Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Priests using arrows

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
September 1, 2005 4:10:01 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

Say, this has always bugged me... If priests can't use sharp weapons because
they draw blood, why can they use bows and arrows? Or do arrows really not
draw much blood? I'm not an expert in archery ;-)

More about : priests arrows

Anonymous
September 1, 2005 4:10:02 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 00:10:01 GMT, Edward Kolis <ekolis@cinci.rr.com>
wrote:

>Say, this has always bugged me... If priests can't use sharp weapons because
>they draw blood, why can they use bows and arrows? Or do arrows really not
>draw much blood? I'm not an expert in archery ;-)

Braining someone with a mace spills a lot more blood.

--
R. Dan Henry
danhenry@inreach.com
Anonymous
September 1, 2005 1:07:20 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

Edward Kolis wrote:
> Say, this has always bugged me... If priests can't use sharp weapons because
> they draw blood, why can they use bows and arrows? Or do arrows really not
> draw much blood? I'm not an expert in archery ;-)

If you think Priests should not use arrows/bolts, you can play Quickband.

On the other hand, I have seen some very sharp war hammers.
Related resources
Anonymous
September 1, 2005 2:47:16 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

R. Dan Henry wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 00:10:01 GMT, Edward Kolis <ekolis@cinci.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Say, this has always bugged me... If priests can't use sharp weapons because
>>they draw blood, why can they use bows and arrows? Or do arrows really not
>>draw much blood? I'm not an expert in archery ;-)
>
> Braining someone with a mace spills a lot more blood.

Maces and other "blunt" weapons in angband are not actually quite so
blunt with exception of certain staves. I think this restriction is
somewhat unlogical.

Lets change that logic in that: Priests are not allowed to use sharp
weapons because they are not allowed to cut _themselves_.

Timo Pietilä
Anonymous
September 1, 2005 2:47:17 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

Timo Pietilä wrote:
> R. Dan Henry wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 00:10:01 GMT, Edward Kolis <ekolis@cinci.rr.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Say, this has always bugged me... If priests can't use sharp weapons
>>> because
>>> they draw blood, why can they use bows and arrows? Or do arrows
>>> really not
>>> draw much blood? I'm not an expert in archery ;-)
>>
>>
>> Braining someone with a mace spills a lot more blood.
>
>
> Maces and other "blunt" weapons in angband are not actually quite so
> blunt with exception of certain staves. I think this restriction is
> somewhat unlogical.
>
> Lets change that logic in that: Priests are not allowed to use sharp
> weapons because they are not allowed to cut _themselves_.
>
> Timo Pietilä
>

I had always assumed that this was an early attempt to maintain game
balance. Is this not the case? If this _is_ the case, it might make
sense to make the restrictions on mages and priests more extreme.
Instead of just reducing the to-hit/to-dam/mana, make them entirely
unwieldable or some such. Mages and priests do seem to get unduly
powerful late game. It'd be great to find ways to balance that out --
not for reasons of "realisticness," but rather game balance.

--
Wil Hunt
Geek in training.
Jack of few trades, master of none.
Anonymous
September 1, 2005 2:48:44 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

On 2005-09-01 09:47:16, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Timo_Pietil�?=
<timo.pietila@helsinki.fi> wrote:

> Maces and other "blunt" weapons in angband are not actually quite so
> blunt with exception of certain staves. I think this restriction is
> somewhat unlogical.
>
> Lets change that logic in that: Priests are not allowed to use sharp
> weapons because they are not allowed to cut _themselves_.
>

Or maybe they should be changed into Samurai/Priests that are not allowed to use
"peasant" or "gaijin" weapons, only bugei weapons like the katana, longbow or
yari. ;-)

--
--

Anssi Ramela

anssi.ramela@myy.helia.fi
Anonymous
September 1, 2005 2:48:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

Ramela wrote.

> On 2005-09-01 09:47:16, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Timo_Pietil�?=
> <timo.pietila@helsinki.fi> wrote:
>
> > Maces and other "blunt" weapons in angband are not actually quite so
> > blunt with exception of certain staves. I think this restriction is
> > somewhat unlogical.
> >
> > Lets change that logic in that: Priests are not allowed to use sharp
> > weapons because they are not allowed to cut _themselves_.

Won't that require a decrease in dexterity which may hamper the
use of prayer based spells?

>
> Or maybe they should be changed into Samurai/Priests that are not allowed to use
> "peasant" or "gaijin" weapons, only bugei weapons like the katana, longbow or
> yari. ;-)

If you want a Japanese flavor let the priest and monks learn to use the
hafted weapons and quarterstaffs as well as hand to hand fighting. Those
were the traditional weapons that gave the shogunates trouble when thousands
of monks came out armed to oppose the diminution of their privileges.

Samurai might resign to become priests though they might forswear
anything but self-defense. The staff that they carried could be a
fearsome weapon.


> Anssi Ramela
>
> anssi.ramela@myy.helia.fi

later
bliss -- C O C O A Powered... (at california dot com)

--
bobbie sellers - (Back to Angband) Team *AMIGA*

"It is by will alone I set my mind in motion.
It is by the beans of cocoa that the thoughts acquire speed,
the thighs acquire girth, the girth become a warning.
It is by theobromine alone I set my mind in motion."
--from Someone else's Dune spoof ripped to my taste.
September 1, 2005 7:08:16 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

Juho Schultz wrote:
> Edward Kolis wrote:
> > Say, this has always bugged me... If priests can't use sharp weapons because
> > they draw blood, why can they use bows and arrows? Or do arrows really not
> > draw much blood? I'm not an expert in archery ;-)
>
> If you think Priests should not use arrows/bolts, you can play Quickband.

Where the sharp-weapon bonuses are increased, and extended to bows and
crossbows (but not slings).

I grew up on D&D and it just feels wrong to have priests wandering
round with bows and arrows.

A.
Anonymous
September 1, 2005 8:29:47 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 09:59:55 -0700, Wil Hunt
<XwilOhuntX@XcomOcastX.XnetX> wrote:

>I had always assumed that this was an early attempt to maintain game
>balance. Is this not the case?

Yes, but its game balance effect in Angband is minor to the point of
pointlessness. It was a rather more effective balance in its origin (if
vastly worse for its silliness in an actual RPG), for it is a pure
*D&Dism.

--
R. Dan Henry
danhenry@inreach.com
Anonymous
September 1, 2005 8:34:22 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 09:07:20 +0300, Juho Schultz
<juho.schultz@helsinki.fi> wrote:

>On the other hand, I have seen some very sharp war hammers.

I have never seen a war hammer that wasn't, outside of fantasy artwork.
[1] The "war hammer" is essentially a spike on a stick, only
perpendicular rather than parallel, because that would be a spear.

[1] Thor's hammer was a representation of the thunderbolt and also a
phallic symbol, not something intended to be a practical weapon for a
mortal. I think this symbol is part of where the notion that a hammer
for fighting resembles one for pounding nails comes from.

--
R. Dan Henry
danhenry@inreach.com
Anonymous
September 1, 2005 11:19:43 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

In article <df6bm5$r26$1@oravannahka.helsinki.fi>,
Timo Pietilä <timo.pietila@helsinki.fi> wrote:
>R. Dan Henry wrote:
>> On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 00:10:01 GMT, Edward Kolis <ekolis@cinci.rr.com>
>> wrote:
>>>Say, this has always bugged me... If priests can't use sharp weapons because
>>>they draw blood, why can they use bows and arrows? Or do arrows really not
>>>draw much blood? I'm not an expert in archery ;-)
>>
>> Braining someone with a mace spills a lot more blood.
>
>Maces and other "blunt" weapons in angband are not actually quite so
>blunt with exception of certain staves. I think this restriction is
>somewhat unlogical.
>
>Lets change that logic in that: Priests are not allowed to use sharp
>weapons because they are not allowed to cut _themselves_.

Actually, priests can't use sharp weapons (except for the Lucerne
Hammer) because D&D said they couldn't.
--
Julian Lighton jl8e@fragment.com
/* You are not expected to understand this. */
Anonymous
September 2, 2005 5:38:54 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

Wil Hunt wrote:

> unwieldable or some such. Mages and priests do seem to get unduly
> powerful late game. It'd be great to find ways to balance that out --
> not for reasons of "realisticness," but rather game balance.

Actually every class (with possible exception of rogue) gets really
powerful at the end. Ranger is the strongest, not mage or priest.
Warrior is also pretty easy after you have survived the middle-part of
the game. Paladin is also powerful but I find it somehow boring to play.

Ranger is probably only class that can kill Great Hell Wyrm before it
gets a turn.

What bugs me is that mage is still weakling compared to priest. Priest
has almost as powerful attack-spells with lower manacost and LoS effect
and in addition to those priest gets healing and best utility-spells.
Only things priest lacks are haste and genocides.

Timo Pietilä
Anonymous
September 2, 2005 2:18:14 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

Cliff Stamp wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Sep 2005, [ISO-8859-15] Timo Pietil� wrote:
>
>> Ranger is probably only class that can kill Great Hell Wyrm before it
>> gets a turn.
>
> Pure offence isn't the whole game

That's true, but high level ranger can also kill double-move insta-kill
monsters that are faster than he is. Especially if they have cold or
fire resistance hole. And Ranger gets nearly all mage spells in top of
that.

My first challenge-game was bookless hobbit ranger. And it turned out to
be easier than warrior, only lack of pseudo-ID hurt at the beginning of
the game.

Next was artifactless bookless hobbit ranger and it _still_ was piece of
cake to play.

>, 0% healing has a tremendous effect on
> gameplay, and 0% WoD even more so. Mages are much worse still though and
> trivial in end game.

Can't say which is easier, they both are. I play priests a lot so I
might have more experience with them than with mages. Rangers I do not
play as long as they get "brand ammo" -spell. That is seriously game
balance breaking feature.

>> What bugs me is that mage is still weakling compared to priest. Priest
>> has almost as powerful attack-spells with lower manacost and LoS
>> effect and in addition to those priest gets healing and best
>> utility-spells. Only things priest lacks are haste and genocides.
>
> Genocide is game breaking powerful, much more so than anything a Priest
> has

IMHO no.

> WoD is close

Mage gets WoD too.

> but genocide turns vaults into chests, and rift is even worse
> than GoI.

GoI was stupidly powerful. Much much worse than anything game has now.
IIRC rift has been changed so that it sometimes teleports monster away
instead of just blinking it. But I agree that it is still very powerful.

Timo Pietilä
Anonymous
September 2, 2005 4:21:20 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

"Cliff Stamp" <sstamp@physics.mun.ca> schrieb...

> Genocide is game breaking powerful, much more so than anything a Priest has,
> WoD is close, but genocide turns vaults into chests,

Genocide now is in the last dungeon book. My mage found it around 4800'.
If found early, vaults will contain many uniques, which are unaffected by
Genocide.

> and rift is even worse than GoI.

There were quite a few times when rift teleported the monster next to
my mage. There were many times the monster resisted. GoI was far worse.

Werner.
Anonymous
September 2, 2005 5:40:00 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

R. Dan Henry wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 09:07:20 +0300, Juho Schultz
> <juho.schultz@helsinki.fi> wrote:
>
>
>>On the other hand, I have seen some very sharp war hammers.
>
>
> I have never seen a war hammer that wasn't, outside of fantasy artwork.
> [1] The "war hammer" is essentially a spike on a stick, only
> perpendicular rather than parallel, because that would be a spear.
>
> [1] Thor's hammer was a representation of the thunderbolt and also a
> phallic symbol, not something intended to be a practical weapon for a
> mortal. I think this symbol is part of where the notion that a hammer
> for fighting resembles one for pounding nails comes from.

Almost all war hammers I have seen had heads with both sharp and blunt ends.
The shape of sharp end varies, I guess it evolved as plate mail evolved.
But I think also the blunt end was used.

War hammers were used (at least in Finland) before metal and Thor were
known. They are called "vasarakirves" (hammer-axe). Biggest difference
to middle-age war hammer is the sharp end: it was wedge instead of cone.
Some people even claim Thor's hammer evolved from this stone-age war hammer.
Anonymous
September 2, 2005 10:26:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

"Cliff Stamp" <sstamp@physics.mun.ca> schrieb ...

>> If found early, vaults will contain many uniques, which are unaffected by
>> Genocide.

> Doesn't matter, just ignore those ones, rinse and repeat.

In another post, you wrote:

> You don't need to kill anything to get items. It basically is a spell of
> *aquirement* if you are willing to vault scum.

*IF* you are willing to vault scum. I think many people don't.

And without, genocide is just another way to choose your fights.

In fact, unless you got extremely lucky, you won't have the book
until you are powerful enough to handle about everything.
My mage found it at 4800', in the drop of one of the last uniques.

>>> and rift is even worse than GoI.
>>
>> There were quite a few times when rift teleported the monster next to
>> my mage. There were many times the monster resisted. GoI was far worse.
>
> What is the percentage of times that it doesn't put the monster out of LoS.

Out of my head, i'd say 30% resist chance, and 10% chance to land
somewhere else in LoS.

(checks source V 3.0.5)
Resist chance is monster level in 127.
So, for high level monsters, chances are very high that they resist.

Werner.
September 2, 2005 11:00:02 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

Timo Pietilä wrote:
> Cliff Stamp wrote:
> > but genocide turns vaults into chests, and rift is even worse
> > than GoI.
>
> GoI was stupidly powerful. Much much worse than anything game has now.

What did GoI do? Did it make you literally invulnerable?

A.
Anonymous
September 3, 2005 1:55:54 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 19:40:15 +0300, Timo Pietilä wrote:

>Cliff Stamp wrote:
>> On Fri, 2 Sep 2005, [UTF-8] Timo Pietilä wrote:
>>
(snip)
>>> IIRC rift has been changed so that it sometimes teleports monster away
>>> instead of just blinking it.
>>
>> Doesn't matter. It is essentially
>>
>> sphere of death : has a small chance of insta kill, teleports away if it
>> fails
>>
>> Unless it has been verfed since I last played it, this is how it
>> essentially works
>
>Apparently it has been verfed, because I don't recall it being that
>powerful. Insta-kill at least is not possible with rift. AFAIK it never
>was (unless monster is weak enough to get killed obviously)

Hi Timo, Cliff,

Here's the description of rift from the spoiler file MAGIC.SPO:

(g) Rift
Mage : Level 35, Mana 30, %Fail 60, Exp 25
Ranger : n/a
Rogue : n/a
Fires a beam that inflicts 40+(level)d7 points of gravity damage on
each monster caught in it, and has a chance to teleport surviving
monsters in the area of effect up to 10 squares away.

The "chance to teleport away" is higher for low-level monsters: monsters
have a (monster level) in 127 chance to resist the teleportation. And
for monsters that breathe gravity, the chance to resist is 100% (and the
damage is reduced to 3/(6+1d6) of the normal damage).

Best, Hugo
--
Your sig line (k) was stolen! (more)
There is a puff of smoke!

(Remove NO and SPAM to get my e-mail address)
Anonymous
September 3, 2005 4:22:06 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

On Fri, 2 Sep 2005, Antoine wrote:

> What did GoI do? Did it make you literally invulnerable?

Yes, and it had a low duration and a high fail rate and could not be recast
to increase duration.

--
Cliff Stamp
sstamp@physics.mun.ca http://www.physics.mun.ca:80/~sstamp/

The one unforgivable sin, the offence against one's own integrity,
is to accept anything at all simply on authority -- Maureen Johnson Long

Anyone can hold the helm when the sea is calm. -- Publilius Syrus
Anonymous
September 4, 2005 10:34:06 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

Cliff Stamp wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Sep 2005, [UTF-8] Timo Pietilä wrote:
>
>> 2 * 4 = 8 (3*4 or 4*3) = 12, 12/8 = 1.5. With brand 36. 36/8 = 4.5.
>>
>> And ranger rarely melees. Missile combat is so much more powerful.
>
> With optimal equipment yeah and by that time damage is never an issue for
> anyone.

It's nice to be able to kill Black Reaver or similar before it moves. I
find damage very important. Even for priest with 0% heals.

> a) The War Hammer 'Homilmach' (9d4) (+16,+19) (+4) (charging)
> b) a Long Bow of Extra Might (x3) (+12,+12) (+1)

> chaos, +3 base speed. The hammer is acid brand, slay demon and undead, which
> are mainly redundant.

That's incredible melee weapon. And bad luck for bow.

>> You don't need to fight, just turn them into porcupines. You don't
>> need to heal much if you don't melee. Pick your fights.
>
> Unless vanilla has changed a lot, melee attacks of high level monsters are
> usually the best option, distance attacks + summoning are the killer
> (Titans and such being the exception).

You can use bow at melee-range in vanilla. Also distance attacks are not
any less in melee range, there are just additional melee attacks instead
of movement. Summons are problem with missile tactics. They get into
way, so summoners are harder than rest. If it isn't weakling or unique I
usually just teleport those away.

Timo Pietilä
Anonymous
September 4, 2005 10:38:51 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

Cliff Stamp wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Sep 2005, Antoine wrote:
>
>> What did GoI do? Did it make you literally invulnerable?
>
> Yes, and it had a low duration and a high fail rate and could not be recast
> to increase duration.

High enough duration to last almost all major battles. When it worns off
you just blink out of the LoS and cast it again. When you got it you had
basically won the game. Morgoth being wall-eater and ruining dungeon
structure was a little bit harder than rest of the uniques, but not much.

Timo Pietilä
Anonymous
September 5, 2005 12:54:07 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

Cliff Stamp wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Sep 2005, [iso-8859-15] Werner B�r wrote:
>
>> If found early, vaults will contain many uniques, which are unaffected by
>> Genocide.
>
>
> Doesn't matter, just ignore those ones, rinse and repeat.

You'll lose a lot of artefacts doing that - OK you can win without any
artefacts but if you are going to scum for things it seems good if you
can actually get them.


>>> and rift is even worse than GoI.
>>
>>
>> There were quite a few times when rift teleported the monster next to
>> my mage. There were many times the monster resisted. GoI was far worse.
>
>
> What is the percentage of times that it doesn't put the monster out of LoS.
>

Just needs to be once to put you in trouble if it is a nasty unique.

--
To contact me take a davidhowdon and add a @yahoo.co.uk to the end.
Anonymous
September 5, 2005 1:11:39 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

On Sun, 4 Sep 2005, David Howdon wrote:

[vault scumming by genocide]

> You'll lose a lot of artefacts doing that - OK you can win without any
> artefacts but if you are going to scum for things it seems good if you can
> actually get them.

Preserve handles that as does WoD.

[Rift]

>> What is the percentage of times that it doesn't put the monster out of
>> LoS.
>
> Just needs to be once to put you in trouble if it is a nasty unique.

Compare it to not using Rift. All you need is the proper setup (perm walls)
and it is very likely they get blinked out of LoS. It is resistable though
at a fairly high chance for high level monsters, so it isn't nearly as
powerful as it used to be.

--
Cliff Stamp
sstamp@physics.mun.ca http://www.physics.mun.ca:80/~sstamp/

The one unforgivable sin, the offence against one's own integrity,
is to accept anything at all simply on authority -- Maureen Johnson Long

Anyone can hold the helm when the sea is calm. -- Publilius Syrus
Anonymous
September 5, 2005 11:28:34 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

Timo Pietilä <timo.pietila@helsinki.fi> wrote in
news:D f6bm5$r26$1@oravannahka.helsinki.fi:

> Maces and other "blunt" weapons in angband are not actually quite so
> blunt with exception of certain staves. I think this restriction is
> somewhat unlogical.

The whole restriction itself is somewhat illogical.

Priests weren't supposed to spill blood, so they didn't use edged
weapons. Staves and the like only marginally follow the letter of the
idea, and outright break the spirit. Fantasy books and games keep
both the restriction and the workaround as a partial means of
balancing their version of priestly magic, often regardless of whatever
religion the priests actually support. (Though generic "good" priestly
religions are probably the general idea themselves.)

When you get into the detail that a completely smooth mace will still
cave in a skull, you are only hitting the problem with the initial
workaround itself.
Anonymous
September 5, 2005 2:24:03 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

Cliff Stamp wrote:

> Plus this is all late game, it isn't like Rangers start off with the
> ability to do ~1000 hp per round. Any class/race can become uberpowerful if you
> play long enough, reach CL50, max stats, fill resistances, base +20 speed, find
> god weapon, etc. . .

Ranger is pretty good after clvl 20 and getting there is not hard. Not
only because of fighting skills but that makes the difference between
ranger and mage. Ranger gets nearly all mage spells, which means that he
can cast spells like haste and heroism. That has a huge impact in
easyness of the game. Consider how easy it is to play warrior early into
game. Now _add_ to that ability to cast a lot of spells and later extra
shots with bow.

And that ability to shoot extra shots gives him ability to deal with
monsters that are faster than he is which is really nice in mid-game.

Later ranger gets brand ammo which basically triples his missile
fighting. This basically makes him able to deliver nine times as much
damage to monsters than any other class when using single shot x3
missile weapons.

And of course this is late game. It is late game when game gets hard. Up
to stat-gain things are easy. And for normal player getting clvl 50 way
before he is ready to face Morgoth is normal. It is fast divers like you
and Eddie who get hurt by XP penalty Ranger has.

Priest maybe easiest early, but ranger is most powerful later.

IMO Ranger should not be able to cast nearly as much spells as it does
now. I have suggested this before, but one more time is not going to
hurt anybody: Swap rogue and ranger spell lists (except detection
spells). Remove brand ammo spell from game entirely.

More radical suggestion: Make ranger prayer-based.

Timo Pietilä
Anonymous
September 5, 2005 2:44:07 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

Cliff Stamp wrote:
> On Sun, 4 Sep 2005, [ISO-8859-15] Timo Pietil� wrote:
>
> [GoI]
>
>> High enough duration to last almost all major battles.
>
> If you could kill things before GoI wore off the game was over a long time
> ago. It was also a CL 45 spell, you can finish the game before that.

Not very many can. You can. Eddie can. Lev certainly could. But for me
that is difficult. You need to kill nearly all uniques before fighting
Morgoth and while killing those you get to clvl 50 before you notice.

>> When you got it you had basically won the game.
>
> No, genocide and WoD do this, there is always risk using GoI, there is no
> risk with those two. They can be easily abused and unbalance the game.

You say that GoI didn't unbalance game? Genocide can be abused only
using vault scumming. Othervise it is not anything huge. And vault
scumming is rare. If you do it I suggest you stop doing it. WoD is
basically a mean to get rid of unique you are not ready to meet. IMO It
isn't abusable in any way (except artifact hunting using vault-scumming).

Vault-scumming effect is easy to correct: prevent destruction and
genocide within vault.

> I don't think it should be back in its origional form, but it isn't as
> powerful as lots of elements in the game, nor nearly as abusable.

What other things are more powerful than GoI was?

> The ability to buy potions of healing in NPP for example destroys
> game balance as it gives all classes trivial 0% healing.

That's bull. In NPP buying potions is not cheap and if you can afford
buying all potions you need you are either playing too slow or have
already won the game. It just makes game _faster_.

Timo Pietilä
Anonymous
September 5, 2005 7:20:26 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

"Cliff Stamp" <sstamp@physics.mun.ca> schrieb...

> [rift]
>
>> Resist chance is monster level in 127.
>> So, for high level monsters, chances are very high that they resist.
>
> Yeah, this nerfs it competely, they never resisted it initially so once you
> got it at a low fail rate everything died trivially. With the above stats
> for high level monsters missles are likely your best option, or mana storm
> for a pure magic mage.

Mana storm is in the last book, like genocide. I found it at 4800'.
I played pure magic mage (no melee or shooting, but use the slots)

As it is, there is no *best* spell in Raals, which is nice IMO.
I used several of them in the late game:

Ice Storm (damage + stun) against non-resistant monsters
Rift for a chance to phase them away, if they got close
Shock Wave to stun high level monsters and uniques
Meteor Swarm (?) for best damage/mana

Werner.
Anonymous
September 5, 2005 7:41:03 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

Timo Pietilä wrote:

>
> You had unbelieveable melee-weapon. I wouldn't try to find that bow, I
> would turn into warrior and won with melee. IIRC in NPP rangers don't
> even get that other extra shot, only one.
>

Correct. Rangers and rogues get +1 shots at level 26 in NPP. Rangers
get the extra shot with bow/arrows and rogues get it with sling/shots.

(This is from the NPP v0.4.1 source file xtra1.c lines 2585-2590.)

--
Wil Hunt
Geek in training.
Jack of few trades, master of none.
Anonymous
September 6, 2005 2:33:30 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

Timo Pietilä <timo.pietila@helsinki.fi> writes:

> (why isn't Azathoth demon???)

This is just a weirdness on Jeff's part. When I complained that
Azathoth was summoned by SummonDemon, Jeff changed the spell rather
than changing Azathoth to a demon or changing to non-'U'.

I would make Azathoth an A[inur] if I was in charge. Jeff doesn't
want a non-Tolkien character to be an Ainur, which is understandable
[though misguided IMO]. Then, the next closest thing is 'U', but
since Azathoth isn't a demon, something has to come out strange.

Now you have me wondering. What letter should be used for
"amorphous toadlike blasphemes"? :) 


Eddie
Anonymous
September 6, 2005 6:05:21 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

Timo Pietilä wrote:

>
> Is there a zero missing in that turn count or does NPP count it
> differently? I got a feeling that you have played this _really_ fast,
> But it doesn't sound like that. If that is in reality 1.5 million then
> it isn't that special. Fast, but not so special.
>

Cliff really does play that fast. I saw his win in Quickband in 43K
moves; I switched back to Quick for a while to try to improve playing
speed. I managed to kill Lurtz in 80K, but never did better than 200K
for Saruman. (If Lurtz had an uber drop, I'd probably have finished in
< 100K.)

I need to try again with a Ranger or Paladin; all my attempts were as
Warrior or Brigand, who are both weak in detection.
Anonymous
September 6, 2005 11:33:32 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

Cliff Stamp wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Sep 2005, [ISO-8859-15] Timo Pietil� wrote:
>
>> Cliff Stamp wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 5 Sep 2005, [UTF-8] Timo Pietil� wrote:
>
>>> Especially in NPP due to the way they
>>> splash you with breaths/balls and chain summon.
>>
>> NPP is not vanilla. 4GAI makes a big difference (as well as quests,
>> store services and random artifacts).
>
> Doesn't Vanilla have high level Wyrm's with high level breaths and undead
> with high storm/ball ability? Black Reavers and GWoP (and other
> nonelementals) are harder than many uniques.

GWoP doesn't exist. GWoMany Colors does, but it is just bigger version
of AMHD. GWoBalance is most dangerous of Wyrms. Black reavers & co
undeads you need to kill sometimes. There fire-branded arrows are very
useful. But there isn't nearly as much very nasty monsters in vanilla
than there is in NPP.

> [uniques]
>
>> You don't want to fight them _with_ Morgoth. Genocide doesn't help you
>> there, nor does WoD. GoI would.
>
> WoD gets rid of them, you don't need to kill them just not fight them. When
> he summons them you use WoD to get rid of them.

And get rid of Morgoth too. And then start again. That's not very smart
move.

> [genocide]


>>> It is
>>> like the levels are generated with no monsters, just items. That is
>>> way more unbalancing than GoI.
>>
>> And taking forever getting those items and XP. Now I understand how
>> you get so deep before hitting clvl 50: you avoid so many monsters
>> that you don't get XP.
>
> It doesn't take forever, game time is short, play turns is high as you are
> resting alot of course until you get decently high int/level so the fail
> rate and mana supply are decent. Plus as you get stronger you genocide
> less, eventually it is only Reavers, great Wyrms and similar.

I just checked and I have remembered one thing wrong. Banishment (as it
is called now) is clvl 35 spell. I remembered it being clvl 45.

It is in last book which makes it rare, but it is much earlier and
easier to cast that I remembered. My bad. It is abusable as it is now.
Maybe level and mana-adjustment is in order.

>>> Use WoD on uniques or the occasional nasty pit, or
>>> just skip those levels, it isn't like you have a limited supply.
>>
>> And that is unbalancing how? You just ruin level structure and wipe
>> out all items in blast radius. With that you didn't gain anything.
>> Unless there was GV in blast radius.
>
> It is the rest of the level you are concerned about, WoD lets you walk
> around without risking LoS death from a unique and takes out pits
> faster/safer than genocide. Again, you don't need to clear every level, and
> kill every monster, just eliminate the ones which are hard to handle and
> take the weak fights. GoI doesn't let you do this, genocide/WoD do.

Stairs do that too. WoD still isn't showing any signs of being
unbalancing. Sure it is useful, but unbalancing? No.


>> And you did then try to kill dlvl 4000' uniques how? With no speed and
>> resist holes? It's easy to crash dive. It can be done with stair
>> scumming by any class. Staying alive at that depth is the difficult part.
>
> No it is trivial with Genocide and WoD as you don't need to fight anything.
> I cleared vaults for items.

So you vault-scummed.

> Turn autoscum on, and it is trivial. It is way
> more broken than GoI.

Vault-scumming is. It is said that Priest Alter Reality should be
removed just because of that. It makes vault-scumming too easy.

>>> People used it to take out Morgoth when he was double moving.
>>
>> And that is different than now how? That bug of double move when both
>> player and Morgoth are moving at same speed is corrected, right.
>
> No, the old linear speed system where people would win when he double moved
> you every time.

Oh, you mean that old time when speed was not fractional and Cubragol
had +1 speed? You could still then get +3 speed or more which was enough
to avoid double moves. Two RoS and haste was enough.

> Without GoI it was impossible because he could mana storm
> you twice and you were dead.

That isn't right because you could win without GoI.

> [floor items]
>
>> Which, as I said, is only a small fraction of game items.
>
> Doesn't matter since you gain them with no risk. You don't need every item.

But it takes too long to get those. You die on boredom without fights.

>>>> What other things are more powerful than GoI was?
>>>
>>> Genocide, WoD, teleportation and ease of healing in NPP.
>>
>> Teleport other, you mean.
>
> Any teleportation, play two mages :
>
> -run with GoI but NO teleportation of any kind
> -run without GoI and all teleportation
>
> Which was the harder win?

Without any teleportation you are dead way before you can get GoI.
That's how game is designed. Comparing GoI and something as basic as
teleport isn't really comparing which is more powerful, it is changing
game basics. Teleportation is something you _need_. You could say that
healing in general is more powerful than GoI. Or speed is more powerful
than GoI. Even that stairs are more powerful than GoI, those give you
ability to dive.

> [NPP Ranger]
>
>> I wouldn't try to find that bow, I would turn into warrior and won
>> with melee.
>
> Against Morgoth is is ~200 per round, that is not overly high.

(9d4 + 57) * 5 = 397. Did you weaken your rings?
(9d4 + 30) * 5 = 262.5 With both rings removed.

> Especially
> since to-dam is low because of lack of bonus on non-weapon items. Against
> what it is weak to it is ~400 per round, decent enough.

9d4 * 3 * 5 = 337.5 from dice alone. Around 500 is more like it even if
you count only STR bonus and weapon own to_dam in it.

> But it isn't
> critical, I use it all the time against things which it doesn't slay but
> because I can cast resistance/haste/shield the fights are win able without
> teleportation the majority of the time.

You said that it has acid-brand. That slays pretty much everything. Only
few uniques (giants and elementals mainly),High level hydras, angels and
multi-hued things out of general population resist acid.

And many of those were either demon or undead.

(why isn't Azathoth demon???)

>> With that low turn count that melee-weapon is really special. How did you
>> get it?
>
> Floor I think it was mixed in with some minor drop. It isn't significantly
> more powerful than a decent HA

9d4 + 19 with acid brand, slay demon and undead isn't significantly more
powerful than decent HA?? Those must be pretty good HA:s then. Vanilla
has _no_ weapon to beat that. Except for the endgame where only slay to
count is slay evil. And even then that HA need to have at least 4d4 dice
and +20 to dam to be even with that.

>> That's like finding Ringil before or at stat-gain in Vanilla.
>
> I found it way past stat gain.

Turn count, that is. Or does that turn count count _player_ turns
instead of game turns? Ordinary vanilla char has more than million turns
used at the endgame. Five million is not rare.

> Had I found Ringil early the game would have
> been way faster. I was at ~3000 with +3 speed without the ability to keep
> haste up due to low level and low INT. With a +10 speed item from the start
> game turns would have been under 150k trivially.

Is there a zero missing in that turn count or does NPP count it
differently? I got a feeling that you have played this _really_ fast,
But it doesn't sound like that. If that is in reality 1.5 million then
it isn't that special. Fast, but not so special.

Timo Pietilä
Anonymous
September 7, 2005 1:20:24 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

Cliff Stamp wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Sep 2005, [UTF-8] Timo Pietilä wrote:
>
>> Cliff Stamp wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 5 Sep 2005, [ISO-8859-15] Timo Pietil� wrote:
>
> [using Tensors]
>
>> You really have unlimited supply of both fire and cold branded arrows
>> without using that spell? Tell me how you do that.
>
> They are not the only brands, ego ammo isn't that rare and you hunt what
> you
> get and you don't shoot it into orc's and such anyway.

Why not? Single branded arrow takes out an orc. You can wipe out entire
group of orcs much faster with bow than with melee. You lose a lot of
arrows that way, but it doesn't hurt, you can re-supply full with just
99 gp.

>> Note that slay foo arrows are worthless in my point of view.
>
> Even the fairly weak ones like animal/giant will take out several uniques,
> slay dragon/demon/undead are way more useful in general as they have
> lots of non-unique monsters.

I take that you haven't ever counted how many monsters actually resist
more than one or two elements. Almost everything has a hole somewhere.

Carrying fire and cold stacks with you covers _much_ wider selection of
monsters than with any combination of two stacks of slay foo arrows.
Around 70 monsters resist both out of 616 races. Multi-hued things,
beholders, angels, moving jellies and most golems resist both, almost
everything else has a hole. Almost all uniques are also vulnerable to
fire or cold.

> What I find more useful is the ability to caste haste and resistance. This
> makes end game much faster than a warrior.

That's true. Haste has huge impact of gameplay.

>> You just said that NPP has unbalancing feature of buying healing
>> potions, so I wonder why you didn't use that with your ranger.
>
> Because it was broken. I have passed on Fundin about six times because it
> would take maybe 5 !healing to kill him and I didn't have that to waste,
> however if I used cash it would essentially take ~25-50k to kill him. No
> big
> deal. I don't use genocide/WoD to item scum either, or summon farm, or use
> various store services like increase stat for the same reason they all
> break
> the game and make it trivial.

I agree that NPP is easier than vanilla. You should try with store
services and random artifacts off (an option). Quests can be also turned
off. Then it is vanilla with 4GAI and much much nastier monsters.

> But I already noted in the past this is one of the problems with RPG's in
> general, you can play with no risk if you run high turn counts. This is way
> more unbalancing than any other feature, unlimited exp and item drops.

People play differently. I sometimes enjoy just toying with monsters
playing demi-god chars. Hunting orc without killing it and that sort of
things.

>> Almost every winner in vanilla has found either Bard or Belthronding
>> (or both) way before endgame.
>
> Average turn count?

That depends what class you play. Warriors seem to be fastest (no
resting for mana). Around three million for ordinary game.

Fast divers are minority of players anyway, so I guess that is average
for most.

> And you found one or both before a decent weapon the
> majority of the time?

Decent melee-weapon turns out earlier. Bard or Belthronding later. But
they turn out sooner or later, they are both so common.

> I don't recall offence being a problem for paladins,
> warriors or rangers in melee.

It isn't. Ranger just happens to be much more powerful with bow. So much
that I played with RoAccuracy once instead of RoDam, because you do get
benefit from Accuracy to shooting, but not Damage.

> It is always the other things you struggle to
> get, speed, resistances, and support potions and scrolls.

Those are pretty much everybodys problem. Except maybe priests.

>>>> Remove brand ammo spell from game entirely.
>>>
>>> I would not miss this in Vanilla, I never used it signifiantly.
>>
>> Maybe that is the reason why you don't realise how unbalancing that
>> spell is.
>
> When I said I didn't use it, I didn't mean I didn't use slay arrows, just
> that I didn't depend on branding them. Fire/cold are weak anyway,

But combined very powerful. All brands are of course *3, so there is no
weaker brands, only less monsters that are vulnerable to some element.

> lightening/acid are more useful and I mainly used them on uniques, I would
> not waste them on trivial monsters.

Get five stacks of 20 arrows each. Fire, cold and poison-branded (just
checked, you get poison-brand too). Thing is that you choose which stack
to use against which monster. Combination of those is _much_ more
powerful than any combination of slay foo -arrows. And because of that
spell you _can_ waste them on trivial monsters, they are not likely to
run out. You can even get re-supply from dungeon. Arrows in drops are
pretty common.

Combined with enchant weapon you can make those stacks combine and carry
only three stacks. And turn even ordinary bow into killing machine. Get
a long bow. Any long bow. Enchant it a few times. You have now _at
least_ +10 bow. And arrows with +8 or bigger to_dam.

(1d4 +10 +9) * 3 * 3 = 193.5 *per arrow*. *3 = 580.5 / turn. With
Lothlorien or similar that is much higher. Even with just common Long
bow of Power (+15) that is 238.5 per arrow. With Bard that is 457.5 per
arrow.

Timo Pietilä
Anonymous
September 7, 2005 4:23:20 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

Cliff Stamp wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Sep 2005, [UTF-8] Timo Pietilä wrote:

> [WoD uniques when fighting Morgoth]
>
>> And get rid of Morgoth too. And then start again. That's not very smart
>> move.
>
> Yeah, you get them apart first, how exactly depends on LoS issues.

And then Morgoth just summons them back with all their escorts (if any).
You really don't gain anything with WoD against Morgoth. At most you get
few turns to breathe easier. Teleport other is better. Priest has banish
evil which is much better than WoD or Mass Geno (priest banish evil is
mass teleport evil, not same as genocide).

> [GoI / underspeed]
>
>> Oh, you mean that old time when speed was not fractional and Cubragol
>> had +1 speed? You could still then get +3 speed or more which was

> that was rare, getting double moves on him was common though . I also
> faintly recall the slightl possibility of RoS +2, but may be off there.

I have this memory also, so it might be right, but it has been long time
for me too.

>>> [floor items]
>>>
>>>> Which, as I said, is only a small fraction of game items.
>>>
>>> Doesn't matter since you gain them with no risk. You don't need every
>>> item.
>>
>> But it takes too long to get those. You die on boredom without fights.
>
> The game never lasts that long.

I do die on boredom if I refuse to fight tough fights. With no risk type
char I die trying something stupid that I know is stupid, but I just
have to try. Something like Wyrm-scum with Greater Draconic Q. Very
rewarding but you make bad move sooner or later and die next turn.

>> Without any teleportation you are dead way before you can get GoI.
>> That's how game is designed.
>
> It can be done. I did it in Heng, you just have to play the game very
> differently, it completely changes the way you have to play.

I don't think anybody has done it in vanilla. You could try.

> [NPP weapon]
>
>>> Floor I think it was mixed in with some minor drop. It isn't
>>> significantly
>>> more powerful than a decent HA
>>
>> 9d4 + 19 with acid brand, slay demon and undead isn't significantly
>> more powerful than decent HA?? Those must be pretty good HA:s then.
>
> HA have demon and undead and evil. You don't really need to kill everything
> well, just one type of monsters is enough and you focus on that. Get a kill
> undead/dragon BoC for example. It is 30d5 which is significantly stronger
> than 27d4.

In old vanilla I used to carry BoC *slay dragon* or similar for Tiamat.
But only as swap. Main weapon was more all-around one like this.

> 9d4+19 is decent against Morgoth, but it isn't hard to do better
> in Vanilla, a BoC slay evil slaughters 9d4, or a MoD assuming you have the
> str, I didn't in this case, only four swings.

That's for endgame. I mentioned that in there it isn't that great. BoC
slay evil needs only +6 to_dam to beat it.

Otherwise that acid-brand is much better than slay evil.

>> Is there a zero missing in that turn count or does NPP count it
>> differently?
>
> I don't know the mechanics, I never looked at the source, here is the
> dump :
>
> http://angband.oook.cz/ladder-show.php?id=4813
>
> I don't know what player/game turns actually means in NPP.

Probably same as in vanilla.

Good heavens!

b) The Long Bow of Valas (x3) (+14,+14) (+2)
It increases your stealth, shooting speed, and shooting power
by 2. It provides resistance to acid. It cannot be harmed
by the elements.

There _is_ something wrong in NPP random artifact creation. x5 bow with
_two_ extra shots. Vanilla ranger would sell The One to get that one.


Adult: All levels generated small : yes (adult_force_small_lev)

This is probably why you could dive so fast. Small levels generate items
in much lesser space, but they are also more dangerous. This is like
getting small vault at every level.

Timo Pietilä
Anonymous
September 7, 2005 4:53:24 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

pete mack wrote:
> Timo Pietilä wrote:
>
>>Is there a zero missing in that turn count or does NPP count it
>>differently? I got a feeling that you have played this _really_ fast,
>>But it doesn't sound like that. If that is in reality 1.5 million then
>>it isn't that special. Fast, but not so special.
>>
> Cliff really does play that fast.

He seems to skip most uniques. There is no Vecna or Feagwath or
Tarrasque or many other high uniques in his notes. He seem to fight
Morgoth with all those alive.

I don't know how he did deal with Vecna and escorts in endgame. At 5000'
almost all escorts are Black Reavers. That's Morgoth, Vecna and big
bunch of Black reavers at the same time. Mass geno leaves Morgoth and
Vecna = RIP. Teleport other leaves escorts and one of the uniques = RIP.
Teleporting self is always risky. Especially if you have teleported some
bad ones away earlier. But that would give him possibility to deal with
Vecna and Morgoth at different times (Vecna first, trust me). WoD would
just cause same to happen again after few turns.

Cliff, I really want to know how you deal with that in endgame. I have
always hunted uniques at least to point where all of those with nasty
escorts are dead. That takes time. Too long actually. It makes game
boring. (I complained about that some time ago: Too many uniques). Do
you simply leave so many alive that when M summons it isn't likely that
those that appear are the bad ones?

Timo Pietilä
Anonymous
September 7, 2005 6:42:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

jl8e@fragment.com (Julian Lighton) writes:

> In article <m3hdcycd91.fsf@hot.NOSPAM.mail.com>,
> Eddie Grove <eddiegrove@hot.NOSPAM.mail.com> wrote:

>>Now you have me wondering. What letter should be used for
>>"amorphous toadlike blasphemes"? :) 
>
> Azathoth isn't toadlike, merely amorphous. (Source: S. Peterson's
> Guide to Cthulhu Monsters.) I'd say 'j' is most appropriate for it.

I didn't mean to imply Azathoth was such, though that seems like what
I did. It's just whenever I think of Lovecraft, I remember the phrase
"amorphous toadlike blaspheme".


Eddie
Anonymous
September 7, 2005 11:29:49 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 00:23:20 +0300, Timo Pietilä
<timo.pietila@helsinki.fi> wrote:

>Cliff Stamp wrote:
>> On Tue, 6 Sep 2005, [UTF-8] Timo Pietilä wrote:

>>> Oh, you mean that old time when speed was not fractional and Cubragol
>>> had +1 speed? You could still then get +3 speed or more which was
>
>> that was rare, getting double moves on him was common though . I also
>> faintly recall the slightl possibility of RoS +2, but may be off there.
>
>I have this memory also, so it might be right, but it has been long time
>for me too.

Yes, but RoS +2 was very, very rare. +3 speed would generally be BoS,
RoS, Ringil or Cubragol. And then you have Haste. IIRC, you could only
wear (or at least benefit from) one RoS.


>b) The Long Bow of Valas (x3) (+14,+14) (+2)
> It increases your stealth, shooting speed, and shooting power
> by 2. It provides resistance to acid. It cannot be harmed
> by the elements.
>
>There _is_ something wrong in NPP random artifact creation. x5 bow with
>_two_ extra shots. Vanilla ranger would sell The One to get that one.

Yikes!

--
R. Dan Henry
danhenry@inreach.com
Anonymous
September 8, 2005 1:16:36 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

In article <m3hdcycd91.fsf@hot.NOSPAM.mail.com>,
Eddie Grove <eddiegrove@hot.NOSPAM.mail.com> wrote:
>Timo Pietilä <timo.pietila@helsinki.fi> writes:
>
>> (why isn't Azathoth demon???)
>
>This is just a weirdness on Jeff's part. When I complained that
>Azathoth was summoned by SummonDemon, Jeff changed the spell rather
>than changing Azathoth to a demon or changing to non-'U'.
>
>I would make Azathoth an A[inur] if I was in charge. Jeff doesn't
>want a non-Tolkien character to be an Ainur, which is understandable
>[though misguided IMO]. Then, the next closest thing is 'U', but
>since Azathoth isn't a demon, something has to come out strange.
>
>Now you have me wondering. What letter should be used for
>"amorphous toadlike blasphemes"? :) 

Azathoth isn't toadlike, merely amorphous. (Source: S. Peterson's
Guide to Cthulhu Monsters.) I'd say 'j' is most appropriate for it.
--
Julian Lighton jl8e@fragment.com
/* You are not expected to understand this. */
Anonymous
September 8, 2005 2:20:56 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

R. Dan Henry <danhenry@inreach.com> writes:

> On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 00:23:20 +0300, Timo Pietilä
> <timo.pietila@helsinki.fi> wrote:
>
>>Cliff Stamp wrote:
>>> On Tue, 6 Sep 2005, [UTF-8] Timo Pietilä wrote:
>
>>>> Oh, you mean that old time when speed was not fractional and Cubragol
>>>> had +1 speed? You could still then get +3 speed or more which was
>>
>>> that was rare, getting double moves on him was common though . I also
>>> faintly recall the slightl possibility of RoS +2, but may be off there.
>>
>>I have this memory also, so it might be right, but it has been long time
>>for me too.
>
> Yes, but RoS +2 was very, very rare. +3 speed would generally be BoS,
> RoS, Ringil or Cubragol. And then you have Haste. IIRC, you could only
> wear (or at least benefit from) one RoS.
>
>
>>b) The Long Bow of Valas (x3) (+14,+14) (+2)
>> It increases your stealth, shooting speed, and shooting power
>> by 2. It provides resistance to acid. It cannot be harmed
>> by the elements.
>>
>>There _is_ something wrong in NPP random artifact creation. x5 bow with
>>_two_ extra shots. Vanilla ranger would sell The One to get that one.
>
> Yikes!

I think I once had an NPP randart xbow with +3 shots&might. Maybe it
was only a heavy xbow x4 (+20,+26) (+2 shots AND might), but I think
it was better than that, I cannot remember any more. I threw it away
lest I be tempted to use it.


Eddie
Anonymous
September 8, 2005 3:55:05 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

In article <m3u0gw5zcr.fsf@hot.NOSPAM.mail.com>,
Eddie Grove <eddiegrove@hot.NOSPAM.mail.com> wrote:
>jl8e@fragment.com (Julian Lighton) writes:
>
>> In article <m3hdcycd91.fsf@hot.NOSPAM.mail.com>,
>> Eddie Grove <eddiegrove@hot.NOSPAM.mail.com> wrote:
>
>>>Now you have me wondering. What letter should be used for
>>>"amorphous toadlike blasphemes"? :) 
>>
>> Azathoth isn't toadlike, merely amorphous. (Source: S. Peterson's
>> Guide to Cthulhu Monsters.) I'd say 'j' is most appropriate for it.
>
>I didn't mean to imply Azathoth was such, though that seems like what
>I did. It's just whenever I think of Lovecraft, I remember the phrase
>"amorphous toadlike blaspheme".

The tentacles, the tentacles, the rugose tentacles!
--
Julian Lighton jl8e@fragment.com
/* You are not expected to understand this. */
Anonymous
September 8, 2005 2:42:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

Julian Lighton wrote:
> In article <m3hdcycd91.fsf@hot.NOSPAM.mail.com>,
> Eddie Grove <eddiegrove@hot.NOSPAM.mail.com> wrote:
>
>>Timo Pietilä <timo.pietila@helsinki.fi> writes:
>>
>>>(why isn't Azathoth demon???)

>>Now you have me wondering. What letter should be used for
>>"amorphous toadlike blasphemes"? :) 
>
> Azathoth isn't toadlike, merely amorphous. (Source: S. Peterson's
> Guide to Cthulhu Monsters.) I'd say 'j' is most appropriate for it.

I still think it should be demon, even that it isn't ordinary one.
Tolkien didn't have "demons", only all kinds of magical and powerful
creatures. Actually only creature that is called "demon" in Balrog
(demons of power IIRC). Demon is human name for powerful magical minion
of Morgoth.

But "j" sounds right for Azathoth. Multi-colored maybe, so that it is
easy to spot?

Timo Pietilä
Anonymous
September 8, 2005 2:42:13 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.angband (More info?)

"Timo Pietilä" <timo.pietila@helsinki.fi> wrote in message news:D foq0k$skq$1@oravannahka.helsinki.fi...
> Julian Lighton wrote:
> > In article <m3hdcycd91.fsf@hot.NOSPAM.mail.com>,
> > Eddie Grove <eddiegrove@hot.NOSPAM.mail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Timo Pietilä <timo.pietila@helsinki.fi> writes:
> >>
> >>>(why isn't Azathoth demon???)
>
> >>Now you have me wondering. What letter should be used for
> >>"amorphous toadlike blasphemes"? :) 
> >
> > Azathoth isn't toadlike, merely amorphous. (Source: S. Peterson's
> > Guide to Cthulhu Monsters.) I'd say 'j' is most appropriate for it.
>
> I still think it should be demon, even that it isn't ordinary one.
> Tolkien didn't have "demons", only all kinds of magical and powerful
> creatures. Actually only creature that is called "demon" in Balrog
> (demons of power IIRC). Demon is human name for powerful magical minion
> of Morgoth.
>
> But "j" sounds right for Azathoth. Multi-colored maybe, so that it is
> easy to spot?
>
Done, it is now a 'j' with the ATTR_MULTI flag.

-Jeff
!