Endgame hints?
Spud
climb the stairs to start the endgame.
Trouble is, I've got this far a couple of times and always get killed.
My major trouble I always get battered by Archons spawning constantly
and summoning monsters. Are there any tips for getting around them?
I'm a Valk level 30 with about 350hp, AC -43 and wielding FB. I've got
some cursed SOGD to find the teleports and some potions of full
healing.
Any hints?
Panu Lahtinen
wrote:
> My major trouble I always get battered by Archons spawning constantly
> and summoning monsters. Are there any tips for getting around them?
> I'm a Valk level 30 with about 350hp, AC -43 and wielding FB. I've got
> some cursed SOGD to find the teleports and some potions of full
> healing.
> Any hints?
Don't get to XP 30. Archons are much less frequent if your level is lower.
--
Panu
"You haven't really been anywhere until you've got back home",
Twoflower in "The Light Fantastic"
Rast
> I'm standing at the level one of the dungeon with the AOY just about to
> climb the stairs to start the endgame.
> Any hints?
Wear a ring of conflict.
--
"Sometimes I stand by the door and look into the darkness. Then I
am reminded how dearly I cherish my boredom, and what a precious
commodity is so much misery." -- Jack Vance
Spud
game......
Jove
<colin_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Would a cursed scroll of light help? IIRC Archons only
summon if they can see you.
I regularly blow through the astral planes as a level 30
wizard with no Archon troubles. Here is what I actually do.
Some of it may not be important.
- Do *not* fight unless absolutely necessary. If you're
not surrounded, it's not necessary. (This is why
MagicBane is a good ascension weapon.)
- Be "very fast" from pumped up spell of haste self.
Alternatives: speed boots, blessed potions of speed
(You *do* have all but one of the speed potions
you've found, haven't you? You're allowed to use
one for alchemy.) If using potions of speed or have
limited mana for spell of haste self, use them just
before Plane of Air. Or when you get into Archon
trouble.
(Does anyone anyone ever die on the Plane of Earth?)
- #jump with jumping boots on planes of earth/fire *and*
the astral plane. (I've #jumped past Pestilence
without being touched coming or going.)
- requires light source, usually a magic lamp, but
oil lamp, brass lantern, spell/wand of light,
or Sunsword will do.
(NB. Sunsword has been lit the last few times
I've inherited it from a dead Angel. It provided
light even though it wasn't wielded. I suspect
it would have gone out if wielded then unwielded.
- You must be able to see your landing point. (Hence
the light.) Can be a problem with Archon stunning
you, so try the cursed scroll of light above to
stop that. Then jump to lit square after using
Wand/spell of teleport.
- Pumped up spell of detect monsters at "skilled" skill
level -> Always know where every monster on the level
is. Very useful for avoiding the worst monsters.
- Permanently invisible (alternative: displaced).
- Wear a ring of conflict. Very important.
- Using wand/spell of teleport to clear a lane when
necessary. Very important. (Wand/spell of death
may work as well.)
- Confused scrolls of gold detection on all four planes
before astral.
- Specials for Plane of Air:
- Magic map to find where clouds are thinnest.
- When engulfed by air elemental get out immediately.
Time spent fighting is better spent travelling.
Use:
- Wand/spell of teleport
- Wand/spell of polymorph
- Wand/spell of death
- Specials for Plane of fire:
- Wands/spell of cold to make a path *when necessary*.
Also for freezing any lava I might end up in.
- Wands of digging for any lava I might be stuck in.
- Means of controlled levitation for when picked up by
vortices, etc. They can drop you in lava.
- I tend to jump towards the edge of the map -> stay
out of Archon range. In the middle of the map
there are more places an Archon can cause trouble
from.
- Specials for Plane of Water
- Controlled means of levitation so can go directly to
the portal.
- Extra scrolls of gold detection to help track down
the portal.
- Wands of secret door detection - may be useless.
- Blessed genocide ";". (A comfort in times of worry
and confusion.)
- Specials for the Astral Plane:
- Don't be wearing a ring of conflict when you enter.
- Close ("C", spell/wand of locking) doors & break
(wand/spell of force bolt, kick) them so you can
jump through at an angle. Remember, you may be
coming back this way.
- Start #jumping towards the nearest altar asap.
Don't let the level fill up with monsters and it
will be easier to #jump past any Rider.
- A ring of free action along with every potion of
paralysis you've collected will let you carve up
any Rider standing in a doorway. Wield the potion
of paralysis & hit the rider with it. Then re-wield
your weapon & commence surgery.
I've never engraved Elbereth or used a scroll of scare
monster on the astral planes because it's never been
necessary. YMMV so bring wands of lightning/fire just
in case.
Other things I rarely use but may come in handy:
- spell/scroll of charm monster
- pumped up spell of confuse monster
- spell of cause fear
IMAO it's better to be fast & #jumping than just very
fast because you can travel faster that way. (Only valid
on the planes of earth/fire and the Astral Plane.)
Jove
Dylan O'Donnell
> Don't get to XP 30. Archons are much less frequent if your level is lower.
Even in the best case of a Sanctum at DL 45, you'd need to be XL 4 or
below to entirely prevent Archons (difficulty 26) appearing in the
Planes; I don't recommend this as an endgame strategy. Since the
distribution of random monsters is flat (after adjustment for
non-level-related factors), the only practical difference would be the
lower bound: the difference between XL 5 and XL 30 in this example is
that monsters with difficulties between 7 and 9 inclusive would have
dropped off the bottom end of the valid range. (For a Sanctum at DL 53,
9 and 10.) This doesn't seem to be sufficient to make Archons
"much less frequent".
--
: Dylan O'Donnell http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/ :
: "Hello. Well, that was the sound of Roger's Wah-Wah Rabbits, you heard :
: them eating endives there, that's very cheap at this time of the year. :
: [...] But now we're going to talk about shirts." -- Bonzo Dog Band :
Jakob Creutzig
> I'm standing at the level one of the dungeon with the AOY just about to
> climb the stairs to start the endgame.
> Trouble is, I've got this far a couple of times and always get killed.
> My major trouble I always get battered by Archons spawning constantly
> and summoning monsters. Are there any tips for getting around them?
> I'm a Valk level 30 with about 350hp, AC -43 and wielding FB. I've got
^^^^^^^^
> some cursed SOGD to find the teleports and some potions of full
> healing.
I indicated what I believe to be one of the main problems.
If you're just ~level 14, my experience is that few, if any,
archons will pester you.
> Any hints?
You could get some nice level drain if that is not interfering
with your skills. Second, if you have the free reserves, carry
some cursed scrolls of genocide. Once on astral, reverse-genocide
purple worms and use conflict. With a little luck, some archons
will be swallowed. Another way is to make a lot of friends;
reading confused scrolls of taming is a good start and might help
you to develop a 'soft barriere' between you and the archons.
And of course, wearing a blindfold ist not too bad an idea, in
particular if you are warned.
Best,
Jakob
Spud
but Pestillence killed me.
I think the only reason I got there was the ring of conflict and
unbelievably the second trap on the fire plane was the portal.....
I've been playing the game a bit better recently and been close to
ascending a few times and hopefully I'll make it soon.
Cheers
lmfback
colin_...@hotmail.com says...
> Cheers for the replies, especially Jove. I did get to the final level
> but Pestillence killed me.
If Pestilence got you you'll ascend next time. Curious, why did
Pestilence get you? Out of healing stuff, (blessed) unicorn horns,
useful spells? All of them probably but still curious ;-)
Eskimo
--
//------------------------------
//Remove tämä all the way to and including soomee to mail directly.
//Ascended:W,V (genopolywish),P(ill ath), T,K,H,S,B,C,P,W
(naked),Ro,Ra,A,W,almost pacifist A
//In progress:PAIN
Kevin Wayne
> Panu Lahtinen <pn...@iki.fi> writes:
>
>>Don't get to XP 30. Archons are much less frequent if your level is lower.
>
>
> Even in the best case of a Sanctum at DL 45, you'd need to be XL 4 or
> below to entirely prevent Archons (difficulty 26) appearing in the
> Planes; I don't recommend this as an endgame strategy. Since the
> distribution of random monsters is flat (after adjustment for
> non-level-related factors), the only practical difference would be the
> lower bound: the difference between XL 5 and XL 30 in this example is
> that monsters with difficulties between 7 and 9 inclusive would have
> dropped off the bottom end of the valid range. (For a Sanctum at DL 53,
> 9 and 10.) This doesn't seem to be sufficient to make Archons
> "much less frequent".
>
inclusion on the "myths and facts" page. It comes up often enough to be
considered a significant "myth."
--
Kevin Wayne
"Art is a tremendous means by which painfully guarded individuals bare
their souls." --Steve Hindalong
Jove
<colin_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Cheers for the replies, especially Jove.
You're most welcome. Sorry it didn't help you ascend.
Commiserations on your death.
Further hints (hope they're more useful than the last.):
- You can pray on the Astral Planes (all of them).
- You can wear a ring of conflict on the Astral Plane.
Just don't wear it when you enter the Astral Plane.
- A helm of opposite alignment makes at least one of the
wrong altars more useful on Astral. (If your god won't
help you when you've got the amulet to the Astral Plane
(You did try #praying, right?), then forget him/her.)
- Knights have #jumping built-in!
- How fast would a knight #jumping on a hasted war-horse
move?
- A level 30 knight with the Magic Mirror of Merlin
casts magic missile for:
- an average of 96 points of damage. AVERAGE.
- Max damage is 192!
- Trapping a monster against a wall may double damage
- Doing this without reflection or magic resistance
is suicidal!
- But it may treble if you have reflection!
- Or hit a line of monsters.
- Items to save for the Ascension run:
- All but one of the potions of speed you find.
- Bless these & use them on the Plane of Air or when
in trouble.
- Every wand of teleport with charges remaining:
- Every potion of paralysis:
- Bless them.
- If you have a ring of free action, wield against
the riders.
- If no ring of free action - #adjust them to
"t" throw them from a distance with "tt"
- Spell of cure sickness at 0% failure is worth trying
for. (Robe, practice, spellcasting armor, etc.)
- Higher character levels do NOT significantly increase
chances of Archon creation.
- If you have MagicBane
- wield it when not in melee
- Do NOT melee if you can RUN.
- You can engrave in one turn semi-permanently with it
if MagicBane is not cursed.
- If you're wielding MagicBane, it resists 95% of curses
thrown at you.
- ENCHANT MAGICBANE TO +6/7!
- <http://www.steelypips.org/nethack/341/art2-341.html>
shows that MagicBane does 4 more points of damage per
hit at +6 than at +2.
- If you hit 100 times, that's +400 points of damage.
- 1000 +4000
- +7 is more difficult to get. Almost requires
hitting a disenchanter or cursing MagicBane to
dull it to +5 from +6.
- If you prefer scared/confused/cancelled/probed
monsters to dead monsters then -
- Engrave Elbereth (scares monsters)
- Cast spell of confuse monster
- Lasts until you hit a monster
- Can be pumped up
- Cast spell of cause fear
- Zap wand of probing to probe the monster you want,
when you want.
- Spell/wand of cancellation to cancel the monsters
you want, when you want.
- You can #twoweapon (silver saber/dagger?)
- If not #twoweaponing then -
- You can wear a shield.
- like a [SoR so you can wear an "oLS
- or a +7 Elven shield
- Set MagicBane as your secondary weapon,
- Switch ('x') when not meleeing,
- Do NOT melee if you can RUN.
(Could someone get the bit about enchanting MagicBane onto
the Nethack Myths page?)
>I did get to the final level
>but Pestillence killed me.
Damn.
>I think the only reason I got there was the ring of conflict and
>unbelievably the second trap on the fire plane was the portal.....
The Real Nethack God giveth, the RNG taketh away.
>I've been playing the game a bit better recently and been close to
>ascending a few times and hopefully I'll make it soon.
>
>Cheers
This is controversial, but you may want to make a backup
copy of your save file right after you exit the dungeon.
If you die, restore it. When you play it, enter eXplore
('X') mode RIGHT AWAY.
This will NOT get you an ascension. It will let you
practice the Astral Planes with a "real" character.
Which can't be done otherwise short of being a wizard
with wizard mode.
Unless some kind wizard mode expert makes up some
sample wizmode setup files for practicing the Astral Planes.
YANI: utility to create a wizmode setup file from a save
file. Builtin to Nethack would be better yet.
If you do this, you will only get out of it what you
put into it.
One last hint. If you get to the right altar on the
Astral Plane, save your game and copy the save file.
(I don't even have a screen shot of my 1st ascension.)
Then restore and offer the amulet before YASD.
Jove
Janis Papanagnou
[ ...many good suggestions... ]
>
> - Items to save for the Ascension run:
> - All but one of the potions of speed you find.
> - Bless these & use them on the Plane of Air or when
> in trouble.
Preferable use speed boots. Potions of speed are good for alchemy to
increase your HP's.
> - Every wand of teleport with charges remaining:
But beware; *not* for the Riders!
> - If you have MagicBane
> - ENCHANT MAGICBANE TO +6/7!
> - <http://www.steelypips.org/nethack/341/art2-341.html>
We read, the good special effects will decrease noticable if enchanted.
> shows that MagicBane does 4 more points of damage per
> hit at +6 than at +2.
Not much compared to the decrease in special attacks, IMO. YMMV.
Especially in the endgame, confusing, stunning, scaring, cancelling, is
of much worth since you want to be fast, and not to engage extensively
with every high level critter; run, teleport them away, whatever... but
don't engage in a fight to death in melee - you don't need the 4 pts.
more of _melee_ damage here.
Regardless of this point, generally having a second artifact for damage
(as you suggested) is indeed good, just in case.
> - If you hit 100 times, that's +400 points of damage.
> - 1000 +4000
You won't have the opportunity to hit 100 (or even 1000) times; even
the toughest creatures need no more than 10 (or so) hits - make it 15
to take the fewer damage into account, but consider the magic effects,
then. (A note aside: for the summoned insects this calculation is anyway
irrelevant, since any artifact will do.)
> - If you prefer scared/confused/cancelled/probed
> monsters to dead monsters then -
> - Engrave Elbereth (scares monsters)
> - Cast spell of confuse monster
> - Lasts until you hit a monster
> - Can be pumped up
> - Cast spell of cause fear
> - Zap wand of probing to probe the monster you want,
> when you want.
> - Spell/wand of cancellation to cancel the monsters
> you want, when you want.
Generally possible, but she was a Valkyrie, no spellcaster.
> - Do NOT melee if you can RUN.
Most important advice!! (And especially in the endgame.)
> (Could someone get the bit about enchanting MagicBane onto
> the Nethack Myths page?)
Which part about it is a myth?
In the past decade the enchantment of Magicbane has been thouroughly
discussed; what's the new point?
Janis
Janis Papanagnou
>
> IIRC Archons only summon if they can see you.
That would be interesting. Can anyone confirm this?
> - Do *not* fight unless absolutely necessary. If you're
> not surrounded, it's not necessary. (This is why
> MagicBane is a good ascension weapon.)
Aha. I read your other posting differently.
> (Does anyone anyone ever die on the Plane of Earth?)
Not that I recall. But I once died on Plane of Fire due to my stolen
MR confering artifact and a finger of death. That could as well have
happened on Plane of Earth.
> - #jump with jumping boots on planes of earth/fire *and*
> the astral plane. (I've #jumped past Pestilence
> without being touched coming or going.)
Heheheh. :-)
> - Specials for Plane of fire:
> - Wands/spell of cold to make a path *when necessary*.
> Also for freezing any lava I might end up in.
Yes, but why bother; you are already levitating from the level before
(i.e. the Plane of Air).
> - Wands of digging for any lava I might be stuck in.
You can dig through lava? (That's interesting; I wouldn't have though
to try that out.)
> - Specials for the Astral Plane:
> - Start #jumping towards the nearest altar asap.
Hmm.. For me, in practice, they are quite the same regarding distance.
I choose the one guarded by the least unsympathetic rider.
> Don't let the level fill up with monsters and it
> will be easier to #jump past any Rider.
If you don't have means to jump the summoned insects are quite a good
shield.
> IMAO it's better to be fast & #jumping than just very
> fast because you can travel faster that way.
Interesting point. May be worth a wish for the boots.
Janis
Sean
> (Does anyone anyone ever die on the Plane of Earth?)
Choked to death on some flavour of troll once, yes. Most embarrassing
death ever.
Raisse the Thaumaturge
Rodney did me in on the Plane of Earth once. One of two times I was killed
by him-- the other time was when I was relearning my spells on the way to
the planes and read a cursed spellbook by mistake.
Raisse, killed by the Wizard of Yendor
--
ir...@valdyas.org LegoHack: http://www.valdyas.org/irina/nethack/
Status of Raisse (piously neutral): Level 8 HP 63(67) AC -3, fast.
Jove
<Janis_Pa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Jove wrote:
>[ ...many good suggestions... ]
Thanks.
>>
>> - Items to save for the Ascension run:
>> - All but one of the potions of speed you find.
>> - Bless these & use them on the Plane of Air or when
>> in trouble.
>
>Preferable use speed boots. Potions of speed are good for alchemy to
>increase your HP's.
Note the "all but one". That "one" is for alchemy.
Alchemy is much more efficient that way as well.
Speed boots are better for fighting. Don't fight on the
Ascension run if you can help it.
Jumping while fast travels faster than speed boots.
Jumping while very fast travels over *twice as fast* as
speed boots.
- Plane of Earth plane, where it's unimportant.
- Plane of Fire, where it's very important for:
- Leaving the plane before Archons appear
- Escaping Archons
- Astral Plane where it's very important for:
- Getting to the first altar before the level
fills up with monsters (just like sneaking through
the graveyard in Moloch's Sanctum)
- Getting past the Riders without being touched.
Speed boots are better on the Plane of Air and the Plane
of Water *if* you're not:
- already very fast.
- using levitation boots
Remember, jump, don't fight. You can easily cut your
time on the planes of Fire and the Astral Plane in half
by jumping.
>
>> - Every wand of teleport with charges remaining:
>
>But beware; *not* for the Riders!
Excellent point. Not directly, no, but you could zap a
wand of teleport to make a path to go by the Rider, then
#jump.
>
>> - If you have MagicBane
>> - ENCHANT MAGICBANE TO +6/7!
>> - <http://www.steelypips.org/nethack/341/art2-341.html>
>
>We read, the good special effects will decrease noticable if enchanted.
The only special attack that decreases is stunning.
From +2 to +7 probing increases from 5.5% to 25.5%
stunning decreases from 14.5% to 9.5%
scaring increases from 2.7% to 3.6%
confusion increases from 2.0% to 3.0%
I'd argue that the decrease in the stunning special effect
is *not* noticable, especially in light of the following:
In <86k86aq...@strackenz.spod-central.org> on Date: 28
Feb 2001
22:49:49, Dylan O'Donnell states:
>It's not true to say that there's _no_ effect; the effect of stunning
>on monsters is just different. A stunned monster:
>
>gives you a +2 bonus to hit it;
>cannot "block your (clumsy) kick";
>has less chance of escaping death by drawbridge.
>
>It's true enough that this isn't all that much of an effect,
>however.
Looking at the source code makes my eyes bleed. However,
a quick check seems to support the above.
From <http://www.steelypips.org/nethack/341/art2-341.html>:
>The STUN effect causes an
>additional d4 of damage; if none of the later effects have
>occurred and been successful, it stuns the monster (or you,
>for 3 (more) turns
MagicBane at +2 instead of +7 gives a 5% more (14.5% vs
9.5%) chance of 3 more turns of +2 bonus to hit, if not
resisted.
>
>> shows that MagicBane does 4 more points of damage per
>> hit at +6 than at +2.
>
>Not much compared to the decrease in special attacks, IMO. YMMV.
The chance of special attacks *increases* from +2 (21.4%)
to +6 (34.3%).
Probe from 5.5% to 22.3%
Scare from 2.7% to 3.2%
Stun does decrease slightly from 14.5% to 12.7%.
If these effects *are* that important, there are easy
and much more reliable ways to get them when you want on
the monster you want.
From my original post:
>> - If you prefer scared/confused/cancelled/probed
>> monsters to dead monsters then -
>> - Engrave Elbereth (scares monsters)
>> - Cast spell of confuse monster
>> - Lasts until you hit a monster
>> - Can be pumped up
>> - Cast spell of cause fear
>> - Zap wand of probing to probe the monster you want,
>> when you want.
>> - Spell/wand of cancellation to cancel the monsters
>> you want, when you want.
Let me repeat that these effects are available *on
demand*, on the monster you, when you want, reliably.
Instead of low random probability from MagicBane.
The big question though, is *if* you want.
And MagicBane's special melee effects are easily trumped
by MagicBane's ability to engrave Elbereth in one turn
guaranteed whenever you want.
>
>Especially in the endgame, confusing, stunning, scaring, cancelling, is
>of much worth since you want to be fast, and not to engage extensively
>with every high level critter; run, teleport them away, whatever... but
>don't engage in a fight to death in melee - you don't need the 4 pts.
>more of _melee_ damage here.
As noted above, the only special attack that decreases is
stunning.
From +2 to +7 probing increases from 5.5% to 25.5%
stunning decreases from 14.5% to 9.5%
scaring increases from 2.7% to 3.6%
confusion increases from 2.0% to 3.0%
And stunning won't help you in melee except by 3 turns
of a +2 chance to hit.
If you're not fighting in melee, then special effects you
don't get aren't worth more than damage points you don't
get. They *can't* be.
If you're blocked by a monster and want to evade (again,
from my original post):
>> - If you prefer scared/confused/cancelled/probed
>> monsters to dead monsters then -
>> - Engrave Elbereth (scares monsters)
>> - Cast spell of confuse monster
>> - Lasts until you hit a monster
>> - Can be pumped up
>> - Cast spell of cause fear
Note again that MagicBane engraves Elbereth in one turn
guaranteed. Much better than a 20% chance of a special
effect that can be resisted and may not help you anyway.
A wand of teleport works even better, except on the
Riders. And they're much more likely to resist the
special effects. So you want them dead, dead, dead.
Ten hits at +7 is 40 more points of damage over +2.
>
>Regardless of this point, generally having a second artifact for damage
>(as you suggested) is indeed good, just in case.
Thanks. Even #twoweaponing with better (#enhanced,
enchanted) non-artifact weapons in probably better in melee.
The biggest problem is the switching, which the nethack
interface makes difficult, just as it does with jumping.
>
>> - If you hit 100 times, that's +400 points of damage.
>> - 1000 +4000
>
>You won't have the opportunity to hit 100 (or even 1000) times; even
>the toughest creatures need no more than 10 (or so) hits - make it 15
>to take the fewer damage into account, but consider the magic effects,
>then. (A note aside: for the summoned insects this calculation is anyway
>irrelevant, since any artifact will do.)
Every time you hit with a +7 MagicBane you do 4 more
points of damage than if you hit with a +4 MagicBane.
What's the reasoning for limiting it to a single monster?
I'm not saying it's wrong to do so, just that the
justification is not evident.
>
>> - Do NOT melee if you can RUN.
>
>Most important advice!! (And especially in the endgame.)
>
>> (Could someone get the bit about enchanting MagicBane onto
>> the Nethack Myths page?)
>
>Which part about it is a myth?
>
>In the past decade the enchantment of Magicbane has been thouroughly
>discussed; what's the new point?
>
From my original post:
> - <http://www.steelypips.org/nethack/341/art2-341.html>
> shows that MagicBane does 4 more points of damage per
> hit at +6 than at +2.
> - If you hit 100 times, that's +400 points of damage.
> - 1000 +4000
> - If you prefer scared/confused/cancelled/probed
> monsters to dead monsters then -
> - Engrave Elbereth (scares monsters)
> - Cast spell of confuse monster
> - Lasts until you hit a monster
> - Can be pumped up
> - Cast spell of cause fear
> - Zap wand of probing to probe the monster you want,
> when you want.
> - Spell/wand of cancellation to cancel the monsters
> you want, when you want.
Summary:
Four more points of damage on every hit for the rest
of the game. Should easily add up to thousands more damage
points.
There are much easier, more reliable, on-demand,
targetable methods of getting MagicBane's special effects.
(Even so most players, with or without MagicBane, don't
bother with them because they're not worth the minor effort.
In which case they're certainly not worth giving up
thousands of extra damage points.)
In this post I've added that the probability of a magical
effect *increases* with MagicBane's enchantment.
Particularly the best ones of scaring and confusion.
(Whether or not this is a "new" point is up to the
reader to decide.)
Jove
Jove
<Janis_Pa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Jove wrote:
>>
>> IIRC Archons only summon if they can see you.
>
>That would be interesting. Can anyone confirm this?
>
>> - Do *not* fight unless absolutely necessary. If you're
>> not surrounded, it's not necessary. (This is why
>> MagicBane is a good ascension weapon.)
>
>Aha. I read your other posting differently.
Oops, already responded to your other post. Apologies
if it seems heavy-handed.
>
>> - #jump with jumping boots on planes of earth/fire *and*
>> the astral plane. (I've #jumped past Pestilence
>> without being touched coming or going.)
>
>Heheheh. :-)
It's a treasured memory.
>
>> - Specials for Plane of fire:
>> - Wands/spell of cold to make a path *when necessary*.
>> Also for freezing any lava I might end up in.
>
>Yes, but why bother; you are already levitating from the level before
>(i.e. the Plane of Air).
#jumping! (spell, boots, or knight). Faster travel
means less time on the plane for Archons to appear.
Also easier to escape summoning storms: zap wand of
teleport and move three squares instead of one. Should even
save charges on your wands of teleport. This is also
useful on the Astral Plane.
>
>> - Wands of digging for any lava I might be stuck in.
>
>You can dig through lava? (That's interesting; I wouldn't have though
>to try that out.)
Freeze it first :-). I once stepped into lava on the
Plane of fire. After proudly freezing the lava with my
cone of cold spell I had to burn a wish for a wand of
digging to get myself out. Not a treasured memory.
>> IMAO it's better to be fast & #jumping than just very
>> fast because you can travel faster that way.
>
>Interesting point. May be worth a wish for the boots.
>
My work here is done.
Jove's Jumping Jive.
Janis Papanagnou
> On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 16:11:26 +0200, Janis Papanagnou
> <Janis_Pa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>Jove wrote:
>
>>> - If you hit 100 times, that's +400 points of damage.
>>> - 1000 +4000
>>
>>You won't have the opportunity to hit 100 (or even 1000) times; even
>>the toughest creatures need no more than 10 (or so) hits - make it 15
>>to take the fewer damage into account, but consider the magic effects,
>>then. (A note aside: for the summoned insects this calculation is anyway
>>irrelevant, since any artifact will do.)
>
> Every time you hit with a +7 MagicBane you do 4 more
> points of damage than if you hit with a +4 MagicBane.
> What's the reasoning for limiting it to a single monster?
In melee you attack _sequentially_, only a single monster at a time.[*]
You need no more than 10 (or so) hits at most to bring down any creature,
mostly much less hits with appropriately enchanted artifact weapons.
(If you add 1000 times a 3% value of successful magic attack you get
really high impressive values. If I haven't overseen anything you've
just multiplied the value by some factor which makes the outcome look
great, nothing more.)
Don't forget you want to run, not engage in melee to long. Make attackers
unable to attack you effectively, either by death, or by magical means.
If, for example, you make 12 instead of 8 points damage, you'll engage,
say 7 rounds instead of 10. Which is a good thing, of course. But if you
manage to occasionally cancel a monsters special attack (which I value
high) it's a very good bonus.
I read the spoiler (that you referred to) that the less interesting magic
effect (probing) dominates on the hight enchantments, and thus suppresses
the better magical attacks (cancel, scare, and stun).
For the suggested enchantments you'll get these values...
enchantment normal/probe stun/scare/cancel
+2 65.5% 34.5%
+7 85.5% 14.5%
Which is quite a significant difference!
The drawback increases especially beyond an enchantment of +2 [**]; thus
the recommendation for that limit.
> I'm not saying it's wrong to do so, just that the
> justification is not evident.
Janis
[*] As opposed to, say, breaking a wand.
[**] From +2 to +3 there is more than 5% of decrease in efficiency, from
+3 to +5 roughly another 5%, and from +5 to +7 another 10% descrease.
Janis Papanagnou
> On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 16:11:26 +0200, Janis Papanagnou
> <Janis_Pa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>Jove wrote:
>
>>>- If you have MagicBane
>>> - ENCHANT MAGICBANE TO +6/7!
>>> - <http://www.steelypips.org/nethack/341/art2-341.html>
>>
>>We read, the good special effects will decrease noticable if enchanted.
Just to emphasize the point you apparently missed...
I wrote "the *good* special effects".
> The only special attack that decreases is stunning.
> From +2 to +7 probing increases from 5.5% to 25.5%
This one is undesirable!
> stunning decreases from 14.5% to 9.5%
> scaring increases from 2.7% to 3.6%
> confusion increases from 2.0% to 3.0%
You have to take the _added_ percentages (they must sum up to 100%).
enchantment normal/probe stun/scare/cancel
+2 65.5% 34.5%
+7 85.5% 14.5%
That's roughly a 1-in-3 (at +2) compared to a 1-in-7 (at +7) probability.
(Compare that to the average damage 9.5 at +2, and 13.4 at +7, that you
give up in exchange.)
> As noted above, the only special attack that decreases is
> stunning.
> [ the same table as above removed ]
Dito; wrong summing.
>>Which part about it is a myth?
>>
>>In the past decade the enchantment of Magicbane has been thouroughly
>>discussed; what's the new point?
>
> Summary:
>
> [...]
>
> In this post I've added that the probability of a magical
> effect *increases* with MagicBane's enchantment.
Your caclulation was wrong, you have to add also the probabilities of
the combined effects!
> Particularly the best ones of scaring and confusion.
You forgot stunning and cancellation.
> (Whether or not this is a "new" point is up to the
> reader to decide.)
There's no new point. Your conclusions are based on two wrong points:
- misinterpretation of the data (as far as I can judge), wrong summing.
- overestimation of the probing "attack" which suppresses the desirable
magic attacks (cancel, stun, scare) to a significant extent.
Janis
John H.
> - You can wear a ring of conflict on the Astral Plane.
> Just don't wear it when you enter the Astral Plane.
Er... of course I could be wrong about this, but what I remember is:
- If you're wearing the ring upon entering the Astral Plane, you don't
get your angel minion, and instead the game sends in four hostile
angels adjacent to you. Considering you've got conflict, however, in
my experience this still isn't that bad.
- If you put on a ring of conflict while your minion angel is still
alive, he'll vanish, and the game will send in the four hostile angels
at that point.
- If your minion angel is dead, putting on a ring of conflict produces
no ill effects.
> - A helm of opposite alignment makes at least one of the
> wrong altars more useful on Astral. (If your god won't
> help you when you've got the amulet to the Astral Plane
> (You did try #praying, right?), then forget him/her.)
This always feels like cheating to me, but I'm weird that way....
> - Knights have #jumping built-in!
<snip>
This is very, very interesting information, I never thought about jump
being useful as an ultra-fast means of escape.
> - Items to save for the Ascension run:
> - All but one of the potions of speed you find.
> - Bless these & use them on the Plane of Air or when
> in trouble.
As others have said, if you're wearing speed boots these are not useful
if drunk.
Others have mentioned not using wands of teleportation against the
Riders. It doesn't work? I know, and rely upon, the fact that wands
of death work against Pestilence and Famine. I always hated that they
made the demon lords immune to it (though I imagine it makes sense with
Orcus).
- John H.
Boudewijn Waijers
> Others have mentioned not using wands of teleportation against the
> Riders. It doesn't work?
No. They have teleport control, and will always teleport next to you
instead of away, I believe. Correct me if I'm wrong.
--
Boudewijn.
--
"I have hundreds of other quotes, just waiting to replace this one
as my signature..." - Me
Janis Papanagnou
>
> Others have mentioned not using wands of teleportation against the
> Riders. It doesn't work?
Worse! It will even resurrect a dead rider corpse and put him adjacent
to you.
> I know, and rely upon, the fact that wands
> of death work against Pestilence and Famine.
I never thought that could be the case, and only used the wand of death
since I read about it. I would not be astonished and would also find it
ok if the wand of death wouldn't work against all the Riders. But ok...
> I always hated that they
> made the demon lords immune to it (though I imagine it makes sense with
> Orcus).
To me, an effective death to demons would make me wonder still more than
with the Riders. Also ok for me; the behaviour is what I'd expect.
Janis
Jove
wrote:
>Jove wrote:
>
>> - You can wear a ring of conflict on the Astral Plane.
>> Just don't wear it when you enter the Astral Plane.
>
>Er... of course I could be wrong about this, but what I remember is:
>- If you're wearing the ring upon entering the Astral Plane, you don't
>get your angel minion, and instead the game sends in four hostile
>angels adjacent to you. Considering you've got conflict, however, in
>my experience this still isn't that bad.
>- If you put on a ring of conflict while your minion angel is still
>alive, he'll vanish, and the game will send in the four hostile angels
>at that point.
>- If your minion angel is dead, putting on a ring of conflict produces
>no ill effects.
You're probably right. I seem to remember conflicting :-)
results when putting on the ring on Astral.
>
>> - A helm of opposite alignment makes at least one of the
>> wrong altars more useful on Astral. (If your god won't
>> help you when you've got the amulet to the Astral Plane
>> (You did try #praying, right?), then forget him/her.)
>
>This always feels like cheating to me, but I'm weird that way....
Thus the query "You did try #praying?" If your god won't
help you on Astral, your god is unworthy of worshippers.
(If roleplaying, roleplay all the way.)
Your feelings I am *not* arguing with. I feel guilty
abandoning pets in the midgame once they become a liability.
If we don't make some decisions on pure personal preference
then we're just power-gaming munchkins. I mana-stuff my wizards
and get every spell because wizards Should Cast Spells.
(I'm a power-gaming uber-munchking with *feelings*, dammit.)
>
>
>> - Knights have #jumping built-in!
><snip>
>
>This is very, very interesting information, I never thought about jump
>being useful as an ultra-fast means of escape.
Probably due to the general lack of appreciation of "the
joys of bravely running away."
Yeah, knights are much more survivable than anyone realizes.
The problem is the interface makes jumping difficult for
everyone. Why not have ^J work for jumping with the spell,
boots, or knight like ^T works for teleporting with the spell,
ring or intrinsic?
Not to mention its uses on Medusa, Juiblex, the Castle
and Fort Ludious jumping over water and trapdoors,
and holes, trapdoors and narrow water in general.
I wonder if it works on land mines? or other traps?
Now the downside to jumping:
- Clear path to landing point (really tough for knights
in a straight corridor).
- Have to see the landing point directly:
- not blind (tough if there's an Archon about)
- landing point lit, so a magic lamp is the perfect
accessory.
- DON'T JUMP IN SOKOBAN! (I once spent a few hundred
turns practicing my spell of jumping in Sokoban.)
>
>
>> - Items to save for the Ascension run:
>> - All but one of the potions of speed you find.
>> - Bless these & use them on the Plane of Air or when
>> in trouble.
>
>As others have said, if you're wearing speed boots these are not useful
>if drunk.
Or the speed boots become expendable and you can use levitation
boots on Air & Water, and jumping boots on Earth, Fire, and the
Astral plane.
And <all together now> jumping while just fast travels faster
than speed boots. <Deep breath> Jumping while very fast (say,
with potions of speed) lets you travel 2-3 times as fast.
Don't get me wrong. As a wizard finding speed boots early
on is a lifesaver. I'd like to weld them to my feet (well, super
glue anyway.) For any early character burnt +0 speed boots
are probably better than +5 fireproof boots of jumping,
or +7 iron shoes, because you fight and run at "very fast."
A wimpy wizard learns to use every last little trick
Jumping is an excellent, but specialized, tool. It and
MagicBane are good fits for ascension run, where the nature of
the game changes. Just like scrolls of gold detection
become suddenly almost essential.
Re: MagicBane. My early ascension runs were overloaded
with holy water, blessed scrolls of remove curse, and
a recently refreshed spell of remove curse at 0% failure.
All of the weight was worse than useless because MagicBane
absorbs 95% of curses. And there are posts where people have
#quit on the ascension run because they ran out of
uncursing material.
I noticed the same thing about Archons on the astral planes.
Even for my level 30 wizards they were never a problem. But
they seem to be a leading cause of death in others on the
astral planes. But I only ever saw Archons in my review mirror,
receding rapidly.
A wizard has to use every last little trick to survive
& prosper in the early game. If you start with a ring of
poison resistance put it on when necessary, take it off
when not so you don't starve to death. If start with a
+1 ring of gain constitution, turn on showexperience
and put the ring on to kill the monster that will cause
you to gain a level for the extra hit points you'll gain.
(Valkyries have their own deep and complex game plan:
Valk SMASH!)
For the end game you want to a) stay alive and b) travel to
the correct altar asap. Travel speed is paramount. (Hence
also the levitation boots on water. They let you travel faster
on the level.)
>
>Others have mentioned not using wands of teleportation against the
>Riders. It doesn't work? I know, and rely upon, the fact that wands
>of death work against Pestilence and Famine. I always hated that they
>made the demon lords immune to it (though I imagine it makes sense with
>Orcus).
>
>- John H.
AFAIR, teleporting the Riders gives a 9/10 chance of them
ending up next to you. Yesterday's YAFAP reveled in zapping a
path around the Riders and just going past them.
Jove
John H.
> John H. wrote:
> > Others have mentioned not using wands of teleportation against the
> > Riders. It doesn't work?
>
> No. They have teleport control, and will always teleport next to you
> instead of away, I believe. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Well I'm not *correcting* you per se, just mentioning that I seem to
remember using wands of teleportation to get rid of Riders. My memory
isn't clear on the issue, though. It may also have taken multiple
zaps.
- John H.
John H.
> John H. wrote:
> > Others have mentioned not using wands of teleportation against the
> > Riders. It doesn't work?
>
> Worse! It will even resurrect a dead rider corpse and put him adjacent
> to you.
Yeah, I think I remember hearing this, but I'm specifically referring
to live (or whatever Death is) Riders.
> I never thought that could be the case, and only used the wand of death
> since I read about it. I would not be astonished and would also find it
> ok if the wand of death wouldn't work against all the Riders. But ok...
I'm of the opinion that wands, in Nethack, seem awfully underpowered
even in the mid game. Wands of Death, being of the most dire type
besides Wishing, seem like they should work on lots of things, but
maybe it's enough that the Wizard is succeptable to them. (Forget your
cloak this morning, Roddy?)
> To me, an effective death to demons would make me wonder still more than
> with the Riders. Also ok for me; the behaviour is what I'd expect.
This is a matter I've wondered about before. What is it about demons
that makes wands of death not make sense with them? Does Nethack take
the stance that demons and angels are departed souls in a later form?
I think that'd make them more like undead. If demons and angels are
suposed to be something different (which I believe is the historical
concept), then wands of death should work on them. (Unless they're
something *really* different, enough so that the idea of "death"
doesn't make sense with them....)
I know, someone'll bop along with a comment like "If a demon dies,
where does he go? He's already in hell!" But I don't think that's
necessarily an answer.
- John H.
Jukka Lahtinen
> Boudewijn Waijers wrote:
> > John H. wrote:
> > > Others have mentioned not using wands of teleportation against the
> > > Riders. It doesn't work?
> > No. They have teleport control, and will always teleport next to you
> > instead of away, I believe. Correct me if I'm wrong.
> remember using wands of teleportation to get rid of Riders. My memory
You may very well remember right.. maybe you used those wands in an
EARLIER version BEFORE the riders got teleport control.
> isn't clear on the issue, though. It may also have taken multiple
> zaps.
..or just repeated zapping them long enough. But that's not the best
strategy these days. When you fail to teleport a rider away, it gets a
free hit and you didn't do any damage at all..
--
Jukka Lahtinen
Janis Papanagnou
> On 16 Jul 2005 13:41:51 -0700, "John H." <Joh...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>>- Knights have #jumping built-in!
>>
>>being useful as an ultra-fast means of escape.
>
> Probably due to the general lack of appreciation of "the
> joys of bravely running away."
Wouldn't knights use jumping to quickly come closer to the battle?!
;-)
> Yeah, knights are much more survivable than anyone realizes.
> The problem is the interface makes jumping difficult for
> everyone. Why not have ^J work for jumping with the spell,
> boots, or knight like ^T works for teleporting with the spell,
> ring or intrinsic?
If you have numberpad on you may use the key j to jump, or Meta-j
which is as good as Ctrl-j. I wonder why the Meta-j won't also work
with numberpad off. OTOH, ^J seems to be yet undefined, and would
give a better association with ^T, so I agree with your suggestion.
> Not to mention its uses on Medusa, Juiblex, the Castle
> and Fort Ludious jumping over water and trapdoors,
> and holes, trapdoors and narrow water in general.
>
> I wonder if it works on land mines? or other traps?
>
> Now the downside to jumping:
> - Clear path to landing point (really tough for knights
> in a straight corridor).
Given that knights have intrinsic (restricted) jumping from start
on I'd liked to see them getting unrestricted jumping with some
higher experience level.
>>Others have mentioned not using wands of teleportation against the
>>Riders. It doesn't work? I know, and rely upon, the fact that wands
>>of death work against Pestilence and Famine. I always hated that they
>>made the demon lords immune to it (though I imagine it makes sense with
>>Orcus).
>
> AFAIR, teleporting the Riders gives a 9/10 chance of them
> ending up next to you.
A 12/13 chance to bring him close.
Janis
Dylan O'Donnell
> - If you put on a ring of conflict while your minion angel is still
> alive, he'll vanish, and the game will send in the four hostile angels
> at that point.
Only if he's in the area, and fails his (base 55%) saving throw
against _being_ conflicted; it's not automatic. However, wearing
conflict in his vicinity will cause this effect sooner or later.
Dylan O'Donnell
> John H. wrote:
>
> > Others have mentioned not using wands of teleportation against the
> > Riders. It doesn't work?
>
> No. They have teleport control, and will always teleport next to you
> instead of away, I believe. Correct me if I'm wrong.
s/will always teleport/have a 12\/13 chance of teleporting/
Dylan O'Donnell
> John H. wrote:
> > Others have mentioned not using wands of teleportation against the
> > Riders. It doesn't work?
>
> Worse! It will even resurrect a dead rider corpse and put him adjacent
> to you.
Just revive; only live Riders do the teleport-to-you trick.
Dylan O'Donnell
> Jove wrote:
> > Why not have ^J work for jumping with the spell, boots, or knight
> > like ^T works for teleporting with the spell,
> > ring or intrinsic?
>
> If you have numberpad on you may use the key j to jump, or Meta-j
> which is as good as Ctrl-j. I wonder why the Meta-j won't also work
> with numberpad off. OTOH, ^J seems to be yet undefined, and would
> give a better association with ^T, so I agree with your suggestion.
^J is "run south". Changing j to ^J for number_padders would probably
be possible, but I don't see any great advantage to doing so.
(In general, there _is_ no undefined usable single-letter, shift-letter,
or ctrl-letter combination; and dashed few non-letters, either. There's
a reason new commands get put in the #extended interface.)
Adam Lawson
On Sun, 17 Jul 2005, Jove wrote:
> Thus the query "You did try #praying?" If your god won't
> help you on Astral, your god is unworthy of worshippers.
> (If roleplaying, roleplay all the way.)
This brought a line from Conan the Barbarian to mind...
Whilst talking to his god, Crom, "And if you do not listen, the HELL with
you!"
Janis Papanagnou
> Janis Papanagnou <Janis_Pa...@hotmail.com> writes:
>>John H. wrote:
>>
>>>Others have mentioned not using wands of teleportation against the
>>>Riders. It doesn't work?
>>
>>Worse! It will even resurrect a dead rider corpse and put him adjacent
>>to you.
>
> Just revive; only live Riders do the teleport-to-you trick.
Well, at least that was the case when I teleported a Rider the first
(and only) time I've done that (after it was changed in NH to behave
like it does now); the rider immediately stood adjacent. I suppose
it was the Riders turn that put him close at once. Is the difference
in practice only that it would just not have happened in the 1/13
chance?
Janis
Jove
O'Donnell) wrote:
>Janis Papanagnou <Janis_Pa...@hotmail.com> writes:
>> Jove wrote:
>> > Why not have ^J work for jumping with the spell, boots, or knight
>> > like ^T works for teleporting with the spell,
>> > ring or intrinsic?
>>
>> If you have numberpad on you may use the key j to jump, or Meta-j
>> which is as good as Ctrl-j. I wonder why the Meta-j won't also work
>> with numberpad off. OTOH, ^J seems to be yet undefined, and would
>> give a better association with ^T, so I agree with your suggestion.
>
>^J is "run south". Changing j to ^J for number_padders would probably
>be possible, but I don't see any great advantage to doing so.
>
>(In general, there _is_ no undefined usable single-letter, shift-letter,
>or ctrl-letter combination; and dashed few non-letters, either. There's
>a reason new commands get put in the #extended interface.)
Thanks for the explanation. Searching for "^J" didn't find
anything in the NetHack GuideBook, while ^t did. So I thought
^J was free.
Jove
Zarel
Erm... Speed boots make you Very Fast. So I don't understand what's
wrong with speed boots. You're basically saying that jumping while
wearing speed boots is over twice as fast as speed boots. Which is fine,
but doesn't constitute an argument against speed boots. So it's
basically wearing speed boots vs quaffing tons of blessed potions of
speed. I think wearing speed boots is better, since then the potions of
speed can be alched.
Note that only Knights can jump like that, otherwise you need a spell of
jumping or something like that.
DISCLAIMER: I have not done extensive research into jumping, so don't
trust me on that.
--
____ (__)
/ \ (oo) -Zarel
|Moo. > \/
\____/
Zarel
Nevermind. Took me long enough to realize you meant we were supposed to
wear jumping boots...
Zarel
> "Spud" <colin_...@hotmail.com> writes:
>
>
>>I'm standing at the level one of the dungeon with the AOY just about to
>>climb the stairs to start the endgame.
>>Trouble is, I've got this far a couple of times and always get killed.
>>My major trouble I always get battered by Archons spawning constantly
>>and summoning monsters. Are there any tips for getting around them?
>>I'm a Valk level 30 with about 350hp, AC -43 and wielding FB. I've got
>
> ^^^^^^^^
>
>>some cursed SOGD to find the teleports and some potions of full
>>healing.
>
>
> I indicated what I believe to be one of the main problems.
> If you're just ~level 14, my experience is that few, if any,
> archons will pester you.
>
Read other posts in this thread.
>
>>Any hints?
>
>
> You could get some nice level drain if that is not interfering
> with your skills. Second, if you have the free reserves, carry
> some cursed scrolls of genocide. Once on astral, reverse-genocide
> purple worms and use conflict. With a little luck, some archons
> will be swallowed. Another way is to make a lot of friends;
> reading confused scrolls of taming is a good start and might help
> you to develop a 'soft barriere' between you and the archons.
> And of course, wearing a blindfold ist not too bad an idea, in
> particular if you are warned.
Or cursed-geno purple worms, then confused-tame them. Like conflict, but
better.
Jove
<Janis_Pa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Jove wrote:
>> On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 16:11:26 +0200, Janis Papanagnou
>> <Janis_Pa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>Jove wrote:
>>
>>>> - If you hit 100 times, that's +400 points of damage.
>>>> - 1000 +4000
>>>
>>>You won't have the opportunity to hit 100 (or even 1000) times; even
>>>the toughest creatures need no more than 10 (or so) hits - make it 15
>>>to take the fewer damage into account, but consider the magic effects,
>>>then. (A note aside: for the summoned insects this calculation is anyway
>>>irrelevant, since any artifact will do.)
>>
>> Every time you hit with a +7 MagicBane you do 4 more
>> points of damage than if you hit with a +4 MagicBane.
>> What's the reasoning for limiting it to a single monster?
>
>In melee you attack _sequentially_, only a single monster at a time.[*]
>You need no more than 10 (or so) hits at most to bring down any creature,
>mostly much less hits with appropriately enchanted artifact weapons.
But you're still going to attack all the monsters. So that
doesn't affect the extra damage total, does it?
>
>(If you add 1000 times a 3% value of successful magic attack you get
>really high impressive values.
Actually, you don't. 30 magic attacks doesn't look like much
vs 4000 extra damage points. And some of the magic attacks don't
accumulate (like probing and cancellation) on a monster. And you
need to factor in monster saving throws.
Plus the magic attacks themselves aren't very impressive:
Probing and stunning are next to useless as far as I know. I'd
love to hear differently, though.
And *damage accumulates*. That's why it adds up. If it didn't
you could never kill any monster you couldn't kill with one hit.
Probing and cancellation don't accumulate. A canceled monster
is canceled. Canceling it again is *completely useless*.
Three more stunned turns, which the faq says you don't get
anyway if another special attack succeeds (cf. infra) aren't
really worth much, are they?
There's nothing wrong with three more turns of fleeing that
scaring gives you. It's just that it's much easier to get
by MagicBane's guaranteed engraving on *all* the monsters
around you, instead of just one every so often at random.
Then you get the extra damage *and* fleeing.
>If I haven't overseen anything you've
>just multiplied the value by some factor which makes the outcome look
>great, nothing more.)
The number of hits is not just "some factor". Any other factor
makes the equation invalid:
total extra damage = extra damage points X number of hits
Do you think the estimate of 1000 hits is too high?
What other, more valid, factor would you suggest?
The reason the outcome looks great is because it *is* great.
Extra damage is what everybody wants (even pacifists. Except
they want it for their pets.) This is why primary and secondary
weapons are routinely enchanted as high as safely possible.
>
>Don't forget you want to run, not engage in melee to long.
Exactly.
>Make attackers
>unable to attack you effectively, either by death, or by magical means.
And MagicBane's best magical means for that is easily engraving
Elbereth.
Even the spoiler says:
"Fortunately, your odds of magic-resistance, curse-resistance,
and engraving do not depend upon the enchantment."
>
>If, for example, you make 12 instead of 8 points damage, you'll engage,
>say 7 rounds instead of 10. Which is a good thing, of course.
Oddly enough, I agree. :-)
> But if you
>manage to occasionally cancel a monsters special attack (which I value
>high) it's a very good bonus.
How so? I really want to know if I'm missing out on something
here.
Most monsters have nothing to cancel. Breath attacks can be
canceled, but monsters don't use them at melee range anyway.
Canceling a nymph would be useful, but taking a %10 chance of
that at melee range is foolhardy when you have a 100% chance of
engraving Elbereth.
Are there any cancelable monsters that don't respect Elbereth?
Don't get me wrong. There are times when I want to cancel a
monster. At those times (disenchanters) it needs to be a)
reliable b) immediate and c) at a distance.
Magicbane fails on all counts when it comes to cancellation.
Engraving would be guaranteed to save me from the threat,
however.
>
>I read the spoiler (that you referred to) that the less interesting magic
>effect (probing) dominates on the hight enchantments, and thus suppresses
>the better magical attacks (cancel, scare, and stun).
Is that not reflected in the probability table? I'm not
saying it is. But if it isn't, the table is misleading to
no good effect.
I've since found:
<http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/nh/art2-343.txt>
which is for 3.4.3 instead of 3.4.1. I apologize for
using an outdated spoiler in my previous post. I don't
know if there were changes between the two versions,
but my references in this post are to the above spoiler.
The spoiler's statement that:
"However, if you want to maximize the best magical attacks
of this artifact, it should be enchanted to +2"
would have to include stunning in the "best magical attacks"
which in my ignorance I do not understand at all.
>For the suggested enchantments you'll get these values...
>
> enchantment normal/probe stun/scare/cancel
> +2 65.5% 34.5%
> +7 85.5% 14.5%
>Which is quite a significant difference!
In relative terms, yes. In absolute terms, no.
That's a difference in the *probability* of something
happening. It doesn't say anything about the worth
of the effect.
Also even 34.5% is very unreliable even if the
special attacks were worthwhile.
Also note that the probabilities given are *over* estimates.
"depending on the monster's magic resistance saving throw"
Possibly very highly over estimated for the late game and
against those monsters where the effects (especially
cancellation) would be most useful.
>
>The drawback increases especially beyond an enchantment of +2 [**]; thus
>the recommendation for that limit.
Actually, the spoiler says:
"However, if you want to maximize the best magical attacks
of this artifact, it should be enchanted to +2"
Note that maximize and best are both relative terms, not
absolute. It by no means says limiting to +2 is a good idea.
It also states:
"If you simply want to cause the most damage, then the table
indicates that you should enchant it as high as possible
(safely to +7)."
Which is at least as strong a recommendation for +7.
Your salesmanship has got me wondering what I'm missing
out on (or somehow not noticing.) I've been scrutinizing
the spoiler very carefully.
Jove
Philip Kendall
Jove <inv...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
> But you're still going to attack all the monsters.
a) Not once I've woken Rodney.
b) Not necessarily if I have a pet.
c) Not necessarily in melee if I have some decent attack spells.
d) Not necessarily if I have conflict.
Cheers,
Phil
--
Philip Kendall <pa...@srcf.ucam.org>
http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~pak21/
Janis Papanagnou
> On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 13:20:14 +0200, Janis Papanagnou
> <Janis_Pa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>In melee you attack _sequentially_, only a single monster at a time.[*]
>>You need no more than 10 (or so) hits at most to bring down any creature,
>>mostly much less hits with appropriately enchanted artifact weapons.
>
> But you're still going to attack all the monsters. So that
> doesn't affect the extra damage total, does it?
No. As I understand, you do so. I am happy if in Endgame I have creatures
scared or made less effective so that they won't bother me and I can get
faster ahead.
> And *damage accumulates*. That's why it adds up.
The 9 points of damage done by Magicbane won't vanish in addition to its
magic attacks.
> Probing and cancellation don't accumulate. A canceled monster
> is canceled. Canceling it again is *completely useless*.
The magic effects work instantly and some even permanent. Its nonsense to
talk about accumulation here. Regarding "useless" I disagree. YMMV.
> Three more stunned turns, which the faq says you don't get
> anyway if another special attack succeeds (cf. infra) aren't
> really worth much, are they?
They are. The creature is busy with his own. Remember, in endgame you are
mostly surrounded.
> There's nothing wrong with three more turns of fleeing that
> scaring gives you. It's just that it's much easier to get
> by MagicBane's guaranteed engraving on *all* the monsters
> around you, instead of just one every so often at random.
> Then you get the extra damage *and* fleeing.
Regarding Elbereth I partly agree; for the non-Endgame. Though that's no
strategy for me in Endgame; I need to build my way through the crowd and
I need some combo of teleporting the creatures away, killing, or scaring
them by any (magic) means. Magicbane is quite good at that (in addition
to its other effects, like curse-protection).
>>If I haven't overseen anything you've
>>just multiplied the value by some factor which makes the outcome look
>>great, nothing more.)
>
> The number of hits is not just "some factor". Any other factor
> makes the equation invalid:
>
> total extra damage = extra damage points X number of hits
>
> Do you think the estimate of 1000 hits is too high?
The factor is relevant only if you hack'n'slash in melee until there's
quietness (simply speaking). Granted, that's one plan how to succeed in
NH. There are other ways.
>>But if you
>>manage to occasionally cancel a monsters special attack (which I value
>>high) it's a very good bonus.
>
> How so? I really want to know if I'm missing out on something
> here.
>
> Most monsters have nothing to cancel. Breath attacks can be
> canceled, but monsters don't use them at melee range anyway.
There are a lot of monsters that have something to cancel.
You can cancel the following special attacks: fire, cold, electricity,
sleep, paralysis, drain life, drain constitution, drain energy, stick,
were, teleport away, slow, slime, disenchant, and, magic spellcasting.
Some of these are, especially in the endgame, of little interest, but
there are quite a few that I won't like to miss.
>>I read the spoiler (that you referred to) that the less interesting magic
>>effect (probing) dominates on the hight enchantments, and thus suppresses
>>the better magical attacks (cancel, scare, and stun).
>
> Is that not reflected in the probability table? I'm not
> saying it is. But if it isn't, the table is misleading to
> no good effect.
It is reflected in the table, but you have not considered it upthread.
There you claimed that probing would even increase and that it would
be thus a good effect of enchanting Magicbane while the other effects
would slightly decrease (because you disregarded the combined effects
in your calculations). You read the table wrong.
>>For the suggested enchantments you'll get these values...
>>
>> enchantment normal/probe stun/scare/cancel
>> +2 65.5% 34.5%
>> +7 85.5% 14.5%
>
>>Which is quite a significant difference!
>
> In relative terms, yes. In absolute terms, no.
The effects are absolute, as said above; every third hit, on average,
you'll get a positive magic attack. (Only every seventh attack at +7.)
> That's a difference in the *probability* of something
> happening. It doesn't say anything about the worth
> of the effect.
>
> Also even 34.5% is very unreliable even if the
> special attacks were worthwhile.
I think 1/3 is really good. A higher probability would spoil the game,
I'd say (as would some weapon with 100 pts of damage per hit).
>>The drawback increases especially beyond an enchantment of +2 [**]; thus
>>the recommendation for that limit.
>
> Actually, the spoiler says:
>
> "However, if you want to maximize the best magical attacks
> of this artifact, it should be enchanted to +2"
>
> Note that maximize and best are both relative terms, not
> absolute. It by no means says limiting to +2 is a good idea.
No one claims so. But it's bad if you prefer the magic effects.
> It also states:
>
> "If you simply want to cause the most damage, then the table
> indicates that you should enchant it as high as possible
> (safely to +7)."
>
> Which is at least as strong a recommendation for +7.
Yes, for those who prefer the damage-approach and value 30% more damage
as essential for their strategy.
> Your salesmanship has got me wondering what I'm missing
> out on (or somehow not noticing.) I've been scrutinizing
> the spoiler very carefully.
Ignoring your mis-interpretation of the table values, there's nothing
wrong if you play your style and recommend it further.
What I think is "wrong" or misleading is your comment elsethread:
>>
>> (Could someone get the bit about enchanting MagicBane onto
>> the Nethack Myths page?)
>>
which seem to imply that a) there is any new knowledge, and/or b) that
keeping Magicbane at +2 is bad. None of it is true. But I may as well
have mis-interpreted this statement of yours.
I think every fact has been thoroughly explained on both sides.[*]
Differences in playing style will remain. So from my side I plan not
to continue that debate that seems to enlighten us no further at this
point.
Happy hacking!
Janis
[*] You recognize it by the length of the postings and repetitions (on
both sides). :-)
PS:
Though one point remain unclear for me; why would one enchant Magicbane
if he goes for damage anyway, since there are artifacts doing much more
damage. But I dispense with the answer to help terminate the thread.
Topi Linkala
>
> I've since found:
>
> <http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/nh/art2-343.txt>
>
> which is for 3.4.3 instead of 3.4.1. I apologize for
> using an outdated spoiler in my previous post. I don't
> know if there were changes between the two versions,
> but my references in this post are to the above spoiler.
>
> The spoiler's statement that:
>
> "However, if you want to maximize the best magical attacks
> of this artifact, it should be enchanted to +2"
>
> would have to include stunning in the "best magical attacks"
> which in my ignorance I do not understand at all.
Actually chance of stunning decreases from 36,4% (+0) to 19,1% (+2),
cancelling stays the same 10%, probing increases from 1,8% (+0) to 5,5%
(+2) and scaring stays the same 20%.
So the statement is missleading. It should say: "However, if you want to
maximize the damage without sacrificing the propabilities of the best
magical attacks of this artifact, it should be enchanted to +2."
Topi
--
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are
always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts."
- Bertrand Russell
"How come he didn't put 'I think' at the end of it?" - Anonymous
David Damerell
[Of Magicbane]
> The only special attack that decreases is stunning.
> From +2 to +7 probing increases from 5.5% to 25.5%
> scaring increases from 2.7% to 3.6%
> confusion increases from 2.0% to 3.0%
Cancellation is at 10% up until +2 and 5% up until +5. I agree with the
analysis that stunning is a junk effect; the +2 to hit is worthless in the
middle and end game. However, this does provide a definite reason to stop
at +2 or +5 depending on how much one values cancellation.
--
David Damerell <dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> flcl?
Today is First Potmos, July.
Dylan O'Donnell
> I've since found:
>
> <http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/nh/art2-343.txt>
>
> which is for 3.4.3 instead of 3.4.1. I apologize for
> using an outdated spoiler in my previous post. I don't
> know if there were changes between the two versions,
> but my references in this post are to the above spoiler.
For the record, the differences in the Magicbane section are:
* corrected a rounding error in the +5 enchantment line
* made clearer the distinction between magical attacks and magical
effects (the latter of which are possible consequences of the
former)
* made clearer which effects take precedence over other effects
* changed "Pur" to "Can" in the relevant table (the nomenclature
changed from "purge" to "cancel" in 3.4.1, I was just slow).
> The spoiler's statement that:
>
> "However, if you want to maximize the best magical attacks
> of this artifact, it should be enchanted to +2"
>
> would have to include stunning in the "best magical attacks"
> which in my ignorance I do not understand at all.
I haven't changed Kevin's wording there, except to change "effects" to
"attacks". If there's a consensus that it's misleading, I'm willing to
do so, but I don't see any such consensus emerging from this thread.
Benjamin Lewis
> I'm of the opinion that wands, in Nethack, seem awfully underpowered
> even in the mid game. Wands of Death, being of the most dire type
> besides Wishing, seem like they should work on lots of things, but
> maybe it's enough that the Wizard is succeptable to them. (Forget your
> cloak this morning, Roddy?)
Which wands in particular do you find underpowered? Some are incredibly
useful, e.g.
Emergencies:
- fire,lightning for permanent E engraving
- digging for crashing through the floor, or more temporary engraving
- teleportation for self or monster zapping
- polymorph for unexpectedly powerful monsters (works great from inside air
elementals!)
- death
Other:
- undead turning for restoring pets
- polymorph for polypiling
- striking can be useful for boulder smashing (I often use these in
Gehennom when I don't feel like whipping out the pickaxe)
- create monster for sacc fests
- cancellation for potion/scroll blanking, BoH uncursing, neutralizing some
monsters...
- cold for water/lava freezing (also does decent damage in early/mid game)
- speed monster before you have intrinsic speed, and for speeding pets
(also good to have in Orcustown...)
- enlightenment is great to have if you're like me and don't keep any
notes, and occasionally forget if you have X intrinsic yet.
... and probably countless others. Actually, I'd love to see how other
people make use of wands.
--
Benjamin Lewis
All what we got here is American made.
It's a little bit cheesy, but it's nicely displayed. -- FZ
james
John H. <Joh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> - A helm of opposite alignment makes at least one of the
>> wrong altars more useful on Astral.
>
>This always feels like cheating to me, but I'm weird that way....
I started a game with the express goal of ascending a Lawful elf.
Succeeded! It's a bit weenie to do it "just to get it over with."
Understandable as a last-ditch survival ploy. Mine was just an
annoyance that nethack elves are supposed to be chaotic.
james
Janis Papanagnou <Janis_Pa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Worse! It will even resurrect a dead rider corpse and put him adjacent
>to you.
Handy trick, when that's what you want. Not every character is
desperate to dispatch the riders or flee from them at this point
in the game. (Who was the death-farmer? Who was the rider-eater?)
Jove
wrote:
>Jove wrote:
>>
>> I've since found:
>>
>> <http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/nh/art2-343.txt>
>>
>> which is for 3.4.3 instead of 3.4.1. I apologize for
>> using an outdated spoiler in my previous post. I don't
>> know if there were changes between the two versions,
>> but my references in this post are to the above spoiler.
>>
>> The spoiler's statement that:
>>
>> "However, if you want to maximize the best magical attacks
>> of this artifact, it should be enchanted to +2"
>>
>> would have to include stunning in the "best magical attacks"
>> which in my ignorance I do not understand at all.
>
>Actually chance of stunning decreases from 36,4% (+0) to 19,1% (+2),
>cancelling stays the same 10%, probing increases from 1,8% (+0) to 5,5%
>(+2) and scaring stays the same 20%.
>
>So the statement is missleading. It should say: "However, if you want to
>maximize the damage without sacrificing the propabilities of the best
>magical attacks of this artifact, it should be enchanted to +2."
>
>Topi
Including the phrase "maximize the damage" is more misleading,
since a) it doesn't and b) the qualifying clause is emotionally
loaded with the vague terms "sacrificing", "best", "magical", and
"attacks".
Since the extra effects (the spoiler makes this distinction)
aren't good, especially magical, or even really attacks, losing
them entirely would not be much of a sacrifice.
And you don't lose them entirely. Their probability goes from
low to very low. If the probabilities were test grades, they'd
be F-- at *every* enchantment.
The statement in the spoiler is misleading enough:
"However, if you want to maximize the best magical attacks
of this artifact, it should be enchanted to +2"
"Maximize" is market-speak. Sounds great, means nothing.
What's being maximized is what's important.
"Best" means the same thing. A tin opener is the "best"
way to open a tin. Does anyone carry one for very long?
"Magical" is meaningless. Sting is magical. A silver
saber isn't. A silver dagger is a better weapon.
"Artifact" is more word inflation. Sting is an artifact.
Who uses it for their primary weapon?
An accurate (and more prcise) statement would be:
"If you want a 30% chance of an effect with a low chance
of affecting your target, enchant Magicbane to +2."
There is one plain statement that's helpful:
"If you simply want to cause the most damage, then the table
indicates that you should enchant it as high as possible (safely
to +7)"
Enchanting other weapon in the games is judged on its effects,
not market speak. (Discussions of the best artifact go on at
length about their specific effects and conditions where they
occur.)
Why should judging MagicBane be any different?
Jove
Jove
O'Donnell) wrote:
>Jove <inv...@invalid.invalid> writes:
>> I've since found:
>>
>> <http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/nh/art2-343.txt>
>>
>> which is for 3.4.3 instead of 3.4.1. I apologize for
>> using an outdated spoiler in my previous post. I don't
>> know if there were changes between the two versions,
>> but my references in this post are to the above spoiler.
>
>For the record, the differences in the Magicbane section are:
>
>* corrected a rounding error in the +5 enchantment line
>* made clearer the distinction between magical attacks and magical
> effects (the latter of which are possible consequences of the
> former)
>* made clearer which effects take precedence over other effects
>* changed "Pur" to "Can" in the relevant table (the nomenclature
> changed from "purge" to "cancel" in 3.4.1, I was just slow).
>
>> The spoiler's statement that:
>>
>> "However, if you want to maximize the best magical attacks
>> of this artifact, it should be enchanted to +2"
>>
>> would have to include stunning in the "best magical attacks"
>> which in my ignorance I do not understand at all.
>
>I haven't changed Kevin's wording there, except to change "effects" to
>"attacks". If there's a consensus that it's misleading, I'm willing to
>do so, but I don't see any such consensus emerging from this thread.
Is it possible to know if it's misleading without knowing the
effect of stunning?
(And are we voting on how the game works now?)
Jove
Jove
<dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>Quoting Jove <inv...@invalid.invalid>:
>[Of Magicbane]
>> The only special attack that decreases is stunning.
>> From +2 to +7 probing increases from 5.5% to 25.5%
>> stunning decreases from 14.5% to 9.5%
>> scaring increases from 2.7% to 3.6%
>> confusion increases from 2.0% to 3.0%
>
>Cancellation is at 10% up until +2 and 5% up until +5.
Thanks for a clear statement. The more I look at the
table the more confused I get.
Do you know why there's an unexplained extra d4 in every
column to the right of PROBE?
Is there an explanation for why CANCEL (unlike every other
attack) does not have a column where it appears on its own.
(It looks like CANCEL never happens by itself, but the
spoiler doesn't say anything about it that I can find.)
>I agree with the
>analysis that stunning is a junk effect; the +2 to hit is worthless in the
>middle and end game.
Thanks.
>However, this does provide a definite reason to stop
>at +2 or +5 depending on how much one values cancellation.
Shouldn't that be "values a %20 chance of cancellation,
versus the other effects of Magicbane"? (Most of the time
you really want cancellation, engraving Elbereth gives
you a better effect, 100% of the time, unaffected by
enchantment.)
Don't we need to discuss the probability of the effect as
well as the actual effect itself to judge whether to stop at +2
or +5?
And the effect is not just cancellation, it's cancellation
at melee range. A very different thing.
Canceling a breath attack at melee range doesn't mean much.
They aren't used at melee range.
Does cancellation do anything to most monsters? It doesn't
keep trolls from re-spawning. I know that much.
A 100% chance of canceling a rust monster, disenchanter,
or nymph at melee distance would be worth keeping at +2 or
+5. For any lower probability, Magicbane's ability to
engrave Elbereth with 100% probability is better. And
the engraving chance is not affected by enchantment.
So you can have a 5 times better probability of a better
effect (works on all adjacent monsters) with a higher
enchantment.
Actually, that last statement is misleading. Higher-level
monsters, the ones most likely to be worth canceling,
are more likely to resist, giving a less than 20% chance
of canceling them.
Jove
Jove
O'Donnell) wrote:
>Jove <inv...@invalid.invalid> writes:
>> I've since found:
>>
>> <http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/nh/art2-343.txt>
>>
>> which is for 3.4.3 instead of 3.4.1. I apologize for
>> using an outdated spoiler in my previous post. I don't
>> know if there were changes between the two versions,
>> but my references in this post are to the above spoiler.
>
>For the record, the differences in the Magicbane section are:
>
>* corrected a rounding error in the +5 enchantment line
>* made clearer the distinction between magical attacks and magical
> effects (the latter of which are possible consequences of the
> former)
>* made clearer which effects take precedence over other effects
>* changed "Pur" to "Can" in the relevant table (the nomenclature
> changed from "purge" to "cancel" in 3.4.1, I was just slow).
>
>> The spoiler's statement that:
>>
>> "However, if you want to maximize the best magical attacks
>> of this artifact, it should be enchanted to +2"
>>
>> would have to include stunning in the "best magical attacks"
>> which in my ignorance I do not understand at all.
>
>I haven't changed Kevin's wording there, except to change "effects" to
>"attacks". If there's a consensus that it's misleading, I'm willing to
>do so, but I don't see any such consensus emerging from this thread.
Then let's put it to a vote:
Resolved: "Stunning is one of Magicbane's best magical
attacks."
Please vote for or against or abstain.
Jove
Dylan O'Donnell
[is "if you want to maximize the best magical attacks of [Magicbane],
it should be enchanted to +2" misleading?]
> (And are we voting on how the game works now?)
How the game works is one thing. Strategy advice is another. (I try to
avoid giving strategy advice in my spoilers; I generally just support
the legacy stuff :-)
Dylan O'Donnell
> The more I look at the
> table the more confused I get.
>
> Do you know why there's an unexplained extra d4 in every
> column to the right of PROBE?
Because probing's d4 is added to every non-normal attack; the other
magical attacks are additional to it. Effectively, _every_ magical
attack combo includes a "probe" component, but its effect is overriden
by any other one (successful or not), so it only contributes its
damage.
> Is there an explanation for why CANCEL (unlike every other
> attack) does not have a column where it appears on its own.
> (It looks like CANCEL never happens by itself, but the
> spoiler doesn't say anything about it that I can find.)
It does so; look at the table of "how the above values were
obtained". Note that the die-roll threshold for "cancel" is always
lower than that for "scare"; hence the former can't occur without the
latter occurring as well.
David Damerell
>Jove <inv...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>But you're still going to attack all the monsters.
>a) Not once I've woken Rodney.
No, you misunderstand him - look at his mention of jumping in the endgame
earlier. "all the monsters" means "all the monsters which must be attacked
because there is no way to evade combat".
--
David Damerell <dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> Distortion Field!
Today is First Teleute, July.
David Damerell
>Jove wrote:
>>everyone. Why not have ^J work for jumping with the spell,
>>ring or intrinsic?
>If you have numberpad on you may use the key j to jump, or Meta-j
>which is as good as Ctrl-j. I wonder why the Meta-j won't also work
>with numberpad off. OTOH, ^J seems to be yet undefined, and would
>give a better association with ^T, so I agree with your suggestion.
Er, no, that's silly. With numberpad on making it Ctrl-J makes it fiddlier
than j, and with it off it interferes with Ctrl-running.
David Damerell
><dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>>Quoting Jove <inv...@invalid.invalid>:
>>[Of Magicbane]
>>> The only special attack that decreases is stunning.
>>> From +2 to +7 probing increases from 5.5% to 25.5%
Another observation here is that the chance of an insightful probe
decreases with enchantment. That's not a big positive effect, but it
certainly is a positive effect.
>>> stunning decreases from 14.5% to 9.5%
>>> scaring increases from 2.7% to 3.6%
>>> confusion increases from 2.0% to 3.0%
>>Cancellation is at 10% up until +2 and 5% up until +5.
> Thanks for a clear statement. The more I look at the
>table the more confused I get.
> Do you know why there's an unexplained extra d4 in every
>column to the right of PROBE?
See later.
> Is there an explanation for why CANCEL (unlike every other
>attack) does not have a column where it appears on its own.
Yes. There's a base 40% chance that Magicbane will do a magical attack of
some kind. This gets a base +d4 damage independent of all effects below.
This attack has a chance to be a stun. A stun is +d4 damage (but we
continue to say that stunning is a junk effect, because the damage is
subsumed in the overall average damage.)
Besides stunning there is a chance that the attack is a scare, which is
+d4 damage, and a lesser chance that the attack is a cancel, which is
+d4 damage. However, these chances are assessed with the same dieroll, so
all cancels are also scares.
An attack that is none of a stun, a scare, or a cancel is a probe.
The trouble is that the top axis is trying to represent 2 independent
axes; stun/no-stun and scare/cancel/no-scare. The chances for a given
enchantment could look like this;
+2 NO SCARE SCARE SCARE+CANCEL
NO STUN 3d4 5.5% probe 4d4 2.7% 5d4 2.7%
STUN 4d4 14.5% 5d4 7.3% 6d4 7.3%
>>However, this does provide a definite reason to stop
>>at +2 or +5 depending on how much one values cancellation.
>Shouldn't that be "values a %20 chance of cancellation,
>versus the other effects of Magicbane"?
I think the two statements are saying much the same thing; clearly mine
has an implicit "relative to other things".
Personally I do not use Magicbane to do maximum damage, because I will
almost certainly have an artifact weapon more effective at that in the
late game. I wield it for curse resistance - all the time after Rodney
is dead except where enough monsters block the way that I will lose
significant time fighting them - and against cursing liches and the like.
Against liches, I suppose the chance of cancelling saves more time (once
they're cancelled you can beat on them with the big artifact weapon with
impunity) than having more damage in MB would.
Jove
<dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>Quoting Philip Kendall <pa...@cam.ac.uk>:
>>Jove <inv...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>But you're still going to attack all the monsters.
>>a) Not once I've woken Rodney.
>
>No, you misunderstand him - look at his mention of jumping in the endgame
>earlier. "all the monsters" means "all the monsters which must be attacked
>because there is no way to evade combat".
In fairness to Philip, in that post I'd kind of lost focus on
the "endgame" aspect of the hints in this thread.
Thanks for the support anyway.
Jove
Jove
O'Donnell) wrote:
>Jove <inv...@invalid.invalid> writes:
>
>[is "if you want to maximize the best magical attacks of [Magicbane],
>it should be enchanted to +2" misleading?]
>
>> (And are we voting on how the game works now?)
>
>How the game works is one thing. Strategy advice is another. (I try to
>avoid giving strategy advice in my spoilers; I generally just support
>the legacy stuff :-)
In that case, ignore my call for a vote. (If there was a
smiley-face for "sheepish grin", you'd see it here.)
For supporting legacy spoilers, your approach is exactly
correct. And your support is appreciated. Especially after
seeing so many other fascinating Nethack extras that have
fallen by the wayside (patchhack, the yani database, NHTNG,
etc.)
BION, I'm not looking for the spoiler to be changed. It's
not clear what it should be changed to, in any case.
And I still don't understand all of it. (BTW, Thanks for
correcting my probability totals Janis. Replying to that
post got overtaken by events, but I still appreciate your
taking the time to educate me.)
Back to David: The Magicbane spoiler's main problem is the
difficulty of understanding it. Given the density and complexity
of the information there's probably no solution short of 3-d
color graphics. And it's doubtful those are appropriate.
Jove
Jove
O'Donnell) wrote:
>Jove <inv...@invalid.invalid> writes:
>> The more I look at the
>> table the more confused I get.
>>
>> Do you know why there's an unexplained extra d4 in every
>> column to the right of PROBE?
>
>Because probing's d4 is added to every non-normal attack; the other
>magical attacks are additional to it. Effectively, _every_ magical
>attack combo includes a "probe" component, but its effect is overriden
>by any other one (successful or not), so it only contributes its
>damage.
Thanks.
>
>> Is there an explanation for why CANCEL (unlike every other
>> attack) does not have a column where it appears on its own.
>> (It looks like CANCEL never happens by itself, but the
>> spoiler doesn't say anything about it that I can find.)
>
>It does so; look at the table of "how the above values were
>obtained". Note that the die-roll threshold for "cancel" is always
>lower than that for "scare"; hence the former can't occur without the
>latter occurring as well.
>
So each attack with a lower threshold than the die-roll occurs?
But only the magical effect of the lowest threshold attack takes
place?
It looked like that's what was happening, but such a procedure
is new to me. Are tables with that interpretation a holdover
from AD&D?
Thanks for the info,
Jove
Jove
<inv...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>On 19 Jul 2005 08:40:48 +0100, psmit...@spod-central.org (Dylan
>O'Donnell) wrote:
>
>
> Back to David: The Magicbane spoiler's main problem is the
^^^^^
Aaauuuggghhh! Dylan! Dylan Dylan Dylan!
Sorry Dylan. 'D' overload.
Jove
Janis Papanagnou
>
> And I still don't understand all of it. (BTW, Thanks for
> correcting my probability totals Janis. Replying to that
> post got overtaken by events, but I still appreciate your
> taking the time to educate me.)
Not my intention to educate, just clear things and hoping not
to make things in that process more muddy than they have been
before. ;-)
Janis
Jove
<dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>Quoting Jove <inv...@invalid.invalid>:
>><dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>>>Quoting Jove <inv...@invalid.invalid>:
>>>[Of Magicbane]
>>>> The only special attack that decreases is stunning.
>>>> From +2 to +7 probing increases from 5.5% to 25.5%
>
>Another observation here is that the chance of an insightful probe
>decreases with enchantment. That's not a big positive effect, but it
>certainly is a positive effect.
Yes, you're certainly right. I've recently started comparing
the monster's armor with the monster's armor class to estimate
the enchantment on the monster's armor. A plain gnome with an AC
of 9 and wearing just an iron skull cap means the skull cap is
+0.
The monster inventory items may also spur me to try for an
insta-kill. Good potions to save for myself, bad potions
to keep from being used on me, good/bad wands ditto, etc.
Perhaps so, but it also implies that Magicbane's cancellation
is like cancellation in general, at least to me. Spell/wand of
cancellation work at a distance Magicbane's cancellation doesn't.
It also seems to be saying "how much one likes cancellation",
with no reasons given. I value playing wizards, but that's not
an argument for anyone else to do so.
I value the wizard's starting cloak of magic resistance, which
neutralizes poly, teleport, and anti-magic traps. That is an
argument other people can look at, verify independently, and
decide for themselves how much they value it.
Maybe I've just come into the argument too late and all the
crushing arguments for leaving Magicbane at +2 have been
condensed down to key phrases which implicitly include the
full effect. Like the legendary prison where the jokes had
been told so often they were numbered and prisoners just said
the number instead of the full joke.
It's frustrating to be told "You're not saying anything new"
with no backup. If that's so, then the answer should be on file
and whipping it out should be simple.
>
>Personally I do not use Magicbane to do maximum damage, because I will
>almost certainly have an artifact weapon more effective at that in the
>late game. I wield it for curse resistance - all the time after Rodney
>is dead except where enough monsters block the way that I will lose
>significant time fighting them
This is more like it. Your point about not using Magicbane as
your primary weapon is a telling one. In that case the
cancellation for lichs is useful. And you'd use your enchant
weapons scrolls on your primary (and secondary, if #twoweaponing)
weapons.
For my overpowered wizards spells are my primary weapon,
frequently including the spell of cancellation. And I still
forget to try the spell of cancellation on Lichs while stabbing
them to death with Magicbane.
> - and against cursing liches and the like.
>Against liches, I suppose the chance of cancelling saves more time (once
>they're cancelled you can beat on them with the big artifact weapon with
>impunity) than having more damage in MB would.
That does make a lot of sense. And it gives a monster where
canceling at melee distance would be worthwhile.
Can't cockatrices can be canceled as well? I seem to remember
hearing one coughing instead of hissing. Now there's a case
where it's difficult to choose between going for a quicker kill
or hoping for a magical cancel attack.
At 20% probability, three hits should give a 48.8% probability
of a cancellation effect. I swear I don't see them anywhere near
that often when Magicbane is at +0/1/2. But I'll be keeping
a closer watch in the future.
Jove
Dylan O'Donnell
> Back to [Dylan]: The Magicbane spoiler's main problem is the
> difficulty of understanding it. Given the density and complexity
> of the information there's probably no solution short of 3-d
> color graphics. And it's doubtful those are appropriate.
Oh, it's not half as complicated as it could be. I could try and show
the probabilities should monsters _make_ their resistance rolls, for
example.
(And there's interesting complications to a blessed Magicbane versus
undead, which I have no intention of going into.)
The DevTeam have fiendishly twisted minds. That's why we're playing
this game :-)
Dylan O'Donnell
> On 19 Jul 2005 11:09:27 +0100, psmit...@spod-central.org (Dylan
> O'Donnell) wrote:
> >> Is there an explanation for why CANCEL (unlike every other
> >> attack) does not have a column where it appears on its own.
> >> (It looks like CANCEL never happens by itself, but the
> >> spoiler doesn't say anything about it that I can find.)
> >
> >It does so; look at the table of "how the above values were
> >obtained". Note that the die-roll threshold for "cancel" is always
> >lower than that for "scare"; hence the former can't occur without the
> >latter occurring as well.
>
> So each attack with a lower threshold than the die-roll occurs?
> But only the magical effect of the lowest threshold attack takes
> place?
There's two separate die-rolls, one for the stun/non-stun chance, and
one for purge/cancel; in fact, the purge/cancel roll is the to-hit roll,
so if your to-hit chance is less than 100% the probabilities on any given
_hit_ are skewed upwards. Effects take precedence in the following
order:
* a cancel attempt overrides a scare attempt
* if neither of these happen or succeed, and we're entitled to a stun,
get a stun; if we're not, get a probe attempt.
> It looked like that's what was happening, but such a procedure
> is new to me. Are tables with that interpretation a holdover
> from AD&D?
No idea. I very much doubt it :-)
> Thanks for the info,
As much as I try to keep that section of art2-343.txt as informative
as possible, there's really no substitute for reading Mb_hit() in
artifact.c itself if you want the full details of what's going on.
Spud
found a great bones file (from an extremely stupid nurse death) I am on
the final level where I get to sacrifice the amulet.
The thing is I'm not sure which altar to sacrifice on. I've got to one
altar and it says there's a peaceful high priest and an aligned altar.
How do I know if it's the one for me?
Please help cos this could be my first ascension.
If you're interested, I got this far cos I wished for a couple of
cockatrice corpses on the hard astral plane levels. It made life a
breeze. I didn''t even lose one life to get this far ;-)
Cheers
Philipp Lucas
> I am on the final level where I get to sacrifice the amulet. The thing
> is I'm not sure which altar to sacrifice on. I've got to one altar and
> it says there's a peaceful high priest and an aligned altar. How do I
> know if it's the one for me?
Use the : command on the altar or apply stethoscope on the priest.
--
Philipp Lucas
phl...@online-club.de
Panu Lahtinen
> On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, Spud wrote:
>> I am on the final level where I get to sacrifice the amulet. The thing
>> is I'm not sure which altar to sacrifice on. I've got to one altar and
>> it says there's a peaceful high priest and an aligned altar. How do I
>> know if it's the one for me?
> Use the : command on the altar or apply stethoscope on the priest.
And (some?) hostile (or non-tame?) will flee from the temple if it's the
right one.
--
Panu
"You haven't really been anywhere until you've got back home",
Twoflower in "The Light Fantastic"
Spud
After years of playing I've finally ascended. Very luckily, the first
throne I got to was the right one.
Using cockatrice corpses with a blindfold and cursed scrolls of gold
detection made it seem sooooo easy.
I was a Valk L27 AC -38 HP 396
Score 3,871,466
Genocided 104 species
Used 15 wishes and killed WOY 15 times and some other stuff.......
Cheers everyone!
David Damerell
>* a cancel attempt overrides a scare attempt
>* if neither of these happen or succeed, and we're entitled to a stun,
> get a stun; if we're not, get a probe attempt.
It seems to me the column headings are pretty misleading, then; no column
should be labelled CANCEL+SCARE. What we really have are;
PROBE STUN SCARE SCARE/ CANCEL CANCEL/
STUN STUN
Working out the probabilities of stuns actually going off (ie, that scares
or cancels fail) would be tedious, but luckily stun's a junk effect so we
don't care.
--
David Damerell <dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> flcl?
Today is First Oneiros, July.
David Damerell
><dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>>Quoting Jove <inv...@invalid.invalid>:
>>>>However, this does provide a definite reason to stop
>>>>at +2 or +5 depending on how much one values cancellation.
>>>Shouldn't that be "values a %20 chance of cancellation,
>>>versus the other effects of Magicbane"?
>>I think the two statements are saying much the same thing; clearly mine
>>has an implicit "relative to other things".
>Perhaps so, but it also implies that Magicbane's cancellation
>is like cancellation in general, at least to me.
Well, it is, in terms of the effect.
>Spell/wand of
>cancellation work at a distance Magicbane's cancellation doesn't.
I think it's evident, yes, that one has to hit people with it for the
hitting-people effects to go off. :-)
> It also seems to be saying "how much one likes cancellation",
>with no reasons given.
Indeed. My point is, it's up to the individual to decide the value of the
cancellation effect; but people who place that value high will find a
reason to stop at +2 or +5.
> Maybe I've just come into the argument too late and all the
>crushing arguments for leaving Magicbane at +2
I don't think there are crushing arguments; I'm only trying to say that
*some* people might decide to leave it at +2, without doing irrational
things like valuing the stun effect.
> For my overpowered wizards spells are my primary weapon,
>frequently including the spell of cancellation.
Mmm. But most classes can't use it with any great facility, and even a
particular wizard might not have it.
> Can't cockatrices can be canceled as well?
Yes, but they are so fragile that I think it is much more effective just
to steamroller them with your main offensive weapon.
Dylan O'Donnell
> Quoting Dylan O'Donnell <psm...@spod-central.org>:
> >* a cancel attempt overrides a scare attempt
> >* if neither of these happen or succeed, and we're entitled to a stun,
> > get a stun; if we're not, get a probe attempt.
>
> It seems to me the column headings are pretty misleading, then; no column
> should be labelled CANCEL+SCARE.
Well, this is why I make the distinction between a magical attack and
a magical effect; a magical attack _may_ cause the effect it's named
for, but may not (in which case, an effect belonging to another attack
in the combo may trigger, but that depends on the exact combo); either
way, the d4 of damage gets counted in. The pecking order in which the
attacks yield to each other in terms of causing effects is detailed in
the text following; I don't think it makes sense to try and squeeze it
into the column headings.
james
Spud <colin_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Any hints?
You've already been killed, so here goes:
Don't wake up the wizard until you're overprepared for the planes.
You can take forever to get ready, but once you wake up the wizard,
that's the beginning of the end. There's no time to work on a
collection of hundreds of scrolls and potions and no time for long
sac fests. Whatever your level, AC, and HP's are when you wake up
the wizard, that's probably going to be it for the game.
Other than errors like falling in lava, AE's engulf attacks, and Pestilence,
there's really nothing to be afraid of in the end game. Don't be
surprised when Pesty kills you on Astral -- he's pretty much the only
thing to be afraid of.
Jove
O'Donnell) wrote:
>Jove <inv...@invalid.invalid> writes:
>> Back to [Dylan]: The Magicbane spoiler's main problem is the
>> difficulty of understanding it. Given the density and complexity
>> of the information there's probably no solution short of 3-d
>> color graphics. And it's doubtful those are appropriate.
>
>Oh, it's not half as complicated as it could be. I could try and show
>the probabilities should monsters _make_ their resistance rolls, for
>example.
Actually, an explanation of how monsters make their resistance
rolls would be enough. You don't need to do the work. But
giving the information so other people can do the work seems
useful enough.
For example, is the d4 for each magical attack resisted
separately, or all the attack's at once?
Another question is how exactly is the saving throw done?
From: <http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/nh/mon1-343.txt>:
"MR is the base magic resistance saving throw percentage."
But from: <http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/nh/art2-343.txt>:
"Finally, the CANCEL attack causes another additional d4 damage
and has the same effect as a spell of cancellation (but with a
fixed level of 10 for resistance saving throw purposes)."
How does the "fixed level of 10" affect the Wizard of Yendor,
who has a 100% "base magic resistance saving throw percentage."
Even going outside Nethack doesn't give us enough information:
From <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saving_throw>:
"Saving throws are represented as a numeric value that decreases
as the character advances in levels and experience. In order to
successfully make a throw, the character must roll higher than
his saving throw value on a 20-sided die."
I'd guess that a "base magic resistance saving throw
percentage", means a base magic resistance saving throw value of
0. Add 10 to that and roll a d20 against it.
Except the spoiler doesn't give "fixed level[s]" for any of the
other magical attacks.
Actually, it looks like a separate spoiler on the effects
of confusion, stunning, scaring, and cancellation on monsters
would be more suitable, as well as one on magic resistance
saving throws for monsters.
Presumably monsters don't get any of the other "status line"
effects: Hungry, Weak, Fainting, Burdened, Stressed, Strained,
Overloaded, Overtaxed, Ill, FoodPois, etc.
From: <http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/nh/art2-343.txt>:
"As a weapon, it may (depending on the monster's magic resistance
saving throw) add additional damage and magical effects."
and:
"The above table describes the chance that each of the magical
attacks will occur, assuming that the monster fails the magic
resistance saving throw it gets to reduce their probability...
Even the NORMAL, non-magical damage that occurs 60% of the time
has an extra d4 damage above that of a normal athame unless the
monster resists."
So higher magic resistance monsters can not only resist
the effects but also each magical attack's d4 of damage.
Can the d4 of magical damage be resisted differently from
the magical effect? i.e. Can the d4 of damage from the
magical attack succeed without the magical effect occurring?
Also from: <http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/nh/art2-343.txt>:
"The SCARE attack causes an additional d4 damage; if not combined
with a CANCEL attack, causes the monster to flee for 3 (more)
turns; the monster has a 50% chance of being given an opportunity
to resist this effect. If you are being attacked by Magicbane
and aren't magic-resistant, this effect paralyses you for 3
(more) turns."
So the scare attack can get its d4 of damage but not have
a magical effect.
The effects of being SCAREd are different between monsters
and players. Players get the same effect as paralysis.
Monsters "flee." Presumably this is the same "flee" effect
that Elbereth has.
from: <http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/nh/weap-343.txt>:
"The following are added [to the to-hit bonus] only when
attacking a monster directly with a wielded weapon or bare-handed
(melee attacks):...
+ 2 if the target monster was stunned.
+ 2 if the target monster was fleeing.
...A die from 1 to 20 is rolled and compared to the to-hit total.
If the die roll is less than the to-hit total (or equal when
throwing or kicking), you hit the monster and inflict damage as
described below; otherwise, you miss the monster. The die roll
is also used in determining if certain "chance" artifact effects
occur (e.g., beheading or Magicbane's special attacks)."
Presumably that last sentence is the explanation of the second
table in <http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/nh/art2-343.txt>
Magicbane's probing effects we know.
- Are they the same as a wand of probing?
- Can probing be resisted by a monster?
Stunning - Player gets +2 to to-hit chance when attacking
(presumably all of melee, ranged, wand, spell, etc.)
- Does a pet or minion also get the +2 to its to-hit chances?
- What about a confused hostile monster that attacks it by
mistake?
- Are there any other circumstances where the to-hit chance
is used?
Confusion - Monster moves in a random direction whenever it
tries to move.
- Does that also cover ranged attacks?
- Are breath attacks treated differently?
- What about teleportation?
- Covetous teleportation to the upstairs?
- Can a monster resist Magicbane's confusion?
(Note monsters can resist confusion when hit by a
potion of confusion.)
- Can a confused monster cast spells
- haste self, healing, etc?
- cursing?
- summon nasties?
Scared acts like confusion in terms of practical movement.
I am unable to find an explanation for the term in the spoilers
on www.nethack.de, which are searchable. It does get used a
number of times.
>
>(And there's interesting complications to a blessed Magicbane versus
>undead, which I have no intention of going into.)
Are the effects of a blessed weapon against the undead covered
nowhere else?
>
>The DevTeam have fiendishly twisted minds. That's why we're playing
>this game :-)
Nethack is like love. If you care it will break your heart.
If you don't care, it's no fun. (converted from golf to
Nethack).
Jove
Jove
O'Donnell) wrote:
>Jove <inv...@invalid.invalid> writes:
>> On 19 Jul 2005 11:09:27 +0100, psmit...@spod-central.org (Dylan
>> O'Donnell) wrote:
>> >> Is there an explanation for why CANCEL (unlike every other
>> >> attack) does not have a column where it appears on its own.
>> >> (It looks like CANCEL never happens by itself, but the
>> >> spoiler doesn't say anything about it that I can find.)
>> >
>> >It does so; look at the table of "how the above values were
>> >obtained". Note that the die-roll threshold for "cancel" is always
>> >lower than that for "scare"; hence the former can't occur without the
>> >latter occurring as well.
>>
>> So each attack with a lower threshold than the die-roll occurs?
>> But only the magical effect of the lowest threshold attack takes
>> place?
>
>There's two separate die-rolls, one for the stun/non-stun chance, and
>one for purge/cancel; in fact, the purge/cancel roll is the to-hit roll,
>so if your to-hit chance is less than 100% the probabilities on any given
>_hit_ are skewed upwards. Effects take precedence in the following
>order:
>
>* a cancel attempt overrides a scare attempt
>* if neither of these happen or succeed, and we're entitled to a stun,
> get a stun; if we're not, get a probe attempt.
Almost but not quite what I had in mind.
>
>> It looked like that's what was happening, but such a procedure
>> is new to me. Are tables with that interpretation a holdover
>> from AD&D?
>
>No idea. I very much doubt it :-)
>
>> Thanks for the info,
>
>As much as I try to keep that section of art2-343.txt as informative
>as possible, there's really no substitute for reading Mb_hit() in
>artifact.c itself if you want the full details of what's going on.
Thanks a lot. Now that I know where to look I can try and
nibble it off a little at a time.
Jove
Jove
<dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>Quoting Dylan O'Donnell <psm...@spod-central.org>:
>>* a cancel attempt overrides a scare attempt
>>* if neither of these happen or succeed, and we're entitled to a stun,
>> get a stun; if we're not, get a probe attempt.
>
>It seems to me the column headings are pretty misleading, then; no column
>should be labelled CANCEL+SCARE. What we really have are;
>
>PROBE STUN SCARE SCARE/ CANCEL CANCEL/
> STUN STUN
>
>Working out the probabilities of stuns actually going off (ie, that scares
>or cancels fail) would be tedious, but luckily stun's a junk effect so we
>don't care.
Maybe each column could be headed with the magical effect that
occurs (scare, stun, cancel, etc.) and sub-headed with the
magical attacks that get in a d4 worth of damage. E.g. STUN
would be sub headed (stun+probe).
(With DD & DO'D in the thread do we have the attack of the
killer D's?)
Jove
Jove
<dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>Quoting Jove <inv...@invalid.invalid>:
>> It also seems to be saying "how much one likes cancellation",
>>with no reasons given.
>
>Indeed. My point is, it's up to the individual to decide the value of the
>cancellation effect; but people who place that value high will find a
>reason to stop at +2 or +5.
But without knowing what those effects are, it's not a decision
so much as a personal affection for the name. And it's certainly
possible to know what those effects are. (Players rarely pick
silver dragon scale mail because just because it's silver, they
pick it because of its effects.)
To me, if someone says they highly value cancellation, that
means they carry a wand of cancellation with them at all times
(if they don't have Magicbane and do have a charged wand of
cancellation).
They don't have a large number of charges in the wand, so
they don't zap every monster they meet. (Even a tourist with
the blessed PYEC wouldn't try to cancel every monster he/she
met.)
Knowing which monsters they do zap will tell us what they
actually value about cancellation.
>
>> Maybe I've just come into the argument too late and all the
>>crushing arguments for leaving Magicbane at +2
>
>I don't think there are crushing arguments; I'm only trying to say that
>*some* people might decide to leave it at +2, without doing irrational
>things like valuing the stun effect.
>
Let me be clear, I have no problems with people leaving it at
+2. My first ascension was with Magicbane at +2. I don't
regard that as a major mistake. But I think I've learned
better.
My problem is summed up in the following:
"Wiser rgrn denizens than I teach that Magicbane is at it's
best at +2. I would never enchant a +1 Magicbane with a
blessed scroll."
It leaves no room for argument. Fine, I wouldn't argue with
the tourist who ascended in orange dragon scale mail. Major
style kudos. Most conducts are non-optimal for ascending.
It's a conscious choice of forgoing an advantage for style
points.
Players like the above poster are not making an in-game
decision. They're following what they think is dogma,
something about which there cannot be a rational discussion.
I can see where they get the idea from. The effects of
cancellation on a monster are generally unknown in rgrn.
My point is that they are not generally unknowable.
Saying "It depends on how much the player values cancellation"
stops the discussion short for no good reason. It implies that
the effects of cancellation cannot be discussed for some reason.
There's no reason not to discuss the effects of cancellation,
some of which are very good indeed.
The effects of cancellation are knowable. I just now finally
found them in:
<http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/nh/wan2-343.txt>:
"(Adapted from the spoiler "cancel", by Boudewijn Waijers.)"
(Presumably the "cancel" spoiler went by the wayside somewhere?)
It makes the cancellation effect of Magicbane much more
powerful if the player knows what they are and takes advantage
of them. (As came out earlier that when a lich has been
canceled by Magicbane there's no risk in going to a more
powerful weapon to finish it off, as long as you have magic
resistance for its touch of death.)
I never doubted that cancellation has some useful effects. I
just wanted to know what they were. I was surprised that someone
who valued cancellation wouldn't immediately give a short list
of their favorite effects. Laughing at canceled disenchanters,
rustmonsters, nymphs, or lichs, for instance. Watching the
letters disappear from a canceled clay golem, for another.
Then it could have discussed whether those effects were useful
in the context of Magicbane's melee only cancellation: The last
two yes, the first three not so much.
A canceled rust monster can be ignored, unless it's blocking
your path, because its attacks have no effect beyond rust. No
damage, in other words.
I listed the useful effects of cancellation known to me and
why they weren't useful to get from Magicbane. No one said
yes, no, or maybe. Were they so right as to be incontrovertible,
or just not worth arguing with?
Once a player wielding Magicbane starts watching for its
cancellation effects and trying to take advantage of them,
then it will be possible for the player to make up his own
mind about whether to enchant Magicbane up to +6/7 and
judge the tradeoff for him/her self.
Jove
Dylan O'Donnell
[Magicbane]
> For example, is the d4 for each magical attack resisted
> separately, or all the attack's at once?
Ok. The resistance rolls involved:
"Even the NORMAL, non-magical damage that occurs 60% of the time has
an extra d4 damage above that of a normal athame unless the monster
resists." This is in fact a straight base MR% chance of resisting,
with no modifiers. (It's rolled for whether magical attacks happen or
not.) Making this resistance roll also decreases the probability of
magical attacks (it adds 1 to the 'Die roll' in the table for scares
and cancels, and changes the probe/stun roll to be a d7 rather than a
d11).
If a cancel or scare effect is attempted, a monster gets (for scares, 50%
chance of getting) a normally-modified saving throw against it, with
the artifact counting as having a level of 10; MR/(110 - ML) chance of
no cancellation or scaring.
Probe or stun effects can't be resisted (but the former only has a
chance of being insightful), nor can the damage from any magical
attack that manages to occur.
> Another question is how exactly is the saving throw done?
> From <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saving_throw>:
>
> "Saving throws are represented as a numeric value that decreases
> as the character advances in levels and experience. In order to
> successfully make a throw, the character must roll higher than
> his saving throw value on a 20-sided die."
That'd be D&D. In Nethack, monsters' magic resistance saving throws
are a modified-percentile roll, with the modifiers being applied to
the _denominator_ rather than the numerator;
(base MR)/(100 + attacker level - defender level)
where "attacker level" is your XL for spells, and fixed levels for
object effects: 12 for wands, 10 for tools and artifact weapons, 9 for
scrolls, 6 for potions, and 5 for rings.
> Presumably monsters don't get any of the other "status line"
> effects: Hungry, Weak, Fainting, Burdened, Stressed, Strained,
> Overloaded, Overtaxed, Ill, FoodPois, etc.
Only pets can suffer from hunger, and monsters won't pick up more than
they can carry (but if they're polymorphed into something unable to
carry their current inventory, this is quietly ignored except for
ex-giants dropping boulders).
> "The above table describes the chance that each of the magical
> attacks will occur, assuming that the monster fails the magic
> resistance saving throw it gets to reduce their probability...
> Even the NORMAL, non-magical damage that occurs 60% of the time
> has an extra d4 damage above that of a normal athame unless the
> monster resists."
>
> So higher magic resistance monsters can not only resist
> the effects but also each magical attack's d4 of damage.
No, it can only reduce their probability, as above, and also resist
the base additional d4 for artifactness.
> Magicbane's probing effects we know.
> - Are they the same as a wand of probing?
> - Can probing be resisted by a monster?
Yes and no respectively.
> >(And there's interesting complications to a blessed Magicbane versus
> >undead, which I have no intention of going into.)
>
> Are the effects of a blessed weapon against the undead covered
> nowhere else?
Hmm, the complications which I thought were there appear not to be now
I look closer. (Magicbane's artifact damage bonus is a dieroll, not a
doubling, so dmgval() doesn't need to indulge in jiggery-pokery.)
David Damerell
><dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>>Quoting Jove <inv...@invalid.invalid>:
>>> It also seems to be saying "how much one likes cancellation",
>>>with no reasons given.
>>Indeed. My point is, it's up to the individual to decide the value of the
>>cancellation effect; but people who place that value high will find a
>>reason to stop at +2 or +5.
>But without knowing what those effects are, it's not a decision
>so much as a personal affection for the name.
I think we're talking at cross-purposes here. You and I both know what the
cancellation effect is; all I'm saying is it's possible that someone will
assess the effects of Magicbane rationally and leave it at +2, and that
will probably stem from them finding the cancellation effect valuable.
>My problem is summed up in the following:
><4061EF1C...@hotmail.com>:
>"Wiser rgrn denizens than I teach that Magicbane is at it's
>best at +2. I would never enchant a +1 Magicbane with a
>blessed scroll."
I agree that, given the data you have mentioned, that - conventional
wisdom - is quite indisputably wrong.
>I can see where they get the idea from. The effects of
>cancellation on a monster are generally unknown in rgrn.
>My point is that they are not generally unknowable.
Are they? To be frank, I was assuming that they were as well known to
others as they are to me, and hence that we didn't need to run over what
they were again. Perhaps that is the source of the misunderstanding.
--
David Damerell <dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> Distortion Field!
Today is First Mania, July.
Janis Papanagnou
>
> But without knowing what those effects are, it's not a decision
> so much as a personal affection for the name. And it's certainly
>
> To me, if someone says they highly value cancellation, that
> means they carry a wand of cancellation with them at all times
Well, I am one who values it high (and apparently you quoted me here).
But that's the least reason to carry the wand of cancellation with me.
Because it is more a problem that usually there are _not enough_ such
powerful wands generated in the game to use them; DiamondRobin found
only a single wand (with 6 or 8 charges?) in the whole game. A usual
amount for me is two or maybe three wands per finished game, not more.
You simply cannot zap every critical monster. So it can be helpful if
you have the Magicbane.
> (if they don't have Magicbane and do have a charged wand of
> cancellation).
(There were also only a few charging scrolls in the mentioned game.
And if you have to decide whether to charge your wand of death or
the wand of cancellation when The Wizard is after you...)
> They don't have a large number of charges in the wand, so
> they don't zap every monster they meet. (Even a tourist with
> the blessed PYEC wouldn't try to cancel every monster he/she
> met.)
Not every, but _he_, the Tourist, could indeed use it regularily on
the critical monsters.
> Knowing which monsters they do zap will tell us what they
> actually value about cancellation.
You may have missed that I gave you a huge list of cancel'able attacks.
Given that there are 400 monsters, you may want to have a look at file
monst.c yourself.
> My problem is summed up in the following:
>
> "Wiser rgrn denizens than I teach that Magicbane is at it's
> best at +2. I would never enchant a +1 Magicbane with a
> blessed scroll."
>
> Players like the above poster are not making an in-game
> decision. They're following what they think is dogma,
> something about which there cannot be a rational discussion.
The quoted text is not from me, nevertheless I think your comment is
not fair. We know it implies the focus on magic attacks, yes? Do you
really think it's a dogma, if one relies on others expertise? What
"in-game decision" do you expect? If one relies on the magic attacks
to enchant it beyond that optimum?? No!
> I can see where they get the idea from. The effects of
> cancellation on a monster are generally unknown in rgrn.
It has been discussed here from time to time. Why do you think it is
unknown?
> My point is that they are not generally unknowable.
>
> Saying "It depends on how much the player values cancellation"
> stops the discussion short for no good reason. It implies that
> the effects of cancellation cannot be discussed for some reason.
> There's no reason not to discuss the effects of cancellation,
> some of which are very good indeed.
So the point seems to be that _you_ did not know about the effect?
Well, in the meantime there has been a lot of information posted
and re-posted; but still you complain in a lengthy posting. [That's
why I wanted to stop my part in the thread in time. And I failed.]
> The effects of cancellation are knowable. I just now finally
> found them in:
> <http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/nh/wan2-343.txt>:
>
> "(Adapted from the spoiler "cancel", by Boudewijn Waijers.)"
>
> (Presumably the "cancel" spoiler went by the wayside somewhere?)
>
> It makes the cancellation effect of Magicbane much more
> powerful if the player knows what they are and takes advantage
> of them.
Aha.
> I never doubted that cancellation has some useful effects. I
> just wanted to know what they were. I was surprised that someone
> who valued cancellation wouldn't immediately give a short list
> of their favorite effects.
I did. Not in the first posting but when you indirectly provoked it
by falsely claiming: "Most monsters have nothing to cancel."
Initially you claimed a lot and asked little. Don't blame others.
Janis
Jove
<Janis_Pa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>You simply cannot zap every critical monster. So it can be helpful if
>you have the Magicbane.
That's my point. You can't do them all, so which monsters
would you zap?
Disenchanters? - Makes perfect sense.
foo-liches? - How often does it work?
gnomes? - I'd really, really wonder about you :^D
So which ones?
>
>> (if they don't have Magicbane and do have a charged wand of
>> cancellation).
>
>(There were also only a few charging scrolls in the mentioned game.
>And if you have to decide whether to charge your wand of death or
>the wand of cancellation when The Wizard is after you...)
>
>> They don't have a large number of charges in the wand, so
>> they don't zap every monster they meet. (Even a tourist with
>> the blessed PYEC wouldn't try to cancel every monster he/she
>> met.)
>
>Not every, but _he_, the Tourist, could indeed use it regularily on
>the critical monsters.
So what are the critical monsters to cancel?
>
>> Knowing which monsters they do zap will tell us what they
>> actually value about cancellation.
>
>You may have missed that I gave you a huge list of cancel'able attacks.
>Given that there are 400 monsters, you may want to have a look at file
>monst.c yourself.
That post of yours has not yet made it to my news spool, I
guess. This may be the root of our apparent communication
problem.
I don't want to know what's cancelable. (Well, actually I do.
It's fascinating to think of how cancellation can be used. I've
already posted suggesting it for use on the plane of water when
grabbed by a ";". A wand of cancellation will work there when
the usual dungeon methods of dealing with eels, etc. won't. And
";" have 0% magic resistance. I love that all that works
together. But Magicbane's cancellation attack is too unreliable
to depend on in an instadeath situation.)
I want to know what *you* use it for.
I've run wizards for years. But even with 1000 max mana
points and 0% failure on the spell of cancellation, it never
occurs to me to use the spell on a monster. And note that I
probably could zap every single monster with no great loss to
my character.
Okay, so I'm missing something. I admit it and I want to make
up for lost time. You've obviously got monsters in mind you
prefer to cancel. Give me a shortcut to effective use of the
cancellation spell, please.
>
>> My problem is summed up in the following:
>>
>> "Wiser rgrn denizens than I teach that Magicbane is at it's
>> best at +2. I would never enchant a +1 Magicbane with a
>> blessed scroll."
>>
>> Players like the above poster are not making an in-game
>> decision. They're following what they think is dogma,
>> something about which there cannot be a rational discussion.
>
>The quoted text is not from me, nevertheless I think your comment is
>not fair.
I did not mean to imply it was from you. Was there not a
message-id with it?)
>We know it implies the focus on magic attacks, yes?
It implies no focus at all, other than following dogma.
>Do you
>really think it's a dogma, if one relies on others expertise?
If they rely on it blindly, definitely. That's the definition
of dogma. And if players do rely on someone else, I expect that
person to demonstrate their expertise by providing specifics.
(I did not mean to imply that poster got the dogma from you, btw.
I wonder how much it comes from being repeated on IRC channels.)
>What
>"in-game decision" do you expect? If one relies on the magic attacks
>to enchant it beyond that optimum?? No!
You can't rely on Magicbane's magic attacks, because they're
not reliable. A 20% success rate is a failing grade in anybody's
book. And, as I pointed out in another post, knowing the effect
of cancellation on a monster makes Magicbane's cancellation
attack much more effective, because the player can take
better advantage of it. Yet the effects of cancellation on
monsters varies as much as the monsters themselves. It seems
more like an advanced technique than something novice players
should be relying on. Yet four more points of damage on every
hit is something any player should understand and be able to
rely on effectively. That seems a more appropriate approach
for novice players to start with.
I don't think the poster knew what the magic attacks were,
much less the effects of them. If he did, he could watch for
them, then judge their effectiveness when they occur. Then
decide for himself whether they were worth giving up 4 more
points of damage every hit.
Right now that player doesn't know enough to make the decision
on his own. Fortunately that's easily corrected simply by
providing information. The most important bit of information
being what he's giving up for those unreliable, indeterminate
magical attacks.
And it seems to be the one thing everyone knows about
Magicbane. My first ascension I didn't rely on Magicbane's
engraving abilities nearly as much as I did on only enchanting
it to +2. Nor did I rely on the 95% curse absorption, carry
far too much holy water and scrolls of remove curse (when I
even had the spell of remove curse at 0% failure.)
>
>> I can see where they get the idea from. The effects of
>> cancellation on a monster are generally unknown in rgrn.
>
>It has been discussed here from time to time. Why do you think it is
>unknown?
No one mentions specific effects of cancellation on monsters.
A recent ascension post decried losing 3 points of enchantment
off of Grayswandir to a disenchanter. There was no outcry of
"Cancel that sucker next time!" Yet people will post
"correcting" someone who enchanted Magicbane to +3.
The dominant meme on wands of cancellation here is: "You're
going to blow up your bag of holding with it." Followed by
various techniques to prevent that, usually involving never
carrying an identified wand of cancellation.
No one talks about the uses of the spell of cancellation,
which would give the benefits of a wand of cancellation without
the risks. (That's not really surprising. High-level spells
get much less discussion than equipment, including wands.
High level matter spells (cancellation, polymorph, digging)
get even less attention. Despite that the spell of polymorph at
50% failure or less is pretty much an unlimited wand of wishing,
for non-artifacts.)
Yet I'm now convinced that having an early wand of cancellation
can be very useful. Especially against were-foo.
>
>> My point is that they are not generally unknowable.
>>
>> Saying "It depends on how much the player values cancellation"
>> stops the discussion short for no good reason. It implies that
>> the effects of cancellation cannot be discussed for some reason.
>> There's no reason not to discuss the effects of cancellation,
>> some of which are very good indeed.
>
>So the point seems to be that _you_ did not know about the effect?
>Well, in the meantime there has been a lot of information posted
>and re-posted; but still you complain in a lengthy posting.
Unfortunately, that information still has not made it to my
mail spool. So we get to blame NNTP for the whole mess.
>[That's
>why I wanted to stop my part in the thread in time. And I failed.]
I posted the effects I knew, and why *I* thought Magicbane's
form of cancellation was inappropriate to rely on for those
effects. I have asked repeatedly for other examples, some that
would demonstrate the usefulness of Magicbane's form of
cancellation.
The example of foo-lich's was given. That a player wielding
Magicbane for the curse resisting effects would be happy when
it canceled a foo-lich at melee distance. Because then the
player could switch to more effective weapons to kill off the
foo-lich and get on with the game. And checking in
<http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/nh/wan2-343.txt> shows
that a canceled lich would be almost helpless. A wonderful
bit of information.
(Now I've just got to get my head around monsters magic
resistance saving throw to figure out the probability of such
a cancellation. I predict a headache.)
I myself offered up the example of a cockatrice/chickatrice
losing its hissing/stoning attack when canceled. A very welcome
result at melee range.
>
>> The effects of cancellation are knowable. I just now finally
>> found them in:
>> <http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/nh/wan2-343.txt>:
>>
>> "(Adapted from the spoiler "cancel", by Boudewijn Waijers.)"
>>
>> (Presumably the "cancel" spoiler went by the wayside somewhere?)
>>
>> It makes the cancellation effect of Magicbane much more
>> powerful if the player knows what they are and takes advantage
>> of them.
>
>Aha.
>
>> I never doubted that cancellation has some useful effects. I
>> just wanted to know what they were. I was surprised that someone
>> who valued cancellation wouldn't immediately give a short list
>> of their favorite effects.
>
>I did. Not in the first posting but when you indirectly provoked it
>by falsely claiming: "Most monsters have nothing to cancel."
I stand by that claim. Especially after looking at
<http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/nh/mon1-343.txt>
An early wizard, who really needs the extra points of damage,
will get almost no benefit from Magicbane's melee range 20%
chance of cancellation.
And again, that posting of yours has not made it to my mail
spool.
Jove
Janis Papanagnou
> On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 22:25:29 +0200, Janis Papanagnou
> <Janis_Pa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> You can't do them all, so which monsters would you zap?
>
> So which ones?
The topic is endgame. In endgame there are only few threats with most
monsters that you met before. What remains as the most disturbing and
dangerous monsters are primarily all the magic spellcasters.
> So what are the critical monsters to cancel?
In the endgame mostly spellcasters. Since their ability to surround you
with hordes of other nasty creatures, and whatever spells. Though a
summoned horde of monsters with special attacks makes things still worse.
>>You may have missed that I gave you a huge list of cancel'able attacks.
>>Given that there are 400 monsters, you may want to have a look at file
>>monst.c yourself.
>
> That post of yours has not yet made it to my news spool, I
> guess. This may be the root of our apparent communication
> problem.
In response to your statement:
>>>
>>> Most monsters have nothing to cancel.
I answered:
>>
>> There are a lot of monsters that have something to cancel.
>>
>> You can cancel the following special attacks: fire, cold, electricity,
>> sleep, paralysis, drain life, drain constitution, drain energy, stick,
>> were, teleport away, slow, slime, disenchant, and, magic spellcasting.
>>
>> Some of these are, especially in the endgame, of little interest, but
>> there are quite a few that I won't like to miss.
That is 15 cancel'able effects spread over many, many of the 400 monsters.
[*]
> I don't want to know what's cancelable. (Well, actually I do.
You'll understand to "decode" the file monst.c, I suppose.
> I want to know what *you* use it for.
See above.
> Okay, so I'm missing something. I admit it and I want to make
> up for lost time. You've obviously got monsters in mind you
> prefer to cancel. Give me a shortcut to effective use of the
> cancellation spell, please.
You make wrong assumptions; please stop that.
Cancellation _spell_ is practically for high level Wizards, only. I have
never - well, maybe in one game - used that spell. The reason is that
I don't select my characters by choice, rather let the RNG choose for
me. Whenever I have a wizard, I'll get Magicbane as the very first gift
from my god, not the rare spellbook, that I can't cast anyway in the
early game.
When you got Magicbane in early game through sacrifices, it is helpful
for many, many monsters; I won't count them for you. But we have been
talking about endgame.
>>The quoted text is not from me, nevertheless I think your comment is
>>not fair.
>
> I did not mean to imply it was from you.
I did not say or meant that.
I said it was not fair, and I told you that even if it is not me whom
you discredited by your wording.
>>What
>>"in-game decision" do you expect? If one relies on the magic attacks
>>to enchant it beyond that optimum?? No!
>
> You can't rely on Magicbane's magic attacks, because they're
> not reliable.
You are playing with words. A probability here is not worse than a
probability with hits and damages. In both cases you need a certain
amount of events to become a significant number.
> It seems
> more like an advanced technique than something novice players
> should be relying on.
But why? As a wizard with Magicbane as your first artifact you'll have
a perfect weapon, knowing the numbers or not when the magic attacks hits
best.
Though real "novice" players won't come fast to the point where you get
an artifact from an altar; you must have at least some experience. And
yet much more to come to the point casting cancellation.
> Yet four more points of damage on every
> hit is something any player should understand and be able to
> rely on effectively.
No, because he cannot determine the damage done. ("Ah, only one more hit
and he will surely get down" - DYWYPI. That's a common fault!)
There's no reason why a beginner would know about 4 points of damage
but not be aware of the magical attacks.
> That seems a more appropriate approach
> for novice players to start with.
No. The worst approach is the damage relying hack'n'slash approach. IMO.
People advance in their proficiency at the moment when they learn that
there are other means to handle situations with monsters.
>>> I never doubted that cancellation has some useful effects. I
>>>just wanted to know what they were. I was surprised that someone
>>>who valued cancellation wouldn't immediately give a short list
>>>of their favorite effects.
>>
>>I did. Not in the first posting but when you indirectly provoked it
>>by falsely claiming: "Most monsters have nothing to cancel."
>
> I stand by that claim.
I haven't counted them, but I suppose 100 of 400 monsters would not count
as "most" for you. And, indeed, literally you would be correct.[*]
But monsters without special attacks, with few exceptions (those who hit
hard and where melee should be avoided anyway), are no threat. The special
attacks make life worse, and there is cancellation against it.
There is a reason why the probabilities for wands are low, and the failure
rate for spells is high, and the handling of the wand somewhat risky, and
the probability for the artifact effect not at 25%, for cancellation. It's
a powerful tool.
> Especially after looking at
> <http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/nh/mon1-343.txt>
Why that? I can't detect any reason supporting your claim in that text.
> An early wizard, who really needs the extra points of damage,
> will get almost no benefit from Magicbane's melee range 20%
> chance of cancellation.
An early wizard already with quite a couple of blessed scrolls of
enchant weapon!? How early?
An early wizard with so many scrolls acquired but no idea how to
defend and attack with this spells that he has from the beginning?
> And again, that posting of yours has not made it to my mail
> spool.
I quoted it in this post.
Janis
[*] I roughly collected the attack fields from monst.c (with ascending
number of occurence, the "AD_" entries are the relevant ones), that's
not exactly what is required here (every monster has 6 entries including
no_attk), but it was easy to collect, and at least gives some hints.
1 AD_CNCL 2 AD_DRDX 5 AD_MAGM 15 AD_COLD
1 AD_CURS 2 AD_ENCH 5 AD_STCK 15 AD_SAMU
1 AD_DCAY 2 AD_FAMN 5 AD_WRAP 15 AT_STNG
1 AD_DRCO 2 AD_PEST 5 AT_EXPL 16 AD_FIRE
1 AD_DREN 2 AD_SLIM 6 AD_ELEC 19 AT_BREA
1 AD_HALU 3 AD_DGST 6 AD_STON 20 AT_KICK
1 AD_HEAL 3 AD_SEDU 8 AD_ACID 20 AT_NONE
1 AD_LEGS 3 AD_SLOW 8 AD_DRIN 24 AD_DRST
1 AD_RBRE 3 AD_STUN 8 AD_PLYS 28 AD_SPEL
1 AD_SGLD 3 AD_WERE 8 AT_BUTT 30 AT_TUCH
1 AD_SSEX 4 AD_DISE 8 AT_TENT 42 AT_MAGC
1 AD_TLPT 4 AD_RUST 10 AD_DRLI 154 AT_BITE
1 AT_BOOM 4 AD_SITM 10 AT_GAZE 177 NO_ATTK
2 AD_CONF 4 AD_SLEE 11 AD_CLRC 183 AT_WEAP
2 AD_CORR 4 AT_SPIT 11 AT_HUGS 198 AT_CLAW
2 AD_DETH 5 AD_BLND 13 AT_ENGL 505 AD_PHYS
2 AD_DISN
HTH
David Damerell
>Jove wrote:
>>My problem is summed up in the following:
>>"Wiser rgrn denizens than I teach that Magicbane is at it's
>>best at +2. I would never enchant a +1 Magicbane with a
>>blessed scroll."
>>Players like the above poster are not making an in-game
>>decision. They're following what they think is dogma,
>not fair. We know it implies the focus on magic attacks, yes? Do you
>really think it's a dogma, if one relies on others expertise?
Well, I think "never" is a dogma, yes. Imagine the situation where a
Chaotic wizard has Magicbane and a pile of junk artifacts, enough to make
further sacrificing an agonisingly slow process; but also the spell of
cancellation at 0% failure and a plentiful supply of mana. Obviously they
should boost Magicbane up to +7. Hence it is wrong to say "never".
--
David Damerell <dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> Kill the tomato!
Today is First Aponoia, July.
Boudewijn Waijers
> Indeed. My point is, it's up to the individual to decide the value of
> the cancellation effect; but people who place that value high will
> find a reason to stop at +2 or +5.
What I usually do is enchant it up to +2, then wield a *real* weapon.
Only when a monster is near that my curse my equipment do I wield
Magicbane.
--
Boudewijn.
--
"I have hundreds of other quotes, just waiting to replace this one
as my signature..." - Me
Janis Papanagnou
You are right, and I would agree if I would take such statements literally.
But these corner-cases (i.e. cancelation at 0%, etc.) are seldom considered
in natural language use; the sentences would get often too complicated, and
in my experience one would nevertheless fail to cover every case and give a
perfect statement.
So in (non-mathematical, non-logical) practice I think one should take these
types of generalisations not too literal, or with a grain of salt.
(I may be wrong, but I remember Wes, the originator of the statement, not to
be any noticeably dogmatic.)
But, again, from your (and I assume Joves) strict perspective, you are right.
Janis
Janis Papanagnou
> David Damerell wrote:
>
>>Indeed. My point is, it's up to the individual to decide the value of
>>the cancellation effect; but people who place that value high will
>>find a reason to stop at +2 or +5.
>
> What I usually do is enchant it up to +2, then wield a *real* weapon.
> Only when a monster is near that my curse my equipment do I wield
> Magicbane.
With "real" you mean a better artifact; yes, that's the usual approach,
also mine.
Things get a bit different when one has The Amulet; random creation of
monsters and random curses make me change my tactics as appropriate.
Janis
Jove
<Janis_Pa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Excellent list. Thank you for reposting it. The spoiler
<http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/nh/wan2-343.txt> confirms
everything but "stick".
That's confirmed in:
<http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/nh/armr-343.txt>
Zapping a giant mimic with a wand of cancellation will make
it let go of you. That's useful to know.
>
>That is 15 cancel'able effects spread over many, many of the 400 monsters.
>[*]
>
That may be true but it's not relevant to my statement:
"Most monsters have nothing to cancel."
<http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/nh/mon1-343.txt>
a giant ant 2 18 3 0 1d4
a giant beetle 5 6 4 0 P 3d6
b acid blob 1 3 8 0 spa* (1d8A)
b quivering blob 5 1 8 0 sP 1d8
d jackal 0 12 7 0 1d2
d fox 0 15 7 0 1d3
d coyote 1 12 7 0 1d4
d little dog 2 18 6 0 1d6
d dog 4 16 5 0 1d6
d large dog 6 15 4 0 2d4
d dingo 4 16 5 0 1d6
d wolf 5 12 4 0 2d4
d warg 7 12 4 0 2d6
f kitten 2 18 6 0 1d6
f housecat 4 16 5 0 1d6
f jaguar 4 15 6 0 1d4 1d4 1d8
f lynx 5 15 6 0 1d4 1d4 1d10
f panther 5 15 6 0 1d6 1d6 1d10
f large cat 6 15 4 0 2d4
f tiger 6 12 6 0 2d4 2d4 1d10
g gargoyle 6 10 -4 0 * 2d6 2d6 2d4
g winged gargoyle 9 15 -2 0 * 3d6 3d6 3d4
h hobbit 1 9 10 0 W1d6
h dwarf 2 6 10 10 W1d8
h bugbear 3 9 5 0 W2d4
h dwarf lord 4 6 10 10 W2d4 W2d4
h dwarf king 6 6 10 20 W2d6 W2d6
h mind flayer 9 12 5 90 W1d4 2!I 2!I 2!I
h master mind flayer 13 12 0 90 W1d8 2!I 2!I 2!I 2!I
2!I
i manes 1 3 7 0 sp 1d3 1d3 1d4
i imp 3 12 2 20 1d4
i lemure 3 3 7 0 Sp 1d3
i tengu 6 13 5 30 P 1d7
j spotted jelly 5 0 8 10 a* (0d6A)
k kobold 0 6 10 0 p W1d4
k large kobold 1 6 10 0 p W1d6
k kobold lord 2 6 10 0 p W2d4
o goblin 0 6 10 0 W1d4
o hobgoblin 1 9 10 0 W1d6
o orc 1 9 10 0 W1d8
o hill orc 2 9 10 0 W1d6
o Mordor orc 3 5 10 0 W1d6
o Uruk-hai 3 7 10 0 W1d8
o orc-captain 5 5 10 0 W2d4 W2d4
p rock piercer 3 1 3 0 2d6
p iron piercer 5 1 0 0 3d6
p glass piercer 7 1 0 0 a 4d6
q rothe 2 9 7 0 1d3 1d3 1d8
q mumak 5 9 0 0 4d12 2d6
q leocrotta 6 18 4 10 2d6 2d6 2d6
q wumpus 8 3 2 10 3d6
q titanothere 12 12 6 0 2d8
q baluchitherium 14 12 5 0 5d4 5d4
q mastodon 20 12 5 0 4d8 4d8
r sewer rat 0 12 7 0 1d3
r giant rat 1 10 7 0 1d3
r rock mole 3 3 0 20 1d6
r woodchuck 3 3 0 20 1d6
s cave spider 1 12 3 0 P 1d2
t lurker above 10 3 3 0 E1d8d
t trapper 12 3 3 0 E1d10d
u white unicorn 4 24 2 70 P 1d12 1d6
u gray unicorn 4 24 2 70 P 1d12 1d6
u black unicorn 4 24 2 70 P 1d12 1d6
u pony 3 16 6 0 1d6 1d2
u horse 5 20 5 0 1d8 1d3
u warhorse 7 24 4 0 1d10 1d4
v fog cloud 3 1 0 0 sp* E1d6
v dust vortex 4 20 2 30 sp* E2d8b
w baby long worm 8 3 5 0 1d6
w baby purple worm 8 3 5 0 1d6
w long worm 8 3 5 10 1d4
w purple worm 15 9 6 20 2d8 E1d10d
x xan 7 18 -4 0 P 1d4x
z zruty 9 8 3 0 3d4 3d4 3d6
A Aleax 10 8 0 30 csep W1d6 W1d6 1d4
B bat 0 22 8 0 1d4
B giant bat 2 22 7 0 1d6
B raven 4 20 6 0 1d6 1d6b
C plains centaur 4 18 4 0 W1d6 1d6
C forest centaur 5 18 3 10 W1d8 1d6
C mountain centaur 6 20 2 10 W1d10 1d6 1d6
D baby gray dragon 12 9 2 10 2d6
D baby silver dragon 12 9 2 10 2d6
D baby red dragon 12 9 2 10 f 2d6
D baby white dragon 12 9 2 10 c 2d6
D baby orange dragon 12 9 2 10 s 2d6
D baby black dragon 12 9 2 10 d 2d6
D baby blue dragon 12 9 2 10 e 2d6
D baby green dragon 12 9 2 10 p 2d6
D baby yellow dragon 12 9 2 10 a* 2d6
E stalker 8 12 3 0 4d4
E air elemental 8 36 2 30 p* E1d10
E earth elemental 8 6 2 30 fcp* 4d6
E water elemental 8 6 2 30 p* 5d6
F lichen 0 1 9 0 0d0m
F shrieker 3 1 7 0 P
F violet fungus 3 1 7 0 P 1d4 0d0m
G gnome 1 6 10 4 W1d6
G gnome lord 3 8 10 4 W1d8
G gnome king 5 10 10 20 W2d6
H giant 6 6 0 0 W2d10
H stone giant 6 6 0 0 W2d10
H hill giant 8 10 6 0 W2d8
H fire giant 9 12 4 5 F W2d10
H frost giant 10 12 3 10 C W2d12
H storm giant 16 12 3 10 E W2d12
H ettin 10 12 3 0 W2d8 W3d6
H minotaur 15 15 6 0 3d10 3d10 2d8
J jabberwock 15 12 -2 50 2d10 2d10 2d10 2d10
K Keystone Kop 1 6 10 10 W1d4
K Kop Sergeant 2 8 10 10 W1d6
K Kop Lieutenant 3 10 10 20 W1d8
K Kop Kaptain 4 12 10 20 W2d6
M kobold mummy 3 8 6 20 csp 1d4
M gnome mummy 4 10 6 20 csp 1d6
M orc mummy 5 10 5 20 csp 1d6
M dwarf mummy 5 10 5 20 csp 1d6
M elf mummy 6 12 4 30 csp 2d4
M human mummy 6 12 4 30 csp 2d4 2d4
M ettin mummy 7 12 4 30 csp 2d6 2d6
M giant mummy 8 14 3 30 csp 3d4 3d4
N red naga hatchling 3 10 6 0 FP 1d4
N black naga hatchling 3 10 6 0 Pa* 1d4
N golden naga hatchlin 3 10 6 0 P 1d4
N guardian naga hatchl 3 10 6 0 P 1d4
O ogre 5 10 5 0 W2d5
O ogre lord 7 12 3 30 W2d6
O ogre king 9 14 4 60 W3d5
S garter snake 1 8 8 0 1d2
T troll 7 12 4 0 W4d2 4d2 2d6
T rock troll 9 12 0 0 W3d6 2d8 2d6
T water troll 11 14 4 40 W2d8 2d8 2d6
T Olog-hai 13 12 -4 0 W3d6 2d8 2d6
X xorn 8 9 -2 20 fc* 1d3 1d3 1d3 4d6
Y monkey 2 12 6 0 0d0- 1d3
Y ape 4 12 6 0 1d3 1d3 1d6
Y owlbear 5 12 5 0 1d6 1d6 H2d8
Y yeti 5 15 6 0 C 1d6 1d6 1d4
Y carnivorous ape 6 12 6 0 1d4 1d4 H1d8
Y sasquatch 7 15 6 0 1d6 1d6 1d8
Z kobold zombie 0 6 10 0 csp 1d4
Z gnome zombie 1 6 10 0 csp 1d5
Z orc zombie 2 6 9 0 csp 1d6
Z dwarf zombie 2 6 9 0 csp 1d6
Z elf zombie 3 6 9 0 csp 1d7
Z human zombie 4 6 8 0 csp 1d8
Z ettin zombie 6 8 6 0 csp 1d10 1d10
Z giant zombie 8 8 6 0 csp 2d8 2d8
' straw golem 3 12 10 0 sp 1d2 1d2
' paper golem 3 12 10 0 sp 1d3
' rope golem 4 9 8 0 sp 1d4 1d4 H6d1
' gold golem 5 9 6 0 spa 2d3 2d3
' leather golem 6 6 6 0 sp 1d6 1d6
' wood golem 7 3 4 0 sp 3d4
' flesh golem 9 8 9 30 FCSEP 2d8 2d8
' stone golem 14 6 5 50 sp* 3d8
' glass golem 16 6 1 50 spa 2d8 2d8
@ human 0 12 10 0 W1d6
@ elf 10 12 10 2 S W1d8
@ Woodland-elf 4 12 10 10 S W2d4
@ Green-elf 5 12 10 10 S W2d4
@ Grey-elf 6 12 10 10 S W2d4
@ elf-lord 8 12 10 20 S W2d4 W2d4
@ Elvenking 9 12 10 25 S W2d4 W2d4
@ doppelganger 9 12 5 20 s W1d12
@ shopkeeper 12 18 0 50 W4d4 W4d4
@ guard 12 12 10 40 W4d10
@ prisoner 12 12 10 0 W1d6
@ soldier 6 10 10 0 W1d8
@ sergeant 8 10 10 5 W2d6
@ lieutenant 10 10 10 15 W3d4 W3d4
@ captain 12 10 10 15 W4d4 W4d4
@ watchman 6 10 10 0 W1d8
@ watch captain 10 10 10 15 W3d4 W3d4
@ Croesus 20 15 0 40 W4d10
ghost 10 3 -5 50 csdp* 1d1
; piranha 5 12 4 0 2d6
; shark 7 12 2 0 5d6
: newt 0 6 8 0 1d2
: gecko 1 6 8 0 1d3
: iguana 2 6 7 0 1d4
: baby crocodile 3 6 7 0 1d4
: lizard 5 6 6 10 * 1d6
: chameleon 6 5 6 10 4d2
: crocodile 6 9 5 0 4d2 1d12
There following monsters were not counted for various reasons
in either the uncancelable or absolute totals even though most
of them cannot be canceled. 20 of them can be canceled out of 53, btw.
(Therefore removing them from the totals hurts my case.):
@ archeologist 10 12 10 1 W1d6 W1d6
@ barbarian 10 12 10 1 p W1d6 W1d6
@ caveman 10 12 10 0 W2d4
@ cavewoman 10 12 10 0 W2d4
@ healer 10 12 10 1 p W1d6
@ knight 10 12 10 1 W1d6 W1d6
@ monk 10 12 10 2 1d8 1d8
@ priest 10 12 10 2 W1d6
@ priestess 10 12 10 2 W1d6
@ ranger 10 12 10 2 W1d4
@ rogue 10 12 10 1 W1d6 W1d6
@ samurai 10 12 10 1 W1d8 W1d8
@ tourist 10 12 10 1 W1d6 W1d6
@ valkyrie 10 12 10 1 c W1d8 W1d8
@ wizard 10 12 10 3 W1d6
@ Lord Carnarvon 20 12 0 30 W1d6
@ Pelias 20 12 0 30 p W1d6
@ Shaman Karnov 20 12 0 30 W2d4
@ Hippocrates 20 12 0 40 p W1d6
@ King Arthur 20 12 0 40 W1d6 W1d6
@ Grand Master 25 12 0 70 fsep 4d10 2d8 M2d8+ M2d8+
@ Arch Priest 25 12 7 70 fsep W4d10 2d8 M2d8+ M2d8+
@ Orion 20 12 0 30 W1d6
@ Master of Thieves 20 12 0 30 * W2d6 W2d6 2d4-
@ Lord Sato 20 12 0 30 W1d8 W1d6
@ Twoflower 20 12 10 20 W1d6 W1d6
@ Norn 20 12 0 80 c W1d8 W1d6
@ Neferet the Green 20 12 0 60 W1d6 M2d8+
& Minion of Huhetotl 16 12 -2 75 fp* W8d4 W4d6 M0d0+ 2d6-
@ Thoth Amon 16 12 0 10 p* W1d6 M0d0+ M0d0+ 1d4-
D Chromatic Dragon 16 12 0 30 FCSDEPa* B6d8z M0d0+ 2d8- 4d8
4d8 1d6
H Cyclops 18 12 0 0 * W4d8 W4d8 2d6-
D Ixoth 15 12 -1 20 F* B8d6F 4d8 M0d0+ 2d4
2d4-
@ Master Kaen 25 12 -10 10 P* 16d2 16d2 M0d0+ 1d4-
& Nalzok 16 12 -2 85 fp* W8d4 W4d6 M0d0+ 2d6-
s Scorpius 15 12 10 0 P* 2d6 2d6- 1d4#
@ Master Assassin 15 12 0 30 * W2d6P W2d8 2d6-
@ Ashikaga Takauji 15 12 0 40 * W2d6 W2d6 2d6-
H Lord Surtur 15 12 2 50 F* W2d10 W2d10 2d6-
@ Dark One 15 12 0 80 * W1d6 W1d6 1d4- M0d0+
@ student 5 12 10 10 W1d6
@ chieftain 5 12 10 10 p W1d6
@ neanderthal 5 12 10 10 W2d4
@ attendant 5 12 10 10 p W1d6
@ page 5 12 10 10 W1d6 W1d6
@ abbot 5 12 10 20 8d2 3d2s M0d0+
@ acolyte 5 12 10 20 W1d6 M0d0+
@ hunter 5 12 10 10 W1d4
@ thug 5 12 10 10 W1d6 W1d6
@ ninja 5 12 10 10 W1d8 W1d8
@ roshi 5 12 10 10 W1d8 W1d8
@ guide 5 12 10 20 W1d6 M0d0+
@ warrior 5 12 10 10 W1d8 W1d8
@ apprentice 5 12 10 30 W1d6 M0d0+
That's 186 monsters out of 326 where even unlimited, 100% probability,
ranged cancellation is a waste of a move: 57%. Every one of them will
take 4 extra points of damage when hit with +7 Magicbane vs. +2
Magicbane.
I feel I've proved that "Most monsters have nothing to cancel."
A nurse can be cancelled, but it's not useful: 187
@ nurse 11 6 0 0 P 2d6H
Canceling any of the following is pointless when wielding
Magicbane because wielding Magicbane gives you magic resistance
which nullifies their Magic Missile attacks anyway. (If you're
not wielding Magicbane then Magicbane's unreliable cancellation
doesn't matter anyway.)
k kobold shaman 2 6 6 10 p M0d0+
D gray dragon 15 9 -1 20 B4d6M 3d8 1d4 1d4
G gnomish wizard 3 10 4 10 M0d0+
N golden naga 10 14 2 70 P 2d6 M4d6+
@ Oracle 12 0 0 50 (0d4M)
We're now at 192 monsters where Magicbane's cancellation attack is
useless.
This is starting to get interesting.
Magicbane's cancellation only occurs at melee distance. Canceling
breath attacks at that distance is pointless because breath attacks
aren't used at melee range.
d winter wolf cub 5 12 4 0 C 1d8 B1d8C
d winter wolf 7 12 4 20 C 2d6 B2d6C
d hell hound pup 7 12 4 20 F 2d6 B2d6F
d hell hound 12 14 2 20 F 3d6 B3d6F
C silver dragon 15 9 -1 20 c B4d6C 3d8 1d4 1d4
D red dragon 15 9 -1 20 F B6d6F 3d8 1d4 1d4
D white dragon 15 9 -1 20 C B4d6C 3d8 1d4 1d4
D orange dragon 15 9 -1 20 S B4d25S 3d8 1d4 1d4
D black dragon 15 9 -1 20 D B4d10D 3d8 1d4 1d4
D blue dragon 15 9 -1 20 E B4d6E 3d8 1d4 1d4
D green dragon 15 9 -1 20 P B4d6P 3d8 1d4 1d4
D yellow dragon 15 9 -1 20 a* B4d6A 3d8 1d4 1d4
N red naga 6 12 4 0 FP 2d4 B2d6F
N black naga 8 14 2 10 Pa* 2d6 S0d0A
N guardian naga 12 16 0 50 P 1d6. S1d6P H2d4
S cobra 6 18 2 0 P 2d4P S0d0b
' iron golem 18 6 3 60 fcsep W4d10 B4d6P
17 more monsters. We're now at 209 monsters where Magicbane's melee
range cancellation attack is useless.
Other monsters are useful to cancel, but you really want to do it from
a distance. You don't want to try it at melee range with an extremely
unreliable cancellation effect like Magicbane's on:
e gas spore 1 3 10 0 [X4d6]
e floating eye 2 1 9 10 (0d70.)
e freezing sphere 6 13 4 0 C X4d6C
e flaming sphere 6 13 4 0 F X4d6F
e shocking sphere 6 13 4 0 E X4d6E
R rust monster 5 18 2 0 0d0R 0d0R (0d0R)
R disenchanter 12 12 -10 0 4d4" (0d0")
b gelatinous cube 6 6 8 0 FCSEpa* 2d4. (1d4.)
c chickatrice 4 4 8 30 P* 1d2 0d0* (0d0*)
c cockatrice 5 6 6 30 P* 1d3 0d0* (0d0*)
n wood nymph 3 12 9 20 0d0- 0d0-
n water nymph 3 12 9 20 0d0- 0d0-
n mountain nymph 3 12 9 20 0d0- 0d0-
13 more monsters. We're now at 222 monsters where you don't want to
rely on Magicbane's unreliable melee range cancellation attack.
l leprechaun 5 15 8 20 1d2$
From: <http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/nh/drgn-343.txt>
Magic Resistance protects against
Magic missile attacks of Angels, gray dragons, Yeenoghu, and the
Chromatic Dragon.
Passive magic missile attack of the Oracle.
Prevents instadeath and reduces chance of damage from death attack
of Death.
"Touch of death", destroy armour, drain strength, and confusion
spells cast by monsters; paralysis and stunning spells' effect
reduced to one turn; psi bolt's and open wounds' damage halved.
Reduces number of objects cursed from a "malignant aura"-type curse.
>> I don't want to know what's cancelable. (Well, actually I do.
>
>You'll understand to "decode" the file monst.c, I suppose.
As I posted, I finally found the cancelable effects in
<http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/nh/wan2-343.txt>.
The part of my post that you cut pointed out that I'm already posting
suggestions for monsters to cancel from it.
>
>> I want to know what *you* use it for.
>
>See above.
>
>> Okay, so I'm missing something. I admit it and I want to make
>> up for lost time. You've obviously got monsters in mind you
>> prefer to cancel. Give me a shortcut to effective use of the
>> cancellation spell, please.
>
>You make wrong assumptions;
Where? What? I'm assuming nothing. I'm telling you I have unlimited
cancellation available and asking you how best to use it.
I'm sticking out my chin here and begging you to hit it!
>
>please stop that.
I can't if you won't tell me what wrong assumptions I'm making in
asking you how best to use unlimited spell of cancellation.
>
>Cancellation _spell_ is practically for high level Wizards, only. I have
>never - well, maybe in one game - used that spell. The reason is that
>I don't select my characters by choice, rather let the RNG choose for
>me. Whenever I have a wizard, I'll get Magicbane as the very first gift
>from my god, not the rare spellbook, that I can't cast anyway in the
>early game.
>
Cancellation is cancellation, right? Show your expertise and tell me
how to use the spell effectively. Other than not to waste a turn
zapping uncancelable monsters, obviously I don't know how.
What monsters aren't worth zapping because their magic resistance is
too high? It would save everyone reading a lot of time and trouble
to know that.
>When you got Magicbane in early game through sacrifices, it is helpful
>for many, many monsters; I won't count them for you. But we have been
>talking about endgame.
Magicbane is useful against all monsters because it does damage
to all monsters. I'm not sure how that applies. Cancellation in
any form is useless against over 180 monsters; I have counted them
for you. (Magicbane's cancellation attack is useless against many
more.)
And in the endgame your shouldn't be fighting anyway if you can help
it. So magical effects you don't get because you're not fighting don't
outweigh damage effects you don't get because you're not fighting. They
can't. So that is not an argument for leaving Magicbane at +2.
On the ascension run Magicbane's most important effect is the
absorption of curses when wielded, imho. You want to wield Magicbane
as much as possible during the ascension run, ideally 100% of the time.
What's the biggest argument for wielding a different weapon, and
thereby losing the curse protection? To do more damage, for whatever
reason. The only good reason to do that is to get a monster out of
the way
In the endgame it's pointless to cancel monsters with a poison
attack because you've got poison resistance, so canceling any of
the following monsters is useless:
a killer bee 1 18 -1 0 P 1d3P
a soldier ant 3 18 3 0 P 2d4 3d4P
a queen bee 9 24 -4 0 P 1d8P
s centipede 2 4 3 0 P 1d3P
s giant spider 5 15 4 0 P 2d4P
s scorpion 5 15 3 0 P 1d2 1d2 1d4P
B vampire bat 5 20 6 0 sp 1d6 0d0P
D green dragon 15 9 -1 20 P B4d6P 3d8 1d4 1d4
S pit viper 6 15 2 0 P 1d4P 1d4P
S python 6 3 5 0 1d4 0d0 H1d4w H2d4
S cobra 6 18 2 0 P 2d4P S0d0b
' iron golem 18 6 3 60 fcsep W4d10 B4d6P
; jellyfish 3 3 6 0 P 3d3P
>
>>>The quoted text is not from me, nevertheless I think your comment is
>>>not fair.
>>
>> I did not mean to imply it was from you.
>
>I did not say or meant that.
>
>I said it was not fair, and I told you that even if it is not me whom
>you discredited by your wording.
How is it not fair? (Claiming it does not make it so, even for you.)
Whom did I discredit? Not the person who originally posted it. He
made it as a statement of belief. I think he believes it. I can't
tell him he doesn't believe it. I don't think it discredits anyone.
I don't see how it could discredit anyone.
Perhaps we're talking at cross-purposes here. I included the quote
as a perfect example of the "Magicbane mindset". It uses the argument
from authority which can only result in ending the discussion. It
implies not only that Magicbane's enchantment won't be discussed, but
that it *can't* be discussed.
>
>>>What
>>>"in-game decision" do you expect? If one relies on the magic attacks
>>>to enchant it beyond that optimum?? No!
>>
>> You can't rely on Magicbane's magic attacks, because they're
>> not reliable.
>
>You are playing with words. A probability here is not worse than a
>probability with hits and damages. In both cases you need a certain
>amount of events to become a significant number.
No, I'm stating a fact. If you got 20% on a test, you failed
very badly. That's just not reliable. If you told a player to
rely on a spell with an 80% failure rate, they'd laugh at you,
and be right to do so. (Sorry, but that's just the way it is.)
>
>> It seems
>> more like an advanced technique than something novice players
>> should be relying on.
>
>But why? As a wizard with Magicbane as your first artifact you'll have
>a perfect weapon, knowing the numbers or not when the magic attacks hits
>best.
>
Because they should be relying on Magicbane's reliable effects:
Engraving Elbereth.
>Though real "novice" players won't come fast to the point where you get
>an artifact from an altar; you must have at least some experience. And
>yet much more to come to the point casting cancellation.
I don't understand what you're saying here. Cancellation is
difficult even for a high level wizard to cast.
>
>> Yet four more points of damage on every
>> hit is something any player should understand and be able to
>> rely on effectively.
>
>No, because he cannot determine the damage done. ("Ah, only one more hit
>and he will surely get down" - DYWYPI. That's a common fault!)
Hitting one more time relying on a 20% chance of cancellation is
better how?
One more reason to change the Magicbane dogma from "weaken it's
damage-dealing capability) to "Engrave Elbereth with it and don't get
hit. With Magicbane you can do that.
>
>There's no reason why a beginner would know about 4 points of damage
>but not be aware of the magical attacks.
There is every reason a beginner would not have memorized what
monsters can be canceled, what's canceled, and how to take advantage of
that cancelation.
>
>> That seems a more appropriate approach
>> for novice players to start with.
>
>No. The worst approach is the damage relying hack'n'slash approach. IMO.
>People advance in their proficiency at the moment when they learn that
>there are other means to handle situations with monsters.
And that's why I say the Magicbane dogma should be "Engrave Elbereth".
(Is thats why the dogma is that valkyries are the easiest class to
ascend?)
>
>>>> I never doubted that cancellation has some useful effects. I
>>>>just wanted to know what they were. I was surprised that someone
>>>>who valued cancellation wouldn't immediately give a short list
>>>>of their favorite effects.
>>>
>>>I did. Not in the first posting but when you indirectly provoked it
>>>by falsely claiming: "Most monsters have nothing to cancel."
What you posted were all the effects. What are your favorites to
cancel? I mean, what have you tried to cancel in a game, not in theory?
What was the last monster you zapped a wand of cancellation at in a
game?
>>
>> I stand by that claim.
>
>I haven't counted them, but I suppose 100 of 400 monsters would not count
>as "most" for you. And, indeed, literally you would be correct.[*]
I'm not sure what you're saying here.
>
>But monsters without special attacks, with few exceptions (those who hit
>hard and where melee should be avoided anyway), are no threat. The special
>attacks make life worse, and there is cancellation against it.
>
>There is a reason why the probabilities for wands are low, and the failure
>rate for spells is high, and the handling of the wand somewhat risky, and
>the probability for the artifact effect not at 25%, for cancellation. It's
>a powerful tool.
>
>> Especially after looking at
>> <http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/nh/mon1-343.txt>
>
>Why that? I can't detect any reason supporting your claim in that text.
>
>> An early wizard, who really needs the extra points of damage,
>> will get almost no benefit from Magicbane's melee range 20%
>> chance of cancellation.
>
>An early wizard already with quite a couple of blessed scrolls of
>enchant weapon!? How early?
The wizard has a co-aligned altar. That's how the wizard got
Magicbane, from sacrificing at it. The wizard has Magicbane. So the
wizard can dip a potion into a fountain safely after engraving
"Elbereth". The newly acquired potion of water can be made into holy
water at the co-aligned altar.
One blessed scroll of enchant weapon can take the +0 Magicbane to +3.
But the force of dogma is so strong that players will forgo the probable
+2 enchantment immediately in favor of waiting to enchant Magicbane with
two uncursed scrolls instead, however long they have to wait to get that
second scroll.
(And that's ignoring the possibility that Magicbane may have been
gifted with an enchantment greater than +0.)
>
>An early wizard with so many scrolls acquired but no idea how to
>defend and attack with this spells that he has from the beginning?
One scroll is all that's needed. See above. And for an early
wizard, Magicbane's ability to engrave Elbereth with 100% probability
in one turn is more important than spells, because an early wizard
doesn't have enough mana, even if useful spells are available.
That's what should be dogma: Engraving Elbereth with Magicbane.
That's what hackers should think of first when they get Magicbane.
Remember that, and you'll rarely die after getting Magicbane.
The second most important thing about Magicbane is magic resistance.
Third is the curse resistance. Actually, this rises to first by
the endgame. And how many people do the run with Magicbane, carefully
enchanted to +2 mind you, stored safely in their bags of holding?
That Magicbane's magic effects reach their dizzying height of
probability of less than 50% at +2 enchantment is trivia.
Most spells are useless to an early wizard because of a) lack of mana
b) inability to cast reliably or c) the spell is useless for attack
or defense. Detect food, knock, etc. (NOT locking. Instant door is
nice for defense.)
I can't play an early wizard as a spellcaster. Maybe a mid-level
wizard, but I work hard to get as much mana as possible at all times
and try to get and keep powerful pets.
Judging from the posts complaining about lack of mana with an early
level wizard I'm not alone. No one answers those posts claiming to
be able to play an early wizard as a spellcaster. Instead, they
all advise improving armor class with the best armor, spell-friendly
or not, getting good with as manahy daggers as possible, using pets
effectively, Elbereth in the dust, running away, etc. so that no
spellcasting is required to survive.
Indeed, the commonest advice is to get the best AC possible and just
forego spellcasting entirely. Good advice, imho, because even if
a wizard started with 50 mana points (and max Int for spellcasting
efficiency and max Wis for max mana gain when leveling up) that wouldn't
be enough to survive as a spellcaster. Force bolt just misses too much.
(All ray/beam spells miss too much, imho).
>
>> And again, that posting of yours has not made it to my mail
>> spool.
>
>I quoted it in this post.
Appreciated.
David Damerell
>David Damerell wrote:
>>>Jove wrote:
>>>>My problem is summed up in the following:
>>>>"Wiser rgrn denizens than I teach that Magicbane is at it's
>>>>best at +2. I would never enchant a +1 Magicbane with a
>>>>blessed scroll."
>>Well, I think "never" is a dogma, yes.
>But these corner-cases (i.e. cancelation at 0%, etc.) are seldom considered
>in natural language use;
No, I don't think this is a failure to consider the corner cases, because
for many years on rgrn no-one seriously suggested using Magicbane at
anything but +2. I really do think that has become a dogma.
--
David Damerell <dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> Distortion Field!
Today is Gaiman, July - a public holiday.
Jove
<Janis_Pa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Not every, but _he_, the Tourist, could indeed use it regularily on
>the critical monsters.
>
Are Tourists immune to amulets of change? Or gender change from
polymorph from wands, potions, traps, and spells?
Jove
Doug Freyburger
>
> No, I don't think this is a failure to consider the corner cases, because
> for many years on rgrn no-one seriously suggested using Magicbane at
> anything but +2. I really do think that has become a dogma.
For a wizard I view using only MB is a sort of challenge
game. I'll stay altar camping until a much more powerfull
melee weapon shows up. Chaotic wizards can get Stormy,
neutrals Vorpy, either Frosty.
Lately I run chaotic wizards. My current one uses "x" to
switch back and forth between Magicbane and Stormbringer.
With that combination I don't feel the need to enchant
MB past +2.
RNG kvetching. My current wizard did a lot of altar
camping for a good artifact. Named Sting early on to
advance dagge skills. As soon as one wouldn't stack I
named it, turned out +3, very nice. Got MB as first gift,
started using "x" between them. Then a long list of
artifacts named after monsters. Werebane and such, gee
thanks. Seemed to take forever to get Stormy. Started
using "x" to bounce between Stormy and MB, Sting goes in
the bag. Several thousand turns later a sac just to tell
if it's safe to pray and Fire Brand shows up. Now I
wonder if its worth enchanting FB up or stick with Stormy.
Janis Papanagnou
>
> For a wizard I view using only MB is a sort of challenge
> game.
You mean also ignoring a wizards attack spells?
Janis
Janis Papanagnou
> On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 22:25:29 +0200, Janis Papanagnou
> <Janis_Pa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Not every, but _he_, the Tourist, could indeed use it regularily on
>>the critical monsters.
This was a reply to the point whether tourists with a PYEC could use a
wand of cancellation on a more regular basis. So I don't see what you
are aiming at with the following questions...
> Are Tourists immune to amulets of change?
Yes, by not wearing these amulets, otherwise no.
> Or gender change from
> polymorph from wands, potions, traps, and spells?
Janis
Doug Freyburger
No, only in comparison to the more powerfull artifacts
that show up later. I wasn't thinking of a "squib"
ascension. I don't even play Valks completely
spell-less.
MB-only in terms of never wielding any other artifact
(or maybe Sting before MB) isn't a usual challenge
game but it is more difficult than using Stormy or
Frosty or whatever once they arrive.
Boudewijn Waijers
> MB-only in terms of never wielding any other artifact
> (or maybe Sting before MB) isn't a usual challenge
> game but it is more difficult than using Stormy or
> Frosty or whatever once they arrive.
You really think so?
For me, MagicBane is just a backup for really dire cases and a curse
magnet; in normal circumstances I don't resort to hand-to-hand combat at
all with a wizard.
Boudewijn Waijers
> Started
> using "x" to bounce between Stormy and MB, Sting goes in
> the bag. Several thousand turns later a sac just to tell
> if it's safe to pray and Fire Brand shows up. Now I
> wonder if its worth enchanting FB up or stick with Stormy.
I'd say you stick with Strombringer, unless you get Frost Brand, which
is better than Fire Brand, since most Gehennom creatures are resistant
to fire, but not to cold.
David Damerell
>David Damerell wrote:
>>No, I don't think this is a failure to consider the corner cases, because
>>for many years on rgrn no-one seriously suggested using Magicbane at
>>anything but +2. I really do think that has become a dogma.
>switch back and forth between Magicbane and Stormbringer.
>With that combination I don't feel the need to enchant
>MB past +2.
Well, indeed, I explained elsewhere in the thread why *I* would keep MB at
+2, as well. But I don't think it's sensible to just assume that it should
be at +2 rather than thinking about it, and that's what became a dogma.
--
David Damerell <dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> flcl?
Today is Second Oneiros, July.
Doug Freyburger
> Doug Freyburger wrote:
>
> > MB-only in terms of never wielding any other artifact
> > (or maybe Sting before MB) isn't a usual challenge
> > game but it is more difficult than using Stormy or
> > Frosty or whatever once they arrive.
>
> You really think so?
>
> For me, MagicBane is just a backup for really dire cases and a curse
> magnet; in normal circumstances I don't resort to hand-to-hand combat at
> all with a wizard.
Spells consume mana and mana is a finite resource.
While exploring a new level I'll use attack-school
spells to take out most monsters anywhere near my
level. By level 20 my wizard won't bother with spells
against orcs or whatever just wade through them.
Face a giant or balrog and I'll zap away and fire
daggers. Nymphs get daggers not spells because they
tend to carry mirrors and that decreases luck in a
way that is not easily measured. Mana regenerates
quickly enough that there always seems to be plenty
of it available while exploring except for the first
couple of levels of the mines. I figure that will
stop being true once the Amulet is in hand but until
then exploration mana is unlimited.
While altar camping for books or protection points
the finite resource aspect of mana comes in. I want
to spend every point on create monster spells to
maximize the number of sacrafices before running out
of mana. That means using Stormbringer to kill the
created monsters. As soon as I run out of mana it's
time to resume explorations. Mana is regenerated
fast enough that there is always plenty while
exploring but not so fast that I never run out while
altar camping.
With a wizard I like to advance dagger to Expert and
then select a small number of other hand to hand
weapons classes to Basic depending on what powerful
artifacts arrive during altar camping sessions.
Wizards get enough potential levels that some can
be spent to match a couple of gifted artifacts just
for style reasons. A chaotic wizard getting Werebane
doesn't have any reason but style to actually use
Werebane until a skill slot is offered but style is
fun.
Boudewijn Waijers
> Boudewijn Waijers wrote:
>> For me, MagicBane is just a backup for really dire cases and a curse
>> magnet; in normal circumstances I don't resort to hand-to-hand
>> combat at all with a wizard.
> Spells consume mana and mana is a finite resource.
> While exploring a new level I'll use attack-school
> spells to take out most monsters anywhere near my
> level. By level 20 my wizard won't bother with spells
> against orcs or whatever just wade through them.
Sure. Agains low level monsters, I also don't use spells. In those
cases, though, Magicbane is efficient enough. One blow usually kills
them. No need for something heavier.
> Nymphs get daggers not spells because they
> tend to carry mirrors and that decreases luck in a
> way that is not easily measured.
Don't use your starting force bolt spell on nymphs, but any other attack
spell. If you only have force bolt for offence, leave them asleep, or
set your pet against them, keeping a locked door between you and the two
of them. Only force bolt or a wand of striking will break their mirrors.
> Mana regenerates
> quickly enough that there always seems to be plenty
> of it available while exploring except for the first
> couple of levels of the mines. I figure that will
> stop being true once the Amulet is in hand but until
> then exploration mana is unlimited.
The Eye of the Aethiopica greatly increases your mana regeneration.
PostQuest, you shouldn't have any problems, not even with the (other)
Amulet.
> While altar camping for books or protection points
> the finite resource aspect of mana comes in. I want
> to spend every point on create monster spells to
> maximize the number of sacrafices before running out
> of mana. That means using Stormbringer to kill the
> created monsters.
That just speeds up things a bit. Magicbane still is efficient enough
for my taste (yours may differ), and will respect your pet's life and
loyalty.
> With a wizard I like to advance dagger to Expert and
> then select a small number of other hand to hand
> weapons classes to Basic depending on what powerful
> artifacts arrive during altar camping sessions.
I don't like to carry more than the obligatory 8+ runed daggers and a
single artifact. The rest is dead weight, and left in a stash.
> Wizards get enough potential levels that some can
> be spent to match a couple of gifted artifacts just
> for style reasons. A chaotic wizard getting Werebane
> doesn't have any reason but style to actually use
> Werebane until a skill slot is offered but style is
> fun.
The wizard is a class that I like to promote to 30th level, and I use as
few slots as possible on weapon skills. I like to spend most on spell
slots instead (although I don't normally push all skills to the maximum;
not all are very useful to raise higher than skilled).