-
“We're more of the love, blood, and rhetoric school. Well, we can do you blood and love without the rhetoric, and we can do you blood and rhetoric without the love, and we can do you all three concurrent or consecutive. But we can't give you love and rhetoric without the blood. Blood is compulsory. They're all blood, you see.”
― Tom Stoppard, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead -
-
I don't see how this is meaningfully different from the status quo? As is, the game will name an object as soon as you've recognized all the non-cursed runes. So if you see an "Amulet of Resist Lightning {??}" you already know the item is cursed.
I'm also not sure how this affects gameplay. If I've ignored an item, that means that I will never equip it, uncursed or otherwise, so who cares if that information is being leaked?
If anything, now that I think about it, this change will make it kind of obnoxious to get trash to properly vanish, because I'll have to identify the curse to get it ignored.
Maybe if we have an "Ignore All X even with unidentified runes" option, sort of like how you can ignore all "Good Swords" and all "Non-Artifact Banded Mail" and what-not.
Then, for things that never have random properties that aren't curses (like Amulets of Resist Lightning) you can squash them away.Comment
-
-
It certainly was true back when rune id was introduced. Perhaps it's been changed since. This is really an issue where I have no opinion either way--and I expect most players would be similarly ambivalent. The behavior of the potions with respect to runes should be whatever is easiest from a code-maintenance standpoint.Comment
-
Whatever the system is, it should be consistent. Back in the day when rune-ID was introduced I remember quite a lot of discussion on this and in the end I "think" the consensus was that you can't learn runes from drinking potions, reading scrolls or innate abilities since those have no runes. They are different kind of magic or alchemy or whatever. That was quite some time ago though so I might be totally wrong here.Comment
-
resist heat potions do teach the rune if you are wearing rfire at the time. Presumably because of the double resist. This however doesn't work with potions of rpoison for some reason.Comment
-
-
Maybe @ could only learn runes when wearing a concrete rune. Fire and cold by drinking a potion and wearing the rune. See invisibility scroll when wearing the rune. Innate abilities would identify the associated runes on wearing them. After shapeshift to bat @ would learn the assosiated runes if wearing them. And so on. That would be logical and consistent.Comment
-
Ever backward in what I thought was one of the principal purposes of rune-id, to remove some of the tedium of the identification process. I'm quite certain that I've begun to despise the reversals in the jewelry identification game. Seeing DL 98 littered with Amulets of Resist Lightning and Rings of Protection, is ridiculous. They don't have to be cursed, they just don't disappear until @ physically walks over them. Tedious.“We're more of the love, blood, and rhetoric school. Well, we can do you blood and love without the rhetoric, and we can do you blood and rhetoric without the love, and we can do you all three concurrent or consecutive. But we can't give you love and rhetoric without the blood. Blood is compulsory. They're all blood, you see.”
― Tom Stoppard, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are DeadComment
-
Are you also complaining about the separate change that was suggested, and that you quoted my response to? I can't see anything obviously wrong with it, but I do miss things.
Rune ID was certainly intended to remove some of the tedium, but also make it a meaningful part of the game, and like any part of the game it has to be open to questions of whether it makes logical sense, whether there are jarring inconsistencies, etc.
As for the unknown rune change - in the 5 days since that change was made, the discussions here have led me to think that automatic ignoring of standard jewellery, but not of stuff that has extra curses, is probably the correct thing to do (although we may end up going back to the original situation).One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.Comment
-
“We're more of the love, blood, and rhetoric school. Well, we can do you blood and love without the rhetoric, and we can do you blood and rhetoric without the love, and we can do you all three concurrent or consecutive. But we can't give you love and rhetoric without the blood. Blood is compulsory. They're all blood, you see.”
― Tom Stoppard, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are DeadComment
-
-
One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.Comment
Tweet
Comment