Re: [Crawl-ref-discuss] Vampires

[David P. <pl...@mi...>]

>> I think Vampire Summoners (even though other undead are automatically excluded)
>> make a lot of sense, but I'm not so sure about Necromancers - it's sooooo easy
>> for Vampires to create skeletons to raise. Not that I've ever played them in a
>> way that wasn't fighting or feeding.
>
> But skeletons are weaker than zombies. And vampire usually can't afford to
> use zombies because they need food. But if this is problem, you could
> sometimes leave no skeleton when vampire consumes body.

Yes, let's leave this in reserve. Or, actually, just code it. It's 
probably cool.

>> Also, mutagenic blood will make a vampire mutate once I've changed
>> that part in mutation.cc. For some reason, I think vampires should be 
>> able to mutate.
>
> This is excellent! But following my logic starving vampires shouldn't 
> mutate.

See below, please.

>> Now for the really difficult part: I don't understand why or how they should
>> become "more dead" and "more living" respectively when in a state of
>> hunger/satiation.
>
> They are dead but want to be alive. Stealing life force allows them to
> feel like living. Blood is like drug to them and they want always more
> (no engorged state). They don't have natural regeneration. Only way to
> regenerate is to steal life from something living. This is why starving
> vampires don't regenerate. The more they eat, the more powerful they
> become (higher regeneration etc).

I like this approach a lot. It is unique, has lots of style (let's not 
care about playability so much at this point) and seems very well 
connected with the myth. Jarmo, do you have ideas how to convey this to 
players in a non-too-technical manner?

> IMO it should just be made clear to player that hunger state affects
> *everything* when you play vampires.

:) True. Just how?


[regeneration as a function of hunger]

> Well, that is one way to see it but I prefer to see it like this:
>  - almost no hunger when not hurted (you could even remove that "almost")
>  - more food -> better regeneration
>  - smaller wounds -> lower hunger rate
>  +  there is always bat form

I think that (should we go that route) _no_ regeneration at starving is a 
must. (BTW, we have changed 'hungry' to 'thirsty' (have we?) - is there a 
better term than 'starving' here?) In my experience, the radical choice is 
usually better in such situations. (Compare with Spriggans: it's much 
better they simply can't eat chunks: less tedium, stronger theme.)

>> Oh, btw: I added a line to the status line/screen saying "You do not regenerate"
>> for special cases like starving vampires and general sickness. Maybe the reason
>> should be added to make it more useful.
>
> In my logic no regeneration is natural state for vampires and regeneration
> is exception.

That would mean: "You regenerate" when not hungry - sounds good to me.

> [about bat form]
>
>> They're still too strong (in terms of power) and I'm afraid that's all my fault
>> as I changed the fighting code as a whole.
>> I've restricted some interactions, but not all. Here's a list of things bats can
>> do in my version they can't in Jarmo's: memorise spells, zap wands, cast spells,
>> quaff or read.
>
> I tried to make bat form nearly useless for fighting.

I second that. Having flight (in both meanings) is very strong already.

>> The "problem" here is that in spider form you can do all these things.

> Spiders have 8 legs so they can easily use 4 legs to use items :)

:)

> Bats are also smaller than spiders in crawl. Giant bat has mass 150 and
> wolf spider 800.

Good reasoning.

>> I guess you interprete bats as a much more natural and integral thing 
>> than I do [...]
>
> Yes, I see that it's very natural form for them. Vampires turn into bat
> when they want to flee or hide. It would actually make sense (to me) if
> it was easier to turn into bat only when they are starving or badly hurt.

Again seconded. I think that not having bat form available from start is 
good. I'd even delegate it to XL 5 or something. Having it when starving: 
all the better.

Cheers,
David

PS: players are vwery excited about the vampires already :)