Sil

[HallucinationMushroom]

What is happening during exchange places, descriptively? As a player, all I know is that we swap places... but what am I suppose to imagine happening? It seems moving to the square behind the target, while leaving the target in place, would make more sense. Like, you slipped or nimbly got by it. What I imagine is more of a strength thing, like a grab and pull and shifting of feet, since not only are you moving to a desired spot, but you are also making a creature move to where you were. My 2 cents... I can't weigh in on math or code, I have -5 grace in those.

[Scatha]

Maybe give it two different mechanisms. For unaware enemies, stealth vs. perception + d10 to swap without getting hit or alerting (high success), alert but not get hit (normal success), alert and get hit (marginal success) or fail the stealth check, alert, and move to the second mechanism.

For alert enemies, or enemies on which you failed the stealth check, move to opposed evasion +d10 vs evasion +d10. If you succeed, swap but get hit, if you fail, waste the turn.

This is a reasonable simulationist mechanic, but it fails simplicity checks (and feels a bit ad hoc rather than elegant). We don't want to make mechanics unnecessarily complex (and some of the complexity here is unnecessary).

I think the main advantage of an opposed Evasion roll is that there wouldn't be any need to add bonuses or penalties for switching with an enemy who was unaware, or who you couldn't see, etc., as they'd come naturally as they are already applied to your evasion. It's still more complicated than just not letting you switch with enemies you can't see, so there's a question about whether the gain is worth it.

[jujuben]

Maybe give it two different mechanisms. For unaware enemies, stealth vs. perception + d10 to swap without getting hit or alerting (high success), alert but not get hit (normal success), alert and get hit (marginal success) or fail the stealth check, alert, and move to the second mechanism.

For alert enemies, or enemies on which you failed the stealth check, move to opposed evasion +d10 vs evasion +d10. If you succeed, swap but get hit, if you fail, waste the turn.

This would make it viable for stealth dabblers, but significantly more powerful for specialists. Even heavy armored builds typically have enough evasion by the midgame to make this useful on most enemies, and cats and vamps and their ilk *should* be harder to get away from.

[Patashu]

My thought is:
Stealth + 1d10 vs perception + 1d10 (or Stealth vs Perception + 1d10)
or
Stealth vs 1d20

Although I haven't put any thought into it beyond 'that seems like it would be about as difficult as it should be' and 'hmm, this makes exchange place useless for heavy armour wearers as opposed to light armour wearers, I wonder if that's a good side effect or not?'

[Scatha]

Alternatively, it could be changed from automatic success to a skill check (stealth and/or evasion based?) with penalties for any of the above conditions. Perhaps it could be scaled such that extreme stealth specialists almost always succeed, even when impaired, but dabblers would have a nontrivial chance of failure under the best conditions, and little to no chance of success under suboptimal ones.

We considered something very like this a while back; I think it was a reserve in case the ability turned out to be too good. It should obviously be some kind of opposed roll, so difficulty scales with opponent, but it's not obvious what the opposed roll should be. Your stealth against the monster's evasion? Opposed evasion? (would very naturally make it harder from a web or pit or against an unseen foe, as your evasion would be halved, but it's a bit strange to use your evasion now that the ability is in the stealth tree.)

[Patashu]

Could you try standing next to them and pressing 'o' for open? I'm trying to work out if something is going wrong with opening them in general, or with the alter command.

Oh, I didn't know 'o' opened chests as well. I'll roll a character and try to find one....

EDIT: Wow, I got some really good equipment on that character. XD Trip report: Found a chest in the barrow wight vault. ctrl+dir struck at nothing, 'o' opened it in one shot. So probably the code in alter for chests needs to be changed to use the code in o for chests. http://angband.oook.cz/ladder-show.php?id=13166

[half]

As I turn each corner, there should be one troll diagonally behind me - if I hit it, it will pause and move up to let its partner in, but since I can keep running until the next corner I've effectively gotten in a free hit on them.

Ah, I can see that working. Neat. I could remove this possibility by adding a random chance that they simply attack you, but I tend to prefer allowing a small amount of exploitation. It is less simulationist and more board-gamey, but that is my general preference (note though, that I like both aspects and Sil is probably more simulationist *and* more board-gamey than Angband overall).

Yes, I definitely think Exchange Places should be able to fail. It's especially silly that you can use it as blind/shadow monsters/invisible monsters radar, for example.

Interesting. Exchange Places originally allowed people to freely walk through monsters, but this was deemed too strong, so the current version gives them a free attack on you (as well as the attack they get on their turn). There are other ways of making it weaker, which could involve removing the free attack.

1) Status Quo
2) You are told that you can't use it if you try but: are confused, or there is no visible monster, or you are in a pit or web.
3) Something involving a stealth skill check (failure leaves you where you started but wastes your turn), but remove the free attack.

Any preferences?

Over 90% of the containers I encounter now I can't even attempt to unlock (strike but nothing is there instead). I think if I keep using the same player file I can never unlock the same 'kind' of container more than once.

Could you try standing next to them and pressing 'o' for open? I'm trying to work out if something is going wrong with opening them in general, or with the alter command.

[Patashu]

Well, maybe you could try to get help on the Development forum or you'd just have to get a Unix-based operating system.

Ah, I read some topics in the development forum on how to use cygwin, and I can compile using make -f Makefile.cyg. So!

Does anyone have some requests for what to try and implement? Right now my list is something like
-Looking into the container bug
-Prompt (aka hack) for stepping next to violet molds
-Making the y/n prompt for autopickup also accept , and g
-Message buffer colouring

[Philip]

Well, maybe you could try to get help on the Development forum or you'd just have to get a Unix-based operating system.

[Patashu]

Are you able to do this systematically? It works for me with Zone of Control if I'm standing in a room near a doorway that has orcs pouring out, but I haven't found any other good ways to exploit this.

Reasonably. Say I see a pair of snow trolls running after me (oh god) and I don't want to be hit by them, I'll look on the map for a closed circuit (preferably not near any staircases) and start 'pillar dancing' around it to run away indefinitely. As I turn each corner, there should be one troll diagonally behind me - if I hit it, it will pause and move up to let its partner in, but since I can keep running until the next corner I've effectively gotten in a free hit on them. (Since trolls regenerate fast it's not actually awfully useful on them)

Scenario two: I have flanking and two or more monsters are surrounding me. if I run perpendicular to the direction they surround me on, most of them will move to keep surrounding me rather than attacking me. (It's kind of hard to explain, just try to flank everything in the dungeon while minimizing number of monsters next to you on each individual move and you'll see it happen)

I always think of XP as some sort of judo move. In keeping with that, I don't think it should work from a web, or a pit, or any time you cannot see and skillfully manipulate the enemy in question (ie: while blind, confused, or hallucinating). Alternatively, it could be changed from automatic success to a skill check (stealth and/or evasion based?) with penalties for any of the above conditions. Perhaps it could be scaled such that extreme stealth specialists almost always succeed, even when impaired, but dabblers would have a nontrivial chance of failure under the best conditions, and little to no chance of success under suboptimal ones.

Yes, I definitely think Exchange Places should be able to fail. It's especially silly that you can use it as blind/shadow monsters/invisible monsters radar, for example.

I don't know what is going on here, but have added it to the unresolved bug list.

Over 90% of the containers I encounter now I can't even attempt to unlock (strike but nothing is there instead). I think if I keep using the same player file I can never unlock the same 'kind' of container more than once.

Not sure what you mean here.

I can't give away everything! They are secret techs after all You're probably already aware of most of the abuse anyway

Well, Patashu, I guess half and Scatha wouldn't be averse to patches, so if you feel up to coding it, I think you'd get your features (which, while I would like them isn't quite the thing I can code) into the game. You'd have to check it with them, but I've rarely heard of maintainers who refused popular patches.

I am definitely interested in helping, but I can't figure out how to compile Sil in Windows (else I'd have my termcasting build by now...) Does anyone know how to do it?

[jujuben]

Perhaps just check for the presence of a web or pit on your square, and disallow use if there is one? This might be a bit cruel if you are surrounded and trapped in a pit, but certainly seems fair for webs.

I'm not quite sure what to think about the use of exchange places to detect hidden monsters. Probably either the failed attempt should cost a turn, or it should just move to that space, or you shouldn't be able to exchange places with unseen monsters at all.

I always think of XP as some sort of judo move. In keeping with that, I don't think it should work from a web, or a pit, or any time you cannot see and skillfully manipulate the enemy in question (ie: while blind, confused, or hallucinating). Alternatively, it could be changed from automatic success to a skill check (stealth and/or evasion based?) with penalties for any of the above conditions. Perhaps it could be scaled such that extreme stealth specialists almost always succeed, even when impaired, but dabblers would have a nontrivial chance of failure under the best conditions, and little to no chance of success under suboptimal ones.

[Scatha]

I've made a note of this and will try to fix it for 1.0.3. The problem is that Exchange Places currently doesn't use the standard movement routine, so there are a number of bugs like this.

Perhaps just check for the presence of a web or pit on your square, and disallow use if there is one? This might be a bit cruel if you are surrounded and trapped in a pit, but certainly seems fair for webs.

I'm not quite sure what to think about the use of exchange places to detect hidden monsters. Probably either the failed attempt should cost a turn, or it should just move to that space, or you shouldn't be able to exchange places with unseen monsters at all.

[half]

Found a bug:
If you trigger a web and use 'Exchange Places' on the spider, the web still exists and you can create another spider using it.

(spiderscumming)

I've made a note of this and will try to fix it for 1.0.3. The problem is that Exchange Places currently doesn't use the standard movement routine, so there are a number of bugs like this.

[half]

-Wielding slay foo weapons for the extra light when their target is around

The whole glowing slaying weapons thing was only added very very late in development, and involved ironing out quite a few bugs, but I love it. It is small, but I find it very fun and flavourful too.

-Dropping items of brilliance/slay foo/permanent light sources around you or under you to add to the light level

This can add a surprising amount of light. I've never done it in the heat of battle (as opposed to when debugging), but I could see it making the different in some situations. As well as against Darkness monsters, the light helps in combat against many enemies. I've even sat amidst four orc-slaying weapons in debug mode and let the order in which they light up tell me which direction the oncoming orc was approaching from. Again, I'd love it if someone found a way to make use of this in a real situation.

[half]

Sil bug while doing the tutorial:

You hit the Orc soldier!!
Your Shortsword strikes truly.
You recognize it as a Shortsword of Orc Slaying (+0,1d7) [+1].
You hit the Orc soldier...
Your Dagger of Accompaniment strikes truly.
You recognize it as a Dagger of Accompaniment (+0,1d5).

Well spotted. Fixed for 1.0.3