Characters Losing Trinkets Is Awful

[Bomoo]

I mean trinkets randomly getting deleted from your inventory when you put them in the bar or somewhere is ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ awful. Might as well put a sign over the bar activity saying "NEVER SEND YOUR PEOPLE HERE. EVER." Going to mod that out of the game as soon as I can find where it is.

[SrMandril]

At the begining, you can risk a common item being gambled away but as time goes by it gets a riskier activity. I have my inventory full of common items, with several copies just in case, and even then I wouldn't risk losing a Music Box. As it is right now, it is a waste of space for mid to late end players..

[Bomoo]

Escrito originalmente por SrMandril:

At the begining, you can risk a common item being gambled away but as time goes by it gets a riskier activity. I have my inventory full of common items, with several copies just in case, and even then I wouldn't risk losing a Music Box. As it is right now, it is a waste of space for mid to late end players..

It essentially makes upgrading certain activities a waste of heirlooms. Why in the name of ♥♥♥♥ would anyone send a character to an activity that can lose you trinkets over one that won't?

[SrMandril]

Escrito originalmente por Bomoo:

It essentially makes upgrading certain activities a waste of heirlooms. Why in the name of ♥♥♥♥ would anyone send a character to an activity that can lose you trinkets over one that won't?

You could say that it is also possible to win trinkets. I know that beyond week 30 the risk of losing something valuable is too high just for the stress mitigation and the possible reward.

[Bomoo]

Escrito originalmente por SrMandril:

Escrito originalmente por Bomoo:

It essentially makes upgrading certain activities a waste of heirlooms. Why in the name of ♥♥♥♥ would anyone send a character to an activity that can lose you trinkets over one that won't?

You could say that it is also possible to win trinkets. I know that beyond week 30 the risk of losing something valuable is too high just for the stress mitigation and the possible reward.

Pretty much. I almost consider myself lucky it was only a blue that got deleted, even if it was one I use often. Highly questionable design. I wonder, did you RH guys actually play a ~100 week game where you lost some valuable trinket after sending a guy drinking and said to yourself: "yeah this feels really good as a design choice."

I mean functionally there isn't much difference between praying and drinking (just like in real life amirite), except I'm never sending a guy to one of those ever again. Was that the design intent? Because I suspect it was not.

[Frostarrows]

Characters will gamble trinkets in their inventory, then trinkets from the stash. Send them in with a *weak* trinket, and potentially profit. It's not terrible.

[Bomoo]

Escrito originalmente por Frostarrows:

Characters will gamble trinkets in their inventory, then trinkets from the stash. Send them in with a *weak* trinket, and potentially profit. It's not terrible.

I'm pretty sure that isn't true. Even if it is, why should I bother when praying does the same amount of stress healing without any of the hassle.

[SrMandril]

The hassle of praying is neglegible. Once in a blue moon I lost 1000 because the character donated to the church. I'd take that over the Matchstick Trophy, Junia's Head or Aria's Musicbox.

[Lu]

Learn to handle stress better on dungeon runs so you rarely have to treat characters in town.

Problem solved.

[Bomoo]

Escrito originalmente por Marma:

Learn to handle stress better on dungeon runs so you rarely have to treat characters in town.

Problem solved.

The problem is that assigning characters to the bar is not viable, not that I don't know how to handle stress. Please read the original post before responding in the future.

[Lu]

Escrito originalmente por Bomoo:

Escrito originalmente por Marma:

Learn to handle stress better on dungeon runs so you rarely have to treat characters in town.

Problem solved.

The problem is that assigning characters to the bar is not viable, not that I don't know how to handle stress. Please read the original post before responding in the future.

I read the original post and replied accordingly.

Losing trinkets during stress recovery is RNG based. The more times you stick characters in the tavern, the higher the chance will be of you eventually losing a trinket. The same applies to characters disappearing after stress recovery or receiving some kind of debuff.

If you handle stress better on dungeon runs, you would rarely need to send them to the tavern or the abbey for that matter, thus limiting the odds of bad things happening.

The game shouldn't need to hold your hand and warn you that sending your character to drink or gamble could have harsher negative effects than sending them to pray.

[Bomoo]

Escrito originalmente por Marma:

Escrito originalmente por Bomoo:

The problem is that assigning characters to the bar is not viable, not that I don't know how to handle stress. Please read the original post before responding in the future.

I read the original post and replied accordingly.

Losing trinkets during stress recovery is RNG based. The more times you stick characters in the tavern, the higher the chance will be of you eventually losing a trinket. The same applies to characters disappearing after stress recovery or receiving some kind of debuff.

If you handle stress better on dungeon runs, you would rarely need to send them to the tavern or the abbey for that matter, thus limiting the odds of bad things happening.

The game shouldn't need to hold your hand and warn you that sending your character to drink or gamble could have harsher negative effects than sending them to pray.

It's 25% if I'm reading the game files correctly. I'm not going to risk losing an ancestral trinket just to remove some stress, nor, I think, would anyone sane. For that reason, the tavern option is non-viable as stress removal simply because of the 25% chance of losing something so valuable. I'd much rather just lose gold. So why is it even there in the first place? If nobody is ever going to use the bar or gambler to remove stress, there's clearly a design problem.

At no point was anyone suggesting any hand-holding. I'm not making this thread because I'm super bad at the game and need the tavern for stress removal, but because I sometimes like to send people there for RP reasons. However, that's not possible because there's no way I'm risking a 25% chance of losing one of my hard-won trinkets, and potentially one that I use often. With the trinket loss penalties, the tavern might as well not exist; the abbey is quite enough covering the one or two stressed people I put there from time to time.

Please think critically about the design problem instead of slagging people off for, as you suggest, not being good enough at stress management.

As a constructive suggestion, perhaps they might lose their equipment instead of losing trinkets. Mechanically, their equipment (weapon or armour, randomly) might get downgraded one rank. I think that's much more reasonable than outright deleting a potentially irreplaceable, or in the best of cases very annoying to replace, trinket.

[Lu]

Escrito originalmente por Bomoo:

It's 25% if I'm reading the game files correctly. I'm not going to risk losing an ancestral trinket just to remove some stress, nor, I think, would anyone sane. For that reason, the tavern option is non-viable as stress removal simply because of the 25% chance of losing something so valuable. I'd much rather just lose gold. So why is it even there in the first place? If nobody is ever going to use the bar or gambler to remove stress, there's clearly a design problem.

It's not a design problem at all. There are plenty of things in the game that are a risk for the player, like curios that cannot be cleansed.

In case you haven't noticed, this game is supposed to be quite punishing for the player.

I'm not making this thread because I'm super bad at the game and need the tavern for stress removal, but because I sometimes like to send people there for RP reasons. However, that's not possible because there's no way I'm risking a 25% chance of losing one of my hard-won trinkets, and potentially one that I use often. With the trinket loss penalties, the tavern might as well not exist; the abbey is quite enough covering the one or two stressed people I put there from time to time.

So you want the tavern to exist for roleplaying reasons, yet you hate that there's risk involved with sending characters to drink and gamble...? That makes very little sense.

As a constructive suggestion, perhaps they might lose their equipment instead of losing trinkets. Mechanically, their equipment (weapon or armour, randomly) might get downgraded one rank. I think that's much more reasonable than outright deleting a potentially irreplaceable, or in the best of cases very annoying to replace, trinket.

From a roleplaying perspective, I think a character is far more likely to try and gamble away a small but valuable trinket than the armour off their back.

[Bomoo]

Escrito originalmente por Marma:

From a roleplaying perspective, I think a character is far more likely to try and gamble away a small but valuable trinket than the armour off their back.

If they have the trinket equipped, maybe. Not if it's locked up in the... wherever the player character keeps all the trinkets in between missions. To me it makes all the sense in the world they'd trade their weapon or their breastplate or something if they were stinking drunk and desperately wanted another bottle.

The tavern exists, and a lot of work went into creating it, yet it's 100% useless because there's an alternate stress healing option that doesn't delete your trinkets and costs the same. You begin to see my point? I'd love to use it, even if I don't need to, but it isn't viable because the random penalties are too harsh. I'd argue no player ever really needs to use the tavern. Especially when you consider that in the course of the early and mid game, the abbey is the stress remover that will get upgraded first. So the abbey has every advantage, and the tavern is, essentially, a dead non-option no player will ever use once they discover its drawbacks.

That isn't punishing, that's a design oversight. What benefit is there to using the tavern? Would you voluntarily send people to the bar knowing you could lose a trophy/ancestral trinket? I submit that you would not unless you were insane.

[Lu]

Escrito originalmente por Bomoo:

If they have the trinket equipped, maybe. Not if it's locked up in the... wherever the player character keeps all the trinkets in between missions. To me it makes all the sense in the world they'd trade their weapon or their breastplate or something if they were stinking drunk and desperately wanted another bottle.

There's another issue with this idea. A lot of players only read about their character losing a trinket after they look at their trinket collection and see that one is missing. If a character simply has their armour downgraded, players are less likely to notice... especially if they have a large roster of 20+ characters. If they do notice it, they'll probably just think "hmm, I could have sworn I upgraded his/her armour... oh well".

The tavern exists, and a lot of work went into creating it, yet it's 100% useless because there's an alternate stress healing option that doesn't delete your trinkets and costs the same. You begin to see my point? I'd love to use it, even if I don't need to, but it isn't viable because the random penalties are too harsh. I'd argue no player ever really needs to use the tavern. Especially when you consider that in the course of the early and mid game, the abbey is the stress remover that will get upgraded first. So the abbey has every advantage, and the tavern is, essentially, a dead non-option no player will ever use once they discover its drawbacks.

You're correct that the player doesn't really need to use the tavern... but there are lots of things in the game that the player doesn't really need to use. They don't need to read stacks of books or touch the sacrificial stones found in the Warrens.

Your problem is you're looking at the tavern as if it's some kind of design oversight, when really its role as a sub-optimal high risk means of removing stress is perfect for the game. Experienced players will know not to use it very often if at all, but new players will use it and "enjoy" the flavour events that inevitably happen.

[SrMandril]

Escrito originalmente por Marma:

You're correct that the player doesn't really need to use the tavern... but there are lots of things in the game that the player doesn't really need to use. They don't need to read stacks of books or touch the sacrificial stones found in the Warrens.

Your problem is you're looking at the tavern as if it's some kind of design oversight, when really its role as a sub-optimal high risk means of removing stress is perfect for the game. Experienced players will know not to use it very often if at all, but new players will use it and "enjoy" the flavour events that inevitably happen.

This. I am not sure how much of it is intentional and how much is an oversight on design. Consider the following:

I know that DD is very different than DS but you can say that they have in common what I heard people call "noob traps". In DS, you can upgrade your stats but they don't tell you that there are certain stats that are "capped" so any point used in that attribute beyond the cap is a "dump point". I think that DD has some of these "noob traps" also. In the few first hours of play, I used to interact with every Curio even without provisions. Now there are certain actions I don't do because I know they are suboptimal for my lvl6 characters, which have already spent plenty of my resources upgrading gear, or bad for my state in general. The Gambling Hall is a "noob trap". You could say that the most evident proof that these decisions(noob traps) are intentional and not design flaw is the Shambler's Altar. My guess is that 99% of players have fallen for it in the first hours of game because we are used to the "what could go wrong, right?" of more casual games.