Andor's Trail

Well, that would allow to remove all poison effects with a save/load too....

Lol, you're fast. I edited my last post while you were writing your response. Can you limit the conditions removed to just those provided by items you used or does AT not currently keep track of what caused the condition to appear? I know one game for example that registers in its combat log "Fiernaq gains Zukero's stun." as a way of showing who caused the effect to appear and on whom the effect appeared as well as what effect it was. In AT terms, this could look like "Fiernaq gains Ring of Lesser Shadow's Bless" which would stay after a save/reload since it's an equippable item and "Fiernaq gains Irdegh's Irdegh Poison" which would stay since it is a monster applied effect and "Fiernaq gains Potion of Luck's Luck" which would get dropped since it comes from a consumable.

Currently, the combat log is made only of text, so while the information of what had happened is visible to the player, it has no more meaning to the game engine than "blah blah blah blah...."
Keeping track of who did what to who (with truly meaningful game engine objects) is *possible*, but would be a pain to implement, a potential memory hog (how far do we keep track ?). Then, using it to know if the effect should be saved or not is yet another pain.
More likely, we could add a property to actor conditions (the definition of the effect itself), or to the cause (the one causing the actor condition, definition magnitude & duration), telling us if it is a transient condition (should be forgotten after loading) or not.

Anyhow, I think it is a bad idea : making something that will impair players who use the save game feature legitimately (I drink this rare potion that I have only once just before attacking this boss, but oh, no, mom's calling !) in order to protect ourselves against frantic saveloaders just sounds wrong to me.

The save/load technique is a well known one, from back to the oldest time of gaming with a storage unit. IMHO, it is a *legitimate way of cheating*, and players who resort to it, do it with full knowledge that they are *cheating*, and I would do nothing to prevent that.
I have to admit I really enjoyed Doom thanks to the godmode

Heh, I couldn't agree with you more after the countless hours I put into making a complete map of every lock pick-able chest along with their combinations for the original Gothic game that required an inordinate amount of saving and reloading to not break all my lock picks.

The combat log reference was just how I know one game displayed that stuff to the user so that mods or parsers could also track that information. It wasn't how the game itself actually managed that data. Also, I don't mean the potion itself would stay "used" after reloading, just that the condition applied would not although now that I think about it, that wouldn't actually do a whole lot. I'll give this idea some more consideration since I think there is a way to accomplish our goals without also making the save/reload method be "as" attractive.

Goals:
1) Item can be purchased
2) Item is prohibitively expensive
3) Only a limited quantity of the item is available
4) The item has a limited duration of usability
5) Saving before use and reloading after use should be possible but should not be so attractive an option that everyone uses it simply because it's that good (example, lack of XP gained is a good way of making save/reload less attractive to players simply wanting more levels)

If the item is a consumable, it makes these goals much easier than if the item is a piece of equipment. That said, there are still ways to limit the usefulness of a piece of equipment.

You make good points. I think your 5 bullets are all valid, although I still think that the save/reload technique should not even be taken into consideration.

Two ideas (in which I address the save/reload anyway) :
#1 Make that potion a Legendary item. Grinding for it first could help grinding for the next one (with a save/reload technique) or help in a pinch (very difficult boss), but it's still a pain to get in the first place (gotta be lucky to be lucky o.O).
#2 Get it once and only once, through a quest (potentially involving spending a huge stack of cash). Using the save/reload would maximize the outcome of its effects, but would still limit you to one useful outcome of it (choices and consequences, in the pure AT style).

Oooh, #2 definitely. I know what I'd do with it

Time to get me a ring of lesser shadow!!!!

But an unique or extremely high priced potion that gives MF+1 for some rounds (it's effect will be gone at the latest when you have killed all trainers and wait for respawn) would only have a real advantage for people who do save/reload grinding.
For others it would be quite useless, they could as well grind an extra round through the caves and gain an overall similar chance without it.

fiernaq wrote:Why not just make loading a game remove all actor conditions that aren't provided by an equipped item? That would prevent save/load while using a potion from being a viable option since loading the game would remove that temporary actor condition.

For something like "luck" that affects your chances of getting a rare item to drop I think I'd prefer to see an expensive but temporary potion rather than a permanent equippable item that you simply unequip once you get the drop you're looking for.

I don't see how that solves the problem:

Starting from Savefile Example1

You open you file:
~Inventory: x1 Potions of luck
~You use one potion and fight NPCs until it runs out...
-After you check your inventory for the L+E item...
-No Potions left

RELOAD SAVEFILE EXAMPLE 1:
You open the file:
~Inventory: x1 Potions of luck
~You use one potions and....
Etc...etc....etc....

I don't like the idea of having only one potion of luck. That's almost like forcing people to use save/reload.

IMHO, they should be bought like BMP. Mybe like Lodar's one. But they should be quite weak, and apply drop chance to all items, not just l/e.

In that way, it will be a potion you can keep active while farming levels, and it should even be worth keeping active when farming for a RoLS, even if you don't find one. You might walk out of there with 30 potions instead of 25. And depending on the price on Potion of Luck, it might be worth it.

And running from Lodar, to the end of the cave, and back again, might give you 3 Runes Scepters. You might get lucky and have 4 in your bag instead.



Just another idea I came up with while writing this, that would be cool, if someone agrees with me.
What if the Potion of Luck gives you a (let's say 10%) chance to get 2 items instead of one when it drops.
So, every item you loot while using this has 10% chance of "duplicate"?

In that way people will not save/load abuse it either. If you have the Potion of Luck and use save/load, and you find a RoLS while doing so (that didn't duplicate), it's not like you go "meeeeh, I only found one, I'll reload again "

10% chance of duplicate doesn't actually increase your chances of finding an l/e item. 10% chance of a second item from that monster's loot table dropping does. Big difference there. Honestly though, both of those seem to be a much better idea than the original "increase chance to drop l&e item by 100%" potion. Make it a non-stacking actor condition applied by a potion and you really would be able to just buy a whole bunch of them before trotting off to grind. I like it.