[YANI] BoH and Wand of Cancellation

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

Pleeeeeeeease add a request when trying to put a Wand of Cancelation
in a BoH.
Just lost Ring of Teleport,Ring of Teleport Control,Amulet of
Reflection(Thank god I have the SoR),all my wands,a lot of scrolls and
potions,not to speak of my entire food stock,now being hungry without
food at top level of Sokoban.

*sigh*

Meldur
13 answers Last reply
More about yani wand cancellation
  1. Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

    Meldur wrote:
    > Pleeeeeeeease add a request when trying to put a Wand of Cancelation
    > in a BoH.
    > Just lost Ring of Teleport,Ring of Teleport Control,Amulet of
    > Reflection(Thank god I have the SoR),all my wands,a lot of scrolls
    and
    > potions,not to speak of my entire food stock,now being hungry without
    > food at top level of Sokoban.
    >
    > *sigh*

    There is a warning about BoH accidents, and you've just had it: Believe
    me, you won't do it again...
  2. Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

    "Meldur" <Meldur@t-online.de> wrote in message
    news:eg54711ekor40hpmibuevovmmvp9k5hppa@4ax.com...
    >
    > Pleeeeeeeease add a request when trying to put a Wand of Cancelation
    > in a BoH.
    > Just lost Ring of Teleport,Ring of Teleport Control,Amulet of
    > Reflection(Thank god I have the SoR),all my wands,a lot of scrolls and
    > potions,not to speak of my entire food stock,now being hungry without
    > food at top level of Sokoban.

    I doubt this is a *new* idea :)

    But why should Nethack hold your hand every step of the way? You were aware
    of the risks, I assume - you could have taken steps to prevent this kind of
    accident.. keeping all wands that have been engrave-id'ed as possible
    cancellation in a separate sack, naming the wand something obvious to make
    it stand out in your inventory, even going so far as to not carry wands of
    cancellation with you at all..

    If you start warning people about things like this, it sets a dangerous
    precedent;

    "Are you sure you want to directly attack the floating eye? (y/n)"
    "Are you sure you want to eat that fortune cookie? You are satiated, you
    know.. (y/n)"
    "This amulet is unidentified, are you sure you want to wear it? (y/n)"

    Nethack isn't a kids game, you have to roll with the punches, and accept
    when *you* have done something wrong.

    Cheers,

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

    On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 11:48:28 GMT, "Ben" <benashmead@gmail.com> wrote:

    >
    >"Meldur" <Meldur@t-online.de> wrote in message
    >news:eg54711ekor40hpmibuevovmmvp9k5hppa@4ax.com...
    >>
    >> Pleeeeeeeease add a request when trying to put a Wand of Cancelation
    >> in a BoH.
    >> Just lost Ring of Teleport,Ring of Teleport Control,Amulet of
    >> Reflection(Thank god I have the SoR),all my wands,a lot of scrolls and
    >> potions,not to speak of my entire food stock,now being hungry without
    >> food at top level of Sokoban.
    >
    >I doubt this is a *new* idea :)

    I know,message was made out of frustration. :)
    This game was developing very well,already visited Minetown,bought
    some protection,had 3 *leashed* pets,made it to Sokoban top level,all
    this still being only level 5,oh well,not all is lost,at least it was
    not a YASD.

    >But why should Nethack hold your hand every step of the way? You were aware
    >of the risks, I assume - you could have taken steps to prevent this kind of
    >accident.. keeping all wands that have been engrave-id'ed as possible
    >cancellation in a separate sack, naming the wand something obvious to make
    >it stand out in your inventory, even going so far as to not carry wands of
    >cancellation with you at all..

    Hard to do,if you just found it. :)

    >
    >If you start warning people about things like this, it sets a dangerous
    >precedent;
    >"Are you sure you want to directly attack the floating eye? (y/n)"
    >"Are you sure you want to eat that fortune cookie? You are satiated, you
    >know.. (y/n)"
    >"This amulet is unidentified, are you sure you want to wear it? (y/n)"

    Hm,but there are already warnings to keep you from doing stupid things
    like attacking shopkeepers or other peaceful dungeon inhabitants.
    And I see a difference between putting on an *unidentified* item like
    the aforementioned amulet and simple oversights like putting an
    *identified* WoC in a BoH.


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

    Meldur wrote:
    > On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 11:48:28 GMT, "Ben" <benashmead@gmail.com> wrote:

    *snip*

    >
    >>If you start warning people about things like this, it sets a dangerous
    >>precedent;
    >>"Are you sure you want to directly attack the floating eye? (y/n)"
    >>"Are you sure you want to eat that fortune cookie? You are satiated, you
    >>know.. (y/n)"
    >>"This amulet is unidentified, are you sure you want to wear it? (y/n)"
    >
    >
    > Hm,but there are already warnings to keep you from doing stupid things
    > like attacking shopkeepers or other peaceful dungeon inhabitants.
    > And I see a difference between putting on an *unidentified* item like
    > the aforementioned amulet and simple oversights like putting an
    > *identified* WoC in a BoH.
    >

    Using your counter-example, should the dev team also make a change for a
    player wielding Stormbringer, like "You are about to risk attacking
    peaceful creatures, are you *really sure* you want to wield this blade?"
    Honestly, where do you expect the line to be drawn?

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

    On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 14:23:37 +0200, Meldur <Meldur@t-online.de> wrote:

    >On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 11:48:28 GMT, "Ben" <benashmead@gmail.com> wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>"Meldur" <Meldur@t-online.de> wrote in message
    >>news:eg54711ekor40hpmibuevovmmvp9k5hppa@4ax.com...
    >>>
    >>> Pleeeeeeeease add a request when trying to put a Wand of Cancelation
    >>> in a BoH.
    >>> Just lost Ring of Teleport,Ring of Teleport Control,Amulet of
    >>> Reflection(Thank god I have the SoR),all my wands,a lot of scrolls and
    >>> potions,not to speak of my entire food stock,now being hungry without
    >>> food at top level of Sokoban.
    >>
    >>I doubt this is a *new* idea :)
    >
    >I know,message was made out of frustration. :)
    >This game was developing very well,already visited Minetown,bought
    >some protection,had 3 *leashed* pets,made it to Sokoban top level,all
    >this still being only level 5,oh well,not all is lost,at least it was
    >not a YASD.
    >
    >>But why should Nethack hold your hand every step of the way? You were aware
    >>of the risks, I assume - you could have taken steps to prevent this kind of
    >>accident.. keeping all wands that have been engrave-id'ed as possible
    >>cancellation in a separate sack, naming the wand something obvious to make
    >>it stand out in your inventory, even going so far as to not carry wands of
    >>cancellation with you at all..
    >
    >Hard to do,if you just found it. :)
    >
    >>
    >>If you start warning people about things like this, it sets a dangerous
    >>precedent;
    >>"Are you sure you want to directly attack the floating eye? (y/n)"
    >>"Are you sure you want to eat that fortune cookie? You are satiated, you
    >>know.. (y/n)"
    >>"This amulet is unidentified, are you sure you want to wear it? (y/n)"
    >
    >Hm,but there are already warnings to keep you from doing stupid things
    >like attacking shopkeepers or other peaceful dungeon inhabitants.
    >And I see a difference between putting on an *unidentified* item like
    >the aforementioned amulet and simple oversights like putting an
    >*identified* WoC in a BoH.
    >
    >

    This looks like a relatively way to add difficulty levels to the game.
    To the guy who's not going to do it, anyway.

    At difficulty Novice you get warned about everything, & prompted
    to continue, with paranoid confirmation ("yes") required, etc.
    Warnings include #conducts (if not broken),

    Even standing still:
    "Are you sure you want to rest "." while that Archon is hitting
    you with the +9 Sunsword?(Yes/No)"
    Note that "no" is also required to be spelled out because a
    "no" answer will halve your final score.


    Difficulty Fair, fewer lower(higher?) warnings

    Difficulty Good, lets you attack the floating eye while saying
    "That probably wasn't a good idea." No conduct help.

    Expert, no warnings at all

    Difficulty level Marvin, if there's a floating eye adjacent attacks it
    (without player intervention) until the player is paralyzed by
    its gaze. (unless player has reflection, wearing ring of FA(?),
    etc.) Better kill them all from a distance.
    - summoned a peaceful Juiblex so you won't have to face s/h/it
    in Gehennom? Automatically attack if in melee distance or
    lined up for ranged attack & have ranged attack.


    On april 1, "Are you sure you want to hit the newt?" should come
    up every so often when attacking a newt, no matter the difficulty level.
    Chickening out would still count.


    Every time you don't continue when warned, increment the counter
    you_chickened_out.


    At the end of the game, ascended or not, Difficulty level be recorded
    in the score file. It will also be displayed with any conducts reported
    (in game or after).


    Final score will be divided by (2 raised to the power of you_chickened_out).

    Use 1 warning to keep from doing something, your score is halved.
    Use 5? score is divided by 32.
    Use 100 (newbie type) score is divided by 2**100
    (1267650600228229401496703205376.)
    Whole new aspect to lowest scoring ascension on /dev/null.


    nethack servers & the /dev/null tournament now can have separate trophies
    for "highest scoring Novice", etc.

    Say, the top ten in any difficulty level won't get their scores recorded
    at that difficulty level or below, in a vain attempt to keep people
    from playing below their difficulty level to do score stuffing.

    If you scored in the top ten in a difficulty level on /dev/null
    in a previous tournament, any tournament game you play at that
    difficulty level or below will be eligible for a trophy, top-scoring
    list, etc.

    You can still play that level or below, just not have it show up
    in top score lists or win a trophy. So you can still play just
    for your own satisfaction.

    An extreme abuse would be an Expert level player abusing the system
    to get high scores in of Novice one year, Fair the next, & Good
    the last. Only after that would they be "forced" to play Expert level.
    They could expect to have their games examined as well.
    "The decision of the judges is final."

    Should be some way of using this to have meaningful difficulty
    level trophies/top ten score lists on servers.

    Yes, it can be abused. But mostly by players with no available
    previous history. And some abuses will be obvious. A Novice game
    scoring 2,000,000,000 points should probably be looked at.


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

    Meldur <Meldur@t-online.de> writes:
    > On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 11:48:28 GMT, "Ben" <benashmead@gmail.com> wrote:

    > >accident.. keeping all wands that have been engrave-id'ed as possible
    > >cancellation in a separate sack, naming the wand something obvious to make
    > >it stand out in your inventory, even going so far as to not carry wands of
    > >cancellation with you at all..

    > Hard to do,if you just found it. :)

    Not so hard. You had just found the wand, didn't yet know what it is,
    didn't know cancellation yet, and certainly had NOT identified as a wand
    of SOMETHING-ELSE-BUT-CANCELLATION.
    Now you know what you should NEVER do with wands that MIGHT be
    cancellation.

    --
    Jukka Lahtinen
  7. Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

    On 29 Apr 2005 17:35:32 +0300, Jukka Lahtinen <jukkal@despammed.com>
    wrote:

    >Meldur <Meldur@t-online.de> writes:
    >> On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 11:48:28 GMT, "Ben" <benashmead@gmail.com> wrote:
    >
    >> >accident.. keeping all wands that have been engrave-id'ed as possible
    >> >cancellation in a separate sack, naming the wand something obvious to make
    >> >it stand out in your inventory, even going so far as to not carry wands of
    >> >cancellation with you at all..
    >
    >> Hard to do,if you just found it. :)
    >
    >Not so hard. You had just found the wand, didn't yet know what it is,
    >didn't know cancellation yet, and certainly had NOT identified as a wand
    >of SOMETHING-ELSE-BUT-CANCELLATION.
    >Now you know what you should NEVER do with wands that MIGHT be
    >cancellation.

    I had it identified,being a Priest with Identify spell,and thats my
    point,a simple oversight punished inappropriate hard.This has nothing
    to do with being skilled in playing Nethack.

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

    Meldur <Meldur@t-online.de> writes:
    > On 29 Apr 2005 17:35:32 +0300, Jukka Lahtinen <jukkal@despammed.com>
    > wrote:

    [WoC/BoH accident]

    > >Now you know what you should NEVER do with wands that MIGHT be
    > >cancellation.
    >
    > I had it identified,being a Priest with Identify spell,and thats my
    > point,a simple oversight punished inappropriate hard.This has nothing
    > to do with being skilled in playing Nethack.

    The opposing view is that constant attention to Avoiding Momentary
    Idiocy _is_ one of the skills NetHack demands.

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

    Meldur <Meldur@t-online.de> wrote in
    news:9hk471tpisbsin4l9ggpg92dvnp2nervn0@4ax.com:

    > I had it identified,being a Priest with Identify spell,and thats my
    > point,a simple oversight punished inappropriate hard.This has nothing
    > to do with being skilled in playing Nethack.

    There's a difference between punishment and consequences.

    If the wand was unidentified or if you just engraved and realized the
    writing on the floor vanishes then #name the wand DEAR GOD NO BAG OF
    HOLDING.

    If you're going to consider this punishment, I'd hate to think what you
    consider being nibbled to death by a newt after striking a floating eye
    without a towel/"oR/blindfold.
  10. Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

    Meldur wrote:

    > This game was developing very well,already visited Minetown,bought
    > some protection,had 3 *leashed* pets,made it to Sokoban top level,all
    > this still being only level 5,oh well,not all is lost,at least it was
    > not a YASD.

    You know, the character you have now is still a lot better than that
    level 1 character you originally started with...

    Just pretend you're starting anew, with a better than average character!

    >> But why should Nethack hold your hand every step of the way? You
    >> were aware of the risks, I assume - you could have taken steps to
    >> prevent this kind of accident.. keeping all wands that have been
    >> engrave-id'ed as possible cancellation in a separate sack, naming
    >> the wand something obvious to make it stand out in your inventory,
    >> even going so far as to not carry wands of cancellation with you at
    >> all..

    > Hard to do,if you just found it. :)

    How so?

    Why is is more difficult to drop a wand if you just found it, compared
    to when you've had it with you for thousands of turns?

    > Hm,but there are already warnings to keep you from doing stupid things
    > like attacking shopkeepers or other peaceful dungeon inhabitants.

    Not always: Stormbringer is an exception to the rule. And you could even
    make this a conduct, by setting the "noconfirm" option.

    In my first Slash'em game, I accidentally attacked a shopkeeper because
    I had stupidly not set that option.

    > And I see a difference between putting on an *unidentified* item like
    > the aforementioned amulet and simple oversights like putting an
    > *identified* WoC in a BoH.

    To add insult to injury, I wouldn't call this a "simple" oversight. I'd
    call it a gross error. :-)

    Happy hacking!

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

    Meldur wrote:

    > I had it identified,being a Priest with Identify spell,and thats my
    > point,a simple oversight punished inappropriate hard.This has nothing
    > to do with being skilled in playing Nethack.

    I don't agree with this.

    One of the main skills at playing NetHack is exactly that: avoiding
    "simple" oversights.

    NetHack gives you all the time you want or need to carefully think about
    what you do: use that time, and don't do anything hasty.

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

    dogscoff@eudoramail.com wrote:
    > Meldur wrote:
    > > Pleeeeeeeease add a request when trying to put a Wand of
    Cancelation
    > > in a BoH.

    > There is a warning about BoH accidents, and you've just had it:
    Believe
    > me, you won't do it again...

    You say that. I managed to destroy three bags in one game and currently
    show no signs of getting any smarter. Lord knows how I have managed to
    ascend any characters at all :)
  13. Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

    Haakon Studebaker wrote:

    >>I had it identified,being a Priest with Identify spell,and thats my
    >>point,a simple oversight punished inappropriate hard.This has nothing
    >>to do with being skilled in playing Nethack.
    >
    > There's a difference between punishment and consequences.
    >
    > If the wand was unidentified or if you just engraved and realized the
    > writing on the floor vanishes then #name the wand DEAR GOD NO BAG OF
    > HOLDING.

    And I thought mine were the only adventurers with varieties of "FOR THE
    LOVE OF GOD, NOT IN THE BAG" on all their cancellation wands.
Ask a new question

Read More

Games Video Games