Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Scrolls/potions and bags

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
June 2, 2005 1:19:26 PM

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

What is your (late) scrolls/potions strategy concerning bags ?

Usually, I put all my scrolls, spellbooks and potions in bag (of holding
if possible) as soon as I have one, together with lots of duplicates wands
and rings I do not need immediatly.

This is mainly to avoid fire burning them, rather than to save on weight.

Of course, when I need a potion of full healing/scroll of taming, it then
takes my 2 moves to use it rather than one, and this often kill me.

So, how do the professional-ascenders usually handle it ? Keep everything
safe and be a bit more cautious on those HPs going down ? Keep a potion of
FH in main inventory whenever possible and risking loosing one from time
to time ?

Hypocoristiquement,
Jym.

More about : scrolls potions bags

Anonymous
June 2, 2005 1:19:27 PM

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

I usually keep a potion or two of healing/extra healing in my inventory
for those times you mention...mainly only keep "cheap" potions on hand,
since they're common enough and not much of a loss if they get
frozen/broken/etc. Same for scrolls, and food, too. I usually keep one
or two food rations or various other small food items on hand for when
I get hungry, eat one, then keep going. Since I usually play a Chaotic
character, I prefer more violent (thus, carnivorous) monsters as my
pets/rides, so I usually keep meat-based items, such as meat
rings/sticks/balls and tripe in my pack, so I can throw/drop them out
for the pet when they need food. I also put things like some treasure
in the bag of holding, things like gems and coins, mainly to keep those
from getting stolen by leprechauns or whatever else would like to nick
my valuables.
Anonymous
June 2, 2005 1:19:27 PM

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

I try to keep one of each essential item available. That includes a
scroll of teleport (and a wand too, if available), a unicorn horn, a
scroll or wand of fire, and a lizard corpse. Unicorn horns and lizard
corpses don't get destroyed by attacks, scrolls of teleport are fairly
common, and I usually have at least two wands of fire by this point in
the game, so I can afford to keep one out in case of slime because I
have a backup if it gets broken by lightning. Also, scrolls of earth
have enough possible uses in danger situations that I'm considering
adding one to the list.

Beyond these things, I might bring out additional items if the case
demands it. If I don't have good cancellation, a potion of full
healing might be warrented. If I've woken the Wizard, a wand of death
could be called for. On Julibex's level, the first thing to come out
of the bag is a wand of digging. The appearance of Demogorgon demands
better reliability for curing than a unicorn horn, so potions of extra
healing might be needed at a moment's notice. And if the situation is
really dangerous, there's always an Amulet of Life Saving.

Just my suggestions, I'm sure there are other good choices.

- John H.
Related resources
Anonymous
June 2, 2005 1:19:27 PM

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

John H. wrote:
> I try to keep one of each essential item available. That includes a
> scroll of teleport (and a wand too, if available), a unicorn horn, a
> scroll or wand of fire, and a lizard corpse.

What about your stethoscope and magic whistle?
Anonymous
June 2, 2005 5:00:57 PM

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

John H. <JohnWH@gmail.com> wrote:
> I try to keep one of each essential item available. That includes a
> scroll of teleport (and a wand too, if available), a unicorn horn, a
> scroll or wand of fire, and a lizard corpse. Unicorn horns and lizard
> corpses don't get destroyed by attacks, scrolls of teleport are fairly
> common, and I usually have at least two wands of fire by this point in

But, they can get cursed, which in the case of unicorn horns is bad news.
Spares are good.
Anonymous
June 3, 2005 1:08:42 AM

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

Jym <moyen@loria.fr> writes:

> Usually, I put all my scrolls, spellbooks and potions in bag (of holding
> if possible) as soon as I have one, together with lots of duplicates wands
> and rings I do not need immediatly.

Basically the same here. But I often keep one scroll of teleport in the
main inventory as an emergency escape. And I keep all the rings in the bag
except for a ring of free action (always on a finger) and whatever I may
be wearing. I may leave a ring of levitation in the main inventory for
convenience even when not worn, especially if I have a spare one in a bag.
(All this, of course, after identifying the objects mentioned.)
And after I have read a spellbook, I don't usually carry it further, I
stash it close to the nearest staircase or altar. (When going up and down
in the dungeon, rooms with staircases are the most convenient ones to keep
stashes.)

> This is mainly to avoid fire burning them, rather than to save on weight.

Both are almost equally important reasons..

--
Jukka Lahtinen
Anonymous
June 3, 2005 4:00:45 AM

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

Really now...this is news to me...but I usually don't have to worry
about invisible stalkers, because one of the first intrinsics I seem to
get is see invisible, so they're not much of a threat to me early on.
Anonymous
June 3, 2005 5:24:28 AM

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

In my inventory I carry one !oFH or !oEH and 2 ?oTeleport in my
inventory (the number of times of died for the want of that second
scroll). I also carry one of all offensive type wands + teleport and
any useful rings, i.e. regen, protec from shape shifters, levitation
and if I don't have the intrinsic =oTeleport. I don't carrying a wand
of cancellation until there is a danager of meeting an arch lich.

In the bag I carry a spare of each wand + one each of non offensive
type wands i, a spare of any of the main rings and any other ring which
maybe useful and a few extra healing potions and ?oTeleport + all other
scrolls and potions which maybe useful.

I generally carry no more then 1 or 2 of anything, except healing
potions ?oTeleport and wands of magic missile and sriking, leaving the
rest in a stash. If I get into a serious ding dong and use up most of
the stuff I have on me I will just go and refill.

And I never carry spell books, they are always stashed.
June 3, 2005 5:26:20 AM

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

"Magus Zeal" <maguszeal@gmail.com> wrote in
news:1117699908.442376.213080@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

> I usually keep a potion or two of healing/extra healing in my inventory
> for those times you mention...mainly only keep "cheap" potions on hand,
> since they're common enough and not much of a loss if they get
> frozen/broken/etc. Same for scrolls, and food, too. I usually keep one
> or two food rations or various other small food items on hand for when
> I get hungry, eat one, then keep going. Since I usually play a Chaotic
> character, I prefer more violent (thus, carnivorous) monsters as my
> pets/rides, so I usually keep meat-based items, such as meat
> rings/sticks/balls and tripe in my pack, so I can throw/drop them out
> for the pet when they need food. I also put things like some treasure
> in the bag of holding, things like gems and coins, mainly to keep those
> from getting stolen by leprechauns or whatever else would like to nick
> my valuables.
>
>

What about (I think they are) invisible stalkers exploding your bag when you
carry money in it? This never seems to happen otherwise/
Anonymous
June 3, 2005 1:37:17 PM

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

It's probably not a healthy habit, but I stuff everything into the bag
and just play cautiously. If Rodney is roaming, I'll have a wand of
death ready, but otherwise I generally have out:

The objects I'm wearing/wielding
A unicorn horn
A lamp (preferably magic)
(Maybe) a pickaxe
Bag of holding
A blessed luckstone

I like to be able to see my entire non-bagged inventory in a single
page.
Anonymous
June 3, 2005 3:24:00 PM

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

Jym wrote:
>
> What is your (late) scrolls/potions strategy concerning bags ?

As usual with Nethack, context sensative with some amount
of risk.

> Usually, I put all my scrolls, spellbooks and potions in bag (of holding
> if possible) as soon as I have one, together with lots of duplicates wands
> and rings I do not need immediatly.

Most rather than all. Forget putting cancelation in a
bag of holding, I'll carry a sack or oilskin for that.
Non-spellcasters often put books in without reading,
spellcasters generally read then store.

For rings I'll often have 2 worn and 1-2 out ready to use,
others go in the bag. Amulets 1 reflection or life
saving worn others stored.

> This is mainly to avoid fire burning them, rather than to save on weight.

I tend to keep "a few" potions, scrolls and wands out.
A compromise between what I might need and what I might
lose to a fire trap. How many depends on how often I
expect to step on a fire trap. More above Genhome,
fewer in it, none on the plane of fire.

> Of course, when I need a potion of full healing/scroll of taming, it then
> takes my 2 moves to use it rather than one, and this often kill me.

This means your current strategy needs improvement.

> So, how do the professional-ascenders usually handle it ?

Since I rarely ascend I don't know how valuable my late game
is to be taken with a grain of salt. My biggest problem is
early game not late game, though.
Anonymous
June 3, 2005 7:00:36 PM

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

chuck wrote:
> What about (I think they are) invisible stalkers exploding your bag when you
> carry money in it? This never seems to happen otherwise/

What the hell are you talking about? Invisible stalkers can't
explode bags, whether they have money in them or not. Nor can any other
monster. The only way to explode your bag is to put one of three
specific items into it. None of those are money, none of them have
anything to do with invisible stalkers, and the chances of bag explosion
if you do put one of those items in are totally unrelated to either
money or invisible stalkers.

--
John Campbell
jcampbel@lynn.ci-n.com
Anonymous
June 3, 2005 7:16:28 PM

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

John Campbell <jcampbel@lynn.ci-n.com> wrote in
news:o g_ne.51$KQ2.41@trnddc08:

> chuck wrote:
>> What about (I think they are) invisible stalkers exploding your bag
>> when you carry money in it? This never seems to happen otherwise/
>
> What the hell are you talking about? Invisible stalkers can't
> explode bags, whether they have money in them or not. Nor can any
> other monster. The only way to explode your bag is to put one of three
> specific items into it. None of those are money, none of them have
> anything to do with invisible stalkers, and the chances of bag
> explosion if you do put one of those items in are totally unrelated to
> either money or invisible stalkers.
>

chuck did recently say something about using an older version of nethack.
Perhaps it's a bug of some type? Possibly related to a patch. The only
other explanation is the sleep-deprived sticking of certain items into a
bag or something.
Anonymous
June 3, 2005 8:51:03 PM

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

"Jym" <moyen@loria.fr> wrote in message
news:p ine.LNX.4.51.0506020915140.3592@hagen.loria.fr...
>Usually, I put all my scrolls, spellbooks and potions in bag (of holding
>if possible) as soon as I have one,
>This is mainly to avoid fire burning them, rather than to save on weight.

This brings to mind a YANI for fire/coldproof paper and potions: If you
wield a scroll or spellbook and read enchant weapon while confused, the
wielded paper item becomes fireproof. If you wield a potion and read the
same, the wielded potion becomes immune to boiling and freezing. Scrolls,
spellbooks, and potions have a new flag for being "fixed" like armor, where
you can wish for fixed versions of these items. For example wish for "3
blessed fireproof scrolls of charging" or "3 fixed potions of holy water".

O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O
* Walter D. "Cruiser1" Pullen :)  ! Astara@msn.com *
O My 1st person Roguelike: http://www.astrolog.org/labyrnth/daedalus.htm O
*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*O*
Anonymous
June 3, 2005 9:41:00 PM

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

Quoting Adam Lawson <zyith@cableone.net>:
[Invisible stalkers detonating bags - yeah, right.]
>chuck did recently say something about using an older version of nethack.
>Perhaps it's a bug of some type?

You'd think someone would have noticed it in the years we were playing
3.3.1...

>Possibly related to a patch. The only
>other explanation is the sleep-deprived sticking of certain items into a
>bag or something.

As a special case of "chuck is an idiot" that fits the observed data.
--
David Damerell <damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> Kill the tomato!
Today is Friday, June.
Anonymous
June 3, 2005 11:29:01 PM

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

delcantheodd@msn.com wrote:

> It's probably not a healthy habit, but I stuff everything into the bag
> and just play cautiously. If Rodney is roaming, I'll have a wand of
> death ready, but otherwise I generally have out:

> The objects I'm wearing/wielding

> A unicorn horn
> A lamp (preferably magic)
> (Maybe) a pickaxe
> Bag of holding
> A blessed luckstone

I also like to carry in my main inventory:

a blindfold
a stethoscope
a magic whistle

> I like to be able to see my entire non-bagged inventory in a single
> page.

So do I.

--
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.
June 4, 2005 3:07:09 AM

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

> What the hell are you talking about? Invisible stalkers can't
> explode bags, whether they have money in them or not. Nor can any other
> monster. The only way to explode your bag is to put one of three
> specific items into it. None of those are money, none of them have
> anything to do with invisible stalkers, and the chances of bag explosion
> if you do put one of those items in are totally unrelated to either
> money or invisible stalkers.
>
Wrong, wrong, wrong. You WILL encounter (esp. in the mines) when you carry a
bag/sack with money in it: ...magical explosion your body absorbs some of the
explosion and your bag/sack and everything in it dissapear.
June 4, 2005 3:08:54 AM

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

David Damerell <damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote in
news:C3z*hicQq@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk:

> Quoting Adam Lawson <zyith@cableone.net>:
> [Invisible stalkers detonating bags - yeah, right.]
>>chuck did recently say something about using an older version of nethack.
>>Perhaps it's a bug of some type?
>
> You'd think someone would have noticed it in the years we were playing
> 3.3.1...
>
>>Possibly related to a patch. The only
>>other explanation is the sleep-deprived sticking of certain items into a
>>bag or something.
>
> As a special case of "chuck is an idiot" that fits the observed data.

scraw you too you memory deprived idiot.
June 4, 2005 3:44:02 AM

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

Jym wrote:

> What is your (late) scrolls/potions strategy concerning bags ?
>
> Usually, I put all my scrolls, spellbooks and potions in bag (of holding
> if possible) as soon as I have one, together with lots of duplicates wands
> and rings I do not need immediatly.
>
> This is mainly to avoid fire burning them, rather than to save on weight.
>
> Of course, when I need a potion of full healing/scroll of taming, it then
> takes my 2 moves to use it rather than one, and this often kill me.
>
> So, how do the professional-ascenders usually handle it ? Keep everything
> safe and be a bit more cautious on those HPs going down ? Keep a potion of
> FH in main inventory whenever possible and risking loosing one from time
> to time ?

I usually stuff all my wands of cancellation into my bag of holding as
soon as I find 'em. Not that I really want to, the bastards just seem to
slip in there during routine bag-lootings.
Stupid wands of cancellation.
Anonymous
June 4, 2005 5:41:01 AM

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

Sean wrote:
> Jym wrote:
>
>> What is your (late) scrolls/potions strategy concerning bags ?
>
> I usually stuff all my wands of cancellation into my bag of holding as
> soon as I find 'em. Not that I really want to, the bastards just seem to
> slip in there during routine bag-lootings.
> Stupid wands of cancellation.

And I'm quite sure you adjust your wand of cancellation to inventory
letter Z before you put everything into your bag of holding? Just to
be on the safe side. :-]

Janis
Anonymous
June 4, 2005 7:30:25 AM

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

David Damerell <damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote in
news:C3z*hicQq@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk:

> Quoting Adam Lawson <zyith@cableone.net>:
> [Invisible stalkers detonating bags - yeah, right.]
>>chuck did recently say something about using an older version of
>>nethack. Perhaps it's a bug of some type?
>
> You'd think someone would have noticed it in the years we were playing
> 3.3.1...
>

That's why I mentioned a patch; perhaps he did something to the source
that caused the behavior. It was just such a *weird* behavior that he
described. Your nethack credentials vastly outweigh mine; I'm not going
to argue, I was just speculating about possibilities. It's not possible
so then he must be mistaken. (Which is obviously a whole lot more
plausible than an invisible stalker blowing up a bag of holding because
it has money in it.)

Though I'm unclear on why an invisible stalker would hate bags with money
in them. Under the described circumstances, they'd be right near the top
of the genocide list. We likes our bag of holding...

> As a special case of "chuck is an idiot" that fits the observed data.


I'm only quoting this to point out that I found it a hilarious way to say
that. :) 

(I'm not saying he is, I'm not saying he isn't...)
June 4, 2005 7:49:14 AM

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

chuck <chucko@nil.car> wrote in
news:Xns966AC31122694chuckonilcar@207.35.177.134:

>> What the hell are you talking about? Invisible stalkers can't
>> explode bags, whether they have money in them or not. Nor can any
>> other monster. The only way to explode your bag is to put one of
>> three specific items into it. None of those are money, none of them
>> have anything to do with invisible stalkers, and the chances of bag
>> explosion if you do put one of those items in are totally unrelated
>> to either money or invisible stalkers.
>>
> Wrong, wrong, wrong. You WILL encounter (esp. in the mines) when you
> carry a bag/sack with money in it: ...magical explosion your body
> absorbs some of the explosion and your bag/sack and everything in it
> dissapear.

Your explanation still doesn't explain what you are talking about.

You can get a "You are caught in a magical explosion!" message followed
by the "Your body absorbs some of the magical energy!" message from a
magic trap (1/30 chance) but they have nothing to do with invisible
stalkers, sacks, gold, or bags of holding. You can also get a "You are
blasted by a magical explosion!" message if you put one of a few bad
things into your Bag of Holding, which will destroy the bag and
everything in it, but this has nothing to do invisible stalkers, sacks,
gold, or absorbing magical energy.
Anonymous
June 4, 2005 12:36:29 PM

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

On Sat, 4 Jun 2005 10:53:34 +0200,
"Boudewijn Waijers" <kroisos@REMOVETHISWORD.home.nl> wrote:

> Walter D. Pullen wrote:

>> For example wish for "3 blessed fireproof scrolls of charging" or "3
>> fixed potions of holy water".

> And a fixed potion of water would be unable to rust something else, as
> well.

Does that mean that a fixed potion of holy water would be unable to
bless something else? That would certainly balance the advantage of
carrying around fixed holy water; now all we need is a method of
unfixing potions....

Regards,
Dan

--
Dan Sommers
<http://www.tombstonezero.net/dan/&gt;
Anonymous
June 4, 2005 2:53:34 PM

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

Walter D. Pullen wrote:

> For example wish for "3 blessed fireproof scrolls
> of charging" or "3 fixed potions of holy water".

And a fixed potion of water would be unable to rust something else,
as well.

--
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
June 4, 2005 2:53:35 PM

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

On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 14:54:38 +0200,
Janis Papanagnou <Janis_Papanagnou@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Reading this, my mind was wandering... And I asked myself, why would
> some metal rust at all immediately(!) after contact with water. Yet
> another "Nethack reality". Even acid won't facilitate metal to corrode
> that fast. (No, I am not arguing, rust traps should drop acid instead
> of water ;-). But would a sane character really drink from fountains
> and pools if this kind of water is able to damage even metal? OTOH,
> it might be some interaction with the atmosphere in the dungeon. But
> that would be even worse for the character. (Umm... - I better stop
> now.)

So rusting (and corroding and rotting?) should be more like stoning or
food poisoning, and take some number of turns to cause permanent damage
instead? That would give your character a chance to #wipe the offending
substance from the item, but damage to non-foo-proofed towels should be
immediate.

That said, should rust monster and pudding (and the like) attacks also
take time to do their damage? Or are (some of) them magical rather than
physical?

Regards,
Dan

--
Dan Sommers
<http://www.tombstonezero.net/dan/&gt;
Anonymous
June 4, 2005 5:37:02 PM

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

On 6/3/05 11:49 PM, Seraphim wrote:
> chuck <chucko@nil.car> wrote

>>Wrong, wrong, wrong. You WILL encounter (esp. in the mines) when you
>>carry a bag/sack with money in it: ...magical explosion your body
>>absorbs some of the explosion and your bag/sack and everything in it
>>dissapear.
>
>
> Your explanation still doesn't explain what you are talking about.
>
> You can get a "You are caught in a magical explosion!" message followed
> by the "Your body absorbs some of the magical energy!" message from a
> magic trap (1/30 chance) but they have nothing to do with invisible
> stalkers, sacks, gold, or bags of holding. You can also get a "You are
> blasted by a magical explosion!" message if you put one of a few bad
> things into your Bag of Holding, which will destroy the bag and
> everything in it, but this has nothing to do invisible stalkers, sacks,
> gold, or absorbing magical energy.

I think this argument boils down to a syllogism:

1) chuck is never wrong;
2) no one else has ever observed the data that chuck is reporting, and
a reading of the source does not support what he says; therefore
3) everyone else's observations are wrong, and everyone else is
misreading the source.

Perhaps there's a spoiler out there which, when *properly* understood,
accounts for this behavior, independently from what the source says.

--
Kevin Wayne

"Art is a tremendous means by which painfully guarded individuals bare
their souls." --Steve Hindalong
Anonymous
June 4, 2005 6:51:08 PM

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

chuck wrote:
> Wrong, wrong, wrong. You WILL encounter (esp. in the mines) when you carry a
> bag/sack with money in it: ...magical explosion your body absorbs some of the
> explosion and your bag/sack and everything in it dissapear.

"Wrong, wrong, wrong," my ass. I can quote source code to prove
everything I said (the relevant bit is mbag_explodes(), in pickup.c). On
the other hand, both your original claim and your new, different claim,
are wrong.

Magic traps do occasionally explode, and you will absorb magical
energy from that. That does not, however, affect your bag or its
contents in any way whatsoever. It's irrelevant whether the bag has
money in it or not. And this has, again, nothing at all to do with
invisible stalkers.

(And the proof is in the function dotrap(), the relevant section
of which starts on line 1058 of trap.c.)

--
John Campbell
jcampbel@lynn.ci-n.com
Anonymous
June 4, 2005 6:54:38 PM

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

Boudewijn Waijers wrote:
>
> And a fixed potion of water would be unable to rust something else,
> as well.

Reading this, my mind was wandering... And I asked myself, why would
some metal rust at all immediately(!) after contact with water. Yet
another "Nethack reality". Even acid won't facilitate metal to corrode
that fast. (No, I am not arguing, rust traps should drop acid instead
of water ;-). But would a sane character really drink from fountains
and pools if this kind of water is able to damage even metal?
OTOH, it might be some interaction with the atmosphere in the dungeon.
But that would be even worse for the character.
(Umm... - I better stop now.)

Janis
June 4, 2005 10:49:50 PM

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

John Campbell <jcampbel@lynn.ci-n.com> wrote in
news:wdjoe.1164$ld3.242@trnddc04:

> chuck wrote:
>> Wrong, wrong, wrong. You WILL encounter (esp. in the mines) when you
carry a
>> bag/sack with money in it: ...magical explosion your body absorbs some of
the
>> explosion and your bag/sack and everything in it dissapear.
>
> "Wrong, wrong, wrong," my ass. I can quote source code to prove
> everything I said (the relevant bit is mbag_explodes(), in pickup.c). On
> the other hand, both your original claim and your new, different claim,
> are wrong.
>
> Magic traps do occasionally explode, and you will absorb magical
> energy from that. That does not, however, affect your bag or its
> contents in any way whatsoever. It's irrelevant whether the bag has
> money in it or not. And this has, again, nothing at all to do with
> invisible stalkers.
>
> (And the proof is in the function dotrap(), the relevant section
> of which starts on line 1058 of trap.c.)
>
Well, that's the first CONSTRUCTIVE argument I've gotten so far. Took bloody
long enough. I will check the source. BTW I am running vanilla 3.3.1 obtained
by way of freshmeat.net compiled under gcc 2.95; a system with which I have
suscessfully compiled ALL of KDE 3.1, along with several versions of X
cleanly so there is no problems there. There MIGHT be another reason why
these bags explode, but it never seems to happen when I don't put money in
it. What are the few things that will do it so I can confirm that something
screwy is/n't going on?
June 5, 2005 2:22:33 AM

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

> You can get a "You are caught in a magical explosion!" message followed
> by the "Your body absorbs some of the magical energy!" message from a
> magic trap (1/30 chance) but they have nothing to do with invisible
> stalkers, sacks, gold, or bags of holding. You can also get a "You are
> blasted by a magical explosion!" message if you put one of a few bad
> things into your Bag of Holding, which will destroy the bag and
> everything in it, but this has nothing to do invisible stalkers, sacks,
> gold, or absorbing magical energy.
>
Then what in the game is the rational? and as I asked in another message
first due to the way IT was written what are these items?
June 5, 2005 2:51:57 AM

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

chuck <chucko@nil.car> wrote in
news:Xns966BBB81B900Dchuckonilcar@207.35.177.135:

>
>> You can get a "You are caught in a magical explosion!" message
>> followed by the "Your body absorbs some of the magical energy!"
>> message from a magic trap (1/30 chance) but they have nothing to do
>> with invisible stalkers, sacks, gold, or bags of holding. You can
>> also get a "You are blasted by a magical explosion!" message if you
>> put one of a few bad things into your Bag of Holding, which will
>> destroy the bag and everything in it, but this has nothing to do
>> invisible stalkers, sacks, gold, or absorbing magical energy.
>
> Then what in the game is the rational? and as I asked in another
> message first due to the way IT was written what are these items?

I assume you mean what are the items that will make a BoH explode if they
are put into the BoH?
The items are a wand of cancellation with a non-zero number of charges, a
bag of tricks with a non-zero number of charges, or another bag of
holding.

As far as I understand the rational is like this:
The inside of a BoH or BoT exists partially outside "normal" reality, and
that if two of these abnormal-realities meet, or if one meets a wand of
cancellation then they cancel out.
Anonymous
June 5, 2005 5:48:49 AM

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

John Campbell wrote:
> chuck wrote:

>> Wrong, wrong, wrong.
> "Wrong, wrong, wrong," my ass.

Will you people please stop responding to chuck?

I put him in my killfile months ago, just because he constantly refuses
to admit when he's wrong, and that happens more often than not.

By responding to him, I *still* get to see his idiotic posts.

--
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
June 5, 2005 5:56:55 AM

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

Dan Sommers wrote:
> "Boudewijn Waijers" wrote:
>> Walter D. Pullen wrote:

>>> For example wish for "3 blessed fireproof scrolls of charging" or "3
>>> fixed potions of holy water".

>> And a fixed potion of water would be unable to rust something else,
>> as well.

> Does that mean that a fixed potion of holy water would be unable to
> bless something else? That would certainly balance the advantage of
> carrying around fixed holy water; now all we need is a method of
> unfixing potions....

No. This would only go for uncursed potions, since something "fixed"
would want nothing to do with rust and corrosion. Blessed or cursed
water does not rust items in the first place.

--
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
June 5, 2005 11:45:51 AM

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

chuck wrote:
> John Campbell wrote:
> > chuck wrote:
>
> > > Wrong, wrong, wrong. You WILL encounter (esp. in
> > > the mines) when you carry a bag/sack with money in
> > > it: ...magical explosion your body absorbs some of
> > > the explosion and your bag/sack and everything in
> > > it dissapear.
>
> > "Wrong, wrong, wrong," my ass. I can quote source code to prove
> > everything I said (the relevant bit is mbag_explodes(), in pickup.c). On
> > the other hand, both your original claim and your new, different claim,
> > are wrong.
>
> > Magic traps do occasionally explode, and you will absorb magical
> > energy from that. That does not, however, affect your bag or its
> > contents in any way whatsoever. It's irrelevant whether the bag has
> > money in it or not. And this has, again, nothing at all to do with
> > invisible stalkers.
>
> > (And the proof is in the function dotrap(), the relevant section
> > of which starts on line 1058 of trap.c.)
>
> Well, that's the first CONSTRUCTIVE argument I've gotten so far.

No, you've been blowing off folks whjo gave good advice.

Magic traps have a list of effects that include a magical
explosion. It happens with no regard to what you are
carrying. Bags of holding will explode if you put a wand
of cancellation in them, with no regard to what's already
in them. Folks carry a sack or oilskin to keep their
cancellation in for this reason.

> BTW I am running vanilla 3.3.1 obtained

There may have been a version long ago that guaranteed a
magic trap in the mines, but now there are just a bunch of
random traps in the mines. More traps, higher chance of
one of them being a magic trap.

> There MIGHT be another reason why
> these bags explode, but it never seems to happen when I don't put money in
> it. What are the few things that will do it so I can confirm that something
> screwy is/n't going on?

Might equals IS in this case. Money in the sack is of
zero relevance.
Anonymous
June 6, 2005 1:16:14 PM

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

Kevin Wayne wrote:

> On the very slight chance that chuck will bother listening, it's
> worthwhile to note (what I'm sure you already know) that it's also *not
> safe* to put a sack or oilskin containing one of the three dangerous
> items into the bag of holding.
>
> For *that* reason, many of us either don't carry wands of cancellation
> at all, or carry them purposely in main inventory so we don't make that
> mistake. I personally also find it helpful to individually #name them
> "DANGER!!!!!"

I usually carry my wands of cancellation in an ordinary/oilskin sack, along
with a couple ?oRC and !oHW. I've accidently put wands in my BoH when they
were in my main inventory, but I've never accidentally put my emergency
sack in my BoH. This is probably because I transfer large quantities of
wands around frequently, but I usually only move one tool at a time.

--
Benjamin Lewis

Although the moon is smaller than the earth, it is farther away.
Anonymous
June 6, 2005 1:34:41 PM

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

On 6/5/05 10:45 AM, Doug Freyburger wrote:

> No, you've been blowing off folks who gave good advice.
>
> Magic traps have a list of effects that include a magical
> explosion. It happens with no regard to what you are
> carrying. Bags of holding will explode if you put a wand
> of cancellation in them, with no regard to what's already
> in them. Folks carry a sack or oilskin to keep their
> cancellation in for this reason.

On the very slight chance that chuck will bother listening, it's
worthwhile to note (what I'm sure you already know) that it's also *not
safe* to put a sack or oilskin containing one of the three dangerous
items into the bag of holding.

For *that* reason, many of us either don't carry wands of cancellation
at all, or carry them purposely in main inventory so we don't make that
mistake. I personally also find it helpful to individually #name them
"DANGER!!!!!"

--
Kevin Wayne

"Art is a tremendous means by which painfully guarded individuals bare
their souls." --Steve Hindalong
June 7, 2005 3:59:11 AM

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

In article <yy7opsuzjwa9.fsf@css.css.sfu.ca>,
Benjamin Lewis <bclewis@cs.sfu.ca> wrote:

>I usually carry my wands of cancellation in an ordinary/oilskin sack, along
>with a couple ?oRC and !oHW. I've accidently put wands in my BoH when they
>were in my main inventory, but I've never accidentally put my emergency
>sack in my BoH. This is probably because I transfer large quantities of
>wands around frequently, but I usually only move one tool at a time.

I like to carry my BoH in an oilskin sack, to keep it blessed and dry.
That's a pretty rare, late game deal. My first ascension, or maybe my
first trip to the planes, can't remember, I went amphibious to the plane
of water (I had planned it.)

But I'll never put any bag in a BoH. I don't care what the bag doesn't
contain. Well, my current game might yield enough extra bags and sacks
to do the extra stash to astral trick with nesting, but I'll cross that
bridge when I come to it.
Anonymous
June 7, 2005 4:11:00 AM

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

Boudewijn Waijers wrote on Sun, 5 Jun 2005 01:48:49 +0200:
> John Campbell wrote:
> > chuck wrote:
>
> >> Wrong, wrong, wrong.
> > "Wrong, wrong, wrong," my ass.
>
> Will you people please stop responding to chuck?
>
> I put him in my killfile months ago, just because he constantly refuses
> to admit when he's wrong, and that happens more often than not.
>
> By responding to him, I *still* get to see his idiotic posts.

I agree (!) with Boudewijn on this. Replying to the obvious morons isn't
very different from feeding trolls.


--
"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
June 7, 2005 5:41:09 AM

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

Benjamin Lewis wrote:

>> For *that* reason, many of us either don't carry wands of
>> cancellation at all, or carry them purposely in main inventory so we
>> don't make that mistake.

> I usually carry my wands of cancellation in an ordinary/oilskin sack,
> along with a couple ?oRC and !oHW.

If you're *really* paranoid about making a mistake, and you don't have
to carry them over long distances, I guess the only safe way is to put
them in a box, and carry that box. You cannot put a box in a sack, so
the danger is gone (or am I missing something?).

--
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
June 7, 2005 4:12:32 PM

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

Rast <rast2@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:MPG.1d0ee8633d51d08d98a352@216.168.3.44:

> Boudewijn Waijers wrote on Sun, 5 Jun 2005 01:48:49 +0200:
>> Will you people please stop responding to chuck?
>>
>> I put him in my killfile months ago, just because he constantly
>> refuses to admit when he's wrong, and that happens more often than
>> not.
>>
>> By responding to him, I *still* get to see his idiotic posts.
>
> I agree (!) with Boudewijn on this. Replying to the obvious morons
> isn't very different from feeding trolls.
>
>

Well, in this case, I think everyone who replied was wondering just what
the heck he was talking about.
!