Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (
More info?)
On 19 Jul 2005 13:27:26 +0100 (BST), David Damerell
<damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>Quoting Jove <invalid@invalid.invalid>:
>><damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>>>Quoting Jove <invalid@invalid.invalid>:
>>>[Of Magicbane]
>>>> The only special attack that decreases is stunning.
>>>> From +2 to +7 probing increases from 5.5% to 25.5%
>
>Another observation here is that the chance of an insightful probe
>decreases with enchantment. That's not a big positive effect, but it
>certainly is a positive effect.
Yes, you're certainly right. I've recently started comparing
the monster's armor with the monster's armor class to estimate
the enchantment on the monster's armor. A plain gnome with an AC
of 9 and wearing just an iron skull cap means the skull cap is
+0.
The monster inventory items may also spur me to try for an
insta-kill. Good potions to save for myself, bad potions
to keep from being used on me, good/bad wands ditto, etc.
>
>>>> stunning decreases from 14.5% to 9.5%
>>>> scaring increases from 2.7% to 3.6%
>>>> confusion increases from 2.0% to 3.0%
>>>Cancellation is at 10% up until +2 and 5% up until +5.
>> Thanks for a clear statement. The more I look at the
>>table the more confused I get.
>> Do you know why there's an unexplained extra d4 in every
>>column to the right of PROBE?
>
>See later.
>
>> Is there an explanation for why CANCEL (unlike every other
>>attack) does not have a column where it appears on its own.
>
>Yes. There's a base 40% chance that Magicbane will do a magical attack of
>some kind. This gets a base +d4 damage independent of all effects below.
>
>This attack has a chance to be a stun. A stun is +d4 damage (but we
>continue to say that stunning is a junk effect, because the damage is
>subsumed in the overall average damage.)
>
>Besides stunning there is a chance that the attack is a scare, which is
>+d4 damage, and a lesser chance that the attack is a cancel, which is
>+d4 damage. However, these chances are assessed with the same dieroll, so
>all cancels are also scares.
>
>An attack that is none of a stun, a scare, or a cancel is a probe.
>
>The trouble is that the top axis is trying to represent 2 independent
>axes; stun/no-stun and scare/cancel/no-scare. The chances for a given
>enchantment could look like this;
>
>+2 NO SCARE SCARE SCARE+CANCEL
>NO STUN 3d4 5.5% probe 4d4 2.7% 5d4 2.7%
>STUN 4d4 14.5% 5d4 7.3% 6d4 7.3%
>
>>>However, this does provide a definite reason to stop
>>>at +2 or +5 depending on how much one values cancellation.
>>Shouldn't that be "values a %20 chance of cancellation,
>>versus the other effects of Magicbane"?
>
>I think the two statements are saying much the same thing; clearly mine
>has an implicit "relative to other things".
Perhaps so, but it also implies that Magicbane's cancellation
is like cancellation in general, at least to me. Spell/wand of
cancellation work at a distance Magicbane's cancellation doesn't.
It also seems to be saying "how much one likes cancellation",
with no reasons given. I value playing wizards, but that's not
an argument for anyone else to do so.
I value the wizard's starting cloak of magic resistance, which
neutralizes poly, teleport, and anti-magic traps. That is an
argument other people can look at, verify independently, and
decide for themselves how much they value it.
Maybe I've just come into the argument too late and all the
crushing arguments for leaving Magicbane at +2 have been
condensed down to key phrases which implicitly include the
full effect. Like the legendary prison where the jokes had
been told so often they were numbered and prisoners just said
the number instead of the full joke.
It's frustrating to be told "You're not saying anything new"
with no backup. If that's so, then the answer should be on file
and whipping it out should be simple.
>
>Personally I do not use Magicbane to do maximum damage, because I will
>almost certainly have an artifact weapon more effective at that in the
>late game. I wield it for curse resistance - all the time after Rodney
>is dead except where enough monsters block the way that I will lose
>significant time fighting them
This is more like it. Your point about not using Magicbane as
your primary weapon is a telling one. In that case the
cancellation for lichs is useful. And you'd use your enchant
weapons scrolls on your primary (and secondary, if #twoweaponing)
weapons.
For my overpowered wizards spells are my primary weapon,
frequently including the spell of cancellation. And I still
forget to try the spell of cancellation on Lichs while stabbing
them to death with Magicbane.
> - and against cursing liches and the like.
>Against liches, I suppose the chance of cancelling saves more time (once
>they're cancelled you can beat on them with the big artifact weapon with
>impunity) than having more damage in MB would.
That does make a lot of sense. And it gives a monster where
canceling at melee distance would be worthwhile.
Can't cockatrices can be canceled as well? I seem to remember
hearing one coughing instead of hissing. Now there's a case
where it's difficult to choose between going for a quicker kill
or hoping for a magical cancel attack.
At 20% probability, three hits should give a 48.8% probability
of a cancellation effect. I swear I don't see them anywhere near
that often when Magicbane is at +0/1/2. But I'll be keeping
a closer watch in the future.
Jove
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram