00:13:05 Unstable branch on cbro.berotato.org updated to: 0.33-a0-616-gbfdca0e29a (34) 00:54:56 Monster database of master branch on crawl.develz.org updated to: 0.33-a0-616-gbfdca0e29a 04:33:02 Experimental (bcrawl) branch on underhound.eu updated to: 0.23-a0-5249-g4a8afe7061 05:12:09 03regret-index02 07* 0.33-a0-617-g7ba718c05c: New Zot metal wall tiles 10(72 seconds ago, 7 files, 98+ 84-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/7ba718c05cc2 08:06:01 <06wensley> I realize the mechanical reasons that player ghosts were moved into locked vaults, but it's kind of a shame that such a unique aspect of the game had to be tucked away into the corner. Has there ever been a proposal for a weaker alternative to player ghosts (call it "player zombies" or "player shades" or something) that could be guaranteed to be weak enough that they could wander the dungeon freely, while leaving player ghosts otherwise 08:06:01 untouched? 08:08:05 <06wensley> Even if it's just "we generated a generic zombie and gave it a name and appropriate species based on a morguefile, and no actual abilities", that would go a long way towards bringing back the flavor and community feeling of old player ghosts 08:11:53 <06wensley> (also it would be a lot of fun if necromancer uniques would be accompanied by player zombies, especially if they're the ones who killed the player) 08:19:15 <09gammafunk> I partially agree, but ghost vaults are not uncommon now and the exact same feeling is evoked when you see them in those vaults. The ghosts aren't lacking in prominence or anything, and it's extremely common for a player to fight a few of them directly in a game 08:20:39 <09gammafunk> it's definitely true that direct deaths to player ghosts have gone down a lot since ghost vaults, if that's really the part of the experience that you're missing, but your proposal seems more about simply labeling monsters as being former players without regard to having them being threatening 08:21:05 <09gammafunk> I'm not sure that slapping a label of "this is the ghost of a player" on more things actually achieves much substantively 08:22:06 <09gammafunk> it's sort of a side note that r-i is planning (still, I think) on moving ghost vaults into a special Necropolis portal. That will indeed significantly reduce the prevalence of ghosts/ghost vaults compared to now 08:22:48 <09gammafunk> so in that regard it could open up room for something connected to a deceased player being represented in the game in another context 08:23:04 <09gammafunk> but I'm not quite sure what the ideal form of that would be 08:43:37 <06wensley> Note that I'm not concerned at all about increasing the lethality of player-whatsits. My sentiment is simply this: in old versions of crawl, the dungeon felt "populated" by other players, and in modern versions, it doesn't. Ghosts today feel like circus sideshows or loot piñatas, something to rubberneck at while you're walking by. I just want to return to the feeling of having a dungeon that is populated by other players, even if that 08:43:37 just means "player zombies" are pure flavor with no mechanics. IMO the community aspect of crawl is in need of some work 10:21:07 <09gammafunk> I fundamentally disagree that monsters who exist only as popcorn does anything substantive to further that sense of community more than what seeing ghosts in a vault would do. Your solution of adding player zombies to rubberneck at briefly as a trivial monsters doesn't feel different than rubbernecking at a ghost in a vault. We've generally removed zombies from circulation precisely because they're boring monsters in most contexts. 10:22:53 <09gammafunk> I would be interested to hear ideas for some kind of middle ground where a player-derived monster could be freely generating and not overly difficult nor having huge variance in difficulty 10:23:20 <09gammafunk> this is not a trivial thing to design though 11:01:29 <08nicolae> make a game mode where you can make a ghost 11:01:32 <08nicolae> done 11:01:51 <08nicolae> game modes are easy to implement right 11:02:10 <09gammafunk> ghost mode 11:02:19 <09gammafunk> hey nicolae, what if we sold ghosts in a shops 11:02:56 <08nicolae> yes! 11:03:04 <08nicolae> an item that summons a ghost 11:03:22 <08nicolae> a potion of experience that tries to kill you first 12:27:55 <04dracoomega> Out of curiosity, were you even aware of the Necropolis project at all? (And yes, Index still wants to do this, and has in fact done a chunk of the work involved. It's just that some of the next steps were rather large things that needed doing all at once, so she'd been applyig herself to other things first. I am like 99% sure she still wants to do it for 0.33) 12:30:54 <04dracoomega> (Like, she definitely feels strongly that the current mechanical state of player ghosts is sad, and I do largely agree. But Necropolis seems interesting to me, and certainly will make them more prominant in a different way than they are now) 12:50:00 <06wensley> I'm not aware of it, and neither google nor the wiki search reveal anything. link? 12:55:20 <06wensley> this feels like an uncharitable interpretation; I'm not arguing from the position "popcorn monsters are good", I'm explaining how the current game feels bad and offering an unsolicited suggestion on how it could be improved. you're free to ignore the suggestion--good game devs routinely ignore player suggestions, but good game devs also listen to player feelings and come up with their own solutions. IMO this isn't a problem that needs 12:55:21 to have a purely mechanical solution; the player shades in Dark Souls are almost entirely useless from a mechanical perspective but they're iconic and cool 12:55:24 <04dracoomega> There may not be a single external link to provide to it, though she's discussed it at length a number of times (and shared in-progress screenshots a few times.) But the simplest way is to think of it as 'a timed bazaar that has ghost vaults instead of shops' 12:56:15 <04dracoomega> So, among other things, players are encouraged to engage with the ghosts before they've become too low level to present a relevant threat (as is often the case nowadays) 12:56:47 <09gammafunk> It's a bit more in the opposite direction of prominence in terms of what wensley was talking about though. It addresses other problems ghost vaults have 12:57:52 <09gammafunk> It will highlight them in a distinctive way that's probably more singularly memorable 12:58:02 <04dracoomega> I feel like giving them their entire own thematic space (with decorations and other elements) is a different kind of more prominant. Like "actually engage with when they are more relevant" is an important part of prominence, I feel? 12:58:08 <09gammafunk> But it will reduce their frequency even more 12:58:57 <08nicolae> if the goal is to make it feel like other players have passed through the dungeon, maybe you could do, like, engravings or something 12:59:05 <08nicolae> FARTBUTT69 WAS HERE 12:59:16 <06wensley> as a nod to the history of roguelikes I do like the idea of player-ghosts-from-morguefiles, and as part of crawl's philosophy I agree that it makes the most sense to make them optional challenges. what I'm suggesting here is that we can decouple "player ghosts" from the specific feeling of community that I'm attempting to convey 12:59:23 <09gammafunk> Yes but wensley is hoping for a different type of prominence I believe. In any case it'll help with some issues 12:59:56 <08nicolae> or maybe there could be atype of statue where you look at it and it's a statue of somebody who got the orb 13:00:13 <06wensley> yes, there's lots of cool ways to implement "playing a single player game with many people" 13:00:17 <08nicolae> well it wouldn't say they got the orb 13:00:59 <08nicolae> but like "mythological hero named FartButt69, a Minotaur Fighter of Okawaru" 13:02:04 <06wensley> like what if oka's capstone equipment gift required you to challenge a former champion to single combat and you took it off their body, and the monster had the name of a former player champion. that sort of thing 13:04:39 <09gammafunk> This is a sort of dev channel where one proposes and idea and another will critique it! You've certainly been around long enough that you can consider yourself a contributor, so I'm just asking for you to contribute something a bit more substantive than a general vibe. I can agree with a general vibe, but what really helps are proposals that do work mechanistically. I know you didn't come to ask for more popcorn monsters, but 13:04:40 likewise we have a hard time when people do propose such monsters purely as a flavor reference 13:04:59 <09gammafunk> I'm not familiar with darksouls shades and whether those have any good analogous idea for a roguelike like dcss 13:06:08 <09gammafunk> so what I sort of begain to imagine is some less insane please-got-not-another-ghostdemon-monster monster (that's a reference to how ghosts are made currently) 13:07:23 <09gammafunk> perhaps something that draws from player attributes in a more principled way where we won't ask people to fight the classic draining breath draconian ghost we all fondly remember...there's just a ways to go from that vague idea to something more specific 13:08:14 <09gammafunk> well, if they're to be free roaming, that does pose quite a problem for the optional challenge idea 13:09:15 <09gammafunk> there are potential ways to address that, like the ghost challenges you (beogh style???) to a more substantial fight and if you refuse it just sort of harasses you a bit in a not-likely-to-be-fatal way 13:09:54 <09gammafunk> and yeah obvious we can make pure flavor stuff like player-derived statues, decorations, etc, potentially 13:10:06 <06wensley> this is an idea that I had in the shower, I wanted to see if other people agree on the general sentiment of fleshing out the singleplayer-but-multiplayer aspect. if anything, my most fleshed-out draft proposal in this area isn't about player ghosts at all, but temple stuff... 13:11:15 <09gammafunk> put all the ghosts in temple 13:11:43 <09gammafunk> you want the Gozag temple altar, better get pass the SpEn ghost 13:12:10 <06wensley> I mean, hep is the ancestor god, after all 😛 13:13:28 <09gammafunk> I've heard general complaints about something being lost with no wandering ghosts over the years, so there's something to that. I'm not sure many devs feel strongly about it. DO has spoken, and r-i is literally working on Necropolis 13:15:44 <09gammafunk> but most complaints I've heard about ghost vaults are more about how the vaults work in practice and there's definitely not huge amount of complaining from players about a lack of roaming ghosts or whatnot 13:21:54 <04dracoomega> I vaguely miss them, but that is probably old sentimentalism, and I understand why they were removed. (Certainly, back in the old days, players sometimes deleting their own bones files so as to not run into them at all was very silly.) Necropolis feels like a more tenable state in the present context (and I am generally hopeful about it.) As for other senses of "This is a space that other players have been in", I guess that's never 13:21:55 felt that valuable to me personally - perhaps because I usually play offline anyway? This whole 'the dungeon is a community space' doesn't resonate with me personally, per se. I understand how it could for others, and Dark Souls does do mildly interesting things with this, but that's never a vibe I got from Crawl. (Certainly, flavor implying other adventurers have been around is fine and good, but I feel we already do this in some ways that are 13:21:55 fairly distinct from other players, if that makes any sense?) 13:22:54 <04dracoomega> Like, "other beings like the player" as rather distinct from "other players" 13:37:32 <04dracoomega> Though speaking of 'specific proposals'... I spent a large chunk of yesterday examining designs and discussing things related to stat damage / stat zero, and I've had a change of heart about what I said about it the other day. And instead, I'm actually in favor of removing stat damage from the game entirely. (Rare for me, I know!) I do think my proposal from the other day is a general status quo improvement over the present, but the 13:37:33 more I thought about it, the more I felt like even an 'improved' version had fundamental problems; like it was trying to make a better version of an old thing just because the old thing once existed and not because it was a mechanical idea that stood as interesting on its own. Basically, as hellmonk said, int loss (but also str loss!) has non-linear effects on spell success - often doing very little, but at certain skill/encumbrance levels, abruptly 13:37:33 doing quite a lot. Which is mildly awkward in terms of encouraging people to recheck regularly, which would be acceptable if the other parts of the effect were sufficiently interesting to justify it. But it takes a lot of stat damage to str or dex to equal even the damage reduction of Weakness (which is already not a very impactful status), and the constellation of 'subtle and varied' effects that stats provide probably simply makes more interesting 13:37:34 sense as a strategic choice than as something to shoehorn monster 'debuffs' into. I think some of the stat zero debuff ideas mentioned could have interesting merit as medium-term problems, but tying them to stats does have the inherent consequence that not only are different characters considerably more exposed to them than others (which isn't automatically bad; resists kind of work the same way), but that the duration of these effects is also 13:37:34 enormously influenced by that. Poor deep elf with 4 str not only collapses immediately, but stays collapsed many times as long - it inherently makes it harder to curate the effects, imo. 13:38:19 <04dracoomega> https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/747522859361894521/1323389731915956294/message.txt?ex=6774563b&is=677304bb&hm=b2f141f6bc1712d347cfd84e2a955fe5ceff6232e801dc2c325da93a72e02830& 13:38:26 <04dracoomega> Ugh 13:38:37 <04dracoomega> No word wrap 13:38:57 <04dracoomega> (Anyway, the closing bit was: Now, without actual stat damage, I feel like having 3 different stat zero effects is needless overcomplication, and it could just be as simple as permaslow while less than 0 in any stat, with no paralysis or any other complicated effects (still relevant for -stat mutations sometimes, gear choice, etc.) I do have a handful of ideas for medium-term debuffs that fill a little of the role that stat damage 13:38:57 theoretically was trying to at one point (which I think are much more interesting than stat damage ever was), and I would like to iterate upon these in future. But I think trying to tie them specifically to this vestigal system is probably worse than not doing that at all. And there's no need to wait on those existing to remove this first (even if a few specific uses of stat damage might eventually be replaced by something new, I think they can be in 13:38:58 an acceptable state even without this, as outlined above). 13:49:46 <06wensley> I don't necessarily agree with removing stat damage, but I do like the idea of reconsidering whether something is being kept around for the sake of historical sentiment, and on that note, if part of your argument is "stat drain feels weird because the formulas/breakpoints are weird and gaining/losing any given stat point matters so little that the player has a hard time even noticing", then is that an argument in favor of removing 13:49:46 stats in general? 13:51:32 <04dracoomega> Not even slightly? 13:52:09 <04dracoomega> I feel like 'player gear choices' and 'long-term player decisions' are such a fundamentally different space of consideration from 'hostile transient effect' 13:53:09 <06wensley> I agree that I would like stat choices to feel meaningful, but (and maybe this is just me) I don't really give much thought to what stats to increase 13:55:02 <04dracoomega> It may be relatively straightforward what stat a given character wants to raise in most cases (though not all of them!), but that does still mean committing to that and not other things, which still shapes your character in the long-term. 13:55:24 <04dracoomega> ie: maybe you're not making a fresh decision on every level up prompt, but you made a decision at one point that has long-term consequences 13:55:52 <06wensley> agreed, and I think the optimal solution would be to find a way to make stats more impactful... but if you successfully do that, then stat draining also sounds like it would be more impactful, and thus might not warrant removal (or at least has one fewer argumet in favor of removal) 13:57:13 <06wensley> but also agreed that I don't think people will miss stat drain much in its current state, especially if they're just replaced with more impactful direct status effects 13:58:47 <04dracoomega> I mean, I feel like stats are 'impactful' right now. I don't think that's the same thing as 'presents multiple unique choices regularly throughout the game', but it's easy to feel when your character has invested itself heavily in one versus another (or when a species is notably low in one verses the other) and this significant affects valuation of items you do find in the dungeon 14:06:56 <06wensley> indeed, I agree that stats are what make races feel distinct currently, but in a stat-less version of crawl it wouldn't be impossible to imagine different mechanisms that achieve the same thing (e.g. what makes a troll feel different than a DE is not the int, but the spell success rate that int gives you; you could just give DEs a boost to that without the indirection through a different formula). which isn't to say that I'm suddenly 14:06:57 fervently arguing in favor of removing stats, but what I am saying is that ideally the stat system would present a choice where all archetypes would have serious choices to make when improving stats, e.g. a system where even MiBe finds some use from Int and even DeIE finds some use from Str (which did use to be the case, although I'm not trying to say we need to bring back item weight 😛 ) 14:12:48 <08wormsofcan> make ghosts plague shambler alarm traps, when the player sees one they move very quickly towards the player, once they come in contact they make a loud noise and mark them, then disappear :PlogChamp: 14:12:58 <04dracoomega> I do think there are a moderate number of characters even now who do want to raise some of more than one stat (or have actual meaningful debates between str and dex in some situations) 14:15:02 <04dracoomega> 'Stats and their wider role in player agency' certainly is a topic one could have design discussion about, but I think even if one were to make some change in that regard, there's awkwardness in trying a whole class of debuff effect to whatever one decided was a good form of strategic player choice. 14:21:38 <06wensley> I think the relevance to this discussion is that, currently, basically the only reason e.g. a troll would have to boost their int is specifically to avoid stat zero against certain specific opponents 14:22:41 <04dracoomega> Sure, this is true. But I feel like int drain at present exists so little that it's rare that that happens even now, when getting hit that way will actually paralyze you 14:23:05 <04dracoomega> I think the normal play is just 'Don't raise int, and hope that this never matters (which it is almost certain not to) 14:24:51 <06wensley> once again, agreed that it would be no great loss, but I think it's important to mention that it does make stats feel less impactful 14:37:50 <04dracoomega> (For that matter, there's nothing saying this has to completely close off future design space for debuffs to care directly about stat distributions, like "Reduce your highest stat by 75%" or whatever.) 15:58:19 (re the above I recently painted myself into a corner where STR is no use at all for kitty other than stat zero, and oops) 16:09:22 <09gammafunk> I don't think it's actually ideal to have e.g. MiBe want to take int etc. MiBe doesn't take int nor train Ice Magic nor over half the skill list in general, but that's ok, since mibe is a highly focused archetypal character. Similar issue for DEIE, although there is more subtlety there and DEIE could sometimes take Dex for damage. But it's not clear at all that having the stat system overloaded to mean more things beyond strategic 16:09:22 build considerations will lead to a more interesting game. 16:13:49 <09gammafunk> I don't have any huge love for stat drain either as it doesn't feel like it achieves much except in certain contexts like Tomb. 16:15:23 <09gammafunk> It's sometimes hilariously relevant because a player hasn't thought about having a pretty low stat and they aren't thinking about a stat draining attack or the degeneration mutation or a combination of those things and suddenly they're in big trouble 16:17:42 <09gammafunk> but yeah it's certainly possible that there's a better set debuff ideas out there that are connected in some way to stats 16:19:17 <04dracoomega> Yeah, like stat damage + stat zero at the moment can do something, once in a blue moon, but it's not clear to me that 'extremely rare debilitation that is highly random in when/if it ever happens, and only to specific characters' is even good in isolation, let alone with a whole system around it to allow just that to happen. If we want to sometimes paralyze the player, we can just do that (or something like that) ^^; 16:21:11 <09gammafunk> bring back floating eyes but they check int 16:22:03 sourceless malevolence can stand a few extensions 😛 16:28:37 <08wormsofcan> floating Is, Ds and Ss 16:29:18 <09hellmonk> doubling I's 16:29:35 <09hellmonk> they double your int but if you go over the cap it overflows 16:31:35 <04dracoomega> What even is the stat cap? Like... 127? 16:34:24 <09hellmonk> I think it's 125 atm 16:34:28 <09hellmonk> used to be lower 16:37:21 <04dracoomega> I wonder if anyone's ever hit that 16:37:26 <04dracoomega> !lg * max=int x=int 16:37:33 <04Cerebot> 18885702. [int=122] BerryKnight the Archmage (L27 DgCj), escaped with the Orb and 15 runes on 2023-09-09 00:53:29, with 29670111 points after 51124 turns and 17:42:06. 16:37:36 <04dracoomega> Close! 16:37:43 <04dracoomega> !lg * max=int x=int -log 16:37:48 <04Cerebot> 18885702. BerryKnight, XL27 DgCj, T:51124: https://crawl.kelbi.org/crawl/morgue/BerryKnight/morgue-BerryKnight-20230909-005329.txt 16:38:21 <09hellmonk> it is theoretically hittable with insane randart luck 16:38:26 <04dracoomega> Oh, cko 16:38:31 <09hellmonk> just need a lot of +10s 16:38:50 <04dracoomega> I mean, that's hard even then. You need a lot of +10s. (And I guess we'll never see how many this person had ^^; ) 16:39:22 Unstable branch on underhound.eu updated to: 0.33-a0-617-g7ba718c05c (34) 16:43:26 <09hellmonk> I believe demigod conjurer with a +10 int item in every slot hits 136 int 16:43:34 <09hellmonk> assuming int every levelup and no mutations 16:43:44 <09hellmonk> so yeah, not exactly easy 16:44:52 <09hellmonk> I did not check every species, possible that a high int species cj of chei can go further 16:46:03 <06wensley> even in the extreme case of MiBe, we should still seek to provide interesting decisions to the player. sure, right now int only governs spells and is thus useles to berserkers, but e.g. imagine if it also affected, say, evocations. in that case, I can absolutly imagine some berserkers who would find int useful, and then weighing whether they want to buy more into str or splurge a little on int would actually present an interesting 16:46:04 decision, and lead to more variety even among a single combo 16:47:00 <09gammafunk> we should seek to provide interesting decisions to the player, but we don't need those decisions to always involve stats 16:47:41 <06wensley> sure, but if stats are in the game, then why not make them contribute to the interesting decisions 🙂 16:47:42 <09gammafunk> making evocations use int would cause a host of other potential issues 16:47:46 <09gammafunk> they do! 16:47:54 <09gammafunk> where did you get the idea that they currently don't? 16:48:33 <06wensley> I'm pretty dissatisfied by the current state of stats. (the past state of stats too, for that matter). I don't find them interesting, personally 16:48:53 <09gammafunk> I mean that's all very vague. DO did outline the general argument of how stats do in fact matter 16:49:05 <09gammafunk> Even to use your MiBe example, some mibe level str more some level dex more 16:49:28 <06wensley> sure, and what's the harm in having some level int a little more? 16:49:42 <09gammafunk> they're a mostly long-term strategic level decision item, and they do prevent meaningful and sometimes fairly subtle decisions in that regard 16:50:12 <09gammafunk> well the harm is you build bad incentives into the game, leave skills/items like evocations poorly balanced 16:50:39 <09gammafunk> like lots of characters do in fact make meaningful decisions between leveling int or str/dex for damage, it's just that those characters are not MiBe 16:51:07 <09gammafunk> I don't think stats are somehow special in that all elements of the stat system must be relevant to all characters 16:51:18 <09gammafunk> we wouldn't apply that logic to skills 16:52:28 <06wensley> skills have the same sort of decisions, although better realized. skills have opportunity cost; buying into one means not buying into others. if there wasn't a choice there--if there weren't skills that a player wants but cannot currently afford--then skills wouldn't be interesting 16:53:20 <06wensley> also, there's like 20 skills, and only 3 stats. it would be weird if a character only cared about one skill; it's entirely normal for a character to only care about one stat 16:53:46 <09gammafunk> yes, that's perfectly reasonable as a design, when you only have 3 versus 20 though 16:54:16 <06wensley> it's fine for us to disagree 🙂 16:54:29 <09hellmonk> I do think that skills and stats are often trying to do similar things. The sort of 2-dimensional axis that crawl has to it works ok imo, but it's not unreasonable to think that it could work different, or better, or that it should be collapsed to one dimension. 16:57:10 <09gammafunk> yeah, like it's fine to theorize about a stat-less crawl, there are arguments to be made pro and anti stat (much like pro and anti skub) but it's a reasonable system and adding new stat uses is a thing you do pretty purposefully (and I don't think mibes using int is that purpose) 16:57:48 <09gammafunk> I am, for what it's worth, entirely anti-skub 16:58:27 <09hellmonk> I would also not recommend trying to make crawl statless at any point in the forseeable future, but I'll be doing that in hellcrawl2 16:58:42 <06wensley> and to reiterate, I'm not trying to get stats removed, I'm trying to express that if they were removed in their current state, I wouldn't really mourn them 😛 I want stats! I just want more interesting decisions 16:58:45 <04dracoomega> Certainly Crawl's current format is not the be-all and end-all of how character-building decisions can be made, but I do think it's relevant (and reasonably interesting) that stats effectively govern multiple skills. Investing in int invests in 'spell skills', but not any specific one skill. And choosing this on level up makes you better at all of those things (just like dex affects multiple weapon skills, but also 16:58:45 dodging/stealth). Stat choice biases your character a certain way, which affects valuation of items/skills and also your ability to pivot, but because it governs a wider group of things you can pivot - your int is just as good for fireball as it is for freezing cloud or whatever 16:59:32 <04dracoomega> And I think this is useful (and also useful to have ways equipment can boost 'group of skills' rather than just 'specific skill') 17:00:07 <09hellmonk> Yeah, stats are sort of an additional axis of commitment to a skill group or archetype. My guess is that a statless crawl would put more of that commitment into the equipment system and try to introduce more ways for characters to 'pivot' in ways that aren't supported now. 17:00:26 <09hellmonk> read: I am going to attempt to do a fork that does this 17:00:40 <04dracoomega> Yeah, there are certainly ways that kind of thing could be done. (Lots of games don't have stats! Lots of games have more stats!) But I do think that what we have now actually works fairly decently in practice. 17:00:45 <09gammafunk> I already purchased hellcrawl2 on steam so you can stop the sales pitch, you have my money! 17:01:19 <06wensley> at the end of the day, obviously what I'm saying is that crawl needs a charisma stat so I can seduce cerebov 17:01:20 <04dracoomega> (There are design upsides and downsides in how easily and widely one can pivot) 17:01:32 <06regret-⸸nde※> (Equipment in particular isn't exactly at the greatest of High Interesting Variety Points beyond resists and unrand properties we've been unwilling spread out further, and I'm not exactly sure it'd be a much better state to have to explain to people to not pivot over Gloves of +3 Axes and Gloves of +3 Long Swords.) 17:01:43 <04dracoomega> Like, I think there's subjective value in it being restricted, just as there is value in it existing 17:02:05 <06regret-⸸nde※> (Stats aren't inherently necessary, but they unavoidably manage to make that whole space rather more straightforward.) 17:02:16 <09hellmonk> I agree. Crawl's skill system as it exists is probably too easy to pivot without stats restraining it somewhat 17:02:23 <04dracoomega> I mean, I think it's fine to approach this from a 'clean slate' perspective in the context of a fork 17:02:28 <09hellmonk> since low level skills are insanely cheap 17:02:46 <04dracoomega> Since I think there's a wide spectrum of positions that an interesting game can be made on 17:02:58 <09hellmonk> and yes, I think stats are probably necessary to have enough equip properties as well 17:03:01 <04dracoomega> But there's a lot chain of design consequences involved 17:03:37 <09hellmonk> maybe that changes after 5 more years of design 17:03:52 <09hellmonk> maybe it doesn't, whom can say 17:03:59 <04dracoomega> (Thinking of stats in some other games with more stats, I can't help but think of how many of them have stats that are traps or redundant or misleading, for instance >.> 17:04:34 <04dracoomega> Crawl's do something comparatively simple, but it does actually do that thing, and every one of them is valuable to different characters 17:09:21 Hey! totally newcomer to open source but I noticed that the Spanish translation has plenty of spelling and grammar mistakes and thought it could be a good idea to try and clean it up. How do I go about it, create a new issue, assign it to me and do a pull request later on? May be a dumb question but as I said, never worked on a public repo and I'm 17:09:22 clueless regarding the etiquette... 17:10:04 Not a developer but if I were you I would just put in a PR (focused on one subject, but "Spanish translation fixes" is one subject) 17:10:25 I think you can just do a PR directly. someone has been cleaning up other translations that way 17:10:58 Ok, I'll give it a try. Thanks! 17:11:54 the person I've seen doing it also uses one commit per functional unit (source code, monspeak.txt, species definition files, etc.) but those I think get squashed when merged so I don't know how important it is 17:12:53 <06wensley> I'm currently playing caves of qud, where you get an attribute point to allocate every 3 levels, and I find myself honestly debating whether or not I want to put it toward str (because I'm a big melee brute with clubs and carry capacity is a constant concern), or int (because there's a skill I want that requires high int as a prereq), or ego (because I have a negative ego mod and shopkeepers are raking me over the coals on prices), or 17:12:53 agi (because my weapons aren't high enough in the tech tiers to make use of a sky-high str mod and also because some things are immune to melee so I still need to be able to hit them with a bow sometimes). caves of qud isn't perfect (toughness and willpower are still kinda underwhelming), but that's where my mind is at this week 17:20:25 <06regret-⸸nde※> The longterm Qud players I've been monitoring since 1.0 have actively been talking about how Int is a dump stat beyond its skill costs and it only exists to be a trap to not have enough for Tinker 2, how Ego only matters for espers because there's a comical number of tedious ways to make infinite money very easily through abusing abandoning / regaining followers plus lugging around items with recoilers (thanks mechanimist 17:20:25 well), and how Willpower's effect on mental armour makes mental armour frustratingly opaque in the UI otherwise. Qud's skill system also doesn't work anything like Crawl's, and gating skill investment versus stat thresholds as they do would completely upend per-species balance. 17:20:59 <06regret-⸸nde※> (Also, god, carrying capacity can go fall into the pits below Golgotha for the rest of eternity.) 17:26:14 fx: thinks about bringing it back 20:15:07 <09hellmonk> hmm, so what was the deal with this mac os build failure again 20:15:50 <09hellmonk> ah just need to rebase it appears 20:16:54 New branch created: pull/4196 (4 commits) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/pull/4196 20:16:54 Branch pull/4196 updated to be equal with doubledown: 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/pull/4196 20:17:23 <09hellmonk> will hit go on this tomorrow unless there are objections 20:27:14 <04dracoomega> Descent isn't something I've been personally that invested in, but certainly no ideological objections to any of this that I can see. 20:27:34 <04dracoomega> (The Mac os build failure is essentially random) 20:38:15 -!- daethoven3 is now known as daethoven 23:35:19 Unstable branch on crawl.develz.org updated to: 0.33-a0-617-g7ba718c05c (34) 23:57:59 Windows builds of master branch on crawl.develz.org updated to: 0.33-a0-617-g7ba718c05c