Limb system trouble
Hansjörg Malthaner
I'm afraid I was too clever and outfooled myself.
I had the idea to build every being in my game from limbs. I.e. the player
has hands, feet, a body a head etc.
In my design a limb can 'hold' an item. I.e. a hand can hold about
everything, a foot can hold a boot, the body some clothing or armor.
In my design a limb also has some actions assigned. I.e. a hand can punch
and pick up things, a foot can kick.
So far so good. If I equip a boot on the foot it still can kick. If I equip
a glove on the hand it still can punch. If I equip a boot on the hand ...
it's pretty hard to punch with a boot in the hand, still this is possible.
Picking up thing while holding a boot in the hand is difficult, at least. If
I equip a shield in the hand it can no longer punch properly. (Shield bash
is a action of the shield, not the hand).
Now, how can I determine which items support the actions of the limbs (a
foot with a boot may kick a opponed even better than a naked foot), and
which hinder the action (a hand holding a shield can't punch or pick up
things)?
Any clever ideas?
Another problem. If "pick up" is a action of the hand, and the player is
holding a shield and a sword, he cannot pick up items anymore. This is
'correct' due to the rule that a hand holding a item looses the pick up
action, but it is very uncomfortable to the player. How realistic should
this part of the game be? This question is interesting in regard to the
problem that the player has two hands only, but in most roguelikes he is
holding sword, shield, light source, swap weapon, shooting wepaon, ammo and
maybe some more stuff. That doesn't go well with the limb system, it
requires tricks or lots of 'special' rules.
Was my idea of a limb system a dumb idea? Am I too confined in my idea of
the limbs? Is there a way to overcome the problems and still implement a
limb system without a thousand of exception rules?
c.u.
Hajo
Daniël Löwenstein
> foot with a boot may kick a opponed even better than a naked foot), and
> which hinder the action
D: Vectors.
> (a hand holding a shield can't punch or pick up
> things)?
D: You can actually hold a shield and a torch in the same hand.
> Another problem. If "pick up" is a action of the hand, and the player is
> holding a shield and a sword, he cannot pick up items anymore.
D: Use a stack of commands.
If you carry a sword and a shield and you want to pick op a
helmet, just push:
-> DROP SWORD
-> PICK UP HELMET
-> PUT HELMET INTO INVENTORY
-> PICK UP SWORD
To the player this will appear as a single action.
In pseudo-code:
If(hands==full)
{
commandStack.push("drop "+rightHand.object);
commandStack.push("get "+floor.object);
commandStack.push("putInInv "+rightHand.object);
commandStack.push("get "+floor.object);
}
Just read a little about Turing machines, and it'll be crystal
clear.
> but in most roguelikes he is
> holding sword, shield, light source, swap weapon, shooting weapon, ammo
and
> maybe some more stuff.
D: light source and shield go perfect together.
Swap weapons and the rest of the stuff is in the inventory
(backpack or another unspecified area on the character)
> That doesn't go well with the limb system, it
> requires tricks or lots of 'special' rules.
D: Nope, just give the holding capacity of a hand in a "holding
radius" (the biggest size your can get you hand around)
Then a sword requires 100% of a hand, and a shield only 50%, and
a torch 50% as well.
> Was my idea of a limb system a dumb idea?
D: Nope. It's just in early concept stage. We (as in : "all the
people in rec.games.roguelike.development") will figure
it out. (eventually)
> Is there a way to overcome the problems and still implement a
> limb system without a thousand of exception rules?
D: Sure! ...... (long silence) ........
> c.u.
> Hajo
Groetend,
Daniël Löwenstein.
Philip Swartzleonard
> Hi,
>
> I'm afraid I was too clever and outfooled myself.
>
> I had the idea to build every being in my game from limbs. I.e. the
> player has hands, feet, a body a head etc.
>
>
> In my design a limb can 'hold' an item. I.e. a hand can hold about
> everything, a foot can hold a boot, the body some clothing or armor.
>
> In my design a limb also has some actions assigned. I.e. a hand can
> punch and pick up things, a foot can kick.
>
> So far so good. If I equip a boot on the foot it still can kick. If I
> equip a glove on the hand it still can punch. If I equip a boot on the
> hand ... it's pretty hard to punch with a boot in the hand, still this
> is possible. Picking up thing while holding a boot in the hand is
> difficult, at least. If I equip a shield in the hand it can no longer
> punch properly. (Shield bash is a action of the shield, not the hand).
>
> Now, how can I determine which items support the actions of the limbs
> (a foot with a boot may kick a opponed even better than a naked foot),
> and which hinder the action (a hand holding a shield can't punch or
> pick up things)?
>
> Any clever ideas?
Filters. Send the hand a message along the lines of 'pick up item #0x3a4b'.
The hand first calls the boot's (or whatever's in the slots's) message-
filter function, which decides what a boot covered limb should be able to
do in terms of picking something up, and passes a modifed message back to
the hand, which decides if it's possible to get the thing given the
limitations data in the message and the limitations data of the hand
itself.
This kind of thing is more useful if you have more than one 'filter' that
needs to be enacted; function stacks and all that. About a year ago I wrote
a disorginized, rambling paper about using something like this to control
sensory input and output to an AI, but I never finished it or did anything
.with it. Should probably polish it up and see if it still makes sense =)
> Another problem. If "pick up" is a action of the hand, and the player
> is holding a shield and a sword, he cannot pick up items anymore. This
> is 'correct' due to the rule that a hand holding a item looses the pick
> up action, but it is very uncomfortable to the player. How realistic
> should this part of the game be? This question is interesting in regard
> to the problem that the player has two hands only, but in most
> roguelikes he is holding sword, shield, light source, swap weapon,
> shooting wepaon, ammo and maybe some more stuff. That doesn't go well
> with the limb system, it requires tricks or lots of 'special' rules.
If i remeber correctly, you almost have the capactiy in your system to
implement various sheathes or other weapon holding places on the body. A
spare bow and swap weapon could be slung on the back and at the waste.
This, combined with automatic switching between a combat/noncombat stance
toggle, would let the player easily stow wepons to deal with the large
piles of loot. This also allows for various quick-draw teqniques (batou-
jutsu? ;), but would tend to be better suited to a game with a higher
percentage of non-combat situations than most roguelikes tend to have.
Oh, and Daniel's 50% holdage for lightsources/shields is good too. In fact,
anyone in the profession of dungeon crawling would soon invent some kind of
head or shield mounted light source, I would think ;)
> Was my idea of a limb system a dumb idea? Am I too confined in my idea
> of the limbs? Is there a way to overcome the problems and still
> implement a limb system without a thousand of exception rules?
I think you're going the right way. Modeling the physical attribues of
creatures seems to be a good way of doing things... it feels to me to be
the right way of doing things.
--
Philip Sw "Starweaver" [rasx] :: rubydragon.com - mostly there
R Dan Henry
Löwenstein" <D.Lowe...@CHello.nl> transmitted thus:
>> (a hand holding a shield can't punch or pick up
>> things)?
>
> D: You can actually hold a shield and a torch in the same hand.
Depends on the shield. And it's not really such a good idea, since
where you want the shield and where you want the torch may conflict.
I'd say it could be allowed, but with a penalty to your shield's
defensive value (since you can't use it as freely when you have to
worry about not burning yourself). More practical is a large shield
with a device to attach either a torch or better, a lantern to the
outside, so the fire source is away from you. Best of all, of course,
is an enchanted shield of light, but that's another story.
>> Another problem. If "pick up" is a action of the hand, and the player is
>> holding a shield and a sword, he cannot pick up items anymore.
>
> D: Use a stack of commands.
>
> If you carry a sword and a shield and you want to pick op a
>helmet, just push:
> -> DROP SWORD
> -> PICK UP HELMET
> -> PUT HELMET INTO INVENTORY
> -> PICK UP SWORD
> To the player this will appear as a single action.
> In pseudo-code:
>
> If(hands==full)
> {
> commandStack.push("drop "+rightHand.object);
> commandStack.push("get "+floor.object);
> commandStack.push("putInInv "+rightHand.object);
> commandStack.push("get "+floor.object);
> }
>
> Just read a little about Turing machines, and it'll be crystal
>clear.
Yeah, I think this is usually assumed in the pick-up command, but
actually doing it this way a cursed object in each hand will prevent
pick up. So, it would be then very nice to allow use of certain object
(esp. those of Remove Curse) from the ground.
--
Richard D. Henry
rdan...@earthlink.net
Vadim Gaidukevich
You wrote on Mon, 21 Jan 2002 18:47:06 +0100:
I try to describe how limb system works in Avanor.
May be it will helpful for someone :-).
All creatures in Avanor consists from parts of body (limbs).
I have use a list of such parts, so it is possible to have 10 hands
and 4 legs for monster.
All objects (items) in Avanor have unique flag:
for example
HELMET = 0x00000001
ARMOUR=0x00000002
NECKLACE=0x0000004
.....
All body parts have a mask, which objects a fit to this part:
BODYPART_HAND = WEAPON | SHIELD.
So, it is an easy to wear/wield item.
How melee combat works with this limb system at now:
creature check if it have weapon or it unarmed attack.
if it is attack with weapon, find all weapon in all hands
and make damage with all of this weapon (if creature
have 4 hands and 4 swords it makes 4 attack during
one turn).
if it is unarmed attack, I call special virtual method of
unarmed attack.
Next step in attack it is find, which body part of target
monster is under attack. And if attack successful -
we can reduce hit points of creature.
Vadim Gaidukevich
"Avanor, the Land of Mystery"
www.swallowtail.org/~vadim
Hansjörg Malthaner
Vadim Gaidukevich wrote:
>
> Hello, Hansjörg!
> You wrote on Mon, 21 Jan 2002 18:47:06 +0100:
>
> I try to describe how limb system works in Avanor.
> May be it will helpful for someone :-).
I have a full laod of questions, see below :)
> All creatures in Avanor consists from parts of body (limbs).
> I have use a list of such parts, so it is possible to have 10 hands
> and 4 legs for monster.
> All objects (items) in Avanor have unique flag:
> for example
> HELMET = 0x00000001
> ARMOUR=0x00000002
> NECKLACE=0x0000004
> .....
> All body parts have a mask, which objects a fit to this part:
> BODYPART_HAND = WEAPON | SHIELD.
>
> So, it is an easy to wear/wield item.
Assuming a creature has three hands. How many gloves does it need to get
full protection of all hands? Do you have single gloves in Avanor? Left and
right? If it wears only one pair of gloves, is the third hand unprotected?
Assuming a creature has four arms. Can it wear ARMOR which is usualy made
for two-armed creatures? Does it need to carry the armor to the blacksmith
to rework it to fit four arms?
I'm pondering to give the player a real wide range from races to chhose
from. I.e. a centaur race, a mixture of horse and human. It has hooves, no
feet. Can it wear boots? Does it need tow pairs of boots? Will it have a
speed penalty if it wears only one pair of boots or different types of
boots?
How do you handle intrinsic actions of limbs? I.e. can a creature without
hands pick up things? If a hand is holding a item is it still able to pick
up things? How do you determine if a item 'shadows' the action of a limb or
if it overrides the action of the limb?
> How melee combat works with this limb system at now:
> creature check if it have weapon or it unarmed attack.
> if it is attack with weapon, find all weapon in all hands
> and make damage with all of this weapon (if creature
> have 4 hands and 4 swords it makes 4 attack during
> one turn).
> if it is unarmed attack, I call special virtual method of
> unarmed attack.
> Next step in attack it is find, which body part of target
> monster is under attack. And if attack successful -
> we can reduce hit points of creature.
You determine the body part, but reduce the hitpoints of the complete
creature? Not only those of the limb that is hit? I.e. if the creature is
four armed, and one of the arms is hurt very severley, it should loose the
attack with that arm. This requires to give the limbs hitpoints.
If it looses all four hands it should not be able to pick up things anymore.
Do you have implemented aimed attacks (i.e. try to hit the neck of the
creature)?
> Vadim Gaidukevich
> "Avanor, the Land of Mystery"
> www.swallowtail.org/~vadim
c.u.
Hajo
Hansjörg Malthaner
>
> Hansjörg Malthaner || Mon 21 Jan 2002 09:47:06a:
>
> > Hi,
[Limbs, items, actions, covererd limbs]
> Filters. Send the hand a message along the lines of 'pick up item #0x3a4b'.
> The hand first calls the boot's (or whatever's in the slots's) message-
> filter function, which decides what a boot covered limb should be able to
> do in terms of picking something up, and passes a modifed message back to
> the hand, which decides if it's possible to get the thing given the
> limitations data in the message and the limitations data of the hand
> itself.
I'll try to sketch my idea raised from your suggestion. Its hard to write
UML in text only but I'll try. The object structure is:
limb (1) -> (0..n) usages
limb (1) -> (0..1) item
item (1) -> (0..n) usages
Meaning: a limb has up to n usages and a limb can have up to one item. A
item has up to n usages.
I could implement the items filter to traverse the limbs list of usages and
set some of them to 'unavalaible' if it is not compatible with those.
The UI will allow to trigger all usages of the item itself and all available
usages of the limb.
This should work. Did I understand your suggestion correctly?
> This kind of thing is more useful if you have more than one 'filter' that
> needs to be enacted; function stacks and all that. About a year ago I wrote
> a disorginized, rambling paper about using something like this to control
> sensory input and output to an AI, but I never finished it or did anything
> .with it. Should probably polish it up and see if it still makes sense =)
Maybe it would be another jewel to add to Björn Bergströms site :)
He has a big collection of articels about roguelike developement there.
> > Another problem. If "pick up" is a action of the hand, and the player
> > is holding a shield and a sword, he cannot pick up items anymore. This
> > is 'correct' due to the rule that a hand holding a item looses the pick
> > up action, but it is very uncomfortable to the player. How realistic
> > should this part of the game be? This question is interesting in regard
> > to the problem that the player has two hands only, but in most
> > roguelikes he is holding sword, shield, light source, swap weapon,
> > shooting wepaon, ammo and maybe some more stuff. That doesn't go well
> > with the limb system, it requires tricks or lots of 'special' rules.
>
> If i remeber correctly, you almost have the capactiy in your system to
> implement various sheathes or other weapon holding places on the body.
I alread added some 'limbs' like a waist to hold a belt, and shoulders to
hold a backpack. Theese limbs just act a sholders for those items.
> A
> spare bow and swap weapon could be slung on the back and at the waste.
> This, combined with automatic switching between a combat/noncombat stance
> toggle, would let the player easily stow wepons to deal with the large
> piles of loot.
How does the program code know on which limb to put the shooter and the
spare weapon? The players body (the limb tree) is read from a config file,
it can be very differently structured. The code shoudl be able to deal with
all kinds of bodies. (The possessor idea from Pern fascinates me. I want to
allow the player to switch to another body or, at least, let him choose from
a large set of races with different bodies at start if he is no possessor).
I could add flags to the limbs do designate them as 'swap_wepaon_hold' or
'shooter_hold' ... but somehow I don#t liekthe idea to add such fake limbs
to the players body.
Is it better to let a limb hold more than one item? But then, this causes
trouble with the UI and seems to be a bit confusing to me.
> This also allows for various quick-draw teqniques (batou-
> jutsu? ;), but would tend to be better suited to a game with a higher
> percentage of non-combat situations than most roguelikes tend to have.
>
> Oh, and Daniel's 50% holdage for lightsources/shields is good too. In fact,
> anyone in the profession of dungeon crawling would soon invent some kind of
> head or shield mounted light source, I would think ;)
I think to avoid too complex code and user interface I should restrict the
limbs to one item only. Asides from that the 'size' aspect is already
implemented. That means limbs can only hold items up to a certain size. But
that's just anotehr constraint like 'can only hold items of certain type'.
> > Was my idea of a limb system a dumb idea? Am I too confined in my idea
> > of the limbs? Is there a way to overcome the problems and still
> > implement a limb system without a thousand of exception rules?
>
> I think you're going the right way. Modeling the physical attribues of
> creatures seems to be a good way of doing things... it feels to me to be
> the right way of doing things.
A while back there was a thread, I think it was entitled "realistic vs.
abstract games". Many people suggested not to become too realistic in
roguelike games. So I wasn't sure if the limb system is one of those overly
realistic features that doesn't work well in a roguelike game.
But some of the more advanced roguelikes have limb systems. OTOH some are
very simple like in PernAngband where the limbs are just a set of flags.
> --
> Philip Sw "Starweaver" [rasx] :: rubydragon.com - mostly there
c.u.
Hajo
Hansjörg Malthaner
>
> > Now, how can I determine which items support the actions of the limbs (a
> > foot with a boot may kick a opponed even better than a naked foot), and
> > which hinder the action
>
> D: Vectors.
Can you elaborate this a bit? I have a vector type, but I still have the
problem. The pure existence of vectors does not help :)
> > (a hand holding a shield can't punch or pick up
> > things)?
>
> D: You can actually hold a shield and a torch in the same hand.
Yes, but thats another problem. The problem I was talking about was, that
certain items make certain actions of limbs unavalaible while other items do
not.
A shield for example makes the 'punch' action of the hand unavailable, while
a glove still allows to punch.
But I think I'll restrict a limb to hold only once item. I already have
items that are held by several limbs (a 1-to-n relation). Allowing limbs to
hold several items will change this into a n-to-m relation which is hard to
handle. I want to avoid n-to-m of relations, 1-to-n relations are complex
enough.
> > Another problem. If "pick up" is a action of the hand, and the player is
> > holding a shield and a sword, he cannot pick up items anymore.
>
> D: Use a stack of commands.
>
> If you carry a sword and a shield and you want to pick op a
> helmet, just push:
> -> DROP SWORD
> -> PICK UP HELMET
> -> PUT HELMET INTO INVENTORY
> -> PICK UP SWORD
>
> To the player this will appear as a single action.
> In pseudo-code:
>
> If(hands==full)
> {
> commandStack.push("drop "+rightHand.object);
> commandStack.push("get "+floor.object);
> commandStack.push("putInInv "+rightHand.object);
> commandStack.push("get "+floor.object);
> }
Umm ... the user interface would not show the pick up option as long as the
player is holding a sword. Even if that command stack works, I'm not sure if
this is a good solution ... it looks like a 'special case' just invented for
the purpose of shadowing a basic fault in the design. Such constructs ten to
be the source of mistakes if the program gets more complex, becasue the
programmer needs to be aware of all the special cases. I.e. most bugs in
PernAngband are caused by the immense number of special cases the code has.
If possible I search fo solutions that proide the needed functionality in a
natural way, that means without much if and swicth statements, but as
intrinsic feature of the design.
> Just read a little about Turing machines, and it'll be crystal
> clear.
I know about touring machines but I just used them to solve questions like
"is a problem in the set of computable problems? Is is semi-computable?". I
don't see the link to the command stack :(
And to be honest it's quite a while back that I had lessons in computer
science theory.
> > but in most roguelikes he is
> > holding sword, shield, light source, swap weapon, shooting weapon, ammo
> > and
> > maybe some more stuff.
>
> D: light source and shield go perfect together.
> Swap weapons and the rest of the stuff is in the inventory
> (backpack or another unspecified area on the character)
I have no unspecified area. The backpack is a item, that is usually equipped
on the shoulders (but can be held in a hand, too). The player actually could
carry one backpack on his shoudlers, and two others in the hands. In this
case the code had severe trouble to determine which backpack to search for a
swap weapon ...
I do not like the idea of having a special 'magic' area that can contain
swap weapon and the other stuff. That again just seems to be a hack to work
around a basic problem of the limb system.
> > Was my idea of a limb system a dumb idea?
>
> D: Nope. It's just in early concept stage. We (as in : "all the
> people in rec.games.roguelike.development") will figure
> it out. (eventually)
Thanks :)
> Groetend,
>
> Daniël Löwenstein.
c.u.
Hajo
Vadim Gaidukevich
You wrote on Tue, 22 Jan 2002 10:29:07 +0100:
HrM> I have a full laod of questions, see below :)
I noticed that it is very right questions :-)
HrM> Assuming a creature has three hands. How many gloves does it need
HrM> to get full protection of all hands? Do you have single gloves in
HrM> Avanor? Left and right? If it wears only one pair of gloves, is the
HrM> third hand unprotected?
First of all lets count that gloves is made for humanoids and all gloves
are in pairs. Second, that lets count that for odd number of hands we
need (N + 1) / 2 pairs of gloves. No, lets describe 3-handed monster
"head body hand hand hand gloves gloves".
hand - means that there is a part of body, that can take weapon, and
gloves means that there is a part of body which can wear a pair of
gloves.
so if we write "head body hand hand hand" we will have monster
which can not wear gloves (probably it have tentacles instead
humanoid's arm)
HrM> Assuming a creature has four arms. Can it wear ARMOR which is
HrM> usualy made for two-armed creatures? Does it need to carry the
HrM> armor to the blacksmith to rework it to fit four arms?
it will be adding of some realism :-)
HrM> I'm pondering to give the player a real wide range from races to
HrM> chhose from. I.e. a centaur race, a mixture of horse and human. It
HrM> has hooves, no feet. Can it wear boots? Does it need tow pairs of
HrM> boots? Will it have a speed penalty if it wears only one pair of
HrM> boots or different types of boots?
we can describe centaur like
"head neck body hand hand gloves ring ring hoof hoof hoof hoof missile
missile_weapon light_source tool"
so it will be impossible to wear boots, but it is possible to wear shoe :-)
HrM> How do you handle intrinsic actions of limbs? I.e. can a creature
HrM> without hands pick up things? If a hand is holding a item is it
HrM> still able to pick up things? How do you determine if a item
HrM> 'shadows' the action of a limb or if it overrides the action of the
HrM> limb?
At this time there is no intrinsic actions of limbs in Avanor. May be
I will made this in fature, but not sure.
All creatures has it own intrinsic actions. In Avanor rat can't pick
up item because AI of rat dosent allow here to do this.
HrM> You determine the body part, but reduce the hitpoints of the
HrM> complete creature? Not only those of the limb that is hit? I.e. if
HrM> the creature is four armed, and one of the arms is hurt very
HrM> severley, it should loose the attack with that arm. This requires
HrM> to give the limbs hitpoints.
At this time this feature dosen't implemented. It is not bad idea to add
hit points to every limb, but I think the game with such model becomes
more complex for user.
HrM> If it looses all four hands it should not be able to pick up things
HrM> anymore.
HrM> Do you have implemented aimed attacks (i.e. try to hit the neck of
HrM> the creature)?
no, at this time it is not implemented.
In whole, I agreed, that Avanor limb system it is not better limb
system of the world. It is olny attempt to add some realism to
game without increasing of complexity for user (and for
programmer, of course :-)).
I think, I probably have understood what is limb system you
want to write, but something says me, that programming
such system will much complex than all game.
R Dan Henry
Malthaner <hansjoerg...@danet.de> transmitted thus:
>A shield for example makes the 'punch' action of the hand unavailable, while
>a glove still allows to punch.
This is the difference between an item that is "worn" and an item that
is "held". You can do just about anything with a glove on as without
(although some tasks may receive a penalty or bonus), but an object
held in the hand will interfere with a lot of other things. Likewise I
can wear a sock or a boot on my foot, but can only hold things with my
toes. You just need to find a way to distinguish worn and held items.
R Dan Henry
Malthaner <hansjoerg...@danet.de> transmitted thus:
>I have no unspecified area. The backpack is a item, that is usually equipped
>on the shoulders (but can be held in a hand, too). The player actually could
>carry one backpack on his shoudlers, and two others in the hands. In this
>case the code had severe trouble to determine which backpack to search for a
>swap weapon ...
A swap weapon is not kept in a backpack! You keep weapons on a belt,
or a shoulder harness, or a sheath strapped to your leg. A really cool
magic on a bow is to have it float in the air when released while
strung, so you can swap without dropping your bow where it will get
trampled. With a bow like that and quickdraw skill, going between
archery and fencing should be nearly as painless as Angband. Or at
least as in most roguelikes. Also, should be possible to have some
items "ready from the ground", as for example arrows or spears set up
to be rapidly raised and released against the enemy.
Wands strapped into wrist holsters.
Scroll tubes on a belt or shoulder strap.
Potions can also be kept in a utility belt or maybe an inventive type
could rig up a couple of potions of healing in a hat, like has been
done with beer.
Hansjörg Malthaner
You're right. I mixed that up.
I'll change the limb code to allow one item to be worn, and some limbs will
get a additional slot to hold an item.
This seems to solve quite a lot of the mentioned problems. Thanks a lot!
> --
> Richard D. Henry
> rdan...@earthlink.net
No sig anymore? I already missed the trained philosopher, but the grand
pasha was great, too :)
c.u.
Hajo
Greg McIntyre
In a vague attempt to not out-clever myself, I was going to have a
bitmask determining what can be held in a hand, etc. *shrug*
> Any clever ideas?
I'm not sure how clever it is, but incorporating methods like:
isBeingUsedToKick(Unit& self, int *damage, ...)
isBeingUsedToPunch(Unit& self, int *damage, ...)
isBeingUsed(Unit& self)
...
(or something -- silly parameters merely a suggestion)
into your items somehow, would give your a lot of flexibility. Those
hooks could do anything and return anything!
I'm personally contemplating embedding Ruby scripts in my XML item
database (<?ruby ... ?>). Then I could include simple hashtable-style
value sets for simple modifications (to-hit +3), and entire scripts if
I need the flexibility (e.g. for items that turn the target blue when
used).
That is, my XML database could define behaviour as well as structure
for maximum flexibility.
Well, that's the theory anyways.
> Another problem. If "pick up" is a action of the hand, and the
> player is holding a shield and a sword, he cannot pick up items
> anymore. This is'correct' due to the rule that a hand holding a item
> looses the pick up action, but it is very uncomfortable to the
> player. How realistic should this part of the game be?
Boo realism!! It's a game, innit? :) Go with what's fun!
--
Greg McIntyre
gr...@puyo.cjb.net
http://puyo.cjb.net
Hansjörg Malthaner
> > Another problem. If "pick up" is a action of the hand, and the
> > player is holding a shield and a sword, he cannot pick up items
> > anymore. This is'correct' due to the rule that a hand holding a item
> > looses the pick up action, but it is very uncomfortable to the
> > player. How realistic should this part of the game be?
>
> Boo realism!! It's a game, innit? :) Go with what's fun!
Actually this is also an experiment to verify or falsify the claims that too
much detailism is bad for games.
When I started the project I was talking about realism, but I found that is
not exactly what I had in mind. I don't want to have realism, but more
detailism. This finding also helps to decide where to make the cut. A detail
that adds nothing to gameplay isn't neccesary in the game.
Realism is endless. Detailism can be cut. Realism is 'art for art' while
details (should) serve a purpose. I.e. I already threw out animated
graphics - they are realistic, but don't add much to gameplay. I'm slowly
learning why roguelikes are how they are :)
But still I think, the limb system can add some aspects to the gameplay. As
said, this is a experiment, to see how far some things can be stretched and
where the cut must be made. I want to find the borderlines, and learn why
they are there. If I understand them, I'll accept them.
> Greg McIntyre
c.u.
Hajo
Hansjörg Malthaner
>
> On Tue, 22 Jan 2002 11:38:37 +0100, the disembodied brain of Hansjörg
> Malthaner <hansjoerg...@danet.de> transmitted thus:
>
> >I have no unspecified area. The backpack is a item, that is usually equipped
> >on the shoulders (but can be held in a hand, too). The player actually could
> >carry one backpack on his shoudlers, and two others in the hands. In this
> >case the code had severe trouble to determine which backpack to search for a
> >swap weapon ...
>
> A swap weapon is not kept in a backpack! You keep weapons on a belt,
> or a shoulder harness, or a sheath strapped to your leg.
As so often your just so right here :)
I'll do it this way.
A bit I'm wondering: Angband allows to use staffs, wands, rods and suchlike
in a 1-turn action from the backpack. This implies that 1-turn access to the
backpack is possible.
> A really cool
> magic on a bow is to have it float in the air when released while
> strung, so you can swap without dropping your bow where it will get
> trampled. With a bow like that and quickdraw skill, going between
> archery and fencing should be nearly as painless as Angband. Or at
> least as in most roguelikes.
Although this is a cool idea, I'm not sure if I want to implement this. My
first go at magic will be to implement elemental magic, spells that affect
the physical structure of the game world.
This will allow to reduce the bows weight, but to have it floating in the
air steadily requires more than just a weightless bow, it requires some
control. Elemental magic doesn't grant that kind of control in my design.
> Also, should be possible to have some
> items "ready from the ground", as for example arrows or spears set up
> to be rapidly raised and released against the enemy.
This sounds very reasonable. Along with this we could allow the player to
build and set up obstacles and defenses to hide behind :)
> Wands strapped into wrist holsters.
>
> Scroll tubes on a belt or shoulder strap.
>
> Potions can also be kept in a utility belt or maybe an inventive type
> could rig up a couple of potions of healing in a hat, like has been
> done with beer.
Not to forget jackets and trousers with pockets - some types of trousers
provide quite many pockets.
Theese are fine suggestions, thanks a lot :)
> Richard D. Henry
c.u.
Hajo
Hansjörg Malthaner
[...]
> In whole, I agreed, that Avanor limb system it is not better limb
> system of the world. It is olny attempt to add some realism to
> game without increasing of complexity for user (and for
> programmer, of course :-)).
>
> I think, I probably have understood what is limb system you
> want to write, but something says me, that programming
> such system will much complex than all game.
It's a bit of a experiment. If it is foudn to be too complex and doesn't add
much to the game I'll use a different, simpler approach.
I'm pondering if a similar system for item parts is good idea for a
roguelike game? A while ago we had a discussion here how to craft and build
items. A item-part system would allow the player to toy around witht he
items he finds, dissasmeble them and try to build new items from the parts.
But I'm not sure if this is of actual use or just a toyish feature?
I'd use the same system that represents the limbs for living creatures to
model the item parts.
> Vadim Gaidukevich
c.u.
Hajo
Daniël Löwenstein
> > D: Vectors.
>
> Can you elaborate this a bit? I have a vector type, but I still have the
> problem. The pure existence of vectors does not help :)
D: Yes, it's on this page:
http://members.ams.chello.nl/d.lowenstein/mvect_a.html
> Umm ... the user interface would not show the pick up option as long as
the
> player is holding a sword.
D: You can always pick up something, even if you're holding a sword.
(Just drop the sword first)
> it looks like a 'special case' just invented for
> the purpose of shadowing a basic fault in the design.
D: No it's not. (said in a Monty Python voice)
> I know about touring machines but I just used them to solve questions like
> "is a problem in the set of computable problems? Is is semi-computable?".
I
> don't see the link to the command stack :(
D: I'll build a page explaining this. But first I'm going to eat.
It'll be finished before Friday (making promises on-line always
keeps my motivation high)
Groetend,
Daniël Löwenstein.
Greg McIntyre
> Actually this is also an experiment to verify or falsify the claims
> that too much detailism is bad for games.
'Too much' detailism? *raises eyebrow*
> Realism is endless. Detailism can be cut. Realism is 'art for art'
> while details (should) serve a purpose. I.e. I already threw out
> animated graphics - they are realistic, but don't add much to
> gameplay. I'm slowly learning why roguelikes are how they are :)
Yes, I hadn't thought about it this way. It's why we love 'em. :)
> But still I think, the limb system can add some aspects to the
> gameplay. As said, this is a experiment, to see how far some things
> can be stretched and where the cut must be made. I want to find the
> borderlines, and learn why they are there. If I understand them,
> I'll accept them.
Fair enough. :) I can also imagine that there could be some pretty fun
things you could do with a good limb model.
R Dan Henry
Malthaner <hansjoerg...@danet.de> transmitted thus:
>I'm pondering if a similar system for item parts is good idea for a
>roguelike game? A while ago we had a discussion here how to craft and build
>items. A item-part system would allow the player to toy around witht he
>items he finds, dissasmeble them and try to build new items from the parts.
>But I'm not sure if this is of actual use or just a toyish feature?
I say yes. At least if you're going to do crafting skills, item
damage/repair, and that sort of thing. Find some Arrows of
Orc-Slaughtering and then find some feathers from a Great Falcon and
use fletching skill to create Long-Ranged Arrows of Orc-Slaughtering.
Watch the haft of your Mace of Mightiness burn in dragon fire and
carry around a useless Mace-Head of Mightiness until you can get a new
haft for it. Use the String of Great Range or the String of Awesome
Damage on your Elven Longbow of Rapid Speed? Add the Pommelstone of
Penetration to your Broadsword of Mayhem or your Dagger of Hurling?
Armor may be treated likewise. PernAngband already treats rods as
two-part items. If you have an item-part system, randomized books
containing multiple spells fits right in. Or for that matter, you
might want to go to a spell-parts system, too, where the caster
defines an effect, a target, a duration, a power level, etc.
This could also lead to constructing some relatively complex devices:
you could build rafts, huts, mechanical men...
R Dan Henry
Malthaner <hansjoerg...@danet.de> transmitted thus:
>R Dan Henry wrote:
>A bit I'm wondering: Angband allows to use staffs, wands, rods and suchlike
>in a 1-turn action from the backpack. This implies that 1-turn access to the
>backpack is possible.
Angband's "backpack" is very abstract. Items are used without delay
from the inventory for balance reasons. Other roguelikes do things
differently, Omega probably most prominently. If you're going to go to
the trouble of assigning real locations to objects rather than just
abstract "slots", it would seem rather strange to be able to use a
potion at the bottom of my backpack as quickly as one in my hand. What
this means is that the game will need to be balanced differently.
Also, a Wand of Bewildering Monsters might not shoot a zappy little
beam at a distant monster, but be a melee weapon which bewilders a
monster when it hits. Actually I like this idea... wands are
touch-range magic items, staves throw spells at a distance. If you
want rods as something yet different, make them magic enhancers.
Wielding a Rod of Fiery Magic will let you cast Fire Magic at twice
your actual level/skill.
>> A really cool
>> magic on a bow is to have it float in the air when released while
>> strung, so you can swap without dropping your bow where it will get
>> trampled. With a bow like that and quickdraw skill, going between
>> archery and fencing should be nearly as painless as Angband. Or at
>> least as in most roguelikes.
>
>Although this is a cool idea, I'm not sure if I want to implement this. My
>first go at magic will be to implement elemental magic, spells that affect
>the physical structure of the game world.
Well, I just said it's a cool bow, not that it would be suitable for
your world. Actually, I'd leave player magic until as late as
possible, so that the magic system can be defined around the rest of
the game's features. The body parts system suggests all sorts of
differences in healing spells, shape change, body enhancement magic,
etc. as compared with other roguelikes.
Do you want a detailed/complex magic system to go with the rest of
your detail? I'd love to bounce around magic system ideas, but to do
it right, you really need a pretty solid grip on what the rest of the
game will look like, unless you intend to build the whole game around
the magic system.
>This will allow to reduce the bows weight, but to have it floating in the
>air steadily requires more than just a weightless bow, it requires some
>control. Elemental magic doesn't grant that kind of control in my design.
Actually, if I wanted to assign this to elemental magic, I'd just have
a conjured (very minor) air elemental hold it up.
>> Also, should be possible to have some
>> items "ready from the ground", as for example arrows or spears set up
>> to be rapidly raised and released against the enemy.
>
>This sounds very reasonable. Along with this we could allow the player to
>build and set up obstacles and defenses to hide behind :)
I seem to recall reading about archers who used large shields with
spikes at the bottom, so they could plant them as mobile cover.
>> Wands strapped into wrist holsters.
>>
>> Scroll tubes on a belt or shoulder strap.
>>
>> Potions can also be kept in a utility belt or maybe an inventive type
>> could rig up a couple of potions of healing in a hat, like has been
>> done with beer.
>
>Not to forget jackets and trousers with pockets - some types of trousers
>provide quite many pockets.
Ooo, pockets!
Yeah, pockets are good for holding the little things like keys, gems,
coins, spare amulets, wallet, International Union of Applied Wizardry
ID card...
>Theese are fine suggestions, thanks a lot :)
R. Dan Henry, Grand Pashah of Small Miscellaneous Objects
rdan...@earthlink.net
"Lately, the only thing keeping me from being a serial
killer is my distaste for manual labor." -- Dilbert
Vadim Gaidukevich
You wrote on Wed, 23 Jan 2002 01:30:43 GMT:
>> I'm pondering if a similar system for item parts is good idea for a
>> roguelike game? A while ago we had a discussion here how to craft and
>> build items. A item-part system would allow the player to toy around
>> witht he items he finds, dissasmeble them and try to build new items
>> from the parts.
>> But I'm not sure if this is of actual use or just a toyish feature?
RH> I say yes. At least if you're going to do crafting skills, item
RH> damage/repair, and that sort of thing. Find some Arrows of
RH> Orc-Slaughtering and then find some feathers from a Great Falcon and
RH> use fletching skill to create Long-Ranged Arrows of
RH> Orc-Slaughtering.
*skip*
I Additional I would like to say:
using a ruby, plate from gold, some peaces of glass and wand of light
give us powerful beam weapon also known as LASER :-)))))
Hansjörg Malthaner
>
> > >
> > > D: Vectors.
> >
> > Can you elaborate this a bit? I have a vector type, but I still have the
> > problem. The pure existence of vectors does not help :)
>
> D: Yes, it's on this page:
> http://members.ams.chello.nl/d.lowenstein/mvect_a.html
Thanks. I mistook 'vector' as a name of a container class like
java.util.vector
Hansjörg Malthaner
>
> > >
> > > D: Vectors.
> >
> > Can you elaborate this a bit? I have a vector type, but I still have the
> > problem. The pure existence of vectors does not help :)
>
> D: Yes, it's on this page:
> http://members.ams.chello.nl/d.lowenstein/mvect_a.html
This leads to the conclusion, that the players stats/skills and abilities
can be modeld as a point in a n-dimensional space (n = Number of
stats/skils/abilites). You could use n-dimesnional vectors to move the point
around in this space.
Actually it seems to be done this way in most rogulikes, but usually all but
one component of the vectors are 0 and not explictely considered.
Do you plan to build your roguleike DRAAK on solid math theory? Your hint
about touring machines seems to point in this direction, too.
Gerry Quinn
>Potions can also be kept in a utility belt or maybe an inventive type
>could rig up a couple of potions of healing in a hat, like has been
>done with beer.
>
The -5 to charisma is too much for it to be worthwhile ;-)
- Gerry Quinn
Hansjörg Malthaner
If charisma was relative, i.e. has to match the charisma of the other
person, you surely could impress one of those half-troll shopkeepers with
that trick :)
> - Gerry Quinn
c.u.
Hajo
Mariusz Chwalba
>I had the idea to build every being in my game from limbs. I.e. the player
>has hands, feet, a body a head etc.
[- snipity snip -]
Hey, this looks exacly like my limb system. :)
>Now, how can I determine which items support the actions of the limbs (a
>foot with a boot may kick a opponed even better than a naked foot), and
>which hinder the action (a hand holding a shield can't punch or pick up
>things)?
>Any clever ideas?
I have an list of skill[*] asigned to every limb and item (well, as far as
game mechanics is concerned, an limb *is* an item). Limb holding item
cannot be used at all. So, when you wear an shoe you cannot run using
feet, but instead you can run using shoes :).
Another typical example is a sword. Bare hand can do a "pick up", "push"
and "use simple device[**]" and "melee/unarmed". Sword can do a "use
simple device(-5)", "push" and "melee/sword". So, when you wield a sword
you can no longer pickup things and combat unarmed, but you still can push
something, operate devices (altrough it's harder), and of course strike
an opponent.
[*] yes, i do have "pickup" skill, "run" skill and so on. I tried to make
*every* action any creature can make a "skill use" action.
Yet Another Overkill. :)
[**] open an unlocked door, pull a lever, etc.
>Another problem. If "pick up" is a action of the hand, and the player is
>holding a shield and a sword, he cannot pick up items anymore. This is
>'correct' due to the rule that a hand holding a item looses the pick up
>action, but it is very uncomfortable to the player. How realistic should
>this part of the game be? This question is interesting in regard to the
>problem that the player has two hands only, but in most roguelikes he is
>holding sword, shield, light source, swap weapon, shooting wepaon, ammo and
>maybe some more stuff. That doesn't go well with the limb system, it
>requires tricks or lots of 'special' rules.
I solved this by allowing UI to memorize couple of equipment settings and
then change them with a single keystroke. So, if you encounter a treasure
in a dungeon you just change to a "looting" setup (both hands empty),
loot, and switch back to "combat" setting. With couple of these player can
easly configure equipment for melee, ranged combat, travel, dungeon
exploration (lightsources and weapons handy) and so on.
>Was my idea of a limb system a dumb idea? Am I too confined in my idea of
>the limbs? Is there a way to overcome the problems and still implement a
>limb system without a thousand of exception rules?
I belive there is. After all, i chose limb-based system to avoid
exceptions. :)
>Hajo
Koder
--
:: ) :: Mariusz 'kODEr' Chwalba
:: (,) ::
:: .-|-. :: kode...@poczta.onet.pl ko...@wish.prv.pl
|~~T|
Hansjörg Malthaner
>
> On Tue, 22 Jan 2002 18:11:54 +0100, the disembodied brain of Hansjörg
> Malthaner <hansjoerg...@danet.de> transmitted thus:
>
> >I'm pondering if a similar system for item parts is good idea for a
> >roguelike game? A while ago we had a discussion here how to craft and build
> >items. A item-part system would allow the player to toy around witht he
> >items he finds, dissasmeble them and try to build new items from the parts.
> >But I'm not sure if this is of actual use or just a toyish feature?
>
> I say yes. At least if you're going to do crafting skills, item
> damage/repair, and that sort of thing.
Most of my design notes regarding item parts root back to suggestions of
yours. I have definite plans to implement a crafting skill, and for players
that don't have a crafting skill, NPCs that can craft and/or rework items
for them. I'm just unsure about the depth and detailism of this area.
> Find some Arrows of
> Orc-Slaughtering and then find some feathers from a Great Falcon and
> use fletching skill to create Long-Ranged Arrows of Orc-Slaughtering.
> Watch the haft of your Mace of Mightiness burn in dragon fire and
> carry around a useless Mace-Head of Mightiness until you can get a new
> haft for it. Use the String of Great Range or the String of Awesome
> Damage on your Elven Longbow of Rapid Speed? Add the Pommelstone of
> Penetration to your Broadsword of Mayhem or your Dagger of Hurling?
I'm always amazed of the names you invent :)
I have to copy them into my notes. I hope you don't mind. I think I'll have
to implement the items and if the player inspects the items there will be
small sign "invented by R. Dan Henry".
I still remember this famous unique iron shod boot 'Kickmaster'
> Armor may be treated likewise. PernAngband already treats rods as
> two-part items. If you have an item-part system, randomized books
> containing multiple spells fits right in. Or for that matter, you
> might want to go to a spell-parts system, too, where the caster
> defines an effect, a target, a duration, a power level, etc.
May first spell system implementation will work a bit like that.
> This could also lead to constructing some relatively complex devices:
> you could build rafts, huts, mechanical men...
This brings up a new question: a blade and a handle must match only some
very rough criterias to be assembled. But mechanical men (on other devices)
requrie the parts to work together. I have no didea how I could implement
item parts that build a function.
Hansjörg Malthaner
>
> On Tue, 22 Jan 2002 16:59:25 +0100, the disembodied brain of Hansjörg
> Malthaner <hansjoerg...@danet.de> transmitted thus:
>
> >R Dan Henry wrote:
>
> >A bit I'm wondering: Angband allows to use staffs, wands, rods and suchlike
> >in a 1-turn action from the backpack. This implies that 1-turn access to the
> >backpack is possible.
>
> Angband's "backpack" is very abstract. Items are used without delay
> from the inventory for balance reasons. Other roguelikes do things
> differently, Omega probably most prominently. If you're going to go to
> the trouble of assigning real locations to objects rather than just
> abstract "slots", it would seem rather strange to be able to use a
> potion at the bottom of my backpack as quickly as one in my hand.
I had in mind to have quick-access inventories, and slow-access inventories.
Jackets, trousers (pockets), belts and straps and suchlike provide quick
access. Backpacks, bags and chests provide more storage space but slow
access. Currently only the most basic inventory handling is implemented.
> What
> this means is that the game will need to be balanced differently.
> Also, a Wand of Bewildering Monsters might not shoot a zappy little
> beam at a distant monster, but be a melee weapon which bewilders a
> monster when it hits. Actually I like this idea... wands are
> touch-range magic items, staves throw spells at a distance.
I like this idea too.
> If you
> want rods as something yet different, make them magic enhancers.
> Wielding a Rod of Fiery Magic will let you cast Fire Magic at twice
> your actual level/skill.
I had planned to have fetishes for this purpose. Things like skulls, bones,
puppets, pieces of special wood, stone or metal, gems, jewels, sacred plants
and magic animals that enstrengthen the magic powers of their owners. I had
two kinds of suchlike devices in mind: help to fokus power (same effect over
a larger distance, more effect on a smaller area) or just provide power
(just overall raises the power of the spell).
I hope same day I'll have the time to implement theese ideas!
> >> A really cool
> >> magic on a bow is to have it float in the air when released while
> >> strung, so you can swap without dropping your bow where it will get
> >> trampled. With a bow like that and quickdraw skill, going between
> >> archery and fencing should be nearly as painless as Angband. Or at
> >> least as in most roguelikes.
> >
> >Although this is a cool idea, I'm not sure if I want to implement this. My
> >first go at magic will be to implement elemental magic, spells that affect
> >the physical structure of the game world.
>
> Well, I just said it's a cool bow, not that it would be suitable for
> your world. Actually, I'd leave player magic until as late as
> possible, so that the magic system can be defined around the rest of
> the game's features. The body parts system suggests all sorts of
> differences in healing spells, shape change, body enhancement magic,
> etc. as compared with other roguelikes.
>
> Do you want a detailed/complex magic system to go with the rest of
> your detail? I'd love to bounce around magic system ideas, but to do
> it right, you really need a pretty solid grip on what the rest of the
> game will look like, unless you intend to build the whole game around
> the magic system.
I've posted my ideas about a magic system a whiele ago, if you want to can
post that section of my design notes again. It goes well with the details of
the game world, but is not very 'magic' currently. Its a very rational
system ... I guess many people will find it a bit boring.
Google has the original post and all the answers:
Erm ... I hope that link will work still work if it reaches the group :)
> >> Also, should be possible to have some
> >> items "ready from the ground", as for example arrows or spears set up
> >> to be rapidly raised and released against the enemy.
> >
> >This sounds very reasonable. Along with this we could allow the player to
> >build and set up obstacles and defenses to hide behind :)
>
> I seem to recall reading about archers who used large shields with
> spikes at the bottom, so they could plant them as mobile cover.
I think in history lessons at school I heard of this, too.
> R. Dan Henry, Grand Pashah of Small Miscellaneous Objects
> rdan...@earthlink.net
c.u.
Hajo
bd
Like have attacks hack specific ones off that could be then used for food ;)
--
Failure is not an option. It comes bundled with your Microsoft product.
Visualize whirled peas.
R Dan Henry
Malthaner <hansjoerg...@danet.de> transmitted thus:
>I'm always amazed of the names you invent :)
>I have to copy them into my notes. I hope you don't mind. I think I'll have
>to implement the items and if the player inspects the items there will be
>small sign "invented by R. Dan Henry".
Any time you need some names and ideas for little features, just let
me know what you're generally looking for and how wacky I can get and
I'll send you a list. As long as I get credit; after all, I may use
them myself some day.
>I still remember this famous unique iron shod boot 'Kickmaster'
Ooh, I like name. I came up with that? Cool.
R. Dan Henry, Grand Pashah of Small Miscellaneous Objects
rdan...@earthlink.net
Daniël Löwenstein
the
> > > problem. The pure existence of vectors does not help :)
> >
> > D: Yes, it's on this page:
> > http://members.ams.chello.nl/d.lowenstein/mvect_a.html
>
> This leads to the conclusion, that the players stats/skills and abilities
> can be modeld as a point in a n-dimensional space (n = Number of
> stats/skils/abilites). You could use n-dimesnional vectors to move the
point
> around in this space.
D: Yes.
> Actually it seems to be done this way in most rogulikes, but usually all
but
> one component of the vectors are 0 and not explictely considered.
D: It would be better to default a component to -100%.
This means you CAN'T combine any item with another, unless it's
specified that you can. Because there will only be a few
tools/lightsources
that can be used in combination with other items.
> Do you plan to build your roguelike DRAAK on solid math theory?
D: Yes, that's the plan.
When I was still at the university I studied math just to get
through my exams.
Score points and get grades just high enough to pass.
But now I'm re-reading all my math-books with creating a
roguelike in the back of my head,
and all of it is coming alive!
Using Turing-machines to build complex actions from a very
limited range of player input.
And matrices to create consistent randomly generated quests.
And constraint logic programming for game mechanics.
First I just tried to understand it all myself, but now my
ultimate goal is to explain it all
in articles that are readable by an average roguelike designer.
(and yes, getting the roguelike DRAAK finished has a lower
priority)
R Dan Henry
Malthaner <hansjoerg...@danet.de> transmitted thus:
>R Dan Henry wrote:
>> If you
>> want rods as something yet different, make them magic enhancers.
>> Wielding a Rod of Fiery Magic will let you cast Fire Magic at twice
>> your actual level/skill.
>
>I had planned to have fetishes for this purpose. Things like skulls, bones,
>puppets, pieces of special wood, stone or metal, gems, jewels, sacred plants
>and magic animals that enstrengthen the magic powers of their owners. I had
>two kinds of suchlike devices in mind: help to fokus power (same effect over
>a larger distance, more effect on a smaller area) or just provide power
>(just overall raises the power of the spell).
Oh, cool, that would have a lot more flavor using a bunch of different
objects. Dragontooth fire enhancers, Jewels of Dancing Thunder, the
Hand Puppet of Delusional Command, Mandrake Root and Hair of Bat...
>> Well, I just said it's a cool bow, not that it would be suitable for
>> your world. Actually, I'd leave player magic until as late as
>> possible, so that the magic system can be defined around the rest of
>> the game's features. The body parts system suggests all sorts of
>> differences in healing spells, shape change, body enhancement magic,
>> etc. as compared with other roguelikes.
Although it seems to me my floating bow could be done under your
system. Just cancel the gravity element with respect to the bow. It
would be the same as fire-immunity on an item and you'd almost
certainly want to include that.
>I've posted my ideas about a magic system a whiele ago, if you want to can
>post that section of my design notes again. It goes well with the details of
>the game world, but is not very 'magic' currently. Its a very rational
>system ... I guess many people will find it a bit boring.
>Google has the original post and all the answers:
>
>http://groups.google.com/groups?q=Elemental+magic+group:rec.games.roguelike.development+group:rec.games.roguelike.development&hl=de&selm=3B13C49F.97E6E15F%40danet.de&rnum=3
>
>Erm ... I hope that link will work still work if it reaches the group :)
Yeah, but is that still your outline? Seems there was enough
discussion you might have modified it some. And if I was doing it that
way, I wouldn't make fire an element, I'd use heat and then fire would
be heat and light. And I'd have a cold element and have water+cold for
ice effects.
R. Dan Henry, Grand Pashah of Small Miscellaneous Objects
rdan...@earthlink.net
Ray Davis
> > This could also lead to constructing some relatively complex devices:
> > you could build rafts, huts, mechanical men...
>
> This brings up a new question: a blade and a handle must match only some
> very rough criterias to be assembled. But mechanical men (on other
devices)
> requrie the parts to work together. I have no didea how I could implement
> item parts that build a function.
FWIW, when dealing with Crafting, you might consider checking out Arcanum, a
very entertaining non-conformist RPG. Basically, for those who have never
heard of the game, in Arcanum you could create a 'Technologist', who was
able to combine various parts into new items, but they took a very simple
approach in which you simply need a 1) schematic, 2) the necessary parts,
and 3) the necessary skill to use said schematic. You could get schematics
either through the University, buying them at shops specializing in
Technology, and of course finding them in the World.
It may sound like a very simple system, but it was actually quite fun
without being too confusing to use/understand... might be a good basis of
inspiration for your own crafting systems...
Hansjörg Malthaner
>
> < lots of snippage >
> > > This could also lead to constructing some relatively complex devices:
> > > you could build rafts, huts, mechanical men...
> >
> > This brings up a new question: a blade and a handle must match only some
> > very rough criterias to be assembled. But mechanical men (on other
> devices)
> > requrie the parts to work together. I have no didea how I could implement
> > item parts that build a function.
>
> FWIW, when dealing with Crafting, you might consider checking out Arcanum, a
> very entertaining non-conformist RPG.
I've read a review about arcanum, but not tested it by myself.
> Basically, for those who have never
> heard of the game, in Arcanum you could create a 'Technologist', who was
> able to combine various parts into new items, but they took a very simple
> approach in which you simply need a 1) schematic, 2) the necessary parts,
> and 3) the necessary skill to use said schematic. You could get schematics
> either through the University, buying them at shops specializing in
> Technology, and of course finding them in the World.
>
> It may sound like a very simple system, but it was actually quite fun
> without being too confusing to use/understand... might be a good basis of
> inspiration for your own crafting systems...
Can you elaborate a bit on this? Maybe a few examples on the schematics?
How do the parts fit together? How is the function determined?
Are the function hardcoded or actually computed from the functions of the
parts?
I'm thinking a while about the computatiopnal aspect, but without luck so
far. All games I know had hardcoded effects, regardless if concerning
machinery or magic effects.
> -Ray
> http://frankfurter.perilith.com
c.u.
Hajo
Daniël Löwenstein
> > the purpose of shadowing a basic fault in the design.
>
> D: No it's not. (said in a Monty Python voice)
>
> > I know about touring machines but I just used them to solve questions
like
> > "is a problem in the set of computable problems? Is is
semi-computable?".
> I
> > don't see the link to the command stack :(
>
> D: I'll build a page explaining this. But first I'm going to eat.
> It'll be finished before Friday (making promises on-line
always
> keeps my motivation high)
D: Here is that page:
http://members.ams.chello.nl/d.lowenstein/pqueue.html
(the Turing machine version of this solution didn't make it
clear at all,
but for the people who like this kind of thing, here it is:
http://members.ams.chello.nl/d.lowenstein/turing1.html
)
Hansjörg Malthaner
>
> Hansjörg Malthaner <hansjoerg...@danet.de> zapodaje:
>
> >I had the idea to build every being in my game from limbs. I.e. the player
> >has hands, feet, a body a head etc.
>
> [- snipity snip -]
> Hey, this looks exacly like my limb system. :)
Probably there are not so much choices :)
Actually there seem to be only two: simple statistical limb systems and the
tree-like structured systems.
> >Now, how can I determine which items support the actions of the limbs (a
> >foot with a boot may kick a opponed even better than a naked foot), and
> >which hinder the action (a hand holding a shield can't punch or pick up
> >things)?
>
> >Any clever ideas?
>
> I have an list of skill[*] asigned to every limb and item (well, as far as
> game mechanics is concerned, an limb *is* an item).
In H-World limbs are items, too, actually they are objects of the same
class.
> Limb holding item
> cannot be used at all. So, when you wear an shoe you cannot run using
> feet, but instead you can run using shoes :).
An interesting idea :)
This simplifies some things quite a bit.
But I think I'll use the "filter" approach that Philip Swartzleonard
suggested. It seems to be the most flexible solution.
> Another typical example is a sword. Bare hand can do a "pick up", "push"
> and "use simple device[**]" and "melee/unarmed". Sword can do a "use
> simple device(-5)", "push" and "melee/sword". So, when you wield a sword
> you can no longer pickup things and combat unarmed, but you still can push
> something, operate devices (altrough it's harder), and of course strike
> an opponent.
>
> [*] yes, i do have "pickup" skill, "run" skill and so on. I tried to make
> *every* action any creature can make a "skill use" action.
> Yet Another Overkill. :)
>
> [**] open an unlocked door, pull a lever, etc.
I've separated 'actions/usages' and skills. Many actions depend on the same
skill, as do usages. But some saction depnd on sevral skills.
The separation of actions and skills will allow more complex dependencies.
As of yet, the skills are not implemented at all, they only exist in my
design document.
> >Another problem. If "pick up" is a action of the hand, and the player is
> >holding a shield and a sword, he cannot pick up items anymore. This is
> >'correct' due to the rule that a hand holding a item looses the pick up
> >action, but it is very uncomfortable to the player. How realistic should
> >this part of the game be? This question is interesting in regard to the
> >problem that the player has two hands only, but in most roguelikes he is
> >holding sword, shield, light source, swap weapon, shooting wepaon, ammo and
> >maybe some more stuff. That doesn't go well with the limb system, it
> >requires tricks or lots of 'special' rules.
>
> I solved this by allowing UI to memorize couple of equipment settings and
> then change them with a single keystroke. So, if you encounter a treasure
> in a dungeon you just change to a "looting" setup (both hands empty),
> loot, and switch back to "combat" setting. With couple of these player can
> easly configure equipment for melee, ranged combat, travel, dungeon
> exploration (lightsources and weapons handy) and so on.
How do you store the setups? I mean the information required to restore a
certain setup?
> >Was my idea of a limb system a dumb idea? Am I too confined in my idea of
> >the limbs? Is there a way to overcome the problems and still implement a
> >limb system without a thousand of exception rules?
>
> I belive there is. After all, i chose limb-based system to avoid
> exceptions. :)
Sounds like I'm on the right way :)
> Koder
c.u.
Hajo
Ray Davis
news:3C516144...@danet.de...
> Can you elaborate a bit on this? Maybe a few examples on the schematics?
> How do the parts fit together? How is the function determined?
>
> Are the function hardcoded or actually computed from the functions of the
> parts?
>
> I'm thinking a while about the computatiopnal aspect, but without luck so
> far. All games I know had hardcoded effects, regardless if concerning
> machinery or magic effects.
>
Okay, an example (or two): there is a simple schematic for a healing salve,
and the schematic calls for two ingredients (ginka root and some other
herb), and once you have those two ingredients you bring up the schematic,
press the nifty 'combine' button, and it creates the new salve.
Or, a schematic for a balanced sword - you must find a fine hilt, and of
course a blade. once you've got the 'ingredients', just bring up the
schematic and voila, you have a nifty new sword.
Like I said, it's fairly basic, and in this case the schematics are all
'hard-coded'... they are in semi-fixed places in the game, and the
ingredients vs. results never change. I don't suggest repeating this system
exactly though, but use it as a basis to expand upon.
Perhaps, instead of 'fixed' ingredients, you can just setup required
ingredient types so for example, with the previously mentioned sword, you
could use a "Hand-crafted hilt" (+weapon skill?), or maybe a "Iron hilt"
(+rust?:), and combine it with various types of blades, and thus produce
many different variations upon same 'schematic'.
That way you still have set a fixed schematics, each for a particular item,
but with each schematic you could have a variable number of ingredients, and
a variable type of ingredients, and then theoretically you end up with an
exponential growth in the number of objects the player could craft.
I'm not sure what you mean exactly by 'hard-coded', but I'm assuming that it
means something in the actual game source that would require a
re-compilation to change. Depending on how you have your Object model
setup, it could be very easy (and very difficult) to have non-hard-coded
schematics... here's a theoretical example (using my own file format,
sorry:) -
// a simple schematic for crafting a sword
<entry> <Schematic> <SwordSchematic>
<product> <Sword>
<component> <Hilt>
<component> <Blade>
<baseskill> <50>
...
<end>
// example ingredients
<entry> <Component> <FieryHilt>
<type> <Hilt>
<modifier> <+firedmg>
<modifier> <-weaponskill> // fire makes it harder to wield
...
<end>
<entry> <Component> <IcyBlade>
<type> <Blade>
<modifier> <+icedmg>
<modifier> <+weaponspeed>
...
<end>
Using this example, a player with the SwordSchematic could combine the
FieryHilt and IcyBlade to create a new Sword that gives all of the listed
modifiers. You could also tweak the system so that 'better' ingredients
require more skill to combine properly - ie the beginner will have a hard
enough time with normal parts, much less trying to combine to magickal
items.
Also with this example, the function of the object isn't determined by the
parts themselves, just modifications to the base. Personally I think that a
system that would try to determine the product from the parts alone would be
a hassle to engineer properly - and ultimately you would end up just having
a list of possible products, which is essentially what the system I'm
describing does. With each new schematic you are defining a new product,
and what parts can be combined to create that product. So in the end you
would also need to make a list of possible parts - but that too can be
entries in your data, and not necessarily hard-coded. It all depends on how
complicated you want to make it I suppose... :)
Not sure if this makes sense, sort of hard to explain... hopefully at some
point I can have a working model as an example in my own game. :)
-Ray
Mariusz Chwalba
[...]
>> Limb holding item
>> cannot be used at all. So, when you wear an shoe you cannot run using
>> feet, but instead you can run using shoes :).
>An interesting idea :)
>This simplifies some things quite a bit.
It allows some interesting combinations. For example animated sword (made
by connecting a "mind" entity with "telekinesis" skill to a mundane sword)
is able to fly around (due to "telekinesis"), strike opponents, bash
doors, push thing around and pull levers - all without a single exception
in game engine. In general, i tried to design Wish to avoid *any*
exceptions in game mechanics.
[...]
>> [*] yes, i do have "pickup" skill, "run" skill and so on. I tried to make
>> *every* action any creature can make a "skill use" action.
>> Yet Another Overkill. :)
[...]
>I've separated 'actions/usages' and skills. Many actions depend on the same
>skill, as do usages. But some saction depnd on sevral skills.
>The separation of actions and skills will allow more complex dependencies.
>As of yet, the skills are not implemented at all, they only exist in my
>design document.
I used an different approach. My skill system itself is an graph, so
almost every skill has couple of weighted predecessors.
[...]
>> I solved this by allowing UI to memorize couple of equipment settings and
>> then change them with a single keystroke. So, if you encounter a treasure
>> in a dungeon you just change to a "looting" setup (both hands empty),
>> loot, and switch back to "combat" setting.
[...]
>How do you store the setups? I mean the information required to restore a
>certain setup?
Right now it is an simple list of two item id's: item concerned and item
to be put into it. Since "wearing an armor" is actually "putting your
torso-item into armor-item", this seems to work fine.
Björn Bergström
news:a2u23i$7fu$1...@iruka.swcp.com...
This is a great idea! I had some notes on creating custom objects from
differents parts, but for weapons and such things it would be difficult
to calculate damage etc. Schematics are much better; you always know the
result and you can still achieve great variation. I really like this! It
shouldn't be hard to implement either...
--
Björn Bergström - dungeon...@swipnet.se
Dungeondweller RLG and Roguelike Development Articles at
http://home.swipnet.se/dungeondweller/index.htm
PROdotes
"Ray Davis" <r...@digitalo.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:a2u23i$7fu$1...@iruka.swcp.com...
> Okay, an example (or two): there is a simple schematic for a healing
salve,
> and the schematic calls for two ingredients (ginka root and some other
> herb), and once you have those two ingredients you bring up the schematic,
> press the nifty 'combine' button, and it creates the new salve.
>
> Or, a schematic for a balanced sword - you must find a fine hilt, and of
> course a blade. once you've got the 'ingredients', just bring up the
> schematic and voila, you have a nifty new sword.
Arcanum?? I think the idea is from there... and it's a good one... if you
limit it by exp and knowledge systems...
Arcum Dagsson
R Dan Henry <rdan...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Jan 2002 18:48:50 +0100, the disembodied brain of Hansjörg
> Malthaner <hansjoerg...@danet.de> transmitted thus:
>
> >R Dan Henry wrote:
>
> >> If you
> >> want rods as something yet different, make them magic enhancers.
> >> Wielding a Rod of Fiery Magic will let you cast Fire Magic at twice
> >> your actual level/skill.
> >
> >I had planned to have fetishes for this purpose. Things like skulls, bones,
> >puppets, pieces of special wood, stone or metal, gems, jewels, sacred plants
> >and magic animals that enstrengthen the magic powers of their owners. I had
> >two kinds of suchlike devices in mind: help to fokus power (same effect over
> >a larger distance, more effect on a smaller area) or just provide power
> >(just overall raises the power of the spell).
>
> Oh, cool, that would have a lot more flavor using a bunch of different
> objects. Dragontooth fire enhancers, Jewels of Dancing Thunder, the
> Hand Puppet of Delusional Command, Mandrake Root and Hair of Bat...
>
Definately. The Skull of Mandos, the Pendant of Ba'al, etc... If you have
priests, you could have similar priestly focuses, such as splinters of the one
true cross, bones of various saints, etc...
> >> Well, I just said it's a cool bow, not that it would be suitable for
> >> your world. Actually, I'd leave player magic until as late as
> >> possible, so that the magic system can be defined around the rest of
> >> the game's features. The body parts system suggests all sorts of
> >> differences in healing spells, shape change, body enhancement magic,
> >> etc. as compared with other roguelikes.
>
> Although it seems to me my floating bow could be done under your
> system. Just cancel the gravity element with respect to the bow. It
> would be the same as fire-immunity on an item and you'd almost
> certainly want to include that.
>
> >I've posted my ideas about a magic system a whiele ago, if you want to can
> >post that section of my design notes again. It goes well with the details of
> >the game world, but is not very 'magic' currently. Its a very rational
> >system ... I guess many people will find it a bit boring.
>
> >Google has the original post and all the answers:
> >
> >http://groups.google.com/groups?q=Elemental+magic+group:rec.games.roguelike.d
> >evelopment+group:rec.games.roguelike.development&hl=de&selm=3B13C49F.97E6E15F
> >%40danet.de&rnum=3
> >
> >Erm ... I hope that link will work still work if it reaches the group :)
>
> Yeah, but is that still your outline? Seems there was enough
> discussion you might have modified it some. And if I was doing it that
> way, I wouldn't make fire an element, I'd use heat and then fire would
> be heat and light. And I'd have a cold element and have water+cold for
> ice effects.
>
In fact, it seems to have been modified somewhat here:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=de&selm=3B163358.7292228B%40danet.de&rnum=5
And this also sketches out focuses, staves, wands, rods, and books. I do have to
wonder if it has been modified further since then...
--
--Arcum
"There was a terrible ghastly silence.
There was a terrible ghastly noise.
There was a terrible ghastly silence. "
R Dan Henry
Bergström" <dungeon...@swipnet.se> transmitted thus:
>This is a great idea! I had some notes on creating custom objects from
>differents parts, but for weapons and such things it would be difficult
>to calculate damage etc. Schematics are much better; you always know the
>result and you can still achieve great variation. I really like this! It
>shouldn't be hard to implement either...
Well, I'd think hafted weapons would have basic damage defined by the
head and the haft act as a multiplier with its leverage, longer hafts
having higher multipliers (but longer "recovery times" if such are
used). But you do need basic rules to define what types of parts can
be meaningfully combined. A sword hilt on a mace head is not going to
make an effective weapon... and a bow string, a lizard, and a lens
isn't going to make anything anyhow.
I do think the less rigid you can make things, the better, but you
will need to carefully look at what odd combos can produce.
Hansjörg Malthaner
>
> "Hansjörg Malthaner" <hansjoerg...@danet.de> wrote in message
> news:3C516144...@danet.de...
>
> > Can you elaborate a bit on this? Maybe a few examples on the schematics?
[...]
> Okay, an example (or two): there is a simple schematic for a healing salve,
> and the schematic calls for two ingredients (ginka root and some other
> herb), and once you have those two ingredients you bring up the schematic,
> press the nifty 'combine' button, and it creates the new salve.
[...]
> I'm not sure what you mean exactly by 'hard-coded', but I'm assuming that it
> means something in the actual game source that would require a
> re-compilation to change.
Yes, that's what I meant.
Agreed. But it won't get any new behaviour. I.e. If I put together a sword
and a feather I won't get a sword that can fly and attack the enemy, unless
I program that behaviour.
A scripting language could help here, but otherwise all behaviour needs to
be hardcoded in the main program. And even if a scripting language is used
someone need to code that behaviour.
What I had in mind was something (a set of rules and a interpreter maybe)
that allows to let the program deduce the effects from the ingredients,
without someone coding each effect, neither in scrip nor main program. The
interpeter interprets the rules, deduces the ingredients properties and then
creates modifiers and behaviour of the newly build item.
I could imagine this is possible. Did someone try to code such a thing? Any
experiences?
> You could also tweak the system so that 'better' ingredients
> require more skill to combine properly - ie the beginner will have a hard
> enough time with normal parts, much less trying to combine to magickal
> items.
I had planned to have a crafting skill. A player character with low crafting
skill will rather break all parts instaed of getting them work together. The
better the skill, the smaller the chance to damage the parts and the bigger
the change to get good results.
> Also with this example, the function of the object isn't determined by the
> parts themselves, just modifications to the base. Personally I think that a
> system that would try to determine the product from the parts alone would be
> a hassle to engineer properly - and ultimately you would end up just having
> a list of possible products, which is essentially what the system I'm
> describing does.
That's what I was afraid of - Angabnd for example has 6000 line sof code (or
even more) to code each spell effect. I don't want to write down all and
every single effect. The world around us does not have a list of all
possible devices, still they work deterministioc and in great variety.
The only question is: does a simulation engine that allows to buidl
intersting devices without hardcoding all combinations take less time to
create than the hardcoded varaint?
In the long run, I guess the simulation engine saves time, because once it
is done, only the rules and the properties of the items must be set, and
everthing else is done automatically.
> With each new schematic you are defining a new product,
> and what parts can be combined to create that product. So in the end you
> would also need to make a list of possible parts - but that too can be
> entries in your data, and not necessarily hard-coded. It all depends on how
> complicated you want to make it I suppose... :)
A list is not exactly what I want, but still vastly better than coding each
effect.
The list has one drawback: reagrdless how big, the player will be
restriucted to the combinations listed there. The rules+interpreter approach
will deduce effects for all combinations, even those the programmer had not
thought of. It will allow the player to experiment and (I hope) will end up
in much more interesting results than even a very big list of predefined
results.
> Not sure if this makes sense, sort of hard to explain... hopefully at some
> point I can have a working model as an example in my own game. :)
If my life allows, I'll try to invent a set of rules and a interpreter for
this. First I'll try that with a magic system, but maybe I can solve both,
the magic system and the item crafting system in one go. But then I may aim
too high ans just find that I cannot do that.
> -Ray
c.u.
Hajo
Greg McIntyre
How about having a set of modifiers/effects for items used on their
own, and another set of modifiers/effects when items are used with
something else? *shrug* Just a thought.
On another tangent, if the effects are the sorts of things that work
well *together* and *not* individually, crafting becomes a real
benefit. Like... the propeller hat lets you float on the spot (i.e.
you can't use your walking skill), and the propeller shoes propel you
along very slowly without you having to walk. So individually there's
not much point to them, but combined they let you float over traps!
That's still pre-coded, but the emphasis is more on cooky and useless
*effects* (as opposed to modifiers) that combine to produce real
benefits. This is the idea I'm planning to use in my roguelike for
whacky Japanese inventions (Headlight Clogs + Wheels = Headlight
Skates, etc.).
--
Greg McIntyre
gr...@puyo.cjb.net
http://puyo.cjb.net
Philip Swartzleonard
> I Additional I would like to say:
> using a ruby, plate from gold, some peaces of glass and wand of light
> give us powerful beam weapon also known as LASER :-)))))
Well i suppose wands of light in say, angband, would be sufficent power to do
some damage, it still seems kinda weak. Maybe you could get stupid orcs to
chase the dot around? ;). Lighing fuses on bombs at a hundred feet before the
invention of RF remote detinators might be helpful, though =)
--
Philip Sw "Starweaver" [rasx] :: www.rubydragon.com
Philip Swartzleonard
I like it too :). I just thought i would mention, a Squaresoft RPG for the
playstation called Vagrant Story has a really basic system of this: all
weapons are made of a hilt-part and a blade-part, and you can combine them
in various ways. There were maybe four or five types of swordish hilts, a
few polearm types, a few crossbow types, and a greater variaty of blades of
different materials. The blade type and material determines most of the
damage and affinity (a very complex systems where you train weapons to work
better against different types of targets, and try hard not to get screwed
=), and the hilt modifies things a little and adds slots for a third
component type: gems, generic additions that change affinty levels and can
also be used on some armor. You could dismantle weapons anywhere, but you
had to find a workshop to put them together, and there you could also
combine different items of different materials to smith completly non-
sensical new items out of them.
I should probably be more coherent, but ... nah :)
Mixu Lauronen
> Well i suppose wands of light in say, angband, would be sufficent power to do
> some damage, it still seems kinda weak. Maybe you could get stupid orcs to
> chase the dot around? ;). Lighing fuses on bombs at a hundred feet before the
> invention of RF remote detinators might be helpful, though =)
>
[GRINS EVILLY]
Delayed fireball spell? Could be useful - unless some orc shaman knows
it...
Mixu Lauronen
--
"Mr. Gandhi, what do you think about western civilization?"
"I think it would be a good idea."
-- Mahatma Gandhi, to a journalist --
Philip Swartzleonard
> Philip Swartzleonard wrote:
>>
>> Hansjörg Malthaner || Mon 21 Jan 2002 09:47:06a:
>>
>> > Hi,
>
> [Limbs, items, actions, covererd limbs]
>
>> Filters. Send the hand a message along the lines of 'pick up item
>> #0x3a4b'. The hand first calls the boot's (or whatever's in the
>> slots's) message- filter function, which decides what a boot covered
>> limb should be able to do in terms of picking something up, and passes
>> a modifed message back to the hand, which decides if it's possible to
>> get the thing given the limitations data in the message and the
>> limitations data of the hand itself.
>
> I'll try to sketch my idea raised from your suggestion. Its hard to
> write UML in text only but I'll try. The object structure is:
>
> limb (1) -> (0..n) usages
> limb (1) -> (0..1) item
> item (1) -> (0..n) usages
>
> Meaning: a limb has up to n usages and a limb can have up to one item.
> A item has up to n usages.
>
> I could implement the items filter to traverse the limbs list of usages
> and set some of them to 'unavalaible' if it is not compatible with
> those.
>
> The UI will allow to trigger all usages of the item itself and all
> available usages of the limb.
>
> This should work. Did I understand your suggestion correctly?
Hm, I think so, maybe, but I don't even know what UML stands for (well,
vaguely), so I just have to interprate your chart from general knowledge.
In anycase, well, i'm not really sure what to think right now, i'm a little
lost and confused and need to work things out a bit. However, here's a
pseudo-pythonish example of a assumption laden hard coded probably not very
good way of doing something like this:
class attack(message):
def __construct__( originator, target, damge, type ):
class pickpocket(message):
def __construct__( originator, target )
class put_on(message):
def __construct__( originator )
class hand(limb):
def attack( target )
def open( target )
def pickpocket( target )
def wear( item )
class glove(item):
valid_limbs = hand
class gauntlet_of_orc_smacking( glove ):
def message_filter( message ):
if message is put_on:
if message.originator.race != orc:
pass message # Lets it contiune on and be worn
else:
kill message
elif message is attack:
if message.target.race == orc:
message.damage += 15
# or
send( attack(self.wearer, target, 15, orc_wackin_damage)
def wear_mod( ):
# called for each worn item before to recalc stats
# might be better as a message
wearer.strength += 2
wearer.coolness += 3
wearer.orc_affinity -= 100000
class gauntlet_of_the_sneaky_bastard( glove ):
def message_filter( message ):
if message is pickpocket:
message.target.perception -= 30
message.target.pickpocket_skill -= 30
def wear_mod( ):
wearer.pickpocket_skill += 30
wearer.dexterity += 1
>> This kind of thing is more useful if you have more than one 'filter'
>> that needs to be enacted; function stacks and all that. About a year
>> ago I wrote a disorginized, rambling paper about using something like
>> this to control sensory input and output to an AI, but I never
>> finished it or did anything .with it. Should probably polish it up and
>> see if it still makes sense =)
>
> Maybe it would be another jewel to add to Björn Bergströms site :)
> He has a big collection of articels about roguelike developement there.
Hm, I was planning to polish it and submit it to RLN way back when... i'm
glad enough Björn's site now contains most or all of the knowledge that was
held back there. I'm going to set up a site devoted to this project (well,
i have a filler page at rubydragon now =), and probably write a bunch of
these things and put them on there, but i'll be glad to let Bjorn or anyone
else host them as well =)
>> > Another problem. If "pick up" is a action of the hand, and the
>> > player is holding a shield and a sword, he cannot pick up items
>> > anymore. This is 'correct' due to the rule that a hand holding a
>> > item looses the pick up action, but it is very uncomfortable to the
>> > player. How realistic should this part of the game be? This question
>> > is interesting in regard to the problem that the player has two
>> > hands only, but in most roguelikes he is holding sword, shield,
>> > light source, swap weapon, shooting wepaon, ammo and maybe some more
>> > stuff. That doesn't go well with the limb system, it requires tricks
>> > or lots of 'special' rules.
>>
>> If i remeber correctly, you almost have the capactiy in your system to
>> implement various sheathes or other weapon holding places on the body.
>
> I alread added some 'limbs' like a waist to hold a belt, and shoulders
> to hold a backpack. Theese limbs just act a sholders for those items.
The sheathes and so on could be made items of their own... or at least
optional upgrades for the slot. I had an idea to make a sheath that
vanishes into the fourth dimension (or something) when you put your weapon
in it, both eliminating the weight and giving you a more peaceful
apperance. Getting it out may be harder though =)
>> A
>> spare bow and swap weapon could be slung on the back and at the waste.
>> This, combined with automatic switching between a combat/noncombat
>> stance toggle, would let the player easily stow wepons to deal with
>> the large piles of loot.
>
> How does the program code know on which limb to put the shooter and the
> spare weapon? The players body (the limb tree) is read from a config
> file, it can be very differently structured. The code shoudl be able to
> deal with all kinds of bodies. (The possessor idea from Pern fascinates
> me. I want to allow the player to switch to another body or, at least,
> let him choose from a large set of races with different bodies at start
> if he is no possessor). I could add flags to the limbs do designate
> them as 'swap_wepaon_hold' or 'shooter_hold' ... but somehow I don#t
> liekthe idea to add such fake limbs to the players body.
Mariusz Chwalba already pretty mich said what my response would have been
way down in the thread here:
I solved this by allowing UI to memorize couple of equipment
settings and then change them with a single keystroke. So, if you
encounter a treasure in a dungeon you just change to a "looting"
setup (both hands empty), loot, and switch back to "combat"
setting. With couple of these player can easly configure equipment
for melee, ranged combat, travel, dungeon exploration
(lightsources and weapons handy) and so on.
So you would be able to set yourself up the way you want then push the 'set
my type-1 setup to what i am right now' button, and so forth. Combined with
a macroing capability that lets you make buttons that do 'drop anything
that happens to be in my right hand and put whatever is in my right back
weapon slot into my right hand' and 'put whatever is in my right hand in my
right back weapon slot' and so on, it should be sufficent. Another possible
option would be to search for similar items for each equipment-point, so
that if your torch and broadsword just fell down the Pit of Ineffable
Damnnation, and you had a flashlight and a longsword in your pack, pushing
'lightsource and weapon close-quarters dungeon crawling setup' would ask
you if you want to replace the items in the template with what is on hand.
> Is it better to let a limb hold more than one item? But then, this
> causes trouble with the UI and seems to be a bit confusing to me.
>> [...]
> I think to avoid too complex code and user interface I should restrict
> the limbs to one item only. Asides from that the 'size' aspect is
> already implemented. That means limbs can only hold items up to a
> certain size. But that's just anotehr constraint like 'can only hold
> items of certain type'.
Well, it depend on what kind of interface you have for one; if you have a
nice mouse based UI you can get away with more complexity. Imagine how much
more fun and infinatly more learnable Omegas system would be if you could
use drag-and-drop with it =). (One of the few things TK angbands do not
take enough advantage of i think, but...).
A further option, that would simplify things, would be to give the
manipulator-limbs (hey, no anti-krakenism and so on ;) an extra X-slot,
similar to in angband, that can hold an item only in between the times that
the user interface is active. You could have a pickup command that moved an
item to the hand and into the backpack - two 'actions' in the game world
with increased time spent accordenly, but only one 'turn' in terms of the
UI cycles. (do everything->input command->repeat)
>> > Was my idea of a limb system a dumb idea? Am I too confined in my
>> > idea of the limbs? Is there a way to overcome the problems and still
>> > implement a limb system without a thousand of exception rules?
>>
>> I think you're going the right way. Modeling the physical attribues of
>> creatures seems to be a good way of doing things... it feels to me to
>> be the right way of doing things.
>
> A while back there was a thread, I think it was entitled "realistic vs.
> abstract games". Many people suggested not to become too realistic in
> roguelike games. So I wasn't sure if the limb system is one of those
> overly realistic features that doesn't work well in a roguelike game.
I like the 'realisim' vs 'detailism' comment you made somewhere else.
Detailsim is a term the IF community could use, for sure. In both cases, it
should get people to stop having their arguments at the level of 'magic
isn't realistic' vs 'i mean realistic as per my game world'... %D
> But some of the more advanced roguelikes have limb systems. OTOH some
> are very simple like in PernAngband where the limbs are just a set of
> flags.
Fleetwood Mac - Go Your Own Way. This song just started playing after I
read that paragraph now. I don't really know what that has to do with
anything, but anyway, I think it's the right way to go. Furthermore, with
this thread, i started out not even having thought about the idea of it,
and now i'm thinking i'll have to be going down a parallel-deviant path ...
there are too many open possibilities for a system such as this for me to
ignore it now =)
Hansjörg Malthaner
>
> In article <7kav4u8v3lnat5qch...@4ax.com>,
> R Dan Henry <rdan...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 23 Jan 2002 18:48:50 +0100, the disembodied brain of Hansjörg
> > Malthaner <hansjoerg...@danet.de> transmitted thus:
> >
> > >post that section of my design notes again. It goes well with the details of
> > >the game world, but is not very 'magic' currently. Its a very rational
> > >system ... I guess many people will find it a bit boring.
> >
> > >Google has the original post and all the answers:
> > >
> > >http://groups.google.com/groups?q=Elemental+magic+group:rec.games.roguelike.d
> > >evelopment+group:rec.games.roguelike.development&hl=de&selm=3B13C49F.97E6E15F
> > >%40danet.de&rnum=3
> > >
> > >Erm ... I hope that link will work still work if it reaches the group :)
> >
> > Yeah, but is that still your outline? Seems there was enough
> > discussion you might have modified it some. And if I was doing it that
> > way, I wouldn't make fire an element, I'd use heat and then fire would
> > be heat and light. And I'd have a cold element and have water+cold for
> > ice effects.
> >
> In fact, it seems to have been modified somewhat here:
> http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=de&selm=3B163358.7292228B%40danet.de&rnum=5
>
> And this also sketches out focuses, staves, wands, rods, and books. I do have to
> wonder if it has been modified further since then...
I think I stopped designing the magic system after that discussion - I don't
remember why, but I think I was focused on other parts of the project.
Looking at the code, I have writtent the environment class to hold the
temperature, humidity, gravity and otehr environmental properties. Also a
interface for a environment_connector exists. The connectors are the objects
that make things burn if the heat raises to high and a object has a
'burnable' connector type assigned.
Actually after i started to code, I soon ran into very basic problems, like
how to open a door? How to implemnt stairs?
I aimed much too high with my ideas, and then was trapped with the basics -
I found my design left them out completely.
> --Arcum
c.u.
Hajo