Here's my idea to make humans interesting. Have them able to customize aptitudes to a limited (perhaps very) extent. Perhaps for each +1, they need to give another apt a -2? This would make humans immensely more popular, I think. Discussion thread: [url][/url] -Gowby

Humans currently have fast level gain but slow stat growth (one point every 5th level). I propose they should get average growth (one point every 4th level). Crawl favors specialists as is, humans do not need have their one advantage (fast leveling) counteracted by inexplicably slow stat growth. Being average makes more sense. — Tonfa 2011-09-10 16:50

Agreed. I would also like to increase halfling, kobold, and hill orc leveling aptitudes to 110, so that humans have the only 100. — minmay 2011-09-10 18:20

Humans are kind of boring and underpowered as it stands. There is never much of a reason to pick human, and more or less every other species winds up more powerful when played to its strengths. The one strength humans have - their fast leveling - is not really an advantage because monsters give less experience when your level is higher, so that it all winds up leveling out, and the cap is the same for everyone anyway.

One idea for changing this might be to emphasize the fact that humans are good at lots of different things, compared to most species that evolved to fill a single ecological niche. Thus, humans might get a special bonus for having many different skills close to each other. For example:

6 skills at level 6 - +1 to each skill 6 skills at level 12 - + 2 to each skill 6 skills at level 18 - + 5 to each skill

Have you played a human? While not as strong as a demigod or centaur, they are by no means underpowered. And “monsters give less experience when your level is higher” is outright incorrect. — minmay 2011-10-14 03:23

Player Ability Idea

Mankind is supposed to have developed machinery to do what he/she cannot themselves do. Obviously a human would be going against a stacked deck in 1-on-1 combat with, say, a huge Minotaur with horns or a gigantic tree-swinging Troll, the human can't shoot or cast as well as Elves, and humans have no special abilities like any other species except that humans are very… normal.

My proposition is that the Human Player-race gets an ability, timed like a “Breath” weapon, allowing them to set exactly 1 trap on an adjacent square. Maybe this ability could use up resources, but that could very well be over-the-top.

My thinking is: I've noticed some (and have been one of the) people asking/begging for players to be able to make traps, even going so far as to ask for a “Spider-Humanoid” species. These people have been asking about player-set traps for at LEAST 3 years. Moreover, one of the most popular Diablo 2 characters was the Assassin (from the Lord of Destruction expansion) who specialized in setting traps, so I think I can safely say that requests for player-trap-making is not just an idea from one or two of your DCSS fans, but a concept demonstrated as widely enjoyable to many people/players of RPGs. And yes, I realize that Diablo 2 was an Action RPG, but that means traps could be even more of a strategic option in a Turn-Based RPG (like DCSS!)

Traps would also fit in with the “Humans are innovative and adaptable” line of thinking which I've observed in the RPG's I've played: if you can't win a clean fight, then fight dirty. Manufacturing traps to take down large (and dangerous!) creatures have been a historic fact for God only knows how many thousands-to-millions of years, as well. Even further is the fact that traps are very simple to manufacture in actuality, using a knife, some rope, and some wood (and traps are all over the Dungeon anyway, so being able to set traps isn't going to make people think “Where did THAT idea come from?”) It would be a *fitting* racial augmentation, give reason to play an otherwise bland race, spice up gameplay without breaking it, and the code is either almost or completely present *already*! Wizard-Mode already has a “Create Trap” command: just let humans access it via some means, limit the placement range to 1, and PRESTO! Many of your followers (including me) would now have a good reason to play as a human.

Andy 2011-12-06 21:51

I'm pretty sure the entire point of humans is to NOT have any weird gimmicks or similar unusual features. They have all armour slots and good aptitudes in everything, that's reason enough to play one. — minmay 2011-12-07 01:45
I don't think letting humans do what apparently every other humanoid in the Dungeon + branches can do (i.e. set traps) is gimmicky, but would fit in nicely. Humans have no gimmicks, weird, bad, OR good. They have all armor slots: so do Mummies, Vampires, Ogres, all Elves, Dwarves, Merfolk, Hill Orcs, and others (like Demonspawn given certain mutations, though I believe there are Armor penalties on the smaller characters.) Humans also do *not* have “good” aptitudes for everything: they have *average* aptitudes in everything. That's why this thread exists: humans excel in having NOTHING exceptional about them, good or bad. This might seem like a good thing, but in DCSS it isn't: the player will eventually specialize in one or two particular areas, so if I want to be a fighter, go with Minotaur, spellcasters are probably Elves or Undead, and Necromancers are Undead, etc. The root of the problem is that there *isn't* a good reason to pick humans over any other race for a given preferred playstyle; any style you pick (Stealth, Magic, Melee, Summoning, Necromancy) has one or more races better suited to it than Humans are.
Anyway, alchemy and traps have been near and dear topics to my heart ever since I started playing the original Linley's Dungeon Crawl, and setting traps seemed something fitting for Humans to do (for the reasons I've pointed out: seems fitting flavor-wise, not unbalanced, interesting, useful, *easily implemented from existing code*, yet COMPLIMENT rather than outright replace good armor, weapons, magic, and religion.)

Andy 2011-12-07 19:49

Maybe the reason you don't find a generalist species useful is that you refuse to generalize? Yeah, if you pick one of melee, summoning, or necromancy, there are species better for that than humans, but what if you want to use all three together? What if you decide to pick up a ranged weapon or air magic as well? Of course if you specialize a specialist species will be better, but specializing, despite what inexperienced players often believe, is not always the best way to do things. — minmay 2011-12-07 23:12
Well, human's lack of good endgame is balanced out by the fact that they win pretty often %-wise cause they survive the pre-Temple well. One less monster to fight at level 1, and early level 2-4 spell do a lot. They're not bad, they're just not a race that newbies win the game with easily. So they're fine as is, just those extra atts Tonfa describes would help a bit — greepish 2011-12-07 21:13
They have full slots. That makes their endgame better than Og/Tr/Dr most of the time, and often Ds too. — minmay 2011-12-07 23:12
Okay, I'm confused. What do you mean by “full slots”? I thought you meant “species that can equip helmet, gloves, boots, body armor, shield, amulet, and 2 rings”. Do large species now have problems with armor, too? And as for generalization, my experience does *not* support your assertions (though it may be that you're just plain better at DCSS than me…) First, if I try to become master of all sorts of things (like more than 2 or 3 magic schools), I have found that I tend to get mundane ratings in everything I try and become hard-pressed to function when those nice Level 9 spells finally become available to me. Secondly, I don't think I was clear: species other than Human don't JUST excel in one of two other areas (Nagas are good in Stealth + Venom + Small blades, etc.) The reason to pick races better suited to playstyles is that there is only so much XP (monsters, traps, and so forth) in the Dungeon, and it has always appeared to me that being a master with one or two weapon types and two or three magic schools (with special species' abilities to fall back on) is better than being a Human who is low-to-mid-level in everything. I like Tornado and Death Channel, dang it! ;)
Oh well, guess if Humans work, they work. Best game I ever had was a Dark Elf of Sif Muna (found a crazy-level Saber of Electrocution early on), but if you like having Jack-of-All-Trades as an option, far be it from me to take away a part of the game you seemingly enjoy. Would it really hurt, though, if there were SOME way the player could build actual traps? It's quite annoying to feel as though Orcs are better engineers than me… :P

Andy 2011-12-08 18:54

Full slots just means they can equip all armour and weapons other than giant (spiked) clubs and large rocks, yeah. Og, Tr and the like have restricted or completely missing slots which means they tend to have less AC and resistances (plus whatever other bonuses artefacts might have, such as slaying). This usually hurts those species noticeably in the endgame and especially the extended game. — minmay 2011-12-08 23:14
Humans don't have access to all slots. They're crippled in their ring wearing capacities. — KiloByte 2011-12-09 04:27
LOLgreepish 2011-12-09 05:07
HAH! I knew something was wrong! ;) — Andy 2011-12-09 18:26
Logged in as: Anonymous (VIEWER)
dcss/brainstorm/species/human.txt · Last modified: 2014-02-25 07:42 by gowby
Recent changes RSS feed Donate Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki