Buff Mummies

[damiac]

As it stands, mummies seem to be regarded as the worst race in the game. Not only that, but they're considered to be the worst in every single part of the game.

So, my question is why? Are they just intended to trap new players who are overly worried about hunger into playing a weak race for a largely unimportant benefit?

I would like to propose that mummies be made less terrible.

To do so, I would propose that all their -2 apts are changed to -1, and their built in cold resistance increased to RC++.

I think that still leaves them pretty weak, but it's an improvement from what they are now.

[bcadren]

This is what happened last time someone proposed this. [It got moved to CYC, but it was originally here.]

[Cheibrodos]

Because they are a fun challenge? I don't think mummies need to be buffed because they supposedly bait players into having a bad experience.

[Sar]

But then some other race (probably Formicids) will be The Worst Race Ever, should we buff them too? Mummies are weak and awful, but mummies are very much winnable; I'd say the only issue with them is probably the fun special interaction with confusion they have. Also, what Chei said.

[and into]

Well as for the actual proposal, its more appropriate in CYC, however the question of *why* mummies are as they are seems relevant enough for GDD. So I think the thread can stay here, at least for the moment.

Some species will be the worst, and if this is the case, then it makes sense (in a way) to intentionally, self-consciously make one the species into an intentional challenge regardless of background chosen (though some make mummies even harder). Such a species should also be distinct and stand out from the others, as all species ideally should in Crawl.

Taking aptitudes -2 to -1 would kind of go against that.

rC++ maybe not, but it isn't a big change either way, frankly. I don't think any mummies are dying to cold attacks in early game or anything, such that this buff actually helps.

I think everything that's to be said about buffing mummies was covered in that last thread, which bcadren helpfully linked right off the bat.

Very new players who are still struggling with learning food management and who are worried about hunger can play Trolls and/or Kobolds, which unlike mummies are actually recommended.

[Mankeli]

I think that still leaves them pretty weak, but it's an improvement from what they are now.

How does buffing equal an improvement? I'm sorry but I've always found mummies to be one of the most entertaining species so I certainly won't support any changes that seem to based on the assumption that more powerful = more fun/better design.

[khalil]

Because they are a fun challenge?

I am curious as to what your definition of fun is.

But then some other race (probably Formicids) will be The Worst Race Ever, should we buff them too? Mummies are weak and awful, but mummies are very much winnable; I'd say the only issue with them is probably the fun special interaction with confusion they have. Also, what Chei said.

Yes, we should. I'll be honest, I'm of the opinion that the races should all be on a fairly equal footing. Isn't crawl supposed to be all about there not being an "optimal" choice?

How does buffing equal an improvement? I'm sorry but I've always found mummies to be one of the most entertaining species so I certainly won't support any changes that seem to based on the assumption that more powerful = more fun/better design.

I enjoy mummies too. That doesn't mean they don't suck. If an option is so terrible it is only taken by A: people who suck at the game and B: people who want to shoot themselves in the foot, that probably means it isn't very well balanced.

As far as design goes, think about it this way. Imagine that mummies weren't in the game.
Then imagine some idiot showed up in GDD and said "You know what this game needs? A race that ignores one of the main mechanics used to prevent grinding, but makes up for it via terrible attributes that force them to do so! Now you can farm lair until the sun goes out!"
He'd be thrown into CYC in under five seconds, and he'd deserve it. However, mummies have been in the game for a very long time, and they have sucked for a very long time, so people are willing to defend them, similar to how there were people who defended Hive, or Victory Dancing.

[Sar]

I am curious as to what your definition of fun is.

Not him, but that's pretty easy:

Spoiler: show

Seriously, fun is subjective. No one says you must have fun while playing mummies. That said, some people like overcoming obstacles. If every race was equal in power to, say, HO, Crawl would be a pretty boring game for me.

I'm of the opinion that the races should all be on a fairly equal footing.

I'm pretty sure races are the way Crawl does difficulty levels, which I personally like.

A race that ignores one of the main mechanics used to prevent grinding, but makes up for it via terrible attributes that force them to do so

The main disadvantage of mummies is not aptitudes. Mummies would not become that much better even if they had Hu apts.
Also I won 4 mummies, and I never grind with them.

[damiac]

Well as for the actual proposal, its more appropriate in CYC, however the question of *why* mummies are as they are seems relevant enough for GDD. So I think the thread can stay here, at least for the moment.

I think everything that's to be said about buffing mummies was covered in that last thread, which bcadren helpfully linked right off the bat.

Actually, in that linked thread, pretty much nothing about buffing mummies was discussed at all, it was about some weird melee contamination. Nobody listed a single problem with buffing mummies there, so I don't understand how you can say it was covered there, it was just derailed.

Anyway, my proposals of -1 instead of -2 apts was just to make them slightly less bad. The RC++ just seemed more consistant with undead stuff, but it's really not too important either way. I was just trying to think of a minor buff you could give them.

I don't believe the only thing that makes mummies interesting is that they're really bad. No potions by itself is a very interesting mechanic. Full torment and pain immunity is interesting. A built in necro boost is interesting. I just don't see the point of a race where the best advice regarding that race is "Don't play them". But maybe a blanket change to apts isn't really interesting either.

What about a built in, activated ability "Curse of the mummy".
Causes exhaustion, or some other timeout, plus some MP.
It could give a random irresistible debuff to a targeted monster, chosen from the following list:
- -X to accuracy and damage. X is based on XL
- -10% max HP
- fear
- slow
- flavor text

This ability would most useful in the early game, where mummies could use a survivability boost, but would remain somewhat useful all game, while not being incredibly game changing either. I'd think the timeout should be rather long, maybe even XP based, given that mummies are quite able to 5 away any turn based timeout. Being able to 'curse' things makes thematic sense for a mummy.

On a related note, shouldn't mummies have at least a 0, if not higher aptitude for hexes?

[Kate]

But then some other race (probably Formicids) will be The Worst Race Ever, should we buff them too? Mummies are weak and awful, but mummies are very much winnable; I'd say the only issue with them is probably the fun special interaction with confusion they have. Also, what Chei said.

Yes, we should. I'll be honest, I'm of the opinion that the races should all be on a fairly equal footing. Isn't crawl supposed to be all about there not being an "optimal" choice?

See the readme.

[Jeremiah]

Why not extend the necromancy power boost to some other magic schools where spellpower actually matters, like conjurations & summoning.

It wouldn't be a huge buff (it would probably come too late to really matter) but could make them more fun.

[Klown]

Still say species should be separated into 'Easy' 'Normal' 'Hard' if they aren't balanced.
Like how it shows warrior, mage, etc.

[damiac]

Then imagine some idiot showed up in GDD and said "You know what this game needs? A race that ignores one of the main mechanics used to prevent grinding, but makes up for it via terrible attributes that force them to do so! Now you can farm lair until the sun goes out!"

This is a falsehood about mummies, they certainly do not require scumming to win. Also, food doesn't really prevent grinding, since there's quite an overabundance of it anyway. I just wanted to make it clear that I'm not saying mummies are terrible because they require scummy play.

I don't see anything in the readme, or the manual that states that some races are supposed to be worse than the rest. What it does say is that it's ok if they're not all balanced. So that does mean "Mummies aren't as good as everything else" isn't a good enough reason to make a change, but "This will make mummies less terrible" is NOT a good enough reason to reject any proposal to improve them. And if they can be made somewhat more interesting in the process, all the better.

[Mankeli]

I enjoy mummies too.

Good for you, high five.

That doesn't mean they don't suck.

They do suck -power wise.

If an option is so terrible it is only taken by A: people who suck at the game and B: people who want to shoot themselves in the foot, that probably means it isn't very well balanced.

Mummies are bad, but that's really not the only reason I've played them at all.

As far as design goes, think about it this way. Imagine that mummies weren't in the game.
Then imagine some idiot showed up in GDD and said "You know what this game needs? A race that ignores one of the main mechanics used to prevent grinding, but makes up for it via terrible attributes that force them to do so! Now you can farm lair until the sun goes out!"
He'd be thrown into CYC in under five seconds, and he'd deserve it. However, mummies have been in the game for a very long time, and they have sucked for a very long time, so people are willing to defend them, similar to how there were people who defended Hive, or Victory Dancing.

I have won, among other mummy wins, a 15-rune MuBe who started with Trog and then changed to Chei for extented to clear two ziggurats without spells, ranged weapons or rods. I didn't find the need the scum even when I tried to gimp my character in every way possible. Actually, scumming as a mummy is actively bad so that doesn't really take away anything from game design. You can scum all you want but it's pretty stupid.

And comparing mummies to victory dancing is just...what.

[khalil]

I'm pretty sure races are the way Crawl does difficulty levels, which I personally like.

I also feel races are how Crawl does difficulty levels, and I think it is a terrible idea. You can get boring races that are the optimal choice, and you can get interesting races that suck in every way. If someone wants to ignore the hunger clock, they shouldn't be forced to play on 'impossible' mode. (See also: crossbows in Pathfinder)
Changing difficulties would be better implemented by having set difficulty levels and the ability to change which one you are playing on. Having races be the game's difficulty level equivalent is just tying two completely unrelated systems together.

The main disadvantage of mummies is not aptitudes. Mummies would not become that much better even if they had Hu apts.

Yes, lack of potions is the big issue. However, whereas not being able to use potions is the race's main gimmick, bad apts are not central to the race, and could be changed without fundamentally changing the race. Furthermore, apts are still a big thing. Go swap Mu and DE's apts, see what happens. (I already tried it, the end result was obtaining high level spells stupidly early and being able to spam them like there was no tomorrow.)

See the readme.

Okay.

Study the philosophy section of the manual carefully. All changes to the game must be in line with the stated game philosophy.

Alright then.

Major design goals:
meaningful decisions (no no-brainers)


Crusade against no-brainers

A very important point in Crawl is steering away from no-brainers. Speaking about games in general, wherever there's a no-brainer, that means the development team put a lot of effort into providing a "choice" that's really not an interesting choice at all. And that's a horrible lost opportunity for fun. Examples for this are the resistances: there are very few permanent sources, most involve a choice (like rings or specific armour) or are only semi-permanent (like mutations). Another example is the absence of clear-cut best items, which comes from the fact that most artefacts are randomly generated. Furthermore, even non-random artefacts cannot be wished for, as scrolls of acquirement produce random items in general. Likewise, there are no sure-fire means of life saving (the closest equivalents are controlled blinks, and good religious standings for some deities).

Not playing a mummy is very much a no-brainer. They are objectively worse than the other options.

I have won, among other mummy wins, a 15-rune MuBe who started with Trog and then changed to Chei for extented to clear two ziggurats without spells, ranged weapons or rods. I didn't find the need the scum even when I tried to gimp my character in every way possible.

Someone beat IWBTG on the permadeath difficulty, but that doesn't mean everyone can manage it.

Actually, scumming as a mummy is actively bad so that doesn't really take away anything from game design. You can scum all you want but it's pretty stupid.

Nonsense. The OOD spawns in Lair are incapable of harming you, so there's nothing to loose by scumming there. It's boring and unfun, but it's not a stupid idea. The closest thing to a limit is the turn cap, and you'd have to be trying if you wanted to hit that.

[damiac]

Not playing a mummy is very much a no-brainer. They are objectively worse than the other options.

I agree wholeheartedly with this statement, and this is the main reason for my creation of this thread.

I disagree with much of the rest of the content of that post, which is why I just quoted part of it rather than thanking the post.

[Leafsnail]

I don't really see any design justification for locking mummies out of necromancy spells. It seems like a trap to give them a necromancy boost and then randomly deny them access to some of the best spells in the school.

Making an undead-only necromancy spell would also be acceptable.

[Sar]

Crawl is a game designed around replayability. If you want to win once, Mummy is a horrible choice. If you want your every win to be DD, your choice. You can dislike the way Crawl does difficulty levels all you want, but I think at this point changing that will make Crawl a different game. A worse one, in my opinion.

[damiac]

Well, I wasn't the one saying I don't like how crawl does difficulty levels, but I think mummies could remain interesting, challenging, and actually become more fun to play with some minor buffs.

And if you like difficulty, why not take it a step further? Let's bring back mountain dwarves, but give them global -3 apts, -30% HP and MP, and say they can't read, so no scrolls. But on the plus side, their beard is full of old food they passively eat throughout the game, so no need to eat chunks or permafood. If you liked mummies, you'll LOVE the new mountain dwarves! Also, their death is so perma, that when you die (and you will) you can't play as them again until you ascend another character. Fun!

[Mankeli]

Lock thread, please, sorry for participating.

[khalil]

You can dislike the way Crawl does difficulty levels all you want, but I think at this point changing that will make Crawl a different game. A worse one, in my opinion.

May I ask why? I'm genuinely curious.

[damiac]

Please don't lock thread... why are you asking for my thread to be locked?

I was using reductio-ad-absurdum with my mountain dwarf suggestion. If it's good to have a race whose sole purpose is to be really bad, to allow for challenging replays, then isn't it even better to have an even worse race, to allow for even more challenging replays?

Please don't ask for other people's threads to be locked just because you disagree with them. This thread has remained pretty civil, and there have been a few interesting ideas thrown around.

[Sar]

Because I enjoyed the progression of "I can't get to Lair with TrBe" -> "I can win with TrBe" -> "I can win with MuBe". Because while I wouldn't like my every game of Crawl to be as challenging as my mummy games, occasionally I enjoy rolling and winning one.

[khalil]

Because I enjoyed the progression of "I can't get to Lair with TrBe" -> "I can win with TrBe" -> "I can win with MuBe". Because while I wouldn't like my every game of Crawl to be as challenging as my mummy games, occasionally I enjoy rolling and winning one.

I understand that, but why would adding another source of adjustable difficulty make things any worse?

[Sar]

I was talking about replacing species-difficulty with difficulty-difficulty. I think adding another difficulty system would muddle things and take out the sense of progression, but that is only my opinion.

[khalil]

I was talking about replacing species-difficulty with difficulty-difficulty. I think adding another difficulty system would muddle things and take out the sense of progression, but that is only my opinion.

I figure if another difficulty feature were ever made, the "normal" would be crawl as it is now, so if one wanted they could just ignore it.

[Mankeli]

Please don't lock thread... why are you asking for my thread to be locked?'

Also, their death is so perma, that when you die (and you will) you can't play as them again until you ascend another character. Fun!

This is hyperbole, not decent arguments.

Also people where claiming that mummies = victory dancing and I take these kind of things personally because I actually like mummies .

And I really don't think that the "no-brainer rule" is applied correctly here either. Also, if mummies are a newbie trap, like you claimed (I'm not sure I agree with this either), then I'm sure we can address that in some other way than just making them marginally less terrible.

[dpeg]

Crawl's species indeed act like difficulty levels. Playing a Mummy means playing a harder game. That's intentional, and I am not aware of any developer who's at unease with this approach (several developers have different gripes with different species, of course). An actual difficulty setting is completely out of the question, as far as I see it. If you guys ask for that too often, I'll just add the idea to the Won't Do list.

I cannot say what would happen in a hypothetical scenario where Crawl has no Mummies and they are suggested today in GDD. Perhaps they would be trashed right away. However, I can say for sure that several important people voice concern about things getting too easy, for example when species were buffed because some they were considered subpar. Challenges have some appeal, for better of worse a species like Mummies is part of that.

[damiac]

Hey, stop all this difficulty mode talk in my mummy thread you whippersnappers.

[khalil]

@dpeg
May I ask what was behind the decision to make races act like difficulty levels?

[Leafsnail]

If species are explicitly intended as a challenge race I think that should be in their description, to avoid putting off new players. Nothing about the current mummy description warns you that you're making the game harder for yourself.

[damiac]

Hey Dpeg, like I said I have no problem with mummies being challenging, but they could be given a slight power boost, as well as being made more interesting. I agree the slight change to apts isn't interesting enough, but an eventual power boost to conjurations, or some sort of species specific curse ability would be more interesting, and at the same time, make them a bit more powerful.

And if nothing else, just for thematic purposes, they should have a better hex aptitude. That's the central theme of mummies!

[crate]

really the problem here is that using mummies (in particular) as a challenge race is bad design imo

they have some unique things--particularly being foodless, which happens to take one big annoyance of crawl and eliminate it completely--that make players want to play them despite their power level
the other races that change how food works (ghouls, vampires in particular) actually make it in some ways (especially for vp) more annoying, not less annoying
(I'm not going to talk about spriggans in this context in this post)

I don't have a problem with something like formicids being a challenge race: the main thing that makes fo difficult is the very thing that lets fo exist in the first place (stasis); or, if you want to consider nagas a challenge race, then the same applies to them.
this is not the case with mu, at least to some extent; being potionless is obviously a large disadvantage but then on top of that they have bad aptitudes (if mummies had to eat then I would be ok with their position as a challenge race, since then their main gimmicks would be precisely being a challenge race, but of course they do not)
or if some race like high elves or ogres were bad, that would be fine too; the reason for their existence would be purely as a higher-difficulty race (you can debate about this for ogres a bit, since giant spiked clubs exist)

of course part of this is the role of food in crawl and how mummies are placed outside of having to deal with food entirely, but that is for a different topic

[KittenInMyCerealz]

EDIT: OOPS double posted accidently

[KittenInMyCerealz]

Ancient Memories

"Mummies are (thematically) older than any other species in Crawl by several orders of magnitude. They have seen and learned many things, but the haze of eternity is thick and the past is fleeting. Even so, new experiences can bring back an ancient nostalgia. At certain level breakpoints (say every 5 levels) mummies could receive a big shot of experience to a random skill, representing ancient memories of things they've done in their massive life and unlife spans, but have only now remembered. Planescape-Style. “Victory seems like an old friend…” “Perhaps not so much was lost.” “You have old visions of yourself <skill>ing with shocking proficiency.” Etc. — Pedjt 2011-01-11 04:09"

from https://crawl.develz.org/wiki/doku.php? ... cies:mummy

I found this to be a quite interesting suggestion.
Not a major buff, but fits thematically and could be interesting enough to be added, in some form.
Could be cool if it increased a random aptitude by 1, if that's possible to implement.

EDIT: Or they could be just given a manual-type boost to a skill, without the manual. And it could have a chance of triggering each dungeon floor, higher chances for entering the first floor of a branch, because of the change in scenery.

[khalil]

I tried coding that up, although it ended up falling apart when my computer crashed and I lost my code.
I really wish I could have gotten it to work, as I really liked that idea.
Here's the mantis link if you think you can get it working:
https://crawl.develz.org/mantis/view.php?id=6710

[TeshiAlair]

Aside: Fo may be hard, but at least they are crazy bananas fun

[Klown]

Crawl's species indeed act like difficulty levels.

This is fine but it's a secret to new players. How many players came over from nethack, bet their life savings they'd win on their first run, chose a mummy...and lost millions?
Why not embrace this and rig up species, 9 easy, 9 normal, 9 hard(or so), so new players know where to start, and pro players know when to brag?

[Tiktacy]

I am curious as to what your definition of fun is.

Not him, but that's pretty easy:

Spoiler: show

Seriously, fun is subjective. No one says you must have fun while playing mummies. That said, some people like overcoming obstacles. If every race was equal in power to, say, HO, Crawl would be a pretty boring game for me.

I'm of the opinion that the races should all be on a fairly equal footing.

I'm pretty sure races are the way Crawl does difficulty levels, which I personally like.

A race that ignores one of the main mechanics used to prevent grinding, but makes up for it via terrible attributes that force them to do so

The main disadvantage of mummies is not aptitudes. Mummies would not become that much better even if they had Hu apts.
Also I won 4 mummies, and I never grind with them.

This pretty much covers my feelings on the topic, well said sar, well said indeed.

Please don't lock this thread, just try to clean it up a bit if it's really that bad. The proposal is out of the question, but the discussion of mummies as a character still has potential. Personally, I just want mummies to stay as they are. In exchange for not having to click c-y-e-e-e-e for half the game, you get a harder more challenging game that requires a calm mind and good decision making.

[bcadren]

After playing a MuCK for awhile; I don't think Mummies are that much harder.

They just have a REALLY great advantage (Torment, Poison and Negative Energy Immunity) and something relatively bad, but not horrible to balance that out.

• Ghouls and Vampires are similar, same bonuses, but different trade offs.
• Mummies have third lowest average apts (1. Trolls; 2. Ogres) and a second trade off (hungerless casting for no potions).
• Ghouls have constant rot, lowest stats in the game and 4th lowest average apts (Demigods are third).
• Vampires; on the other hand don't have the resistances all the time and WHEN THEY DO, they have no natural healing, worse than Deep Dwarves (above average apts.).

If you want to talk about a race that needs a buff; I'd probably go with Ogres; the 3 Fight/3 Maces is about all they float on. Their Robust is far less useful than you'd think; especially compared to Trolls whole Claws/UC/Robust/Regen 3 Shtick. And their apts are...only slightly better than trolls outside of those 3's.
If you want to talk about buffing mummies? ...I don't think you can find a reason to buff them ANY MORE THAN THE OTHER UNDEAD RACES. And when it comes to buffing those...erm, they could use an equivalent to a good god. (which was one of the purposes I wrote 'the Forgotten' for)

Specific to mummies though...maybe their self-revitalization could be boosted to also cure current HP? Be useful as a panic button as well as a 'I guess i have to use this because I'm so horribly rotten' button. People wouldn't use it much either way as most mummies are casters and they need their MP.

[Tiktacy]

A mummy of ely sounds like it would be impossible to lose with, so probably no good gods.

[eeviac]

Being locked out of Regeneration still really bugs me. If rings and troll leather work, the spell should work.

[duvessa]

The bigger reason regeneration should work on mummies, imo, is that it works on ghouls.

[Mankeli]

they have some unique things--particularly being foodless, which happens to take one big annoyance of crawl and eliminate it completely--that make players want to play them despite their power levelthe other races that change how food works (ghouls, vampires in particular) actually make it in some ways (especially for vp) more annoying, not less annoying
(I'm not going to talk about spriggans in this context in this post)

Since food/hunger mechanics affect every other species except mummies, the problems one might or might not have with that mechanic probably have to do more with food/hunger in general than it does with mummies.

The bigger reason regeneration should work on mummies, imo, is that it works on ghouls.

The necromancy inconsistencies bug me too. Also it is strange that eventhough the race has necromancy enhancers, it cannot use the best necro spells. If we are talking about newbie traps, like someone was before, maybe the game (kind of) baiting a player to believe that a mummy necromancer is better than other necros is one. (At least I still remember thinking "hey, these guys have necromancy enhancers I bet they really rule as necromancers!" when I was starting this game and then proceeded to suck horribly).

[graffen69]

If you guys ask for that too often, I'll just add the idea to the Won't Do list..

So…if…ehrm..wait, what???
Nevermind.

[Leafsnail]

They just have a REALLY great advantage (Torment, Poison and Negative Energy Immunity) and something relatively bad, but not horrible to balance that out.

Torment immunity is irrelevant in a 3 rune game and only sortof helpful in extended. Poison immunity is pretty cool but doesn't really balance out the fire vulnerability early on. Negative energy immunity really doesn't matter.

If you want to talk about buffing mummies? ...I don't think you can find a reason to buff them ANY MORE THAN THE OTHER UNDEAD RACES. And when it comes to buffing those...erm, they could use an equivalent to a good god. (which was one of the purposes I wrote 'the Forgotten' for)

How about the fact that neither of the other two undead races have the core weakness that Mu does, making them not comparable in any way? Ghouls have claws and can drink potions. Vampires have apts that do not suck and can drink potions.

[bcadren]

How about the fact that neither of the other two undead races have the core weakness that Mu does, making them not comparable in any way? Ghouls have claws and can drink potions. Vampires have apts that do not suck and can drink potions.

Yes their weaknesses are different, but they all have a weakness to trade off for their being undead. Ghoul's constant rot might be manageable for a 3-runer, because can be quite a pain for a 15; unless you of Kiku for the corpse drops and their horrible stats...are more of a weakness than lack of potions in late game (after you'd have /haste and /heal wounds to make up for the best pots anyways).

Vampires aren't even really undead for most the game (takes intentionally abstaining from food and having no natural healing to do so). If you actually played them foodless, they would be far harder than Mummies (completely impossible without Makhleb and then basically DD without the damage shaving).

Mummy mages are the most recommended, but I'd personally recommend a melee start or hybrid, it's faster to get melee up with their bad apt.

The reason Djinni didn't work out was they were a demonic race with all the bonuses of being a demon and no trade-offs...even having a BETTER bonus of the EP system.

A race with the great undead bonuses or the slightly better demonic bonuses NEEDS a tradeoff to make it less broken; and their bonuses still make them quite powerful. Don't Believe me...Wizmode a human into having undead bonuses with no tradeoffs; a guarantee it'll make Trolls and Centaurs look very hard.

[duvessa]

being undead is a massive disadvantage, not an advantage

[Arrhythmia]

...are more of a weakness than lack of potions in late game (after you'd have /haste and /heal wounds to make up for the best pots anyways).

What?

Mummy mages are the most recommended, but I'd personally recommend a melee start or hybrid, it's faster to get melee up with their bad apt.

What?

even having a BETTER bonus of the EP system.

what

Wizmode a human into having undead bonuses with no tradeoffs; a guarantee it'll make Trolls and Centaurs look very hard.

what

[Leafsnail]

Do you lose all of your games to poison, torment and negative energy or what?