Concise proposals

[Grillkick]

Lol- I actually haven't been following ADOM II development very closely. Seems pretty old-school in his design so far from what I've seen so far though.

[bricks]

Ha! I wouldn't try to convince Thomas Biskup of anything. I can understand the simulation- and equipment-driven roguelikes benefiting from those sorts of mechanics, but ToME is so skill-driven that I can't see a place for it. It'd be more meaningful if we still had items like potions and magic scrolls. AI that tries to collect and use items intelligently can also be abused - DoomRL players often use a strategy called "giftdropping," in which crappy items are dropped on the floor to lure enemies around corners. Interesting as far as emergent behavior goes, but probably not appropriate for ToME.

[Guevara-chan]

OK, folks, seems like it is more-or-less perfect time for next batch:
[*][/b] As 'cursed/cursed aura' talent tree if freely obtainable, could there be also hate cost for 'ruined earth' and 'cursed sentry' ? Unlikely to be serious deal yet reasonable enough, if you ask me.
[*][/b] How about equilibrium being depolarized at least by necromancy and vim-based spells ? While banning infusions seems too harsh, 'Rushing Claws' is not.
[*][/b] Could summoners desist hobnobbing with golems, since those things already stated as unnatural ? In contrast of earth elementals, for example…

[bricks]

[*][/b] How about equilibrium being depolarized at least by necromancy and vim-based spells ? While banning infusions seems too harsh, 'Rushing Claws' is not.

This actually just got committed a few days ago; Vim-using abilities increase equilibrium. I think interaction between mana and equilibrium should be avoided since there are plans for a class that uses both, and I like the idea of magic and nature just being siblings that don't play well together (and vim/antimagic are the older brothers who take things too far).

[Sirrocco]

Obviously the alchemist golems are unnatural, but where is it stated that all golems are unnatural?

[hamrkveldulfr]

Golem can be any non living creature that is brought to life. Filling a mound of stone with life energy can create a golem. The alchemist golem is also specifically designated as an arcane golem. Which hints that a magic infused creature is odd enough that it needs mentioning.

[Guevara-chan]

I think interaction between mana and equilibrium should be avoided since there are plans for a class that uses both

Hm… While I’m evidently aware that Stone Warden is under development, some further thoughts made me disbelieve whole idea of granting’em any death-reverting power… Yet still, taking resource usage as singular indicator: shouldn’t souls manipulations be considered a little more antinatural ?

Obviously the alchemist golems are unnatural, but where is it stated that all golems are unnatural?

Here: line #29 clarifies it all.

Filling a mound of stone with life energy can create a golem.

Bringing anything to life through direct vis tap just as natural, as recycling corpse into ghoul. Isn't it ?

[hamrkveldulfr]

It is the energy you use that makes the difference. flame breath and fire shock both do fire damage, that does not mean all fire is magic or natural. Bringing forth life is the most natural thing there is, so there is no reason the creation of life HAS to be unnatural. necromancy is twisting and perverting life, not actually creating it, and golemancy is not so much creating life as making a magic roomba. That smashes things.

[Sirrocco]

"Not natural creatures" and "arcane abominations against nature" are not the same thing.

[Guevara-chan]

OK, let's analyze corresponding race (golems) further: SVN entry, line #54.
…So, if animated statues is acceptable by nature, how could it prohibit own usage for them ?

[darkgod]

?
There are natural golems and arcane golems, jsut like in the future there might be steamtech golems.

Nature is not against the idea of golems, but she is against using arcane energies to create them

[Guevara-chan]

?^3
I) Aren’t all golems belongs to construct archetype by logic ?
II) Aren’t all constructs stated as unnatural by in-code description ?
III) Aren’t all constructs excluded from nature empowerment by code ?

P.S. Clockwork golems is sure out, btw ?

[darkgod]

I) Aren’t all golems belongs to construct archetype by logic ?

Construct means constructed, nothing else

II) Aren’t all constructs stated as unnatural by in-code description ?

Where ?

III) Aren’t all constructs excluded from nature empowerment by code ?

Where ?

[Guevara-chan]

Construct means constructed, nothing else

Exactly.

Where ?

SVN entry, line #29

Where ?

SVN entry, line #54.

[darkgod]

Yes constructs are not natural, as in not creatures evolved the usual way.
It doesnt prevent nature from imbuing directly a lump of stone and making it move, liek the sumomner's golem does.