Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
However, from the look of the game mechanics you mentioned, this seems to be quite standard for games like this. The rng is in order to lengthen gameplay, provide an element of luck, and to force the player to adapt their play based on items acquired. I'm basing it most on my experience with Slay the Spire.
(Slay the Spire)
The core loop isn't particularly complex, but the rng compensates by making runs varied and hard to keep one play-style from start to finish. Builds can be aimed for, but not guaranteed. Most actions from one play through carry little to no impact on future ones aside from unlockables or one small bonus.
If you want the feeling of constant progress, I would suggest looking into RPG's that have a similar combat mechanic. Rougelikes are typically quite grindy in terms of mechanics and are meant to be extensively replayed rather than one and done.
This is why I found your suggestion of the hoarder having the full selection of trinkets a bit odd. I think the charm of DD2 is the "make do" nature of trinkets. The runs vary from run to run, even with the same combination of heroes, just because I need to mix and match whatever trinkets I can find. Making trinkets predictable would limit the replayability of the game.
I'm strongly against any sort of suggestions that make DD (both 1 and 2) more predictable.