Nethack 3.2.0 Release
Mike Stephenson
it out until now... -- arp]
Greetings NetHackers...
By now someone *may* have noticed that the NetHack source directories
on ftp.uu.net are locked down. There is a simple reason for this.
The NetHack Development Team is proud to announce...
NetHack 3.2.0
We are currently setting up the directory structure and simply wanted
everyone to know that we are not being evicted, purged, deleted or otherwise
persecuted. We are, in fact setting up the file structure for 3.2.0 and
testing it to make sure that it can, indeed be downloaded and built from
scratch.
We are going to be a little short on some of the binaries for the
first little while. Most of the DOS/Windows stuff is there, but there have
been some final teething problems with the Amiga and MAC stuff (mostly due to
the fact that the folks responsible for these ports have been very busy as of
late). As our port teams come up stable binaries we will upload them so just
keep an eye out for announcements.
Our past experience with the archives on linc.cis.upenn.edu and the
3.1.x releases showed that there was a heavy surge of ftp activity after a
release. We expect the surge to be heavier still this time around due to the
fact that we will not be posting the source via comp.sources.games. There
will be a fairly long queue of folks looking to get into ftp.uu.net, so see if
you can find a mirror site.
When the archive is ready, I will release a message in this newsgroup.
Please don't constantly poll uunet. It'll just increase the load and you
probably won't get in anyway.
Finally, I would like to mention that this version of NetHack is
dedicated in the memory of Izchak Miller, a founding member and first librarian
of the NetHack DevTeam. Izchak died slightly over two years ago, during the
development of 3.2.
On behalf of the NetHack Development Team...
Mike Stephenson
Mail: Siemens Nixdorf Phone: (905) 819-5944
Document Management Systems FAX: 819-5949
2185 Derry Rd. West
Mississauga, Ontario
Canada M3C 3L8 INTERNET: mi...@sni.ca
Mike Stephenson
Mike Stephenson <mi...@sni.ca> wrote:
>
>Greetings NetHackers...
>
> The NetHack Development Team is proud to announce...
>
> NetHack 3.2.0
>
>3.1.x releases showed that there was a heavy surge of ftp activity after a
>release. We expect the surge to be heavier still this time around due to the
>fact that we will not be posting the source via comp.sources.games. There
>will be a fairly long queue of folks looking to get into ftp.uu.net, so see if
>you can find a mirror site.
>
>dedicated in the memory of Izchak Miller, a founding member and first
>librarian of the NetHack DevTeam. Izchak died slightly over two years ago,
>during the development of 3.2.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Nethack source and binary directories at ftp.uu.net are now open
for business. In addition, we have a couple of mirror sites that should be
coming on line shortly. NetHack 3.2.0 is officially in release as of today.
We are only missing the binaries for the Amiga and OS/2 binaries are
not ready at this time. As our port teams come up stable binaries we will
upload them so just keep an eye out for announcements.
For European NetHackers, we have a mirror in Europe:
ftp://ftp.win.tue.nl/pub/games/nethack
So download, and enjoy! As before any comments or bug reports should
be sent to nethac...@linc.cis.upenn.edu.
On behalf of the NetHack Development Team...
Mike Stephenson
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Brown
I have uploaded the sources and binaries of Nethack3.2 to my Web page:
http://reality.sgi.com/david_neu/slash-net-hack.html
This is a mirror of my page "slash.html".
People have told me that downloads from this site are very fast
when compared to .edu sites.
Boudewijn Wayers
> The NetHack Development Team is proud to announce...
> NetHack 3.2.0
> We are going to be a little short on some of the binaries for the
>first little while. Most of the DOS/Windows stuff is there, but there have
>been some final teething problems with the Amiga and MAC stuff (mostly due to
>the fact that the folks responsible for these ports have been very busy as of
>late). As our port teams come up stable binaries we will upload them so just
>keep an eye out for announcements.
> Our past experience with the archives on linc.cis.upenn.edu and the
>3.1.x releases showed that there was a heavy surge of ftp activity after a
>release. We expect the surge to be heavier still this time around due to the
>fact that we will not be posting the source via comp.sources.games. There
>will be a fairly long queue of folks looking to get into ftp.uu.net, so see if
>you can find a mirror site.
> When the archive is ready, I will release a message in this newsgroup.
>Please don't constantly poll uunet. It'll just increase the load and you
>probably won't get in anyway.
> Finally, I would like to mention that this version of NetHack is
>dedicated in the memory of Izchak Miller, a founding member and first librarian
>of the NetHack DevTeam. Izchak died slightly over two years ago, during the
>development of 3.2.
Let me immediately follow up to this message in saying that a complete
mirror of the archive has been set up at the ftp.win.tue.nl NetHack
Spoiler site, so the load on the ftp.uu.net site can be divided. When
you are located in Europe, especially, I suggest you try our mirror
here, in the Netherlands.
The ftp address is:
ftp.win.tue.nl:/pub/games/nethack/Official
or 131.155.70.19:/pub/games/nethack/Official
Both addresses are basically the same.
As the ftp.uu.net site is carrying more versions of the game (for more
platforms), I will make sure that they are put in place here as well.
Note that the WWW part of our site still has to be restructured, and
that this might take half a month or so (I can work only a few hours
every week on the site). So, if you plan getting the files through the
WWW, you will have to cope with the ftp interface for a short while.
Let me take this opportunity to apologize to those I have told the last
month that I had no idea when the next release was to appear: I _did_
know a new release was forthcoming, but I had sworn a holy oath of
silence to the Dev Team... :-)
Thanks to the Dev Team for the new release and the pleasant discussions
over the last three years or so...
Boudewijn Wayers, ftp/www.win.tue.nl games section maintainer.
--
My homepage: http://www.win.tue.nl/games/roguelike/homepage.html
True or False, but they say that... (rot13: D, d, or X to decode)
Arire fjvz jvgu n pnzren: gurer'f abguvat gb gnxr cvpgherf bs. (S)
Lbh srry yvxr fbzrbar vf chyyvat lbhe yrt. (S)
Charles G. Shapiro
> The NetHack Development Team is proud to announce...
>
> NetHack 3.2.0
Very impressive.
I've looked at the README.src file, and I still have some questions about
all the NEW STUFF in 3.2.0.
1) Spellcasting is now supposed to be like in NH+. What is different
in 3.2.0 as opposed to NH+ ?
2) I've already encountered a new monster (a gargoyle). What new monsters
have LETHAL attributes?
3) I've noticed that Minetown is quite different. Anything useful we should
know about it?
4) The bottom of the mines looks strange... What stuff will be found there?
5) Has the wishing code been changed at all?
I see that you can still wish for quest artifacts.
6) Are there any NEW artifacts?
7) Have any of the favorite abuses been plugged? i.e. Nurse dancing,
cursed bell, cursed bell of opening.
8) Are there any changes to the "magic armor", gauntlets of Power, [GoDex,
etc?
9) Have any tools been given charges, like in NH+?
My very first game has been going quite well, with my Wizard starting with a
/WoPoly. My kitten became a barbed devil, and I picked up two wishes in
minetown which went for a =RoPolyControl and the PYEC. I almost tried to
ascend in a single sitting (This game ain't so tough!), but I decided to
try to find out more about what I'm up against. If all goes well, I could
hope to ascend tomorrow.
Thanx a 1e6.
Charles the Wizard
Peter Snelling
In article <3177F7...@stratasys.com>, "Charles G. Shapiro" <c1sh...@stratasys.com> writes:
>>
>> The NetHack Development Team is proud to announce...
>>
>> NetHack 3.2.0
Great News!
>2) I've already encountered a new monster (a gargoyle). What new monsters
> have LETHAL attributes?
>6) Are there any NEW artifacts?
spoilers:
OK, I haven't looked through the artifacts or monsters, but while
compiling, I looked through objects.c, and noticed the following
new items:
Armor: cornuthaum (clairvoyance), dunce cap, T-shirt
Tools: land mine, beartrap
Potions: oil
Rocks: Flint, rock
--
Peter Snelling, P.Eng. (snel...@nortel.ca) My views only, not my employer's
"The organization formerly known as Bell-Northern Research", Ottawa Canada
vvii...@cc.helsinki.fi
} The NetHack Development Team is proud to announce...
}
} NetHack 3.2.0
I grabbed the sources from ftp.uu.net, and put them on my nethack
www-page. The server is pretty good, and has a pretty damn fast
connection to the net, so download shouldn't be a problem !
http://www.physics.helsinki.fi/~vviitane/nethack.html
(or the sources directly http://www.helsinki.fi/~vviitane/nh3.2.0.tar.gz)
-- Viljo
NH 3.1.3U D Viljo
[- )+ P S+ D p $+ !t s+ W+ !E PS+ PP+ G- C- I++
!@W N b-- B !Y X So Sp++ !sb !wb
David J Robertson
>I've looked at the README.src file, and I still have some questions about
>all the NEW STUFF in 3.2.0.
Spoilers for NH 3.2.0
>1) Spellcasting is now supposed to be like in NH+. What is different
> in 3.2.0 as opposed to NH+ ?
Looks like each class has a specific spell it can cast easily,
like magic mapping for Archs, magic missile for Wizards, Charm for
Tourists, etc. Also, wearing armor like helms/gloves/small shields
can make it harded to cast spells. Large shields prevent any spell
casting. The amount it makes the spell harder is class dependent.
>2) I've already encountered a new monster (a gargoyle). What new monsters
> have LETHAL attributes?
What do you mean by leathal? The only new monsters I see are the
gargolyes, winged gargoyles and black lights (explode for hallucination).
>3) I've noticed that Minetown is quite different. Anything useful we should
> know about it?
>4) The bottom of the mines looks strange... What stuff will be found there?
I think they just added in an alternate town and alternate end
level. The Alternate end level does have some more potions
(especially of booze) and the gems are harder to reach. There
seems to be a lot of gold embedded in the rock on this level too.
>5) Has the wishing code been changed at all?
> I see that you can still wish for quest artifacts.
Doesn't look like it.
>6) Are there any NEW artifacts?
Don't think so.
>7) Have any of the favorite abuses been plugged? i.e. Nurse dancing,
> cursed bell, cursed bell of opening.
There is an upper limit on how much nurses can raise your
max hp. The max amount you can ever reach soley by nurses
is 25*your_level. They can raise your maxhp even when
your hp aren't at max, and their chance of disapearing
is not dependent on your hp/mhp level.
Cursed bells of opening only summon undead while charged, and any
use of the bell requires a charge. The number of charges (3 normally)
is the same as in 3.1.3, but in that version the undead summoning always
worked, irregardless of charge status. The bell can be recharged
with a recharging scroll, and it needs to have a charge to call up
the stairs to Moloch's sanctum.
Cursed normal bells have a chance of breaking when rung.
All nymphs summoned by this have no inventory (same as for reverse
genoiced creatures).
Also, The more ghosts/djinni's you've seen, the smaller the chances
of getting either from a potion. Its based on a (1 in # of created
Djinnis) chance of success (in addition to the old chance). This
includes djinni's from fountains, ghosts from temples, etc.
>8) Are there any changes to the "magic armor", gauntlets of Power, [GoDex,
> etc?
They seem to be the same as 3.1.3, with all GOP giving 25 strength,
and GOD give +1 dex for each enchantment +.
>9) Have any tools been given charges, like in NH+?
No, not that I can see.
You should try mixing potions, some combinations are now hard
coded in, with nice results. (Like healing + speed ->extra healing)
David Robertson
Nathan Maling
: new items:
: --
: "The organization formerly known as Bell-Northern Research", Ottawa Canada
Landmines, yes, new; beartrap, no, not new.
NM
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
E-mail: nma...@nmaling.seanet.com
Got Mad Gates Disease? Get Linux.
Paul Brinkley
>: OK, I haven't looked through the artifacts or monsters, but while
>: compiling, I looked through objects.c, and noticed the following
>: new items:
>: Tools: land mine, beartrap
>: --
>: Peter Snelling, P.Eng. (snel...@nortel.ca) My views only, not my employer's
>: "The organization formerly known as Bell-Northern Research", Ottawa Canada
>
>Landmines, yes, new; beartrap, no, not new.
As a trap, no; as a tool, beartraps are most certainly new.
Either that, or in my days of rampant polypiling of tools,
I got extremely unlucky. :)
Funny thing about beartraps in 3.1.3: they're hard as heck
to escape from, but if you're in a diggable level, all you
have to do is dig a pit, and poof! The trap's gone! Heh.
(Well, you've got a pit now, but pits are relatively easy to
climb out of...)
Paul Brinkley
brin...@cs.utexas.edu
William Harris
>Landmines, yes, new; beartrap, no, not new.
As a -tool-, if they are actually available as tools, both are new.
--
William Harris wil...@carsinfo.com
Perry F Nguyen
In article <4len84$d...@kaleka.seanet.com>,
nma...@seanet.com (Nathan Maling) writes:
>: OK, I haven't looked through the artifacts or monsters, but while
>: compiling, I looked through objects.c, and noticed the following
>: new items:
>: Tools: land mine, beartrap
>Landmines, yes, new; beartrap, no, not new.
I'm quite sure I've encountered land mines in 3.1.3, especially in the
Gnomish mines and Fort Ludios.
- --
| pfng...@netcom.com - ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/pf/pfn | TCP/IP Networking, |
| 1024/0D97E00D 1995/01/01 Perry "Huy" Francis Nguyen | Unix Systems Admin, |
| CE 62 F2 01 33 87 9D 89 - BC 53 8D 11 F9 A0 DE 8F | and Consulting. |
| FTP, finger or mail with subject PGPKEY for PGP Key | Applications Devel. |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBMXr9Ti2IFwkNl+ANAQHMnwP/QhrjdNL5Fs/RVBC25GQ3T9kKIW+n/GQE
BcryAj4Pc/LNOguzOEGCrrUPeXXUrgEUWnY49AqDVVeKLx0MRX6/6GHUhDf7h4gT
hBaoCGm6dVD+OmL7hPC3LHO6+qbnbn9op4whODAcoixwK23mzh9xLKb0tjPCM+6/
Z+lLFSLdaGc=
=XjIl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Derek
*] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
*] >: new items:
*] >: Tools: land mine, beartrap
^^^^^^
*] >Landmines, yes, new; beartrap, no, not new.
*] I'm quite sure I've encountered land mines in 3.1.3, especially in the
*] Gnomish mines and Fort Ludios.
Neither of which were TOOLS, they were TRAPS. read closely before posting.
Landmines and beartraps you could place would be extremely useful.
--
finger for PGP key -*- lor...@netcom.com -*- Vote Brain/Pinky in '96!
Key fingerprint = D1 6E A2 69 CF 60 C6 90 3D 34 BE 05 87 B8 12 C8
"I toasted the enemy, cursed the flag, saluted the glass
and dashed the King in the fireplace." - Sir Rodney
Perry F Nguyen
In article <lorimerD...@netcom.com>,
lor...@netcom.com (Derek) flames:
>In meaningless drivel <pfnguyenD...@netcom.com>, Perry F Nguyen (pfng...@Viet.Viet.Com) dared to claim that:
>*] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>*] >: new items:
>*] >: Tools: land mine, beartrap
^^^^^^
OOOPS!!!!
>*] >Landmines, yes, new; beartrap, no, not new.
>*] I'm quite sure I've encountered land mines in 3.1.3, especially in the
>*] Gnomish mines and Fort Ludios.
My bad.
>Neither of which were TOOLS, they were TRAPS. read closely before posting.
>Landmines and beartraps you could place would be extremely useful.
Anyhow, I never saw beartraps in nh 3.1.3 ... not as tools.
- --
| pfng...@netcom.com - ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/pf/pfn | TCP/IP Networking, |
| 1024/0D97E00D 1995/01/01 Perry "Huy" Francis Nguyen | Unix Systems Admin, |
| CE 62 F2 01 33 87 9D 89 - BC 53 8D 11 F9 A0 DE 8F | and Consulting. |
| FTP, finger or mail with subject PGPKEY for PGP Key | Applications Devel. |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBMXsbRy2IFwkNl+ANAQHTMQP/WpMYaewv5vDjiInswmVEkQXGKsyjwo1c
xxkL/nHQfvej6G7uRufn0JDiBWFsl6XC4rBM9CdUALu/EI82sLQDwbNwCaCKTXC0
TN9jkqYjs5gZiHbcSKeMU1dVChdmF+ivAiN1aefxXchQSo9fEDgyqSiyiIC0NLRm
vQKXnSxrY/A=
=I4/S
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Ben Allen
>In <3177F7...@stratasys.com> Charles G. Shapiro (c1sh...@stratasys.com) wrote:
>>I've looked at the README.src file, and I still have some questions about
>>all the NEW STUFF in 3.2.0.
>Spoilers for NH 3.2.0
>
>>1) Spellcasting is now supposed to be like in NH+. What is different
>> in 3.2.0 as opposed to NH+ ?
> Looks like each class has a specific spell it can cast easily,
>like magic mapping for Archs, magic missile for Wizards, Charm for
>Tourists, etc. Also, wearing armor like helms/gloves/small shields
>can make it harded to cast spells. Large shields prevent any spell
>casting. The amount it makes the spell harder is class dependent.
About this "armor affecting spellcasting" thing...I find it more than
a little bit annoying. Yeah, I can see someone having troubles casting
spells when wearing plate mail, but I personally don't like to see my
fail rate skyrocket when I put on mithril, of all things. I mean, for
the most part spellcasting is really weak already; why make it even
weaker?
Jeffrey Robertson
Well, one member of the DevTeam (Ken A.) simply ignores spellbooks.
However, I believe it is only metallic armor that affects spell
casting, so your mithril should be OK.
--
-------------------------------------+----------------+-----------------
Jeffrey Robertson | je...@bnr.ca | BNR, Ottawa
"I speak for myself, not BNR" - Me +----------------+ (Meriline)
"Verbing weirds language" - Calvin OC-48 FiberWorld
Charles G. Shapiro
> Well, one member of the DevTeam (Ken A.) simply ignores spellbooks.
> However, I believe it is only metallic armor that affects spell
> casting, so your mithril should be OK.
Mithril is a form of silver, i.e. metal. I know that the dwarvish
one I wore really messed up my chances.
But... I guess DSM is non-metallic... You mean I've been traipsing
around the dungeon practically naked for NOTHING? DOH!
Charles the apparently REALLY STUPID wizard.
!David/ Kirsty Damerell
>However, I believe it is only metallic armor that affects spell
>casting, so your mithril should be OK.
Mithril is metallic. Reading Tolkien might help...
--
David 'Gotterdammerung' Damerell, GCV Sauricon. djs...@hermes.cam.ac.uk.
Trinity College, Cambridge University. CUWoCS President. All Hail Discordia!
|___|These loathsome parasites who cling to the Cross, the cloth and |___|
| | |the skin, soaked in blood of men. Christian Death: This Is Heresy.| | |
Warren Young
je...@bnr.ca (Jeffrey Robertson) wrote:
>However, I believe it is only metallic armor that affects spell
>casting, so your mithril should be OK.
Mithril isn't metal? Tolkien says it's a spiffy form of silver. Or
do you mean "iron"?
= Warren -- http://www.cyberport.com/~tangent
William Harris
In article <4lj5m7$5...@bmerhc5e.bnr.ca>, je...@bnr.ca says...
>However, I believe it is only metallic armor that affects spell
>casting, so your mithril should be OK.
Isn't mithril metal? In Tolkien and other books, it seems to always be treated
like a metal, though very light. None of the fiction handles it like (say)
leather.
The observation that mithril armor is very un-encumbering (and for that matter
appears to be magical in construction) is very true, and would itself be a good
reason to ease or eliminate mithril from the things interfering with
spellcasting.
William Harris 75176...@compuserve.com
(or) wil...@carsinfo.com
Larry Stewart-Zerba
> Well, one member of the DevTeam (Ken A.) simply ignores spellbooks.
> casting, so your mithril should be OK.
I dont believe so. From memory a wizard with elven mithril coat on had his
ability to cast spells reduced. I believe that crystal plate mail was ok
though.
--
Larry
_-_|\ Larry Stewart-Zerba email: la...@cs.uq.oz.au
/ * <- Comp Sci Department, DOS!! We dont need no stinking DOS!!
\_.-._/ Univ. of Queensland, Then God made Linux and the Geeks did rejoice.
v
Daniel Olson
Warren Young wrote:
>
> je...@bnr.ca (Jeffrey Robertson) wrote:
>
> >However, I believe it is only metallic armor that affects spell
> >casting, so your mithril should be OK.
>
> do you mean "iron"?
>
> = Warren -- http://www.cyberport.com/~tangent
Tolkien: The dwarves established a mine in Moria, mining for 'true silver', that
is Mithril.
It is a metal.
However, if the intent is only "ferrous" metals, then Mithril would not be included.
dan
Toni Lahti
In article <4lafjb$t...@masala.cc.uh.edu>,
>like magic mapping for Archs, magic missile for Wizards, Charm for
Hmmm. I think this is a good addition...
>Tourists, etc. Also, wearing armor like helms/gloves/small shields
>can make it harded to cast spells. Large shields prevent any spell
>casting. The amount it makes the spell harder is class dependent.
... but this is dumb! I mean I have _always_ hated the AD&D style
restrictions, ie. the wizard can't possibly use a sword or armor and others
like it. Casting spells has always been IMO the most useless feature, maybe
that's because I rarely play priest/healer/wizards/major spellcasters, but
if the only reason for this change is that 'It's more realistic' or 'It's
closer to AD&D' then buuu! I mean who's telling us how to cast spells :)
What will be next? Priests restricted to maces and other smashing weapons.
> What do you mean by leathal? The only new monsters I see are the
>gargolyes, winged gargoyles and black lights (explode for hallucination).
Only 3? I guess they are running out of good ideas on new monsters.
> I think they just added in an alternate town and alternate end
>level. The Alternate end level does have some more potions
>(especially of booze) and the gems are harder to reach. There
>seems to be a lot of gold embedded in the rock on this level too.
Great! More new levels the merrier.
>You should try mixing potions, some combinations are now hard
>coded in, with nice results. (Like healing + speed ->extra healing)
Good addition
--
Toni Lahti EMAIL: akt...@uta.fi OR cct...@tit.fi
SNAIL: Vilppulanpolku 16 a4 33720 TRE, FINLAND
An honest politician is one who, when bought, stays bought.
Jeffrey Robertson
In article <317fc925....@news.cyberport.com>,
Warren Young <tan...@cyberport.com> wrote:
>je...@bnr.ca (Jeffrey Robertson) wrote:
>
>>However, I believe it is only metallic armor that affects spell
>>casting, so your mithril should be OK.
>
>Mithril isn't metal? Tolkien says it's a spiffy form of silver. Or
>do you mean "iron"?
Yes, that was what I was thinking. And to all the sarcastic people
(Not referring you you, Warren) who suggest I've never read
Tolkien: Shut up. I have.
Caine
> >casting, so your mithril should be OK.
>
> like a metal, though very light. None of the fiction handles it like (say)
> leather.
>
> The observation that mithril armor is very un-encumbering (and for that matter
> appears to be magical in construction) is very true, and would itself be a good
> reason to ease or eliminate mithril from the things interfering with
> spellcasting.
>
> William Harris 75176...@compuserve.com
> (or) wil...@carsinfo.com
Yeah, I think you are right about it being a very light metal. It is
also quite magical in nature, if I remember correctly in the books...
So it would make sense that it wouldn't interfere with spellcasting.
Caine
btne...@midtown.net
In <uywiven...@isa.cs.uq.oz.au>, la...@cs.uq.oz.au (Larry Stewart-Zerba) writes:
>> Well, one member of the DevTeam (Ken A.) simply ignores spellbooks.
>> casting, so your mithril should be OK.
>
>ability to cast spells reduced. I believe that crystal plate mail was ok
>though.
Wilbur the Wizard has YASD'd his way to the Medusa level. My +5 Dwarven
Mithril is a Huge Impediment to spellcasting.
Observations about 3.2 and Wizards (possible spoilers follow:)
Writing spellbooks and scrolls:
You now no longer need to have seen a spellbook or scroll in order to write one.
I wanted a scroll of charging without ever having seen one, so I wrote it. No problem.
To test, I then wrote a scroll of genocide. No more L's.
I went magic marker happy and wrote: spellbook of remove curse, spellbook
of fireball, spellbook of haste self. I drained my magic markers in my glee before
writing another scroll of charging. Dang!
I had quite the time standing naked far away from the front door of Fort
Ludios and fireballing everything inside. I have my mithril stashed in the BoH &
and generally walk around with my cloak, boots, helm, SoR and GoP. I remove my
gloves and shield and blast away.
Magical energy is very high for Wizards and regenerates extremely fast.
Jeffrey Robertson
In article <Zd6fxwVJ...@kielo.uta.fi>,
Toni Lahti <akt...@kielo.uta.fi> wrote:
>
>What will be next? Priests restricted to maces and other smashing weapons.
Hardly "next": That's in NH320!
Furthermore, I'll assert the usual statement that "Differences between
classes is a Good Thing (tm)" In NH313, by the time a character has
the amulet, it is hard to tell a tourist from a barbarian. They both
have incredible strength, every intrinsic, and their choice of several
artifacts. Generally, anthing that works against this trend is a
good idea.
That said, I don't think spells are worth the trouble in NH320.
If I had the choice between a spell, and a decent AC, I'd take the
AC. Maybe if the spells were more powerful, the decision to
abandon them would be harder.
Darin Takemoto
> In article <Zd6fxwVJ...@kielo.uta.fi>,
> Toni Lahti <akt...@kielo.uta.fi> wrote:
> >
> >What will be next? Priests restricted to maces and other smashing weapons.
>
> Hardly "next": That's in NH320!
>
> Furthermore, I'll assert the usual statement that "Differences between
> classes is a Good Thing (tm)" In NH313, by the time a character has
> the amulet, it is hard to tell a tourist from a barbarian. They both
> have incredible strength, every intrinsic, and their choice of several
> artifacts. Generally, anthing that works against this trend is a
> good idea.
I agree.
>
>
> That said, I don't think spells are worth the trouble in NH320.
> If I had the choice between a spell, and a decent AC, I'd take the
> AC. Maybe if the spells were more powerful, the decision to
> abandon them would be harder.
Agreed again. The times I played a Wizard, I have done best when I
ignored spells and loaded up on armor. I even sold my spellbooks to
get money to donate to priests for AC. That seems silly. More
powerful spells would help. And how about different spells for each
class, or spells that only certain classes could use. Spellbooks
should really be lighter, too. They only have one spell, after all, and
Wizards are usually low on carrying capacity.
> --
> -------------------------------------+----------------+-----------------
> Jeffrey Robertson | je...@bnr.ca | BNR, Ottawa
> "I speak for myself, not BNR" - Me +----------------+ (Meriline)
> "Verbing weirds language" - Calvin OC-48 FiberWorld
Darin Takemoto
take...@xtal0.harvard.edu
Jeffrey Robertson
In article <takemoto-290...@fairchild-lobright.fas.harvard.edu>,
Darin Takemoto <take...@xtal0.harvard.edu> wrote:
>
>[H]ow about different spells for each
>class, or spells that only certain classes could use.
Close... there are spells that each class is particularly
good at casting. They generally make sense too. For
example, Valkyries are good at "cone of cold".
ba...@sprynet.com
In Article<317fc925....@news.cyberport.com>, <tan...@cyberport.com>
writes:
> je...@bnr.ca (Jeffrey Robertson) wrote:
>
> >However, I believe it is only metallic armor that affects spell
> >casting, so your mithril should be OK.
>
> Mithril isn't metal? Tolkien says it's a spiffy form of silver. Or
> do you mean "iron"?
There's a lot of speculation that mithril is aluminum.
Bart Lidofsky
Torsten Edelmann
25 Apr 96, !David/ Kirsty Damerell writes:
DD> Mithril is metallic. Reading Tolkien might help...
But wasn't the reason for Mithril being so worhtwile, that it is the only metal
a spellcaster can wear without keeping himself from casting? Well, it's this
way in AD&D...
Sayonara...
Yamara-R; killed by an ironball
NH 3.1.3D D Groo-BM HP:140 Pw:60 AC:-15 N
[+ )++ P S+ D p+ $ t+ s+ W E- PS-- PP- G+ C
I++ @W(*) N-- b B !Y X So-- Sp !sb wb?
John Fouhy
In article <4lr22j$6...@bmerhc5e.bnr.ca>,
Jeffrey Robertson <je...@bnr.ca> wrote:
> >Mithril isn't metal? Tolkien says it's a spiffy form of silver. Or
> >do you mean "iron"?
> (Not referring you you, Warren) who suggest I've never read
> Tolkien: Shut up. I have.
Mithril was also known as "silver-steel", and was not just a silver
compound or something, although it was silver coloured.
-=)> John <(=-
Ronald Neumann
ba...@sprynet.com wrote:
: In Article<317fc925....@news.cyberport.com>, <tan...@cyberport.com>
: writes:
: > je...@bnr.ca (Jeffrey Robertson) wrote:
: >
: > >However, I believe it is only metallic armor that affects spell
: > >casting, so your mithril should be OK.
: >
: > Mithril isn't metal? Tolkien says it's a spiffy form of silver. Or
: > do you mean "iron"?
: There's a lot of speculation that mithril is aluminum.
Can you imagine aluminium armour being *much* better than iron/steel
armour? Can you imagine weapons made of aluminium? (as if silver weren't
silly enough,soft as it is)
Finally,can you think of pure aluminium found anywhere?
Or of "middle-earth" people digging for Bauxite and making Al out of this?
<g>
Jesse Morris
ba...@sprynet.com wrote:
> > >However, I believe it is only metallic armor that affects spell
> > >casting, so your mithril should be OK.
> >
> > Mithril isn't metal? Tolkien says it's a spiffy form of silver. Or
> > do you mean "iron"?
> There's a lot of speculation that mithril is aluminum.
I never heard that. And it doesn't make much sense to me -
aluminium is considerably softer than most other metals armour/weapon are
made out of, yet it seems time and time again to be more effective. Also,
I thought it was very shiny, rather than the sort of dull lustre you find
on all but the most polished of aluminium.
--
/*************************************************************\
**< jrmo...@macalstr.edu >*< cu...@gryphon.ccs.brandeis.edu >**
***************************************************************
**< Jesse Morris >************< enr...@max.tiac.net >**
**< Macalester College >*************************************
**< 1600 Grand Avenue >*** Fencing - Juggling - Madness **
**< St. Paul, MN 55105 >**** C Programming - Musicmaking ***
**< voice 1.612.696.7284 >*** Dramatic Lighting - Et cetera **
\*************************************************************/
Francis Favorini
In article <takemoto-290...@fairchild-lobright.fas.harvard.edu>,
take...@xtal0.harvard.edu says...
>The times I played a Wizard, I have done best when I
>ignored spells and loaded up on armor. I even sold my spellbooks to
>get money to donate to priests for AC. That seems silly. More
>powerful spells would help. And how about different spells for each
>class, or spells that only certain classes could use. Spellbooks
>should really be lighter, too.
Agreed. How about a Magic Shield (or Force Field) spell? You temporarily
get increased AC. "You are surrounded by a silver glow." Or maybe
temporary reflection. When hallucinating you might get "You are surrounded
by a delicious chocolate coating." (Remember Magic Shell ice cream
topping?) Lighter spellbooks sounds good.
-Francis
Snibor Eoj
In article <takemoto-290...@fairchild-lobright.fas.harvard.edu>,
take...@xtal0.harvard.edu (Darin Takemoto) wrote:
> Agreed again. The times I played a Wizard, I have done best when I
> ignored spells and loaded up on armor. I even sold my spellbooks to
> get money to donate to priests for AC. That seems silly. More
> powerful spells would help. And how about different spells for each
> class, or spells that only certain classes could use. Spellbooks
> should really be lighter, too. They only have one spell, after all, and
> Wizards are usually low on carrying capacity.
It seems to be the case that each class has a spell it "specializes"
in... for example, I noticed that my Valkyrie had a much better chance to
cast Cone of cold than any other spell...
Snibor Eoj
jmro...@sccs.swarthmore.edu http://www.cs.swarthmore.edu/~robins/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm a member of the Non-Sequiturs Association of America
"You can lead a yak to water but you can't teach an old dog to make a silk
purse out of a pig in a poke." -Opus
pcs$...@altair.selu.edu
In article <4m590r$l...@gina.zfn.uni-bremen.de>, e1...@alf.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Ronald Neumann) writes:
> ba...@sprynet.com wrote:
>
> : In Article<317fc925....@news.cyberport.com>, <tan...@cyberport.com>
> : writes:
> : >
> : > >However, I believe it is only metallic armor that affects spell
> : > >casting, so your mithril should be OK.
> : >
> : > Mithril isn't metal? Tolkien says it's a spiffy form of silver. Or
> : > do you mean "iron"?
>
> : There's a lot of speculation that mithril is aluminum.
>
> armour? Can you imagine weapons made of aluminium? (as if silver weren't
> silly enough,soft as it is)
> Finally,can you think of pure aluminium found anywhere?
> Or of "middle-earth" people digging for Bauxite and making Al out of this?
good for use in weapons and armor), and as pretty and shiny as silver, and
it never tarnishes. It's definitely not aluminum. It definitely is metal.
Just a very high quality metal.
The elven chainmail in AD&D is not made of mithril, but it's specialness
is attributed to workmanship. It has very tiny, fine links and is more like
a metallic cloth than the heavy stuff humans call chainmail. It's lighter
and less noisy, and allows more freedom of movement. It was designed by a
very much magic-using people, and designed with magic using warriors in mind.
Therefore, it's permitted for magic-user/warriors to wear it and cast spells in
it.
I don't think AD&D would use the word mithril for the same reason they wouldn't
use the word hobbit.
> <g>
Bridget Farace
bfa...@selu.edu
What good is opening your mind, if in doing so, you close your heart
to your greatest ally in the universe? Is it worth so much to you to
realize that you are naked?
Ad...@beachyhd.demon.co.uk
In a message of 29 Apr 96 Jeffrey Robertson wrote to All:
JR> That said, I don't think spells are worth the trouble in NH320. If I had
JR> the choice between a spell, and a decent AC, I'd take the AC. Maybe if
JR> the spells were more powerful, the decision to abandon them would be
JR> harder.
I completely agree. A wizard, armed even with the most powerful spells, still
can't do very much more than someone who's stumbled across a few wands laying
around in the dungeon.
Magic spells should be much more powerful than wands, especially with the
increased spellcasting problems. Can anyone who's roleplayed and played AD&D
more than I have suggest some powerful spells that was can dream about for the
next version? :)
.\dam. [Team Amiga] rec.games.roguelike.nethack FAQ Keeper
NH 313 Am DC Leikaena-VF N
[+/++ )++ P S++ D+ p+ $+ T s+++ W+ !E PS-- PP++ G/G+
C+ I++ @W(wd) N b-- !B !Y X+ So++ Sp+++ !sb !wb
Darin Takemoto
> In article <takemoto-290...@fairchild-lobright.fas.harvard.edu>,
> Darin Takemoto <take...@xtal0.harvard.edu> wrote:
> >
> >[H]ow about different spells for each
> >class, or spells that only certain classes could use.
>
> Close... there are spells that each class is particularly
> good at casting. They generally make sense too. For
> example, Valkyries are good at "cone of cold".
True, there is that, but I'd like to see more specialization still. In
3.2 spellcasting seems crippled, with precious little upside. If there
were some powerful spells waiting at the end of the rainbow, I could see
planning to use spells. But as it is, I just sell my heavy spellbooks,
wear metal armor, and wonder why I bothered to train to use spells at all.
> --
> -------------------------------------+----------------+-----------------
> Jeffrey Robertson | je...@bnr.ca | BNR, Ottawa
> "I speak for myself, not BNR" - Me +----------------+ (Meriline)
> "Verbing weirds language" - Calvin OC-48 FiberWorld
Darin Takemoto
take...@xtal0.harvard.edu
Jesse Morris
Ad...@beachyhd.demon.co.uk wrote:
> I completely agree. A wizard, armed even with the most powerful spells, still
> can't do very much more than someone who's stumbled across a few wands laying
> around in the dungeon.
> Magic spells should be much more powerful than wands, especially with the
> increased spellcasting problems. Can anyone who's roleplayed and played AD&D
> more than I have suggest some powerful spells that was can dream about for the
> next version? :)
More defensive spells would certainly be a plus. A spell of
Protection, Displacement, or Reflection would certainly be used a lot.
More misc. effects would be nice. "Fly" would be a lot more usefull than
levitation. What about Walk On Water. How about a paralytic spell more
powerful than sleep? What about a spell equivalent to AD&D's prismatic
spray spell? (A bunch of rays come out of your hand and one of them hits
you causing one of many effects.) Holy Word destroys/damages undead.
How about a Full Healing spell? How about a spell like "heat metal"
which damages creatures wearing armour, and causes them to sometimes drop
their weapons? How about a spell which temporarily enchants your weapon
(not subject to the +7 max limitation) or armour? Time Stop? Some sort
of Gate spell? How about the Wall of Fire (iron? Stone? Ice? etc?)
spell(s)? How about some spells which summon pets which stay for a while
then vanish? "Delayed blast fireball" would CERTAINLY be well-used by
me. Chain Lightning (A bold of lightning hits one thing, and then arcs
to the next closest thing, and so on and so forth, becoming less powerful
each hop.) A Telekinesis spell (you can use it to get stuff out from on
top of traps, to move cursed lodestones, to pick locks, et cetera.) would
be handy.
Most of these spells are straight out of the AD&D PHB. I think
the entire spell system would have to be changed so that lower level
characters can cast spells earlier, and that they use fewer power points
(or you get them back faster and have higher maxima.) in order for them
to really be usefull.
Torsten Edelmann
30 Apr 96, Jeffrey Robertson writes:
JR> They generally make sense too. For example, Valkyries are good at
JR> "cone of cold". --
What about barbarians? I have a 100% miscasting probabillity in each and every
spell I want to cast, and even totally naked my best chance is around 60
percent. I'm about to just let books be books and get on my merry way.
Sayonara...
Sperber-K; killed by the ghost of Portly (a priest that was
killed by the Ghost of Grunt-B)
NH 3.2.0D D Groo-BM HP:140 Pw:60 AC:-15 N
ba...@sprynet.com
In Article<4m5o35$1...@mckinley.cit.macalstr.edu>, <jmo...@math.macalstr.edu>
writes:
> ba...@sprynet.com wrote:
>
> > > >However, I believe it is only metallic armor that affects spell
> > > >casting, so your mithril should be OK.
> > >
> > > Mithril isn't metal? Tolkien says it's a spiffy form of silver. Or
> > > do you mean "iron"?
> > There's a lot of speculation that mithril is aluminum.
>
> I never heard that. And it doesn't make much sense to me -
> aluminium is considerably softer than most other metals armour/weapon are
> made out of, yet it seems time and time again to be more effective. Also,
> I thought it was very shiny, rather than the sort of dull lustre you find
> on all but the most polished of aluminium.
Note that mithril in Tolkein and Nethack is only used for armor, NOT
weapons. When aluminum is brought to armor-thickness, it is quite strong; it
just doesn't hold an edge, and dents more easily than steel. As far as the
dull lustre, remember that steel needs constant care to keep it from rusting,
while aluminum "rust" (the dull lustre) is harder than the aluminum itself,
and protects the metal from further wear, so it keeps what shine it does have
without much extra care. Also note that before almost the 20th century (I
believe the year was 1897), there was no known way of smelting aluminum, so it
was extremely rare (the top of the Washington Monument was made from then
expensive aluminum, which was a bit of an embarrassment when aluminum became
cheap only a couple of years after the monument was built).
Bart Lidofsky
David J Robertson
>Magic spells should be much more powerful than wands, especially with the
>increased spellcasting problems. Can anyone who's roleplayed and played AD&D
>more than I have suggest some powerful spells that was can dream about for the
>next version? :)
Hmm, a couple leap to mind (that would be pretty easy to code):
Hold person/monster: act like a potion of paralysis (possibly
with a longer duration)
Raise Water: Creates a pool (maybe it requires a pit
to hold the pool)
Lower Water: Drains a pool to form a pit
Pass Wall: Grants walk through walls intrinsic, like
Xorns have, for a limited duration
Glyph of <foo>: Creates a trap of some sort (commonly
things like fire/lightning/cold). You
don't trigger it when stepping on it,
(unless confused, hallucinating, stunned,
etc), but monsters do. It should either
be one use, or have a chance of disapearing
each time it is triggered.
Web: Creates a spider web and entangles foe in
it.
Detect Magic: Duration spell. Objects emit a glow if
they are enchanted, blue if positive,
red if negative (would probably be limited
to +'s (blue) and -'s (red) on armor/weapons.
David Robertson
David J Robertson
In <ef9_960...@wombaz.robin.de> Torsten Edelmann (so...@wombaz.robin.de) wrote:
>30 Apr 96, Jeffrey Robertson writes:
> JR> They generally make sense too. For example, Valkyries are good at
> JR> "cone of cold". --
>What about barbarians? I have a 100% miscasting probabillity in each and every
>spell I want to cast, and even totally naked my best chance is around 60
>percent. I'm about to just let books be books and get on my merry way.
Barbarians are good at the haste self spell. Barbarians are
the worst spell casters in the game though, so don't expect
to be able to cast spells very reliably.
David Robertson
Kjetil Svendsberget
All you people having doubt about wether mithril is a metal better read "MORDOR" from
Iron Crown Enteprises. This module describes in detailed how mithril was found, how good
it is, how they mine it etc. (and all the troubles they have in mining it(they meaning
dwarves that is)...may i say BALROG?)
LowLife Dragon
--==<UDIC>==-- "You had best not do THAT, Avatar!"
Warren Young
francis....@yale.edu (Francis Favorini) wrote:
>In article <takemoto-290...@fairchild-lobright.fas.harvard.edu>,
>>The times I played a Wizard, I have done best when I
>>ignored spells and loaded up on armor. I even sold my spellbooks to
>
>topping?) Lighter spellbooks sounds good.
Or, allowing a blank spellbook to hold more than one spell. Just
transcribe them all to the blank one, and toss the others.
Darin Takemoto
> In a message of 29 Apr 96 Jeffrey Robertson wrote to All:
>
> JR> That said, I don't think spells are worth the trouble in NH320. If I had
> JR> the choice between a spell, and a decent AC, I'd take the AC. Maybe if
> JR> the spells were more powerful, the decision to abandon them would be
> JR> harder.
>
> I completely agree. A wizard, armed even with the most powerful spells, still
> can't do very much more than someone who's stumbled across a few wands laying
> around in the dungeon.
Now that Wizards can't use metallic armor and use spells effectively, as
in AD&D and many other RPGs, it seems to make sense that Wizards should
get spells that are powerful enough to make it worth it. What about other
classes using these ultra-powerful spells? Well, just make the high level
spells *much* harder for other classes to cast, and the metallic armor
penalties very severe for casting high level spells, and this shouldn't
be a problem. Or simply exclude most classes from casting them (100%
fail at all levels).
>
> Magic spells should be much more powerful than wands, especially with the
> increased spellcasting problems. Can anyone who's roleplayed and played AD&D
> more than I have suggest some powerful spells that was can dream about for the
> next version? :)
Hmm, the well-dressed Wizard definitely needs defensive spells. Shield,
Barkskin, and Bless for low level characters. Antimagic Shield, Missile
Shield, and Displacement for higher level. Reflection and Globe of
Invulnerability for highest level. And I suppose protection spells
against the standard attacks (fire, cold, acid, poison).
Utility spells would be useful too. Fly as a beefed up levitation. Water
walking so you don't need the boots. Detect Traps and Disarm Traps would
be helpful. Stone to Mud so you can ditch that pickaxe.
And of course, offensive spells (the fun part ;) Faerie fire (makes a
given opp easier to hit), Bless, Strength, Shocking Grasp (electrical
damage, but need to hit in combat) for low level. Stinking Cloud and Ice
Storm for higher levels. Cloudkill, Delayed-Blast Fireball, some sort
of Death spell, and maybe Holy Word for Priests for the highest levels.
Instead of giving the Wizard a bucketload of magic items, how about a
few (lightened) spellbooks, with an emphasis on low-level spells so
the Wizard can start casting right away. Or maybe a magic marker and a
special large fireproof blank spellbook that can contain multiple spells,
with a few spells pre-written. This would make the Wizard a true spell-
caster, instead of a guy with a golfcart full of magic items. For those
who like their golfcart, we can make a new class which is a less capable
spellcaster but has the present Wizard's assortment of goodies.
>
> .\dam. [Team Amiga] rec.games.roguelike.nethack FAQ Keeper
>
> NH 313 Am DC Leikaena-VF N
> [+/++ )++ P S++ D+ p+ $+ T s+++ W+ !E PS-- PP++ G/G+
> C+ I++ @W(wd) N b-- !B !Y X+ So++ Sp+++ !sb !wb
Darin Takemoto
take...@xtal0.harvard.edu
John Fouhy
In article <takemoto-030...@fairchild-lobright.fas.harvard.edu>,
Darin Takemoto <take...@xtal0.harvard.edu> wrote:
Note that I don't think we want to completely copy AD&D in all respects...
> Hmm, the well-dressed Wizard definitely needs defensive spells. Shield,
> Barkskin, and Bless for low level characters. Antimagic Shield, Missile
We don't need Shield /and/ Bearskin (??) - I'd presume they'll both have
the same effect (lower AC). And I would prefer an Omega-style Bless -
magically bless objects! (increase spell level)
This would be very useful, and worth it, methinks..
> Utility spells would be useful too. Fly as a beefed up levitation. Water
'Beefed up'? You could just make it so you can fly..
> be helpful. Stone to Mud so you can ditch that pickaxe.
We already have a 'Dig' spell...
> And of course, offensive spells (the fun part ;) Faerie fire (makes a
Would only be useful against really big/nasty monsters.
> Storm for higher levels. Cloudkill, Delayed-Blast Fireball, some sort
Delayed blast? What - gauge a monster's speed, Zap it somewhere, then
lure the monster onto it? I dunno..
> of Death spell, and maybe Holy Word for Priests for the highest levels.
We have Finger of Death.
> caster, instead of a guy with a golfcart full of magic items. For those
> who like their golfcart, we can make a new class which is a less capable
> spellcaster but has the present Wizard's assortment of goodies.
An Alchemist, maybe?
I would like an alchemist anyway - have the ability to create potions
from others...
Jesse Morris
John Fouhy (jfo...@atlantis.actrix.gen.nz) wrote:
> > Storm for higher levels. Cloudkill, Delayed-Blast Fireball, some sort
> Delayed blast? What - gauge a monster's speed, Zap it somewhere, then
> lure the monster onto it? I dunno..
Makes a one-shot big damage FireTrap?
Mischa Damon Krilov
John Fouhy (jfo...@atlantis.actrix.gen.nz) wrote:
: An Alchemist, maybe?
: I would like an alchemist anyway - have the ability to create potions
: from others...
I played Ragnarok for a while, and I thought that it had poorly
implemented alchemists. Yes, I enjoyed knowing which potions I could mix
_safely_, but I'd really, really like the ability to _create_ potions
from scratch.
IE: We have a tinning kit, right? What about an alchemist's kit? Apply it
to a cocatrice corpse, get a potion of paralysis. Of course, not constant
recipes game-to-game, maybe just a few.
The largest and immidiately obvious problem: Alchemist. Archeologist
takes up the 'A' slot already. Maybe L? Can't call 'em Apothecaries either..
Now I want to see this <subliminal>implemented</subliminal>. Anyone see
other problems?
Me.
--
+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+--------+
:<mailto:mkr...@tiger.lsu.edu> | If you've got the inclination | APATHY :
:Freelance Work Done On Request | I've got the crime -PSB | KILLS :
+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+--------+
John Fouhy
In article <4mbhak$r...@mckinley.cit.macalstr.edu>,
Jesse Morris <jmo...@math.macalstr.edu> wrote:
> More defensive spells would certainly be a plus. A spell of
> Protection, Displacement, or Reflection would certainly be used a lot.
Especially if it had a decent time limit. That wizard that can't get a
decent AC or use a SoR could wander around with Reflection and Protection
being recast when necessary. :-) Have to live without the GoP though..
> powerful than sleep? What about a spell equivalent to AD&D's prismatic
> spray spell? (A bunch of rays come out of your hand and one of them hits
> you causing one of many effects.) Holy Word destroys/damages undead.
Good effects, I presume?
> How about a Full Healing spell? How about a spell like "heat metal"
> which damages creatures wearing armour, and causes them to sometimes drop
Something like this would require a more sophisticated targetting system
(like Angband or Omega), unless you made it a simple area effect spell,
afecting all monsters in range.
> (not subject to the +7 max limitation) or armour? Time Stop? Some sort
> of Gate spell? How about the Wall of Fire (iron? Stone? Ice? etc?)
Wizards (which I presume will be the main users) already have the Eye,
which #invokes to form portals between dungeons.
> spell(s)? How about some spells which summon pets which stay for a while
Perhaps summon angels / elementals / demons, depending on alignment?
> me. Chain Lightning (A bold of lightning hits one thing, and then arcs
> to the next closest thing, and so on and so forth, becoming less powerful
Might not work as all ray weapons at present go in straight lines?
> Most of these spells are straight out of the AD&D PHB. I think
> the entire spell system would have to be changed so that lower level
> characters can cast spells earlier, and that they use fewer power points
They can cast some.. I played a healer, and I had Healing on 0% in no
time at all (dunno about level 1 - possibly - but certainly by level 2),
and as soon as he got the necessary level for extra healing, it plumetted.
And my wizard had almost exclusivly very low %ages or 100% for spells he
knew, until he started using inhibiting armour.
> (or you get them back faster and have higher maxima.) in order for them
> to really be usefull.
I think the wizard already has a good recharge rate..
What really needs to be done is to have lots of /useful/ spells, that
make up for the armour problems.
Have some classes magic users (wiz the most), others mainly fighters, and
some in the middle. And make it so the magic users don't need the
equipment they can't use so much...
Snibor Eoj
In article <4mgp7n$1...@mckinley.cit.macalstr.edu>,
jmo...@math.macalstr.edu (Jesse Morris) wrote:
> John Fouhy (jfo...@atlantis.actrix.gen.nz) wrote:
> > > Storm for higher levels. Cloudkill, Delayed-Blast Fireball, some sort
>
> > Delayed blast? What - gauge a monster's speed, Zap it somewhere, then
> > lure the monster onto it? I dunno..
Delayed Blast FB would be a fun way to get rid of a nymph... the nymph
steals the little gem it makes (that's what it exists as until it goes
kablooie, at least in the D&D system...) Moments later, an explosion
tears the nymph to shreds... <evil grin>
Martin Read
On 1 May 1996 pcs$25...@altair.selu.edu wrote:
[snip]
> I remember reading that mithril is lightweight, hard as steel (and just as
> good for use in weapons and armor), and as pretty and shiny as silver, and
> it never tarnishes. It's definitely not aluminum. It definitely is metal.
> Just a very high quality metal.
Titanium alloys spring to mind...
> The elven chainmail in AD&D is not made of mithril, but it's specialness
> is attributed to workmanship. It has very tiny, fine links and is more like
> a metallic cloth than the heavy stuff humans call chainmail. It's lighter
> and less noisy, and allows more freedom of movement. It was designed by a
> very much magic-using people, and designed with magic using warriors in mind.
> Therefore, it's permitted for magic-user/warriors to wear it and cast spells in
> it.
>
> I don't think AD&D would use the word mithril for the same reason they wouldn't
> use the word hobbit.
Except that the 1st-edition DMG _and_ the Dungeoneer's Survival Guide
both made references to mithril.
1Ed DMG:
"+3 armour is made of meteoric iron, +4 from mithril alloys, and +5 from
adamantite"
(wording may not be 100% accurate, but the spirit is there.)
Martin Read, Caius College, Cambridge.
|\/| |] |] "It will help to pass the time until you die."
| | | |\
Jesse Morris
Snibor Eoj (jmro...@sccs.swarthmore.edu) wrote:
> > John Fouhy (jfo...@atlantis.actrix.gen.nz) wrote:
> > > > Storm for higher levels. Cloudkill, Delayed-Blast Fireball, some sort
> > > Delayed blast? What - gauge a monster's speed, Zap it somewhere, then
> > > lure the monster onto it? I dunno..
> Delayed Blast FB would be a fun way to get rid of a nymph... the nymph
> steals the little gem it makes (that's what it exists as until it goes
> kablooie, at least in the D&D system...) Moments later, an explosion
> tears the nymph to shreds... <evil grin>
It's not all that easy to get a nymph to steal anything
specific. Also, you lose your potion of object detection, and, if it's a
big enough blast, your mirror also.
Chuan-Tze Teo
>> I remember reading that mithril is lightweight, hard as steel (and just as
>> good for use in weapons and armor), and as pretty and shiny as silver, and
>> it never tarnishes. It's definitely not aluminum. It definitely is metal.
>> Just a very high quality metal.
>Titanium alloys spring to mind...
Wrong colour.
Nick Vargish
In words of tamed electrons, mkr...@tiger.lsu.edu (Mischa Damon
Krilov) scribed thusly:
>The largest and immidiately obvious problem: Alchemist. Archeologist
>takes up the 'A' slot already. Maybe L? Can't call 'em Apothecaries either..
How about M for "Mixologist"?
Nick "killed by a burning book" Vargish
--
+-------------------------------------+
| Nick Vargish, BBN Network Services | Help! I'm trapped in a random
| var...@bbn.com ask for my PGP key | signature generating program!
| http://www.sura.net/~vargish |
Charles G. Shapiro
Jesse Morris wrote:
> It's not all that easy to get a nymph to steal anything
> specific.
Not true. You can ALWAYS get a nymph to steal a =RoA (by wearing it).
Also, you can drop everything but one item and a nymph will always steal it.
Charles
Ad...@beachyhd.demon.co.uk
In a message of 04 May 96 Mischa Damon Krilov wrote to All:
MDK> IE: We have a tinning kit, right? What about an alchemist's kit? Apply
MDK> it to a cocatrice corpse, get a potion of paralysis. Of course, not
MDK> constant recipes game-to-game, maybe just a few.
Now that sounds like a nice idea! Other classes should not be allowed to use
this item (and I guess it should never be randomly generated, like the Athame).
So this would leave the wizard class to read his powerful spellbooks, and the
alchemist to be more like the current implementation of a wizard, but with a
few more advantages. Nice.
John Fouhy
In article <4mj1fu$o...@mckinley.cit.macalstr.edu>,
Jesse Morris <jmo...@math.macalstr.edu> wrote:
> It's not all that easy to get a nymph to steal anything
> big enough blast, your mirror also.
I'll say..
Hello, miss nymph, please steale my iron ball? Hey, wait, not my sword!
Come back with that shield!
And you definately don't want to lose the mirror... (7 years bad luck
anyone?)
Sander Plomp
Ad...@beachyhd.demon.co.uk wrote:
>In a message of 29 Apr 96 Jeffrey Robertson wrote to All:
>
> JR> That said, I don't think spells are worth the trouble in NH320. If I had
> JR> the choice between a spell, and a decent AC, I'd take the AC. Maybe if
> JR> the spells were more powerful, the decision to abandon them would be
> JR> harder.
>
>I completely agree. A wizard, armed even with the most powerful spells, still
>can't do very much more than someone who's stumbled across a few wands laying
>around in the dungeon.
>
>Magic spells should be much more powerful than wands, especially with the
>increased spellcasting problems. Can anyone who's roleplayed and played AD&D
>more than I have suggest some powerful spells that was can dream about for the
>next version? :)
One way would be to give spells area effects where wands are rays.
This allows you to attack many monsters at once, with no need to align
first. Another possibility would be to give spell casters a large
number of low power spells at low cost. These would give you lots of
ways enhance your fighting abilities, hurt or confuse your opponents,
and escape from trouble. Because they are (for wizards) easy to get
and cheap to use you could use them very often. This would solve the
big problem with mega spells: those are to valuable to waste them on
minor monsters, yet it is the constant stream on annoying but not
really powerful monsters that drains heavily on the wizards hit
points.
Another way to achieve the same effect is to limit the magical
abilities of non spell casters. If you want to zap death rays, you'll
have to be a wizard! The power level in Nethack increased considerably
over time (I remember when an enchanted wormtooth was considered a
great weapon). The game is just as much fun if you tone it down a bit,
both player and monster wise. Possible ways to put limits on the easy
magic:
1. Simply remove high power wands and such. Such magic is too powerful
to be contained in mere objects! Make the medium level ones much
rarer so medium level spells become more useful. A wand of fire
will be a prized possession.
2. Make using magic items similar to using low level magic. Reading a
scroll might be easier than casting the spell it contains, but it
still requires you to do magic. Wizards now can use magic items
more easily than other classes.
3. Limit what kind of items various classes can use. To use a wand,
you must be able to tell the front end from the back end in ways
other than testing for sharpness. That's clearly beyond the
abilities of a barbarian. To use a scroll, you must be able to read
difficult words. To use a blank scroll, you must be able to write
them. Granted, anyone can quaff a potion, but some classes might
have ethics against spoiling their body with foul alchemist brew.
(translation: your God gets displeased when you drink something
magical.)
4. Let magical items work better for spell casters, in much the same
way that blessed items now often work better. Those items of
magic are refined works of art. Surely those skilled in such
matters can use them to greater effect than some axe wielding
yokel. For a fighter a ring of warning simply flashes. For a
wizard, it slowly flashes light green three times. (three low level
monsters, unarmed, at considerable distance.)
--
Sander Plomp pl...@together.net
Ronald Neumann
John Fouhy (jfo...@atlantis.actrix.gen.nz) wrote:
: In article <4mbhak$r...@mckinley.cit.macalstr.edu>,
: Jesse Morris <jmo...@math.macalstr.edu> wrote:
: > More defensive spells would certainly be a plus. A spell of
: Especially if it had a decent time limit. That wizard that can't get a
: decent AC or use a SoR could wander around with Reflection and Protection
: being recast when necessary. :-) Have to live without the GoP though..
Funny.I just thought about grouping 3 spells each into every spellbook
(making a total of 24 books with 72 spells,i.e. all NH+ spells +30 extra),
to cut down on spellbook weight and allow spellcasters to have some relia-
ble magic to start with,wizards starting with at least two books,Healers
with one book containing healing,extra healing and restore abilities etc.
And one of the groups was Invisibility,Displacement and Reflection.
Spells of Displacement/Reflection would surely be very attractive,due to
the restriction concerning large shields and since wizards start with a
[CoMR,so Displacement would be a good ability but scarcely worth donning
the Cloak.
: > powerful than sleep? What about a spell equivalent to AD&D's prismatic
: > spray spell? (A bunch of rays come out of your hand and one of them hits
: > you causing one of many effects.) Holy Word destroys/damages undead.
: Good effects, I presume?
Could be a surprise effect:2/3 of the time *real* good,1/3 pretty nasty.
: > How about a Full Healing spell? How about a spell like "heat metal"
: > which damages creatures wearing armour, and causes them to sometimes drop
: Something like this would require a more sophisticated targetting system
: (like Angband or Omega), unless you made it a simple area effect spell,
: afecting all monsters in range.
: > (not subject to the +7 max limitation) or armour? Time Stop? Some sort
: > of Gate spell? How about the Wall of Fire (iron? Stone? Ice? etc?)
: Wizards (which I presume will be the main users) already have the Eye,
: which #invokes to form portals between dungeons.
: > spell(s)? How about some spells which summon pets which stay for a while
: Perhaps summon angels / elementals / demons, depending on alignment?
I hope that the alignment thingy gets cleared sometime,as angels are
by definition "good" and demons "evil".This implies that "chaotic=evil"
and "lawful=good" which is at least highly questionable (horned devils,
IIRC,are lawful,as are barbed devils).Omega actually adapted this approach,
i.e. to become chaotic you have to do something bad,to become lawful you
must do something good.
I'd say that actually *summoning* a powerful ally should be reduced to
the summoning of demons,which should be the domain of truly evil charac-
ters like necromancers.All other classes should be severely punished for
doing this.Also,the use of "spell components" seems an attractive idea
to imply here.E.g. you'd burn five eyes of newt,a dead toad and two wings
of bat in the attempt.Since demons are renowned to want a price for their
service,you could be prohibited from gaining any experience whilst a
demon helps you (he wants all the souls for himself [or herself if it's
an erinyes {why are they demons?} or a marilith]).
Support by an angel should be a bonus for very pious characters,granted
by their deities,IMO.
Elementals as pets seem no really good idea to me,esp. since they are
mindless,so i assumed they are supposed to be pure elemental forces that
only rarely care about humans (though of course they will pound you if
you're in their way).
*But* i think a "summon insects" spell similar to the one of the priests
would be a good idea.A bunch of ants wouldn't be a terrific help,but they
would keep your pursuers occupied and would immobilize them.
: > me. Chain Lightning (A bold of lightning hits one thing, and then arcs
: > to the next closest thing, and so on and so forth, becoming less powerful
: Might not work as all ray weapons at present go in straight lines?
: > Most of these spells are straight out of the AD&D PHB. I think
: > the entire spell system would have to be changed so that lower level
: > characters can cast spells earlier, and that they use fewer power points
: They can cast some.. I played a healer, and I had Healing on 0% in no
: time at all (dunno about level 1 - possibly - but certainly by level 2),
: and as soon as he got the necessary level for extra healing, it plumetted.
: And my wizard had almost exclusivly very low %ages or 100% for spells he
: knew, until he started using inhibiting armour.
: > (or you get them back faster and have higher maxima.) in order for them
: > to really be usefull.
: I think the wizard already has a good recharge rate..
Yep.But i don't think that the mages should be the only class in the
entire game with magic abilities.All other classes' spellcasting sucks.
: What really needs to be done is to have lots of /useful/ spells, that
: make up for the armour problems.
: Have some classes magic users (wiz the most), others mainly fighters, and
: some in the middle. And make it so the magic users don't need the
: equipment they can't use so much...
And also some of the penalties seem too high to me,e.g. the special penal-
tie for wearing metal helmets (exc.[HoB,but they're rare and by the time
you'll have them enchanted a [HoT would be more helpful for most characters).
I liked the restriction code of NH+ better:large shields make spellcasting
impossible (not like 90% fail for detect treasure with [SoR when playing a
Rogue),and only the weight of the body armour was relevant for the additio-
nal encumbrances.Also,if you had too heavy armour,it still didn't hose your
basic spells.BTW dragon scale armours are "heavy" in NH+ >:)
Rick Arding
tan...@cyberport.com (Warren Young) wrote:
>Or, allowing a blank spellbook to hold more than one spell. Just
>transcribe them all to the blank one, and toss the others.
>
>= Warren -- http://www.cyberport.com/~tangent
In NetHack? How do I do this?
...
Clip-clop..clip-clop..<scowl>..Clip-clop... Amish drive-by shunning
---------------------------------------------
Rick Arding @ @
sam...@midtown.net
---------------------------------------------
James Young
John Fouhy (jfo...@atlantis.actrix.gen.nz) wrote:
: In article <4lr22j$6...@bmerhc5e.bnr.ca>,
: Jeffrey Robertson <je...@bnr.ca> wrote:
: > >Mithril isn't metal? Tolkien says it's a spiffy form of silver. Or
:
: Mithril was also known as "silver-steel", and was not just a silver
: compound or something, although it was silver coloured.
Actually, isn't mithril meant to be titanium in our world? This makes
sense, since titanium is very strong, not prone to rust, and extremely
light. It is also non-ferrous, and cannot become a magnet, even though
there would be no magnetic field inside the hollow mithril coat. Does
this mean it should provide some limited protection against magical
attack? Or isn't magic electromagnetic? <boggle>
+================+===================================================+
| _ /| Ooga, | James Young |
| 'o.O' Booga! | (jyo...@box.satech.net.au) |
| =(___)= | -=<* LiNuX uSeR - C PRoGRaMMeR - WiZaRD *>=- |
| U | ALsO KNoWN aS: NightStalker & Gr8_Ape |
+================+===================================================+
Peter Wilson
>
> tan...@cyberport.com (Warren Young) wrote:
>
> >Or, allowing a blank spellbook to hold more than one spell. Just
> >transcribe them all to the blank one, and toss the others.
> >
> >= Warren -- http://www.cyberport.com/~tangent
>
> In NetHack? How do I do this?
Not yet.
Martin Read
On Thu, 2 May 1996 ba...@sprynet.com wrote:
[snip]
> Note that mithril in Tolkein and Nethack is only used for armor, NOT
> weapons. When aluminum is brought to armor-thickness, it is quite strong; it
> just doesn't hold an edge, and dents more easily than steel. As far as the
I see a couple of problems with aluminium _chain mail_, which is the
implied form of mithril armour (dwarvish/elvish mithril _coat_). Chain
mail gets a lot of punishment, especially when lots of bladed weapons
keep slamming into it...
> dull lustre, remember that steel needs constant care to keep it from rusting,
> while aluminum "rust" (the dull lustre) is harder than the aluminum itself,
If it were aluminium, then the first hit from a wand of fire would turn
it to waste metal. Al has a melting point quite a _lot_ lower than that
of steel.
> and protects the metal from further wear, so it keeps what shine it does have
> without much extra care. Also note that before almost the 20th century (I
> believe the year was 1897), there was no known way of smelting aluminum, so it
> was extremely rare (the top of the Washington Monument was made from then
> expensive aluminum, which was a bit of an embarrassment when aluminum became
> cheap only a couple of years after the monument was built).
>
> Bart Lidofsky
Martin Read, Caius College, Cambridge.
|\/| |] |] "I don't mind getting flamed. What I object to is when flames
| | | |\ take seven days to reach my news server, by which time I've
forgotten the bloody article being flamed."
Warren Young
sam...@midtown.net (Rick Arding) wrote:
>tan...@cyberport.com (Warren Young) wrote:
>
>>Or, allowing a blank spellbook to hold more than one spell. Just
>>transcribe them all to the blank one, and toss the others.
>
>In NetHack? How do I do this?
We were discussing "wouldn't it be nice if..." stuff. Wouldn't it be
nice? B-)
Warren Young
jfo...@atlantis.actrix.gen.nz (John Fouhy) wrote:
>> And of course, offensive spells (the fun part ;) Faerie fire (makes a
>
>Would only be useful against really big/nasty monsters.
...and Ghosts. _Anything_ that increases the to-hit on ghosts gets my
immediate support. B-)
>> Storm for higher levels. Cloudkill, Delayed-Blast Fireball, some sort
>
>Delayed blast? What - gauge a monster's speed, Zap it somewhere, then
>lure the monster onto it? I dunno..
I think he means so that it doesn't get you, too. Cast it while being
chased, and then move on. I've never cast it in Nethack (is there
one?), but in Slash, the Flame Mage starts with this spellbook, and
even though he also has fire resistance, the stuff he's carrying often
doesn't. The last time I cast it, I lost a potion of holy water,
among other things.
>> caster, instead of a guy with a golfcart full of magic items. For those
>> who like their golfcart, we can make a new class which is a less capable
>> spellcaster but has the present Wizard's assortment of goodies.
>
>An Alchemist, maybe?
How about "Sorcerer's Apprentice"?
Warren Young
jmo...@math.macalstr.edu (Jesse Morris) wrote:
>> Delayed Blast FB would be a fun way to get rid of a nymph... the nymph
>
> It's not all that easy to get a nymph to steal anything
>specific. ...
Maybe you could be allowed to throw it? Cackle, cackle...
TonyMiner
Does anyone know what types of monsters are able to eat rings with
gemstones?
TonyMiner
I've reviewed all the spoiler files and can't seem to find an answer to
the following question: What creature would one need to polymorph into in
order to eat rings made of minerals or gemstones?
Suggestions are welcome!
Pat Rankin
In article <4ovo2o$6...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>,\
tony...@aol.com (TonyMiner) writes...
> I've reviewed all the spoiler files and can't seem to find an answer to
> the following question: What creature would one need to polymorph into in
> order to eat rings made of minerals or gemstones?
"You can't get there from here."
No monsters eat those.
Dayle Mandelson
tony...@aol.com (TonyMiner) wrote:
>I've reviewed all the spoiler files and can't seem to find an answer to
>the following question: What creature would one need to polymorph into in
>order to eat rings made of minerals or gemstones?
>Suggestions are welcome!
My favorite creature is the Xorn. Among other abilities (going
through rock!!) the Xorns are great at eating amulets, RINGS, and
weapons of armor. When I poly to a xorn, I'm never hungry, since it
is so easy to be able to eat almost anything. Ah, well... That's my
two zorkmids...
-ET-
TonyMiner
In article <4p50bv$1...@redqueen.wizard.com>, Da...@discover-net.net (Dayle
Mandelson) writes:
I agree with you that the Xorn is an excellent choice. However, it seems
that they are unable to eat rings made of minerals or gemstones. Since
the ring types are randomized with each game (e.g., a ring of invisibility
could be a pearl ring or a wire ring, etc.), I was hoping that there might
be an alternate creature capable of consuming rings made of gemstones or
minerals. How else would one gain the intrinsic of searching, for
example, when a ring of searching is made from something like a moonstone?
Perhaps the answer is that one cannot, but I don't know. Hence, the
question....