I've found that identification is very difficult in ADOM, because
the Nethack tricks don't work and identify scrolls are much
rarer. Also you can't name classes of items.
If you want to make identification easier, you can add more tricks
or add more sources of identification. You can balance this by adding
more things that need to be identified. This ties in well with Zack's
desire to see more equipment and more artifacts.
However you get rid of this problem, it's going to be by creating
more aspects of equipment. Either there will be no way to get all
these aspects at once, there will be so many ways to get partial
coverage it will be difficult to figure out the best one, or some of
the aspects will be negative (permacurses, vulnerabilties). It helps
if you limit (ADOM) or remove (*Angband) permanent intrinsics. That
way the player has to rely more on their equipment and less on
something they ate.
ADOM has more useful artifacts than Nethack, even though there's no
custom behavior. *Angband has random artifacts that are cool, and
Zangband(?) has a whole subgenre of usually-useless artifacts that can
be triggered for some effect every N turns and have fun Knapsack Problem-esque names. Diablo
II has super-cool customizable artifacts. I like Zack's idea of
artifacts (or just random objects) gaining more power as you complete
quests, but that's going to be a whole lot of side quests most of
which won't be triggered in a given game. Sounds kind of MMORPGish.
Magicbane, Mjolnir, and Stormbringer are the only Nethack artifacts
that feel like artifacts, like powerful magics barely under your
control. That said, most roguelikes don't give artifacts any special
behavior at all. You could go a long way just by programming that big
table of artifact effects from the 1st edition AD&D DMG.
In this context Zack brings up the complaint, common to pseudo-RPG
genres, that although saving the world is supposedly your job, nobody
lifts a finger to help you. I actually wrote What Fools These Mortals to explain this, and
the "Guide to the Mazes of Menace" tries to accomplish the same by
downplaying the implications of the game intro dump.
In a game design context, this occurs in Nethack for two
reasons. First, Nethack comes from Rogue, and in Rogue you are
"some punk kid with no particular skills and no holy mission" -- a
rogue, if you will. Second, if you started the game with good
equipment, the first part of the game would be too easy. It'd have to
be made harder. Then you'd be back where you started. Maybe kick in a
couple food rations for classes that start with no food, but I think
Nethack gives you a wide variety of challenges here and it's a
reasonable design decision.
(7) Tue Oct 16 2007 21:53 More Roguelike Notes:
The meta-adventure continues as I consider more of Zack's complaints about Nethack.
