Oversized Monsters/Tiles

[Guest]

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

How do people feel about monsters that are larger than a single tile? I'm
looking at IVAN which supports 2x2 monsters (and maybe larger, I need to
explore some more).

I've read some posts by people who think it's silly that an ancient red
dragon should be the same size as a kobold with respect to dungeon
corridors, being able to walk through doors, ect.

At the same time, does making an ancient red dragon 3x3 really make things
that much better? Roguelikes are abstractions, after all.

I'm using tile graphics, so representation is not a problem. However, it
seems like there's a lot of implementation difficulties (or at least,
considerations) involved in allowing tiles that are larger than 1x1.

--
Blog:
Shedletsky's Bits: A Random Walk Through Manifold Space
http://www.stanford.edu/~jjshed/blog

 

[Guest]

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

Shedletsky <mylastname@stanford.edu> schrieb:
> At the same time, does making an ancient red dragon 3x3 really make
> things that much better? Roguelikes are abstractions, after all.

I guess that's the difference between a roguelike and a role playing
game; the level of abstraction.

I think the best advice is that if extensive use of multi-tiled monsters
is a good idea, it would have been done already. You can also search for
the many boring discussions that we've had here on this topic that have
lead to no fruitful implementation of new features.

A rat and dragon being the same size is just something we have to live
with, because we're playing a game.

--
Jim Strathmeyer

 

[Guest]

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

Shedletsky wrote:
> How do people feel about monsters that are larger than a single tile? I'm
> looking at IVAN which supports 2x2 monsters (and maybe larger, I need to
> explore some more).
>
> I've read some posts by people who think it's silly that an ancient red
> dragon should be the same size as a kobold with respect to dungeon
> corridors, being able to walk through doors, ect.
>
> At the same time, does making an ancient red dragon 3x3 really make things
> that much better? Roguelikes are abstractions, after all.
>
> I'm using tile graphics, so representation is not a problem. However, it
> seems like there's a lot of implementation difficulties (or at least,
> considerations) involved in allowing tiles that are larger than 1x1.
>

Ultimately, you have to decide for yourself what is a good idea and
what is not.
if you feel like going to the extra trouble, and you believe it would
add somehting to your game, go for it.

I myself ham of the opinion that it is a major pain in the butt, but
worth it. While I am going multi-tile for a few things, I am also not
making monsters 3x3, or any square shape. dragons are not sqaure I
intend dragons that are like nethacks long worms, excepting that they
have wings which do not permit them to fit into small corridors. maybe
a tentacle beast that has tentacles it can whip around. nothing square
though. I'm also planning a "crack in the wall" terrain type, which is
invisible if your perception is less than foo and impassible if your
size is greater than bar. also, monsters will have a degree of
visibility to the player, based on thier stealth, of which size is a
factor. extra small monsters can't be seen in plain sight except when
right in front of your face, and extra large monsters can be seen right
through walls.

 

[Guest]

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

Shedletsky wrote:
> How do people feel about monsters that are larger than a single tile? I'm
> looking at IVAN which supports 2x2 monsters (and maybe larger, I need to
> explore some more).

We really should condense this into an article somewhere.

There have been several useful discussions on the subject, one under
"creature sizes" includes my comments...

http://groups.google.ca/group/rec.games.roguelike.development/msg/5ca609c740aea024?hl=en&

I've done 2x2 sized creatures for POWDER. Large creatures make good
exceptional bosses, IMO, but are a bit flakey for every day use.
--
Jeff Lait
(POWDER: http://www.zincland.com/powder)

 

[Guest]

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

> We really should condense this into an article somewhere.

The Roguebasin wiki? I really like it as a resource, but there are not many
articles there now.

I don't mind digging through usenet archives, but for me that means digging
through Google groups, which is not an optimal format in which to digest
information (imho).

--
Blog:
Shedletsky's Bits: A Random Walk Through Manifold Space
http://www.stanford.edu/~jjshed/blog

 

[Guest]

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

> There have been several useful discussions on the subject, one under
> "creature sizes" includes my comments...
>
>
http://groups.google.ca/group/rec.games.roguelike.development/msg/5ca609c740aea024?hl=en&
>

That thread gave me a great idea for a potion that temporarily makes the
player 2x2, potentially trapping him in places with narrow corridors.

My RL is in an early stage of development, so it's probably not too late to
add support for large tiles... Yes. This is the feature creep.

--
Blog:
Shedletsky's Bits: A Random Walk Through Manifold Space
http://www.stanford.edu/~jjshed/blog

 

[Guest]

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

At Tue, 23 Aug 2005 11:29:06 -0400,
Shedletsky wrote:

> How do people feel about monsters that are larger than a single tile? I'm
> looking at IVAN which supports 2x2 monsters (and maybe larger, I need to
> explore some more).
>
> I've read some posts by people who think it's silly that an ancient red
> dragon should be the same size as a kobold with respect to dungeon
> corridors, being able to walk through doors, ect.
>
> At the same time, does making an ancient red dragon 3x3 really make things
> that much better? Roguelikes are abstractions, after all.
>
> I'm using tile graphics, so representation is not a problem. However, it
> seems like there's a lot of implementation difficulties (or at least,
> considerations) involved in allowing tiles that are larger than 1x1.

I think you can get very similar results much easier by just marking some
creatures as 'big' and some corridors as 'narrow'.

If you're using graphics, you can still make those creatures greater than
one tile -- just make some parts stick out, but without really occupying
the neighboring tiles.

......................
......................
......................
.........\--/..|......
......./`')::|......
......(=\VvvV/=+......
.......\:vVVv::.......
.......::#^^#::.......
......................
......................
......................
......................

--
Radomir `The Sheep' Dopieralski @**@_
(--) 3 ..zzZZ
. . . ..v.vVvVVvVvv.v.. .

 

[Guest]

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

Shedletsky wrote:
> My RL is in an early stage of development, so it's probably not
> too late to add support for large tiles... Yes. This is the
> feature creep.

Haven't you heard the number one rule of roguelike-developer?
It's "start small" That means it's too _early_ to support
large tiles Trust me, I know everything about features and
having lots of vague features to be implemented is the root
of all evil.

 

[Guest]

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

"Shedletsky" <mylastname@stanford.edu> wrote in
news:deffc7$ife$2@news.Stanford.EDU:

> How do people feel about monsters that are larger than a single tile?
> I'm looking at IVAN which supports 2x2 monsters (and maybe larger, I
> need to explore some more).
>
> I'm using tile graphics, so representation is not a problem. However,
> it seems like there's a lot of implementation difficulties (or at
> least, considerations) involved in allowing tiles that are larger than
> 1x1.
>

Another option would be to replace the single goblin with a group of
goblins. Thus one dragon is the same size as 6 or 8 goblins, and they all
fit onto a single tile.

For references, consider the early Wizardry games or the original Bard's
Tale, or strategy games like Heroes of Might and Magic.

JSwing

 

[Guest]

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

On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 10:52:28 -0500,
strathWHATEVERIGETENOUGHSPAMANYWAYS@ipass.net (Jim Strathmeyer) wrote:

>A rat and dragon being the same size is just something we have to live
>with, because we're playing a game.

And if you try to represent that difference with different tile sizes,
you start down the slippery slope to 50x50 tiles. And doing a half-way
job of 2x1 or 3x3 tiles just highlights the unrealism in the
abstractions.

--
R. Dan Henry = danhenry@inreach.com

 

[Guest]

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

JSwing wrote:
> "Shedletsky" <mylastname@stanford.edu> wrote in
> news:deffc7$ife$2@news.Stanford.EDU:
>
> > How do people feel about monsters that are larger than a single tile?
> > I'm looking at IVAN which supports 2x2 monsters (and maybe larger, I
> > need to explore some more).
> >
> > I'm using tile graphics, so representation is not a problem. However,
> > it seems like there's a lot of implementation difficulties (or at
> > least, considerations) involved in allowing tiles that are larger than
> > 1x1.
> >
>
> Another option would be to replace the single goblin with a group of
> goblins. Thus one dragon is the same size as 6 or 8 goblins, and they all
> fit onto a single tile.
>
> For references, consider the early Wizardry games or the original Bard's
> Tale, or strategy games like Heroes of Might and Magic.

d
Hmmm... perhaps this is best used for swarming creatures such as bees
and piranahs.

also:
you see here a roach.
the roach bites your foot
you shift your wheight and step on the roach

The cat steps under your feet.
the cat steps under your feet.
You trip over the cat.
(me hates it when they do that and I'm moving furnture!)

 

[Guest]

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

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

> On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 10:52:28 -0500,
> strathWHATEVERIGETENOUGHSPAMANYWAYS@ipass.net (Jim Strathmeyer) wrote:
>
>>A rat and dragon being the same size is just something we have to live
>>with, because we're playing a game.
>
> And if you try to represent that difference with different tile sizes,
> you start down the slippery slope to 50x50 tiles. And doing a half-way
> job of 2x1 or 3x3 tiles just highlights the unrealism in the
> abstractions.

One reasonable compromise you can make though, is to include a "blocks LOS"
flag for huge monsters that fill the entire tile. You might also make it so
that really tiny monsters don't block movement - you can step right over them.

sherm--

--
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
Hire me! My resume: http://www.dot-app.org

 

[Guest]

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

Sherm Pendley wrote:
> R. Dan Henry <danhenry@inreach.com> writes:
>
>
>>On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 10:52:28 -0500,
>>strathWHATEVERIGETENOUGHSPAMANYWAYS@ipass.net (Jim Strathmeyer) wrote:
>>
>>
>>>A rat and dragon being the same size is just something we have to live
>>>with, because we're playing a game.
>>
>>And if you try to represent that difference with different tile sizes,
>>you start down the slippery slope to 50x50 tiles. And doing a half-way
>>job of 2x1 or 3x3 tiles just highlights the unrealism in the
>>abstractions.
>
>
> One reasonable compromise you can make though, is to include a "blocks LOS"
> flag for huge monsters that fill the entire tile. You might also make it so
> that really tiny monsters don't block movement - you can step right over them.

That would be a painful solution. How does a first time player know
whether or not a small dog blocks movement? How does a first time
player know whether or not ogres are big enough to block LOS? You'd
end up forcing extra, useless information on a player, and I can't
imagine anyone enjoying such a feature. Being forced to 'l'ook at
every new creature type, to check for extra flags, would be the
ultimate pain in the ass.


--
My projects are currently on hold, but I do have
some junk at the site below.

http://www.freewebs.com/timsrl/index.htm

--

 

[Guest]

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

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 18:59:41 -0400, Timothy Pruett
<drakalor.tourist@gmail.com> wrote:

>That would be a painful solution. How does a first time player know
>whether or not a small dog blocks movement? How does a first time
>player know whether or not ogres are big enough to block LOS? You'd
>end up forcing extra, useless information on a player, and I can't
>imagine anyone enjoying such a feature. Being forced to 'l'ook at
>every new creature type, to check for extra flags, would be the
>ultimate pain in the ass.

You really don't 'l'ook at every new creature type when playing a game
the first time? That's pretty strange, IMO. I certainly like to know
what it is that I'm about to be facing. And if it pays off in practical
information as well as a name and flavor text, so much the better.

--
R. Dan Henry = danhenry@inreach.com

 

[Guest]

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

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 18:49:14 -0400, Sherm Pendley <sherm@dot-app.org>
wrote:

>R. Dan Henry <danhenry@inreach.com> writes:
>
>> On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 10:52:28 -0500,
>> strathWHATEVERIGETENOUGHSPAMANYWAYS@ipass.net (Jim Strathmeyer) wrote:
>>
>>>A rat and dragon being the same size is just something we have to live
>>>with, because we're playing a game.
>>
>> And if you try to represent that difference with different tile sizes,
>> you start down the slippery slope to 50x50 tiles. And doing a half-way
>> job of 2x1 or 3x3 tiles just highlights the unrealism in the
>> abstractions.
>
>One reasonable compromise you can make though, is to include a "blocks LOS"
>flag for huge monsters that fill the entire tile. You might also make it so
>that really tiny monsters don't block movement - you can step right over them.

Oh, I certainly see lots of viable usage of size as a feature of
creatures/items rather than of the display. Heck, I wrote up suggestions
for Steamband to include shrinkage/enlargement of the @.

--
R. Dan Henry = danhenry@inreach.com

 

[Guest]

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

Timothy Pruett <drakalor.tourist@gmail.com> writes:

> How does a first time player know
> whether or not a small dog blocks movement?

How does a first time player know anything at all? He doesn't - he finds out
by playing the game.

> end up forcing extra, useless information on a player

I'm not suggesting that someone add this or any other feature for its own sake.
Obviously, if you can't imagine a use for a feature, don't put it in your game.

Just off the top of my head, I can think of several tactical effects a "huge"
flag might have. A huge creature might have a chance of terrifying a tiny one,
or of gaining an extra "stomp" attack. Spells, lights, and other things that
use LOS would be effected. A huge creature can fit in a single tile, but it's
a tight fit, and it's constantly crunching against any walls - so there could
be the risk of a cave-in if there are four or more walls adjacent to it. Also
because of the tight fit, it might be able to turn around without having some
empty tiles around it.

Anyway, try to keep in mind that I'm discussing mechanism here, not policy. I'm
just pointing out that, if you *do* want to go that route, a full multi-tiled
approach isn't necessarily the only option. A simple "huge" flag would be easy
to code, and could be used to implement any number of game effects.

sherm--

--
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
Hire me! My resume: http://www.dot-app.org

 

[Guest]

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

In article <tktpg19ko2o9oi6nh6a1hvcujnbkpmt55e@4ax.com>,
R. Dan Henry <danhenry@inreach.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 10:52:28 -0500,
>strathWHATEVERIGETENOUGHSPAMANYWAYS@ipass.net (Jim Strathmeyer) wrote:
>
>>A rat and dragon being the same size is just something we have to live
>>with, because we're playing a game.
>
>And if you try to represent that difference with different tile sizes,
>you start down the slippery slope to 50x50 tiles. And doing a half-way
>job of 2x1 or 3x3 tiles just highlights the unrealism in the
>abstractions.

For some reason this makes me wonder about the potential for a TetrisRL.

But only briefly

-Andrew (who would, on occasion, like to kill several S or Z pieces)

 

[Guest]

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

R. Dan Henry wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 18:59:41 -0400, Timothy Pruett
> <drakalor.tourist@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>That would be a painful solution. How does a first time player know
>>whether or not a small dog blocks movement? How does a first time
>>player know whether or not ogres are big enough to block LOS? You'd
>>end up forcing extra, useless information on a player, and I can't
>>imagine anyone enjoying such a feature. Being forced to 'l'ook at
>>every new creature type, to check for extra flags, would be the
>>ultimate pain in the ass.
>
>
> You really don't 'l'ook at every new creature type when playing a game
> the first time? That's pretty strange, IMO.

I typically don't need to. Most RLs have a large number of very
similar creatures. When playing ADOM for the first time, I didn't
really find it necessary to 'l'ook at every kobold, orc, goblin, etc.
Eventually I did, as I got more into the game, but even then I only
did it for the flavor text. I only 'l'ook at new creatures in games
if they are actually new. I'm not likely to bother examining a rat,
since pretty much every RL out there treats them the same, and until I
see enough games break away from these generic creatures, I don't have
too much incentive to 'l'ook at all of them.

> I certainly like to know
> what it is that I'm about to be facing. And if it pays off in practical
> information as well as a name and flavor text, so much the better.


--
My projects are currently on hold, but I do have
some junk at the site below.

http://www.freewebs.com/timsrl/index.htm

--

 

[Edward]

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

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

> And if you try to represent that difference with different tile sizes,
> you start down the slippery slope to 50x50 tiles. And doing a half-way
> job of 2x1 or 3x3 tiles just highlights the unrealism in the
> abstractions.

What do you think of the idea of long tails as with silver serpents in
Ultima 6 ? Creatures are generally single tiles, but truly huge monsters
may have tails spanning several tiles.

I plan on having such monsters as a rarity. Only extremely
powerful monsters will have tails, and they will have two main
adverse effects for the monster:
monsters with huge tails cannot turn more than 90 degrees in one step
(so they cannot retreat directly back onto their tails or diagonally
backwards), and they can be surrounded and hit by more people in one
turn.
Perhaps as a bonus, they can lash their tail at anyone standing directly
next to it.

Tails aside, an ogre will still occupy the same space as a rat, as it
should in a tile-based game.

--
jude hungerford.

 

[Guest]

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

At Wed, 24 Aug 2005 18:59:41 -0400,
Timothy Pruett wrote:

> Sherm Pendley wrote:
>> R. Dan Henry <danhenry@inreach.com> writes:
>>>On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 10:52:28 -0500,
>>>strathWHATEVERIGETENOUGHSPAMANYWAYS@ipass.net (Jim Strathmeyer) wrote:
> How does a first time
> player know whether or not ogres are big enough to block LOS?

Well, he *sees* that his LOS is blocked...


--
Radomir `The Sheep' Dopieralski @**@_
(^^) 3 Bee!
. . . ..v.vVvVVvVvv.v.. .

 

[Guest]

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

At Wed, 24 Aug 2005 21:19:29 -0700,
R Dan Henry wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 18:49:14 -0400, Sherm Pendley <sherm@dot-app.org>
> wrote:
>>R. Dan Henry <danhenry@inreach.com> writes:
>>> On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 10:52:28 -0500,
>>> strathWHATEVERIGETENOUGHSPAMANYWAYS@ipass.net (Jim Strathmeyer) wrote:

>>>>A rat and dragon being the same size is just something we have to live
>>>>with, because we're playing a game.
>>>
>>> And if you try to represent that difference with different tile sizes,
>>> you start down the slippery slope to 50x50 tiles. And doing a half-way
>>> job of 2x1 or 3x3 tiles just highlights the unrealism in the
>>> abstractions.
>>
>>One reasonable compromise you can make though, is to include a "blocks LOS"
>>flag for huge monsters that fill the entire tile. You might also make it so
>>that really tiny monsters don't block movement - you can step right over them.
>
> Oh, I certainly see lots of viable usage of size as a feature of
> creatures/items rather than of the display. Heck, I wrote up suggestions
> for Steamband to include shrinkage/enlargement of the @.

AFAIR NetHack's weapons have different damage for different sizes of
monsters, which seems pretty reasonable.

--
Radomir `The Sheep' Dopieralski @**@_
(*+) 3 Sparkle
. . . ..v.vVvVVvVvv.v.. .

 

[Guest]

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

Quoting Timothy Pruett <drakalor.tourist@gmail.com>:
>That would be a painful solution. How does a first time player know
>whether or not a small dog blocks movement? How does a first time
>player know whether or not ogres are big enough to block LOS?

Well, if you have - as many roguelikes do - a change in colour for
background tiles currently in LOS, there you go.
--
David Damerell <damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> Distortion Field!
Today is First Wednesday, August.

 

[Guest]

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

In article <cmhqg1prstg87atf2q63kqrv5ihs8c6btv@4ax.com>, R. Dan Henry <danhenry@inreach.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 18:59:41 -0400, Timothy Pruett
><drakalor.tourist@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>That would be a painful solution. How does a first time player know
>>whether or not a small dog blocks movement? How does a first time
>>player know whether or not ogres are big enough to block LOS? You'd
>>end up forcing extra, useless information on a player, and I can't
>>imagine anyone enjoying such a feature. Being forced to 'l'ook at
>>every new creature type, to check for extra flags, would be the
>>ultimate pain in the ass.
>
>You really don't 'l'ook at every new creature type when playing a game
>the first time? That's pretty strange, IMO. I certainly like to know
>what it is that I'm about to be facing. And if it pays off in practical
>information as well as a name and flavor text, so much the better.

Nope. Personally I find "l" "arrow" "arrow" "arrow" "arrow" <read>
"esc" kind of tedious. A tooltip on mouseover wouldn't be so bad,
though.

Alan