If Scrying were an instant ability (last time I checked it was not), it might see more use. Sometimes you want to know what's around a corner before you move, but can't afford to spend a turn to find out. I think it would also fit Ash flavor better if it were not an active prayer, but an instant flash of insight.
I would like to revisit what I had proposed with the Ashenzari skill boost: -Skill boost is based on piety. -If you have bound magic (jewelry), you can boost one magical skill (magic skills, invocations, evocations, spellcasting). -If you have bound body (armour), you can boost one physical skill (anything else). -Changing a skill is instant, but costs piety - a lot of it. You can leave it unswapped for a permanent, passive boost. I still feel like this has potential. Having to choose to boost only one or two skills is more interesting than boosting all of them, if swapping requires a hefty piety investment. Of course, this could be modified, such as the discussed capping of your boosted skill at your current highest skill (presumably, in that category). Or the skill boost could be based on partially piety and partially degree of cursedness. Two other notes: *I still feel that "bound hands" doesn't work well. For some characters, it is not an interesting choice because they'd rarely want to swap away from their weapon anyways. For other characters, their build cannot be viable without swapping (e.g., rod-users). It's not like jewelery where all characters will want to swap items during combat at least some of the time. *The way armour layers could be revisited. A two handed weapon doesn't block swapping gloves - it can be assumed that you only need to keep one hand in contact with it. Likewise, gloves don't need to block swapping rings, because you should be okay if you only leave one ring on. Similarly, a cursed cloak can be bunched up while still remaining in contact with you, giving you enough room to undo your body armour. This wouldn't matter that much for normal gameplay, but would remove some current Ashenzari "no brainers" - don't curse gloves until after rings, don't curse cloak until after body armour. -Ero On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 8:09 AM, <crawl-ref-discuss-requ...@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > Send Crawl-ref-discuss mailing list submissions to > crawl-ref-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/crawl-ref-discuss > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > crawl-ref-discuss-requ...@lists.sourceforge.net > > You can reach the person managing the list at > crawl-ref-discuss-ow...@lists.sourceforge.net > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Crawl-ref-discuss digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Regarding Stonemail (David Ramsey) > 2. Re: Regarding Stonemail (David Ploog) > 3. Re: Regarding Stonemail (Raphael Langella) > 4. Re: 0.8 Ash (David Ploog) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 09:29:04 -0500 > From: David Ramsey <pooka...@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [Crawl-ref-discuss] Regarding Stonemail > To: crawl-ref-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net > Message-ID: > <aanlktim7b829qgvueimssrvur78a+d+8tcq+wimyu...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 5:18 AM, David Ploog <dpl...@mi.fu-berlin.de> > wrote: >> I have this idea that Stonemail incurs slower moving speed (like a >> ponderous body armour). Is this true? > > No. According to the code, it only increases AC and burden, and > decreases EV. > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 18:06:27 +0100 (CET) > From: David Ploog <dpl...@mi.fu-berlin.de> > Subject: Re: [Crawl-ref-discuss] Regarding Stonemail > To: crawl-ref-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net > Message-ID: > <alpine.deb.1.10.1103141804480.28...@lobster.imp.fu-berlin.de> > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > > On Mon, 14 Mar 2011, David Ramsey wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 5:18 AM, David Ploog <dpl...@mi.fu-berlin.de> >> wrote: >>> I have this idea that Stonemail incurs slower moving speed (like a >>> ponderous body armour). Is this true? >> >> No. According to the code, it only increases AC and burden, and >> decreases EV. > > Okay, so it is removed for now. But I think a Stonemail spell along the > lines I mentioned could be interesting. Would then be a completely new > thing, I'll add it to the wiki. > > David > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 19:24:28 +0100 > From: Raphael Langella <raphael.lange...@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [Crawl-ref-discuss] Regarding Stonemail > To: crawl-ref-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net > Message-ID: > <AANLkTikfhZWSFFNyM=YTBUM0ET5kuU6Df=b__xgyj...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Le 14 mars 2011 18:06, "David Ploog" <dpl...@mi.fu-berlin.de> a ?crit : >> >> On Mon, 14 Mar 2011, David Ramsey wrote: >> > On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 5:18 AM, David Ploog <dpl...@mi.fu-berlin.de> >> > wrote: >> >> I have this idea that Stonemail incurs slower moving speed (like a >> >> ponderous body armour). Is this true? >> > >> > No. According to the code, it only increases AC and burden, and >> > decreases EV. >> >> Okay, so it is removed for now. But I think a Stonemail spell along the >> lines I mentioned could be interesting. Would then be a completely new >> thing, I'll add it to the wiki. > Wouldn't it overlaps with statue form? > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 20:01:00 +0100 (CET) > From: David Ploog <dpl...@mi.fu-berlin.de> > Subject: Re: [Crawl-ref-discuss] 0.8 Ash > To: crawl-ref-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net > Message-ID: > <alpine.deb.1.10.1103141813530.28...@lobster.imp.fu-berlin.de> > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII > > On Mon, 14 Mar 2011, Adam Borowski wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 01:38:49PM +0100, Raphael Langella wrote: >>> 2011/3/14 David Ploog <dpl...@mi.fu-berlin.de> > >>>> I have been thinking about Ashenzari some more... but I need someone >>>> willing to code. Here is the uncontroversial stuff: >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> last part of 3, 4 and 8 -- not really. > > Well, 8 was never meant to be uncontroversial. Second part of 3 was > forgotten to be optional in view of the new proposal. And I had thought > that we agreed on getting rid of the xp boost, only that it wasn't clear > how to replace it (and how powerful it would be before and after). > > Here is how I see it: > > Ash is a god that allows to tinker with skills. You can do that in two > ways: an active one (reskilling: provides strategic flexibility at the > cost of xp and piety) and a passive one (low skill boost, but requires the > non-use of uncursed items). > The current xp boost is passive and include some, but fewer choices > (because it goes up with proportion of cursed items). So I believe that > out of the three (reskilling, low skill boost, xp bonus) the first two are > easier to fit into the Ash framework (easier for players to see what's > going on and more befitting the god). > But I see you're actually already there... sorry for long rant. > >>>> 3. Slower piety gain as suggest by Raphael on the wiki page: >>>> (piety gain is too fast and you spend it rarely) >>>> Add a new bounding level: fully bounded (all slots cursed). >>>> Divide piety gains by 2: >>>> 1 bound: x1 (no bonus) >>>> 2 bounds: x2 >>>> 3 bounds: x3 >>>> Fully bounded: x4 -- see below (*). >> >> As discussed several times before, the "full bound" tier would be damn >> tedious. People would have to mark places they want to visit, uncurse a >> ring, go back there, curse it again... Dump a pile of armours to check then >> go back. Inscribe a level with an unique who demands a resistance (Azrael, >> Nikola, Xtahua, ...). And so on... > > Yes, that's something that can happen. It is mediated by the fact that > scrolls are finite. However, I believe that with 8 we could dispense with > the concept of doing something special for "fully bound": you will want to > wear as many items as possible anyway; for piety reasons you'll want some > cursage; for skill boosts you'll then have to think about full cursage > without anything special from us. So the tension and the goal is there, > and players can make a decision depending on circumstances. > >>>> 4. Remove xp gain. >> Only after there's a good replacement. 8 might be a candidate but only if >> it doesn't suffer from the flaws of 3 (as above). > > Okay, so let's take 8 and ignore the 4x piety gain for now? > >>>> 8. If nonoe of your worn/wielded items are uncursed (**), then all your >>>> present skills (at least 1) are boosted to the piety level (maximal 6). >> >> Mentioned above why that requirement is a bad idea. > > This requirement is _not_ that you have to wear a full set of cursed > items. It is about wearing no uncursed items, which is much weaker. (And > provides that choice right from the start.) In other words: instead of > forcing you to curse item Foo, you can also decide to take off Foo. > >>> I'm working on 2 and 6, and will do 3 and 7 after. Can do 8 too, seems easy. >>> Any idea for reskill piety cost? What about scrying, should we also boost >>> its cost? >> >> You mean, _increasing_ the cost of scrying? Heck, having it always on at no >> cost wouldn't be unbalanced, even together with most of the "boosts" which >> save for 8 are negligible. > > I think scrying could do with longer duration and higher piety cost. But > that's not really crucial, it will work either way. > > David > > > > ------------------------------ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Colocation vs. Managed Hosting > A question and answer guide to determining the best fit > for your organization - today and in the future. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/internap-sfd2d > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Crawl-ref-discuss mailing list > Crawl-ref-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/crawl-ref-discuss > > > End of Crawl-ref-discuss Digest, Vol 55, Issue 10 > ************************************************* > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Colocation vs. Managed Hosting A question and answer guide to determining the best fit for your organization - today and in the future. http://p.sf.net/sfu/internap-sfd2d _______________________________________________ Crawl-ref-discuss mailing list Crawl-ref-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/crawl-ref-discuss
