On 24 January 2011 23:33, Raphael Langella <raphael.lange...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2011/1/24 Johanna Ploog <johanna.pl...@googlemail.com> > All right, let's try to keep it simple. We don't need to tell the player all > the ways to do each thing, the interface does that.
Well, I guess I should at least mention the ...panels? somewhere. > For the command... thing, I'll see if I can make the buttons blink or > something. Blink? In what context? *blinks* > a whip or a hammer maybe. You can give it a negative damage enchantment if > it's too deadly. Both good suggestions, but negative enchantments also cause the weapon to appear special, don't they? It's much too early to mention that at this point, and I wouldn't want to introduce glowing weapons with negative enchantments, anyway. > After a quick poll on ##crawl-dev, it seems thrown clubs are a big part of > the "throw junk at monster" early levels strategy. I don't really like that > (it deals 2.5 more damage than thrown stones) but removing it would require > some balancing, so let's forget about it for now. Okay. >> Is "If necessary, rest up!" better? It appears the lua markers are >> evaluated on level generation, so we can't check for health there. The >> best way is probably to let the marker call a function that does the >> health check in-place, either in C++ or Lua. > > Rephrasing is good. Of course, having a check would be better, but I can't > help with the implementation, I still haven't looked into Lua. What I mean is... oh shoot, I'm still not sure when the code would get evaluated. If I call a lua wrapper function inside a lua marker, is the function called and evaluated at map generation, or later when the marker is triggered? > Another idea: gain a single level in each tutorial, and start the next one > at the level you finished the last. That gives the player a sense of > progression, and allow us more variety with monsters. And no more problems > with low MP for the latter lessons on spells and gods. Hmm... unusual idea. I sort of like it, though it might also be confusing, or the player might get the impression that spells are more powerful than bow and arrows, simply because they had a higher xlevel at the time. I'll think about it. :) > I don't think it's necessary to be specific. "Try which of the walls you can > destroy" is enough. Okay. > The various wall types are obvious. Are they? Part of the point is that there are diggable and undiggable rock types and that they look the same until closely examined. >> Doesn't need to be a unique, but yeah rF armour is a definite >> possibility, as are monsters natively immune to fire. An imp? > > OK, maybe keep the unique for a latter session. Imps are a bit annoying, but > they may be appropriate for the tutorial. Sorry, that was the only earlyish monster I could think of that's resistant to fire. :) An alternative solution is to scratch the whole melting wax idea and hand out a low-damage wand instead, though with recharging around that's still plenty of damage. Or a wand of cold, where at least there are plenty of undead that might resist its effects. Cheers, Johanna ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Special Offer-- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE (a $49 USD value)! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! Download using promo code Free_Logger_4_Dev2Dev. Offer expires February 28th, so secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsight-sfd2d _______________________________________________ Crawl-ref-discuss mailing list Crawl-ref-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/crawl-ref-discuss
