I think this feature would indeed be quite necessary in a randomly generated world. On the other hand thugs, assassins and the like are more common in often-used roads and large cities, i.e. populated areas. Also there should be a difference between lawful and chaotic cities and such, I suppose.
In fact, I'd say that the vicinity of small towns is the safest, because the town would not have survived if it was dangerous around. For bigger cities I would consider it quite possible or even preferable that it is quite unsafe.

Nah, I disagree. If it was unsafe around a big city, how would it have grown big in the first place? Besides, its influence would have made nearby dungeons safer. Thugs and robbers maybe, because they'll find more to rob in populated areas - but no Molochs or such.

Small towns are usually young, so they have not survived *that* long. They should be around the middle of the scale. In the absolutely most dangerous areas there shouldn't be any population whatsoever.

More ideas... in some pretty dangerous areas, towns would be more paranoid and put much effort in protection. They'd be small fortresses by settlers who want to explore more of the world, potentially finding valuable metals or plants.

I like this a lot. These settlements would survive because the benefits of maintaining the settlement outweigh the hardships of holding it. The valuable metals, magic sources, plants or whatever even encourage new adventurous settlers to join, even though it seems risky.

Another thing that should provide players with hints about which places are safe or not, are rumors. By spending a lot of time chatting with different people, it should be possible to get pretty accurate ideas about what is going on in the caves around an area.

I think the general idea is very good, but it shouldn't be taken to the extreme. I don't see why there shouldn't be (even big) cities near very unsafe areas. We're talking about Ancardia here, a highly magical and varied world, lots of things can happen (and even in the real world, places that have been at war most of the time during the last 100 years still have cities).

Reasons why a city could be in a very unsafe area:

- The city is chaotic evil, with inhabitants such as necromancers and such, so they are in good terms with the monsters in the nearby dungeons.
- The evil boss of the nearby dungeon forced the city to a pact: he leaves the city in peace in exchange for a monthly tribute.
- The city used to be peaceful, but hordes of monsters have recently arrived from <direction>. There have been attacks and some people have fleed the city but at the moment it is still there.
- The city is very dangerous since it is near the monster-infested wastelands of <X>, but it is the last line of defense of the kingdom so there must be military presence in the area. Soldiers are regularly killed but this is considered a necessary evil to defend the kingdom and their families receive generous pensions.
- The city has a guild of powerful wizards that have cast a protective spell on it, so that the monsters can't go inside. Transport to other cities is regularly carried out by teleportation (those who can't pay for teleportation are screwed).

Therefore I agree with there being more dangerous and less dangerous areas, but I think in a fantasy world a general rule like "dangerous areas shouldn't have cities" is too restrictive.

If anything a dangerous area should have more POWERFUL cities. So in a monster infested area you might have stone giant mercenaries and wizards instead of regular guards.

Obviously there should be exceptions to add more variance, but as a general rule I still think that most people would prefer to stay in safer areas. All big cities in dragon-infested forests should have a very good reason to be there, such as most of those you listed. (Disagreeing on the first bit at least - there really is no reason why all chaotic evil groups would be on the same side.)

That's something like what I meant with towns being more protective and even paranoid in more dangerous areas. The inhabitants would be mostly adventure-minded people instead of farmers.

I think that there should be a simple balance factor.

Picture this. For each randomly-generated map of Ancardia, you have two variables that vary across it. The first variable is Danger Level. If the location of a dungeon has a higher Danger Level, then the dungeon itself will be harder. The Danger Level could also present itself in descriptions - if the Danger Level of a forest area is high, then an observant PC should notice battle scars on the trees, lots of tracks created by bandits, etc, whereas a relatively safe area should look pretty much pristine. Cities and towns in high Danger Level areas would be more like fortresses, with tougher guards and fewer civilians.

The other variable should be a Land Value - a dungeon with a high land value would have higher chance of generating higher metals when mined, for instance. Perhaps deeper levels of dungeons with high land values could be expected to house vaults, underground cities, royal treasuries, and even guarded artifacts. Cities and towns in high Land Value areas would have better shops, more productive farmland, etc... and would also attract a higher quality of thief. Think Terinyo as high Land Value, and Lawenilothehl as low Land Value.

Each of these would vary smoothly throughout the map, with moderate (a little below half) Land Value and low Danger Level for the town that the PC starts at. The higher the Land Value relative to the Danger Level, the more likely that a town or city would be placed there. As a result, you would basically expect low Land Value towns and cities to mostly only show up in low Danger Level areas, as high Danger Level combined with low Land Value would mean that it's a risky place to make a town with no resulting gain from Land Value.

Perhaps large Orderly (not Good, just Orderly) cities could inherently reduce the Danger Level of an area, making it more likely for satellite towns to form around it, while large Chaotic cities could slightly increase the Danger Level.

The actual Danger Level and Land Value would be smooth patterns, with jumps possible in the locations of high mountains. That is, if a mountain is impassable, then the Danger Level and Land Value on either side can be very different, but otherwise, any particular square would have to be no more than one value different from an adjacent square.

Just thinking about it - perhaps each value could vary between 1 and 10, with 1 meaning "expect to see rats and goblin scavengers" for Danger Level and "Poorest of the poor" for Land Value, and 10 meaning "be wary of the Greater Undead and the Molochs" in Danger Level and "Maybe the shops will even stock Artifacts" (and "look in dungeon for a Dwarven Hall") in Land Value.

And some other effects could also be seen - weapons shops would be more common in areas of high Danger Level, for instance, whereas high Land Value would be likely to stock Books, Wands, and Rings. Perhaps Hermit's huts could be particularly rare in high Danger Level areas, but more likely to house a powerful being (who may help, or be hostile), whereas the more common Hermit's huts in low Danger Level areas would be more likely to house a woodcutter or a farmer (who may still have something to offer).

Al-Khwarizmi: While your arguments certainly hold in a "realistic" fantasy setting, one must also remember that JADE should be playable as a game. The world could be much more interesting and diverse by having a lot of cities that are exceptions to the rule, but Laukku's point is that it has to be possible to figure out which areas are "safe" (or in the power-level of the character). Perhaps his vision is less realistic, given the setting, but how would you then propose the danger issue at hand?

If these exception cities are very rare and NPCs spread rumors about them, then maybe the player still would be able to figure out which areas are safe and which are not.

It should be possible for PCs to "test" a dungeon to some degree and bolt off once the danger senses start tingling, possibly using knowledge skill (Survival? Dungeon Lore? Animal Lore?) checks that ring warning bells if you're in an out-of-depth place even before you meet some dangerous creature. A tracking skill that identifies some of the monsters that will appear from random tracks found on the first floor, maybe (put that functionality in Survival too and you have skill go from basically useless in ADOM to best skill in JADE). I definitely want the world to make sense, and to reward players for being smart explorers; rather than give them entirely obvious guidelines, let them piece stuff together from the various sources of information in game.

That said, this requires way more polish than the game has at this point and is going to have for quite some time.

hmm after a vacation with a lot of walks in the forest, I would actually suggest to have tracking as a skill on its own; but I guess this should require a new thread. I also don't have any idea of how you should be able to use what the skill implies: following a creature by its track. Using tracking skill would create an overlay of tracks of which you can choose one, from then on indicated in blue or something? (because usual blue tiles would be water, where tracks can't be seen). Guess I'll make a feature suggestion for it sometime after thinking some more.

But I don't like the idea of lvl 1 of a cave being a test out level, because for very dangerous caves it would soon be too dangerous anyhow for low level pc's, but something like halving the difficulty for level 1 would be too crude and give an untrue indication of the rest of the cave. I would prefer to have the ability to 'analyze' the entrance of the cave (sounds coming out, tracks leading in/out, smell, ground type)

Not true tracking, but just a random chance to find tracks by monsters that dwell in the dungeon in question, not so you can actually hunt them down, but so you can know a bit about what awaits you before you meet it face to face. I'm not even advocating keeping the first level free of the dangerous stuff (though dungeons should get progressively more dangerous as you go deeper), just a chance to anticipate it.

How about this - a combination of skills can help you to assess the danger level of a dungeon, forest, etc.

- Tracking - look for indications in terms of footprints/hoofprints/etc, markings against trees or rocks, and so on. Can also be used to set an ambush for something. Spots major signs automatically, but requires active use to see more subtle signs.
- Listening - Listen to nearby sources of sound. Active listening can identify noises that indicate dangers, passive listening works just like in ADoM. Particularly effective from just outside a dungeon, where you can hear sounds echoing out.
- Lore - Book-trained skill (like Bridge Building in ADoM). Improves ability to identify monster weak points, but also has a use in identifying signs that an area is one preferred by certain types of creatures - basically, boosts the effectiveness of the Tracking skill when operating automatically.
- Alertness - In addition to ADoM functionality, increases the chance of noticing the presence of dangerous monsters without having to see them first. Works on short range, basically to double the range of vision.

Also, if my idea of having Land Value and Danger Level as two distinct properties of each overworld space (and perhaps also dungeon level) is implemented:
- Appraising - In addition to possibly sensing BUC state, allows you to sense the Land Value of a space or dungeon level. Particularly useful in getting a sense of what sort of ores you'll find in a dungeon/level.

Obviously, I'd also like to see the Law skill expanded, and that could also provide some information, since an area with no law would be expected to be more dangerous, while a region with a lot of laws is likely to be safer.

This could find a use for the Knowledge Skills suggestion I made a thread about in the dicussion forum, which bascially could let you gain basic insights about monsters you have not yet fought. Knowledge skills for identifying danger levels of caves and wildernes, as suggested by Aielyn, Moeba and Silfir, seems as a good addition. Having a lot of skills related to knowledge could definitely be a feature of JADE.

A simpler way of knowing whether a dungeon is dangerous or not would be asking NPC's in nearby towns. It would make sense that they could give clues about the danger levels of nearby dungeons.

Not to say that the ideas about tracking, etc. aren't good, both kinds of clues could coexist.

Could double this up with the wilderness survival skill, I mean, gathering food in the wilderness is sorta limited in dungeons, and dungeons are where all the fun happens.

I like the idea of having the Survival skill usable in the dungeons in the same way that it works in the wilderness, only with different specific results. For instance, maybe using Survival in a dungeon allows you to find mosses and fungi that are edible, but wouldn't be usable during battle - basically, it would take quite a few turns, and leave you vulnerable in the meantime (with any attack or other event leading to a prompt asking if you want to stop what you're doing).

You'd also be able to use it in rivers, although that would risk bringing up water-based creatures.

As I see it, there's no reason why Survival skills shouldn't be useful in dungeons - the finer details would be different, but the basic methods would be the same. And Tracking would then be a distinct skill usable in both the wilderness and dungeons.

Bump... Now that dungeons have randomly generated names, it would make sense from them to imply the dangerousness of the cave, as another way of telling the player how safe or unsafe it is. Currently every dungeon seems to have the same danger level and equally scary names however. Suffices such as "of despair" should be reserved for tougher dungeons, with names like "moss cavern", "small dungeon" for the easiest ones.

I disagree, to a degree... if only because the "Small Cave" was one of the most dangerous places in ADoM.

Initially I would have agreed with you... But I just started my first playthrough of JADE 0.2.2 just then.

The very first cave I stepped into was called the "Eldritch Maze of Crimson Terror".

I was fighting orcs and rats.

Can you imagine how awesome a high-level dungeon themed around that name could be?

I am now in favor of "high level" names given to high level dungeons.

That's not a bad idea - with different names assigned to different danger levels, a player could easily tell if a particular dungeon was worth looking into at his current level or not. No point killing rats when you're champion of the arena, and the like.