Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [crawl-dev] bugs, new & old

Expand Messages
  • Brent Ross
    // Brent Ross wrote: // // // From: Josh Fishman // // 2) Autopickup line in config file still has 10+ lines of // //
    Message 1 of 34 , Nov 1, 2000
      // Brent Ross wrote:
      // >
      // > // From: Josh Fishman <fishman@...>
      // > // 2) Autopickup line in config file still has 10+ lines of
      // > // instruction on how to format a 1 line option -- making
      // > // the line take "gold, corpses, wands, etc." instead
      // > // would be good.
      // >
      // > Since there is no documentation elsewhere for the feature, I like having
      // > the next easy to read table... people that are concerned with the
      // > length of the file can just delete anything they don't like and get
      // > a really small file (but the baseline one serves as documentation, and
      // > I was tempted to give it a lot more comments).
      // Yes, documentation good. It's the arcane option syntax that's bad.
      // Most of the options are good -- they plainly indicate their function.
      // The autopickup line stands out.

      The option syntax of autopickup isn't really arcane... it's pretty
      standard (comes from nethack) and most of the symbols are obvious.
      Tha table stands more for a reference to verify what the user already
      knows (ie. that they can select potions for autopickup), and to
      point out that corpses and food are two separate things (so it's
      not nearly as dangerous to autopickup food as it is in nethack).
      I considered wrting a proper parser for the initfile that would
      allow lists of items for values, but it just wasn't worthwhile
      (there are only a handful of uses for it and it's not so important).

      // > // 3) Nagas who get Breathe Fire mutation: ought they be able to
      // > // both spit poison and breathe fire? I think not -- I think
      // > // that Nagas and Draconians *either* ought never get a spit
      // > // or breathe mutation *or* the mutation ought to trump their
      // > // native ability. I prefer the former.
      // >
      // > There are currently rules in the code to handle these situations (it
      // > has some trumping and power-up rules). As for Nagas breathing fire
      // > and spitting poison... there's no real problem with that... they use
      // > the same counter (if you're concerned with balance), and aren't
      // > technically exclusive (one is a gland in the mouth, the other is
      // > a mutation in the throat).
      // Where I get unhappy is the implication of those two points: if the
      // second is valid (technical exclusivity) then the former ought not
      // be (shared timer): but for game purposes the former must be (due
      // to balance issues).

      The balance issue isn't that important... separating them is more
      trouble than it's worth (requires a new minor level to the savefile
      for one small number... although we've lost backwards compatiblity
      recently because of the new LOS).

      // I'd find it simpler to eliminate the chance of
      // this occuring than to deal with the resultant cognitive dissonance.
      // I get especially unhappy about the idea of a white draconian getting
      // to breathe frost and fire.

      It's really not that bad. Worse is the fact that I noticed that
      breathe fire gives a bonus if the player is transformed (doesn't
      matter what: Ice Beast, Blade Hands, or Dragon)... that's a bug.

      I wouldn't make the spit attacks (poison, acid) exclusive to the
      breathe attacks in any case.

    • mannix
      ... From: Brent Ross Sent: Friday, November 10, 2000 5:21 PM ... The DVD versions has a rather MST3K-like (and humorous)
      Message 34 of 34 , Nov 10, 2000
        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "Brent Ross" <bwross@...>
        Sent: Friday, November 10, 2000 5:21 PM

        > // instead I would like to refer everyone to the
        > // opening sequence of GhostBusters for a humorous take
        > // on a ghost changing its form :P

        > Reminds me, I've got the Critereon LD version lying around that I
        > haven't got around to watching.

        The DVD versions has a rather MST3K-like (and humorous)
        on-screen, front-row commentary ... but I digress.

        > It's not the only example, crawl
        > has one of it's own...

        No, it isn't ... but it's the one that popped into my
        mind first :P You are right, though, that it is a theme
        common to folklore.

        > Well, certainly it would be nice if the bones files could do
        > this for the victims of Vampires and starvation.

        That *would* be nice.

        > Although,
        > for the most part I'd have to say that a return from death
        > as a playable undead is a bit extreme

        Probably for Crawl, I was considering it for a personal
        project -- I'm much more taken with your muted counter-
        proposal to differentiate the outcomes of player deaths
        in Crawl terms.

        > (I'd also not give it to Kiku...
        > he's already very good,
        > Yred might be a better choice if any).

        Like I said, I was grafting an external thought into
        Crawlese, but I concede that Yred is likely a better
        fit (I had simply grabbed for the first Crawl god that
        came to mind).

        > Right now you either ignore those questions or you make
        > assumptions [...] This is
        > probably the best way to treat it right now

        Sure, sure -- I took your earlier post as suggestive
        of possible future change away from assumptions
        to a more "defined" system.

        > // oh, I don't know, I kinda like my
        > // ghosts to stay spectral, y'know?
        > Well, not all abilities are going to come across, but a spectral dragon
        > still has a right to it's damage and/or tailslap, even if it doesn't get
        > the breath (which could be changed to nether or left out).

        Agreed. I don't see ghostly transformations as illegal,
        but they would have to be handled carefully.

      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.