My character must be diabetic.

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

Simmie Simmerson says...
>
> The last two characters I played... well before I begin I will tell you that
> I refrained from casting any spells or wearing any rings, since apparently
> that drains your stomach. I just used my quarterstaff. I died on level 3 in
> a gnomish mine, and I must have eaten 25 times. Food rations, lichens,
> fruit, even my favorite food popped up a few times.

It sounds like you aren't eating corpses.

> But I swear it was like
> after 20 turns I got hungry again, every single time. What... the...
> bloody... HELL!?

It's a turn every single time you type a letter. No way
you're getting hungry by the time you'e walked around the
edge of a typical sized room. Even with exaggeration,
hunger happens after a few hundred turns not a few dozen.

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

On Mon, 27 Jun 2005, Jym wrote:

> On Mon, 27 Jun 2005, Adam Lawson wrote:
>
>> "Ecch! That must have been poisonous!" is only bad if you're not resistant
>> (and some corpses that are poisonous grant said resistance... some times).
>> Others of your own race are bad to eat, as are former pets (and I think
>> cats, dogs, and ponies are off limits). And make sure stuff is fresh!
>
> Former pets can be eaten, not offered.
> Domestic animals can be offered, not eaten.
>
> Well, technically they can, but it's a rather bad idea.
>


Ah. I was close. So you can eat a former pet if it's not a domestic
animal?

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

In news:<6mSve.12331$pa3.11389@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>, Simmie
Simmerson <radiohead3@earthlink.net> says...
> The last two characters I played... well before I begin I will tell you that
> I refrained from casting any spells or wearing any rings, since apparently
> that drains your stomach. I just used my quarterstaff. I died on level 3 in
> a gnomish mine, and I must have eaten 25 times. Food rations, lichens,
> fruit, even my favorite food popped up a few times. But I swear it was like
> after 20 turns I got hungry again, every single time. What... the...
> bloody... HELL!? The only thing I can figure is that maybe constitution
> affects how much you have to eat. I kept getting lousy scores like 8 and 9.

Stressed/worse? Perhaps because of low Con+Str combination resulting in
a low carrying capacity?

Normal food consumption is 1 nutrition unit per turn. If stressed and
nothing else causing extra hunger you should consume 3 units per 2
turns. Still doesn't account for the extreme hunger you describe, since
even a lichen corpse has nutrition value 200 (slime mold 250, food
ration 800). Some fruits have really low nutrition value though.

According to the food spoiler the absolute maximum possible food
consumption is 64 units / 20 turns. This however requires you to be
wearing two rings (2/20), at least one of them a ring of hunger (10/20),
be wearing the Amulet (1/20) of Yendor (1/20), being stressed or worse
encumbered (10/20), creating conflict through non-artifact means
(10/20), and having some form of non-artifact regeneration going on
(10/20), in additin to your normal consumption (20/20). Still only 3.2
units/turn in average, so a lichen corpse would last for ~30 turns under
these extreme circumstances.

But if you were already fainting (nutrition level < 0) a lichen corpse
might take you only just above the 'hungry' level (nutrition 50-149) and
if you were also stressed, it could be a matter of only a few turns
until you dipped into 'hungry' again. Then perhaps you waited until
weak/fainting again for another 'small snack' which only gave you 50-200
points of nutrition and you'd soon be back in hungry/weak/fainting if
you even got above hungry.

If you are very low on food don't be too hard with the diet because if
you start fainting you will lose valuable food-finding time while
fainted (besides other obvious reasons not to lie unconscious in the
DoD).

/Kristoffer

--
This cookie has a scrap of paper inside. It reads:
Gurl fnl gung gurer'f bayl ubcr yrsg nsgre lbh'ir bcrarq Cnaqben'f obk.

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

> Stressed/worse? Perhaps because of low Con+Str combination resulting in
> a low carrying capacity?

No, I basically had what I started with. Aside from not being able to find
food, I wasn't able to find anything else, either. Weapons, armor and the
like, I just left laying on the ground. What's the point? Anyway, I had 10
strength. What happened, should not have. But it did.

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

In news:<1119890634.426258.19310@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, Doug
Freyburger <dfreybur@yahoo.com> says...
> Simmie Simmerson says...
> > The last two characters I played... well before I begin I will tell you that
> > I refrained from casting any spells or wearing any rings, since apparently
> > that drains your stomach. I just used my quarterstaff. I died on level 3 in
> > a gnomish mine, and I must have eaten 25 times. Food rations, lichens,
> > fruit, even my favorite food popped up a few times.
> It sounds like you aren't eating corpses.

Yup, it does (non-lichen). But that doesn't really explain the full
extent of the OP's problem. Good hint though.

> > But I swear it was like
> > after 20 turns I got hungry again, every single time. What... the...
> > bloody... HELL!?
> It's a turn every single time you type a letter. No way
> you're getting hungry by the time you'e walked around the
> edge of a typical sized room. Even with exaggeration,
> hunger happens after a few hundred turns not a few dozen.

Well, if he was already hungry and ate a low-nutrition fruit, he could
get hungry again on the next turn - or not even get out of the hungry
state at all. Lichen corpse, well if already fainting, still some
possibility for immediate hunger afterwards. Food ration OTOH - no, it
is not possible.

I know that I'm bending reality (Nethack reality at least) here, and
trying hard to put some credibility to the OP's writing. But still,
hunger can happen a few turns after eating. Not a common occurrence for
the bunch of us that likes to stay up close to the 1000 nutrition level
(where 'satiated' starts).

/Kristoffer

--
This cookie has a scrap of paper inside. It reads:
Gurl fnl gung vg'f abg bire gvyy gur sng ynqvrf fvat.

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

On Mon, 27 Jun 2005, Adam Lawson wrote:

> "Ecch! That must have been poisonous!" is only bad if you're not resistant
> (and some corpses that are poisonous grant said resistance... some times).
> Others of your own race are bad to eat, as are former pets (and I think
> cats, dogs, and ponies are off limits). And make sure stuff is fresh!

Former pets can be eaten, not offered.
Domestic animals can be offered, not eaten.

Well, technically they can, but it's a rather bad idea.

Hypocoristiquement,
Jym.

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

On Mon, 27 Jun 2005, Adam Lawson wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, 27 Jun 2005, Jym wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 27 Jun 2005, Adam Lawson wrote:
> >
> >> "Ecch! That must have been poisonous!" is only bad if you're not resistant
> >> (and some corpses that are poisonous grant said resistance... some times).
> >> Others of your own race are bad to eat, as are former pets (and I think
> >> cats, dogs, and ponies are off limits). And make sure stuff is fresh!
> >
> > Former pets can be eaten, not offered.
> > Domestic animals can be offered, not eaten.
> >
> > Well, technically they can, but it's a rather bad idea.
> >
>
>
> Ah. I was close. So you can eat a former pet if it's not a domestic
> animal?

Yes. You may want to double check in sppoilers to be sure. This is rather
usefull with pet giants :-) (Pet dragons also provide armor...)

Hypocoristiquement,
Jym.

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

Adam Lawson wrote:
> "Ecch! That must have been poisonous!" is only bad if you're not
> resistant (and some corpses that are poisonous grant said resistance...
> some times). Others of your own race are bad to eat, as are former pets
> (and I think cats, dogs, and ponies are off limits).

Ponies (and horses/warhorses) make perfectly fine meals. It's
just cats and dogs that you shouldn't eat.

--
John Campbell
jcampbel@lynn.ci-n.com

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

On Tue, 28 Jun 2005, John Campbell wrote:

> Adam Lawson wrote:
>> "Ecch! That must have been poisonous!" is only bad if you're not resistant
>> (and some corpses that are poisonous grant said resistance... some times).
>> Others of your own race are bad to eat, as are former pets (and I think
>> cats, dogs, and ponies are off limits).
>
> Ponies (and horses/warhorses) make perfectly fine meals. It's
> just cats and dogs that you shouldn't eat.
>

That seems kind of weird. I thought it was any of the main pet species.
This should be changed to be more accurate towards what the character has
had as a pet. So a knight could eat a horse and not get any sort of
negative effect?

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

actually, since knights are vegetarian, there is a negative effect.
(just don't ask me what it is, I don't remember it.)
On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 11:56:13 -0500
Adam Lawson <adam.lawson@gmail.com> wrote:
| That seems kind of weird. I thought it was any of the main pet species.
| This should be changed to be more accurate towards what the character has
| had as a pet. So a knight could eat a horse and not get any sort of
| negative effect?

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

On Tue, 28 Jun 2005, noah bedford wrote:

> actually, since knights are vegetarian, there is a negative effect.
> (just don't ask me what it is, I don't remember it.)

Monks are (theoretically) vegetarian. Not knights. And the negative effect
is a -1 to alignement, which is generally not a big issue after quest or
if you don't feed only on fresh blood (my ascended monk ate all the giant
corpse he found).

> On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 11:56:13 -0500
> Adam Lawson <adam.lawson@gmail.com> wrote:
> | That seems kind of weird. I thought it was any of the main pet species.
> | This should be changed to be more accurate towards what the character has
> | had as a pet. So a knight could eat a horse and not get any sort of
> | negative effect?
>

Hypocoristiquement,
Jym.

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

Quoting noah bedford <noahbedford@gmail.com>:
>Adam Lawson <adam.lawson@gmail.com> wrote:
>>This should be changed to be more accurate towards what the character has
>>had as a pet. So a knight could eat a horse and not get any sort of
>>negative effect?
>actually, since knights are vegetarian, there is a negative effect.

Don't top-post misinformation, please.
--
David Damerell <damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> flcl?
Today is First Thursday, Presuary.