Chaos Theory

[The Avatar]

Hmm... That could work. Still, I don't like having gimmick bosses who's main strength is counteracted by paying 10 gold.

[Nandrew]

Paying 10 gold?

Rex is still far from gimmicky. Lowering damage and increasing berserk threshold would only turn him into a glass cannon who just takes one turn to "wind up". There could be a marginal health increase to soak up the free shot you'd get at him as a result, but even that may be overkill considering the overall increase of the time he'd spend in a "threatening" state afterwards (now instead of potentially landing two blows before berserk is reached, you'll definitely only get one).

Moreover, even with his low health, you're going to spend most of the level "fighting" Rex in a more protracted and subtle manner (At least if you want his trophy).

Right now, it's admittedly hard to meet his 97 damage for a 1hit-KO survival if you're trying to exploit knockback at lower levels. It relies on other measures which aren't always at hand. Reducing the damage output by about 15 or so should increase your range of survivability options considerably, and hitting the berserk switch immediately afterwards will carry him up to a decent 120.

[The Avatar]

The Binlor prep costs 10.

Personally, I consider a glass cannon gimmicky but I guess that's debatable.

[Sidestepper]

Again, I really, really think that Rex does not need an adjustment. He is not the problem. A map where the higher level monsters are all crammed into a single linear corridor is the problem. The player would lose that scenario with or without Rex, he just makes it end quicker.

I get that Rex is supposed to be used as a wall smasher, but look at that map I posted. There are only only two or three places along the corridor where you can use him to break through, and most of those just kick you back into the low level central area that you will have already explored by then.

[The Avatar]

Rex is the problem, because without him no one would follow you around. Then it's rock garden with different monsters and bosses. Seeing rock garden is easy to beat, so would be this new labyrinth.

[Sidestepper]

No, rock garden is easy because it opens itself up as you play. Totally different situation. Those two extra connections per level are absolutely huge.

[Darvin]

I'd be hesitant about lowering Rex's damage at all. Rexx is basically in the same category as Aequitas or Bleaty in terms of the kind of threat he presents, with his primary difficulty being his capacity to 1HKO you. His lack of magic resist is particularly notable, and even characters with abysmal spellcasting power can still fireball him to death. Even a single free attack may be over the top, and if his post-berserk damage is reduced that would certainly be far too generous to the player.

I agree with Sidestepper; the problem is the dungeon layout, and if anything Rex is one of the weakest and least threatening bosses in the game.

[Lujo]

I'm with Darvin.

Even though I was annoyed at the fact that Rex was a bit pita to get a throphy out of, once I started thinking about it as intentonal, I don't mind it anymore.

[Bloggorus]

Yeah, the Labyrinth has this problem bad. The other two mazes (Shifting Passages and Rock Garden) have special conditions that mitigate the problem and give the player control. SP starts out open and closes over time, giving the player a window of opportunity to prepare. RG starts out closed but opens up over time, introducing new options as the game goes on.

The Labyrinth on the other hand, not only lacks a mitigating condition, but actually has an aggravating one. If those megahallways were guaranteed to connect back into the central open area more frequently, that would help a lot.

This is an excellent point. Given the nature of the map, it might be a good idea to include a little something to facilitate wall breaking, so the maze can be tackled by purist players without scumming. A bear mace would be good, it it is very functional and little else.

I'll repeat a previous point, but i think Rex is supposed to be relatively easy to kill; the real danger is the Labyrinth itself. That kind of thinking requires a little backflip after fighting monsters and bosses the whole game, but I laways saw the Labyrinth as the point in the game where players learn that you have to consider the layout of a map as much as anything else. Either break the walls, or fall prey to it.

In case anyone is interested, according to the Greek mythology the maze was both a cage and a way to stop people falling prey to the unquenchable hunger of the minotaur; more of a deterrent to intruders than a typical 'prison'.

Theseus required help from Ariadne to find his way through the maze to slay the beast, as it posed his biggest problem. Actually killing the thing was fairly run of the mill for him.

I'm not usually in favour of lore dictating design choices, but in this case it's hard to mess with one of the most symbolic stories in human history, particularly when it serves as a valuable lesson for players.

[Bloggorus]

I disagree with the very last statement. It will matter if something is OP, but only if it's so OP it's stupidly broken. What if the fighter got 10 DP per level? That would make dungeons easy to beat and hard to master, but it would also take the fun out of beating them it's such a joke. While monkrogs are fine, anything truly and in all ways OP does not belong in this game.

Maybe I've just played too much Vicious and the Vicious philosophy is "Hard to beat, broken if you master".

Just to clarify, when i used the phrase 'OP' i meant those classes which could be seen as 'stupid', or easier to play, and therefore intrinsically require 'balancing'. It's a little bit meta, and made sense in my head.

Probably not the right phrase to use, but it ties into a trend in modern gaming; that the difference between a class with a high skill ceiling vs a low skill ceiling is about balance, not skill. It's the numbers that dont add up, not player inputs.

This might be because of MMO's or something, i cant be bothered arguing.

So where one person sees an OP class, another might simply see a high skill ceiling. Its very hard to have only one without alienating half your player base, so having easy and hard classes in one game is a necessary evil.

If anyone has ever played Monday Night Combat, they have a very good way of handling this; they state quite clearly, with a huge bar graph, the 'difficulty' of every single class. Some are hard to use, some are easy, and when you are told this, you don't feel like a complete failure when you fail. It's a simple solution that does much to give the player an indication of balancing that goes beyond DPS and hit points.

The Desktop Dungeons solution is to make a game where objectives are spread out, with multiple solutions. Quests should be solvable by hardcore theorycrafters who like to find the most efficent route AND more casual players who enjoy a little grinding.

Given the complexity of their system i think GCF are doing very well. *applause*