Rune-based ID

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Nick
    replied
    The latest builds - Windows and OS X - are up.

    Changes:
    • Identify spells are back
    • I've adopted spara's suggestion of {??} meaning unidentified runes


    I'm not aware of anything that needs fixing on this branch; let me know if there is. The point about ,Emergency is probably good - some time before 4.1 I was going to have a quick look aver all the objects with this sort of thing in mind.

    Leave a comment:


  • Derakon
    replied
    I just checked; Mushrooms of Emergency are 249+1d101 turns of hallucination (a.k.a. 250-350 turns). I'd say a flat 50 turns is a lot more reasonable, gameplay-wise.

    Leave a comment:


  • Estie
    replied
    Yes mushroom of hallu is the reason I dont test them; even if I dont outright die during 500 turns of disorientation, its far too nerve-wracking to risk. Also, it doesnt help that I only use 1,5 of them.

    Edit: I mean mushroom of emergency of course, which produces hallucination.

    Leave a comment:


  • spara
    replied
    Originally posted by Derakon
    Most side-effects from mushrooms wear off fairly quickly. The only one that I think could be toned down is the hallucination from Mushrooms of Emergency, which takes really too long to wear off. What is it, 500+ turns? 50 would be more appropriate IMO.
    It might just be that the first mushroom I ever ate was Emergency. It made me very, very wary about mushrooms. The game is obviously educational here .

    Leave a comment:


  • Derakon
    replied
    Originally posted by spara
    Some other form of ID than testing would be nice for mushrooms. In practice I never test them because of their trade off effects. I have suggested this earlier, but maybe identify scrolls could also identify mushrooms, scrolls and potions.
    Most side-effects from mushrooms wear off fairly quickly. The only one that I think could be toned down is the hallucination from Mushrooms of Emergency, which takes really too long to wear off. What is it, 500+ turns? 50 would be more appropriate IMO.

    Leave a comment:


  • spara
    replied
    Some other form of ID than testing would be nice for mushrooms. In practice I never test them because of their trade off effects. I have suggested this earlier, but maybe identify scrolls could also identify mushrooms, scrolls and potions.

    Leave a comment:


  • spara
    replied
    This feels a bit quirky. Maybe the name of a ring of element should identify when the rune is known? That {??} is also a bit misleading as it refers to the activation. Making {??} mean explicitly unknown runes would help here. Is that {tried, ??} even needed to flag untested activation? Inscription already says the item can be aimed.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nick
    replied
    Originally posted by PowerWyrm
    Now there's a check in monster_list_can_update() vs cave_monster_max() that only allows redraw when entries_size >= cave_monster_max(). This means that the list won't be updated if you enter a level which has more monsters than the previous one. The check should simply be removed to let monster_list_reset() deal with the case where there are more monsters to display than the list has entries.
    I think this is OK, as monster_list_reset() gets called on every subwindow update, and if entries_size < cave_monster_max() it immediately re-allocates the list so its size is cave_monster_max(), and the check will succeed again.

    The point is to make sure there are enough entries in the list to take every monster on the level. It is not currently necessary as monster_list_collect() is only ever called after either monster_list_new() or monster_list_reset(), both of which set the list size to cave_monster_max(); but it is a sensible check to have to avoid overrunning the list array.

    Leave a comment:


  • PowerWyrm
    replied
    Originally posted by Nick
    Latest builds for Windows and OS X.

    Changes:
    • Monster list updates correctly (thanks to PowerWyrm and molybdenum)
    • 'l'ook command no longer looks at ignored floor items
    • Lack of sustain is noticed on items after stat drain


    I think that's all the known bugs dealt with - please let me know if I've missed any, or report new ones. Also opinions on how this branch is looking now are welcome.

    I have just realised that I haven't implemented an Identify spell - I guess that will happen for next build (unless there are objections). Plan was for it to pretty much be as before - cheap and early for mages, less cheap and later for rogues and rangers, in a dungeon book for priests and paladins.
    Now there's a check in monster_list_can_update() vs cave_monster_max() that only allows redraw when entries_size >= cave_monster_max(). This means that the list won't be updated if you enter a level which has more monsters than the previous one. The check should simply be removed to let monster_list_reset() deal with the case where there are more monsters to display than the list has entries.

    Leave a comment:


  • tprice
    replied
    First, 2 updated versions in one day! Thanks for all the hard work Nick and for those that help find the problem code!

    Well I just ran into my first Greater Vault while playing the RuneID Branch. a Mazer vault at DL45. I found the new ID scheme made all the loot I found much easier to sort as I made my way slowly through it. As a CL32 Ranger I would barely have regular ID spell, not enough mana to spam it, and probably would have been worried over what to use my limited staves on if this was "vanilla ID" still.

    I also found I'm intrigued by what would otherwise be junk but has a rune or two i don't know. I was eager when i found a small stack of ?ID in one space. Even after dropping off the things that stack finished off I'm carrying around a couple things i don't have fully IDed...

    I'll go post a bigger report on my fun with the vault over in AAR instead of cluttering up this thread.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nick
    replied
    Latest builds for Windows and OS X.

    Changes:
    • Monster list updates correctly (thanks to PowerWyrm and molybdenum)
    • 'l'ook command no longer looks at ignored floor items
    • Lack of sustain is noticed on items after stat drain


    I think that's all the known bugs dealt with - please let me know if I've missed any, or report new ones. Also opinions on how this branch is looking now are welcome.

    I have just realised that I haven't implemented an Identify spell - I guess that will happen for next build (unless there are objections). Plan was for it to pretty much be as before - cheap and early for mages, less cheap and later for rogues and rangers, in a dungeon book for priests and paladins.

    Leave a comment:


  • fruviad
    replied
    Minor typo in lib/help/command.txt on line 97?

    This causes you to move one step in a given direction. If the quare you

    "quare" should be "square".

    Leave a comment:


  • Nick
    replied
    Originally posted by PowerWyrm
    The monster list doesn't work anymore because monster_list_can_update() now checks vs cave_monster_max() and only allows redraw when entries_size <= cave_monster_max(). This means that the list won't be updated if you enter a level which has less monsters than the previous one.
    Thank you so much

    Originally posted by PowerWyrm
    Commit 42adf6d: this forces one entry per object, which means you will have two separate entries for two similar objects in the same square. Instead of removing the call to object_similar(), it would be better to add a location check in object_similar() instead.
    I don't think this is a problem - similar items on the same grid will almost always have stacked and be a single item.

    Originally posted by spara
    I just got drained of str and con, but I've still got question marks in all stats. A bug?
    Yeah, that seems like a bug.

    Leave a comment:


  • spara
    replied
    I just got drained of str and con, but I've still got question marks in all stats. A bug?

    Leave a comment:


  • PowerWyrm
    replied
    Commit 42adf6d: this forces one entry per object, which means you will have two separate entries for two similar objects in the same square. Instead of removing the call to object_similar(), it would be better to add a location check in object_similar() instead.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
😀
😂
🥰
😘
🤢
😎
😞
😡
👍
👎