Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

The miscellaneist #227

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: Spl-R-1.2.0
Choose a base branch
from
Open

The miscellaneist #227

wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

RojjaCebolla
Copy link
Collaborator

these bits from that big ol' PR are in the truest spirit of "assorted tweaks"! they defy categorization! they aren't very important! but they might be nice!

and i think that wraps it up

todo XXX: involve madLibs.c someday
We had 14 different polearms (including the lance, which uses a
different skill but can "pound" at range like other polearms).

Now, there's 4 that spawn normally: halberd, ranseur, lance, partisan

Scythes can also be generated, but only in specific monster inventories.
@RojjaCebolla RojjaCebolla mentioned this pull request Dec 11, 2021
@NullCGT
Copy link
Owner

NullCGT commented Dec 21, 2021

I'm totally on board for all of this, with one exception.

I'm personally not sold on removing redundant polearms, given that their mere existence is an expense at D&D. What is gained by removing them? Players can see the stats of items, so there is less chance of confusion compared to vanilla NetHack.

Copy link
Contributor

@copperwater copperwater left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As a polearm remover, I don't see all that much point in "removing" them by dropping their probabilities to 0 but leaving them in the game (they are wishable! not really correct to say they are "removed"!) since you're still on the hook for maintaining any code related to them.

@NullCGT, a good argument for reducing the amount of polearms is that they stop contributing to pointless clutter in players' and developers' heads. There's no particular point in having 20 nearly-identical things when you could have 4.

verbalize("It's going to be OK.");
} else {
pline("%s utters a complex chant.", Monnam(mtmp));
pline("%s utters a %s chant.", Monnam(mtmp),
(!rn2(3)?"complex":!rn2(2)?"soothing":"healing"));
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is there any particular reason to cram this line together with no spaces? It's hard to read.

Comment on lines +4081 to +4083
{ PM_ICE_ELEMENTAL, ZT_SONIC, PM_WATER_ELEMENTAL },
{ PM_MAGMA_ELEMENTAL, ZT_COLD, PM_EARTH_ELEMENTAL },
{ PM_MAGMA_ELEMENTAL, ZT_ACID, PM_FIRE_ELEMENTAL },
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

These two don't make a ton of sense to me. Presumably, no matter how much you shatter an ice elemental with sonic attacks, it won't actually heat up enough to melt. (More of a snow elemental type of thing?)

Fire elementals are classically made of fire without any solid substance. Hitting a molten-rock being with acid doesn't seem like it would separate the heat from the rock.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants