YASNHB - Potions

[Guest]

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

In case no one has figured out that acrynim, its yet another small
nethack bug (I might have just made it up). Nothing game changing, but
just technically incorrect. Am playing an athiest illiterate character,
so have no real way of identifying BUC status of items (can get 3
stack, pet ID cursed, assume large stack is uncursed, and remainder
blessed, but only bother doing that for water).

Anyway, was doing some alchamy, and as I had 3 different stacks of
healing, thought Id bless them all so I could alchamise them all in one
go. dipped an unknown BUC stack of potions into holy water and get the
amber glow mesage, then potions show up as uncursed potions. Now I had
no way of knowing whether they were uncursed or blessed.
Also, tried it with the next stack, and got the 'no effect...
interesting' message, which enables me to id my blessed potions without
using up a potion of holy water.
And then, when I did the same for my last stack, got the same amber
glow message, and it was IDed as blessed.

Like a said, a minor bug, and one I wouldnt normally pick up if I wasnt
doing this conduct, but a bug none the less

 

[Guest]

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

Marky Mark wrote:

> In case no one has figured out that acrynim, its yet another small
> nethack bug (I might have just made it up). Nothing game changing, but
> just technically incorrect. Am playing an athiest illiterate character,
> so have no real way of identifying BUC status of items (can get 3
> stack, pet ID cursed, assume large stack is uncursed, and remainder
> blessed, but only bother doing that for water).
>
> Anyway, was doing some alchamy, and as I had 3 different stacks of
> healing, thought Id bless them all so I could alchamise them all in one
> go. dipped an unknown BUC stack of potions into holy water and get the
> amber glow mesage, then potions show up as uncursed potions. Now I had
> no way of knowing whether they were uncursed or blessed.

Yes you do; if they show up as uncursed, they are uncursed.

> Also, tried it with the next stack, and got the 'no effect...
> interesting' message, which enables me to id my blessed potions without
> using up a potion of holy water.
> And then, when I did the same for my last stack, got the same amber
> glow message, and it was IDed as blessed.
>
> Like a said, a minor bug, and one I wouldnt normally pick up if I wasnt
> doing this conduct, but a bug none the less

I don't understand what you think the bug is here.

--
Benjamin Lewis

Although the moon is smaller than the earth, it is farther away.

 

[Sean]

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

Marky Mark wrote:
> In case no one has figured out that acrynim, its yet another small
> nethack bug (I might have just made it up). Nothing game changing, but
> just technically incorrect. Am playing an athiest illiterate character,
> so have no real way of identifying BUC status of items (can get 3
> stack, pet ID cursed, assume large stack is uncursed, and remainder
> blessed, but only bother doing that for water).
>
> Anyway, was doing some alchamy, and as I had 3 different stacks of
> healing, thought Id bless them all so I could alchamise them all in one
> go. dipped an unknown BUC stack of potions into holy water and get the
> amber glow mesage, then potions show up as uncursed potions. Now I had
> no way of knowing whether they were uncursed or blessed.
> Also, tried it with the next stack, and got the 'no effect...
> interesting' message, which enables me to id my blessed potions without
> using up a potion of holy water.
> And then, when I did the same for my last stack, got the same amber
> glow message, and it was IDed as blessed.
>
> Like a said, a minor bug, and one I wouldnt normally pick up if I wasnt
> doing this conduct, but a bug none the less

Actually, blessing stuff with holy water should make it glow softly with
a light blue aura and uncursing it gets you the amber glow.

 

[Guest]

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

On Tue, 24 May 2005 02:13:04 GMT,
Kevin Wayne <killedbyafoo@yahoo.com> wrote:

> (Evidently the game assumes that characters enter the dungeon knowing
> how to BUC identify items by the requisite glow or flash.)

The glows are a little tricky, but the flashes aren't.

It doesn't take a blessed greased rustproof +7 helm of brilliance to
notice a correspondence between the flash (or lack thereof) I see when I
drop an item onto an altar and the actual BUC status that I see when I
pick up that item from that altar afterwards.

Regards,
Dan

--
Dan Sommers
<http://www.tombstonezero.net/dan/>

 

[Guest]

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

On 5/23/05 6:23 PM, Benjamin Lewis wrote:
> Marky Mark wrote:
>
>>In case no one has figured out that acrynim, its yet another small
>>nethack bug (I might have just made it up). Nothing game changing, but
>>just technically incorrect. Am playing an athiest illiterate character,
>>so have no real way of identifying BUC status of items (can get 3
>>stack, pet ID cursed, assume large stack is uncursed, and remainder
>>blessed, but only bother doing that for water).
>>
>>Anyway, was doing some alchamy, and as I had 3 different stacks of
>>healing, thought Id bless them all so I could alchamise them all in one
>>go. dipped an unknown BUC stack of potions into holy water and get the
>>amber glow mesage, then potions show up as uncursed potions. Now I had
>>no way of knowing whether they were uncursed or blessed.
>
> Yes you do; if they show up as uncursed, they are uncursed.

I don't think the OP knew that the "amber glow" message indicated that
they were (now) uncursed.

>>Also, tried it with the next stack, and got the 'no effect...
>>interesting' message, which enables me to id my blessed potions without
>>using up a potion of holy water.
>>And then, when I did the same for my last stack, got the same amber
>>glow message, and it was IDed as blessed.

This is evidently a mistake. If the last stack was turned to blessed
(from uncursed), it should have glowed blue.

>>Like a said, a minor bug, and one I wouldnt normally pick up if I wasnt
>>doing this conduct, but a bug none the less
>
> I don't understand what you think the bug is here.

The OP thinks that items always glow amber when dipped in holy water
(unless they're already blessed), so his character should have no way of
knowing whether the items are now uncursed or blessed. Since, in fact,
they glow differently in each case, that explains why the character now
"knows" the BUC status.

(Evidently the game assumes that characters enter the dungeon knowing
how to BUC identify items by the requisite glow or flash.)

--
Kevin Wayne

"Art is a tremendous means by which painfully guarded individuals bare
their souls." --Steve Hindalong

 

[Guest]

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

Sean wrote:
> Actually, blessing stuff with holy water should make it glow softly
with
> a light blue aura and uncursing it gets you the amber glow.


It seems a little inconsistent to me that BUC-testing with an altar
breaks atheism conduct, but learning/changing BUC status with holy
water does not. Shouldn't an atheist character not really believe in
that stuff anyway, and just use whatever's available regardless of its
BUC status?

 

[Guest]

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

Dan Sommers wrote:
> On Tue, 24 May 2005 11:36:41 GMT,
> Kevin Wayne <killedbyafoo@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On 5/23/05 11:20 PM, Dan Sommers wrote:
> >> On Tue, 24 May 2005 02:13:04 GMT,
> >> Kevin Wayne <killedbyafoo@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > It works similar to items that monsters wield. If you *see* it
stick
> > to the monster's hand, then kill the monster, the weapon will
already
> > be identified as "cursed."
>
> Too bad there's no equivalent for armor.

Monsters do attempt to take off armour if they pick up something better
to relpace it, and I'm fairly sure that when they try to take off
cursed armour, the player's character recognises it.

 

[Guest]

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

"Marky Mark" <mdmota@yahoo.com.au> writes:

> In case no one has figured out that acrynim, its yet another small
> nethack bug (I might have just made it up). Nothing game changing, but
> just technically incorrect. Am playing an athiest illiterate character,
> so have no real way of identifying BUC status of items

Thrones could help.

> (can get 3
> stack, pet ID cursed, assume large stack is uncursed, and remainder
> blessed, but only bother doing that for water).
>
> Anyway, was doing some alchamy, and as I had 3 different stacks of
> healing, thought Id bless them all so I could alchamise them all in one
> go. dipped an unknown BUC stack of potions into holy water and get the
> amber glow mesage, then potions show up as uncursed potions. Now I had
> no way of knowing whether they were uncursed or blessed.

The amber glow is unique for C->U. U->B gives a light blue
glow, B->U brown (IIRC), and U->C black. Hence the game assumes
you know the final status by knowing the colour.

> And then, when I did the same for my last stack, got the same amber
> glow message, and it was IDed as blessed.

*That* would be a bug, but I assume you got a light blue glow.

Best,
Jakob

 

[Guest]

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

On Tue, 24 May 2005 11:36:41 GMT,
Kevin Wayne <killedbyafoo@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On 5/23/05 11:20 PM, Dan Sommers wrote:
>> On Tue, 24 May 2005 02:13:04 GMT,
>> Kevin Wayne <killedbyafoo@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> (Evidently the game assumes that characters enter the dungeon knowing
>>> how to BUC identify items by the requisite glow or flash.)
>> The glows are a little tricky, but the flashes aren't.
>> It doesn't take a blessed greased rustproof +7 helm of brilliance to
>> notice a correspondence between the flash (or lack thereof) I see when I
>> drop an item onto an altar and the actual BUC status that I see when I
>> pick up that item from that altar afterwards.
>>
> I always took it that it was seeing the glow or the flash that made you
> able to recognize that item as blessed, uncursed, or cursed
> afterward. Note that if you are blindfolded when the flash happens, your
> items are *not* BUC identified.

I think we've both fallen into a trap: what do you mean by the word
"you" in your explanation? Is it the character at the keyboard or the
character in the dungeon?

I know that when I post here, I am (usually) pretty careful about
choosing who "I" is, but I (the character at the keyboard) blew it that
time.

Yes, now I agree with you: the game assumes that the characters *in the
dungeon* recognize which colored flashes and glows mean what.

> It works similar to items that monsters wield. If you *see* it stick
> to the monster's hand, then kill the monster, the weapon will already
> be identified as "cursed."

Too bad there's no equivalent for armor.

It's also interesting that the characters in the dungeon can tell the
difference between a healing, an extra healing, and a full healing
potion just by watching a monster drink one, but NHINRL.

Regards,
Dan

--
Dan Sommers
<http://www.tombstonezero.net/dan/>

 

[Guest]

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

On 5/23/05 11:20 PM, Dan Sommers wrote:
> On Tue, 24 May 2005 02:13:04 GMT,
> Kevin Wayne <killedbyafoo@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>(Evidently the game assumes that characters enter the dungeon knowing
>>how to BUC identify items by the requisite glow or flash.)
>
> The glows are a little tricky, but the flashes aren't.
>
> It doesn't take a blessed greased rustproof +7 helm of brilliance to
> notice a correspondence between the flash (or lack thereof) I see when I
> drop an item onto an altar and the actual BUC status that I see when I
> pick up that item from that altar afterwards.
>
I always took it that it was seeing the glow or the flash that made you
able to recognize that item as blessed, uncursed, or cursed afterward.
Note that if you are blindfolded when the flash happens, your items are
*not* BUC identified.

It works similar to items that monsters wield. If you *see* it stick to
the monster's hand, then kill the monster, the weapon will already be
identified as "cursed."

--
Kevin Wayne

"Art is a tremendous means by which painfully guarded individuals bare
their souls." --Steve Hindalong

 

[Guest]

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

On 24 May 2005 08:44:03 -0700,
dogscoff@eudoramail.com wrote:

> Dan Sommers wrote:
>> On Tue, 24 May 2005 11:36:41 GMT,
>> Kevin Wayne <killedbyafoo@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On 5/23/05 11:20 PM, Dan Sommers wrote:
>> >> On Tue, 24 May 2005 02:13:04 GMT,
>> >> Kevin Wayne <killedbyafoo@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > It works similar to items that monsters wield. If you *see* it
> stick
>> > to the monster's hand, then kill the monster, the weapon will
> already
>> > be identified as "cursed."
>>
>> Too bad there's no equivalent for armor.

> Monsters do attempt to take off armour if they pick up something
> better to relpace it, and I'm fairly sure that when they try to take
> off cursed armour, the player's character recognises it.

I can't produce this behavior in wiz mode: I can get a monster to put
on cursed armor and pick up better armor, but I don't see any attempts
by that monster to take off the cursed armor (for hundreds of turns). I
can see monsters put on better armor when their current armor is not
cursed, so the experiment is a success, but the results aren't what we
were looking for.

Regards,
Dan

--
Dan Sommers
<http://www.tombstonezero.net/dan/>

 

[Guest]

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

> I think of the atheist conduct not so much as a character refusing to
> believe in the gods, but rather as one who knows of the help they can
> give, but stubbornly refuses to accept it.

Wouldn't that make one more of an agnostic than an atheist?

~Laura

 

[Guest]

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

On 5/24/05 11:30 AM, Dan Sommers wrote:
> Kevin Wayne <killedbyafoo@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Dan Sommers wrote:
>>
>>>Kevin Wayne <killedbyafoo@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>(Evidently the game assumes that characters enter the dungeon knowing
>>>>how to BUC identify items by the requisite glow or flash.)
>>>
>>>The glows are a little tricky, but the flashes aren't.
>>>It doesn't take a blessed greased rustproof +7 helm of brilliance to
>>>notice a correspondence between the flash (or lack thereof) I see when I
>>>drop an item onto an altar and the actual BUC status that I see when I
>>>pick up that item from that altar afterwards.
>>
>>I always took it that it was seeing the glow or the flash that made you
>>able to recognize that item as blessed, uncursed, or cursed
>>afterward. Note that if you are blindfolded when the flash happens, your
>>items are *not* BUC identified.
>
> I think we've both fallen into a trap: what do you mean by the word
> "you" in your explanation? Is it the character at the keyboard or the
> character in the dungeon?
>
> I know that when I post here, I am (usually) pretty careful about
> choosing who "I" is, but I (the character at the keyboard) blew it that
> time.
>
> Yes, now I agree with you: the game assumes that the characters *in the
> dungeon* recognize which colored flashes and glows mean what.

Right. I generally use the term *character* when referring to the one
valiently seeking the Amulet of Yendor, and the term *player* when
referring to the one wasting time at the keyboard. Not that there aren't
a lot of characters on r.g.r.n....

--
Kevin Wayne

"Art is a tremendous means by which painfully guarded individuals bare
their souls." --Steve Hindalong

 

[Guest]

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

"micromoog" <micromoog@gmail.com> writes:

> Sean wrote:
> > Actually, blessing stuff with holy water should make it glow softly
> with
> > a light blue aura and uncursing it gets you the amber glow.
>
>
> It seems a little inconsistent to me that BUC-testing with an altar
> breaks atheism conduct, but learning/changing BUC status with holy
> water does not.

<mode = rationalization>
Well, an atheist may experiment with interesting alchemical
substances, getting strange and interesting results and still
be an atheist. You might think about this 'spiced water'
experiments a bit like homeopathy, or as a kind of alchemy
magic -- believe in magic is allowed for atheists.
</>

Best,
Jakob

 

[Sean]

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

Jakob Creutzig wrote:

>>>Actually, blessing stuff with holy water should make it glow softly
>>
>>with
>>
>>>a light blue aura and uncursing it gets you the amber glow.
>>
>>It seems a little inconsistent to me that BUC-testing with an altar
>>breaks atheism conduct, but learning/changing BUC status with holy
>>water does not.
>
> <mode = rationalization>
> Well, an atheist may experiment with interesting alchemical
> substances, getting strange and interesting results and still
> be an atheist. You might think about this 'spiced water'
> experiments a bit like homeopathy, or as a kind of alchemy
> magic -- believe in magic is allowed for atheists.
> </>

I think of the atheist conduct not so much as a character refusing to
believe in the gods, but rather as one who knows of the help they can
give, but stubbornly refuses to accept it. So the holy water thing
really depends on whether the "holy" aspect is magical or divine in
nature. And since magical spells and scrolls of remove curse are able to
tamper with the BUC-state of items, and the cursing-attacks of
spellcasting monsters don't immediately strike me as coming about
through divine intervention, I favour the former. And apparently the Dev
Team do too

 

[Guest]

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

Jakob Creutzig wrote:
> The amber glow is unique for C->U. U->B gives a light blue
> glow, B->U brown (IIRC), and U->C black. Hence the game assumes
> you know the final status by knowing the colour.

> Best,
> Jakob

Ok, Ive now leanr something new, thanks all, but I still think the fact
that you can dip unknown blessed items in holy water and get the "no
effect... interesting" message and still keep that poiton of holy water
is a very small bug.

On a different point, I know you are able to fix rusted weapons with
oil, is it possible to fix rusted armour also with oil (or any other
means that doesnt require reading a scroll)? Im guessing not, but
thought Id ask anyway

Mark

 

[Guest]

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

"Cool Laura" <llarsen@drizzle.com> wrote:
>> I think of the atheist conduct not so much as a character refusing to
>> believe in the gods, but rather as one who knows of the help they can
>> give, but stubbornly refuses to accept it.
>
>Wouldn't that make one more of an agnostic than an atheist?

Agnosticism is the belief either that one has no knowledge of God
(pragmatic), or that knowledge of God is impossible (dogmatic).

Atheism is either the belief that there is no God (dogmatic), or the
absence of belief that there is a God (pragmatic).

Wilful disregard for Gods you know to exist would make you... I dunno.
Possibly an iconoclast, if you also went in from smashing up their
temples.
--
Martin Read - my opinions are my own. share them if you wish.
My roguelike games page (including my BSD-licenced roguelike) can be found at:
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~mpread/roguelikes.html
bounce. bounce. bounce. bounce bounce bounce bounce.

 

[Sean]

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

Martin Read wrote:

>>>I think of the atheist conduct not so much as a character refusing to
>>>believe in the gods, but rather as one who knows of the help they can
>>>give, but stubbornly refuses to accept it.
>>
>>Wouldn't that make one more of an agnostic than an atheist?
>
> Agnosticism is the belief either that one has no knowledge of God
> (pragmatic), or that knowledge of God is impossible (dogmatic).
>
> Atheism is either the belief that there is no God (dogmatic), or the
> absence of belief that there is a God (pragmatic).
>
> Wilful disregard for Gods you know to exist would make you... I dunno.
> Possibly an iconoclast, if you also went in from smashing up their
> temples.

Being on a god-given quest to retrieve an artifact of the gods for the
greater good of your god hardly sounds iconoclastic to me, even if you
are ignoring their existance for the duration. Any Nethack character
pretty much has to be religious, so maybe the conduct should be
called... Er... Stubborn? Proud? Passively iconoclastic?

 

[Guest]

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

Sean <sgegg@hotspammeallyouwantpop.com> writes:
> Martin Read wrote:
> > Agnosticism is the belief either that one has no knowledge of God
> > (pragmatic), or that knowledge of God is impossible (dogmatic).
> > Atheism is either the belief that there is no God (dogmatic), or the
> > absence of belief that there is a God (pragmatic).
> > Wilful disregard for Gods you know to exist would make you... I
> > dunno.
> > Possibly an iconoclast, if you also went in from smashing up their
> > temples.
>
> Being on a god-given quest to retrieve an artifact of the gods for the
> greater good of your god hardly sounds iconoclastic to me, even if you
> are ignoring their existance for the duration. Any Nethack character
> pretty much has to be religious, so maybe the conduct should be
> called... Er... Stubborn? Proud? Passively iconoclastic?

"Apostasy" would be closest, I think. You're turning away from your
ordained faith.

--
: Dylan O'Donnell http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/ :
: "He puts evil in its place :
: With his martial arts and a stripy face!" :
: -- "Banzai Badger" theme tune :

 

[Guest]

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

Dylan O'Donnell wrote:
> Sean writes:
> > Martin Read wrote:
>
> > > Agnosticism is the belief either that one has no knowledge of God
> > > (pragmatic), or that knowledge of God is impossible (dogmatic).
> > > Atheism is either the belief that there is no God (dogmatic), or the
> > > absence of belief that there is a God (pragmatic).
> > > Wilful disregard for Gods you know to exist would make you... I
> > > dunno.
> > > Possibly an iconoclast, if you also went in from smashing up their
> > > temples.
>
> > Being on a god-given quest to retrieve an artifact of the gods for the
> > greater good of your god hardly sounds iconoclastic to me, even if you
> > are ignoring their existance for the duration. Any Nethack character
> > pretty much has to be religious, so maybe the conduct should be
> > called... Er... Stubborn? Proud? Passively iconoclastic?
>
> "Apostasy" would be closest, I think. You're turning away from your
> ordained faith.

That's doing a conversion. Converting breaks atheist conduct.

I think it's called atheist because of word origins. A- is a
prefix meaning "without". -Ist is a suffix meaning "person who".
The "the" in the middle is an abbreviation of "theos" meaning
diety. In real life atheism is about belief. In Nethack there
is no source code to track belief so atheism needs to be about
actions. An atheist character *acts* without diety. Not for
and against, simply without. Incidentally there are religions
in the world that track beliefs and other religions that track
actions. Within the JCI family disbelief doesn't make you not
J, but disbelief does make you not C, at least in theory.

Sink and fountain actions don't break atheist challenge, so why
should dropping items on an altar? It doesn't address diety any
moe than dropping a ring in a sink. I think it's because being
able to B/U/C id items is so usefull it makes the behavior more
costly. Forgoing prayer and sacrafice isn't all that big a
deal for some playing styles. Forgoing easy BUC-ID is a big
deal for many playing styles.

 

[Guest]

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

"Doug Freyburger" <dfreybur@yahoo.com> writes:
> Dylan O'Donnell wrote:
> > Sean writes:
> >
> > > Being on a god-given quest to retrieve an artifact of the gods for the
> > > greater good of your god hardly sounds iconoclastic to me, even if you
> > > are ignoring their existance for the duration. Any Nethack character
> > > pretty much has to be religious, so maybe the conduct should be
> > > called... Er... Stubborn? Proud? Passively iconoclastic?
> >
> > "Apostasy" would be closest, I think. You're turning away from your
> > ordained faith.
>
> That's doing a conversion. Converting breaks atheist conduct.

No, it isn't. Apostasy only requires abandoning a faith, not taking
up any other.

> Sink and fountain actions don't break atheist challenge, so why
> should dropping items on an altar?

I'd agree with that. You're observing a physical effect and making
deductions therefrom; perfectly rational.

--
: Dylan O'Donnell http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/ :
: "He puts evil in its place :
: With his martial arts and a stripy face!" :
: -- "Banzai Badger" theme tune :

 

[Sean]

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

Doug Freyburger wrote:

>>>>Agnosticism is the belief either that one has no knowledge of God
>>>>(pragmatic), or that knowledge of God is impossible (dogmatic).
>>>>Atheism is either the belief that there is no God (dogmatic), or the
>>>>absence of belief that there is a God (pragmatic).
>>>>Wilful disregard for Gods you know to exist would make you... I
>>>>dunno.
>>>>Possibly an iconoclast, if you also went in from smashing up their
>>>>temples.
>>
>>>Being on a god-given quest to retrieve an artifact of the gods for the
>>>greater good of your god hardly sounds iconoclastic to me, even if you
>>>are ignoring their existance for the duration. Any Nethack character
>>>pretty much has to be religious, so maybe the conduct should be
>>>called... Er... Stubborn? Proud? Passively iconoclastic?
>>
>>"Apostasy" would be closest, I think. You're turning away from your
>>ordained faith.
>
> That's doing a conversion. Converting breaks atheist conduct.
>
> I think it's called atheist because of word origins. A- is a
> prefix meaning "without". -Ist is a suffix meaning "person who".
> The "the" in the middle is an abbreviation of "theos" meaning
> diety. In real life atheism is about belief. In Nethack there
> is no source code to track belief so atheism needs to be about
> actions. An atheist character *acts* without diety. Not for
> and against, simply without. Incidentally there are religions
> in the world that track beliefs and other religions that track
> actions. Within the JCI family disbelief doesn't make you not
> J, but disbelief does make you not C, at least in theory.
>
> Sink and fountain actions don't break atheist challenge, so why
> should dropping items on an altar? It doesn't address diety any
> moe than dropping a ring in a sink. I think it's because being
> able to B/U/C id items is so usefull it makes the behavior more
> costly. Forgoing prayer and sacrafice isn't all that big a
> deal for some playing styles. Forgoing easy BUC-ID is a big
> deal for many playing styles.

Again, the atheist character is well aware of the existance of his god
and knows that when he drops an item on an altar, that's his god telling
him the BUC status of that item. It's help from the gods, and if the
character accepts this kind of help (knowing full well where it's coming
from), then he's not an atheist in action.

(One man, alone against the gods: Steven Seagal is... Atheist in Action!
Coming this summer to a dungeon near you!)

He's not atheist in belief either, but I'd say that's a given with every
Nethack character.