Difference between revisions of "Talk:Discussion:Field of Vision"

From RogueBasin
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
Line 8: Line 8:


::::Well it's a two-fold problem: just because you can target the ghost in the wall doesn't mean you can hit it with spells.  The only thing you can do to a walled monster is tunnel it, and then you just get a melee attack.  Ghost in wall isn't a problem because of asymmetric LOS, it's a problem because spells fizzle and arrows break when they hit the wall.  If you let the player fight back, then I agree it's not a significant difference.  I am adding comments as such to the main page. --[[User:Marble Dice|Marble Dice]] 22:43, 25 June 2009 (CEST)
::::Well it's a two-fold problem: just because you can target the ghost in the wall doesn't mean you can hit it with spells.  The only thing you can do to a walled monster is tunnel it, and then you just get a melee attack.  Ghost in wall isn't a problem because of asymmetric LOS, it's a problem because spells fizzle and arrows break when they hit the wall.  If you let the player fight back, then I agree it's not a significant difference.  I am adding comments as such to the main page. --[[User:Marble Dice|Marble Dice]] 22:43, 25 June 2009 (CEST)
::::: Hengband (and presumably Entroband; haven't tested Zangband) handles that by making monsters in walls attackable by ranged attacks. -- [[User:Bessarion|Bessarion]] 15:48, 25 June 2009 (U.S. CDT)


= Talk:Discussion: =
= Talk:Discussion: =

Revision as of 20:49, 25 June 2009

Would DFOV really make pass-wall enemies harder?

can someone who believes this write some supporting points for it? -- d_m
Any pass wall monster could see you from inside the wall of any arbitrarily long hallway. If they can see you, they can target you, and thus breath on you or cast at you. As far as I know, currently pass wall monsters are limited by targetability restraints and cannot target you from a distance greater than a traditional hockey stick. Is this not the case? --Marble Dice 22:01, 25 June 2009 (CEST)
I guess what I meant to say is "this is seems fine to me as long as LOS/targeting symmetry exists." Right now, passwall monsters can target the player (via the hockey stick or adjacency) while in a wall but the player cannot target them back (making -teleport_other not work). This change does give them more opportunities for ranged attacks, but also gives the player the ability to respond via missiles, wands, etc. I don't imagine this to be significantly harder, which is why I'm interested in arguments to that effect. --d_m
Well it's a two-fold problem: just because you can target the ghost in the wall doesn't mean you can hit it with spells. The only thing you can do to a walled monster is tunnel it, and then you just get a melee attack. Ghost in wall isn't a problem because of asymmetric LOS, it's a problem because spells fizzle and arrows break when they hit the wall. If you let the player fight back, then I agree it's not a significant difference. I am adding comments as such to the main page. --Marble Dice 22:43, 25 June 2009 (CEST)
Hengband (and presumably Entroband; haven't tested Zangband) handles that by making monsters in walls attackable by ranged attacks. -- Bessarion 15:48, 25 June 2009 (U.S. CDT)

Talk:Discussion:

Heh, I guess I should have thought a little more before naming the wiki page. ;-) PaulBlay

Hey now, nothing wrong with a good little talk discussion conversation every now and then. --Marble Dice 22:49, 25 June 2009 (CEST)