Stuck in the Valley of the Dead - possible bug
Joe B.
escaping upwards with it. I got to the Valley of the Dead, and....THERE'S
NO UPSTAIRS! I even checked some spoilers and found a map of the Valley,
which looks exactly like it should, but in my game, where the upstairs would
be, there is a trap. Is this a transient flaw in my game?
I have searched the area thoroughly and even rang the Bell of Opening, which
did nothing.
I have tried quaffing a cursed potion of gain level, which I blew a wish on.
All it did is give me "an uneasy feeling".
The Amulet inhibits level teleport and maybe the Valley does too. Should I
drop the Amulet and get out somehow and come back for it? I am very
reluctant to do so, as I fought so hard to get the damn thing!
If this is a bug/flaw, is there anyway to fiddle with the program and get me
up a level. I'd hate to have my first potential ascension spoiled by
something stupid.
On a totally separate topic: other than for knights with a lance, why is
riding useful? I figured if you happened to have a saddle and riding skill
and a decent pet, you could hop aboard and get the benefit of a pet (extra
attacks basically), plus get to control where it goes. But the pet doesn't
get it's attacks, so what's the point?
- Joe B.
Raisse the Thaumaturge
> I'm doing really well with a Valkyrie, I actually got the Amulet and
> am escaping upwards with it. I got to the Valley of the Dead,
> and....THERE'S
> NO UPSTAIRS! I even checked some spoilers and found a map of the
> Valley, which looks exactly like it should, but in my game, where the
> upstairs would
> be, there is a trap. Is this a transient flaw in my game?
No, it's a (known) bug.
> I have searched the area thoroughly and even rang the Bell of Opening,
> which did nothing.
That's because there's nothing to open.
> I have tried quaffing a cursed potion of gain level, which I blew a
> wish on. All it did is give me "an uneasy feeling".
Strange; that should work even with the Amulet.
> The Amulet inhibits level teleport and maybe the Valley does too.
> Should I
> drop the Amulet and get out somehow and come back for it? I am very
> reluctant to do so, as I fought so hard to get the damn thing!
>
> If this is a bug/flaw, is there anyway to fiddle with the program and
> get me
> up a level. I'd hate to have my first potential ascension spoiled by
> something stupid.
There's a patch to replace the flawed level with another, IIRC, but that
won't help if you're actually *on* that level, I think. Dropping the
Amulet doesn't help, because you need to take it up to ascend.
Raisse, killed by a boulder
--
ir...@valdyas.org (myself) http://www.valdyas.org/irina
Status of Raisse (piously neutral): Level 8 HP 63(67) AC -3, fast.
Dylan O'Donnell
> On Thursday 12 September 2002 17:40 Joe B. wrote:
[VotD upstair-replaced-by-trap bug]
> > I have tried quaffing a cursed potion of gain level, which I blew a
> > wish on. All it did is give me "an uneasy feeling".
>
> Strange; that should work even with the Amulet.
No, it shouldn't. It won't work on any level without an upstair or
upladder.
--
: Dylan O'Donnell http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/ :
: "Hi! I'm Prozac the Bear!" :
: -- Prozac the Bear, "Triangle and Robert" :
Joe B.
> There's a patch to replace the flawed level with another, IIRC, but that
> won't help if you're actually *on* that level, I think. Dropping the
> Amulet doesn't help, because you need to take it up to ascend.
>
Ok, so I should be able to go down one level, then patch the game, then come
up and actually GO UPSTAIRS right? That'd be so cool! Thanks for the info.
If I drop the Amulet, does the Wizard appear to take it? If I leave it on a
level, does it stay there?
- Joe B.
Joe B.
> There's a patch to replace the flawed level with another, IIRC, but that
> won't help if you're actually *on* that level, I think. Dropping the
> Amulet doesn't help, because you need to take it up to ascend.
>
Hmm...looking, not finding patch. Could you direct me to where it would be
located? I'm checking http://nethack.sourceforge.net among others.
- Joe B.
Sam Dennis
If you want to fix a game that you're currently playing, patching the source
won't help. (Actually, I suppose that it could, but it may be unnecessarily
complicated.) Tina Hall described a method to fix this in `new toys', IIRC,
(I rarely do remember correctly) but if you want to stop it happening again,
something like this should work:
--- nethack-3.4.0/src/trap.c Thu Aug 29 02:37:12 2002
+++ nethack-3.4.0+trap_placement_fix/src/trap.c Thu Sep 12 18:21:38 2002
@@ -235,6 +235,9 @@
register struct rm *lev;
register boolean oldplace;
+ if (levl[x][y].typ == STAIRS || levl[x][y] == LADDER)
+ return (struct trap *)0;
+
if ((ttmp = t_at(x,y)) != 0) {
if (ttmp->ttyp == MAGIC_PORTAL) return (struct trap *)0;
oldplace = TRUE;
Or not. This code is not tested, and I can't immediately see how complaints
about the portal on the quests being overwritten aren't dealt with...
--
++acr@,ka"
Brad N.
Not sure how to do what you are describing. I'm not up to writing (or even
transcribing) code to fix the problem.
I have perused the bug list of official bugs in 3.4.0. Most of them say
"Fixed", but there is no more recent version of Nethack, say 3.4.1
available. How are these bugs then "Fixed"? There must be a bugfix update
available. You'd think they'd link to it on the bug list page...
Brad N.
Ah, I see. Fixed = fixed in the next release. Geez...so unless I can find
a non-official patch, I'm SOL.
*sigh* And I was doing so well, too.
Sam Dennis
_Please_ keep attributions!!!!!
I wrote at some point:
>> > --- nethack-3.4.0/src/trap.c Thu Aug 29 02:37:12 2002
>> > +++ nethack-3.4.0+trap_placement_fix/src/trap.c Thu Sep 12 18:21:38
>> 2002
>> > @@ -235,6 +235,9 @@
>> > register struct rm *lev;
>> > register boolean oldplace;
>> >
>> > + if (levl[x][y].typ == STAIRS || levl[x][y] == LADDER)
>> > + return (struct trap *)0;
>> > +
>> > if ((ttmp = t_at(x,y)) != 0) {
>> > if (ttmp->ttyp == MAGIC_PORTAL) return (struct trap *)0;
>> > oldplace = TRUE;
>> >
>> > ...
>> >
>> > --
>> > ++acr@,ka"
And remove signatures.
> Ah, I see. Fixed = fixed in the next release. Geez...so unless I can find
> a non-official patch, I'm SOL.
That _is_ an unofficial patch. Also, try looking up the thread I mentioned
for information on how to fix up your current game.
(SOL?)
--
++acr@,ka"
Brad N.
- Brad N.
"Sam Dennis" <s...@malfunction.screaming.net> wrote in message
news:slrnao1ph...@localhost.loopback...
> Brad N. wrote:
>
> _Please_ keep attributions!!!!!
>
> I wrote at some point:
> >> > --- nethack-3.4.0/src/trap.c Thu Aug 29 02:37:12 2002
> >> > +++ nethack-3.4.0+trap_placement_fix/src/trap.c Thu Sep 12
18:21:38
> >> 2002
> >> > @@ -235,6 +235,9 @@
> >> > register struct rm *lev;
> >> > register boolean oldplace;
> >> >
> >> > + if (levl[x][y].typ == STAIRS || levl[x][y] == LADDER)
> >> > + return (struct trap *)0;
> >> > +
> >> > if ((ttmp = t_at(x,y)) != 0) {
> >> > if (ttmp->ttyp == MAGIC_PORTAL) return (struct trap *)0;
> >> > oldplace = TRUE;
> >> >
>
>
> > Ah, I see. Fixed = fixed in the next release. Geez...so unless I can
find
> > a non-official patch, I'm SOL.
>
> That _is_ an unofficial patch. Also, try looking up the thread I
mentioned
> for information on how to fix up your current game.
>
> (SOL?)
>
S**t outta luck. :)
Er.. if that's an unofficial patch then I don't understand how to implement
it. It looks like messing around with source code to me, which is not
something I understand how to do. I will keep looking for the thread.
Thanks.
Brad N.
news:slrnao1ph...@localhost.loopback...
>
> _Please_ keep attributions!!!!!
>
> I wrote at some point:
> >> > --- nethack-3.4.0/src/trap.c Thu Aug 29 02:37:12 2002
> >> > +++ nethack-3.4.0+trap_placement_fix/src/trap.c Thu Sep 12
18:21:38
> >> 2002
> >> > @@ -235,6 +235,9 @@
> >> > register struct rm *lev;
> >> > register boolean oldplace;
> >> >
> >> > + if (levl[x][y].typ == STAIRS || levl[x][y] == LADDER)
> >> > + return (struct trap *)0;
> >> > +
> >> > if ((ttmp = t_at(x,y)) != 0) {
> >> > if (ttmp->ttyp == MAGIC_PORTAL) return (struct trap *)0;
> >> > oldplace = TRUE;
> >> >
> >> > ...
> And remove signatures.
>
> > Ah, I see. Fixed = fixed in the next release. Geez...so unless I can
find
> > a non-official patch, I'm SOL.
>
> That _is_ an unofficial patch. Also, try looking up the thread I
mentioned
> for information on how to fix up your current game.
>
> (SOL?)
>
The thread you mentioned was Tina Hall, 'new toys'. Could you give me a
little more to go on? I have Googled for "Tina Hall nethack new toys" to no
result. I have found some Tina Hall spoilers, but nothing of what I need.
Looked for stuff on patching the source code, no luck there either.
Sam Dennis
> "Sam Dennis" <s...@malfunction.screaming.net> wrote in message
> news:slrnao1ph...@localhost.loopback...
>> Brad N. wrote:
>>
>> _Please_ keep attributions!!!!!
You got it, this time :)
>> I wrote at some point:
>> >> > [five minute attempt at fixing buggy trap placement in 3.4.0]
>> > Ah, I see. Fixed = fixed in the next release. Geez...so unless I can
>> > find a non-official patch, I'm SOL.
>>
>> That _is_ an unofficial patch. Also, try looking up the thread I mentioned
>> for information on how to fix up your current game.
>
> Er.. if that's an unofficial patch then I don't understand how to implement
> it. It looks like messing around with source code to me, which is not
> something I understand how to do.
That's what patches are ;)
(Of course, you don't have to _personally_ mess with the source, just run it
through patch -p1 in your tree and recompile. Then probably find days later
that it doesn't fix it, after all. If you cannot compile nethack, I suppose
that patchhack may be an option, if it has the fix. You will probably break
save and bones compatibility if you do that, though.)
--
++acr@,ka"
Boudewijn Waijers
> If I drop the Amulet, does the Wizard appear to take it? If I leave it on a
> level, does it stay there?
No level will ever change when you're not on it.
--
Boudewijn Waijers -- www.win.tue.nl/~kroisos
PP++++: My name is Efembe.
Rob Ellwood
>
> [A trap fell down on my staircase out of the VotD, and now I
> can't get up!]
> "Sam Dennis" <s...@malfunction.screaming.net> wrote
>
> Tina Hall described a method to fix this in `new toys', IIRC....
She described a method to replace the broken level for
a game in progress. She also fixed the level so it wouldn't
break any more, and donated that to the "New Toys" collection
of levels.
"Brad N." wrote:
>
> I have Googled for "Tina Hall nethack new toys" to no
> result.
Here's my standard spiel; stop reading unless you need
the fix:
_________________________________
Tina Hall developed a procedure for replacing a flawed
level for a game in progress. Back up your save game file first;
no-one's nailed down exactly what you have to do.
Google for "Tina Hall" with subject "New Toys", or try
this link:
(The "New Toys" collection of levels has fixed versions
of all levels that can be nailed by this bug, courtesy of T. H.
"New Toys" also has some irksome bugs, courtesy of me. Things
like a duplicate set of stairs which don't actually work. I
just moved to a new job / city / temporary accommodations, and
I have no idea when I'll fix them.)
--
Rob Ellwood
"New Toys": new & fixed levels for Nethack
http://members.shaw.ca/rob.ellwood/
Tina Hall
[help for no upstairs in VotD]
> The thread you mentioned was Tina Hall, 'new toys'. Could you
> give me a little more to go on? I have Googled for "Tina Hall
> nethack new toys" to no result.
Rob Ellwood has previously pointed people to google for 'Tina
Hall' and 'New Toys', and there were no complaints of not finding
anything.
Basically, you'll have to replace the level in a running game.
That my name appears in the answer to these 'no upstairs/no
portal' posts is because a while ago I was fiddling around with
levels (in Slash'EM, but that doesn't matter in this case),
screwed up, and had just a maze loaded instead of the proper
level.
Afair after a suggestion here, I fixed the problem in that I
started wizardmode games until the level I needed had the same
extension as the one in the real game, and replaced the relevant
file (both were with the character outside the level, of course).
I posted the more or less exact procedure when someone else asked
for help, who also had no upstairs in the Valley. Rob's provided
links to that I think, ever since. (This problem does turn up
fairly often.)
Where's Rob when you need him?
Anyway, it's not that hard. If you can't find anything let me
know, and I'll sum it up again.
Last but not least, some un-confusion: The New Toys are a variant
of Nethack that Rob Ellwood put together, additional and
alternate levels, but of the same difficulty as Vanilla. They
also include some bug fixes, the Valley upstairs has a greater
range (3*3 instead of just the fixed spot) so it's less likely to
be covered by a trap (I hope), the Quest Home levels were altered
too (some have just a choice between fixed random places for
traps, others a 3*3 range for the portal, the rogue quest had
some walls added too).
The fix is just temporary, as the DevTeam hopefully will (or
maybe already has) come up with a proper fix that prevents traps
from covering branch-entrances in the first place, in the next
release.
--
A. Tina "summer stinks" Hall - Spring is an atrocity, but summer
is like waking up to find you spent the night with Demogorgon,
already feeling deathly sick, and all your gear is spread across
various bermuda piles. (Emails: <Tina...@railroad.robin.de>)
Philipp Lucas
<s...@malfunction.screaming.net> wrote:
[Trap-on-strais, fix for]
>If you cannot compile nethack, I suppose
>that patchhack may be an option, if it has the fix.
I just integrated your fix. (No, the binary is not yet available.)
>You will probably break
>save and bones compatibility if you do that, though.)
My standard distribution is compatible with the MS-DOS version. If Brad
uses a Windows version, he's out of luck.
--
Philipp Lucas
phl...@online-club.de
Grande Puffo
> "Joe B." <joeblo...@hotmail.com> wrote...
>
> > If I drop the Amulet, does the Wizard appear to take it? If I leave it on a
> > level, does it stay there?
>
> No level will ever change when you're not on it.
Excepting a pet on such a level.
--
GP_Spukgestalt, human Samurai. You displace your Statue of Demogorgon.
Sam Dennis
> On Thu, 12 Sep 2002 20:22:30 +0000 (UTC), Sam Dennis
><s...@malfunction.screaming.net> wrote:
>
> [Trap-on-strais, fix for]
>>If you cannot compile nethack, I suppose
>>that patchhack may be an option, if it has the fix.
>
> I just integrated your fix. (No, the binary is not yet available.)
Eek, I guess I'd better check if it actually works, then. (With the obvious
typo fixed.)
Hmm... *fiddles with gehennom.dat*
Okay, it looks like it doesn't fix anything important :) However, this might:
(put_lregion_here fails in `one shot' mode (when it absolutely must not)
because bad_location detects the trap before any attempt to remove it is
made.)
--- src/nethack-3.4.0/src/mkmaze.c Thu Aug 29 02:37:11 2002
+++ src/nethack-3.4.0+realfix/src/mkmaze.c Fri Sep 13 10:41:16 2002
@@ -288,7 +288,6 @@
boolean oneshot;
d_level *lev;
{
- if (bad_location(x, y, nlx, nly, nhx, nhy)) return FALSE;
if (oneshot) {
/* must make due with the only location possible */
/* avoid failure due to a misplaced trap */
@@ -296,6 +295,7 @@
struct trap *t = t_at(x,y);
if (t) deltrap(t);
}
+ if (bad_location(x, y, nlx, nly, nhx, nhy)) return FALSE;
switch (rtype) {
case LR_TELE:
case LR_UPTELE:
All right, now it actually seems to work. Why does nobody take warnings that
the fix probably isn't one seriously? (Even when it clearly hasn't ever been
compiled!)
--
++acr@,ka"
J. Ali Harlow
> Okay, it looks like it doesn't fix anything important :) However, this might:
> (put_lregion_here fails in `one shot' mode (when it absolutely must not)
> because bad_location detects the trap before any attempt to remove it is
> made.)
> --- src/nethack-3.4.0/src/mkmaze.c Thu Aug 29 02:37:11 2002
> +++ src/nethack-3.4.0+realfix/src/mkmaze.c Fri Sep 13 10:41:16 2002
> @@ -288,7 +288,6 @@
> boolean oneshot;
> d_level *lev;
> {
> - if (bad_location(x, y, nlx, nly, nhx, nhy)) return FALSE;
> if (oneshot) {
> /* must make due with the only location possible */
> /* avoid failure due to a misplaced trap */
> @@ -296,6 +295,7 @@
> struct trap *t = t_at(x,y);
> if (t) deltrap(t);
> }
> + if (bad_location(x, y, nlx, nly, nhx, nhy)) return FALSE;
> switch (rtype) {
> case LR_TELE:
> case LR_UPTELE:
> All right, now it actually seems to work. Why does nobody take warnings that
> the fix probably isn't one seriously? (Even when it clearly hasn't ever been
> compiled!)
I can't recall why this trivial fix isn't sufficent for all cases, but
I do remember that I had to be a little more fancy when I fixed this
for Slash'EM. See
--
J. Ali Harlow Email: J.A.H...@city.ac.uk
"When I consider your heavens, the work of your fingers, the moon and
the stars, which you have set in place, what is man that you are mindful
of him, the son of man that you care for him?" Psalm 8 v 3-4, NIV.
Sam Dennis
> Sam Dennis <s...@malfunction.screaming.net> wrote:
>> [one line fix for branch placement]
>>
>> All right, now it actually seems to work. Why does nobody take warnings that
>> the fix probably isn't one seriously? (Even when it clearly hasn't ever been
>> compiled!)
>
> I can't recall why this trivial fix isn't sufficent for all cases, but
> I do remember that I had to be a little more fancy when I fixed this
> for Slash'EM. See
>
> http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/slashem/slashem/src/mkmaze.c.diff?r1=1.6&r2=1.7&diff_format=u
Well, for some reason, you wanted to be able to write a #define to get the
buggy behaviour back (!!!) and wanted to replace the trap at that location
if it turned out that it was unsuitable for other reasons, too.
Other than that, it's the same. I think I can live without that extremely
minor detail.
--
++acr@,ka"
J. Ali Harlow
> Well, for some reason, you wanted to be able to write a #define to get the
> buggy behaviour back (!!!) and wanted to replace the trap at that location
> if it turned out that it was unsuitable for other reasons, too.
The define is so that I can backout the change when NetHack 3.4.1 is
released and apply the official fix. I don't usually fix vanilla bugs
in Slash'EM if the dev-team has already marked it as fixed but on this
occasion Tina persuaded me that it needed doing. The substantive
difference will be the replacement of the trap. It may well be that I
was playing safe just in case this made a difference. I seem to recall
having a conversation with Dylan where we were speculating as to why
the dev-team had changed this in 3.4.0 in the first place. It was a
little while ago.
Sam Dennis
> Sam Dennis <s...@malfunction.screaming.net> wrote:
>> Well, for some reason, you wanted to be able to write a #define to get the
>> buggy behaviour back (!!!) and wanted to replace the trap at that location
>> if it turned out that it was unsuitable for other reasons, too.
>
> The define is so that I can backout the change when NetHack 3.4.1 is
> released and apply the official fix.
This is almost certainly the same as the official fix. The code to remove
traps wouldn't be there if this wasn't how it was meant to be.
--
++acr@,ka"
Brad N.
all is good. I'm now slogging through the plane of Earth.
--
- Brad N.
"Rob Ellwood" <rob.e...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:3D8164A3...@shaw.ca...
Rob Ellwood
[Exit from the VotD was replaced by a trap. I pointed
to Tina's workaround.]
"Brad N." wrote:
>
> Thanks. Followed the procedure described in the document
> you linked, and all is good. I'm now slogging through the
> plane of Earth.
Good!
Did you have to make any changes to Tina's procedure?
It would be nice to nail it down.
Boudewijn Waijers
> "Boudewijn Waijers" <kro...@win.tue.nl> wrote...
>> No level will ever change when you're not on it.
> Excepting a pet on such a level.
The *level* won't change, and the *pet* will only change when you get back on
the level, not while you're not on it.
Grande Puffo
> "Grande Puffo" <Tars_...@ganja.com> wrote...
> > "Boudewijn Waijers" <kro...@win.tue.nl> wrote...
>
> >> No level will ever change when you're not on it.
> > Excepting a pet on such a level.
>
> The *level* won't change, and the *pet* will only change when you get back on
> the level, not while you're not on it.
Well, the distinction between the pet being un-tamed while you're away
or just when you get to the level again is not really a big one, or am
I missing something here?
--
GP_Spukgestalt, human Samurai, wondering.
okb
The former implies some activity occurring on a level when you're not
there, which seems the whole point of this extended dialogue. :-)
1. The level does not change when you're not there. Technically this
is true and probably always will be.
2. The level appears to change by alienating pets. From a play
standpoint, it looks like the level has changed. Corpses spoil and
vanish, as well.
[ok]