So had my 1st death to bloated, & while there was a good chance I was dead anyway it still just felt like a bad way to die. I don't see what this adds if the solution is to press R x if full. My own opinion is this is just reverting to a bad mechanic that was originally removed because it was in fact bad.

I think the system needs some improvement - for example, ?SatisfyHunger needs to set the players's hunger to just full, rather than almost gorged. If it's working properly, the simple rule should be "don't eat if you're already full", and that should almost always avoid getting gorged.

In addition, I think there should be some better measure of hunger status. How do you judge the time between "Full" and "Hungry"? And then one can go too quickly from Hungry to Weak. Once you see that Hungry indication, it is often too late to start foraging. You see a ration, is it safe to eat it, or will @ soon be in a fight where quaffing potions will leave @ Gorged, slowed and dead (especially dangerous in the final fights)? So many "gotcha's" have been removed from the game, or changed to be meaningful in an interesting way (ala traps), but reintroduction of hunger as currently implemented has just been bringing back a "gotcha" that was removed for good reason.

What do you feel the Gorged status adds to the game? Or perhaps a better question is, what potential do you see in the concept?

It's an extra constraint on how the player deal with food. If there's no constraint at the top, then it's just a matter of stuffing your face when you're in town and not thinking about it at all. And before anyone mentions ironman, I'm trying to bring back ironman's status as a challenge option :)

On Ingwe's idea, we could always have a meter of some sort.

It sounds like your goal then is to make it more important for the player to manage hunger while in the dungeon; is that accurate? If I understand you correctly, then couldn't you accomplish your goal by just significantly reducing the satiation maximum? If "maximum Full" was half or a third of what it is now, other sources of food contributed less fullness, and Satisfy Hunger was rarer, that would make players have to manage their food more closely. And the penalty for overeating could simply be that you wasted food, not that you were slowed.

To clarify my opinion a little, I'm not absolutely against a speed penalty, I just think -10 is well over the top. If the intention is to catch the player out & kill the @ it makes sense. If it's just there to annoy the @ enough to stop stuffing its face with rations you could probably achieve that with as little as -2 or so.

I also wouldn't mind seeing food a little less plentiful or filling, but not necessarily by much. I don't think there's many people who'd want to play angband as a food management game.

It doesn't resemble a hunger mechanic anymore rather than not-being-gorged mechanic.
I got gorged against Morgoth in the middle of fight drinking healing potions. So this is what I have concentrate in the future? To rest off satiation level before big fights?

Personally, I would remove food altogether but I think there's enough vocal opposition against that. At least show the satiation level if this is really where the food mechanic is going.

OK, I have some ideas. Next build should include them.

Little bug on Beorn. In monster description, his human form is supposed to move at normal speed and bear form is supposed to move quickly (+10). Still, Beorn has normal speed in both forms.