I Want Wand of Far Slaying and Drakeling Acid Spit Damage ..
- Thread starter Guest
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Battlefield Video Games
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.adom (More info?)
Twinge wrote:
> Higher Game wrote:
>
>> Spoil me please.
>>
>
> Sure thing.
>
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
>
> Acid Spit:
> The formula appears to be Max(PCLevel / 3,2)d6+Max(PCLevel / 3,2). There
> was some weird stuff in the code but this should be accurate; should be
> tested though. Should be the same for the sulphur corruption too.
>
> Lvl Damage
> 1-8 : 2d6+2 (Average 9)
> 9-11 : 3d6+3
> 12-14: 4d6+4
> ...
> 48-50: 16d6+16 (Average 72)
>
> Your satiation goes down by 5d10+50 (Average about 77).
Does the sulphur corruption decrease satiation too? I remember spitting
the sulphur corruption for a while to try to decrease satiation to eat
a corpse, but don't recall it going down. Perhaps I was super-bloated,
or maybe it just doesn't decrease satiation.
Twinge wrote:
> Higher Game wrote:
>
>> Spoil me please.
>>
>
> Sure thing.
>
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
>
> Acid Spit:
> The formula appears to be Max(PCLevel / 3,2)d6+Max(PCLevel / 3,2). There
> was some weird stuff in the code but this should be accurate; should be
> tested though. Should be the same for the sulphur corruption too.
>
> Lvl Damage
> 1-8 : 2d6+2 (Average 9)
> 9-11 : 3d6+3
> 12-14: 4d6+4
> ...
> 48-50: 16d6+16 (Average 72)
>
> Your satiation goes down by 5d10+50 (Average about 77).
Does the sulphur corruption decrease satiation too? I remember spitting
the sulphur corruption for a while to try to decrease satiation to eat
a corpse, but don't recall it going down. Perhaps I was super-bloated,
or maybe it just doesn't decrease satiation.
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.adom (More info?)
Nick Strnad wrote:
> Twinge wrote:
>
>> Higher Game wrote:
>>
>>> Spoil me please.
>>>
>>
>> Sure thing.
>>
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>>
>> Acid Spit:
>> The formula appears to be Max(PCLevel / 3,2)d6+Max(PCLevel / 3,2). There
>> was some weird stuff in the code but this should be accurate; should be
>> tested though. Should be the same for the sulphur corruption too.
>>
>> Lvl Damage
>> 1-8 : 2d6+2 (Average 9)
>> 9-11 : 3d6+3
>> 12-14: 4d6+4
>> ...
>> 48-50: 16d6+16 (Average 72)
>>
>> Your satiation goes down by 5d10+50 (Average about 77).
>
>
> Does the sulphur corruption decrease satiation too? I remember spitting
> the sulphur corruption for a while to try to decrease satiation to eat
> a corpse, but don't recall it going down. Perhaps I was super-bloated,
> or maybe it just doesn't decrease satiation.
It certainly does decrease satiation. I've used it for the same purpose
and it works just fine; sometimes you just have to spit 3-4 times,
sometimes more.
--
Curry Bucket's Controversial Web Presence:
The Birthplace of Teenage Angst
http://chat.carleton.ca/~jsingh3/
or http://www.currybucket.cjb.net/
Nick Strnad wrote:
> Twinge wrote:
>
>> Higher Game wrote:
>>
>>> Spoil me please.
>>>
>>
>> Sure thing.
>>
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> .
>>
>> Acid Spit:
>> The formula appears to be Max(PCLevel / 3,2)d6+Max(PCLevel / 3,2). There
>> was some weird stuff in the code but this should be accurate; should be
>> tested though. Should be the same for the sulphur corruption too.
>>
>> Lvl Damage
>> 1-8 : 2d6+2 (Average 9)
>> 9-11 : 3d6+3
>> 12-14: 4d6+4
>> ...
>> 48-50: 16d6+16 (Average 72)
>>
>> Your satiation goes down by 5d10+50 (Average about 77).
>
>
> Does the sulphur corruption decrease satiation too? I remember spitting
> the sulphur corruption for a while to try to decrease satiation to eat
> a corpse, but don't recall it going down. Perhaps I was super-bloated,
> or maybe it just doesn't decrease satiation.
It certainly does decrease satiation. I've used it for the same purpose
and it works just fine; sometimes you just have to spit 3-4 times,
sometimes more.
--
Curry Bucket's Controversial Web Presence:
The Birthplace of Teenage Angst
http://chat.carleton.ca/~jsingh3/
or http://www.currybucket.cjb.net/
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.adom (More info?)
Twinge <homelesspete@gmail.com> wrote:
[ ... ]
Twinge, even though your posts are usually quite interesting, I have some
problems with your way of quoting. Sometimes you answer several different
posts in just one reply, and it's not always possible to sort out the
attribution lines. Especially the first point is problematic for me, as I'm
using a threaded newsreader, and am frequently confused when quotations from
others appear in your articles without being in the article you're replying
to. I'm quite certain that you know the r.g.r.a FAQ, and it's really clear
about how to quote. So to improve my enjoyment of your posts [I'm being a
flatterer here, see!
], please try more to stick to the usual conventions.
Thanks in advance!
Cheers, Gero
--
Gero Kunter (gero.kunter@epost.de)
Twinge <homelesspete@gmail.com> wrote:
[ ... ]
Twinge, even though your posts are usually quite interesting, I have some
problems with your way of quoting. Sometimes you answer several different
posts in just one reply, and it's not always possible to sort out the
attribution lines. Especially the first point is problematic for me, as I'm
using a threaded newsreader, and am frequently confused when quotations from
others appear in your articles without being in the article you're replying
to. I'm quite certain that you know the r.g.r.a FAQ, and it's really clear
about how to quote. So to improve my enjoyment of your posts [I'm being a
flatterer here, see!
], please try more to stick to the usual conventions.Thanks in advance!
Cheers, Gero
--
Gero Kunter (gero.kunter@epost.de)
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.adom (More info?)
Gero Kunter wrote:
> Twinge <homelesspete@gmail.com> wrote:
> [ ... ]
>
> Twinge, even though your posts are usually quite interesting, I have
> some problems with your way of quoting. Sometimes you answer several
> different posts in just one reply, and it's not always possible to
> sort out the attribution lines. Especially the first point is
> problematic for me, as I'm using a threaded newsreader, and am
> frequently confused when quotations from others appear in your
> articles without being in the article you're replying to. I'm quite
> certain that you know the r.g.r.a FAQ, and it's really clear about
> how to quote. So to improve my enjoyment of your posts [I'm being a
> flatterer here, see!], please try more to stick to the usual
> conventions. Thanks in advance!
Fair enough. What would be the prefered method by the people here? I
assumed replying to each message individually would get kind of spammy
myself, but that's an option. The other way I'm thinking of is what I
did in the post I made right before this, where I made sure to leave who
said what but still did it all in one message.
Gero Kunter wrote:
> Twinge <homelesspete@gmail.com> wrote:
> [ ... ]
>
> Twinge, even though your posts are usually quite interesting, I have
> some problems with your way of quoting. Sometimes you answer several
> different posts in just one reply, and it's not always possible to
> sort out the attribution lines. Especially the first point is
> problematic for me, as I'm using a threaded newsreader, and am
> frequently confused when quotations from others appear in your
> articles without being in the article you're replying to. I'm quite
> certain that you know the r.g.r.a FAQ, and it's really clear about
> how to quote. So to improve my enjoyment of your posts [I'm being a
> flatterer here, see!
], please try more to stick to the usual> conventions. Thanks in advance!
Fair enough. What would be the prefered method by the people here? I
assumed replying to each message individually would get kind of spammy
myself, but that's an option. The other way I'm thinking of is what I
did in the post I made right before this, where I made sure to leave who
said what but still did it all in one message.
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.adom (More info?)
Twinge wrote:
> Gero Kunter wrote:
>> Twinge <homelesspete@gmail.com> wrote:
>> [ ... ]
>>
>> Twinge, even though your posts are usually quite interesting, I have
>> some problems with your way of quoting. Sometimes you answer several
>> different posts in just one reply, and it's not always possible to
>> sort out the attribution lines. Especially the first point is
>> problematic for me, as I'm using a threaded newsreader, and am
>> frequently confused when quotations from others appear in your
>> articles without being in the article you're replying to. I'm quite
>> certain that you know the r.g.r.a FAQ, and it's really clear about
>> how to quote. So to improve my enjoyment of your posts [I'm being a
>> flatterer here, see!], please try more to stick to the usual
>> conventions. Thanks in advance!
>
> Fair enough. What would be the prefered method by the people here? I
> assumed replying to each message individually would get kind of spammy
> myself, but that's an option. The other way I'm thinking of is what I
> did in the post I made right before this, where I made sure to leave
> who said what but still did it all in one message.
fwiw, I don't have any problems reading your responses, *shrug* There may be
some issues I'm not seeing or aware of though, I don't use a heavy duty
newsreader (though I don't use google either)
Twinge wrote:
> Gero Kunter wrote:
>> Twinge <homelesspete@gmail.com> wrote:
>> [ ... ]
>>
>> Twinge, even though your posts are usually quite interesting, I have
>> some problems with your way of quoting. Sometimes you answer several
>> different posts in just one reply, and it's not always possible to
>> sort out the attribution lines. Especially the first point is
>> problematic for me, as I'm using a threaded newsreader, and am
>> frequently confused when quotations from others appear in your
>> articles without being in the article you're replying to. I'm quite
>> certain that you know the r.g.r.a FAQ, and it's really clear about
>> how to quote. So to improve my enjoyment of your posts [I'm being a
>> flatterer here, see!
], please try more to stick to the usual>> conventions. Thanks in advance!
>
> Fair enough. What would be the prefered method by the people here? I
> assumed replying to each message individually would get kind of spammy
> myself, but that's an option. The other way I'm thinking of is what I
> did in the post I made right before this, where I made sure to leave
> who said what but still did it all in one message.
fwiw, I don't have any problems reading your responses, *shrug* There may be
some issues I'm not seeing or aware of though, I don't use a heavy duty
newsreader (though I don't use google either)
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.adom (More info?)
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 13:25:25 -0700, Twinge wrote:
> Fair enough. What would be the prefered method by the people here? I
> assumed replying to each message individually would get kind of spammy
> myself, but that's an option. The other way I'm thinking of is what I
> did in the post I made right before this, where I made sure to leave who
> said what but still did it all in one message.
FWIW, I find a separate message per reply much easier to read.
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 13:25:25 -0700, Twinge wrote:
> Fair enough. What would be the prefered method by the people here? I
> assumed replying to each message individually would get kind of spammy
> myself, but that's an option. The other way I'm thinking of is what I
> did in the post I made right before this, where I made sure to leave who
> said what but still did it all in one message.
FWIW, I find a separate message per reply much easier to read.
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.adom (More info?)
Twinge <homelesspete@gmail.com> wrote:
> Gero Kunter wrote:
>> Twinge <homelesspete@gmail.com> wrote:
>> [ ... ]
>> Twinge, even though your posts are usually quite interesting, I have
>> some problems with your way of quoting. Sometimes you answer several
>> different posts in just one reply, and it's not always possible to
>> sort out the attribution lines. Especially the first point is
>> problematic for me, as I'm using a threaded newsreader, and am
>> frequently confused when quotations from others appear in your
>> articles without being in the article you're replying to. I'm quite
>> certain that you know the r.g.r.a FAQ, and it's really clear about
>> how to quote. So to improve my enjoyment of your posts [I'm being a
>> flatterer here, see!], please try more to stick to the usual
>> conventions. Thanks in advance!
>
> Fair enough. What would be the prefered method by the people here? I
> assumed replying to each message individually would get kind of spammy
> myself, but that's an option. The other way I'm thinking of is what I
> did in the post I made right before this, where I made sure to leave who
> said what but still did it all in one message.
I agree with you just merge two sub-threads if they are roughly about the
same.
Twinge <homelesspete@gmail.com> wrote:
> Gero Kunter wrote:
>> Twinge <homelesspete@gmail.com> wrote:
>> [ ... ]
>> Twinge, even though your posts are usually quite interesting, I have
>> some problems with your way of quoting. Sometimes you answer several
>> different posts in just one reply, and it's not always possible to
>> sort out the attribution lines. Especially the first point is
>> problematic for me, as I'm using a threaded newsreader, and am
>> frequently confused when quotations from others appear in your
>> articles without being in the article you're replying to. I'm quite
>> certain that you know the r.g.r.a FAQ, and it's really clear about
>> how to quote. So to improve my enjoyment of your posts [I'm being a
>> flatterer here, see!
], please try more to stick to the usual>> conventions. Thanks in advance!
>
> Fair enough. What would be the prefered method by the people here? I
> assumed replying to each message individually would get kind of spammy
> myself, but that's an option. The other way I'm thinking of is what I
> did in the post I made right before this, where I made sure to leave who
> said what but still did it all in one message.
I agree with you just merge two sub-threads if they are roughly about the
same.
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.adom (More info?)
Twinge <homelesspete@gmail.com> wrote:
[ ... ]
> Fair enough. What would be the prefered method by the people here?
I would really, really prefer reading a seperate post for each message
that you're replying to. The traditional Usenet representation of messages
is in a tree structure, not a time-based one. So, if you're using a threaded
newsreader, all replies to one postings are displayed consecutively,
followed by replies to the next article. By your method of merging several
postings into one, I frequently find quotations inside of your messages from
articles I haven't read yet, because they are further down the message tree.
You might see that this may result in confusion or me missing your point,
because I lack the required context.
And by the way, thank you for taking my suggestion so easily. It can be
quite tricky to utter criticisms in a Net-based way of communication without
offending others.
Cheers, Gero
--
Gero Kunter (gero.kunter@epost.de)
Twinge <homelesspete@gmail.com> wrote:
[ ... ]
> Fair enough. What would be the prefered method by the people here?
I would really, really prefer reading a seperate post for each message
that you're replying to. The traditional Usenet representation of messages
is in a tree structure, not a time-based one. So, if you're using a threaded
newsreader, all replies to one postings are displayed consecutively,
followed by replies to the next article. By your method of merging several
postings into one, I frequently find quotations inside of your messages from
articles I haven't read yet, because they are further down the message tree.
You might see that this may result in confusion or me missing your point,
because I lack the required context.
And by the way, thank you for taking my suggestion so easily. It can be
quite tricky to utter criticisms in a Net-based way of communication without
offending others.
Cheers, Gero
--
Gero Kunter (gero.kunter@epost.de)
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 4K
-
News Intel showed up for consumers at the 'Consumer Electronics Show;' AMD didn’t- Started by Admin
- Replies: 73
Latest posts
-
Question Oracle Virtualbox on Ubuntu 24.04 - "Kernel Driver not installed rc=-1908"- Latest: thegrandcheese
-
-
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram