Cryolemon

Originally Posted By: Miramor It's Magic-type damage that zaps affects you each turn, stacking with each acid attack up to 32767 damage per turn IIRC. Acid-protective items can block it and acid-curing items can remove it, but are rare. The "Cleanse" and "Major Cleansing" spells do *NOT* remove it. Yeah, that sounds vastly overpowered. It should perhaps be more powerful than poison, but not by that much.

How does acid damage actually work anyway?

Originally Posted By: Thuryl Acid counts as magical damage. I'm aware that it would be a lot of hassle, but maybe it should be it's own type?

Did anything ever come of the idea to allow custom sized towns?

Originally Posted By: Crynsos Hm, yeah I guess that would be the better version... maybe call the old invulnerable something like "Highely Protected" (as seen in the Exile Trilogy, Rentar-Ihrno) and call the new Invulnerable version just what is is supposed to do? As discussed above, I think "highly protected" makes the most sense.

Originally Posted By: Thuryl Some scenarios (such as At the Gallows, I believe) have "invulnerable" enemies that you're expected to kill, so "fixing" the ability is definitely not the way to go. Wouldn't it be possible to keep the current behaviour, and call it something different, then add a "fixed" version.

Originally Posted By: w of the dueck clan But seriously, whose ears can tell the difference between a waveform and a good mpeg? Whatever you do, do NOT start this discussion on a music forum lol: http://www.nfcboard.net/system/display.php?thread=9707&forum=9&page=1 Link contains some strong language.

Cool idea, if you do it.

Poisoned arrows could be useful, but the spell for it is better.

Originally Posted By: Celtic Minstrel Does it not already do that? But sorting would be good, yes, and these other suggestions are useful... I think it does to an extent. Not sure how much and how well it works though, since I've never used it lol.

Would it be easier to improve the in-game journal? Maybe look at that first with an option to export the journal to a text file being added later?

Making it unsigned makes sense, but I'm not sure why Jeff used a signed int for gold in the first place lol.

Originally Posted By: Celtic Minstrel I do want to remove the 30000 cap, though. Well, actually, I want to double it rather than remove it, but whatever... Is there any reason why the cap is 30,000, or is it just arbitrary?

Originally Posted By: The Almighty Doer of Stuff There could be a Preference for it, or just an LED in the Get window, that switches between automatically picking up gold and food and not automatically picking it up. Possibly. That makes sense. Or maybe a scenario option, so the designer chooses whether it happens in that scenario, which defaults to off for compatibility.

Originally Posted By: Miramor That would break Brotherhood of the Hand, where to progress beyond a certain point you have to get rid of all your food. I think all he was saying is that it should be like E2 where if there is gold or food around and you press "Get" the gold and food is added automatically and you don't need to click on each item of it.

Any idea why those spells aren't available to PCs? It always struck me as a bit odd.

Which are the ones that are unavailable to PCs? Wrack is one, but I can't figure out the other one. Would it be possible to be able to specify which spells a monster knows in the editor? It would be cool to be able to make a monster that could only cast say fire spells.

Originally Posted By: Miramor Idea for a new monster ability... Mindduel. If a party contains spellcasters, the monster has a chance of selecting one within twelve spaces and invoking Mindduel (as with the spell, but no Smoky Crystals needed). For this Mindduel would have to be working correctly, of course... Cool idea. On the subject of monsters, is there a list of exactly which spells monsters of different levels can cast? It would be quite cool to be able to choose which spells a monster could cast, but I'm not sure that would be easy to implement.

Originally Posted By: Celtic Minstrel Originally Posted By: Cryolemon Makes sense, I didn't know how the template towns stored their terrain. They're a feature that Exile 3 had which I intend to reimplement; the terrain will be stored in discrete chunks, and there may be multiple versions of some chunks. How is it stored now, as an array of terrain type values?

Originally Posted By: Celtic Minstrel That's not far off from what I said, though: the "regular town" subclass would have the size as variables. The only reason I'd keep a multi-class structure is to support the template towns, which have their terrain stored in quite a different way. Makes sense, I didn't know how the template towns stored their terrain.

Originally Posted By: Celtic Minstrel I don't see the point of storing a string description of the size. At present, the situation is much as Niemand described (presumably he's seen it). I have an abstract base class cTown, which contains most of the town data as well as pure virtual accessor-mutators (in Java terms, that's abstract methods; I'm guessing that's the same in C#?) for the variable-sized data. (I call them accessor-mutators because they return a reference to the data, allowing them to be used on the left hand size of an assignment.) Then I have three subclasses for the different sizes. I also have incomplete subclasses for template towns in the three sizes (they aren't currently used). So, if removing the size limits, I'd probably make template towns a subclass of the abstract town class (currently it's a completely separate class) and make a subclass to represent an ordinary town, which is basically the three existing classes merged into one. That makes sense. I still think it would be better to have one class for a town that has the size as variables, but having not looked at the code in great detail I'm not sure how plausible it is.

Originally Posted By: Celtic Minstrel The thing is, dynamically allocating a two-dimensional array is a little tricky. So I'd prefer to avoid it. Still, if you really think that town size limits should be removed, I can use a boost::multi_array to simplify it; this would also have the advantage of collapsing the current three classes into a single class, meaning there are only two types of towns: standard, and template. Would collapsing the town classes into one help? If I was doing it from scratch it would seem sensible if it looked something like this (in C#, since I don't really know C++) Code: Class Town{ //attributes of the town string sizeDescription; //Small, med, large, custom. int townWidth; int townHeight; //constructor public Town(int width, int height, string description) { sizeDescription = description; width = townWidth; height = townHeight; } //whatever methods apply to towns. } You then have code that automatically makes the variables correct if the user chooses "Small" "Medium" or "large", then let the user choose what the numbers are if they choose custom.

Originally Posted By: Celtic Minstrel This could theoretically be done, of course. However, the way it's currently handled is that there's a class for each size of town, all of which inherit from the town base class, so adding a larger size amounts to adding another class. Once that's done, it'll pretty much just "work", apart from possibly a few small things. Hmm. Could you not just add a "custom Town" class that allows for the size to be variable? I get how making an in-between town works, I'm thinking more of people who want to make larger towns.

Originally Posted By: echo $pdn; I think having towns larger than large would be nice, so one could make larger cities (like those in the Adventurer's Club series) without having to mess with noding around everything or make all the buildings miniature. I agree, it would be useful for things like that. Originally Posted By: Celtic Minstrel Well then, we'd just have to add another town size. Perhaps 128x128? Anyway, functionally that would be easy. There would probably be a few difficulties though. I'd prefer a "custom" option, but if it's too complex then it makes sense to just have a larger town size. I'm not sure anyone would want, say, a 512x512 town, but you never know lol. Originally Posted By: Celtic Minstrel Originally Posted By: Thuryl Self-summoning isn't a concern with any of the monsters in the default bladbase, so if a scenario designer puts it in, they've presumably put it in on purpose. It's only in BoA that vampires can summon other vampires ad infinitum. Okay, fine. Vampires are an interesting point,since they can create other vampires, but not by summoning... Not sure there's anyway to model this in BOE's system though...

Originally Posted By: Celtic Minstrel Idea: should summoning be tweaked so that monsters can't summon other monsters of the same type through spell-casting? So you're saying for example that a Nephil shaman shouldn't be able to summon Nephilim? That makes sense. A different suggestion now: Is it reasonable to ask for customizable town sizes? i.e Instead of just Small, Medium and Large, you have Custom as well? Also, any chance of increasing the limit on dialog slots per town to 32?