[Bug?] Mimic Generated inside a door
John Gibson
on the same square as a closed door. Is this a bug? Have other people
seen this behavior?
John
Daniel Morris
"John Gibson" <john...@NOGOODlosgibsons.us> wrote in message
news:Af-dncMP0KH...@rcn.net...
> On the final level of Sokoban I found a mimic pretending to be a boulder
> on the same square as a closed door. Is this a bug? Have other people
> seen this behavior?
I don't think it's a bug... I've seen this several times.
Danny
chuck
i...@rcn.net:
In a game I played about three days ago, I ran into two different occurances
of monsters on the same square as a closed door. I used 3.3.1 (haven't had
the time to go through the install.unix/install.linux of 3.4.2 yet). I'm
pretty sure one of them was a shrieker but I just can't remember what the
other was although I'm almost positive it wasn't humanoid or animal.
chuck
> I don't think it's a bug... I've seen this several times.
> Danny
>
to appear inside a door...
Dylan O'Donnell
It's not a bug. Mimics are amorphous, so surrounding a door wouldn't be
a problem for it.
--
: Dylan O'Donnell http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/ :
: "Peek-a-boo, I can't see you, everything must be grand; :
: Boo-ka-pee, you can't see me, as long as I've got me head in t'sand..." :
: -- Michael Flanders, "The Ostrich" :
james
What part of it do you consider a bug? Is it that a door symbol
appeared where there could be no door? That might be a bug, but,
if there's reasonably a door on the map, and the mimic appears at
the doorway and mimics a door, what's the problem?
Even a pacifist can get around him. Engrave Elbereth, wake it up,
and it will flee.
John Gibson
<snip>
>>>I don't think it's a bug... I've seen this several times.
>>>Danny
>>>
>>
>>Why is that not a bug? I sure would call it a bug for a monster
>>to appear inside a door...
>
>
> What part of it do you consider a bug? Is it that a door symbol
> appeared where there could be no door? That might be a bug, but,
> if there's reasonably a door on the map, and the mimic appears at
> the doorway and mimics a door, what's the problem?
The mimic appeared as a boulder in the doorway when the map already
indicated that it was a door (because it was Sokoban). It was a dead
giveaway of the mimic. In addition (probably because I was playing
noeGNUd) both the boulder and the doorway remained visible. However on
the minimap (which is in the normal ASCII) the square appeared as a
boulder. If mimics would pretend to be doors when they are on top of one
then I wouldn't consider it a bug.
John
james
John Gibson <john...@NOGOODlosgibsons.us> wrote:
>If mimics would pretend to be doors when they are on top of one
>then I wouldn't consider it a bug.
They do, in the dungeon. Guess they are biased toward mimicing boulders
in soko.
chuck
> a problem for it.
>
topological problem...
chuck
> What part of it do you consider a bug? Is it that a door symbol
> appeared where there could be no door? That might be a bug, but,
> if there's reasonably a door on the map, and the mimic appears at
> the doorway and mimics a door, what's the problem?
The point has been explained clearly enough by others I guess, but just to
make it absolutely clear: Imagine you are say a Trifid (only non-nethack
animate plant I could think of) and part of you is on the outside of your
houses front door part outside in front of the door and the two or so inches
remaining is inside the door itself occupying the wood thereby changing its
density to woods plus that of a plant. Isn't that a undesired result which
should be handled as an exception to wanted behavoir by a game? Or at the
very least handled so that it makes sense in some (admittedly wierd) way in
the game? THAT is a bug. Didn't mean to harp on it too much, but there are
people that don't understand the intracies of what pogramming (of any sort)
can entail and this is such a case.
BWIGLEY
How about if it stretches itself around the door:
___
|||
|||
|||
|||,the middle one being the door.
chuck
> How about if it stretches itself around the door:
> ___
>|||
>|||
>|||
>|||,the middle one being the door.
>
have SOME semblance to reality, and that definately is over the line...
Chris 'Bob' Odorjan
Exactly, I've never seen a mimic stretch itself around a door in real
life either, so it shouldn't happen in Nethack.
--
Chris "Bob" Odorjan - bob...@canada.com
BobNET - http://www.execulink.com/~bobnet/
jasonn...@yahoo.com
very small space around it, then the doorframe, which connects with the
wall; this then would appear to be half a boulder protruding and flush
with a wall.
jasonn...@yahoo.com
________
/m | m\
| m | m |
| m | m |
\__|__/____
the middle part being a door. However, this would NOT appear to be a
boulder in an Open doorway; if the boulder were smaller than the
dimensions of the opening, it would reveal a bisection by a closed
door;
if the boulder were larger than the dimensions of the opening, it would
reveal bisection by an intact wall.
It would be more adventitious to the mimic if it were mimicking the
surface of an existing closed door, or a closed door in an open
archway.
or if the mimic were at least mimicking a boulder in an open doorway,
or if the mimic were mimicking a boulder in a collapsed section of
wall,
Do mimics engulf?-
On that vein, why not have them mimick open spaces; e.g. the mimic
conforms itself to the surface of the open arch/doorway, or the surface
of a narrow corridor space
(either one is a space between two other walls)
then strikes (already has grapple attack) as you attempt to walk
through
or the mimic could fall/enter a pit and mimic normal floor, until you
attempt to walk over it.
John Campbell
It's not much of a stretch, actually, given that there are
critters in the game that are explicitly capable of doing it. Closed
doors in nethack are not hermetically sealed, and amorphous critters -
which includes, but is not limited to, mimics - can pass through them.
This is not a bug, but deliberate behaviour, as evidenced by the message
produced when you see it happen. e.g., "The acid blob oozes under the
door."
I know from observation that acid blobs, puddings and green
slime, fungi, fog clouds, and lights are capable of this. I suspect it's
all b, P, F, j, v, y, and m, and possibly some others I've forgotten.
And that's discounting xorns, earth elementals, ghosts, and shades,
which can pass through closed doors by other means.
--
John Campbell
jcam...@lynn.ci-n.com
Dylan O'Donnell
I've always imagined NetHack mimicry to involve a certain amount of
illusion-projection, rather than necessarily actual shapeshifting:
otherwise it'd be tricky for, say, a giant mimic to pretend to be a
tiny key, or a small mimic to be a boulder (which blocks LOS when
undetected, but can be seen past when you find out what it is). So, we
have a mimic plastering itself over the doorpanels that just makes
itself _look_ like a boulder sitting in a doorway.
chuck
> It's not much of a stretch, actually, given that there are
> critters in the game that are explicitly capable of doing it. Closed
> doors in nethack are not hermetically sealed, and amorphous critters -
> which includes, but is not limited to, mimics - can pass through them.
> This is not a bug, but deliberate behaviour, as evidenced by the message
> produced when you see it happen. e.g., "The acid blob oozes under the
> door."
>
> I know from observation that acid blobs, puddings and green
> slime, fungi, fog clouds, and lights are capable of this. I suspect it's
> all b, P, F, j, v, y, and m, and possibly some others I've forgotten.
> And that's discounting xorns, earth elementals, ghosts, and shades,
> which can pass through closed doors by other means.
>
yes, but I've yet to see a boulder slither under a door...
chuck
> I've always imagined NetHack mimicry to involve a certain amount of
> illusion-projection, rather than necessarily actual shapeshifting:
> otherwise it'd be tricky for, say, a giant mimic to pretend to be a
> tiny key, or a small mimic to be a boulder (which blocks LOS when
> undetected, but can be seen past when you find out what it is). So, we
> have a mimic plastering itself over the doorpanels that just makes
> itself _look_ like a boulder sitting in a doorway.
because I catagorize most of them them silimiar to D&D's player's guide)
about exercising intelligence, but all I can find is Boudjin's (sp? sorry if
so) old one saying that you can't. If you could name me a file name I would
be much obliged. Thanks in advance.
John Campbell
>
> yes, but I've yet to see a boulder slither under a door...
Which part of "MIMICS CAN CHANGE SHAPE" are you not
understanding?
--
John Campbell
jcam...@lynn.ci-n.com
Boudewijn Waijers
> On the off topic matter, I KNOW I have a "spoiler"
> (quotes because I catagorize most of them them silimiar to D&D's
> player's guide) about exercising intelligence,
If you indeed do have such a spoiler, it's wrong.
> but all I can find is Boudjin's (sp? sorry if so) old one saying
> that you can't.
Which is, of course, correct. :-)
It's "Boudewijn", by the way. See my home page,
http://members.home.nl/bwaijers/index.html
for an explanation, or
http://members.home.nl/bwaijers/boudewijn_waijers.wav
for the pronunciation.
> If you could name me a file name I would be much obliged.
No need to. The spoiler you have by me is correct. Intelligence cannot
be exercised.
--
Boudewijn Waijers (kroisos at home.nl).
The garden of happiness is surrounded by a wall so low only children
can look over it. - "the Orphanage of Hits", former Dutch radio show.
chuck
news:Xplae.450$Nc.328@trnddc08:
> Which part of "MIMICS CAN CHANGE SHAPE" are you not
> understanding?
then back to a boulder? VERY unlikely for random events...
Antoine
Dylan O'Donnell wrote:
> "jasonn...@yahoo.com" <jasonn...@yahoo.com> writes:
> > especially a closed door- one generally imagines a closed door
with a
> > very small space around it, then the doorframe, which connects with
the
> > wall; this then would appear to be half a boulder protruding and
flush
> > with a wall.
>
> I've always imagined NetHack mimicry to involve a certain amount of
> illusion-projection, rather than necessarily actual shapeshifting:
> otherwise it'd be tricky for, say, a giant mimic to pretend to be a
> tiny key, or a small mimic to be a boulder (which blocks LOS when
> undetected, but can be seen past when you find out what it is). So,
we
> have a mimic plastering itself over the doorpanels that just makes
> itself _look_ like a boulder sitting in a doorway.
Or perhaps, that it still looks like a mimic and nothing like a
boulder, but it makes you delude yourself into thinking that it looks
like a boulder! And into thinking that such a thing could possibly
happen.
A.
chuck
i...@rcn.net:
> james wrote:
> The mimic appeared as a boulder in the doorway when the map already
> indicated that it was a door (because it was Sokoban). It was a dead
> giveaway of the mimic. In addition (probably because I was playing
> noeGNUd) both the boulder and the doorway remained visible. However on
> the minimap (which is in the normal ASCII) the square appeared as a
> boulder. If mimics would pretend to be doors when they are on top of one
> then I wouldn't consider it a bug.
or if the door was open I guess...
chuck
>
> It's "Boudewijn", by the way. See my home page,
> http://members.home.nl/bwaijers/index.html
> for an explanation, or
> http://members.home.nl/bwaijers/boudewijn_waijers.wav
> for the pronunciation.
by Trevor Powell which it says you can't exercise, gives a couple ways to
raise it (which is probably what I remembered and the says
SPOILER BELOW BEWARE!!! SPOILER BELOW BEWARE!!! SPOILER BELOW BEWARE!!!
applying a unicorn horn repeatedly will increase intelligence. Since it is
something done more than once I would classify that as "exercise" despite the
non-standard method (i.e. not reading scrolls, spellbooks etc.)
Janis Papanagnou
Applying a unicorn horn will just _restore_ lost intelligence (eg. due to
mind flayer attacks); otherwise it will not increase your intelligence.
You may occasionally increase your intelligence by eating mind flayer meat
or drinking potions of gain ability.
The code has two comments about increasing intelligence (and charisma):
attrib.c (270):
if (i == A_INT || i == A_CHA) return; /* can't exercise these */
attrib.c (394):
if(i == A_INT || i == A_CHA) continue;/* can't exercise these */
Janis
Dylan O'Donnell
> You may occasionally increase your intelligence by eating mind flayer meat
> or drinking potions of gain ability.
Also blessed potions of enlightenment.
(Magic fountains can have a gain ability effect as well, but they're
harder to spot. Thrones are a chancier business, but you may get
lucky.)
> The code has two comments about increasing intelligence (and charisma):
> attrib.c (270):
> if (i == A_INT || i == A_CHA) return; /* can't exercise these */
> attrib.c (394):
> if(i == A_INT || i == A_CHA) continue;/* can't exercise these */
And indeed, nor does any place try to; these lines are just backstops.
Martin Read
[gaining intelligence]
>(Magic fountains can have a gain ability effect as well, but they're
>harder to spot. Thrones are a chancier business, but you may get
>lucky.)
Disappointingly, eating a helm of brilliance while metallivorous does
not increase intelligence.
--
Martin Read - my opinions are my own. share them if you wish.
My roguelike games page (including my BSD-licenced roguelike) can be found at:
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~mpread/roguelikes.html
Everyone expected the Bavarian Inquisition.
Dylan O'Donnell
> psm...@spod-central.org wrote:
> [gaining intelligence]
> >(Magic fountains can have a gain ability effect as well, but they're
> >harder to spot. Thrones are a chancier business, but you may get
> >lucky.)
>
> Disappointingly, eating a helm of brilliance while metallivorous does
> not increase intelligence.
It wouldn't persist when you polyed back anyway, so it's not that much
of a loss.
Rast
> Martin Read <mpr...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:
> > Disappointingly, eating a helm of brilliance while metallivorous does
> > not increase intelligence.
>
> It wouldn't persist when you polyed back anyway, so it's not that much
> of a loss.
I thought the mental stats were unchanged by polymorphing.
--
"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
Dylan O'Donnell
> Dylan O'Donnell wrote on 25 Apr 2005 11:17:57 +0100:
> > Martin Read <mpr...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:
>
> > > Disappointingly, eating a helm of brilliance while metallivorous does
> > > not increase intelligence.
> >
> > It wouldn't persist when you polyed back anyway, so it's not that much
> > of a loss.
>
> I thought the mental stats were unchanged by polymorphing.
No, all six attributes are saved when you polymorph, and reset to
those values when you polymorph again; see the u.macurr stuff in
polymon() and polyman().
Rast
> Rast <ra...@hotmail.com> writes:
> > Dylan O'Donnell wrote on 25 Apr 2005 11:17:57 +0100:
> > > Martin Read <mpr...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:
> >
> > > > Disappointingly, eating a helm of brilliance while metallivorous does
> > > > not increase intelligence.
> > >
> > > It wouldn't persist when you polyed back anyway, so it's not that much
> > > of a loss.
> >
> > I thought the mental stats were unchanged by polymorphing.
>
> No, all six attributes are saved when you polymorph, and reset to
> those values when you polymorph again; see the u.macurr stuff in
> polymon() and polyman().
Thanks.
Odd. In most games, including TGTNIN, mental stats are not changed by
chuck
news:8664yb9...@strackenz.spod-central.org:
> Janis Papanagnou <Janis_Pa...@hotmail.com> writes:
>> You may occasionally increase your intelligence by eating mind flayer meat
>> or drinking potions of gain ability.
>
> Also blessed potions of enlightenment.
>
> (Magic fountains can have a gain ability effect as well, but they're
> harder to spot. Thrones are a chancier business, but you may get
> lucky.)
PLEASE read the spoiler mentioned as what you are saying is mentioned in
there as well...
chuck
news:d4hl1v$svf$1...@online.de:
> [ spoiler ]
>
> chuck wrote:
>>>Which is, of course, correct. :-)
>>>
>>>It's "Boudewijn", by the way. See my home page,
>>> http://members.home.nl/bwaijers/index.html
>>>for an explanation, or
>>> http://members.home.nl/bwaijers/boudewijn_waijers.wav
>>>for the pronunciation.
>>
>> I actually did find the file I mentioned which was Nethack Instadeath
Spoiler
>> by Trevor Powell which it says you can't exercise, gives a couple ways to
>> raise it (which is probably what I remembered and the says
>> SPOILER BELOW BEWARE!!! SPOILER BELOW BEWARE!!! SPOILER BELOW BEWARE!!!
>>
>> applying a unicorn horn repeatedly will increase intelligence. Since it is
>> something done more than once I would classify that as "exercise" despite
the
>> non-standard method (i.e. not reading scrolls, spellbooks etc.)
>
> Applying a unicorn horn will just _restore_ lost intelligence (eg. due to
> mind flayer attacks); otherwise it will not increase your intelligence.
PLEASE read the spoiler mentioned as what you are saying is mentioned in
there as well...
--
lisp LIVES!!!
Janis Papanagnou
>>
>>>by Trevor Powell which it says you can't exercise, gives a couple ways to
>>>raise it (which is probably what I remembered and the says
>>>SPOILER BELOW BEWARE!!! SPOILER BELOW BEWARE!!! SPOILER BELOW BEWARE!!!
>>>
>>>applying a unicorn horn repeatedly will increase intelligence. Since it is
>>>something done more than once I would classify that as "exercise" despite
>
> the
>
>>>non-standard method (i.e. not reading scrolls, spellbooks etc.)
>>
>>Applying a unicorn horn will just _restore_ lost intelligence (eg. due to
>>mind flayer attacks); otherwise it will not increase your intelligence.
>
>
>
> PLEASE read the spoiler mentioned as what you are saying is mentioned in
> there as well...
I'm uncertain what you intend to tell us here. I read your statement
>>>
>>>"applying a unicorn horn repeatedly will increase intelligence."
>>>
as if you mean to say you can exercise 'Int', which is not the case,
whether it is written in any spoiler or not. (Personally I don't read
spoiler, whether wrong or accurate, since I have the code available.)
I assume that the mentioned spoiler also contains correct information.
But I was responding to a - quoted or not - wrong statement.
Janis
chuck
>> PLEASE read the spoiler mentioned as what you are saying is mentioned in
>> there as well...
(Personally I don't read
> spoiler, whether wrong or accurate, since I have the code available.)
Then I'll have no alternative than to ignore your response (not personal,
just makes your response an uninformed one)
David Tillotson
>> (Personally I don't read
>>spoiler, whether wrong or accurate, since I have the code available.)
>
> Then I'll have no alternative than to ignore your response (not personal,
> just makes your response an uninformed one)
Yes, it is annoying when you get what seems like reliable information
from the source code, only to discover that particular function has been
overridden by a spoiler file ...
Atillo, died while helpless from laughter
Martin Read
>Odd. In most games, including TGTNIN, mental stats are not changed by
>polymorphing.
Er. In at least some editions of the canonical GTNIN, some forms of
polymorph have a chance of affecting the mind, and if they do, the
transformation becomes permanent.
Janis Papanagnou
(You would have alternatives, if you were aware of these.)
There are inaccurate and even wrong spoilers out there; apparently you
haven't heard about it. And you also lack to verify information by the
code.
There ARE accurate and up-to-date spoilers out there, but you ought to
know which ones are reliable and which are not.
You may keep on ignoring expertise and go on believe what *anyone* has
written.
But don't post mis-information, chuck!
Janis
chuck
> (You would have alternatives, if you were aware of these.)
>
> There are inaccurate and even wrong spoilers out there; apparently you
> haven't heard about it. And you also lack to verify information by the
> code.
>
> There ARE accurate and up-to-date spoilers out there, but you ought to
> know which ones are reliable and which are not.
>
> You may keep on ignoring expertise and go on believe what *anyone* has
> written.
>
> But don't post mis-information, chuck!
such spoiler period. I believe I have implied this in my previous messages...
chuck
> Yes, it is annoying when you get what seems like reliable information
> from the source code, only to discover that particular function has been
> overridden by a spoiler file ...
your message honestly: party b (janis) had not read the spoiler, therefore
didn't know what it said AT ALL, therefore couldn't comment on it in any way.
Heikki Moilanen
> look jerk, is spite of the fact that I wasn't addressing you
Plonk.
-Heikki
jasonn...@yahoo.com
Ken Cuvelier
You're being a bit blind here, chuck. The insta-death spoiler you're
reading phrases the section on intelligence rather poorly. You cannot
*exercise* intelligence by repeated application of a unicorn horn;
rather, you can *regain intelligence lost due to mindflayer attacks* by
doing same. It's easy to see how the source document can be read to
construe a different result, but that does not mean that interpretation
is what will actually happen in the game.
-Ken
Richard Bos
[ Learn to quote. Use attributions. ]
> > Yes, it is annoying when you get what seems like reliable information
> > from the source code, only to discover that particular function has been
> > overridden by a spoiler file ...
> look jerk, is spite of the fact that I wasn't addressing you
Get some clue, will you? This is a newsgroup, not an email conversation.
_Everybody_ addresses everybody else.
>I will answer
> your message honestly: party b (janis) had not read the spoiler, therefore
> didn't know what it said AT ALL, therefore couldn't comment on it in any way.
Nevertheless, he was correct, and you were wrong. Now isn't that just
_awful_?
Richard
chuck
> reading phrases the section on intelligence rather poorly. You cannot
have read the spoiler.
> *exercise* intelligence by repeated application of a unicorn horn;
> rather, you can *regain intelligence lost due to mindflayer attacks* by
> doing same. It's easy to see how the source document can be read to
> construe a different result, but that does not mean that interpretation
> is what will actually happen in the game.
fair enough I will take that as fact. You HAVE read that spoiler right?
Ken Cuvelier
>>You're being a bit blind here, chuck. The insta-death spoiler you're
>>reading phrases the section on intelligence rather poorly. You cannot
>
> No, you are the only person here besides myself that even IMPLIES that they
> have read the spoiler.
It's really beside the point whether someone has read the spoiler, if
they are indeed knowledgeable about how the game actually works.
Spoilers are not the source code for the game, so someone whose answer
to your question is based on knowledge of the actual source code for the
game should be considered more authoritative on the subject! But read on
below...
>
>
>>*exercise* intelligence by repeated application of a unicorn horn;
>>rather, you can *regain intelligence lost due to mindflayer attacks* by
>>doing same. It's easy to see how the source document can be read to
>>construe a different result, but that does not mean that interpretation
>>is what will actually happen in the game.
>
> fair enough I will take that as fact. You HAVE read that spoiler right?
Yes, I have read the spoiler, and I think it gives correct information
when read in proper context. Unfortunately, it's easy to get the
context wrong when reading the line about unicorn horns.
-Ken
Kevin Wayne
> chuck <chu...@nil.car> wrote:
>>I will answer
>>your message honestly: party b (janis) had not read the spoiler, therefore
>>didn't know what it said AT ALL, therefore couldn't comment on it in any way.
>
> Nevertheless, he was correct, and you were wrong. Now isn't that just
> _awful_?
No, Richard, you just don't get it. Chuck is *never wrong.* It is
impossible. It can't happen. You have to say it like a mantra:
Chuck is never wrong.
Chuck is never wrong.
Chuck is never wrong.
Keep saying it until you believe it. You have to BELIEVE!
--
Kevin Wayne
"For the judges of the lowest grade, to whom my acquaintences belong,
haven't the power to grant a final aquittal, that power is reserved for
the highest court of all, which is quite inaccessable to you, to me, and
to all of us. What the prospects are up there we do not know and, I may
say in passing, do not even want to know." --Franz Kafka, *The Trial*
chuck
news:1173ddc...@corp.supernews.com:
> It's really beside the point whether someone has read the spoiler, if
> they are indeed knowledgeable about how the game actually works.
> Spoilers are not the source code for the game, so someone whose answer
> to your question is based on knowledge of the actual source code for the
> game should be considered more authoritative on the subject! But read on
> below...
my point was really two fold 1) if there is a bug in the code that allows a
method of increasing intelligence and 2) if that spoiler had found such bug.
Nobody but me seemed to see that possibilty though...
Ken Cuvelier
Using your logic, quaffing potions of restore ability should cause
intelligence to go up. It is clear to me that the author of the
instadeath spoiler felt that anyone reading that section would
understand from reading it that there is hope for regaining lost
intelligence due to mindflayer attacks, but no hope for exercising
intelligence when intelligence has not been lost.
-Ken
Epworthian
And yet, when certain people, who KNOW how the game works (from having
played it and/or the source code), told you that there was not such a
bug, you discounted them (in a somewhat antagonistic fashion) merely
because they admitted to not having read the particular spoiler in
question.
Interesting way of going about seeking information, there.
chuck
news:1114776456....@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
>
> chuck wrote:
>> Ken Cuvelier <kvcfl...@SPAMyahoo.com> wrote in
>> news:1173ddc...@corp.supernews.com:
>>
> And yet, when certain people, who KNOW how the game works (from having
> played it and/or the source code), told you that there was not such a
> bug, you discounted them (in a somewhat antagonistic fashion) merely
> because they admitted to not having read the particular spoiler in
> question.
>
> Interesting way of going about seeking information, there.
>
>
Interesting literacy skills you have as you seem to have completely missed my
first point.
chuck
> chuck wrote:
> Using your logic, quaffing potions of restore ability should cause
> intelligence to go up. It is clear to me that the author of the
> instadeath spoiler felt that anyone reading that section would
> understand from reading it that there is hope for regaining lost
> intelligence due to mindflayer attacks, but no hope for exercising
> intelligence when intelligence has not been lost.
>
> -Ken
no, a potions of restore ability is not the same thing nor has all the
effects of a unicorn horn. Exercising using potions is hardly a logical
comparison.
Ken Cuvelier
What I was trying to point out is that you are deliberately ignoring
language that precedes the line mentioning use of unicorn horns. The
instadeath spoiler states thusly:
> Remember that intelligence cannot be exercised like other statistics
Anything you read after that should be taken either as ways to gain
intelligence (*not exercise*) or to restore lost points of intelligence.
So your theory of some hidden hint at a discovered bug seems lacking.
-Ken
chuck
> language that precedes the line mentioning use of unicorn horns. The
> instadeath spoiler states thusly:
>
>> Remember that intelligence cannot be exercised like other statistics
>
> Anything you read after that should be taken either as ways to gain
> intelligence (*not exercise*) or to restore lost points of intelligence.
> So your theory of some hidden hint at a discovered bug seems lacking.
>
> -Ken
unicorn horn. Now I suppose that means that another tool (which the unicorn
horn is) say a lockpick, would have no affect on dexterity?
chuck
> And yet, when certain people, who KNOW how the game works (from having
> played it and/or the source code), told you that there was not such a
> bug, you discounted them (in a somewhat antagonistic fashion) merely
> because they admitted to not having read the particular spoiler in
> question.
>
> Interesting way of going about seeking information, there.
>
>
questions, which is definitely not the case. I generally have to go by the
bard's saying, I think he doth protest too much.
Ken Cuvelier
Okay, point by point, here is what I'm saying. This whole excursion
started with you quoting from the instadeath spoiler and interpreting it
as saying that intelligence might be exercisable using a unicorn horn.
As far as I can tell, your conclusion was reached by reading this line
(again quoting from said spoiler):
> so the only ways to raise it are: potions of gain ability, potions of
> restore ability, blessed potions of enlightenment, eating a mind
> flayer corpse, or repeated application of a unicorn horn.
The logic that seems to apply to your conclusion is that anything in
that list can cause intelligence to be gained where none was lost.
Using tools can exercise stats that are subject to being exercised, but
intelligence is not among those stats, which is spelled out quite
clearly *immediately* before the part I just quoted (see above).
There is no way, taking the entire sentence in the original text of the
spoiler, to come away with the notion that repeated use of a unicorn
horn could result in your character gaining intelligence where none had
been previously lost. Taking also the comments from persons
knowledgeable about the source, it seems no one else holds with your
position.
-Ken
Richard Bos
_If_. There is no such bug. Learn to read code, man.
> Nobody but me seemed to see that possibilty though...
That's because everybody but you knows that this possibility is not, in
fact, the case.
Richard
Rob Ellwood
No need for the hint: I plonked him already. (He's in the
killfile folder marked "obnoxious".) Thanks for trying to help out,
though.
--
Rob "Ken Cuvelier: do you need tech support setting up a
killfile? (Hint, hint.)" Ellwood
Ken Cuvelier
> --
> Rob "Ken Cuvelier: do you need tech support setting up a
> killfile? (Hint, hint.)" Ellwood
*grin*
Sorry if I've cluttered the newsgroup with futility lately. I may yet go
to the trouble of filtering out the obviously clueless, trollish or
overall obnoxious.
-Ken
chuck
I assume you will also apply that to those who troll for ones to abuse?