Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (
More info?)
Kevin Wayne <killedbyafoo@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On a broader note, why is it that vampires leave a "human corpse," but
>werefoo leave a werefoo corpse (not "human"), and yet trigger
>cannibalism when eaten? It would make more sense if werefoo left human
>corpses (don't werewolves change back into humans after death in the old
>movies?),
Cannibalism is triggered by whether the corpse is of a monster type whose
corpses are designated to be of your species.
Werefoo meat is special (eating it gives you lycanthropy), and having
the corpse appear entirely human would require extra special casing.
Given that soldiers leave not "human corpses" but "soldier corpses",
having werefoos leave werefoo corpses seems perfectly reasonable, given
that you can see that they are werefoos even if you never see them take
on their animal form.
Vampires are treated like zombies and mummies; they leave an
unremarkable (but unfit for consumption due to aging) generic corpse of
whatever kind of thing they were in life. All vampires are currently
treated as having been humans in life, so they leave generic human corpses.
>or if vampires left "vampire corpses" which then triggered
>cannibalism when eaten.
In 3.1.3 (and possibly 3.2; I can't remember), vampires left vampire
corpses, which could be safely eaten by humans (I think they might have
been poisonous, though). The Dev Team could have decided to add the
flag that makes a monster count as human. Instead, they decided to
have them leave generic human corpses.
--
Martin Read - my opinions are my own. share them if you wish.
\_\/_/ in the metal and blood in the scent and mascara on a backcloth of
\ / lashes and scars in a flood of your tears in sackcloth and ashes
\/ -- Sisters of Mercy, "Flood I"
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram