Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Erasing scrolls/potions

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
February 19, 2005 8:27:43 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

What is the preferred way to erase a scroll or potion? I usually dip
them in fountains but am growing weary of the "side effects". Is there
another maybe safer way to do this?

tiny k
Anonymous
February 20, 2005 12:19:29 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

"tiny k" <kdlittle88@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1108862863.848610.254620@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> What is the preferred way to erase a scroll or potion? I usually dip
> them in fountains but am growing weary of the "side effects". Is there
> another maybe safer way to do this?
Two as a matter of fact...

(spoiler space for water/blank paper)
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
Potions and scrolls can be blanked by walking into a pool of water, remember
that things will rust and you should not do this while burdened or carrying
anything you wouldn't want to have blanked. To make pools of water you can
apply a pick-axe to a fountain, just don't do it in minetown or with a pet
in the same room. One can stand on a pool of water while wearing water
walking boots and dip potions and scrolls safely unless ; are about.

A /oCancellation will make water and blank paper/books from most anything,
although not potions of sickness, booze, fruit juice or oil or the book of
the dead. The first two become the third, all becoming uncursed.

All hail the most holy RNG
Danny
February 20, 2005 5:19:31 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

"tiny k" <kdlittle88@yahoo.com> wrote in news:1108862863.848610.254620
@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:

> What is the preferred way to erase a scroll or potion? I usually dip
> them in fountains but am growing weary of the "side effects". Is there
> another maybe safer way to do this?

Pools are my prefered method. You can generate pools by applying a
pickaxe on a fountin (try to did down). You can use pools to erase
scrolls or potions in several ways. Some examples are:
1) Drop anything you don't want to get wet and jump in over and over
2) Same as #1 but use an amulet of magical breathing and stay in the pool
3) Use boots of water walking and #dip your items into the pool
Related resources
Anonymous
February 20, 2005 7:26:30 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Can you ever drown from jumping in the pool?
February 21, 2005 9:40:28 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

"tiny k" <kdlittle88@yahoo.com> wrote in news:1108945590.575554.213900
@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:

> Can you ever drown from jumping in the pool?

Yes, but I belive only if you are carrying to much stuff.
Anonymous
February 21, 2005 9:41:37 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Not sure about that, I remember an archeologist dropping his stuff at
the bottom of the moat when he fell in and was carrying too much.

I think you drown if you fall in the water at a place where there's no
"shore" i.e. if all adjacent spaces are water too. That's one way of
dying I haven't tasted yet.

--
nonobots
Anonymous
February 21, 2005 5:23:00 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack,misc.misc (More info?)

David Damerell wrote:

> begin quoting nonobots <jfcote@nonobots.com>:

>> Not sure about that,

> Not sure about WHAT? Context!

Heh. This constant screaming of yours because your
news reader has a problem with implicit reference
due to threading that isn't a problem for others is
sounding an awful lot like Boudewijn's "message
ignored" that irritated you so much you are _still_
making a jerk out of yourself in public with your
faked "begin" attribution lines to annoy him.

Sauce for the goose, David, sauce for the gander.

xanthian, loving the irony.
Anonymous
February 21, 2005 5:30:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Kent Paul Dolan wrote:

> David Damerell wrote:
>
>> begin quoting nonobots <jfcote@nonobots.com>:
>
>>> Not sure about that,
>
>> Not sure about WHAT? Context!
>
> Heh. This constant screaming of yours because your news reader has a
> problem with implicit reference due to threading that isn't a problem for
> others

My news reader has *no* problem with implicit reference due to threading,
but I sure do.

--
Benjamin Lewis

I regret to say that we of the FBI are powerless to act in cases of
oral-genital intimacy, unless it has in some way obstructed interstate
commerce. -- J. Edgar Hoover
Anonymous
February 21, 2005 6:42:17 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

begin quoting nonobots <jfcote@nonobots.com>:
>Not sure about that,

Not sure about WHAT? Context!

>I remember an archeologist dropping his stuff at
>the bottom of the moat when he fell in and was carrying too much.
>I think you drown if you fall in the water at a place where there's no
>"shore" i.e. if all adjacent spaces are water too.

Certain types of things;
/*
* Undroppables are: body armor, boots, gloves,
* amulets, and rings because of the time and effort
* in removing them + loadstone and other cursed stuff
* for obvious reasons.
*/

won't be dropped, and if you're still too weighed down with those, you
drown anyway.
--
David Damerell <damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> Kill the tomato!
Today is Gloucesterday, February.
February 22, 2005 2:45:43 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

"nonobots" <jfcote@nonobots.com> wrote in news:1108996897.345918.161830
@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

> Not sure about that, I remember an archeologist dropping his stuff at
> the bottom of the moat when he fell in and was carrying too much.
>
> I think you drown if you fall in the water at a place where there's no
> "shore" i.e. if all adjacent spaces are water too. That's one way of
> dying I haven't tasted yet.

There are some things that can't be droped quickly enough to avoid
drowning.
Anonymous
February 22, 2005 12:27:24 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Seraphim schrieb:
> "nonobots" <jfcote@nonobots.com> wrote in news:1108996897.345918.161830
> @g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
>
>
>>Not sure about that, I remember an archeologist dropping his stuff at
>>the bottom of the moat when he fell in and was carrying too much.
>>
>>I think you drown if you fall in the water at a place where there's no
>>"shore" i.e. if all adjacent spaces are water too. That's one way of
>>dying I haven't tasted yet.
>
>
> There are some things that can't be droped quickly enough to avoid
> drowning.

Another question: suppose you are unburdened and there is at least one
square of solid ground next to were you fell in the water. Are you
guaranteed to get out or is there a finite probability of drowning
nonetheless?
--
Klaus Kassner
Anonymous
February 22, 2005 1:08:03 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Klaus Kassner wrote:

> Another question: suppose you are unburdened and there is at least one
> square of solid ground next to were you fell in the water. Are you
> guaranteed to get out or is there a finite probability of drowning
> nonetheless?

You are guaranteed to get out, unless you didn't fall in voluntarily but
were dragged in by a sea monster.

--
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.
Anonymous
February 22, 2005 5:04:04 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack,misc.misc (More info?)

nyra wrote:

> Please don't assume others _aren't_ pissed off by
> some posters' inability to provide context.

You mean like others are about Damerell's
_deliberate_ munging of his attribution line to
break MS-Outlook?

He deserves to suffer, and he's whining about
others doing from misadventure something he is
doing maliciously.

FYI

xanthian.

How short must attention spans be that one cannot
manage to remember the context from visit to visit
to RGRN, anyway, much less from article to article
of a single thread?
Anonymous
February 22, 2005 5:19:00 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

I disagree. [1]


[1] Can you remember the context of this article based on my previous
sentence *without* looking at the parent article?

--
Benjamin Lewis

I regret to say that we of the FBI are powerless to act in cases of
oral-genital intimacy, unless it has in some way obstructed interstate
commerce. -- J. Edgar Hoover
Anonymous
February 22, 2005 11:49:09 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Kent Paul Dolan schrieb:
>
> David Damerell wrote:
>
> > begin quoting nonobots <jfcote@nonobots.com>:
>
> >> Not sure about that,
>
> > Not sure about WHAT? Context!

I wonder about that, too.

> Heh. This constant screaming of yours

Please don't assume others _aren't_ pissed off by some posters'
inability to provide context.

--
Konstit on monet, sanoi akka, kun kissalla pöytää pyyhki.
Vaihtelu virkistää, sanoi kissa, kun akkalla pöytää pyyhki.
Anonymous
February 23, 2005 2:08:06 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack,misc.misc (More info?)

Benjamin Lewis wrote:

> I disagree. [1]

> [1] Can you remember the context of this article
> based on my previous sentence *without* looking at
> the parent article?

I don't have to, since Google Groups Beta presents
my article right above yours, but yes, since you're
answering my most recent contribution to this
thread, I managed to know with what you were
disagreeing without looking back. I did, after all,
lavish several precious seconds _writing_ that with
which you disagree, and while I'm old, and slowly
but surely becoming senile, my memory isn't so bad
yet that I can't remember my own writing a day later.

xanthian.
Anonymous
February 23, 2005 2:34:49 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Kent Paul Dolan wrote:

> Benjamin Lewis wrote:
>
>> I disagree. [1]
>
>> [1] Can you remember the context of this article based on my previous
>> sentence *without* looking at the parent article?
>
> I don't have to, since Google Groups Beta presents my article right above
> yours, but yes, since you're answering my most recent contribution to
> this thread, I managed to know with what you were disagreeing without
> looking back. I did, after all, lavish several precious seconds _writing_
> that with which you disagree, and while I'm old, and slowly but surely
> becoming senile, my memory isn't so bad yet that I can't remember my own
> writing a day later.

Well, I'm sure everyone else can see my point; especially those that
*didn't* write the message to which I responded. In most cases when
reading usenet, one doesn't want to see articles which one has already
read.

I suspect even you might agree with me if this wasn't part of your silly
vendetta with David.

--
Benjamin Lewis

I regret to say that we of the FBI are powerless to act in cases of
oral-genital intimacy, unless it has in some way obstructed interstate
commerce. -- J. Edgar Hoover
Anonymous
February 23, 2005 1:17:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Benjamin Lewis wrote:

> In most cases when reading usenet, one doesn't want to see
> articles which one has already read.

One doesn't want to see the *entire* article which one has already read.
One does want to see some context, *especially* but not only when
someone is reacting to several parts of an article.

--
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.
!