Crossfire Mailing List Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
CF: Re: Spell failures, the programmer weighs in
- To:
- Subject: CF: Re: Spell failures, the programmer weighs in
- From: Peter Mardahl <>
- Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 12:57:56 -0700
- cc: crossfire (at) ifi.uio.no
- In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 09 Oct 1996 20:57:53 PDT." <>
- Sender: owner-crossfire
> Michael Martin wrote:
> > IMHO, making monsters more powerful is not necessary. The real problem is
> > that players can become way too powerful. For example, I once had a
>
> Agreed - at least it's too easy.
Possibly this is a map problem. I don't think any of the
ORDINARY artifacts which are handed out are much of a problem.
The ones you make are the real trouble.
> > closer to a doubling of experience. This would dramatically cut down on
> > the number of ultra-powerful characters, and in turn the nasty monsters
> > would still be nasty.
It's already worse than just gaining x experience to gain a level.
You get less experience/monster as you go up in level, so it gets
harder already.
> Another thing is that characters become more powerful than their level
> would suggest (using artifact weapons). And you get MUCH more experience
> from higher level monsters. And a 50 lev fighter + "demonbane +10" has
A *big* problem is that you can spray cone spells over a MULTI-SQUARE
monster and kill him easily. I figure a big dragon, at 6 squares and
3000hp, is *easier* to kill than a "baby" dragon, at 1 square and
1250hp. A big dragon is 2.5 times *easier* to kill with icestorm!!!!!
And I won't even mention how easy it is to kill a demon lord with
Holy Word.
At one point I hacked something to balance this a bit: I made
it so that cone spells couldn't go through monsters. In this way,
you could only hit the front of a monster with a cone spell,
and cone spells in general are weaker. It's one of the #defines
in config.h, NOT a default.
> little difficulty with the lev 100 angels in Lake Country. And he gets
> tons of experience points. (And you get even *more* exp if the
> artifact gives a stat bonus.)
Lots of monsters in lake country need adjustment. End of story.
> What I did in my version (or plan to do) was removing most artifacts
> from the treasure file. I think they should almost NEVER be handed out
> randomly. Better make them quest items so charaters have to start with
> simple equipment and EARN the artifacts.
Why don't you design some better maps?
> [I once got a(!) One Ring from killing a red dragon; should never happen!
Well, the One Ring is really rare. One solution is to have a lot of
artifacts in the artifacts file, so that the least probable item shows
up more rarely. I've never seen the One Ring come randomly in a dungeon,
only in a shop. Having things show up in shops *is* a problem.
> I'm planning to put some mid-level artifacts at the end of the maps
> I'm working at. (e.g. large fireball spell, ring of life/magic, stat potions,
> amulet ac+2, etc) Of course that's quite pointless as long as these things
> are sold out in the shops.
> > > I agree here, mana blast SHOULD perhaps do more a percentage of damage
> > > than a fixed amount.
> >
> > It makes sense to me to have the failure effect "proportional" to the
> > difference in levels between the spell and the spellcaster. If a
> > 12th-level mage botches a 1st-level spell, no big deal (maybe lots of
> > flowers appear ;). But if he botches a 12th-level spell, look out!
When I hacked the spell failure effects, I did make it proportional,
though also random. You're *more* likely to get a big disaster like
madness or a mana storm from a difficult spell than an easy one, and
it also depends on how much encumbrance the player had.
> He should more likely FAIL with a high level spell. But the damage
> should better be depend on his hp or his spellcasting level.
Modulating the damage by the players properties i have NOT done.
> Note: spell_failure_effect does NOT the same as a failed scroll. The
> magic of the scroll is warped randomly, I think. Spell_failure_effect
> does only wonder/confusion/mana storm and does not take into account
> the level of the spell (afaik).
You are correct, unless someone changed this. This is how I programmed
it. Random spells are distasteful, I prefer to screw the player
in certain predictable ways, not inadvertently help him.
> (no need to kill the player for a failed spell). I'd suggest e.g.
> confusion (BAD in a room full of monsters), sleep, desruction, curse
> (an item), summon hostile monsters, magic draining. All bad things but
> not fatal.
Perhaps the mana storm is too severe? It's not difficult to change,
though it does require a little hacking.
PM