Endgame hints?

[Guest]

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

Jove wrote:
>
> But without knowing what those effects are, it's not a decision
> so much as a personal affection for the name. And it's certainly
> possible to know what those effects are. [...]
>
> To me, if someone says they highly value cancellation, that
> means they carry a wand of cancellation with them at all times

Well, I am one who values it high (and apparently you quoted me here).

But that's the least reason to carry the wand of cancellation with me.
Because it is more a problem that usually there are _not enough_ such
powerful wands generated in the game to use them; DiamondRobin found
only a single wand (with 6 or 8 charges?) in the whole game. A usual
amount for me is two or maybe three wands per finished game, not more.

You simply cannot zap every critical monster. So it can be helpful if
you have the Magicbane.

> (if they don't have Magicbane and do have a charged wand of
> cancellation).

(There were also only a few charging scrolls in the mentioned game.
And if you have to decide whether to charge your wand of death or
the wand of cancellation when The Wizard is after you...)

> They don't have a large number of charges in the wand, so
> they don't zap every monster they meet. (Even a tourist with
> the blessed PYEC wouldn't try to cancel every monster he/she
> met.)

Not every, but _he_, the Tourist, could indeed use it regularily on
the critical monsters.

> Knowing which monsters they do zap will tell us what they
> actually value about cancellation.

You may have missed that I gave you a huge list of cancel'able attacks.
Given that there are 400 monsters, you may want to have a look at file
monst.c yourself.

> My problem is summed up in the following:
>
> "Wiser rgrn denizens than I teach that Magicbane is at it's
> best at +2. I would never enchant a +1 Magicbane with a
> blessed scroll."
>
> Players like the above poster are not making an in-game
> decision. They're following what they think is dogma,
> something about which there cannot be a rational discussion.

The quoted text is not from me, nevertheless I think your comment is
not fair. We know it implies the focus on magic attacks, yes? Do you
really think it's a dogma, if one relies on others expertise? What
"in-game decision" do you expect? If one relies on the magic attacks
to enchant it beyond that optimum?? No!

> I can see where they get the idea from. The effects of
> cancellation on a monster are generally unknown in rgrn.

It has been discussed here from time to time. Why do you think it is
unknown?

> My point is that they are not generally unknowable.
>
> Saying "It depends on how much the player values cancellation"
> stops the discussion short for no good reason. It implies that
> the effects of cancellation cannot be discussed for some reason.
> There's no reason not to discuss the effects of cancellation,
> some of which are very good indeed.

So the point seems to be that _you_ did not know about the effect?
Well, in the meantime there has been a lot of information posted
and re-posted; but still you complain in a lengthy posting. [That's
why I wanted to stop my part in the thread in time. And I failed.]

> The effects of cancellation are knowable. I just now finally
> found them in:
> <http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/nh/wan2-343.txt>:
>
> "(Adapted from the spoiler "cancel", by Boudewijn Waijers.)"
>
> (Presumably the "cancel" spoiler went by the wayside somewhere?)
>
> It makes the cancellation effect of Magicbane much more
> powerful if the player knows what they are and takes advantage
> of them.

Aha.

> I never doubted that cancellation has some useful effects. I
> just wanted to know what they were. I was surprised that someone
> who valued cancellation wouldn't immediately give a short list
> of their favorite effects.

I did. Not in the first posting but when you indirectly provoked it
by falsely claiming: "Most monsters have nothing to cancel."

Initially you claimed a lot and asked little. Don't blame others.

Janis

 

[Guest]

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

Jove wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 22:25:29 +0200, Janis Papanagnou
> <Janis_Papanagnou@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> You can't do them all, so which monsters would you zap?
> [...]
>
> So which ones?

The topic is endgame. In endgame there are only few threats with most
monsters that you met before. What remains as the most disturbing and
dangerous monsters are primarily all the magic spellcasters.

> So what are the critical monsters to cancel?

In the endgame mostly spellcasters. Since their ability to surround you
with hordes of other nasty creatures, and whatever spells. Though a
summoned horde of monsters with special attacks makes things still worse.

>>You may have missed that I gave you a huge list of cancel'able attacks.
>>Given that there are 400 monsters, you may want to have a look at file
>>monst.c yourself.
>
> That post of yours has not yet made it to my news spool, I
> guess. This may be the root of our apparent communication
> problem.

In response to your statement:
>>>
>>> Most monsters have nothing to cancel.

I answered:
>>
>> There are a lot of monsters that have something to cancel.
>>
>> You can cancel the following special attacks: fire, cold, electricity,
>> sleep, paralysis, drain life, drain constitution, drain energy, stick,
>> were, teleport away, slow, slime, disenchant, and, magic spellcasting.
>>
>> Some of these are, especially in the endgame, of little interest, but
>> there are quite a few that I won't like to miss.

That is 15 cancel'able effects spread over many, many of the 400 monsters.
■

> I don't want to know what's cancelable. (Well, actually I do.

You'll understand to "decode" the file monst.c, I suppose.

> I want to know what *you* use it for.

See above.

> Okay, so I'm missing something. I admit it and I want to make
> up for lost time. You've obviously got monsters in mind you
> prefer to cancel. Give me a shortcut to effective use of the
> cancellation spell, please.

You make wrong assumptions; please stop that.

Cancellation _spell_ is practically for high level Wizards, only. I have
never - well, maybe in one game - used that spell. The reason is that
I don't select my characters by choice, rather let the RNG choose for
me. Whenever I have a wizard, I'll get Magicbane as the very first gift
from my god, not the rare spellbook, that I can't cast anyway in the
early game.

When you got Magicbane in early game through sacrifices, it is helpful
for many, many monsters; I won't count them for you. But we have been
talking about endgame.

>>The quoted text is not from me, nevertheless I think your comment is
>>not fair.
>
> I did not mean to imply it was from you.

I did not say or meant that.

I said it was not fair, and I told you that even if it is not me whom
you discredited by your wording.

>>What
>>"in-game decision" do you expect? If one relies on the magic attacks
>>to enchant it beyond that optimum?? No!
>
> You can't rely on Magicbane's magic attacks, because they're
> not reliable.

You are playing with words. A probability here is not worse than a
probability with hits and damages. In both cases you need a certain
amount of events to become a significant number.

> It seems
> more like an advanced technique than something novice players
> should be relying on.

But why? As a wizard with Magicbane as your first artifact you'll have
a perfect weapon, knowing the numbers or not when the magic attacks hits
best.

Though real "novice" players won't come fast to the point where you get
an artifact from an altar; you must have at least some experience. And
yet much more to come to the point casting cancellation.

> Yet four more points of damage on every
> hit is something any player should understand and be able to
> rely on effectively.

No, because he cannot determine the damage done. ("Ah, only one more hit
and he will surely get down" - DYWYPI. That's a common fault!)

There's no reason why a beginner would know about 4 points of damage
but not be aware of the magical attacks.

> That seems a more appropriate approach
> for novice players to start with.

No. The worst approach is the damage relying hack'n'slash approach. IMO.
People advance in their proficiency at the moment when they learn that
there are other means to handle situations with monsters.

>>> I never doubted that cancellation has some useful effects. I
>>>just wanted to know what they were. I was surprised that someone
>>>who valued cancellation wouldn't immediately give a short list
>>>of their favorite effects.
>>
>>I did. Not in the first posting but when you indirectly provoked it
>>by falsely claiming: "Most monsters have nothing to cancel."
>
> I stand by that claim.

I haven't counted them, but I suppose 100 of 400 monsters would not count
as "most" for you. And, indeed, literally you would be correct.■

But monsters without special attacks, with few exceptions (those who hit
hard and where melee should be avoided anyway), are no threat. The special
attacks make life worse, and there is cancellation against it.

There is a reason why the probabilities for wands are low, and the failure
rate for spells is high, and the handling of the wand somewhat risky, and
the probability for the artifact effect not at 25%, for cancellation. It's
a powerful tool.

> Especially after looking at
> <http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/nh/mon1-343.txt>

Why that? I can't detect any reason supporting your claim in that text.

> An early wizard, who really needs the extra points of damage,
> will get almost no benefit from Magicbane's melee range 20%
> chance of cancellation.

An early wizard already with quite a couple of blessed scrolls of
enchant weapon!? How early?

An early wizard with so many scrolls acquired but no idea how to
defend and attack with this spells that he has from the beginning?

> And again, that posting of yours has not made it to my mail
> spool.

I quoted it in this post.

Janis

■ I roughly collected the attack fields from monst.c (with ascending
number of occurence, the "AD_" entries are the relevant ones), that's
not exactly what is required here (every monster has 6 entries including
no_attk), but it was easy to collect, and at least gives some hints.

1 AD_CNCL 2 AD_DRDX 5 AD_MAGM 15 AD_COLD
1 AD_CURS 2 AD_ENCH 5 AD_STCK 15 AD_SAMU
1 AD_DCAY 2 AD_FAMN 5 AD_WRAP 15 AT_STNG
1 AD_DRCO 2 AD_PEST 5 AT_EXPL 16 AD_FIRE
1 AD_DREN 2 AD_SLIM 6 AD_ELEC 19 AT_BREA
1 AD_HALU 3 AD_DGST 6 AD_STON 20 AT_KICK
1 AD_HEAL 3 AD_SEDU 8 AD_ACID 20 AT_NONE
1 AD_LEGS 3 AD_SLOW 8 AD_DRIN 24 AD_DRST
1 AD_RBRE 3 AD_STUN 8 AD_PLYS 28 AD_SPEL
1 AD_SGLD 3 AD_WERE 8 AT_BUTT 30 AT_TUCH
1 AD_SSEX 4 AD_DISE 8 AT_TENT 42 AT_MAGC
1 AD_TLPT 4 AD_RUST 10 AD_DRLI 154 AT_BITE
1 AT_BOOM 4 AD_SITM 10 AT_GAZE 177 NO_ATTK
2 AD_CONF 4 AD_SLEE 11 AD_CLRC 183 AT_WEAP
2 AD_CORR 4 AT_SPIT 11 AT_HUGS 198 AT_CLAW
2 AD_DETH 5 AD_BLND 13 AT_ENGL 505 AD_PHYS
2 AD_DISN

HTH

 

[Guest]

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

Quoting Janis Papanagnou <Janis_Papanagnou@hotmail.com>:
>Jove wrote:
>>My problem is summed up in the following:
>>"Wiser rgrn denizens than I teach that Magicbane is at it's
>>best at +2. I would never enchant a +1 Magicbane with a
>>blessed scroll."
>>Players like the above poster are not making an in-game
>>decision. They're following what they think is dogma,
>The quoted text is not from me, nevertheless I think your comment is
>not fair. We know it implies the focus on magic attacks, yes? Do you
>really think it's a dogma, if one relies on others expertise?

Well, I think "never" is a dogma, yes. Imagine the situation where a
Chaotic wizard has Magicbane and a pile of junk artifacts, enough to make
further sacrificing an agonisingly slow process; but also the spell of
cancellation at 0% failure and a plentiful supply of mana. Obviously they
should boost Magicbane up to +7. Hence it is wrong to say "never".
--
David Damerell <damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> Kill the tomato!
Today is First Aponoia, July.

 

[Guest]

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

David Damerell wrote:

> Indeed. My point is, it's up to the individual to decide the value of
> the cancellation effect; but people who place that value high will
> find a reason to stop at +2 or +5.

What I usually do is enchant it up to +2, then wield a *real* weapon.
Only when a monster is near that my curse my equipment do I wield
Magicbane.

--
Boudewijn.

--
"I have hundreds of other quotes, just waiting to replace this one
as my signature..." - Me

 

[Guest]

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

David Damerell wrote:
> Quoting Janis Papanagnou <Janis_Papanagnou@hotmail.com>:
>>Jove wrote:
>>
>>>My problem is summed up in the following:
>>>"Wiser rgrn denizens than I teach that Magicbane is at it's
>>>best at +2. I would never enchant a +1 Magicbane with a
>>>blessed scroll."
>>>Players like the above poster are not making an in-game
>>>decision. They're following what they think is dogma,
>>
>>The quoted text is not from me, nevertheless I think your comment is
>>not fair. We know it implies the focus on magic attacks, yes? Do you
>>really think it's a dogma, if one relies on others expertise?
>
> Well, I think "never" is a dogma, yes. Imagine the situation where a
> Chaotic wizard has Magicbane and a pile of junk artifacts, enough to make
> further sacrificing an agonisingly slow process; but also the spell of
> cancellation at 0% failure and a plentiful supply of mana. Obviously they
> should boost Magicbane up to +7. Hence it is wrong to say "never".

You are right, and I would agree if I would take such statements literally.

But these corner-cases (i.e. cancelation at 0%, etc.) are seldom considered
in natural language use; the sentences would get often too complicated, and
in my experience one would nevertheless fail to cover every case and give a
perfect statement.

So in (non-mathematical, non-logical) practice I think one should take these
types of generalisations not too literal, or with a grain of salt.

(I may be wrong, but I remember Wes, the originator of the statement, not to
be any noticeably dogmatic.)

But, again, from your (and I assume Joves) strict perspective, you are right.

Janis

 

[Guest]

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

Boudewijn Waijers wrote:
> David Damerell wrote:
>
>>Indeed. My point is, it's up to the individual to decide the value of
>>the cancellation effect; but people who place that value high will
>>find a reason to stop at +2 or +5.
>
> What I usually do is enchant it up to +2, then wield a *real* weapon.
> Only when a monster is near that my curse my equipment do I wield
> Magicbane.

With "real" you mean a better artifact; yes, that's the usual approach,
also mine.

Things get a bit different when one has The Amulet; random creation of
monsters and random curses make me change my tactics as appropriate.

Janis

 

[Guest]

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

Quoting Janis Papanagnou <Janis_Papanagnou@hotmail.com>:
>David Damerell wrote:
>>>Jove wrote:
>>>>My problem is summed up in the following:
>>>>"Wiser rgrn denizens than I teach that Magicbane is at it's
>>>>best at +2. I would never enchant a +1 Magicbane with a
>>>>blessed scroll."
[...]
>>Well, I think "never" is a dogma, yes.
>You are right, and I would agree if I would take such statements literally.
>But these corner-cases (i.e. cancelation at 0%, etc.) are seldom considered
>in natural language use;

No, I don't think this is a failure to consider the corner cases, because
for many years on rgrn no-one seriously suggested using Magicbane at
anything but +2. I really do think that has become a dogma.
--
David Damerell <damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> Distortion Field!
Today is Gaiman, July - a public holiday.

 

[Guest]

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

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 22:25:29 +0200, Janis Papanagnou
<Janis_Papanagnou@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Not every, but _he_, the Tourist, could indeed use it regularily on
>the critical monsters.
>

Are Tourists immune to amulets of change? Or gender change from
polymorph from wands, potions, traps, and spells?

Jove

 

[Guest]

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

David Damerell wrote:
>
> No, I don't think this is a failure to consider the corner cases, because
> for many years on rgrn no-one seriously suggested using Magicbane at
> anything but +2. I really do think that has become a dogma.

For a wizard I view using only MB is a sort of challenge
game. I'll stay altar camping until a much more powerfull
melee weapon shows up. Chaotic wizards can get Stormy,
neutrals Vorpy, either Frosty.

Lately I run chaotic wizards. My current one uses "x" to
switch back and forth between Magicbane and Stormbringer.
With that combination I don't feel the need to enchant
MB past +2.

RNG kvetching. My current wizard did a lot of altar
camping for a good artifact. Named Sting early on to
advance dagge skills. As soon as one wouldn't stack I
named it, turned out +3, very nice. Got MB as first gift,
started using "x" between them. Then a long list of
artifacts named after monsters. Werebane and such, gee
thanks. Seemed to take forever to get Stormy. Started
using "x" to bounce between Stormy and MB, Sting goes in
the bag. Several thousand turns later a sac just to tell
if it's safe to pray and Fire Brand shows up. Now I
wonder if its worth enchanting FB up or stick with Stormy.

 

[Guest]

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

Janis Papanagnou wrote:
> Doug Freyburger wrote:
>
> > For a wizard I view using only MB is a sort of challenge
> > game.
>
> You mean also ignoring a wizards attack spells?

No, only in comparison to the more powerfull artifacts
that show up later. I wasn't thinking of a "squib"
ascension. I don't even play Valks completely
spell-less.

MB-only in terms of never wielding any other artifact
(or maybe Sting before MB) isn't a usual challenge
game but it is more difficult than using Stormy or
Frosty or whatever once they arrive.

 

[Guest]

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

Doug Freyburger wrote:
>
> For a wizard I view using only MB is a sort of challenge
> game.

You mean also ignoring a wizards attack spells?

Janis

 

[Guest]

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

Jove wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 22:25:29 +0200, Janis Papanagnou
> <Janis_Papanagnou@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Not every, but _he_, the Tourist, could indeed use it regularily on
>>the critical monsters.

This was a reply to the point whether tourists with a PYEC could use a
wand of cancellation on a more regular basis. So I don't see what you
are aiming at with the following questions...

> Are Tourists immune to amulets of change?

Yes, by not wearing these amulets, otherwise no.

> Or gender change from
> polymorph from wands, potions, traps, and spells?

Janis

 

[Guest]

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

Boudewijn Waijers wrote:
> Doug Freyburger wrote:
>
> > MB-only in terms of never wielding any other artifact
> > (or maybe Sting before MB) isn't a usual challenge
> > game but it is more difficult than using Stormy or
> > Frosty or whatever once they arrive.
>
> You really think so?
>
> For me, MagicBane is just a backup for really dire cases and a curse
> magnet; in normal circumstances I don't resort to hand-to-hand combat at
> all with a wizard.

Spells consume mana and mana is a finite resource.

While exploring a new level I'll use attack-school
spells to take out most monsters anywhere near my
level. By level 20 my wizard won't bother with spells
against orcs or whatever just wade through them.
Face a giant or balrog and I'll zap away and fire
daggers. Nymphs get daggers not spells because they
tend to carry mirrors and that decreases luck in a
way that is not easily measured. Mana regenerates
quickly enough that there always seems to be plenty
of it available while exploring except for the first
couple of levels of the mines. I figure that will
stop being true once the Amulet is in hand but until
then exploration mana is unlimited.

While altar camping for books or protection points
the finite resource aspect of mana comes in. I want
to spend every point on create monster spells to
maximize the number of sacrafices before running out
of mana. That means using Stormbringer to kill the
created monsters. As soon as I run out of mana it's
time to resume explorations. Mana is regenerated
fast enough that there is always plenty while
exploring but not so fast that I never run out while
altar camping.

With a wizard I like to advance dagger to Expert and
then select a small number of other hand to hand
weapons classes to Basic depending on what powerful
artifacts arrive during altar camping sessions.
Wizards get enough potential levels that some can
be spent to match a couple of gifted artifacts just
for style reasons. A chaotic wizard getting Werebane
doesn't have any reason but style to actually use
Werebane until a skill slot is offered but style is
fun.

 

[Guest]

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

Doug Freyburger wrote:

> MB-only in terms of never wielding any other artifact
> (or maybe Sting before MB) isn't a usual challenge
> game but it is more difficult than using Stormy or
> Frosty or whatever once they arrive.

You really think so?

For me, MagicBane is just a backup for really dire cases and a curse
magnet; in normal circumstances I don't resort to hand-to-hand combat at
all with a wizard.

--
Boudewijn.

--
"I have hundreds of other quotes, just waiting to replace this one
as my signature..." - Me

 

[Guest]

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

Doug Freyburger wrote:

> Started
> using "x" to bounce between Stormy and MB, Sting goes in
> the bag. Several thousand turns later a sac just to tell
> if it's safe to pray and Fire Brand shows up. Now I
> wonder if its worth enchanting FB up or stick with Stormy.

I'd say you stick with Strombringer, unless you get Frost Brand, which
is better than Fire Brand, since most Gehennom creatures are resistant
to fire, but not to cold.

--
Boudewijn.

--
"I have hundreds of other quotes, just waiting to replace this one
as my signature..." - Me

 

[Guest]

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

Quoting Doug Freyburger <dfreybur@yahoo.com>:
>David Damerell wrote:
>>No, I don't think this is a failure to consider the corner cases, because
>>for many years on rgrn no-one seriously suggested using Magicbane at
>>anything but +2. I really do think that has become a dogma.
>Lately I run chaotic wizards. My current one uses "x" to
>switch back and forth between Magicbane and Stormbringer.
>With that combination I don't feel the need to enchant
>MB past +2.

Well, indeed, I explained elsewhere in the thread why *I* would keep MB at
+2, as well. But I don't think it's sensible to just assume that it should
be at +2 rather than thinking about it, and that's what became a dogma.
--
David Damerell <damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> flcl?
Today is Second Oneiros, July.

 

[Guest]

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

Doug Freyburger wrote:
> Boudewijn Waijers wrote:

>> For me, MagicBane is just a backup for really dire cases and a curse
>> magnet; in normal circumstances I don't resort to hand-to-hand
>> combat at all with a wizard.

> Spells consume mana and mana is a finite resource.

> While exploring a new level I'll use attack-school
> spells to take out most monsters anywhere near my
> level. By level 20 my wizard won't bother with spells
> against orcs or whatever just wade through them.

Sure. Agains low level monsters, I also don't use spells. In those
cases, though, Magicbane is efficient enough. One blow usually kills
them. No need for something heavier.

> Nymphs get daggers not spells because they
> tend to carry mirrors and that decreases luck in a
> way that is not easily measured.

Don't use your starting force bolt spell on nymphs, but any other attack
spell. If you only have force bolt for offence, leave them asleep, or
set your pet against them, keeping a locked door between you and the two
of them. Only force bolt or a wand of striking will break their mirrors.

> Mana regenerates
> quickly enough that there always seems to be plenty
> of it available while exploring except for the first
> couple of levels of the mines. I figure that will
> stop being true once the Amulet is in hand but until
> then exploration mana is unlimited.

The Eye of the Aethiopica greatly increases your mana regeneration.
PostQuest, you shouldn't have any problems, not even with the (other)
Amulet.

> While altar camping for books or protection points
> the finite resource aspect of mana comes in. I want
> to spend every point on create monster spells to
> maximize the number of sacrafices before running out
> of mana. That means using Stormbringer to kill the
> created monsters.

That just speeds up things a bit. Magicbane still is efficient enough
for my taste (yours may differ), and will respect your pet's life and
loyalty.

> With a wizard I like to advance dagger to Expert and
> then select a small number of other hand to hand
> weapons classes to Basic depending on what powerful
> artifacts arrive during altar camping sessions.

I don't like to carry more than the obligatory 8+ runed daggers and a
single artifact. The rest is dead weight, and left in a stash.

> Wizards get enough potential levels that some can
> be spent to match a couple of gifted artifacts just
> for style reasons. A chaotic wizard getting Werebane
> doesn't have any reason but style to actually use
> Werebane until a skill slot is offered but style is
> fun.

The wizard is a class that I like to promote to 30th level, and I use as
few slots as possible on weapon skills. I like to spend most on spell
slots instead (although I don't normally push all skills to the maximum;
not all are very useful to raise higher than skilled).

Boudewijn.

--
"I have hundreds of other quotes, just waiting to replace this one
as my signature..." - Me