have masses of D:1 splats, more than CK, Wn and Fi could ever have, and a few very good speedruns. Is this really good design? Basically you're forcing players into start-scumming.

[danr]

I don't think it should be that many D1 splats - I managed to find a weapon in the same room as the first monster, a kobold. I admit it could do with some tweaking though - maybe it should start with a dagger, or a bit of unarmed combat, or a few Teleport scrolls. Call it the "Ninja".

I am realizing from my playtest that you're not going to be able to avoid monsters from the start unless you play a fast species. A number of species would lend themselves well to this though:

Halfling - stealthy. Archetypal thief. Good at Tloc.
Spriggan - good at running away and avoiding contact. Good Tloc and Spc. Fragile, which fits.
Centaur - ditto with speed, but not as fragile
Deep Dwarf - dungeon attunement fits with this, and the inability to heal makes it a real good idea to avoid contact if possible
Naga - also stealthy. Like a snake in the grass, hard to see or track. The natural attack makes up a bit for the lack of offence to start
Draconian - the random colour adds to the variability of this class
Demonspawn - ditto with mutations
Elves - in "lore" they sometimes have an ability to hide / vanish.
Felid - Cat burglar. Don't get much equipment anyway
Mummy / Ghoul / Vampire - all unpleasant creatures with a penchant for sneaking around

Would also lend itself well to a couple of Gods:
Ely - pacifist
Lugonu - more dungeon distorting and translocational goodness
Gods that gift spellbooks - for guaranteed access to other spells
Fedhas - also more control over dungeon features and nontraditional ways of taking on monsters
Ashenzari - monster sensing

[cerebovssquire]

I managed to find a weapon in the same room as the first monster

"I was lucky, so everyone else will be as well." It doesn't work that way. That's like writing a guide for MiFi saying "Use a vampiric demon blade." We currently have no class that doesn't have a way of disabling monsters, for a good reason. Species that will have really big problems with this class (even if it gets a +0 dagger or Unarmed Combat 2 or whatever): basically everything not Na, Mi, Ce, DD, Dr, Gh, Tr (and maybe some species with aux attacks or claws that doesn't have horrible HP and I am forgetting).

I am also unsure which niche this is supposed to fill. No, it doesn't start with the Warper spellbook. So what? The Warper spells have a very similar function, and in addition, with Aportation, Passage of Golubria and Control Teleport, there is a lot of direct overlap. A good name for this class would be "warper that can't kill stuff". And that is maybe a niche, but not one that should be filled, and at any rate, you can achieve similar results by starting a Warper and dropping your weaponry. Except the Warper will still be stronger, because he'll have a ?blinking,

[Mankeli]

A good name for this class would be "warper that can't kill stuff".

Nah, that doesn't roll of the tongue at all. Let's call it Suckper.

[danr]

I managed to find a weapon in the same room as the first monster

"I was lucky, so everyone else will be as well." It doesn't work that way. That's like writing a guide for MiFi saying "Use a vampiric demon blade." We currently have no class that doesn't have a way of disabling monsters, for a good reason. Species that will have really big problems with this class (even if it gets a +0 dagger or Unarmed Combat 2 or whatever): basically everything not Na, Mi, Ce, DD, Dr, Gh, Tr (and maybe some species with aux attacks or claws that doesn't have horrible HP and I am forgetting).

I am also unsure which niche this is supposed to fill. No, it doesn't start with the Warper spellbook. So what? The Warper spells have a very similar function, and in addition, with Aportation, Passage of Golubria and Control Teleport, there is a lot of direct overlap. A good name for this class would be "warper that can't kill stuff". And that is maybe a niche, but not one that should be filled, and at any rate, you can achieve similar results by starting a Warper and dropping your weaponry. Except the Warper will still be stronger, because he'll have a ?blinking,

- Re: the luck - I said above, maybe they should start with a weapon after all

- It is very clearly a separate niche from Warper, and not necessarily weaker. It is if anything a hybrid between warper and earth elementalists. You get access to passwall, which is arguably more powerful than blink as an escape spell. You also get LRD, which can actually do a lot of damage, you just don't get it right away. You also get swiftness which is a highly desired spell. I'd be concerned that this spellbook is overpowered if anything.

- So the spellbook itself might be overpowered, or maybe it's underpowered. Either way it can be balanced by other adjustments - giving a better weapon, taking it away, setting the amount of skill levels.

It would have a very different game progression from either Wizard, EE, AE, or Warper, though it has elements of all of them.

[galehar]

A background designed to avoid monsters, I would call it a thief. But then, I don't think such a background fits into crawl. Killing monsters is after all, the only way to get XP, and snatching the Orb at XL1 is impossible. Well, there's pacification, but mechanically it's the same. Defeat a monster for XP, invest the XP into skills so you can defeat stronger monsters.
Such a background would need a way to gain XP other than killing monsters to be anything else than a challenging conduct. And introducing a way to gain XP without defeating monsters would be a major change.

[dpeg]

galehar: that is absolutely the crucial point. If you want a playing style like that, the only option I see is with a god: gods can change rules and there are conducts to balance the gains. However, I spent a really long time thinking about a Thief god and got nowhere: so you want xp for spotting monsters, and there's a piety loss for noisy battles (so that stabs are okay). But then: where should the piety come from. Also, a playing style like will be awkward as hell to play because there are billions of monsters you don't want to see twice -- making autoexplore/travel unusable.

[evilmike]

A background designed to avoid monsters, I would call it a thief. But then, I don't think such a background fits into crawl. Killing monsters is after all, the only way to get XP, and snatching the Orb at XL1 is impossible. Well, there's pacification, but mechanically it's the same. Defeat a monster for XP, invest the XP into skills so you can defeat stronger monsters.
Such a background would need a way to gain XP other than killing monsters to be anything else than a challenging conduct. And introducing a way to gain XP without defeating monsters would be a major change.

This is what I was going to say. Backgrounds in crawl *need* a way to kill things, or otherwise gain XP. A class designed only around escaping is badly designed, because it can't do anything else well. Even healers (who don't need to kill things as much) have a way of gaining XP (which also lets them branch into much needed offensive skills).

If you want to play a character that specializes in escaping, you have two options:

1. Play a warper, and have access to nice translocations while also being able to kill stuff.
2. Play a spriggan.

[danr]

After my quick play test I realized that avoiding all monsters, or even most of them, isn't going to happen.

However, it would set up a fundamentally different character development path from all the other backgrounds - no powerful attacks (unless found), no powerful debuffs.

I'm convinced it would play somewhat differently and in a way that would force players to think differently about tactics. I think it has the potential to be interestingly different.

This background will also need a way to kill things, but one interesting thing is that what they settle on will not be pre-determined as much by their starting toolkit. The toolkit instead is something that buys them time while they cautiously gain XP and find something that will define how they deal with monsters.

It might be a more challenging background, but there's nothing wrong with that. It would definitely be distinctive.

[ebarrett]

People with profound knowledge of the game and of the philosophy behind it have already dissected the idea and carefully, thoroughly explained why it's bad, and minmay reminding everyone of the ill-fated thief class (rest in peace Th, nobody misses you) should have been the nail in the coffin.

But no, you had to come back and tell us your that fantastic idea is actually a gimped wanderer with fixed starting gear and stats.

[danr]

I'm sorry to have offended you. I didn't realize it was rude to continue to try to explore an idea.

I'm sorry I wasted everyone's time. I'm also sorry I wasted my own. I thought this was a friendly, safe place to throw around ideas that may not yet be ready for the dev wiki.

Thank you though for demonstrating how to be completely insulting without using any bad words, that was instructive.

[danr]

There's not really much difference between "exploring" this idea "exploring" the idea of a cooking skill. You've already been told by three developers - in a row, at that - why it's a bad idea at a fundamental level. Continuing to pursue it is far more insulting to those people than ebarrett was to you.

That is absurd.

I'm not forcing anyone to read or respond to these posts. This isn't like a face-to-face conversation where I won't let you walk away.

I'm guessing this is a distinction that people like minmay and ebarrett just are not able to see, but there is a difference between the posts above. Yes, all of them thought it was not good idea. But some simply talked about why (which is helpful, it opens the door to addressing those issues) while others just ridicule the idea while adding nothing of value to the conversation.

It's those latter kinds of comments that are a complete waste of space on a forum like this. The only purpose they can serve is to let people feel like they took a good shot at someone, and discourage that person from suggesting things in the future. Which, it now occurs to me, may be what some of you want but it's not what this forum is meant to be like.

For myself, I'm kinda feeling like I don't want to hang out here much right now. Right or not, that's the effect that comments like yours and ebarrett's have and as a mod that concerns me. I know I might come back, but there's no way to know how many others are turned off by it.

[njvack]

Backgrounds in crawl *need* a way to kill things, or otherwise gain XP. A class designed only around escaping is badly designed, because it can't do anything else well.

As long as the only way to gain XP is to kill, pacify, or banish monsters, then yes. There could be other ways to gain XP.

Yes, it'd be a huge change to Crawl's experience mechanic (and I'm not suggesting anyone take that on), but that doesn't mean it's inherently a bad idea. Gods have lots of ways of yielding piety, for example -- and I have a hard time imaging another "piety for kills" god making it in to Crawl, because that idea is kinda boring.

I do agree, though: as things stand now, a build based on not "dealing with" monsters doesn't yield a viable character.

[Deimos]

There's not really much difference between "exploring" this idea "exploring" the idea of a cooking skill. You've already been told by three developers - in a row, at that - why it's a bad idea at a fundamental level. Continuing to pursue it is far more insulting to those people than ebarrett was to you.

That is absurd.

I'm not forcing anyone to read or respond to these posts. This isn't like a face-to-face conversation where I won't let you walk away.

I'm guessing this is a distinction that people like minmay and ebarrett just are not able to see, but there is a difference between the posts above. Yes, all of them thought it was not good idea. But some simply talked about why (which is helpful, it opens the door to addressing those issues) while others just ridicule the idea while adding nothing of value to the conversation.

It's those latter kinds of comments that are a complete waste of space on a forum like this. The only purpose they can serve is to let people feel like they took a good shot at someone, and discourage that person from suggesting things in the future. Which, it now occurs to me, may be what some of you want but it's not what this forum is meant to be like.

For myself, I'm kinda feeling like I don't want to hang out here much right now. Right or not, that's the effect that comments like yours and ebarrett's have and as a mod that concerns me. I know I might come back, but there's no way to know how many others are turned off by it.

To not seem so terrible, my earlier post wasn't criticizing the idea, but rather referencing something.

I guess that that doesn't excuse it for being a waste of a post, but it got me to smirk... sorry if I had contributed to this feeling. You're a nice member, who cares if some people don't like your idea. It's better to be berated for your ideas then be berated for your personality, and we already know which individuals get a lot of flak about their personality.

[XuaXua]

As long as the only way to gain XP is to kill, pacify, or banish monsters, then yes. There could be other ways to gain XP.

Yes, it'd be a huge change to Crawl's experience mechanic (and I'm not suggesting anyone take that on), but that doesn't mean it's inherently a bad idea.

It's actually an excellent idea.

Haters gonna hate...

When you observe the evolution of the classic pen and paper RPGs from which Crawl takes it's origin, you will note that in many games, the reward which gives one advancement ("experience") moves around. It can be straight experience gained only from slaying something, to rewards for direct successful skill use, to rewards for a combination of interaction, participation, and problem solving (where problem solving could be killing something, or otherwise resolving a situation).

How do you apply this in a video game? Well, it depends on the make of the video game. Consider the original Fallout where you can take the diplomat, thief or fighting path and each was challenging in its own way, but (barring bugs) completely viable.

Crawl is one of those games that focuses on defeating and comes from the ancient days of "kill monster = win". This has been adjusted slightly for kills made by allies, where the controlling player gains a percentage of the experience and the ally gains some, but otherwise is stuck in the kill = win. There is no reward for disarming a trap. There is no reward for exploring (except as someone under Ashenzari) - a concept that the crawl-inspired Desktop Dungeons takes to heart. There is no longer a reward for casting spells or using skills successfully; the old reward was XP allocation to a skill, an implementation which translated poorly leading to skill dancing, was correctly removed.

I have a solution to all of this for Crawl, and it derives from some of nvjack's post and I will post it next.

[njvack]

Crawl is one of those games that focuses on defeating and comes from the ancient days of "kill monster = win".

Well, I'm not saying this is a bad thing, either. At some point, Crawl is what it is, and if you want a thief game, play a different game. The rouguelikes I've played based on a non-killdudes (for some values of kill) gameplay style feel very different than Crawl. That might be part and parcel; I'm not dev enough to really know.

I kinda expect no one really knows, and would need to code and balance it to be sure, and it'd be a whole lot of coding and balancing which might amount to nought, or to a game that no longer felt like Crawl. I totally understand if the devteam's consensus is "Crawl is a game in which a thief class will be non-viable for the foreseeable future."

[danr]

There's not really much difference between "exploring" this idea "exploring" the idea of a cooking skill. You've already been told by three developers - in a row, at that - why it's a bad idea at a fundamental level. Continuing to pursue it is far more insulting to those people than ebarrett was to you.

That is absurd.

I'm not forcing anyone to read or respond to these posts. This isn't like a face-to-face conversation where I won't let you walk away.

Nobody else is forcing anyone to read or respond to their posts. So why are you offended?

And ebarrett did point out exactly what was wrong with your revision of the idea. It's a wanderer but worse.

If you read ebarrett's post and you can't tell why it's rude and non-constructive, I can't help you.

[danr]

Crawl is one of those games that focuses on defeating and comes from the ancient days of "kill monster = win".

Well, I'm not saying this is a bad thing, either. At some point, Crawl is what it is, and if you want a thief game, play a different game. The rouguelikes I've played based on a non-killdudes (for some values of kill) gameplay style feel very different than Crawl. That might be part and parcel; I'm not dev enough to really know.

I kinda expect no one really knows, and would need to code and balance it to be sure, and it'd be a whole lot of coding and balancing which might amount to nought, or to a game that no longer felt like Crawl. I totally understand if the devteam's consensus is "Crawl is a game in which a thief class will be non-viable for the foreseeable future."

There are similarities to a thief character, but I think the analogy to wanderer is a bit more apt. It overlaps with a number of things without being any of them.

People seem really stuck on this idea, so I have no choice but to repeat - yes, this class would have to kill monsters. Lots of them. It would simply present different challenges at the start and access to a specific set of tools as it progresses.

To the comment "Why not play a spriggan" - because this would be more interesting than always using the same tactic (running fast). Much of the time you'd have to engage because you do need XP, and quite likely past D1 you'll have a totally reasonable means of dealing with stuff, even if it's just a club or a bunch of darts. Or it could even start with a weapon, that's not the key point anymore (not having a weapon).

But, there would be times when you can't / shouldn't engage. Instead of just being a Spriggan and always running, you could play other races and have choices - should I apport the item? Should I put on swiftness and do the running thing? Should I passwall past this baddie? Or put in a Passage of Golubria as a retreat, and try to engage and escape via the passage if it goes badly? Etc.

One of the great things about Crawl is how open the class system is. Whatever you start as, you can go in many directions. The starting class just kind of lets you pick one set of tools that you will have guaranteed access to. This would just give you that access to avoidance / escape techniques for those to whom there was an appeal in just making sure they have their bases covered in terms of the ability to avoid trouble if they need to. Just like choosing a MiBe gives you that guaranteed access to the Berserk tactic, or playing a Conjurer means you'll have access to blasting spells. Whatever the player would most like to ensure is available, they can get via a background.

This is a theme that's just not available from the start currently, and I still see no reason why it shouldn't be. It's kind of covered by Warper but I still think this would be different in interesting ways - a warper with LRD, swiftness and passwall? If anything it seems likely overpowered to me, not sure why people think it would be weak. Escape is the most powerful tool in the game, that's what keeps you alive in the worst spots.
Anyhow, it's not getting any traction, and I'm not going to push it further. I just thought it was an interesting idea worth discussing

[danr]

Some further, more basic thoughts:

I think what I'm interested in isn't necessarily a thief type or escaping type character. Mostly I'm just interested in figuring out a new starting class that fills a new niche. It's not a small challenge and I'm interested in others thoughts about possibilities.

Where I started with this is the idea that there a lot of utility-type spells in the game. That's sort of a category of magic that is scattered here or there but does not have a specific background dedicated to it. Other categories of magic (creating allies, blasting at range, melee buffs, enemy de-buffs) come in several flavours (e.g. necro, summoning both centre around allies).

So I think my basic, basic concept is a background centred on this category of magic - magic that is not really useful for combat directly (and here escape spells and much of the Tloc school fails what I'm looking for too), just magic that is helpful for non-combat aspects of the game.

Think of it as starting with a generic, non-magic-using background, e.g. a fighter or a hunter. Then you give it these utility spells that don't really apply that directly to killing monsters. It is a buff, but probably not quite the same level of buff as adding magic that is directly useful in combat. So it would be stronger with non-magic tools than say a conjurer or summoner is, but not as strongly equipped with mundane skills / equipment as a hunter or fighter might be.

I guess the niche is a hybrid class that would probably rely on magic less than any other magic-using class, but have just that bit of utility magic that's helpful and creates interesting tactics that other non-magic-users wouldn't have. This also suggests a smaller starting book, perhaps 2-4 spells only.

So, applying my test of what is purely utility magic, i.e. is not that directly useful in combat (which is tricky I admit, everything has some potential use in combat), here are the spells I think would fit my theme:

- Apportation
- Swiftness
- Flight
- Control Teleport

It's sort of a stripped down hybrid between a warper and an AE.

[sardonica]

Running away is currently thrilling and fun because you're always running FOR something else - the chance to kill.

For example I run out of mana and flee from an ogre that's coming at me. Do I use my last few MP to blink, or try for a Mcloud?

I'm almost out of HP and standing on some stairs, do I risk an extra javelin throw at that polearm-wielding orc knight, or go up the stairs?

Or do I just run away and heal up and come back and kill? Or go around the threat?

But this proposal is crappy because, yes, you can run, but you really won't have any of the other choices I listed.

Basically no one would give up a decent starting skill / book just for apportion, flight, swiftness, and... control teleport (? hope you find a book w blink in it!)

At least warpers get those wonky darts...

[danr]

Another approach to finding a new niche between hybrids with strong magic and completely non-magical classes would be to just use L1 spells.

The point though would be to find the right balance. So for instance in comparison to an Arcane Marksman - yes, this would have crappier spells. But it would have better skills or equipment than an AM as a trade-off.

Basically I'm looking a character that is as balanced as any other, but only includes just a bit of magic. Just a few low-level spells that are occasionally helpful, but not game-defining, but that still add an interesting dimension that none of the mundane backgrounds has. It has to be balanced, I agree. The question is, what's that balance, and which spells would add just that bit of interest without being as big a factor in the class as spells are in the other hybrids.

Maybe there is no such balance, or maybe all utility or L1 spells are totally boring or they are overpowered. I just think it's interesting to see if there's a possibility that's been overlooked.

The word "Sorcerer's Apprentice" comes to mind as a name. You're a farmhand who's been apprenticed to a wizard, you've picked up some cantrips but nothing really powerful. Or "Dabbler" - a wealthy townie who has dabbled in the magical arts but then lost interest and so only has a few spells available. But they have the money for some nicer gear than those filthy student wizards.

[sardonica]

Basically I'm looking a character that is as balanced as any other, but only includes just a bit of magic. Just a few low-level spells that are occasionally helpful, but not game-defining, but that still add an interesting dimension that none of the mundane backgrounds has.

A Skald with Summon small mammals instead of brands?

So you've given up on the gimped warper thing and now you want to make a gimped wizard?

The word "Sorcerer's Apprentice" comes to mind as a name.

Pardon, gimped sorcerer...

[danr]

Sort of. Gimped in magic, but then buffed (relative to sorcerer) in mundane skills / equipment.

[Deimos]

That's a very weak niche imho. It might be pretty good gameplay wise, but it seems a little boring...

To be perfectly honest, I think we might need to wait a bit until we can fit some more interesting classes in. I might just be in a creative slump, but all the current niches seem to be filled. We'd need to wait until more open up.

[danr]

Yeah maybe.

Incidentally, I just rolled up a warper. I keep thinking this is a class I should like, but I just don't find them very fun actually.