Spellcaster backgrounds

[casmith789]

It still looks ridiculous. Hey. Hey guys.


BATTLEMAGES.

Just one step short of Witches, I'd swear.

Care to enlighten us with a better proposal?

The term generally used for training magic skills and non-magic skills is "hybrid". Not sure it would fit that well, however.

[OneTrueFelid]

Better than BATTLEMAGES. Yes, the term hybrid is more commonly used but may not be thematic enough. To be honest, I just suggest reverting the selection screen. I don't see a reason to change it. Rearrange it to fit the specifics? Sure, why not? Categorization seems silly.

[OneTrueFelid]

That's exactly why I think this change is unnecessary. I look at the selection screen for all of ten seconds, pick my combination, and then go play. If the classes need to be rearranged so all the proper things are next to each other (weren't they already?) then that's fine. Putting silly category titles on is... silly.

[mumra]

That's exactly why I think this change is unnecessary. I look at the selection screen for all of ten seconds, pick my combination, and then go play. If the classes need to be rearranged so all the proper things are next to each other (weren't they already?) then that's fine. Putting silly category titles on is... silly.

The option "Warmages" was discussed earlier in the thread.

[OneTrueFelid]

Wat.

[casmith789]

Categorisation shouldn't be necessary, because each class should be far enough from another that you can't meaningfully lump them together.

I preferred the old screen too. But as I've been told already on this forum, maybe I'm just change-averse!

[OneTrueFelid]

The evidence supports all accusations and further ones of being lame and a know-nothing. Your political stances do you no credit, minobro. >:[

[galehar]

The point is obviously to help beginners who get overwhelmed by the many choices. You're saying that you barely look at it, yet you're complaining that it has changed.
None of the suggestions which has been posted here is better than battlemage in my opinion.

[OneTrueFelid]

Firstly, I'm saying that I don't care about the aesthetics of the selection screen because I am familiar enough with it now to pick what I want without getting "overwhelmed" by a multitude of choices. I agree with casmith in that the classes are distinct enough now (especially with the removal of Reavers, alterations to the nuances between Necromancer, Priest [Yred] (removed), and Death Knight) to not be lumped together.

BATTLEMAGES.

[dpeg]

I support to close this thread, it has done its duty.
The starting screen is a lot better than it used to be. I might like Warmage more than Battlemage but that's a very minor issue.
Also, development is not a democratic process. That some of you don't like a change does not mean that we roll it back. Accusations won't get anything across apart from your rudeness.

[mumra]

Wat.

I quoted the wrong post. I meant to respond to the comment that "Battlemages" wasn't a good category title.

[danr]

I don't think "spellblade" sounds any cooler, in fact I'd say a lot less.

[galehar]

As long as we're going into this: I think "Zealot" and "Adventurer" sound very silly as well. Not as silly as "battlemage" or "spellblade," but close.

'Course, I think the same about half of the background names, so...

Thanks, this is very helpful.

[danr]

A few comments:

- First, it's a change and it will just take some time for people to get used to it.
- Seriously, you're worried about how "cool" a category title in a ROGUELIKE sounds? Do some of you think you'll get more girls playing this game if the category is "spellblade" or "warmage"?

Okay, silliness aside, by pure serendipity in my current game I have actually found the "sabre of the warrior-mage" (+2,+2, speed, rElec, but that's beside the point). I would offer as a constructive suggestion using warrior-mage instead of battlemage because a) it is apparently already used in-game in this way and b) it is actually a combination of the other categories of "warrior" and "mage".

Please some of you, if you want to complain, offer an alternative suggestion to the thing you are complaining about. You defeat your own argument if you claim that something is lame but are unable to offer anything better. If you can't think of something better, you can hardly complain that others couldn't either.

[galehar]

I haven't found this in the learndb. And why the uppercase?
Anyway, one more like this and I'm locking the thread.

[galehar]

Fair enough. I'm locking threads when there's nothing left than trolls, offensive and off-topic messages being posted to it. This one hasn't seen many bright posts lately.
I don't like warmage, but warrior-mage is indeed a good suggestion.

[ryak]

FWIW i think the change was a good one.

[mumra]

The main reason people didn't seem keen on Hybrid was that new players might not know what it meant. But to be honest, I think anyone can quickly work that out from seeing it positioned in between "Warrior" and "Mage", and from a quick look at the kind of themes in that background. So I vote for plain Hybrid.

Zealots -> Spiritualists or Believers
Adventurers -> Others; it doesn't sound as "cool" but it's just more accurate, Adventurers doesn't really mean anything in context

[danr]

Adventurers - this was my suggestion, so I'll go to bat for it. Adventurer simply means one who sets off in search of adventure. That suits the wanderer perfectly. It also suits artificer if you think of them as the tinkerer or handyman who goes from town to town plying his trade, and who has gotten tired of rigging magical doorbells for dukes and princesses and wants to try an adventure in the dungeon.

This is in distinction from the other classes who are not just ordinary people seeking adventure, but professional warriors and mages etc.

Zealots: the name is not bad but others could work too. Believers is pretty good. Crusaders would actually make a lot more sense for this group than for how it is currently used.

However, I'll throw another suggestion out there: Holy Warrior or Divine Warrior. That again fits with the warrior / warrior mage approach if that is taken.

[zasvid]

However, I'll throw another suggestion out there: Holy Warrior or Divine Warrior. That again fits with the warrior / warrior mage approach if that is taken.

If everyone is some kind of a Warrior, is it meaningful to have that word in category titles?

[danr]

Everyone except mages and adventurers.

I see three basic approaches to naming the categories:
Technical - this would be names like "Melee-based", "Magic-oriented", "Hybrid", "Religious" and "Other"
Original - Crawl could create it's own categories like ""spellblade", "God-sent", etc.
General - Warrior, Mage, etc.

Any of these would work, the main thing is that a consistent approach be used.

[szanth]

Suggestions from the learndb, the foremost authority on the subject:

WAR WARLOCK
ASSAULT ALCHEMIST
STRUGGLE MUGGLE
SKIRMISH SHAMAN
ONSLAUGHT OCCULTIST
CONFLICT CONJURER
ALTERCATION ARCHMAGE
SPELLCLASHER
SCUFFLE SORCERER
COMBATOMANCER
CARNAGEOLOGIST
SOOTHSLAYER
KILLUSIONIST
FIGHTWIZARD
BRAWLTHAUMATURGE
TRANSMUTILATOR
PUNCHCASTER
FRACASMAGICKER

At this point? I think it's probably physically impossible to come up with a name for this that isn't, well, silly.

I love you and the fightwizard.

[Jeremiah]

Reading this has made me think that "Zealot" might actually be a better name than "Priest" for the Hill Orc follower of Beogh background, as they are quite different from the Priest of Zin so having a different name would distinguish them.

"Fanatic" could be used instead if it would be confusing to have "Zealot" as a category in the table of backgrounds as well as an individual background.

I'm not sure if it's a good idea to have a whole background that is only available to one species, however.

[galehar]

Reading this has made me think that "Zealot" might actually be a better name than "Priest" for the Hill Orc follower of Beogh background, as they are quite different from the Priest of Zin so having a different name would distinguish them.

"Fanatic" could be used instead if it would be confusing to have "Zealot" as a category in the table of backgrounds as well as an individual background.

I'm not sure if it's a good idea to have a whole background that is only available to one species, however.

But we have monster orc priests already.

[ryak]

no reason why they couldn't be orc zealots, i guess.

[galehar]

no reason why they couldn't be orc zealots, i guess.

Their iconic monsters who kill many new players. It's like renaming Sigmund.

[smock]

no reason why they couldn't be orc zealots, i guess.

Their iconic monsters who kill many new players. It's like renaming Sigmund.

Sigbot?

Even if orc preists remain orc priests, there's lot of room for fun names. Shaman, cleric, curate, confessor, lama, etc.

[roguelikedev]

From a number of other comments and my own experience, it seems Vehumet is just way better in nearly all games.

Sorry for not reading the interceding comments, but Sif Muna is the best reason in the game to play a mummy. Since she started making you go into the inventory screen every few minutes with random spellbooks instead of squaring you away with a name on the cover you could look at, recognize and leave on the ground I'd also call mummies the only reason to play Sif Muna.

[galehar]

I was about to say that this is off-topic, but I can't even remember what is the topic of this thread. Anyway, the discussion has obviously drifted off of game design. The background selection menu is good enough for 0.8 in my opinion. If anyone has some good suggestions for it, please open a new thread, as I'm locking this one.