Abilities for monsters that affect missile and/or magic users

[SirTheta]

A long time ago, I posted this RFE: http://www.adom.de/forums/project.php?issueid=1536.

I don't want to continue discussion on said RFE, however - I want to have a community discussion of powers that can be applied to discourage people from using missiles and/or magic against a monster. The idea would be to have a range of creatures that are debilitating or what-have-you to fight with missiles and/or magic, but not melee. For example, (quoting from my RFE): "There's a fair number of creatures you really shouldn't, or plain can't in certain circumstances, fight in melee--karmics, of course, come to mind, as well many monsters with corruption attacks, [x] kings, things that paralyze you , stat drainers [and not just wights, which can be fended off with PV, but lich kings, minotaur mages, greater daemons]...the list is [I]quite extensive."

No such disincentives exist for missiles and/or magic. I would appreciate some ideas so I can post a fleshed-out RFE. Note that "powerful ranged attacks" (a la titans/greater titans) and "cannot use missiles against them" (a la doppleganger [x]) are not what I'm looking for: rather, I would like to see some sort of cost-benefit analysis involved (heavily weighted towards cost), such as is typically involved in deciding whether to go mano a mano with stat drainers or paralyzing creatures. Also, this would ideally generate a lot of ideas wrt spells as I've come to the conclusion that missiles are less important.

As a framework, consider an half-idea I had: summoning a ball spell could trigger an effect while a bolt spell would not.

[JellySlayer]

Maybe something like a mindcraft blowback (eg. vs undead) for magic attacks? Or something that acts like a wall to bolts and bounces/fizzles them (living walls would be a prime candidate)?

[Harwin]

An easy one might be a monster that got more powerful (damage, speed, abilities?) for having spells cast against. Notably NOT HP. So you can burn it down with spells - but it gets more and more dangerous.

Going with Jellyslayer's idea for mindcraft blowback. Rather than damage-style blowback - what if using spells against this monster drained extra PP? (It uses the conduit from the spell to pull out PP from you). You could use a spell and it would work, but it might trigger HP casting (in which case it *is* like mindcraft blowback), or at least drain extra PP, which can be significant in its own right.

[Blasphemous]

I'd like to point your attention to the fact that both melee and missile attacks are in principle single type of attack - physical.
With magic, we're talking about a wide range of possible medium used to carry out an attack.
It can be fire, frost, lightning, acid. It can be death ray, magic missile, whatever it is that destroys undead, and we have stuff like webs and stun bolts.
I agree that perhaps some monsters should present a backlash-kind of threat caused by attacking them with specific type of offensive magic.
Some powerful monsters should perhaps cause such a backlash in response to two different kinds of magic.
But I would very much like to avoid situation where ALL magic is ineffective.

I had a mindcrafter char recently that was at lvl 50, had some of the best artifacts in the game and was ready to close the gate.
*Something* summoned great karmic wyrms in UL, 5 of them. At that point using thrown trident would have taken too long and I had no dragon slayers available.
So, considering the abundance of altars around that level, I just meleed them with twin daggers, fully aware of the consequences.
It worked, I sacced some gold and removed dooming and cursing. So, it's possible given the right situation.
Mimics, dorn beasts and gray oozes should usually be dealt with from a safe distance, but with para resistance, you can just go face-to-face with them without worry of being disabled.
For PV ignoring monsters that experienced players advice to tackle from a distance as well, you can also just melee them, given that you have a decent amount of HP and ~70 DV, which isn't a big deal to achieve with some shield and spear combinations, other items, talents etc. Mentioned character took down balors, greater molochs, greater earth elementals and deep CoC mimic tension rooms all in melee.

So you see, there really are no monsters that cannot be dealt with in melee.
Similarly, there should be no monsters that cannot be put down with magic.

I'd like some more consequential approach to magic.
If fiery monsters are immune to great heat but vulnerable to ice, reflect that in the game more strongly.
They should not be able to shrug frost bolts as often as they do, but at the same time, all fire spells should heal them/make them faster/increase their DV/PV or whatever.
This would address two situations: first you encounter a mixed vault and you need to switch between different elements to use against monsters.
If red and white dragons are standing next to each other, a fire bolt should strengthen the first and damage the second one. It would be up to the player to align him/herself cleverly and try to align monsters to avoid consequences of bolting everything with a single bolt type.
Second situation: Imagine a greater fire vault, with drakes, lizards, dragons and of course wyrms.
Great wyrms and ancient dragons see invisible and will typically follow the PC and breathe fire at him/her, without any respect for monsters standing between you and them.
What it could mean is that they would power each other up enormously by treating each other with fire, their most favorite element.
This again forces the player to consider the strategy and how to best lure them out one by one because the alternative is having to deal with super-wyrms and super-dragons with the conditions favoring them rather strongly.

Maybe I'm looking the wrong way and this isn't such a good idea but it would be a start.

[RedBamboo]

An easy one might be a monster that got more powerful (damage, speed, abilities?) for having spells cast against. Notably NOT HP. So you can burn it down with spells - but it gets more and more dangerous.

I like this idea. Like if you shot someone with an arrow, they'd probably get pissed off and sprint at you. Speed would be increased aswell as hits/turn.

[Lasher]

Hi!

So, you probably don't want to hear this, but I don't want this to happen! If that's not want you want to hear you can ignore the rest of what I'm saying.

So, it sounds like you want to make the ranged people run into the monsters like Karma Lizards and other scary things that sometimes Melee people get. But the thing is those monsters usually aren't fun! I know when I run tino a doppleganger with my archer I don't think "Oh Boy!" I mean, maybe it's balanced, but I don't care.

Also, the thing is Archers and Wizards have ammo. Maybe that's not balanced cause they never run out but that's a different issue. I know that my last archer kept running out of arrows and it was miserable cause I could never get enough or find any at all. The other thing is Wizards, sometimes there are monsters that just shrug off bolt spells and it's like why even bother. You just have to get close anyways to use a ball spell anyways. So I don't know if that's a thing or not. I know my wizards near the end of the game they just basically fight up close the whole time cause they mostly only use ball spells.

Also Wizards have PP, and there are places and bad guys where you just can't get any PP and then you are in trouble especially now since if you cast from your life you lose stats.

Anyways, I think a type of monster that you want just wouldn't be fun. Maybe it'd be better to make the horrible melee guys just less bad or less common. Otherwise you could just make a guy who sometimes deflects or dodges arrows and who shrugs bolts a lot. Then you have to get close anyways.

[magpie]

know that my last archer kept running out of arrows and it was miserable cause I could never get enough or find any at all.

You almost have to use Coward tactics and scum archery-using monsters in the early game - kobolds, ratling archers, raiders, stuff like that. By the time you head west to the CoC, you should ideally have a stack of 50-100 arrows, and as many quarrels and rocks/sling bullets as you can find. Don't neglect thrown rocks and slings! In the mid-end game, 'sling bullets of demon slaying' are rather common, and very powerful against demons.

Dopplegangers and doppleganger lords aren't so bad - after all, they're not that tough, and can be pretty easily melee'ed or zapped with wands. But even for an end-game archer, doppleganger kings are a big problem thanks to their insane +to hit and powerful melee attacks. You don't have to fight everything, and they don't give enough XP to be worth the risk of melee'ing. Just avoid them.

TH is stronger for Archers than many other classes, because it will ensure a steady stream of slaying ammo from the midgame on. I'd say it's almost a must-take - archers level quickly, so by the midgame you can have TH and Quick/Lightning Shot as well. Then you're pretty much set - with high missile weapon skill, you'll be getting off 2-3 shots for every attack a monster gets, and that's if they get into melee range, which ideally they shouldn't be.

Crowning is also very strong for an Archer, what with Sun's Messenger, Thunderstroke, True Aim, Far Slayer and Whirlwind, you've got 5 crowning gifts which are incredibly powerful.

There's already a class of monsters which screw over magic-users - magebane and magedoom eyes with their constant shrugging, PP drain, confusion attacks and (in the case of magedooms) penetrating attacks - but they're not that common, except in the Mana Temple. I still think magic-users are the most powerful class, but I've never ended a game with one, so what do I know?


I mean, maybe it's balanced, but I don't care.

The thing is that ADOM is a single player game with no PVP, so it's never been balanced and I don't think it was supposed to be. How else to explain a game with Archers, Wizards, Duelists (et cetera) as character classes in a game which also features Thieves and Merchants? Some classes are relatively easy, and some are almost-impossible without a lot of time and care. Winning with an Archer is nothing compared to winning with a Merchant. And that's the way it's supposed to be, I think.

[SirTheta]

So you see, there really are no monsters that cannot be dealt with in melee.
Similarly, there should be no monsters that cannot be put down with magic.Having taken down most monsters in melee....I agree! That's why I clearly state I don't want abilities akin to the doppleganger "cannot use missiles" - rather, I want to see interesting things where there are diverse effects, so you can still use magic (or some form of magic), but you have to consider the cost! I really like some of the suggestions so far as they fit this theme wonderfully. Like - look at that wonderful living wall suggestion! What a great idea - and if you make the bolt bounce, you can still have the wall take damage [since one 'square' of a bolt is absorbed by a normal wall]! Plus, ball spells / burning hands / etc. are still in play. So it really spices things up and is very inventive. The same goes for Harwin's suggestions.


So, it sounds like you want to make the ranged people run into the monsters like Karma Lizards and other scary things that sometimes Melee people get. But the thing is those monsters usually aren't fun! I know when I run tino a doppleganger with my archer I don't think "Oh Boy!" I mean, maybe it's balanced, but I don't care.Well, I don't know about fun - they're dangerous, so of course they're a little less fun. The idea here is to add some variety to the game and points where you have to consider "do I use spells [or a certain type of spell?], do I use a different type of spells, or do I use non-magic [i.e. missiles or melee]?" I think this would make the game incredibly more interesting versus the whole "bolt everything until it stops twitching or ball everything".

[Arctic]

I think the fun part of playing a spellcaster is that you can bolt/ball everything. But this discussion reminded me of nishruu/hakeashar from Baldurs Gate 2. They were healed by magic, successful hits drained magic items of charges and lost memorized spells. Great fun.

[JellySlayer]

An easy one might be a monster that got more powerful (damage, speed, abilities?) for having spells cast against. Notably NOT HP. So you can burn it down with spells - but it gets more and more dangerous.

Going with Jellyslayer's idea for mindcraft blowback. Rather than damage-style blowback - what if using spells against this monster drained extra PP? (It uses the conduit from the spell to pull out PP from you). You could use a spell and it would work, but it might trigger HP casting (in which case it *is* like mindcraft blowback), or at least drain extra PP, which can be significant in its own right.

Shambling mounds already kind of do this with lightning. I think the effect would have to be a lot more extreme though for it to really be noticeable though--shambling mounds gain levels, but not enough for it to be really that threatening. But if it was a big enough boost, yeah, that would work nicely.

[asdf]

Or something that acts like a wall to bolts and bounces/fizzles them (living walls would be a prime candidate)?
Please, RFE. Wall beasts and Living Walls. Let them behave like a real walls!

[YourMum]

Mirrored statues that reflect bolts back at their attacker?

Mana slimes or something like that that absorb attacking magic used against them then use the same spell (with the same strength range etc? ) in their own turn. Or maybe they replicate when magic is used against them like gremlins and water?

[Lasher]

I really like the bouncing bolt Living Wall thing Jellyslayer said.

I was thinking more about this and I thought, maybe there could just be a Karma Lizard that works on Magic or Ranged attacks?

The other thing I was thinking of was maybe make some of the summoner enemies like, either Necromancers, or the Black Wizards(?) summon more enemies every time you cast a spell too close to them. Like they get magic from the spell and it makes more guys.

The thing about making monsters that are dangerous for one thing is that I wouldn't want them to be too dangerous. I would really like it if there were a clever way to stop them instead. Like, if there were a Rust monster that it eats your ammo but gets angrier and stronger but also a lot slower. Then sure you can just throw away your ammo to make it stop, but then you are out your arrows. He'd get slower cause he'd be heavier and probably fatter.

[YourMum]

Could higher level human-sized monsters have a skill like the archer class power whereby there's a chance they dodge the missile entirely? Maybe dark elves as the DE PCs have alertness and dodge. Suitable "warrior" type monsters could have a chance to deflect missiles with their shield (chaos and ratling warriors/warlords being a good candidate. No new monsters (and all their bugs) and should* be easy to code.

*haahaaa as if anything is simple

[grobblewobble]

Maybe vortices should explode without self-destructing and / or speed up if you cast elemental attacks on them?

[SirTheta]

I'm keeping a master list of ideas at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wGi-qqHwXPbqqxQKI5OfFgpiYJWGZzgZJXm2_0kcCx8/, for reference. I will probably post them as separate RFEs. (You can comment on stuff if you want).

[YourMum]

Maybe vortices should explode without self-destructing and / or speed up if you cast elemental attacks on them?

Ah I like that a lot! The getting faster (and maybe strong) bit

[Tyrnyx]

Make a monster who shoots stronger bolts the farther you are away from it. In fact I think this should be done for the ACW and make it so he can't flee. This would give you incentive to close the gap instead of long range blast away. And put you in nasty melee range. I would be difficult for a monster that didn't have lots of health like the ACW though. Maybe have a regular monster do the same but always dodge certain bolts?

Also some monster should swat missiles away (knocking away those that would otherwise auto-return). Or at least prevent auto-return... it's stupid strong as it is. Rune-covered trident can best the entirety of D50! Balors should get hit and grab it before it can return. Molochs, Titans and their greater forms should do the same.

[asdf]

Balors should get hit and grab it before it can return. Molochs, Titans and their greater forms should do the same.
Molochs? This is pretty opposite of "cathing something".

[YourMum]

I would have thought Moloch and especially Greater Molochs would be far far too slow and clumsy to catch arrows. Maybe (Master) Swordsmen could deflect them, unrealistic I know, but it looks good in films...! Then you have to fight them on their terms, where their skills come into play. It would certainly encourage Archers and other ranged fighters to train up a little more (though I don't suppose anyone neglects their melee weapon skills do they) to avoid being disarmed.

[grobblewobble]

I think the main problem is not so much that we need more monsters that resist ranged attacks. Instead, we need monsters that can actually threaten you at range.

There are many monsters that can do bad bad things to you when you stand next to them. (Greater) mimics, (greater) balors, (greater) molochs, stat drainers like vampires etc, ghosts, the cat lord, greater wyrms, something that goes into a blind rage, killer bugs, berserker emperors, doppleganger kings, werewolf kings...

How many monsters are a threat at range? Basically, only (greater) titans. And the ACW, as long as you stand in a straight line. Ok, maybe the chaos archmage too, but the AMW is guaranteed. As long as you keep your distance and attack with missiles or magic, the vast majority of ADOM monsters can do absolutely nothing to harm you.

And that is the cause of the problem. We need more monsters with a real ranged attack.

[YourMum]

That's a good point. Aren't giants meant to fire rocks? Maybe they could throw huge rocks, or just fire rocks more often. It's rarely happens to me and when they do finally get around to launching a rock at my PCs is just like being pelted with little pebbles. Dark elf, pixie, quickling and hurthling archers are all laughable. As you say only titans and to a lesser extent dragons are the only monsters with ranged attacks that threaten you.

[mewmew]

giants throwing rocks can hurt bad

[grobblewobble]

The stone giant lord in HMV and the fire giants in the tower can hurt, good point. Dragons can basically only hurt your items, unless you run around without resistances for some reason. The glowing ball spell from wyrms is especially weak.

[LexyBoy]

The banshee?

Perhaps Dorn Beasts could be buffed by having the paralysation effect occur whenever it is visible to the PC (or a chance of occurring each turn it is visible, dependent on Wi)? As it is, Dorns are not nearly as dangerous as you would expect for a monster that has a warning. Or have a Medusa which instantly petrifies any PC who sees her.

Liches and Wyrms use a glowing balls attack, maybe other magic users could use these (and make them a bit tougher or harder to resist)? As-is, most of the higher level magicians just summon loads of crap which is a bit tedious. Fire giant kings have a pretty mean thrown attack, it would be fitting for other giants to have these as well.

[Harwin]

Being able to throw things and attack at ranged doesn't necessarily punish magic/ranged. It does mean that they can shoot at you while you're trying to get into melee range - where missile users can start fighting back immediately.

[Joe]

Maybe stronger spellcasters and/or some ranged critters could be given a 'focused' attack for additional to hit and damage (and increased chance for crits). Ofcourse the special attack would need extra time/energy. The attack should be impossible in melee range (I also think Death Ray should be impossible in melee range; the stat draining of emperor liches/Nuurag Vaarn is bad enough as is).

Something like: 'The lich went into a trance, drawing up huge magical energies...' could be a message for some bolt of arcane energy which has a very high chance to hit and does like 100 damage (no resistance available) or so. It would mean you could quickly kill the nasty guys before they start UBERhealing themselves. Same for: 'the dark elven archer starts aiming carefully at you, concentrating deeply' for an extra powerful shot. The chance for such attacks should be dependant on the range of the PC (the further the higher).

[YourMum]

Oh how could I forget that arsehole in the HMV! I haven't seen him for quite a few games now, but he has taken out characters of mine that couldn't even see him.

As I said the most of the archer monsters are laughable, they're a nuisanse once you've got a few levels and a few points of PV. Being stuck in the middle of a large group of barbarians all with line of sight to you isn't fun but for the most part i think i take more damage (from individual monsters not overall) from things like gnolls and hill orcs that use thrown weapons. They don't seem to use this skill as much as they could and of course there's the worry if they did vaults and tension rooms would be even more milkable.

High/Dark Elf (both to help increase the low low number of lawful monsters) ranger-type characters: armed with a long bow/heavy crossbow, with a couple of melee attacks per turn when it comes down to it. They fire normal missiles but have, say, a 1 in 10 crit chance. If they have a high speed and long line of sight they should able able to get in a few shots at least. Light green 'u's for Highelves, maybe dark brown for Darkelves?

Also, inspired by a statue that someone found recently, maybe let shambling mounds throw mud/crud balls at you that you have to waste a turn to wipe from your 'f'ace? Could hurt a little too but not all ranged attacks have to be of the hurting variety do they?

It might not do much (at least not of endgame characters, but what does unless you're Nuuuuurgy or a doppleganer king?) but couldn't we just get all monsters with ranged attacks to use them more? The more they attack the more likely they are to get a hit that might damage. It might make kobolds and goblins just plain old annoying but might buff giants a bit?

[Mobius]

the PC can have any spell in the book.

Perhaps a Dark Sage could have some random spell from an interesting list?
Slow monster, fireball, iceball, invis, darkness, etc. Don't have it be so predictable.

Imagine the fear from a Sage who can cast petrification. Or death ray. Or burning hands.

[Blasphemous]

I agree with grobblewobble - we need more things that threaten players from a distance. Some suggestions:
- Chaos Alchemists that throw exploding potions which have the effect of thrown crystals of fire but have a wider range of possible effects, including ice, lightning and acid. Could be a high DL monster.
- Magic Anomalies - something like a will'o'wisp but with the ability to cast magic bolts and maybe something like improved magic ball. Impossible to resist so it's bound to be dangerous.
- More monsters should have their spells effective even when the PC is not in direct line of fire, like the case with glowing balls used by liches. Some monsters could benefit from similar attacks, using different elements. This of course prompts us to ask why the PCs do not have any such spells available to them, even wizards, but it's either "Ancardia has a special, unique form of magic widespread among its denizens, unknown elsewhere" or just provide extra spells to PCs, ones without area-of-effect like improved fireball.
- Ratling Sharpshooters - they could be the equivalent to ratling warlords or whichever ratling is the worst disarmer. They could have a *very* high chance to damage worn equipment, have low energy consumption and ignore PV. This would have to be a mid-high DL monster.
- (Huge) rocks thrown by Troll Kings and (Greater) Earth Elementals could push the PC back one tile, much like the effect of wind in the Ice Queen realm. It wouldn't necessarily make them that dangerous but quite annoying and unpredictable.
- Greater Demons could use bolt attacks similar to Keriax - they would corrupt the PC - that would make them formidable ranged creatures as right now all you need is fire resistance and maybe a ring of ice.
- I don't know how likely this is to be implemented but I always thought that huge monsters should have a longer reach than PC - titans, giants, wyrms and most greater stuff is arguably bigger than the PC by at least a factor of 2 and often much more. If those monsters were able to engage the PC in melee from 2 or 3 tiles away, they would suddenly become quite a threat.

[SirTheta]

I agree with grobblewobble - we need more things that threaten players from a distance.I don't want to shoot you down [I didn't see all the previous replies until your post], but you're really missing the point of this topic. Life is already pretty tough for melee classes - far more so than any magic or missile user. If you give more monsters good ranged abilities, you do make life a bit more difficult for melee or magic users, sure. But far more, the effect is felt by melee classes, who are impacted hugely. This, of course, only winds up privileging missiles & magic over melee more. All your suggestions are in the vein of making melee much more dangerous than missiles or magic, which would still be the best way to deal with all the abilities you've suggested.

So, I fundamentally disagree with any suggestion where monsters become much more dangerous at range, as I think it is ultimately counter-productive in attempting to slightly rebalance ranged vs melee.

[Joe]

I don't want to shoot you down [I didn't see all the previous replies until your post], but you're really missing the point of this topic. Life is already pretty tough for melee classes - far more so than any magic or missile user. If you give more monsters good ranged abilities, you do make life a bit more difficult for melee or magic users, sure. But far more, the effect is felt by melee classes, who are impacted hugely. This, of course, only winds up privileging missiles & magic over melee more. All your suggestions are in the vein of making melee much more dangerous than missiles or magic, which would still be the best way to deal with all the abilities you've suggested.

So, I fundamentally disagree with any suggestion where monsters become much more dangerous at range, as I think it is ultimately counter-productive in attempting to slightly rebalance ranged vs melee.

That's why I drew up an example of what I think you're seeking: improved range attack that makes the monster more vulnerable to melee and against which being in melee range is a defense. For balancing you can just fiddle the exact numbers; it's mainly trying to capture the 'concept' you feel is missing in ADOM, namely monsters which are 'safest' to melee as quickly as possible and against which ranged attacks and spells are more risky to use.
I can see however that an extra powerful and time consuming attack could also be countered by simply shooting/spellcasting alot during the extra time consume. But at least making some spells/specials impossible in melee could be a nice twist that favors melee classes a little against those monsters (I say this should be done for death ray.. it's way too dangerous to cast it in close combat!)

Quote below has some slight adaptations. So is this the kind of thing that would satisfy you?


Maybe stronger spellcasters and/or some ranged critters could be given a 'focused' type of attack for additional to hit and damage (and increased chance for crits). Ofcourse the special attack would need extra time/energy BEFORE happening. The attack should also be impossible in melee range (I also think Death Ray should be impossible in melee range; the stat draining of emperor liches/Nuurag Vaarn is bad enough as is).

Something like: 'The lich went into a trance, drawing up huge magical energies...' (I am imagining the sound effects that could be written for such a message :D) could be a message signaling that in 5000 ep some bolt of arcane energy will be cast which has a very high chance to hit and does like 100 damage (no resistance available) or so. It would mean you could quickly get into melee range to prevent such attack from happening. Same for: 'the dark elven archer starts aiming carefully at you, concentrating deeply' for an extra powerful shot. The chance for such attacks happening should be dependant on the range of the PC (the further away the more likely such an attack could be tried by the monster).

[Blasphemous]

I don't think melee is as dangerous as people make it out to be.
The only stuff I don't melee are karmic beings.
Everything else is doable; mimics can be dealt with once you have amulet of free action or any source of -para.
All things like balors, molochs and undead except for king/emp liches can be done in melee.
Lich royalty is annoying because of the invulnerability to disablers and stat drains in melee range but we've had those monsters in the game for many years now and advanced players take this in-stride.
They are sufficiently rare to justify their apparent power and level of danger they present.


I don't want to shoot you down [I didn't see all the previous replies until your post], but you're really missing the point of this topic.

I don't think I do. Consider this: why would monsters in the game wish to engage powerful melee PC in melee?
The reasonable thing is to use ranged combat, either magic or missiles against a tank PC with AotME or any slaying stuff and 50+ PV.
It's like PCs fighting greater molochs - you don't fight them in straight melee because they hit like a ton of bricks, you use speed advantage or missiles.
You use slaying stuff to offset their own ability to crit and deal massive damage. You use ranged magic to remain safely outside of their reach.
Same should be true for hostile monsters approaching a powerful melee PC, the roles are simply reversed.

I understand that the main idea of the thread is to create some kind of "kickback" for casters and ranged attack-reliant PCs without much affecting pure or almost pure melee chars, but this is not entirely reasonable.
You are trying to make the game more challenging for challenge and difficulty's sake.
I on the other hand would much rather see the game take reasonable approach.
Look at the basic monsters - orcs, goblins, kobolds.
Each can fight in melee and each can fight using ranged weapons, be it thrown knives, rocks or bow+arrows.

What I'm suggesting is to extend this versatility to many other, powerful monsters.
Why affect only the group of players that rely on magic or ranged combat?
I had situations where orc scorchers or trolls - arguably common monsters - crited me for a huge amount of HP, either killing or near-killing me.
At some point however, they cease to be a threat because of combination of HP, DV and PV.
I'd like to see more powerful monsters scale a little with that natural progression.
When the PC encounters troll kings, they should be able to live up to their name - throwing rocks that can successfully hit and damage even strong, well armored PCs.
Monsters that rely on elemental magic should have a wider range of spells available to them, to more effectively damage a PC that might be lacking in the related resistance.

I agree with the idea of introducing *some* way of making life more difficult to casters - monsters could reflect spells or absorb them and gain power or whatever.
There could even be dedicated monsters that make it unthinkable to attack them using magic. Instead force players to do it in melee.
Such monsters should not be too common, however.
The idea is to not get too far with this. I think all monsters need some weakness so that the choice between magic, missiles and melee is more meaningful.
PC's can specialize, but let's face it - at some point in the game, ANY player character is bound to have reliable means to use all there methods of combat and defend against all three as well.
I wouldn't want to see the same being true for monsters, this sort of defies the purpose of RPG games, a category that ADoM definitely belongs to.
Another thing that has to be mentioned is this: casters are typically fragile and lightly armored.
I'm not talking about dwarven or drakish casters, but about the more popular races used for caster classes, namely elves.
You start with 0-1 PV and no reliable means to beat stuff up in melee. You have to mainly use casting.
Introducing monsters that are a threat to casters by directly affecting magic has to be relegated to mid-late game.
You already sacrifice toughness and armor in favor of magic when you select a caster class.
If you run out of PP you're in trouble because your melee abilities leave you lacking.
This is the natural tradeoff and I don't like the idea of attacking that.
Finally, there is the issue of roleplaying. Magic has always been the most exciting and interesting aspect of fantasy games and should remain such.
It's the ultimate weapon and the greatest power. It's not a coincidence that wizards are the most powerful end-game class. This is as it should be.

[grobblewobble]

I don't want to shoot you down [I didn't see all the previous replies until your post], but you're really missing the point of this topic. Life is already pretty tough for melee classes - far more so than any magic or missile user. If you give more monsters good ranged abilities, you do make life a bit more difficult for melee or magic users, sure. But far more, the effect is felt by melee classes, who are impacted hugely. This, of course, only winds up privileging missiles & magic over melee more.

Could you maybe explain why you think so? I think it's the opposite, I would expect that this would affect ranged / magic users much stronger than melee characters. The reason that ranged / magic characters are so much stronger than melee is that they almost never have to take any real damage, as long as they can keep their distance. I wonder if it is really possible to change the balance at all, as long as this remains so. Melee characters are already used to eating damage and they tend to have better HP, DV / PV to be able to deal with it.

[SirTheta]

Quote below has some slight adaptations. So is this the kind of thing that would satisfy you?Something like this is what I have in mind and would satisfy me.


I don't think melee is as dangerous as people make it out to be.
The only stuff I don't melee are karmic beings.
. . .Well, yes – you can melee everything. My second win was an unarmed monk that killed everything but karmics in melee, so I'm well aware of this fact. However, this absolutely doesn't change that melee is, generally, a suboptimal option. I nearly always melee Nuurgy, but I know full well that using humanoid slaying ammo would be a better choice. On the other hand, I nearly always shoot lich kings and their ilk because it's pretty hard to do enough damage in melee to counteract their healing spell – coupled with their stat drains, it makes for a pretty brutal situation. There's no such consideration if you're using magic: you blast away until dead. I would like to change that by introducing "choice".


I don't think I do. Consider this: why would monsters in the game wish to engage powerful melee PC in melee?
The reasonable thing is to use ranged combat, either magic or missiles against a tank PC with AotME or any slaying stuff and 50+ PV.
It's like PCs fighting greater molochs - you don't fight them in straight melee because they hit like a ton of bricks, you use speed advantage or missiles.
You use slaying stuff to offset their own ability to crit and deal massive damage. You use ranged magic to remain safely outside of their reach.
Same should be true for hostile monsters approaching a powerful melee PC, the roles are simply reversed.Monsters in ADOM are generally not very bright and presumably cannot assess (a) what the PC is wearing (b) how much damage the PC can do from range. Just as a PC cannot know how much damage a greater moloch will do beforehand [aside from relying on a history of encounters], the greater moloch does not know us - information is asymmetric. You are assuming perfect knowledge on the part of both the PC and monster, but neither is true—the perfect knowledge comes from your out-of-game self. (I don't even buy this argument in the abstract, by the by, but it's easy to refute for this case, so whatevs).


I understand that the main idea of the thread is to create some kind of "kickback" for casters and ranged attack-reliant PCs without much affecting pure or almost pure melee chars, but this is not entirely reasonable.
You are trying to make the game more challenging for challenge and difficulty's sake.Incorrect on both counts. For one, it's pretty darn reasonable to want more balance between melee and ranged classes. One of the biggest things separating them is that, generally, there are a range of bad effects for melee PCs, but none for ranged PCs. So, this is an attempt to create more balance and "choice" in the game – not to just make it more difficult (though it is an intended side effect).


I on the other hand would much rather see the game take reasonable approach.
Look at the basic monsters - orcs, goblins, kobolds.
Each can fight in melee and each can fight using ranged weapons, be it thrown knives, rocks or bow+arrows.

What I'm suggesting is to extend this versatility to many other, powerful monsters.
Why affect only the group of players that rely on magic or ranged combat?From the first post: "There's a fair number of creatures you really shouldn't, or plain can't in certain circumstances, fight in melee—karmics, of course, come to mind, as well many monsters with corruption attacks, [x] kings, things that paralyze you , stat drainers [and not just wights, which can be fended off with PV, but lich kings, minotaur mages, greater daemons]...the list is [I]quite extensive." And yet, such does not exist for ranged combat. With the ``reasonable`` approach you get monsters like titans: mobs with a ranged attack and a stronger melee attack that make more sense to fight from range!


I had situations where orc scorchers or trolls - arguably common monsters - crited me for a huge amount of HP, either killing or near-killing me.
At some point however, they cease to be a threat because of combination of HP, DV and PV.
I'd like to see more powerful monsters scale a little with that natural progression.
When the PC encounters troll kings, they should be able to live up to their name - throwing rocks that can successfully hit and damage even strong, well armored PCs.
Monsters that rely on elemental magic should have a wider range of spells available to them, to more effectively damage a PC that might be lacking in the related resistance.See my reply to grobblewobble below.


I agree with the idea of introducing *some* way of making life more difficult to casters - monsters could reflect spells or absorb them and gain power or whatever.
There could even be dedicated monsters that make it unthinkable to attack them using magic. Instead force players to do it in melee.
Such monsters should not be too common, however.
The idea is to not get too far with this. I think all monsters need some weakness so that the choice between magic, missiles and melee is more meaningful.That is the goal of this topic, yes.


PC's can specialize, but let's face it - at some point in the game, ANY player character is bound to have reliable means to use all there methods of combat and defend against all three as well.
I wouldn't want to see the same being true for monsters, this sort of defies the purpose of RPG games, a category that ADoM definitely belongs to.Well this is blatantly untrue. Any magic class can easily pick up missiles or melee, definitely. The opposite is sometimes, but not often, the case – you are constrained not just by the difficulty of learning spells, but actually getting offensive spellbooks generated in the first place! (see also: the next reply)


Another thing that has to be mentioned is this: casters are typically fragile and lightly armored.
I'm not talking about dwarven or drakish casters, but about the more popular races used for caster classes, namely elves.
You start with 0-1 PV and no reliable means to beat stuff up in melee. You have to mainly use casting.
Introducing monsters that are a threat to casters by directly affecting magic has to be relegated to mid-late game.
You already sacrifice toughness and armor in favor of magic when you select a caster class.
If you run out of PP you're in trouble because your melee abilities leave you lacking.
This is the natural tradeoff and I don't like the idea of attacking that.I won a 1.1.1 game with a Grey Elf Priest who true berserked in the late-game, wielding the AOTME. While my intention with this thread is to, indeed, leave the early game not affected much, I don't buy that there is a true dichotomy between magic and melee on a magic-using class. They're just as good at it as anyone else (unlike the reverse).


Finally, there is the issue of roleplaying. Magic has always been the most exciting and interesting aspect of fantasy games and should remain such.
It's the ultimate weapon and the greatest power. It's not a coincidence that wizards are the most powerful end-game class. This is as it should be.See, I find this extremely suspect. For one, I find using magic incredibly boring: choose spell, blast away until dead. There's nothing truly exciting about it because there is rarely cause for concern as you normally aren't taking much damage and rarely a need to position one's PC as in melee. Yeah, you can teleport in the middle of a greater undead vault and wreak havoc with a ball spell but it's ultimately only satisfying from a "I AM ALMIGHTY" perspective. For two, there are plenty of "magical" artifacts in the game, and there's little reason they need to be abjectly worse than magic. There are plenty of games where it's far better to be a beefy melee user than frail caster – there's no ADOM-intrinsic (or -extrinsic, or RPG, or etc.) reason why magic has to be the best thing ever with no drawbacks.

[SirTheta]

Could you maybe explain why you think so? I think it's the opposite, I would expect that this would affect ranged / magic users much stronger than melee characters. The reason that ranged / magic characters are so much stronger than melee is that they almost never have to take any real damage, as long as they can keep their distance. I wonder if it is really possible to change the balance at all, as long as this remains so. Melee characters are already used to eating damage and they tend to have better HP, DV / PV to be able to deal with it.Sure – it's the classic titan problem, as I see it. If I have to walk five tiles while under attack from a titan – even on Coward – I'm going to take quite a bit of damage from, at the very least, one quarrel and then have to confront it in melee and take yet more damage. While I'll concede that this can be avoided by making the ranged attack of a mob much stronger than its melee attack, that is the opposite of how things work in ADOM. Nearly all of the abilities that Blasphemous proposed, for instance (being pushed back by a missile attack, big mobs like greater molochs/titans having a multi-tile reach, corrupting bolts from greater daemons, more missile-like magic attacks, impossible-to-resist spells) would be incredibly more punishing to a melee PC than a ranged PC.

[YourMum]

I don't want to shoot you down [I didn't see all the previous replies until your post], but you're really missing the point of this topic.

True things were getting a little off-topic but the that monsters ranged attacks are fairly weak overall is fairly valid. Just in the wrong thread.

Just giving a few appropriate monsters an ability like doppelgangers that shows them to (sometimes) deflect arrows would be simple enough. Doppelgangers themselves already fill the niche as anti-archer monsters

[Harwin]

True things were getting a little off-topic but the that monsters ranged attacks are fairly weak overall is fairly valid. Just in the wrong thread.

Just giving a few appropriate monsters an ability like doppelgangers that shows them to (sometimes) deflect arrows would be simple enough. Doppelgangers themselves already fill the niche as anti-archer monsters

Well dopplegangers are really an example of both anti-archer(missile deflection) AND anti-melee(confusion). So while they are anti-archer, they're also anti-melee.

[Soirana]

Personally I'd rather see few things which sorb or reflect spells instead of something alongside great titan quarrels. Honestly does anyone really wants to be shot for 100+hp more frequently?

[Joe]

Something like this is what I have in mind and would satisfy me.

So here are some ideas that fit the concept, ranged from really brutal to slight inconveniences.

- Remove DV bonuses from weapon/shield for 1 turn after performing a ranged/magical attack. Do the same for monsters by giving them a flat DV penalty for 1 turn.
- Make stat drains only possible in 3-7 range.
- Make ranged/magic attacks impossible in coward stance (you are too scared to attack the -foo-!). You can still cast non-offensive spells, read books/scrolls etc. in coward ofcourse.
- Make death ray impossible in melee range.
- Give PC and some monsters a temporary speed boost (25%?) when an attack outside melee range does over 25% damage at once. This should go for all insects/animals and all 'naturally living' (non-undead/demon/construct) monsters of higher intelligence.
- Make bolt spells used in melee range slightly damage the PC and his worn equipment due to proximity.
- Increase the chance for more intelligent, non-magically capable monsters to berserk at you as soon as they see you performing a spell of any sort (including calm monster :D).
- Add to-hit penalties to physical ranged attacks that are too close (1-2 range) or too far off (10+). Make the penalties not apply for thrown objects/weapons. Also make it apply for both PC and monsters.
- Give some monsters the option to do an improved 'focused' attack for 5000+ ep. See my post above somewhere. Running into melee range should make the focused attack miss.
- Add a chance for potion/gem destruction when being hit by thrown rocks. Add a chance for damage on weapon/armor/food/spellbooks with huge rocks.
- Add/increase the chance for bleeding/stunned status on some ranged attack types.
- Add a chance to be confused when being hit by a physical attack outside line of sight (or by an invisible enemy). Magic attacks should not confuse, as magic is magic so being unexpected is nothing extraordinary for it ;)

/edit: some slight adaptions.

[Tyrnyx]

I like a lot of the suggestions especially the ones in the post above mine. However, some of the suggestions (in the thread, mostly avoided in the post above mine) actually hurt melee characters more than ranged characters! Having archer monsters do more damage just means that melee characters have to close more ground while taking more damage. If missile monsters damage is increased then have pure melee characters take less damage from missiles - not sure how the game would determine "pure" but it's a thought?

Another suggestion: monsters that absorbs your missiles until you kill it might be interesting. Perhaps a property of say a Death Ooze or other fancy jellies.

Personally I just think that PC missiles should do less damage. Especially the artifact missiles.

[jtadom]

Agree, lots of creative ideas. I particularly like two, because they're elegant, i.e. make sense and are simple:

1) The farther away you are, the less accurate your shooting.

2) More monsters can deflect missiles, like doppelgangers.

Both of those seem realistic, and would significantly cut the effectiveness of archers without affecting melee.

My two cents :)

[mewmew]

But missile power it's not some luxury for archers, missile weapon is the main way for some weaker classes to take down bosses and other dangerous foes, not everybody plays barbarians and wizards. I already dislike that ammo break rate seems to be increased in pre23, it adds a lot of annoyance and kind of forces you to use artifact ammo.

Also that deflecting idea, i don't recall monsters deflecting melee hits, why should missile users have a disadvantage..

[melphen]

I'm not sure why anyone would want to do anything to make this game harder.

Maybe instead of making the core game harder in all the ways people that get ultimate endings all the time want we can add a harder mode to the game as an option of something. Some of us haven't been able to figure out all the things needed to complete the game once yet, much less an ultimate ending we thought needed to be more difficult.

If you want to make sure no one new ever gets into this game just keep begging for the game to be closer to actually impossible to beat at all.

As a matter of fact, karmics alone are enough for me to ask for a nerf on some of this stuff. Just having to have ranged weapons to kill them without completely screwing your character is enough to cause to real problems when there are 3 in the first level of SMC.

My point is we are already riding a line between a really hard game that is really hard for anyone to get well into and a game so hard that only the most hardcore should even bother.

I love this game because it is super hard, but if you make it much harder it will become clear that I have no choice but to quit or hate the game the entire time I'm playing it. Please don't take this game from people like myself. I'm trying hard, and making progress, but adding even more to this will ruin it.

[JellySlayer]

You shouldn't see karmics in the SMC until you're at least level 4 or 5. Passed time that you should have vacated the premises. It's rare that you run into a karmic where you don't even have at least a couple random weapons to throw at it, if not a nice pile of rocks.