Scrolls/potions and bags

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.
39 answers Last reply
More about scrolls potions bags
  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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?
  4. 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.
  5. 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
  6. 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.
  7. 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.
  8. 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/
  9. 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.
  10. 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.
  11. 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
  12. Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

    John Campbell <jcampbel@lynn.ci-n.com> wrote in
    news:og_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.
  13. Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

    "Jym" <moyen@loria.fr> wrote in message
    news:Pine.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*
  14. 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.
  15. 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.
  16. 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.
  17. 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.
  18. 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.
  19. 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
  20. 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...)
  21. 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.
  22. 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/>
  23. 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.
  24. 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/>
  25. 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
  26. 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
  27. 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
  28. 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?
  29. 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?
  30. 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.
  31. 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.
  32. 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.
  33. 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.
  34. 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.
  35. 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
  36. 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.
  37. 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
  38. 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.
  39. 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.
Ask a new question

Read More

Games Video Games