Slay the Spire discussion

Ffrog 2018-06-10 19:02:40 UTC #1

I went back to Slay the Spire for the first time in a while, to try out the new character (The Defect). However, I’d never managed to complete the game with The Silent, so the new character was still locked.

So I started a new run with The Silent, not expecting to get very far (don’t think I’d got to act 3 with her before). But it all just clicked: by the end of act 2 i had huge card draw, often hitting the limit of the number you can hold at any one time. Then picked up some powerful poisons at the start of act 3, and breezed through the rest, picking up the 99 poison achievement against Donu and Deca.

This game is so fun when abilities snowball like that! Now to check out The Defect…

Ffrog 2018-06-12 20:50:47 UTC #2

…and I completed the game with The Defect on the first try! Didn’t really know what I was doing, but picked up plenty of lightning cards and an artifact that added a new orb slot every two turns, and that seemed to do the trick. By the end of the final battle with the Time Eater there were 9 lightning orbs doing most of my damage.

Not sure what to try next. Not sure how the daily challenge works - this run took 2 hours, I’m not sure I’d be able to fit that into one sitting very often. I might have to look up how to activate ascension mode.

Naramsin 2018-06-26 16:54:05 UTC #3

Slay the Spire is fricking dope! I love it. Daily challanage are nifty. I beat the game with all characters but I suck at building decks, CCG was never really my forte, so I still relay on luck too much, still what a fantastic game. The only thing that pales in comparison to FTL for example are early fights, with a starting deck, you are litteraly playing it exact the same way, it gets a bit slow till you go into the fray.

thischarmingman 2018-06-26 17:13:13 UTC #4

Now try the speedrun achievement
Seriously though, It’s a completely different way of approaching the game, and I found it fun - even though my runs usually hit the hour mark.

Ffrog 2018-06-26 19:48:38 UTC #5

I played a daily challenge (one with lots of Alchemise cards), which was good fun - managed to beat the final boss, but it took me a couple of sessions over a couple of days, so I never got to see where I was placed on that day’s scorecard.

I have been looking at the achievements, next time I might have a few goes at the speed run. I tried to get the shiv one the other day, but just didn’t get the cards for it and died at the first boss.

Naramsin 2018-06-27 14:14:12 UTC #6

At first I was really into relics hoarding, and it is still a cornerstone of good run. It’s just that on floor 3, now I am more reluctatnt to pick paths with multiple elites. If you have strong hand and well pumped build, well then it is no brainer to pick a fight in exchange for some good relics. If you are still getting your ass in gear, it may be too risky to fight these monsters like “giant head”, that can hurt you for a lot of HP that may cause you fight with end boss.

vinraith 2018-06-30 15:42:20 UTC #7

Can anyone that’s played both lay out the differences/similarities between this (which I’ve not played yet) and Monster Slayers (which I’ve played extensively)?

Car_to_Pol 2018-07-03 20:23:41 UTC #8

It’s been a while since I played Monster Slayers, but I remember it being very similar to Dream Quest, which I played a ton.

The basics of the games are similar. You combat monsters with your deck, and build that deck outside of combat, mostly from defeating enemies or from shops. During combat there’s many ways in which your deck can change, but each combat starts with your deck as you’ve built it during the run.

One of the most significant changes to the combat mechanics, though, is that each card has an energy cost. To start with, each turn sees you at 3 energy, with a hand of 5 1-energy cards, mostly. So in contrast to monster slayers/dream quest, you cannot simply play your hand, as most often you lack the energy to. This makes card draw much less valuable, as you often do not have the energy to make use of your card advantage.
Another is that enemies are really predictable. They do not have a deck of their own, and will telegraph exactly how much damage they will do, if any. Most enemies also have a set sequence of actions, making them more like obstacles to be solved with your deck, rather than obstacles that spike in difficulty based on their draw.
The most significant change to the deck building comes from the fact that each of Spire’s three classes has a totally unique, and sizable, card pool. In contrast to monster slayers/dream quest, each of the classes has a lot more build variety. And since there’s no overlap between the classes, each has a very distinct mechanical identity.

I feel like the game is also less worried about breaking. It allows synergies that can get so busted strong that you will guarantee a win. But it’s usually balanced so that you scrape by if you play well enough.
The dev team is also amazing. Each week sees an official update, with new content, bug fixes, card tweaks. And if you opt into the beta branch, you get updates almost every work day. And the updates so far have consistently made it a better game.

The highest recommendations from me if you’re even remotely into roguelike deck builder things.

vinraith 2018-07-03 20:46:33 UTC #9

Thank you for the detailed response.

In Monster Slayers cards cost either action points or mana, both of which come from finite pools (action points are per turn, mana regenerates slowly over time).

That’s a substantial difference. In MS, not only do the enemies have a deck, but manipulating enemy decks is a central strategy for some classes.

My brief experience with the game is that they all start the same, which I found very disappointing. MS has something like 9 classes, with another 7 unlockable, each of which starts out with a materially different selection of cards and variations to base mechanics. There is a pool of shared cards (a basic attack is a basic attack, regardless of class) but magic classes don’t even focus on the same resource pool as non-magic classes, to say nothing of the significant variations in strategy and perks, progressive unlocking of starter deck variations for your next playthrough etc. Are there differences in the classes beyond a different card selection? To be honest the small class selection is a big part of what’s made me cautious.

This would be consistent with the predictable enemy patterns and the general “puzzle” approach to the design, “right” answers tend to arise in deterministic systems like that. I guess the updates are consistently “shuffling the deck” on that stuff for the time being. I wonder what it’ll look like when it settles out.

Car_to_Pol 2018-07-03 21:13:27 UTC #10

Ah, I may have remembered wrong. In Dream Quest, you have similar Action and Mana resources, but most cards do not use them. In that game, drawing another card usually means playing another card. In Spire, every card draws from the same resource pool, although some cards have a 0-energy cost. Drawing a card then usually gives you more options, but not necessarily more power. Felt significant enough to point out.

I can imagine that. Just know that, while the starting deck is built from 3/4 different cards, each class has 75, of which only the basic attack and defend cards are identical. So while the starting decks are similar, they quickly diverge.
Besides the card selection difference, the classes have a small number of class-specific relics (passive additions to your character, external to your deck, but often influencing your strategy). They’re not a huge deal, the real meat is in the card pools. The Defect, for example, is the only one to use ‘orbs’, which have end-of-turn effects depending on the type of orb, and have a nifty positional management aspect (orbs fill the rightmost empty slot, of which you have 3. Creating an orb while you have no empty slots pushes the rightmost orb out, which generates an orb-specific effect (which, in case of Dark orbs, is the only way to benefit from it).
The Ironclad, to give another example, is the only one who can remove cards from its deck during combat. Your tactics might just involve removing your entire deck but 2 cards, which form an infinite damage combo. No other class has this potential.

You do make it sound like monster slayers has a lot going for it, though! When I originally played it, it felt like a competent but worse Dream Quest. Perhaps I’ll give it another go.

vinraith 2018-07-03 21:27:48 UTC #11

MS takes a little while to get going, so it’s easy not to see the layers at first (sounds like Slay the SPire has the same issue for very different reasons). One thing to understand is that with MS, items and presige earned remain from character to character, so there’s a “top level” development aspect. You’re not going to beat the game the first time you play, but as you get better stuff and also learn your class better you’ll get further and further.

I appreciate the detail on StS, sounds interesting. How many classes are planned for the full release?

Car_to_Pol 2018-07-03 22:42:51 UTC #12

From what I’ve read they’re planning on releasing it with the current three characters. They’ve said that further characters are very likely after release, and considering their current development work I’m inclined to believe them.

I just played a tiny bit of monster slayers, and there’s a few things I’ve noticed.
Firstly, the rate at which you obtain cards is very different. In Spire, you get offered a choice of 1 out of 3 random cards for free after every combat encounter, of which a run has about 30-35 I think. Each shop contains 7 cards, and they’re cheap. So deck sculpting is much more frequent, and decks tend to be larger. Deleting cards is a rarity, so you add cards to lessen the density of your weak starting deck, as well as reducing vulnerabilities to curse and status cards (resp. permanent and temporary malus cards).
Another thing is that its much harder to regain health in Spire. You don’t level up, and you can’t heal to max, except for after each boss (so twice during a full run). There’s campsites that can heal you for 35% of your health I think, but since you’re offered the choice between healing and upgrading a card, you miss out on that permanent power increase. This makes defense a significant part of combat. You cannot really tank with your face. Turns are therefore less about how much damage you can output, and more about putting up enough defense while still achieving your goals.

And regarding top level development, there is hardly any. Each character has 6 unlocks (each of which adding three cards to the pool), which you reach by playing. After 10ish runs with a character, you have it all. Each run is thus self-contained, and you do not get stronger at a meta-level, just better at it.

Regarding Monster Slayer, any characters in particular which I should check out? My run with the warrior was alright, though a bit one-dimensional.

Oh, and just in case, if you haven’t played dream quest, oh boy! Still such a gem

vinraith 2018-07-03 22:59:27 UTC #13

OK, those are both major and intriguing differences, thanks for the follow-up. You end up making a lot of deck choices over the span of three adventures, but you get a lot more options in the latter two - which you won’t see for your first few runs. It’s probably the game’s weakest point, honestly.

As I said, Monster Slayers takes a little time to get going. My advice would be to pick a class and stick with it for a few runs. Don’t forget to access your inventory at the beginning of any run and gear up - it’s easy to overlook and you’ll die much quicker without gear.

Personally, I had a lot of fun with the rogue - with time you’ll be able to build some truly ridiculous attack chains.

deano2099 2018-07-05 09:29:58 UTC #14

To try and explain the differences from a more feels, rather than mechanical point of view:
That energy restriction is a big thing. It’s like if even your basic attacks cost AP in DreamQuest. What it means in reality is that most of your turns you will not be playing your whole hand. Which immediately means a lot more choices round to round. It’s not just order and who you hit. It’s if you hit at all. Later on you may manage to make a deck that allows you to play through your hand every turn, but equally you may not. Either strategy works.

Block. Block is a huge thing in StS. It was in the other games but it’s far more a core mechanic here. I started the first class, with all his blocking cards, and though, oh, this is the more defensive guy from the opening classes. Then played the second and went, oh, no, he was the more offensive class, this is the defensive one. As health recovery is hard to come by, any hit you take is a big deal. While strategies around minimising damage through block or other things existed in DQ etc, in StS it certainly feels like they account for a much larger amount of viable strategies. Because you just can’t have a strat where you lose 20% of your health every fight (well, unless you really build for healing).

Class selection. There are just the three. So pretty much every class in MS is represented in different builds for the first two classes. So that variety is there. But equally it means you depend on a lot on what cards come up. You can’t go* I want to play with poison a lot so picking a rogue and knowing those cards will come up. You sort of have to figure out a build from the cards you get offered. And sometimes you can start doing that and just never see the latter cards you need. The other problem with this is although in DQ there are maybe two different ways to win with each class, and in StS there’s maybe 10 or 12, once you’ve won, you’ve won. There’s no achievements or unlocks for winning with different builds (there can’t be as it’s not that distinct). So after you win with all three classes it’s just playing slightly harder versions over and over. I’ve found that less interesting than trying to win with a new class. You can tell yourself you’re going to try and say, win with a small deck “monk” build but you might not see the cards and the game won’t acknowledge you. You don’t get to chip away at the whole meta game in the same way as the others. The daily quests do help somewhat with this though.

(* I think in the new version you can choose keywords or something and get a custom seed that will push cards for a given build though I think this turns off achievements and everything else?)

I’ve kind of hit a wall with it as now I’ve beat it with every class, I’m not feeling compelled to go back as progression isn’t that interesting. It looks like maybe we will get more levels after the third dungeon at some point, which would be more interesting? But yeah number of classes is a real concern and my main problem with it. But that’s more because I’m not good at creating my own fun without the game acknowledging me,

arathain 2018-07-09 18:11:07 UTC #15

I’ve played both Monster Slayers and Slay The Spire (Dream Quest, too). MS is a fun game. StS is a masterpiece.

For me, a lot of it comes down to card design. StS has fantastic cards, which walk carefully between being easy to understand and play, and rich with potential. Each, through mechanics and art, gives tons of character to each class, which is why 3 classes isn’t an issue. Many of them demand you think about your deck in a specific, careful way, and most are rich with potential. Just to add to that, and to muck with it…

You accumulate artifacts throughout the run. These can also totally alter the way you build and play. These really give each run its flavour.

It also can’t be understated how satisfying it is to play around having near complete information on what your enemies are going to do. Knowing exactly how much damage you need to block (or otherwise mitigate) allows you to have decisions that are no easier for being informed. Do you block all damage and pass the opportunity to get a buff going?

More nebulous, but the strangeness of StS’s art style is a big draw for me also. It feels much more like a place than MS generic fantasy.

Viral_Frog 2019-01-31 03:57:06 UTC #16

I’m gonna go ahead and revive this topic, given that official launch was just a few days ago on the 23rd.

I’ve started getting back into the game! Had some pretty good runs with the Ironclad earlier. I seem to do a lot better with glass cannon, high damage, low block type builds (exactly what got me through an entire run with the Ironclad during EA). I still haven’t played much with the other two characters, though.

Blackice 2019-01-31 10:25:46 UTC #17

I’m trying the Silent again, going for a poison build. I’ve yet to manage a build which pulverises enemies in one or two hits (as I’ve read about and heard of on podcasts), so I tend to slog my way up to the third floor before being slaughtered by something I’m ill prepared for. This poison build appears to be shaping up ok at the moment but I’m only about half way through floor two.

I’m a bit annoyed the third class is gated behind winning with the Silent, as the chances of me achieving that are fairly slim going by my previous efforts…

Naramsin 2019-01-31 12:22:34 UTC #18

For me silent is easiest to play nad most reliable to put together good build through a course of a run. For Silent is good to stack poison cards as well as defence cards. So you will do damage even when playing defense. If you ca get hand of catalyst , you should try to upgrade it, if you can have more copies that it is golden. Envenom helps a lot. Never pass up oportunities for defensive cards like Leg Sweep or Dash. I’m pretty sure that poison silent build will carry you to the victory.

Jurple 2019-01-31 13:07:27 UTC #19

In the last few weeks I’ve gotten through Act 3 once with each character, gaining a key piece. But I’ve yet to see Act 4.

Blackice 2019-01-31 14:54:04 UTC #20

Cool, sounds like I’m on the right track this time then. I have catalyst and upgraded it, also have the relic that gives a 50% chance a card is discarded instead of exhausted. My main problem is there aren’t enough chances to get rid of cards (unless I’m missing something). I think I’ve seen a relic that gives the chance to do this at any rest point, but I couldn’t afford it at the time.