Egyptian patch in development

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
G

Guest

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

One of the things I thought Nethack didn't have enough of was useless
artifact weapons. I mean Werebane, Demonbane, Giantslayer, Orcrist, Sting,
Dragonbane, Ogresmasher, and Trollsbane ... well, there just ain't enough
of 'em. I was thinking, what about an anti-mummy weapon? Mummybane! But
there's no point in adding in another useless artifact weapon if it's just
going to be ... well, useless. So, what would go along with Mummybane?

Then I looked at the list of mummies in the game. Frankly, there aren't
enough of them. Kobold, gnome, orc, dwarf, elf, human, ettin, giant ...
that's all kind of, well, boring. Standard mummy fare, really. So I was
thinking, why not add more mummies? Some initial ideas I thought of were
dragon mummies (all eight varieties!), gelatinous mummy, mummified cat,
mummy lich, etc. Frankly, mummies should be the largest monster class
because /anything/ can become mummified. And of course, mummies would be
more powerful versions of their non-mummified counterparts (once you come
back from the dead, you're understandably very angry). This would add more
challenge to the endgame.

So, now I have all of these extra mummy types. What to do next? Make a
concentrated mummy area, of course! So I came up with the concept of a
Burial Chamber. Like an anthive or a beehive, but full of mummies! The
floors of the burial chamber would have random gems and money. The message
when entering a burial chamber would be "You enter a dazzling burial
chamber!"

And with all of these new mummies, surely they should drop interesting
items? They already drop mummy wrappings, but that's pretty much the only
mummy-exclusive item we currently have. So I was thinking of adding in
more mummy-specific items. Why can't mummies drop mummy gloves? That's
all I've come up with so far, but I'm sure you all can think of some other
things that go along with Egyptian lore. Maybe scarab carapaces?

Right now the Egyptian patch is only in the development stages, but I
assure you, it's going to be a blast when it all comes together. It'll be
an exciting combination of a new weapon, new enemies, new items, and a new
dungeon room type.

--
~ Cyde Weys ~

Mana du vortes, mana du vortes
Aeria gloris, aeria gloris
 
G

Guest

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

Cyde Weys wrote:

>
> So, now I have all of these extra mummy types. What to do next? Make a
> concentrated mummy area, of course! So I came up with the concept of a
> Burial Chamber. Like an anthive or a beehive, but full of mummies! The
> floors of the burial chamber would have random gems and money. The message
> when entering a burial chamber would be "You enter a dazzling burial
> chamber!"

This sounds exciting! :)
I think you should also make special bonuses for archeologists when
they enter such a chamber, like finding traps more easily (if you
intend to put traps), or something like that. After all, visiting
such chambers would be an archeologist routine job.

> And with all of these new mummies, surely they should drop interesting
> items? They already drop mummy wrappings, but that's pretty much the only
> mummy-exclusive item we currently have. So I was thinking of adding in
> more mummy-specific items. Why can't mummies drop mummy gloves? That's
> all I've come up with so far, but I'm sure you all can think of some other
> things that go along with Egyptian lore. Maybe scarab carapaces?

Are there already amulets in form of scarabs in nethack? If not, this
would definitely be a mummy item to add I think.

Good luck for the development of the patch!

Clemence
 
G

Guest

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

Cyde Weys wrote:
> "Clemence Magnien" <clemence.magnien@shs.polytechnique.fr> wrote in
> news:1120632478.842198.86390@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
>
> > Cyde Weys wrote:

>
> I'm thinking an advantage you could confer to archaeologists would be a
> good chance of obtaining Mummybane through some action in a burial
> chamber. I'm not quite sure what the mechanism would be, but maybe add
> a special kind of fountain near the entrance to burial chambers that
> usually have negative effects when quaffed from, but for archaeologists,
> have a decent chance of generating Mummybane?
>

Yes, increased chance of getting Mummybane sounds cool.

> Also, what kind of weapon should Mummybane be? There's already too many
> swords, so I was thinking, how about a lance? There are no artifact
> lances as it stands now, and for whatever reason I can conceive of a
> lance being the ideal weapon to fight mummies with. Mummies are slow
> but powerful and you certainly don't want to get up close to their
> decaying flesh ... so why not poke their decaying flesh with a lance
> from far away? Makes perfect sense to me.

Yes, I agree it should not be a sword as there are many of them.
But... what about an axe? As mummies are undead creature, I think
maybe ordinary damage does not harm them that much. An axe on
the other hand might have a chance of cutting a limb.
Or would it possible to make a weapon (like a dagger maybe) that
would let you be quick only if you attack a mummy? Anyway I
think a dagger makes sense againts a mummy also, as it would allow
you to cut the bandadges that prevent the flesh to rot, hence
the mummy would decay faster...


> I had some additional ideas after I posted this original message.
>
> The higher level mummies (not the run-of-the-mill kobold mummies or
> whatever) would have a chance of dropping a reed stylus. It would work
> similar to a magic marker except it would have a failure rate in
> addition to the charge rate. Something like 50% of the time it would
> generate a message like, "You try to write a scroll of <blah>, but the
> words warp into strange hieroglyphics and the reed stylus and scroll of
> blank paper disappear in a puff of smoke." This is to make sure that
> they are not a replacement for magic markers. Also, their drop rate and
> failure percentage would have to be tuned such that reverse-genoing
> mummies and then writing more genocide scrolls with the newly dropped
> stylii could not be a self-sustaining process.
>
> Also I was thinking of something like a scarab carapace that would be
> dropped. It would function sort of like how dragon scales do now. On
> its own it's just a 2AC piece of chest armor with nothing special, maybe
> a small damage mitigation ability. But read a scroll of enchant armor
> and it turns into an 8AC carapace armor. It can be safely enchanted to
> +7 (like elven armor). Thus, a fully-enchanted carapace armor has one
> more AC than DSM but lacks the special abilities, so it is not a
> replacement. It would be very light though, something for the weight-
> conscious adventurer (it would also be a viable alternative if someone
> already has magic resistance and reflection covered through amulets,
> cloaks, and shields, and do not need a GDSM or SDSM).

Hm, I think a scarab armor _shoul_ have some special magical effects...
Maybe something evil, like prevent spell casting, or removing
telepathy, or maybe one thing nice and one thing bad, likes, gives
warning but hinder spellcasting or whatever...
The idea of a scarab carapace that is only an armor feels somehow
wrong, but, why not!

>
> And then of course there is the scarab amulet you mentioned. I'm
> thinking it should have some sort of random effects that are invoked
> when it is (a)pplied while worn. For balance purposes, it would take 10
> turns to put on so that you couldn't just put it on for its effects
> really quickly and then swap it out for the "real" amulet of reflection
> or life saving or whatever. It would have a variety of abilities, all
> of them beneficial - perhaps an equal chance of healing the adventurer,
> curing maladies, identifying one random object in inventory, etc. It
> also has a decent chance of doing nothing with each application and a
> small chance of poofing after each usage.

Yes, that sounds nice. I had no idea what it could do, only what
it should look like! :)

>
> Ohh and by the way, it'd be cool to have a new kind of grave, a
> sarcophagus, that when you dig up has a chance of having something nice
> in it OR a mummy. This would go exclusively in burial chambers, of
> course.

Yes, definitely sarcophaguses! :)

As for king and queen mummies, names that come on my mind are :
Nefertiti, Toutankhamon (however that is spelled), Ramses.
There's also a famous one who has a greek name I cannot remmber,
but I think this one was after all the pyramids and mummy things.

Ah, and what about a pyramidical amulet? Or a sceptre,
I see pictures of pharao's with scepters in my mind. Did they
not have two? Is it possible to think of two scepters that
might have nice effects only if you have the two of them?

Clemence
 
G

Guest

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

Jakob Creutzig wrote:

>
> Hmh.. Scarabs could be more powerful kinds of amulets, but maybe
> with negative side--effects. A scarab could act like an amulet
> of foo, plus a luckstone or some resistance, or grant a slightly
> improved magic recovery. On the other hand, they could cancel
> out a resistance while being worn, make HP recovery slower, or
> increase attack ratings of certain monsters (mummies come to
> mind ;-))

Yes, I think that things coming from mummies having negative
and positive effects as a same time is nice.

>
> Btw, higher mummies should be able to summon insects at least.

Insects, definitely! :)

Clemence
 
G

Guest

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

Clemence Magnien wrote:

>
> Yes, I think that things coming from mummies having negative
> and positive effects as a same time is nice.
>

Oh, and also: shouldn't _everything_ (except perhaps
Mummybane) that you can get in a burial chambers bu cursed?
 
G

Guest

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

Jym wrote:

>
> Tutankhamon, Ramses, Tutmosis, Akhenaton, Ptolemee.
> Nefertiti.

Aha! Ptolemee, that's the one I was looking for!
And Akhenaton should have been obvious since I'm french....

>
> Hypocoristiquement,

Woah, I finally decided to look for 'hyporistiquement' in a
dictionnary, and it really exists! :) I'm baffled. Anyway I'm
glad I've looked up, because I thought it was a combination of
words and I spent a long time trying to figure out which words...

Clemence
 
G

Guest

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

"Clemence Magnien" <clemence.magnien@shs.polytechnique.fr> wrote in
news:1120632478.842198.86390@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

> Cyde Weys wrote:
>
>>
>> So, now I have all of these extra mummy types. What to do next?
>> Make a concentrated mummy area, of course! So I came up with the
>> concept of a Burial Chamber. Like an anthive or a beehive, but full
>> of mummies! The floors of the burial chamber would have random gems
>> and money. The message when entering a burial chamber would be "You
>> enter a dazzling burial chamber!"
>
> This sounds exciting! :)
> I think you should also make special bonuses for archeologists when
> they enter such a chamber, like finding traps more easily (if you
> intend to put traps), or something like that. After all, visiting
> such chambers would be an archeologist routine job.

I'm thinking an advantage you could confer to archaeologists would be a
good chance of obtaining Mummybane through some action in a burial
chamber. I'm not quite sure what the mechanism would be, but maybe add
a special kind of fountain near the entrance to burial chambers that
usually have negative effects when quaffed from, but for archaeologists,
have a decent chance of generating Mummybane?

Also, what kind of weapon should Mummybane be? There's already too many
swords, so I was thinking, how about a lance? There are no artifact
lances as it stands now, and for whatever reason I can conceive of a
lance being the ideal weapon to fight mummies with. Mummies are slow
but powerful and you certainly don't want to get up close to their
decaying flesh ... so why not poke their decaying flesh with a lance
from far away? Makes perfect sense to me.

>> And with all of these new mummies, surely they should drop
>> interesting items? They already drop mummy wrappings, but that's
>> pretty much the only mummy-exclusive item we currently have. So I
>> was thinking of adding in more mummy-specific items. Why can't
>> mummies drop mummy gloves? That's all I've come up with so far, but
>> I'm sure you all can think of some other things that go along with
>> Egyptian lore. Maybe scarab carapaces?
>
> Are there already amulets in form of scarabs in nethack? If not, this
> would definitely be a mummy item to add I think.
>
> Good luck for the development of the patch!

Thanks, I'll try my best.

I had some additional ideas after I posted this original message.

The higher level mummies (not the run-of-the-mill kobold mummies or
whatever) would have a chance of dropping a reed stylus. It would work
similar to a magic marker except it would have a failure rate in
addition to the charge rate. Something like 50% of the time it would
generate a message like, "You try to write a scroll of <blah>, but the
words warp into strange hieroglyphics and the reed stylus and scroll of
blank paper disappear in a puff of smoke." This is to make sure that
they are not a replacement for magic markers. Also, their drop rate and
failure percentage would have to be tuned such that reverse-genoing
mummies and then writing more genocide scrolls with the newly dropped
stylii could not be a self-sustaining process.

Also I was thinking of something like a scarab carapace that would be
dropped. It would function sort of like how dragon scales do now. On
its own it's just a 2AC piece of chest armor with nothing special, maybe
a small damage mitigation ability. But read a scroll of enchant armor
and it turns into an 8AC carapace armor. It can be safely enchanted to
+7 (like elven armor). Thus, a fully-enchanted carapace armor has one
more AC than DSM but lacks the special abilities, so it is not a
replacement. It would be very light though, something for the weight-
conscious adventurer (it would also be a viable alternative if someone
already has magic resistance and reflection covered through amulets,
cloaks, and shields, and do not need a GDSM or SDSM).

And then of course there is the scarab amulet you mentioned. I'm
thinking it should have some sort of random effects that are invoked
when it is (a)pplied while worn. For balance purposes, it would take 10
turns to put on so that you couldn't just put it on for its effects
really quickly and then swap it out for the "real" amulet of reflection
or life saving or whatever. It would have a variety of abilities, all
of them beneficial - perhaps an equal chance of healing the adventurer,
curing maladies, identifying one random object in inventory, etc. It
also has a decent chance of doing nothing with each application and a
small chance of poofing after each usage.


Soo ... what do you think? I'm hoping that by adding in all of the
additional dangerous mummies it balances out the advantages of the new
items. I'm also, of course, open to suggestions on any of the items
I've laid out as well as suggestions for anything else I didn't think
of.

Ohh and by the way, it'd be cool to have a new kind of grave, a
sarcophagus, that when you dig up has a chance of having something nice
in it OR a mummy. This would go exclusively in burial chambers, of
course.


--
~ Cyde Weys ~

Mana du vortes, mana du vortes
Aeria gloris, aeria gloris
 
G

Guest

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

Cyde Weys <cyde@umd.edu> wrote in
news:Xns968B34D796B012galopagosterrapincy@199.45.49.11:

> Soo ... what do you think? I'm hoping that by adding in all of the
> additional dangerous mummies it balances out the advantages of the new
> items. I'm also, of course, open to suggestions on any of the items
> I've laid out as well as suggestions for anything else I didn't think
> of.

Silly me, I forgot about the king mummy and queen mummy. There would be
only one of each per game and would be very hard, ala named demons such as
Yeenoghu. They would be generated in burial tombs or in the instance when
your character has both a high xplvl and dlvl. They would be given random
names from historical mummies ... I can only think of King Tut and Queen
Cleopatra right now but I'm sure there are a lot more historical mummy
leader names to draw from.


--
~ Cyde Weys ~

Mana du vortes, mana du vortes
Aeria gloris, aeria gloris
 
G

Guest

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

Cyde Weys <cyde@umd.edu> writes:

> And with all of these new mummies, surely they should drop interesting
> items? They already drop mummy wrappings, but that's pretty much the only
> mummy-exclusive item we currently have. So I was thinking of adding in
> more mummy-specific items. Why can't mummies drop mummy gloves? That's
> all I've come up with so far, but I'm sure you all can think of some other
> things that go along with Egyptian lore. Maybe scarab carapaces?

Hmh.. Scarabs could be more powerful kinds of amulets, but maybe
with negative side--effects. A scarab could act like an amulet
of foo, plus a luckstone or some resistance, or grant a slightly
improved magic recovery. On the other hand, they could cancel
out a resistance while being worn, make HP recovery slower, or
increase attack ratings of certain monsters (mummies come to
mind ;-))

Btw, higher mummies should be able to summon insects at least.

The whole idea sounds especially suitable for the archeologist
class. Maybe one should tweak his Quest this way, and/or
improve the chances for mummy tombs greatly if the player is
an arch.

Best,
Jakob
 
G

Guest

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

On Wed, 6 Jul 2005, Cyde Weys wrote:

> Also, what kind of weapon should Mummybane be? There's already too many
> swords, so I was thinking, how about a lance? There are no artifact
> lances as it stands now, and for whatever reason I can conceive of a
> lance being the ideal weapon to fight mummies with. Mummies are slow
> but powerful and you certainly don't want to get up close to their
> decaying flesh ... so why not poke their decaying flesh with a lance
> from far away? Makes perfect sense to me.

In slash'em, you could make it a firearm to go with all those mummy horror
films where archeologist of the late 19th/early 20th discover mummy and
fight them with their guns.

Or into flamethrowers since this is likely to be the best thing to quickly
dispatch mummies from long distance :)



And maybe mummies can be generated from corpses (or zombies ?) and mummy
wrapping with the appropriate magic (yet another dreadfull spell for lich,
reviving corpses into mummies/zombies, now you have to kill them twice !)

Hypocoristiquement,
Jym.
 
G

Guest

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

On Wed, 6 Jul 2005, Cyde Weys wrote:

> Cyde Weys <cyde@umd.edu> wrote in
> news:Xns968B34D796B012galopagosterrapincy@199.45.49.11:
>
> > Soo ... what do you think? I'm hoping that by adding in all of the
> > additional dangerous mummies it balances out the advantages of the new
> > items. I'm also, of course, open to suggestions on any of the items
> > I've laid out as well as suggestions for anything else I didn't think
> > of.
>
> Silly me, I forgot about the king mummy and queen mummy. There would be
> only one of each per game and would be very hard, ala named demons such as
> Yeenoghu. They would be generated in burial tombs or in the instance when
> your character has both a high xplvl and dlvl. They would be given random
> names from historical mummies ... I can only think of King Tut and Queen
> Cleopatra right now but I'm sure there are a lot more historical mummy
> leader names to draw from.

Tutankhamon, Ramses, Tutmosis, Akhenaton, Ptolemee.
Nefertiti.

Those are french transliteration, english ones may vary.

Hypocoristiquement,
Jym.
 
G

Guest

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

On 2005-07-06, dogscoff@eudoramail.com wrote:
>
>
> Gary Olson wrote:
>> Nethack has no artifact polearms. So I suggest you add the Scythe of the
>> Reaper. This of course would have little effect against mummies because
>> the whole purpose of the scythe is to "mow down" the living: level
>> drain, HP drain, whatever. The weapon would scare mummies; because
>> mummies want to live beyond their natural lifespan.
>>
> What happens when you get to the plains and meet the scythe's rightful
> owner?
>
Obviously the scythe appeared in the dungeons of doom because the
rightful owner has abandoned it in favour of some more modern equipment.

Death mounts his combine harvester --more--
....

--
Jann Ohle Claussen | GPG-Key-ID E7149169
http://www.stud.uni-goettingen.de/~s251251
"My education message will resignate amonst all parents."
--dubya
 
S

Sean

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
1,007
0
19,280
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Clemence Magnien wrote:

>>Yes, I think that things coming from mummies having negative
>>and positive effects as a same time is nice.
>
> Oh, and also: shouldn't _everything_ (except perhaps
> Mummybane) that you can get in a burial chambers bu cursed?

And merely opening the door makes you deathly sick. Okay, maybe just
poisoned.
 
S

Sean

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
1,007
0
19,280
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Cyde Weys wrote:

>>Soo ... what do you think? I'm hoping that by adding in all of the
>>additional dangerous mummies it balances out the advantages of the new
>>items. I'm also, of course, open to suggestions on any of the items
>>I've laid out as well as suggestions for anything else I didn't think
>>of.
>
> Silly me, I forgot about the king mummy and queen mummy. There would be
> only one of each per game and would be very hard, ala named demons such as
> Yeenoghu. They would be generated in burial tombs or in the instance when
> your character has both a high xplvl and dlvl. They would be given random
> names from historical mummies ... I can only think of King Tut and Queen
> Cleopatra right now but I'm sure there are a lot more historical mummy
> leader names to draw from.

#chat
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings!"
You kill Ozymandias! Ozymandias' body crumbles into dust.

Say, there's an idea for an artifact in the statue category. "The Leg of
Ozymandias". Conveys disintegration-resistance, perhaps? #Invoke to
cause fear? "The foo looks on the Leg of Ozymandias and despairs!"
 
C

Chuck

Distinguished
Nov 19, 2001
1,479
0
19,280
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

> And with all of these new mummies, surely they should drop interesting
> items? They already drop mummy wrappings, but that's pretty much the only
> mummy-exclusive item we currently have. So I was thinking of adding in
> more mummy-specific items. Why can't mummies drop mummy gloves? That's
> all I've come up with so far, but I'm sure you all can think of some other
> things that go along with Egyptian lore. Maybe scarab carapaces?

the dung/scarab beetles from the movie The Mummy come to mind...
 
G

Guest

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

Ohle Claussen wrote:

>On 2005-07-06, dogscoff@eudoramail.com wrote:
>
>
>>Gary Olson wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Nethack has no artifact polearms. So I suggest you add the Scythe of the
>>>Reaper. This of course would have little effect against mummies because
>>>the whole purpose of the scythe is to "mow down" the living: level
>>>drain, HP drain, whatever. The weapon would scare mummies; because
>>>mummies want to live beyond their natural lifespan.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>What happens when you get to the plains and meet the scythe's rightful
>>owner?
>>
>>
>>
>Obviously the scythe appeared in the dungeons of doom because the
>rightful owner has abandoned it in favour of some more modern equipment.
>
>Death mounts his combine harvester --more--
>...
>
>
ROFLMAO...
John Deere....Death rides only the best in modern harveting equipment.
 
G

Guest

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

Cyde Weys wrote:
> One of the things I thought Nethack didn't have enough of was useless
> artifact weapons. I mean snip Demonbane snip...

Agreed about all except Demonbane. I've taken a liking to Tourists and
have two coming along nicely (one has forgotten where he left 7
candles). One is two-weaponing Grayswandir/sabre and the other
Demonbane/sabre. Apart from the antihallucinogenic properties of
Grayswandir, it seems that both combinations (blessed and +7) are
equally effective against the worst monsters in the deeper levels-so
far. Perhaps Sunsword, a lamp with sharp edges would be better included
rather than Demonbane. Possibly it's only a newbies opinion, but I do
think that the spoilers under rate Demonbane-at least so far as its
usefulness for a Tourist is concerned.
Tom.
 
G

Guest

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

If you're going to add a zillion types of mummies, you might want to consider
making them regular monsters with a flag set somewhere instead of inventing a
new monster type for each kind of mummy....
--
Ken Arromdee / arromdee_AT_rahul.net / http://www.rahul.net/arromdee

"You know, you blow up one sun and suddenly everyone expects you to walk
on water." --Samantha Carter, Stargate SG-1
 
G

Guest

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

Ken Arromdee wrote:
> If you're going to add a zillion types of mummies, you might want to consider
> making them regular monsters with a flag set somewhere instead of inventing a
> new monster type for each kind of mummy....

Well actually, they were all going to fall under M, but that might be
excessive. The game already has S_MUMMY for 'M' monsters I don't want
to overload that with my new mummies. So a mummy dog, for instance,
would fall under 'd' instead of 'M'.

My question now is - should all mummies drop mummy wrappings, or just
the humanoid mummies which already fall under S_MUMMY? I'm thinking
the latter. If you search through the source code for specific
instances that handle mummies, there aren't many. There pretty much
are: dying to one is a special case, they are created with a chance of
having mummy wrappings, they are created by digging up tombs, they are
defined in role.c as being enemies of archaelogists (if I'm
interpreting that correctly), and some other insignificant things.
These are all "running" off of the S_MUMMY flag, which is also what
makes mummies get assigned the "M" character.

So I probably need to add an M1, M2, or M3 flag that indicates that the
creature is a mummy, find out all of S_MUMMY is referenced that doesn't
refer to how it is displayed, and change it over to use the new mummy
flag. Any sourcedivers or source-editors care to comment on this
approach? A lot of where S_MUMMY is found is in a big switch()
statement related to monster species, and it might get ugly to have to
put special ifs before or after these long blocks.
 
G

Guest

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

In article <dagonf$2r3d$1@gwdu112.gwdg.de>, Ohle Claussen wrote:
> On 2005-07-06, dogscoff@eudoramail.com wrote:
>>
>> What happens when you get to the plains and meet the scythe's rightful
>> owner?
>>
> Obviously the scythe appeared in the dungeons of doom because the
> rightful owner has abandoned it in favour of some more modern equipment.

> Death mounts his combine harvester --more--
> ...

You must have read Pratchett, right?-)

--
Panu
"You haven't really been anywhere until you've got back home",
Twoflower in "The Light Fantastic"
 
G

Guest

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

Cyde Weys wrote:
>
> One of the things I thought Nethack didn't have enough of was useless
> artifact weapons. I mean Werebane, Demonbane, Giantslayer, Orcrist, Sting,
> Dragonbane, Ogresmasher, and Trollsbane ... well, there just ain't enough
> of 'em. I was thinking, what about an anti-mummy weapon? Mummybane! But
> there's no point in adding in another useless artifact weapon if it's just
> going to be ... well, useless. So, what would go along with Mummybane?

I think it needs to be a grappling hook. Mummies are
put into pyramids, and a gappling hook is used in
stuff like stone work.

> So, now I have all of these extra mummy types. What to do next? Make a
> concentrated mummy area, of course! So I came up with the concept of a
> Burial Chamber. Like an anthive or a beehive, but full of mummies! The
> floors of the burial chamber would have random gems and money. The message
> when entering a burial chamber would be "You enter a dazzling burial
> chamber!"

I'd like this as a Quest. As an alternate for priests
or archeologists?
 
G

Guest

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

Doug Freyburger <dfreybur@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Cyde Weys wrote:
>>
>> One of the things I thought Nethack didn't have enough of was useless
>> artifact weapons. I mean Werebane, Demonbane, Giantslayer, Orcrist, Sting,
>> Dragonbane, Ogresmasher, and Trollsbane ... well, there just ain't enough
>> of 'em. I was thinking, what about an anti-mummy weapon? Mummybane! But
>> there's no point in adding in another useless artifact weapon if it's just
>> going to be ... well, useless. So, what would go along with Mummybane?
>
> I think it needs to be a grappling hook. Mummies are
> put into pyramids, and a gappling hook is used in
> stuff like stone work.

No, grappling hook is used to mush and pull the brains out through the nose.
Now, where are the canopic jars?

--
Pasi Kallinen
paxed@alt.org
 
G

Guest

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

On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Pasi Kallinen wrote:

> Doug Freyburger <dfreybur@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Cyde Weys wrote:
> >>
> >> One of the things I thought Nethack didn't have enough of was useless
> >> artifact weapons. I mean Werebane, Demonbane, Giantslayer, Orcrist, Sting,
> >> Dragonbane, Ogresmasher, and Trollsbane ... well, there just ain't enough
> >> of 'em. I was thinking, what about an anti-mummy weapon? Mummybane! But
> >> there's no point in adding in another useless artifact weapon if it's just
> >> going to be ... well, useless. So, what would go along with Mummybane?
> >
> > I think it needs to be a grappling hook. Mummies are
> > put into pyramids, and a gappling hook is used in
> > stuff like stone work.
>
> No, grappling hook is used to mush and pull the brains out through the nose.

Which, of course, is completely false but a big part of the 'egyptian
folklore' (well, of the folklore that has been rebuild recentely). So I
guess, this could go without major trouble in nethack...

> Now, where are the canopic jars?

In which you'll find rottent tripe rations ? (well, not rotten, but
probably not really eadible either)

--
Hypocoristiquement,
Jym.

Adresse mail plus valide à partir de septembre 2005.
Utiliser l'adresse de redirection permanente :
Jean-Yves.Moyen `at` ens-lyon.org
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom