Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

[Bug?] Mimic Generated inside a door

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 12:08:15 AM

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

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?

John
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 2:00:56 AM

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

"John Gibson" <johnSPAM@NOGOODlosgibsons.us> wrote in message
news:Af-dncMP0KH9Z__fRVn-iA@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
April 18, 2005 6:17:13 AM

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

John Gibson <johnSPAM@NOGOODlosgibsons.us> wrote in news:Af-dncMP0KH9Z__fRVn-
iA@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?
>
> John
>


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.
Related resources
April 18, 2005 6:32:28 AM

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

> 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...
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 12:21:30 PM

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

John Gibson <johnSPAM@NOGOODlosgibsons.us> writes:
> 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?

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" :
April 18, 2005 9:42:31 PM

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

In article <Xns963BE5CD6873Fchuckonilcar@207.35.177.135>,
chuck <chucko@nil.car> wrote:
>
>
>
>> 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?

Even a pacifist can get around him. Engrave Elbereth, wake it up,
and it will flee.
Anonymous
April 19, 2005 2:34:58 AM

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

james wrote:

<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
April 19, 2005 6:42:26 AM

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

In article <FuWdnauegqCg8_nfRVn-iA@rcn.net>,
John Gibson <johnSPAM@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.
April 20, 2005 5:07:45 AM

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

> It's not a bug. Mimics are amorphous, so surrounding a door wouldn't be
> a problem for it.
>
How do you image a boulder surrounding a door? seems to me to be quite a
topological problem...
April 20, 2005 5:17:18 AM

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

> 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.
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 9:31:37 PM

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

chuck wrote:
>>It's not a bug. Mimics are amorphous, so surrounding a door wouldn't be
>>a problem for it.
>>
>
> How do you image a boulder surrounding a door? seems to me to be
quite >a
> topological problem...

How about if it stretches itself around the door:
___
|||
|||
|||
|||,the middle one being the door.
April 22, 2005 5:48:43 AM

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

> How about if it stretches itself around the door:
> ___
>|||
>|||
>|||
>|||,the middle one being the door.
>
IF you're not being facicious, you are overthinking it, games are supposed to
have SOME semblance to reality, and that definately is over the line...
Anonymous
April 22, 2005 5:48:44 AM

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

On 04/21/05 9:48 PM, chuck wrote:

>>How about if it stretches itself around the door:
>>___
>>|||
>>|||
>>|||
>>|||,the middle one being the door.
>
> IF you're not being facicious, you are overthinking it, games are supposed to
> have SOME semblance to reality, and that definately is over the line...

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 - bobnet@canada.com
BobNET - http://www.execulink.com/~bobnet/
Anonymous
April 22, 2005 3:02:11 PM

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

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.
Anonymous
April 22, 2005 3:19:28 PM

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

more like

________
/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.
Anonymous
April 22, 2005 10:58:43 PM

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

chuck scrawled:
>
>
>>How about if it stretches itself around the door:
>>___
>>|||
>>|||
>>|||
>>|||,the middle one being the door.
>>
>
> IF you're not being facicious, you are overthinking it, games are supposed to
> have SOME semblance to reality, and that definately is over the line...

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
jcampbel@lynn.ci-n.com
Anonymous
April 23, 2005 1:06:29 AM

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

"jasonnorthrup@yahoo.com" <jasonnorthrup@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.

--
: 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" :
April 23, 2005 6:59:14 AM

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

> 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...
Anonymous
April 23, 2005 9:53:59 AM

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

chuck scrawled:
>
> 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
jcampbel@lynn.ci-n.com
Anonymous
April 23, 2005 4:27:06 PM

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

chuck wrote:

> 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.
April 23, 2005 10:51:53 PM

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

Dylan O'Donnell wrote:
> "jasonnorthrup@yahoo.com" <jasonnorthrup@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.
April 24, 2005 5:03:10 AM

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

John Campbell <jcampbel@lynn.ci-n.com> wrote in
news:Xplae.450$Nc.328@trnddc08:
> Which part of "MIMICS CAN CHANGE SHAPE" are you not
> understanding?
None, but when it goes under a door does it then change to a acid blob and
then back to a boulder? VERY unlikely for random events...
April 25, 2005 5:08:52 AM

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

John Gibson <johnSPAM@NOGOODlosgibsons.us> wrote in news:FuWdnauegqCg8_nfRVn-
iA@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...
April 25, 2005 5:14:18 AM

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

> 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.)
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 8:35:43 AM

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

[ 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.

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
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 2:10:24 PM

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

Janis Papanagnou <Janis_Papanagnou@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.)

> 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.

--
: 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" :
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 2:26:05 PM

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

psmith@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.
--
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.ht...
Everyone expected the Bavarian Inquisition.
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 3:17:57 PM

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

Martin Read <mpread@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:
> psmith@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.

--
: 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" :
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 9:54:15 PM

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

Dylan O'Donnell wrote on 25 Apr 2005 11:17:57 +0100:
> Martin Read <mpread@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
April 26, 2005 3:49:31 AM

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

psmithnews@spod-central.org (Dylan O'Donnell) wrote in
news:8664yb9q7z.fsf@strackenz.spod-central.org:

> Janis Papanagnou <Janis_Papanagnou@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...
April 26, 2005 3:50:06 AM

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

Janis Papanagnou <Janis_Papanagnou@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:D 4hl1v$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!!!
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 4:39:35 AM

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

Rast <rast2@hotmail.com> writes:
> Dylan O'Donnell wrote on 25 Apr 2005 11:17:57 +0100:
> > Martin Read <mpread@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().

--
: 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" :
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 4:39:36 AM

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

Dylan O'Donnell wrote on 26 Apr 2005 00:39:35 +0100:
> Rast <rast2@hotmail.com> writes:
> > Dylan O'Donnell wrote on 25 Apr 2005 11:17:57 +0100:
> > > Martin Read <mpread@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
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
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 6:32:57 AM

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

chuck wrote:
> Janis Papanagnou <Janis_Papanagnou@hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:D 4hl1v$svf$1@online.de:
>>chuck wrote:
>>
>>>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
April 26, 2005 6:32:58 AM

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

>> 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)
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 10:01:39 AM

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

chuck wrote:
>> (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
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 11:34:58 AM

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

Rast <rast2@hotmail.com> wrote:
>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.
--
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.ht...
Everyone expected the Bavarian Inquisition.
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 11:14:43 PM

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

chuck wrote:
>>>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)

(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
April 28, 2005 4:53:34 AM

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

> 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 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.
April 28, 2005 4:56:00 AM

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

> (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!
none of the above, I merely asked for the opinion of someone who has/had read
such spoiler period. I believe I have implied this in my previous messages...
Anonymous
April 28, 2005 11:04:16 AM

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

chuck <chucko@nil.car> wrote:

> look jerk, is spite of the fact that I wasn't addressing you

Plonk.

-Heikki
Anonymous
April 28, 2005 1:05:10 PM

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

a closed doorway, no less
Anonymous
April 28, 2005 2:46:15 PM

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

chuck wrote:
>>(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!
>
> none of the above, I merely asked for the opinion of someone who has/had read
> such spoiler period. I believe I have implied this in my previous messages...

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
Anonymous
April 29, 2005 12:54:23 AM

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

chuck <chucko@nil.car> wrote:

[ 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
April 29, 2005 5:09:24 AM

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

> 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.

> *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?
Anonymous
April 29, 2005 5:09:25 AM

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

chuck wrote:
>>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
April 29, 2005 8:28:56 AM

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

Ken Cuvelier <kvcflameNO@SPAMyahoo.com> wrote in
news:1173ddc3f0d3u45@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...
Anonymous
April 29, 2005 8:28:57 AM

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

chuck wrote:
> Ken Cuvelier <kvcflameNO@SPAMyahoo.com> wrote in
> news:1173ddc3f0d3u45@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...

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
Anonymous
April 29, 2005 8:31:05 AM

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

On 4/28/05 4:54 PM, Richard Bos wrote:
> chuck <chucko@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*
Anonymous
April 29, 2005 9:07:36 AM

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

chuck wrote:
> Ken Cuvelier <kvcflameNO@SPAMyahoo.com> wrote in
> news:1173ddc3f0d3u45@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...

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.
!