Unique idea

[khalil]

Kay, I had an idea for a unique, but I figured I'd run it by the fourms before coding it in case it turns out no-one likes it.
Medusa:
She is only found in a vault, where she is surrounded by 1x1 bits of wall that claim to be statues and use the tile of a statue. The reason I'm not just using statues is because walls block LOS.
She has low hit points, but is basicly immune to ranged attacks.
She is immobile (to avoid her wandering out from the vault)
And she has a something out of 5 chance of casting petrify on everything in her los. This won't be deadly on its own, but if some other monsters show up when you're petrified, things could get bad.
The idea is you have to use the statues as cover to sneak up and kill her in melee.
As far as her speach goes, in the orgional myth she was a human turned into a monster against her will as a punishment for something she had no controll over, so I figure it should reflect that:
(Normal stuff): Medusa <cries/sobs/whatever>
"I used to be beautifull."
"Athena!(Or possibly one of the crawl gods.) Why did you do this to me?"
"What did I do to deserve this?"
(On seeing the player)
"Don't look at me!"
"I'm hidious!"
(On death)
"Why?"
Anyway, what do you think?

[mumra]

Luckily I have
a) A memory reaching back more than a month, and
b) The non-unique ability to use the forum search function

All of which makes it very easy to link to this: https://crawl.develz.org/tavern/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=1885&p=95284&hilit=medusa#p95284

[khalil]

Luckily I have
a) A memory reaching back more than a month, and
b) The non-unique ability to use the forum search function

All of which makes it very easy to link to this: https://crawl.develz.org/tavern/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=1885&p=95284&hilit=medusa#p95284

I remember it too. I'm still not sure why medusa is considered to be an icon of nethack instead of greek myths.
The reason I started this is because I wasn't sure if the mechanics I thought up would be at all that fun, and I was hopeing for feedback on that. Also, it was a month old, and posting it that probably counts as a thread necro or something.

[BlackSheep]

She is immobile

This right here will guarantee a lot of opposition.

[mumra]

I remember it too. I'm still not sure why medusa is considered to be an icon of nethack instead of greek myths.
The reason I started this is because I wasn't sure if the mechanics I thought up would be at all that fun, and I was hopeing for feedback on that. Also, it was a month old, and posting it that probably counts as a thread necro or something.

You already necro'd that other thread; perhaps you'd have got a response if you'd asked a polite question instead of calling a devteam member a plebian.

I don't think it's worth me explaining how something can be an iconic feature of two things at once. But I don't think anyone would want to make that three things.

[cerebovssquire]

Besides the Nethack thing - which admittedly does seem a bit far-fetched considering our other parallels, though I've never played Nethack - I don't think merging Roxanne and catlobes is unique. There are a couple added things, such as the tactical enviroment with statues, which is almost exactly like numerous vaults with many walls where dodging behind them and keeping monsters in melee range is a good idea. In fact, this is basic positioning used everywhere in the dungeon.
The catoblepas Lair ending uses petrification much more interestingly, allowing you to use it against other monsters easily and forcing you to walk up a straight corridor to fight a catoblepas.

[mumra]

Galehar made this pretty unambiguous:

We already have enough references to NH, so no medusa for me, thank you very much.

Sure this is a Roguelike, it's impossible to avoid absolutely everything Nethack ever did. But Medusa was a major boss with her own floor, and Crawl is a different game; there is plenty of untapped mythology as well as the infinite realms of human imagination to be tapped to invent new uniques, rather than retreading old paths ...

[khalil]

Galehar made this pretty unambiguous:

We already have enough references to NH, so no medusa for me, thank you very much.

Sure this is a Roguelike, it's impossible to avoid absolutely everything Nethack ever did. But Medusa was a major boss with her own floor, and Crawl is a different game; there is plenty of untapped mythology as well as the infinite realms of human imagination to be tapped to invent new uniques, rather than retreading old paths ...

I woudn't know, as I never got that far in nethack.
I didn't really think of it as a NH ref, as there was the whole greek myth thing.

Besides the Nethack thing - which admittedly does seem a bit far-fetched considering our other parallels, though I've never played Nethack - I don't think merging Roxanne and catlobes is unique. There are a couple added things, such as the tactical enviroment with statues, which is almost exactly like numerous vaults with many walls where dodging behind them and keeping monsters in melee range is a good idea. In fact, this is basic positioning used everywhere in the dungeon.
The catoblepas Lair ending uses petrification much more interestingly, allowing you to use it against other monsters easily and forcing you to walk up a straight corridor to fight a catoblepas.

Point. I'll probably go make something else then. Thanks for the feedback.

[mumra]

I didn't get that far in Nethack either. On the other hand Google is incredibly easy to use.

[mumra]

http://www.google.com/search?q=medusa

I looked through the first five pages of my results and none of them were nethack

I mean obviously adding Medusa to Crawl is a ridiculous idea but using "it's in NetHack" as an argument is even more ridiculous IMO

A search that might work is "nethack medusa" ...?

Nobody is claiming that Medusa is more associated with Nethack than with Greek Mythology. But for anyone who knows Nethack well, it appears an association exists.

[Grimm]

medusa roguelike would be more to the point

[WildSam]

Nobody is claiming that Medusa is more associated with Nethack than with Greek Mythology. But for anyone who knows Nethack well, it appears an association exists.

  Code:

Nethack Medusa: About 23,700 results
Nethack: About 1,690,000 results

Doesnt looks like she's some kind of famous feature of Nethack. E.g. "dungeon crawl" gives only 3 times more hits than "dungeon crawl sigmund" (which 1.8 * same with Boris or 4 * same with Mennas or 8 * same with kobold).

  Code:

Medusa: About 34,900,000 results.

  Code:

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Medusa

Doesnt look like her appearance in Nethack is something unique or even just special, especially for game in fantasy setting.

I dont get how somebody can associate Medusa with Nethack above Greek mythos. May be because read too much of it in childhood.

I dont get at all (especially if anybody agrees Medusa mostly associated with Greek mythos) how somebody can use argument like "too much nethack already."
We got playable humans, goblins and longswords already. Even maze with minotaur. What's wrong with Medusa?
Also i just got nice idea about reducing Crawl's nethackity by removing minotaurs and taking back glorious MD.

I should note: i dont like this idea, especially dramatic flavour. New kind of monster can be nice tho.

[crate]

i'm not sure we need a unique that is even worse than roxanne in gameplay

[njvack]

The idea is you have to use the statues as cover to sneak up and kill her in melee.

Why would I not just put an exclusion on her and walk away?

[cjo]

I realize not all crawl players used to play nethack, but I did. I loved that game.

Nethack did not have uniques distributed throughout the dungeon like Crawl does. Most uniques appeared very late in the game. A loose (very very loose) Crawl analog would be if extra-special-unique-of-your-choice was the only pre-Zot unique, if Pan and Hell were part of Zot, and the only other uniques were the Pan and Hell lords.

Because Nethack is part of Crawl history, I absolutely would think of Nethack if I met Medusa. I'm not saying that's automatically good or bad, just that it is. I would be inclined to see it as an homage, even if it wasn't. And yes, I already knew about the Greek myth before I started playing Nethack. It's a matter of context.

[mumra]

I dont get at all (especially if anybody agrees Medusa mostly associated with Greek mythos) how somebody can use argument like "too much nethack already."

If you're familiar with DCSS's development then "Nethack did it" is a perfectly good argument to say no to something.

[Sandman25]

No more statues please. They can be impossible to beat without spoilers: some are destroyed by a single zap from wand of disintegration, others are immune to it, some make you blink without any chance for you to resist, other throw high level magic spells. And now here is a suggestion to have a statue which is immune to ranged attacks.

[Lasty]

Medusa in Nethack is notable because she poses a unique and game-ending threat: looking at her can kill you instantly, forcing you to fight blind. Medusa in Crawl would be pointless because you can't fight blind and the game will not include any instant-kills. Petrify in Crawl is basically paralysis where you get improved defenses and some time to react, and we already have monsters that use it.

The themes that would make Medusa an interesting unique are not themes which work in Crawl. If the idea of Medusa is broadened to the point where she becomes interesting in Crawl, she would probably little resemble the Medusa of mythology, and would most likely be better served by another name.

[sgrunt]

Medusa

It certainly is a unique idea.

[khalil]

The idea is you have to use the statues as cover to sneak up and kill her in melee.

Why would I not just put an exclusion on her and walk away?

The idea was that she would have good loot and it would be like one of those groves where you've got an ooklob tree and a bunch of loot.
I say was because the purpose of this thread was to see if people would like such an addition to the game and the answer to that question seems to be no.

[ZipZipskins]

Doesnt looks like she's some kind of famous feature of Nethack. E.g. "dungeon crawl" gives only 3 times more hits than "dungeon crawl sigmund" (which 1.8 * same with Boris or 4 * same with Mennas or 8 * same with kobold).

As someone who played Nethack a lot, I can assure you that Medusa is a famous feature of Nethack. She had her own level, the navigation of which was an obstacle on its own. She was a gateway to what was the most important (some would say truly the only) real milestone in the whole game, that being the Castle and the guaranteed wand of wishing. She meant at least a 25% chance at a shield of reflection (and with the proper level layout at 75% chance) with those percentages flipped for a shot at boots of levitation in the other layout.

She HERSELF was not particularly dangerous for the spoiled (kind of like all of Nethack) which I think explains the lack of results on your Google search- it doesn't matter how spoiled you are, Sigmund, Boris, Mennas, and sometimes even kobolds can still be major threats depending on how you encounter them, so it makes sense people are writing and talking about them. Beating Medusa boils down to either "have a source of reflection" or "wrap a towel around your head and wail on her with telepathy".

That being said, literally any Nethack player would see Medusa's inclusion in Crawl as at the very least a tip of the hat to Nethack, being that she and her level represent a pretty major break from the dungeon proper and a rather important milestone/gateway, and as stated by the devs, Crawl doesn't need any more Nethack references.

Yes she was in Greek mythology first. So?

edit: yes I know a lot of this has been covered but I couldn't just let someone who clearly didn't really play nethack talk about the game using google statistics as if they were meaningful in context

[nicolae]

there were two other Gorgons, with cooler names, if we need a petrifying unique who's not Roxanne 2.0 why not just go with Stheno or Euryale

[WildSam]

If you're familiar with DCSS's development then "Nethack did it" is a perfectly good argument to say no to something.

There is one thing i really like in DC:SS project. Clarity.
Even manual says about design philosophy. I can check this forum and see how concepts and features are born or rejected. With rational reasoning behind. Reasoning i can understand.
E.g. I understand "no nethackish bones because they're scummy".
"Nethack did it" isnt rational reason. But considering said above, probably there is something not-obvious explanation, why devteam should use that. Looks like fastest way, without repeating things said before.
I always considered borrowing of good features and learning on mistakes of others as good strategy.
Why implementing something from Nethack (it's not matter, Medusa-like unique or whatever) can be bad in itself?

...some facts about Medusa in Nethack...
...Medusa in Nethack basicly is simple gearcheck so people dont want to talk abot her...
Yes she was in Greek mythology first. So?
edit: yes I know a lot of this has been covered but I couldn't just let someone who clearly didn't really play nethack talk about the game using google statistics as if they were meaningful in context

1. I remember one guy in Crawl. You know, like unique. Even more - with his own level! And unique artifact.
And his level is also entrance to like half of endgame content. Sounds like we found iconic character of Crawl?
Oh, probably, no. Just 53 mSig (milliSigmunds, obviously).
Maybe that's all about those leviboots and reflection shield with 50% probablity each?
Or am i wrong and Geryon is icon?
2. It destroys my statistical argument, yes. But how can you consider gearcheck with snakehairs as iconic character?
3. It means Medusa, not as character, not as some concept is something special. At all. I can understand some people (also i doubt there is majority of such players (and yes, i based that on statistics (without google))) got huge expirience (and yes, its mostly not about where you read about her first) in Nethack and liked it. And got some associations. But it doesnt make some stereotypical character a icon, or association that requre care.
4. a) You played Nethack much more than i. No doubt, youre cool guy. How much ascensions?
b) This google argument was meaningful, at least for my understanding of "strong association"/"iconic". I may be wrong. Or just didnt get this thing. This method can be far from perfect, but its fast and gives some information.
If you have any more appropriate statistic - welcome.
Also i used that statistic thing not because i suck at Nethack (never saw even Medusa tho), but because when people start arguing subjectivly (mumra says "nethackish", minmay says "not nethackish", you say "nethackish", i say "not nethackish" etc.) usually its good idea to put facts (as statistics) in use instead of just giving another "i think that way".

[WildSam]

there were two other Gorgons, with cooler names, if we need a petrifying unique who's not Roxanne 2.0 why not just go with Stheno or Euryale

One problem: they're immortal. Boris with petrify?

[mumra]

"Nethack did it" isnt rational reason. But considering said above, probably there is something not-obvious explanation, why devteam should use that. Looks like fastest way, without repeating things said before.

There is this aspect: I try reasonable statements like "Medusa was an iconic milestone in Nethack" and people start throwing around completely pointless and irrelevant arguments about whether she's a bigger icon of Nethack or Greek Mythology. Sometimes it's far far easier (and much more productive) to just be able to say "this isn't happening, end of discussion".

I always considered borrowing of good features and learning on mistakes of others as good strategy.

Absolutely, and Nethack is a big source of mistakes that Crawl has learned not to repeat.

Why implementing something from Nethack (it's not matter, Medusa-like unique or whatever) can be bad in itself?

I'm pretty sure it's been said like numerous times now that it's not bad in itself, but this example is just too cheesy for some people's palate.

b) This google argument was meaningful, at least for my understanding of "strong association"/"iconic". I may be wrong. Or just didnt get this thing. This method can be far from perfect, but its fast and gives some information.
If you have any more appropriate statistic - welcome.

Using the number of Google hits for a given subject is a ludicrous means to infer anything. This is not rational. I'm pretty sure you don't know much about how Google works. For one thing, it's possible to get wildly varying numbers of results depending on where in the world you are and therefore which server cluster you're nearest. Numbers can swing back and forth daily. Sorry, it's not a meaningful statistic. The best it can tell you is whether a lot of people have heard of something or not. All that I can tell from that 23,700 result is that, yes, a lot of people have heard of the Nethack-Medusa connection: this completely backs up my argument. You can't gain anything else from it.

In the spirit of this, however, I just went out in the street and asked 10 completely random people what they thought of Nethack and Medusa. None of them had even heard of Nethack. So I conclude that Nethack doesn't actually exist and we must all be delusional.

[roctavian]

Using the number of Google hits for a given subject is a ludicrous means to infer anything.

I think it's nice for estimating off-the-cuff frequency of language usage (e.g. in the office a couple days ago, two people were arguing whether "Applicants who want to improve their chance" or "Applicants who want to improve their chances" is more correct, and I had to do a quick Google search simply to shut them up) but certainly not something to back up an argument.

@OP: if you're truly interested in coding a new unique, I'd shoot for one of the player races not yet represented, like a Demonspawn or an Octopode or best of all a Felid, as discussed in the cited recent thread.

[dpeg]

Despite all the Nethack bashing [*], we're not too picky to actually lift some mechanics from that game. Two cases where that happened: shafts are pretty much a trap that Nethack alread had (minus all the digging nonsense); ammunition enchantments have been changed not so long ago (they used to help against mulching, now they increase damage).

[*] The bashing shouldn't be seen as harshly, it is mostly a joke. Most of us have played Nethack. Many of us actually got into rogueliking through Nethack. Then again, many of us left Nethack because of (i) the "development" model and (ii) the brokeness. Hence the malice.

[Galefury]

ammunition enchantments have been changed not so long ago (they used to help against mulching, now they increase damage).

Ammunition enchantments have been changed to not exist.

[galehar]

"Nethack did it" isnt rational reason. But considering said above, probably there is something not-obvious explanation, why devteam should use that. Looks like fastest way, without repeating things said before.

Most crawl devs have played nethack before. In a way, the motivation behind creating dungeon crawl in the first place was to make a roguelike which avoids all nethack mistakes. Of course, nethack had very different design goals when it was created. It was meant to be played without spoilers to begin with. What's interesting about nethack is discovering it, not winning it. But that was decades ago. And when Linley started coding crawl, people were still playing nethack, but internet was ubiquitous and everybody was playing with spoiler. So the game had changed to become a scumming/farming fest.

I always considered borrowing of good features and learning on mistakes of others as good strategy.

Of course. But the main thing we learned from nethack is how not to do things.

Why implementing something from Nethack (it's not matter, Medusa-like unique or whatever) can be bad in itself?

OK, note that this argument originated from a one line post I made almost 2 years ago. People have linked to it and turned it into something it wasn't meant to be. I am not The Voice Of The Devteam, it was just my opinion at the moment. But now, I guess I have to elaborate and explain.

So, In My Humble Opinion, being a nethack feature doesn't prevent something from being integrated into crawl. But we try to move away from our original inspiration, so I still consider it as a downside. We're trying to create something different, not a NH clone. Of course, Medusa originated from the Greek mythology and that's what most people will associate it with. But we're not most people, we're roguelike players. And most of us have played nethack. A lot. So in our community, Medusa is an iconic nethack monster.

That being said, the OP's proposal (statue immune to ranged attacks) is terrible. On second reading, Mumra's proposal from 2 years ago is much better. It integrates better with crawl's gameplay and is quite different from the NH monster.

[WildSam]

In the spirit of this, however, I just went out in the street and asked 10 completely random people what they thought of Nethack and Medusa. None of them had even heard of Nethack. So I conclude that Nethack doesn't actually exist and we must all be delusional.

More correct: you asked 1000, 100 were aknowledged about Nethack and only 7 about Meduse. (random numbers)
I checked same about "nethack" and crawl, as i wrote. Because i dont believe this googly thing to be precise in any degree.
Some logical (as i see them) statements:
0. Iconic things are popular.
0. Hits correlate with popularity.
1. Nethack got much more hits than nethacky Medusa.
2. Crawl got even not close that difference with crawly Sigmund (cool and popular guy by my opinion (I got funny picture of Sigmund. Funny picture made on imageboard. Local russian imageboard. If it isnt popularity - i dont know what)).
3. Different Crawl uniques got lower score, but still much better than Medusa relatively to pure gamename-query.
Duduction: Medusa isnt close to really iconic for nethack.

But we're not most people, we're roguelike players. And most of us have played nethack. A lot. So in our community, Medusa is an iconic nethack monster.

Oh-oh! Did i say about statistics for this?
Just check survey results. 2009 and 2012.
In 2009, ~250 players, 74% played Nethack (still doesnt mean "played significantly and before crawl", whats obviously a prerequisite for this medusy-nethacky thing).
In 2012, ~6300 players (forget 10% who didnt finish survey). ~25 times more.
No info about other roguelikes, but i believe chances than new player will be nethack-experienced are lower with every day. Because every nethack player interested in crawl already got enought time for trying it.
Considering Nethack dead and Crawl being casual roguelike new players tend to be not very rogueliky.
May be sound wierd, but its pretty casual. With all this design idea it becomes "easy to learn, hard to master" with extremely nice tile grafics (for roguelike of course) and friendly interface. And smooth tutorial.
You can check ascii/tiles statistics also. Same idea, but you can see huge difference in 3 years.
So there are no most of us who played nethack more.

Damn, screw this thing. I just saw as mumra gets his idea rejected because nethackity and then starts to reject same idea because nethackity like galehar bited him or like that. And at first glance this rejection conception suck.
Then he says something about icons (looks like not in the meaning i use), then somebody make worst statistic using attempt ever like "i checked first five pages of medusa-query and didnt find nethack here".
Also i just love arguing, statistics and Sigmund.
If devs would need statistical justification for some sick change like removing race loved by everyone, call me.

[galehar]

Just check survey results. 2009 and 2012.
In 2009, ~250 players, 74% played Nethack (still doesnt mean "played significantly and before crawl", whats obviously a prerequisite for this medusy-nethacky thing).
In 2012, ~6300 players (forget 10% who didnt finish survey). ~25 times more.

Oh, that's probably right. We're going mainstream, new players don't care about Nethack! Yay!
However, if you look at the population of developers or the population of people involved in crawl's design you'll probably find a majority of people who have played a lot of nethack.

Anyway, can we just drop this silly argument about nethack? It's getting boring. I'd rather talk about the design of a new unique monster, even if it's called medusa. And who cares about statistics? 82% of them are made up anyway.

[mumra]

Some logical (as i see them) statements:
0. Iconic things are popular.
0. Hits correlate with popularity.

I could see how the rest of your deductions followed. Unfortunately these base assumptions are both fallacies.

An icon is defined as "An important and enduring symbol". This has nothing to do with popularity.

Google hits are effectively random. Sure they can be used as a completely vague yardstick, but "correlation" is a very strong word.

Damn, screw this thing. I just saw as mumra gets his idea rejected because nethackity and then starts to reject same idea because nethackity like galenahar bited him or like that. And at first glance this rejection conception suck.
Then he says something about icons (looks like not in the meaning i use), then somebody make worst statistic using attempt ever like "i checked first five pages of medusa-query and didnt find nethack here".
Also i just love arguing, statistics and Sigmund.

I can 100% agree on something: this whole thread is ridiculous

If devs would need statistical justification for some sick change like removing race loved by everyone, call me.

Wait, did you just invoke MD? This is like Crawl's equivalent of Godwin.

Anyway, nobody needs any statistical justification for anything. If something improves the game that's enough reason. Nethack is irrelevant here; in my opinion a petrifying unique wouldn't improve the game. It was a long time ago when I wrote that proposal.

[Kate]

Maybe if this was actually a good proposal for a unique other than just "it's Medusa, she casts petrify" then this discussion would be worth having at all.

[ZipZipskins]

It is reasonably likely that I have been playing NetHack for longer than you have, but I confess I never thought Medusa was a famous feature of it! She struck me as less memorable than some of the quest nemeses. Or most of the non-unique monsters. Maybe I had just seen her in too much other media?

See, that's interesting, because she really struck me simply by virtue of having her own level with such a strange and jarring layout from the rest of the dungeon. It probably is likely you've been playing longer, haha. And yeah, the quest nemeses were generally significantly more memorable, what with all the dialogue and flavor added to them.

I guess really the whole thing is about perceptions, as such discussions or disputes so often are. I was really just trying to relate my NetHack experience and concur with the thought that "some players (maybe many) would view the adding of this 'unique' to Crawl as a NetHack reference."

b) This google argument was meaningful, at least for my understanding of "strong association"/"iconic". I may be wrong. Or just didnt get this thing. This method can be far from perfect, but its fast and gives some information.
If you have any more appropriate statistic - welcome.

awww mannn I didn't say that at all

ALSO what if she cast petrify AND she had a hydra on her head that could ride around on her and bite you like 30 times

[mumra]

awww mannn I didn't say that at all

Oops, sorry :S the thread had me so bamboozled by this point my vision was starting to blur...

[ZipZipskins]

No sweat, I just thought it was funny that I had made the opposite point. XD

To be honest, I have no idea what happened in the thread after minmay's post, I was just intrigued when I saw my user name pop up in a quote.

[Martyr of Zot]

ALSO what if she cast petrify AND she had a hydra on her head that could ride around on her and bite you like 30 times

OR.. what if she could cast sticks to snakes only in reverse and WHAMMO!! with her multi-cudgel headbut.

[Lasty]

OR.. what if she could cast sticks to snakes only in reverse and WHAMMO!! with her multi-cudgel headbut.

This is the best terrible idea I've heard yet.

[Frelus]

How about a snake god that lets you invoke a corrupt level-esque ability that randomly turns walls into allied writhing masses of snakes?
Other abilites would be to make you lose your legs, give you a poison fang mutation, and finally let you brand your weapon with a (stronger than usual) poison brand.
Also, makes you able to turn enemy weapons, even metal, into snakes.