Dealing with mind flayers -- is this cheating?
Artemis the Ranger
after a mind flayer, which I had never dared to tackle close up
before. Big mistake. My intelligence was down at about 4 before I
zapped it with a wand of death.
My unihorn took care of the intelligence drain quickly enough, but to
my dismay I'd lost about half my inventory identities (and my level
maps too, but I didn't know that at the time.) Fortunately, I had a
fairly good idea of what I had where in my inventory and BoH, and I
was able to reconstruct most of my identities in fairly short order.
Except for my wands, that it. I had been carrying around about 20
wands, most of different types, and had forgotten about 3/4 of their
identities. The only two I remembered were the wand of death, because
I remembered very clearly the number of charges on it, and my wand of
cancellation, because...I had labelled it, "DON'T PUT IN BAG OF
HOLDING!!!"
My question is, is this method of dealing with the results of mind
flayer attacks cheating? What if I had labelled ALL my wands prior to
going after the mind flayer? I think the basic premise is that you're
not supposed to know anything your character doesn't know, so it's a
no-no to write down maps or object identities. But if your character
gives an individual wand a particular name, perhaps they could
remember this even if their knowledge of the wand's identity vanishes.
(Something like, "Oh yeah, I had a wand of death over here in my back
pocket. I don't remember anything about what it looked like,
though...")
And how come the BUC status of objects and the number of charges on
wands isn't lost during a mind-flayer attack? I'm more likely to
forget that *this particular wand* has exactly four charges left on it
and has been recharged once, then to forget having ever seen any wands
of this variety.
Any thoughts?
Artemis the Ranger
Big Al
I assume that when you name a group of objects, you mark them in a way
that you will recognize them later even though the true name and all is
forgotten. The other things you can sense like the weight of a full clip
or a power of 4 charges, but are not sure chages of what kind.
Big Al in Seattle
William David Thweatt
: A little while ago in my current game I decided that I was ready to go
: after a mind flayer, which I had never dared to tackle close up
: before. Big mistake. My intelligence was down at about 4 before I
: zapped it with a wand of death.
: My unihorn took care of the intelligence drain quickly enough, but to
: my dismay I'd lost about half my inventory identities (and my level
: maps too, but I didn't know that at the time.) Fortunately, I had a
: fairly good idea of what I had where in my inventory and BoH, and I
: was able to reconstruct most of my identities in fairly short order.
: Except for my wands, that it. I had been carrying around about 20
: wands, most of different types, and had forgotten about 3/4 of their
: identities. The only two I remembered were the wand of death, because
: I remembered very clearly the number of charges on it, and my wand of
: cancellation, because...I had labelled it, "DON'T PUT IN BAG OF
: HOLDING!!!"
: My question is, is this method of dealing with the results of mind
: flayer attacks cheating? What if I had labelled ALL my wands prior to
: going after the mind flayer? I think the basic premise is that you're
: not supposed to know anything your character doesn't know, so it's a
: no-no to write down maps or object identities. But if your character
: gives an individual wand a particular name, perhaps they could
: remember this even if their knowledge of the wand's identity vanishes.
: (Something like, "Oh yeah, I had a wand of death over here in my back
: pocket. I don't remember anything about what it looked like,
: though...")
I don't think it is cheating. I kind of think naming classes of objects
is like your character writing on a notepad, "Crystal wand is wand of
speed," after watching bugs speed up on the floor. After ID-ing the wand,
then meeting an unfriendly mind flayer and forgetting what the wand is,
you can always look it up in your notepad.
--
--
William "Dave" Thweatt
Robert E. Welch Postdoctoral Fellow
Chemistry Department
Rice University
Houston, TX
thw...@ruf.rice.edu
dave.t...@us.army.mil
Edwin Thomson
> I assume that when you name a group of objects, you mark them in a way
> that you will recognize them later even though the true name and all is
> forgotten. The other things you can sense like the weight of a full clip
> or a power of 4 charges, but are not sure chages of what kind.
You engrave "Wand of Death(1:2)" on the yellow sticky note.--More--
You stick the note onto the aluminium wand.
Chaos Master
> My question is, is this method of dealing with the results of mind
> flayer attacks cheating?
IMHO it isn't.
It's the same as writing in your notes:
"zinc wand : wand of death
combat boots : water walking boots"
etc etc etc...
--
E-mail address is fake. Please reply to the group!
Bruce
> Artemis the Ranger scribbled:
>> My question is, is this method of dealing with the results of mind
>> flayer attacks cheating?
> IMHO it isn't.
> It's the same as writing in your notes:
> "zinc wand : wand of death
> combat boots : water walking boots"
Of course, some consider taking identifying notes such as the above to
be cheating in itself.
--
Bruce Labbate | Leave the gun.
shiftless layabout | Take the cannolis.
| - Clemenza
|
Martin Read
S. <NO...@NONE.COM> wrote:
>sol...@gehennom.net says...
>> Of course, some consider taking identifying notes such as the above to
>> be cheating in itself.
>
>within the context of the game.
Of course, any items I *possess*, I can use single-object #name to track
their type :)
m.
--
\_\/_/| Martin Read - my opinions are my own. share them if you wish.
\ / | a passer by was staring deep into your open skirt as we lay there
\/ | in the dirt as we lay there in the dirt should we make ourselves do
------+ painful things? and do they really hurt? -- Naevus, "Harm"
Stanislav Traykov
> sol...@gehennom.net says...
>> Chaos Master <cmtrap...@uol.com.br> deserves a cookie for saying:
>> > Artemis the Ranger scribbled:
>>
>> >> My question is, is this method of dealing with the results of mind
>> >> flayer attacks cheating?
>>
>> > IMHO it isn't.
>> > It's the same as writing in your notes:
>>
>> > "zinc wand : wand of death
>> > combat boots : water walking boots"
>>
>> Of course, some consider taking identifying notes such as the above to
>> be cheating in itself.
>
>
> within the context of the game.
It's strange enough from a logical point of view that in a given game a
zinc wand has always the same functionality. Anyway, the (magical)
process of identifying it just reveals the mapping of zinc to this
functionality.
Whatever the perception of this association might be like, it is more
real to the character and she or he is _expected_ to remember it. This
is also because they have richer (visual, haptic, aural) perception and
are dealing with such important things as life and death, the avoidance
of the latter being sometimes courtesy of wands. The player however, may
forget these associations, and is thus assisted by the interface which
kindly replaces zinc with a more meaningful name, once the mapping has
been discovered.
How the mind flayers' psychic energy reaches this interface and/or
supposedly the player's mind is a bit of a mystery. Perhaps, as no real
forgetting is possible, this is a "best effort".
In any case, if I cannot be accused because I happen to remember what
ELBIB YLOH, HACKEM MUCHE, etc. stand for, why can I be accused if I
wrote it down? Esp., would you recommend players, in order to avoid
cheating, to hit `\' and memorize the entire list, when they see a mind
flayer coming? Also, would it be cheating if I turned off the "assisting
features" of the interface and let it use the descriptive names (ELBIB
YLOH, pink potion, ...) for everything (with the `\' command left
intact)? Then, I would, just as the real character, learn to distinguish
objects by their use and would have little problems remembering what my
stuff is (the game will be a bit[?] more tedious however).
--
Stanislav Traykov
Bruce
> S. wrote on 09/24/2003 10:09 AM:
>> Yep. Any IDs the character loses, stay lost until they're re-identified
>> within the context of the game.
> It's strange enough from a logical point of view that in a given game
> a zinc wand has always the same functionality. Anyway, the (magical)
> process of identifying it just reveals the mapping of zinc to this
> functionality.
True, true.
> Whatever the perception of this association might be like, it is more
> real to the character and she or he is _expected_ to remember it. This
> is also because they have richer (visual, haptic, aural) perception and
> are dealing with such important things as life and death, the avoidance
> of the latter being sometimes courtesy of wands. The player however, may
> forget these associations, and is thus assisted by the interface which
> kindly replaces zinc with a more meaningful name, once the mapping has
> been discovered.
Again, true. The character is expected to remember certain things.
Unless, of course, his or her brain is devoured by skull-burrowing
tentacles. Hypothetically.
> How the mind flayers' psychic energy reaches this interface and/or
> supposedly the player's mind is a bit of a mystery. Perhaps, as no
> real forgetting is possible, this is a "best effort".
Definitely. Everything in the game is, to some extent, a best effort.
Any effects on the interface are simply representative of changes
in-game. If the interface is assisting you with certain associations
that the character remembers on his or her own, all help from the
interface should vanish when a character forgets those associations
in-game. Meaning, IMO, that all #namings on any forgotten objects
should be wiped as well. In the current situation, where #namings
remain, I consider any #namings designed to circumvent amnesia or mind
flayer attacks to be in poor taste at best and cheating at worst.
> In any case, if I cannot be accused because I happen to remember what
> ELBIB YLOH, HACKEM MUCHE, etc. stand for, why can I be accused if I
> wrote it down?
Once it's IDed, the game "writes it down" for you by changing the name
in the interface. Writing it down out of game as well serves no purpose
except in preparation for amnesia.
> Esp., would you recommend players, in order to avoid cheating, to hit
> `\' and memorize the entire list, when they see a mind flayer coming?
No.
> Also, would it be cheating if I turned off the "assisting features" of
> the interface and let it use the descriptive names (ELBIB YLOH, pink
> potion, ...) for everything (with the `\' command left intact)? Then,
> I would, just as the real character, learn to distinguish objects by
> their use and would have little problems remembering what my stuff is
> (the game will be a bit[?] more tedious however).
It certainly removes the best-effort mechanism for amnesia, effectively
making amnesia a non-issue, but I think the downside of having to
remember everything without interface help is more than a balance.
--
Bruce Labbate | Wow! Santa's head came
shiftless layabout | off easier than I thought!
| - Bun-Bun
|
t...@no.com
>It certainly removes the best-effort mechanism for amnesia, effectively
>making amnesia a non-issue, but I think the downside of having to
>remember everything without interface help is more than a balance.
but it still (virtually) removes 1/3 charges of your books and forces
you to relearn all your spells, or ? this can be quite annoying if you
have spread them over several containers. you may also be interrupted
while relearning your favorite book, wasting another books charge.
Dan McGuirk
> but it still (virtually) removes 1/3 charges of your books and forces
> you to relearn all your spells, or ? this can be quite annoying if you
> have spread them over several containers. you may also be interrupted
> while relearning your favorite book, wasting another books charge.
You only use up the "charge" when you successfully complete the reading,
not when you're interrupted.
Jonathan Ellis
"Bruce" <sol...@gehennom.net> wrote in message
news:bks94m$1k9$1...@news-int.gatech.edu...
I don't. If you #name an object class, what difference is this from
your character taking out a notepad from his inside pocket, and
writing down "ah, zinc wands are wands of magic missile". That way, if
he ever gets his *brain* eaten, he can go and look at his hypothetical
notepad, assuming he is still intelligent enough to be able to read.
(How about wiping all #namings if intelligence drops to 5 or less?)
Jonathan.
Richard Llewellyn Smith
> Chaos Master <cmtrap...@uol.com.br> deserves a cookie for saying:
>> Artemis the Ranger scribbled:
>
>>> My question is, is this method of dealing with the results of mind
>>> flayer attacks cheating?
>
>> IMHO it isn't.
>> It's the same as writing in your notes:
>
>> "zinc wand : wand of death
>> combat boots : water walking boots"
>
> Of course, some consider taking identifying notes such as the above to
> be cheating in itself.
The player's option of doing either could be easily removed by the
program by simply re-shuffling the description of all unidentified
objects after a successful amnesia attack.
David Damerell
>The player's option of doing either could be easily removed by the
>program by simply re-shuffling the description of all unidentified
>objects after a successful amnesia attack.
This doesn't work for everything. For instance, players could
intentionally suffer amnesia attacks in order to shuffle the set of
potentially edible rings.
--
David Damerell <dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> Distortion Field!
Bruce
> I don't. If you #name an object class, what difference is this from
> your character taking out a notepad from his inside pocket, and
> writing down "ah, zinc wands are wands of magic missile". That way, if
> he ever gets his *brain* eaten, he can go and look at his hypothetical
> notepad, assuming he is still intelligent enough to be able to read.
If my character didn't think to bring a key, a lamp, or pants, I'm not
assuming he brought a notepad. ;) Anyway, is he carrying around ink
and a quill, too?
--
Bruce Labbate | Kay - Do you know how naive you sound,
shiftless layabout | Michael? Presidents and Senators
| don't have men killed!
| Michael - Oh. Who's being naive, Kay?
DavidASim
>If my character didn't think to bring a key, a lamp, or pants, I'm not
>assuming he brought a notepad. ;) Anyway, is he carrying around ink
>and a quill, too?
Hmmm... I guess if you were playing genoless (and thus at risk of MF attack)
and in the process of cutting useful paths for escaping from the dungeon, it
might be worth leaving a few roadsigns to counter the effects of forgetting
maps: engraving ^^^^^ or <<<vvv or something on the stairs to point you in the
right direction on the way back. OTOH, doing it to remember your inventory
might be a bit cumbersome.
d.
nyra
>
> Stanislav Traykov <stanisla...@tortoises.org> deserves a cookie for saying:
> > S. wrote on 09/24/2003 10:09 AM:
> >> Yep. Any IDs the character loses, stay lost until they're re-identified
> >> within the context of the game.
Which can consist of simply re-naming the objects in question to the
remembered identities...
[Amnesia partially destroys all sorts of item and place knowledge
acquired]
> Meaning, IMO, that all #namings on any forgotten objects
> should be wiped as well.
Questionable - if you assume that the individual namings are made by
actually scratching something into the surface of the item with a
sharp object, or if they're in some other way equivalent to actually
sticking a post-it note on the named object, it'd be extremely
illogical if amnesia removed such very material aide-memoires.
Of course, if individual naming is physical it is a bit strange that
_un-individual_ naming information apparently is only kept inside the
brain, where it simply isn't safe.
> In the current situation, where #namings
> remain, I consider any #namings designed to circumvent amnesia or mind
> flayer attacks to be in poor taste at best and cheating at worst.
Say, if you make such notes _in the game_, i.e. scratch some key
identities into the floor with a hard gem on a particularly important
level - would you consider it cheating to actually go to, say, the up
staircase on the Castle level and read what's engraved into the floor
there?
It would still be an action that only has a use as mind flayer
insurance, but it would achieve this by game-internal
"outside-of-the-brain" information storage and making mind flayers
less harmful is a sensible thing to do from an in-game point of view.
As long as the DevTeam doesn't allow individual #namings to be wiped
out by amnesia, i assume that such information is stored by visibly
marking the object and thus naturally immune to amnesia attacks; using
this to circumvent amnesiac identity loss is in the current state of
the game _not cheating_; at worst it can be considered an abuse -
exploiting a shortcoming of the program.
--
Das Mittel dieser Schrift / Macht, dass dich kein' Kugel trifft.
Asa vitom rahoremarhi ahe menalem renah oremi nasiore ene nahores ore
eldit ita ardes inabe ine nie nei alomade sas ani ita ahe elime arnam
asa locre rahel nei vivet aroseli ditan Veloselas Herodan ebi menises
asa elitira eve harsari erida sacer elachimai nei elerisa.
- H.J.C.v.Grimmelshausen, Simplicissimus Teutsch
Kent Paul Dolan
> If my character didn't think to bring a key, a lamp, or pants, I'm not
> assuming he brought a notepad. ;) Anyway, is he carrying around ink
> and a quill, too?
This game just _really_ needs an engineer character, so we can have a
pocket protector; perhaps even as the quest artifact.
xanthian, ripping off Dilbert for fun and profit.
PHB as the arch-nemesis
Wally as the Quest Master (he'll delegate _anything_)
Asok as the pet
...
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
Stanislav Traykov
> Stanislav Traykov <stanisla...@tortoises.org> deserves a cookie for saying:
> Meaning, IMO, that all #namings on any forgotten objects
> should be wiped as well. In the current situation, where #namings
> remain, I consider any #namings designed to circumvent amnesia or mind
> flayer attacks to be in poor taste at best and cheating at worst.
Naming, as I understand it, is like engraving something on the object.
You can't differentiate between two potions of water for example (that's
why they always stack:) but if you inscribe something on one of them,
you'll be able to distinguish them. Same thing for wands: in NetHack
zinc wands all look alike, but you name them because you want to
distinguish them.. There's no way the character really remembers all
that named stuff.
>> In any case, if I cannot be accused because I happen to remember what
>> ELBIB YLOH, HACKEM MUCHE, etc. stand for, why can I be accused if I
>> wrote it down?
>
> Once it's IDed, the game "writes it down" for you by changing the name
> in the interface. Writing it down out of game as well serves no purpose
> except in preparation for amnesia.
This ain't really an argument is it? You cannot say "it's cheating
because it serves no other purpose than for what I'm arguing is
cheating". Besides, I myself sometimes note (though admittedly won't
write down) scroll names and am likely to magic marker a "read me"
scroll, since it's shorter than "enchant weapon".
>> Esp., would you recommend players, in order to avoid cheating, to hit
>> `\' and memorize the entire list, when they see a mind flayer coming?
>
> No.
Why? Because it's boring? It would be good strategy though..
>> Also, would it be cheating if I turned off the "assisting features" of
>> the interface and let it use the descriptive names (ELBIB YLOH, pink
>> potion, ...) for everything (with the `\' command left intact)? Then,
>> I would, just as the real character, learn to distinguish objects by
>> their use and would have little problems remembering what my stuff is
>> (the game will be a bit[?] more tedious however).
>
> It certainly removes the best-effort mechanism for amnesia, effectively
> making amnesia a non-issue, but I think the downside of having to
> remember everything without interface help is more than a balance.
Well.. I'll admit that in the end it serves its purpose, but only with
some "cooperation" from the player :-)
--
Stanislav Traykov
Bruce
> Bruce wrote on 09/24/2003 04:19 PM:
>> Meaning, IMO, that all #namings on any forgotten objects
>> should be wiped as well. In the current situation, where #namings
>> remain, I consider any #namings designed to circumvent amnesia or mind
>> flayer attacks to be in poor taste at best and cheating at worst.
> Naming, as I understand it, is like engraving something on the object.
> You can't differentiate between two potions of water for example (that's
> why they always stack:) but if you inscribe something on one of them,
> you'll be able to distinguish them. Same thing for wands: in NetHack
> zinc wands all look alike, but you name them because you want to
> distinguish them.. There's no way the character really remembers all
> that named stuff.
What are you writing on them with? How do you fit so much text on a
small object? How do you erase it? Overwrite it?
>> Once it's IDed, the game "writes it down" for you by changing the name
>> in the interface. Writing it down out of game as well serves no purpose
>> except in preparation for amnesia.
> This ain't really an argument is it? You cannot say "it's cheating
> because it serves no other purpose than for what I'm arguing is
> cheating".
Why not? You're right that it's just an extension of my assertion that
deliberately circumventing the effects of amnesia is cheating, but I
wanted to be more specific. It's certainly no more or less valid than
that original assertion, just more specific. And still just an opinion.
>>> Esp., would you recommend players, in order to avoid cheating, to hit
>>> `\' and memorize the entire list, when they see a mind flayer coming?
>>
>> No.
> Why? Because it's boring? It would be good strategy though..
No, because it can be represented in-game by a character seeing a mind
flayer coming and quickly patting himself down and looking in his
backpack to try and remember what he's carrying, and/or concentrating
hard to try and remember what he's identified. A last minute cram
session, if you will.
--
Bruce Labbate | I still write to my senators,
shiftless layabout | Saying they should legalize cannibus.
| And I should know, 'cause I am a
| Horticulturist - Dar Williams
Martin Crisp
(in message <bkvi16$7qr$1...@news-int.gatech.edu>):
> Stanislav Traykov <stanisla...@tortoises.org> deserves a cookie for
> saying:
>> Bruce wrote on 09/24/2003 04:19 PM:
>>> Meaning, IMO, that all #namings on any forgotten objects
>>> should be wiped as well. In the current situation, where #namings
>>> remain, I consider any #namings designed to circumvent amnesia or mind
>>> flayer attacks to be in poor taste at best and cheating at worst.
>
>> Naming, as I understand it, is like engraving something on the object.
>> You can't differentiate between two potions of water for example (that's
>> why they always stack:) but if you inscribe something on one of them,
>> you'll be able to distinguish them. Same thing for wands: in NetHack
>> zinc wands all look alike, but you name them because you want to
>> distinguish them.. There's no way the character really remembers all
>> that named stuff.
>
> What are you writing on them with? How do you fit so much text on a
> small object? How do you erase it? Overwrite it?
A marker pen you keep in your pants. Try #naming a war hammer
"Mjollnir"
Have Fun
Martin
--
Playing NetHack on Mac OS X?
Want to swap between terminal and Qt versions of 3.4.2?
This might help:
http://www.tesseract.com.au/nethack.html
Kevin Wayne
14:19:02 +0000 (UTC):
>Stanislav Traykov <stanisla...@tortoises.org> deserves a cookie for saying:
>> S. wrote on 09/24/2003 10:09 AM:
>>> Yep. Any IDs the character loses, stay lost until they're re-identified
>>> within the context of the game.
>
>> It's strange enough from a logical point of view that in a given game
>> a zinc wand has always the same functionality.
Why? In the Nethack universe, <bar> wands are simply always made of
<foo> material (or have <foo> appearance). From game to game, of
course, these are shuffled to stymie the real-life player; but then,
from ascension to ascension that bloody Amulet keeps reappearing in
the possession of that bloody Wizard and his priestly partner. There's
only so much consistency you can expect.
>> Anyway, the (magical)
>> process of identifying it just reveals the mapping of zinc to this
>> functionality.
Well, "magical" IDing does more than that; it reveals BUC status,
charges, number of recharges, etc.
>
>True, true.
>
>> Whatever the perception of this association might be like, it is more
>> real to the character and she or he is _expected_ to remember it. This
>> is also because they have richer (visual, haptic, aural) perception and
>> are dealing with such important things as life and death, the avoidance
>> of the latter being sometimes courtesy of wands. The player however, may
>> forget these associations, and is thus assisted by the interface which
>> kindly replaces zinc with a more meaningful name, once the mapping has
>> been discovered.
It seems to me that this effect of the interface simply reproduces
what happens in the human mind when things are identified, which is
why I can look at something and identify it as "pencil" or "pen"
without consciously thinking "painted wooden stick" or "molded plastic
stick."
>
>Again, true. The character is expected to remember certain things.
>Unless, of course, his or her brain is devoured by skull-burrowing
>tentacles. Hypothetically.
>
>> How the mind flayers' psychic energy reaches this interface and/or
>> supposedly the player's mind is a bit of a mystery. Perhaps, as no
>> real forgetting is possible, this is a "best effort".
>
>Definitely. Everything in the game is, to some extent, a best effort.
>Any effects on the interface are simply representative of changes
>in-game. If the interface is assisting you with certain associations
>that the character remembers on his or her own, all help from the
>interface should vanish when a character forgets those associations
>in-game.
Which it does, with non-individual IDs.
>Meaning, IMO, that all #namings on any forgotten objects
>should be wiped as well.
Except for the fact that individual #namings are envisioned by the
game as engraving on items, as attempting to #name an artifact that
cannot be generated by this means demonstrates. More on this later.
>In the current situation, where #namings
>remain, I consider any #namings designed to circumvent amnesia or mind
>flayer attacks to be in poor taste at best and cheating at worst.
I generally agree, for my own games. (But then, I generally don't
refer to spoilers while playing, either.) I don't consider it a
serious cheat when others do it--i.e., I wouldn't regard a savescummed
YAAP as legit, but would regard one by the OP, should his character
survive, as legit.
>
>> In any case, if I cannot be accused because I happen to remember what
>> ELBIB YLOH, HACKEM MUCHE, etc. stand for, why can I be accused if I
>> wrote it down?
>
>Once it's IDed, the game "writes it down" for you by changing the name
>in the interface. Writing it down out of game as well serves no purpose
>except in preparation for amnesia.
An additional benefit of the game interface as it is now is that it is
unlikely that you *will* recall the appearance of a particular wand,
since you will never view it as that appearance once it's id'd. Thus,
when the character "forgets" and the game interface returns to
describing the items by appearance, it's unlikely that you will recall
(without the use of notes) the identity of items by their appearance.
(An exception may be items which you've made special note of, because
their appearance is important for some reason: silver rings, for
example.)
However, inferring the identity of forgotten items by what is
remembered would seem to be legitimate. IOW, I may not recall that
wands of death are zinc, but I may recall that I only had one of them,
and it was in my bag, etc. Re-#naming items on the basis of such
recalled information is okay. It also runs the realistic risk of
misidentification.
>> Also, would it be cheating if I turned off the "assisting features" of
>> the interface and let it use the descriptive names (ELBIB YLOH, pink
>> potion, ...) for everything (with the `\' command left intact)? Then,
>> I would, just as the real character, learn to distinguish objects by
>> their use and would have little problems remembering what my stuff is
>> (the game will be a bit[?] more tedious however).
>
>It certainly removes the best-effort mechanism for amnesia, effectively
>making amnesia a non-issue, but I think the downside of having to
>remember everything without interface help is more than a balance.
No. It's a horrible idea. Not only is it analogous to thinking
consciously "painted wooden stick" every time I refer to a pencil, but
a RL player has a life outside Nethack, which may tend to cause him to
forget what curved wands are within a particular game. Plus, it's
rather unlikely that a RL player is going to have his brain eaten by a
multi-tentacled monster.
Back to individual #naming. Since the game does view it as a type of
engraving, I propose that a character should actually have to use an
item to do it, which may be dulled in the process, and it should
consume in-game time. Of course, this can be circumvented by any
player who simply wants to jot the identities in his notes. But at
least it imposes some potential cost/risk, however slight, to
individual #naming, commensurate with the actual imagined practice of
spending time in the dungeon engraving information on every silly item
that you own.
--
Kevin Wayne
"Stark raving sane."
-- Rosencrantz and Guildenstern