possibility of winning unspoiled (spoily)

[Guest]

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

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005, Boudewijn Waijers wrote:

> And note that Ellora's player had played other roguelikes before
> (although only a few), as well as real-life fantasy role playing, if I
> recall correctly. Also, he had played some games of NetHack before
> starting up Ellora. Not many, though, so it's still quite an achievement
> to get as far as he did.

Well, I'm currently reading it (saw it mentionned only a few time ago in
the group and <god> knows I would like to play as well as Ellora does,
even after being heavily spoiled (and having ascended once)) and I think
he's mentionning around 120 previous characters.

Well, anyway, even after an ascension, reaching Gehennom is an achievment
to me (well, especially since I'm now playing slash'em and cannot manage
to go past the quests). I'm truly impressed by everything Ellora's doing.

Hypocoristiquement,
Jym.

 

[Guest]

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

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005, Boudewijn Waijers wrote:

> jorge estrada wrote:

> > I just would like to see or hear about someone that ascends without
> > resorting to spoilers. I personally would like more hints put into
> > the game to make ascending without spoilers more probable.
>
> As said before, so would I. But I don't think it to be possible without
> making the game too easy for advanced players.

Not necessarly if those hints are "just" spoilers. That will be useless
for already heavily spoiled peoples.

> The only way I can easily think of is to create more hints for the
> Oracle, but that would mean that the "necessary" hints, like the one
> about bell, book and candle would shop up even less often.

You could have some more hints by other people. Quest leader comes in mind
(once the quest is finished) to give free spoilers (different from the
ones of the Oracle).

Hypocoristiquement,
Jym.

 

[Guest]

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

Jym wrote:

> I'm truly impressed by everything Ellora's doing.

So was I.

That's why I put her story on my website.

--
Boudewijn Waijers (kroisos at home.nl).

The garden of happiness is surrounded by a wall so low only children
can look over it. - "the Orphanage of Hits", former Dutch radio show.

 

[seraphim]

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

jorge estrada <jestrada5@yahoo.com> wrote in news:3aornaF6ce583U1
@individual.net:

> Boudewijn Waijers wrote:
>
>> jorge estrada wrote:
>>
>>> I read the guidebook back in the day, but nethack is so complex
>>> that some things in it where beyond my understanding. Even after
>>> reading spoilers and the guidebook i didn't know how to remove a
>>> saddle from a critter until somebody on the newsgroup told me to
>>> use the loot command.
>>
>> What's beyond your understanding in the following quote from the
>> Guidebook?
>>
>> -> #loot
>> -> Loot a box or bag on the floor beneath you, or the saddle
>> -> from a horse standing next to you.
>>
>
> Sure, it is easy when you know what to look for, but at this stage i
> was spoiled rotten and looked up info in the group and spoilers and
> guidebook. There is so much info in nethack that i just read over
> that paragraph. I read it but did not take in the info. I has already
> won the game at this point and was playing my crazy conduct games.

Why do you need to know what to look for? You could just tell the
computer what to look for. Computers are good at things like searching
large text files for specific words. I searched for "Saddle" in the
guidebook when I had this question a long time ago and came up with a
few matches. Doing it now comes up with four, two of which told me
command(s) I could use.

 

[Guest]

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

Dan Sommers <me@privacy.net> writes:

> But what would make an unspoiled player think that magic resistance was
> more important than displacement? I can get both from an appropriate

Would every unspoiled player even know what displacement IS?
Sure, the monsters miss you more often, but they sometimes do anyway.
An unspoiled player might not notice that they miss more often than
usually, or might not guess that it happens because of the (still
unidentified) cloak they put on before even seeing those creatures..

True, they might equally not guess that they are magic resistant because
of the other cloak, either.
But when identified, the meaning of "magic resistance" is probably clearer
to many people than the meaning of "displacement". At least it would be to
me.

--
Jukka Lahtinen

 

[Guest]

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

On 3/27/05 2:22 PM, Boudewijn Waijers wrote:
> jorge estrada wrote:
>
>>one player figuring something out doesn't make the case that the
>>game can be figured out without spoilers for the majority of players.
>
> If ONE can do it, everyone should be able to do it.
>
> As long as one can stand the boredom, of course. I don't think even *I*
> would have the patience to do it...

I think there are three separate questions going on here: 1) Is the game
theoretically possible to ascend without spoilers? 2) Is the game
practically possible to ascend without spoilers? and 3) How much does
the example of Ellora affect our understanding of the first two questions?

To tackle the third question first, I don't much like the approach that
"Ellora (almost) did it, therefore it's possible, both theoretically and
practically. QED." There are two major problems with this approach: how
unspoiled, really, was Ellora's player, and how much in that game was
the product of dumb luck, as opposed to learning how to play?

The most impressive thing, to me, about the Ellora story, was the
player's original post: "Hey, I've gotten trapped in this big fortress;
how do I get out?" It was impressive that an unspoiled player had gotten
down to the Castle--all the more so since those of us who are spoiled
consider the game effectively won at that point. What we may have
missed, in our enthusiasm, was that Ellora's game was anything but
effectively won. The player was stuck, and came to us for help. Yes, he
asked that we not spoil him, and most of us tried our best not to spoil
him, but from the first "The stairway is in the maze on the left, but
DON'T GO UP THE STAIRS WITHOUT A BLINDFOLD!" we were prodding him along.

Ellora's player drew heavily on his past (apparently thorough) knowledge
of D&D, which is a rather odd definition of "unspoiled" to begin with.
And even so, he had no apparent knowledge of fire resistance or magic
resistance, which were the two issues that most of us figured would kill
him sooner or later. I couldn't read through the blow-by-blow accounts
of *every last single bloody battle* to find out if he ever figured
those things out; I do know that he ended up getting pretty far down in
Gehennom, one way or another.

So we have a player who had a lot of indirect knowledge of the game,
even if he didn't consult actual "spoilers," and had at least some
assistance from the r.g.r.n community as well. Even so, the player got
as far as he did largely by luck, and without knowing certain things
that most of us consider pretty crucial to winning the game. Was an
ascension possible? Yes, but then the question would be, Would it be
repeatable? On that question, I have strong doubts. Ellora's player has
shown a willingness to contact us again and share details of other
characters' adventures; the fact that this has happened only once, and
the story was quickly aborted, suggests to me that the player has had no
comparable success since Ellora.

So back to questions 1 and 2, I think that an unspoiled ascension may be
theoretically possible, for certain questionable values of "unspoiled,"
and given enough dumb luck. In practice, I highly doubt that it has
happened or will happen. Yes, such players wouldn't be a part of forums
like this one; on the other hand, presumably they do have friends they
would tell. There should be anecdotal evidence; heck, even whole urban
legends should be springing up about Tommy, the deaf, dumb, and blind
incredible Nethack player who ascends at will without knowing what a
"spoiler" is. The fact that this doesn't exist argues strongly for me
that no one has even gotten credibly close.

After all, overcoming boredom isn't really what playing a game
(presumbably for fun) should be about, anyway.

--
Kevin Wayne

"I came to Casablanca for the waters."
"Waters? What waters? We're in the desert?"
"I was misinformed."

 

[Guest]

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

Boudewijn Waijers schrieb:
> jorge estrada wrote:
>
>
>>one player figuring something out doesn't make the case that the
>>game can be figured out without spoilers for the majority of players.
>
>
> If ONE can do it, everyone should be able to do it.

*should be* is quite different from *is*. Gifts are not distributed
evenly. There might be some kind of unspoiled Marvin out there who is
able to win the game without reading spoilers. That does not at all
mean that everyone is able to do so.

--
Klaus Kassner

 

[Guest]

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

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005, Jukka Lahtinen wrote:

> Dan Sommers <me@privacy.net> writes:
>
> > But what would make an unspoiled player think that magic resistance was
> > more important than displacement? I can get both from an appropriate
>
> Would every unspoiled player even know what displacement IS?
> Sure, the monsters miss you more often, but they sometimes do anyway.
> An unspoiled player might not notice that they miss more often than
> usually, or might not guess that it happens because of the (still
> unidentified) cloak they put on before even seeing those creatures..

Cloaks of displacement self-id when put on.
Message "The <foo> strikes at your displaced image and misses you!" seems
enough to guess that monster is missing you because you're wearing that
cloak.

> True, they might equally not guess that they are magic resistant because
> of the other cloak, either.

MR, OTOH, doesn't self-id. You may only guess how important it is if seing
it active. I suppose something like stepping on a poly-trap or being
zapped and resisting (at least with the visual effect in the tiles
version). Probably playing a wizard a few time at least help to figure out
that cloak of MR exists. After that, if you've played the game that
nethack is not, well, there is also MR (at least in the latest version)
and it is really good to have it since you can resist even the more
powerfull spells.

> But when identified, the meaning of "magic resistance" is probably clearer
> to many people than the meaning of "displacement". At least it would be to
> me.

Given the messages for cloak of displacement, I'm not sure. MR has not
specific message, just a few visual effects. And you may think (for
spells) that you just "make all your saving", as did Ellora for poison
and cold resistance before being enlightened.

Hypocoristiquement,
Jym.

 

[Guest]

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

Boudewijn Waijers wrote:
> Janis Papanagnou wrote:

> And note that Ellora's player had played other roguelikes before
> (although only a few), as well as real-life fantasy role playing, if I
> recall correctly. Also, he had played some games of NetHack before
> starting up Ellora. Not many, though, so it's still quite an achievement
> to get as far as he did.

I think he said something about having played 121 games or so before. I
would not call that *not many* (although it will not take longer than
two or three ascensions if all of them are short...). I have not kept
track of the exact number of games I have played, but I would be
surprised if it was (much) more than 150 (and 200 would be almost
certainly too many).

--
Klaus Kassner

 

[Guest]

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

Jukka Lahtinen wrote:
>
> True, they might equally not guess that they are magic resistant because
> of the other cloak, either.
> But when identified, the meaning of "magic resistance" is probably clearer
> to many people than the meaning of "displacement". At least it would be to
> me.

The meaning is clearer also for me. What would still be nebulous is why
"he is using his finger of death" or the destruction of armor would be
depending on MR; disintegration yes, but MR?

You can imagine my astonishment to see a DYWYPI on the plane of fire with
an "invincible" character. (The Wiz stole my MR artifact, the other used
The Finger.)

Janis

 

[Guest]

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

Klaus Kassner wrote:
> Boudewijn Waijers wrote:
>
>> Janis Papanagnou wrote:

[For people misinterpreting quoting levels and won't recognize
the wrong reference...] No not me, Boudewijn wrote that.

>> And note that Ellora's player had played other roguelikes before
>> (although only a few), as well as real-life fantasy role playing, if I
>> recall correctly. Also, he had played some games of NetHack before
>> starting up Ellora. Not many, though, so it's still quite an achievement
>> to get as far as he did.
>
> I think he said something about having played 121 games or so before.

Yes, that's what I also remembered.

Janis

 

[Guest]

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

Janis Papanagnou <Janis_Papanagnou@hotmail.com> wrote:
> james wrote:
>>
>> At least one thing I still can't figure out, even though completely
>> spoiled, is exactly how you do the boulder/pit/iron ball thing. Does it
>> require a scroll?
>
> I'd guess, move a boulder adjacent to a pit, drag the iron ball over the
> pit to let it fall in, step behind the boulder and push it into the pit.

if you have trouble finding or making such an arrangement, rock moles
are happy to snack on the ball and chain, too.


Keith
--
Keith Davies "English is not a language. English is a
keith.davies@kjdavies.org bad habit shared between Norman invaders
keith.davies@gmail.com and Saxon barmaids!"
http://www.kjdavies.org/ -- Frog, IRC, 2005/01/13

 

[Guest]

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

"Boudewijn Waijers" <kroisos@REMOVETHISWORD.home.nl> wrote:

> David Justiss wrote:
>
> > Zork is the only place I had ever heard of that ritual.
>
> Well, that's enough, isn't it? The fact that *even* obscure, though
> historically important, games like zork use it, should be an indication
> that the ritual itself would be quite well-known.

Zork? Obscure? Well, compared to Quake, yes, but that's like calling the
Divina Commedia obscure because not nearly as many people have read it
as have read Harry Potter.

Richard

 

[Guest]

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

"David Justiss" <dajustis@hotmail.com> wrote:

> "Boudewijn Waijers" <kroisos@REMOVETHISWORD.home.nl> wrote in message
> news:d21v1a$t0p$1@news3.zwoll1.ov.home.nl
>
> > On the other hand, the ritual with Bell, Book and Candle is a well known
> > ritual, which appears in various myths and popular fantasy literature.
> Really? I'm interested in fantasy and mythology (though I admit not
> an expert in it) never heard of any ritual with a the bell, book and
> candle. Zork is the only place I had ever heard of that ritual.

It occurs in Pratchett (a fantasy writer!) for one; and it's drawn from
real-life (reasonably well-known) religious ritual. Besides...

> Zork has no amulet or vibrating square, nevertheless it would very hard
> to figure out how to open it if you hadn't heard of the Bell, book and
> candle ritual which I only knew of from Zork.

....it's not too hard to figure out if you pay the Oracle a bit of money.

Richard

 

[Guest]

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

Keith Davies wrote:
> Janis Papanagnou <Janis_Papanagnou@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>james wrote:
>>
>>>At least one thing I still can't figure out, even though completely
>>>spoiled, is exactly how you do the boulder/pit/iron ball thing. Does it
>>>require a scroll?
>>
>>I'd guess, move a boulder adjacent to a pit, drag the iron ball over the
>>pit to let it fall in, step behind the boulder and push it into the pit.
>
> if you have trouble finding or making such an arrangement, rock moles
> are happy to snack on the ball and chain, too.

But where are these rock moles when you need them!?

Back in times when I read unidentified scrolls I used to look for nymphs
which always seemed to have been around quite a lot.

Janis

 

[Guest]

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

Kevin Wayne wrote:
>
> I don't much like the approach that
> "Ellora (almost) did it, therefore it's possible, both theoretically and
> practically. QED."

I may have missed it but I haven't seen someone stating that. Quite contrary
I think that if one is really unspoiled he will, after having finished The
Valley, do harder in Gehennom than spoiled people. I think Ellora's path
would have continued to be very challenging (for her).

> There are two major problems with this approach: how
> unspoiled, really, was Ellora's player, and how much in that game was
> the product of dumb luck, as opposed to learning how to play?

Here I have a completely different view. I am certain that there are so
many possibilities to make a bad move that you would need a _continuous_
series of good luck to compensate that. So much luck is unlikely. And
Ellora's approach did not show that luck was the primary success factor,
rather her carefully considered gameplay. Dumb luck? No.

You learn by knowledge and/or by experience. Being spoiled emphasizes the
knowledge factor.

Janis

 

[Guest]

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

Janis Papanagnou wrote:

> Benjamin Lewis wrote:
>
>> There are some things I'm sure I would *never* have figured out, such as
>> magic cancellation.
>
> I still don't consider this type of information; I ignore that completely
> since I would not have any possibility to obtain that information
> natively by playing the game. There is other hidden information like
> that; luck comes to my mind. Even if I know from spoilers that throwing
> named glass to unicorns (to identify them) does not affect luck, simply
> the message that the unicorn is "not interested in my junk" keeps me off
> from doing that.

At least in *some* cases there are clues about luck, e.g. "you see a
four-leafed clover at your feet", and enlightenment will tell you something
about your luck level, whether it "times out", etc.

I think there should be more in-game messages, however. I'd like to see,
for example, in-game indication that smashing sokoban boulders is unlucky.

I can't really think of *any* way an unspoiled character would even
determine there existed such a thing as magic cancellation, unless there
are some fortunes that mention it.

--
Benjamin Lewis

A small, but vocal, contingent even argues that tin is superior, but they
are held by most to be the lunatic fringe of Foil Deflector Beanie science.

 

[Guest]

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

Janis Papanagnou wrote:

> Benjamin Lewis wrote:
>> I can't really think of *any* way an unspoiled character would even
>> determine there existed such a thing as magic cancellation, unless there
>> are some fortunes that mention it.
>
> It's impossible. Therefore I don't use that information for gameplay.
> But do you really _need_ precise values of luck or magic cancellation?
> I don't think so.

True. On the other hand, I think it would be nice if there was in-game
indication that one's cloak or other armour was preventing some attacks
from being successful. Perhaps a message along the lines of "The foo's
attack is absorbed by your cloak!". I don't mind so much if there is no
obvious indication that some cloaks are better than others at this.

--
Benjamin Lewis

A small, but vocal, contingent even argues that tin is superior, but they
are held by most to be the lunatic fringe of Foil Deflector Beanie science.

 

[Guest]

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

Quoting David Justiss <dajustis@hotmail.com>:
> Really? I'm interested in fantasy and mythology (though I admit not
>an expert in it) never heard of any ritual with a the bell, book and
>candle.

Stock equipment for exorcisms - in popular mythology, maybe not in actual
exorcism ritual, but I heard that usage long before playing Zork.
--
David Damerell <damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> Distortion Field!
Today is First Oneiros, April.

 

[Guest]

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

Quoting Janis Papanagnou <Janis_Papanagnou@hotmail.com>:
>One thing I suspect being practically necessary (and I don't know of any
>existing hint) is MR. You could of course deduce it at least by accident
>with the help of enlightenment.

I would expect an unspoiled player to figure that out. Sometimes they will
suffer annoying deaths from death rays and the like; then they will be
playing a wizard wearing the starting CoMR, be hit by a death ray, and
aha! no effect.

I doubt they would work out every item which grants MR or every adverse
condition it prevents, but this would be sufficient to make it seem very
important.

I also think the wand of enlightenment is a gift to the unspoiled doing
research on item properties. That would potentially make it clear that
gray dragon scale* grants the same resistance.

If playing with Hearse, bones files could provide valuable information on
what other players find to be important equipment.
--
David Damerell <damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> Distortion Field!
Today is First Oneiros, April.

 

[Guest]

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

David Damerell <damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:

> Quoting Janis Papanagnou <Janis_Papanagnou@hotmail.com>:
> >One thing I suspect being practically necessary (and I don't know of any
> >existing hint) is MR. You could of course deduce it at least by accident
> >with the help of enlightenment.
>
> I would expect an unspoiled player to figure that out.

A "cloak of magic resistance" gives a subtle hint to it's
main power somewhere in its name, alright. The fact that
GDSM provides MR might or might not be found, though.
*Much* harder (if not downright impossible) to figure out
would be magic cancellation (but then, it does not seem as
important as MR to me).

I also believe that you can win unspoiled, but it's an
uphill battle at best.

Best,
Jakob

 

[Guest]

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

On 3/28/05 7:42 PM, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
> Kevin Wayne wrote:
>
>>I don't much like the approach that
>>"Ellora (almost) did it, therefore it's possible, both theoretically and
>>practically. QED."
>
>
> I may have missed it but I haven't seen someone stating that.

I took Boudewijn's comments to be stating exactly that:

from message-id <d25sj4$fod$1@news6.zwoll1.ov.home.nl>

=> jorge estrada wrote:
=>
=>>> one player figuring something out doesn't make the case that the
=>>> game can be figured out without spoilers for the majority of players.
=>
=> If ONE can do it, everyone should be able to do it.
=>
=> As long as one can stand the boredom, of course. I don't think even *I*
=> would have the patience to do it...

I took the "ONE" referred to as indicating Ellora, whom Boudewijn had
brought up upthread.

> Quite contrary I think that if one is really unspoiled he will, after
> having finished The Valley, do harder in Gehennom than spoiled
> people. I think Ellora's path would have continued to be very
> challenging (for her).

Just my point, although I believe she did actually get pretty far down
in Gehennom.

>>There are two major problems with this approach: how
>>unspoiled, really, was Ellora's player, and how much in that game was
>>the product of dumb luck, as opposed to learning how to play?
>
> Here I have a completely different view. I am certain that there are so
> many possibilities to make a bad move that you would need a _continuous_
> series of good luck to compensate that. So much luck is unlikely.

I think you're misreading my point. I'm not saying that Ellora's player
was the proverbial "monkey at a typewriter." I am saying that the
*combination* of info from D&D (which non-D&D players would have had to
get from spoilers), extremely cautious play, and quite a bit of luck,
all contributed to Ellora's degree of success.

I'm saying this because of what Krysius Krusader (sp? - Ellora's player)
wrote, indicating his level of understanding of the game. He kept
talking about Ellora "making her saving throw" against various
attacks--he had no conception of resistances. He didn't know about
Medusa's gaze attack, and was warned by us not to go upstairs without a
means of blindness (although he was wearing an amulet of reflection and
would have been saved by that). Iirc, he was carrying around a cloak of
magic resistance without knowing what it was for. In many cases, it
appears that he happened to be wearing the right amulets/rings/cloaks to
survive various attacks, without really understanding what they were
for. He thought that blessed daggers were the best weapons of the
game--and attributed their effectiveness to blessing, not to enchantment.

On the other hand, I am *not* saying that KK wasn't playing as well as
anyone could without being spoiled. I was quite impressed by the level
of patience, careful reading of game messages and oracularities, and
stopping and thinking before moving. And admittedly, the D&D info cut
two ways--as I wrote above, KK thought in terms of "saving throws"
rather than "resistances."

> And Ellora's approach did not show that luck was the primary success
> factor, rather her carefully considered gameplay. Dumb luck? No.

I'm saying that "dumb luck" (or RNG friendliness, or happening to do the
right thing at the right time without understanding why it was right;
call it what you will) was one factor, and an important one. My overall
point was that achieving one ascension and learning how to win the game
are two separate matters. I think an unspoiled player could achieve the
first, with careful play and some luck; I don't think one could achieve
the second.

> You learn by knowledge and/or by experience. Being spoiled emphasizes the
> knowledge factor.

I wouldn't divide things up that way. Experience is one means of gaining
knowledge; another is appealing to authority (spoilers, source code,
Guidebook). Whether the game gives enough information to learn how to
win, through the Guidebook and play experience itself, is the issue
under discussion.

--
Kevin Wayne

"I came to Casablanca for the waters."
"Waters? What waters? We're in the desert?"
"I was misinformed."

 

[Guest]

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

Quoting Jakob Creutzig <creutzig@mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de>:
>David Damerell <damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:
>>Quoting Janis Papanagnou <Janis_Papanagnou@hotmail.com>:
>>>One thing I suspect being practically necessary (and I don't know of any
>>>existing hint) is MR. You could of course deduce it at least by accident
>>>with the help of enlightenment.
>>I would expect an unspoiled player to figure that out.
>A "cloak of magic resistance" gives a subtle hint to it's
>main power somewhere in its name, alright.

What is more difficult to figure out is that this becomes a vital thing to
have.
--
David Damerell <damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> Distortion Field!
Today is First Oneiros, April.

 

[Guest]

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

Janis Papanagnou wrote:
> Jukka Lahtinen wrote:
>
>>
>> True, they might equally not guess that they are magic resistant because
>> of the other cloak, either.
>> But when identified, the meaning of "magic resistance" is probably
>> clearer
>> to many people than the meaning of "displacement". At least it would
>> be to
>> me.
>
>
> The meaning is clearer also for me. What would still be nebulous is why
> "he is using his finger of death" or the destruction of armor would be
> depending on MR; disintegration yes, but MR?
>
> You can imagine my astonishment to see a DYWYPI on the plane of fire with
> an "invincible" character. (The Wiz stole my MR artifact, the other used
> The Finger.)
>
> Janis

That would be The Touch. The player is the only one in the game that can
cast The Finger, IIRC.

--
____ (__)
/ \ (oo) -Shadow
|Moo. > \/
\____/

 

[Guest]

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

Benjamin Lewis wrote:
>
> I believe that, given strong enough motivation, I could have *eventually*
> ascended unspoiled, but that it would have been a matter of years or
> possibly decades rather than weeks or months. However, I'm more interested
> in the strategy of NetHack than in the long arduous process of discovery.

The same here. Once I figured out that e.g. the base prices for items are
always the same I resorted to the object.c source file instead of making
notes or relying on my unreliable memory.

> There are some things I'm sure I would *never* have figured out, such as
> magic cancellation.

I still don't consider this type of information; I ignore that completely
since I would not have any possibility to obtain that information natively
by playing the game. There is other hidden information like that; luck
comes to my mind. Even if I know from spoilers that throwing named glass
to unicorns (to identify them) does not affect luck, simply the message
that the unicorn is "not interested in my junk" keeps me off from doing
that.

Janis