00:39:28 Unstable branch on cbro.berotato.org updated to: 0.28-a0-1624-g820543e53a (34) 00:54:02 Monster database of master branch on crawl.develz.org updated to: 0.28-a0-1624-g820543e53a 01:36:32 Fork (bcrawl) on crawl.kelbi.org updated to: 0.23-a0-4535-gd7aa5628e3 03:13:06 Is there a wizmode to create a portal? 03:34:02 <05kate> you can place them with &( to make the feature, or place an entry vault with &L 03:38:01 Thanks! 03:40:19 I'm about ready to give up on this +Inv ring bug 03:40:20 Cannot reproduce it, nothing in the code suggests it should be possible. 03:44:34 My last theory is that there is some entirely different artifact generation method that bypasses _artp_can_go_on_item (maybe converting an unrand that already exists??) but that's sort of hailing and flailing 04:22:05 Experimental (bcrawl) branch on underhound.eu updated to: 0.23-a0-4535-gd7aa5628e3 06:01:24 <10PleasingFungus> blame cosmic rays imo 06:46:47 -!- allbery_b is now known as geekosaur 08:23:09 03advil02 07* 0.28-a0-1625-gee65da1: fix: select first travelable item in stash search 10(16 minutes ago, 3 files, 19+ 6-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/ee65da1d57c4 08:23:09 03advil02 07* 0.28-a0-1626-ge5bbfea: feat: use DESC_INVENTORY_EQUIP for carried stash search results 10(3 minutes ago, 1 file, 5+ 2-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/e5bbfea7ee15 08:24:08 <06advil> man, reading that 2016 tavern thread really brings back how awful that forum was at times 08:24:08 <06advil> sort of glad I wasn't a dev then 08:39:49 Unstable branch on crawl.kelbi.org updated to: 0.28-a0-1626-ge5bbfea7ee (34) 09:07:05 03advil02 07* 0.28-a0-1627-g6e7a31e: fix: map touch input backspace to esc 10(8 minutes ago, 2 files, 19+ 1-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/6e7a31e4fcaf 09:13:26 03advil02 07* 0.28-a0-1628-gc665463: fix: initialize a bool (Goratrix) 10(3 minutes ago, 1 file, 1+ 0-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/c66546352eda 09:14:35 Huh, I think the rock wall that borders the extremes of the level doesn't respond to right click to describe it like normal rock walls 09:17:00 probably; it's somewhat special, not even undiggable stone 09:17:34 Unstable branch on crawl.kelbi.org updated to: 0.28-a0-1628-gc66546352e (34) 09:27:16 <06advil> yes, that might be right, those squares are out of bounds so often have different handling to avoid crashes 09:27:16 <06advil> they don't react to xv either 09:27:16 <06advil> surprised no one has ever come up with a quote for the floor 09:28:00 <06advil> that is to say it's semi-intentional, and arguably a ui bug, but of a kind that often has ended up being a lot of work to deal with 09:28:12 that's understandable 09:30:36 <03wheals> it definitely would be nice to allow xv, currently it's hard to tell up to where you can dig (though the targeter helps with that) but i recall looking into it and it wasn't trivial 09:32:13 <06advil> looks like if someone could fix xv the right click thing would come automatically, out of bounds coords are passed along up until the describe code just fine 09:34:03 yeah, I noticed it because I was actually trying to dig around in an entry vault to a fly-only room 09:34:08 but couldn't :( 10:21:20 Unstable branch on crawl.akrasiac.org updated to: 0.28-a0-1628-gc665463 (34) 11:14:53 ooh, that "initialize a bool" thing - does that fix the situation where you roll a delver, there's a timed portal on the map, and the screen is initially all black until you hit escape a few times? 11:15:49 <03wheals> if that bug is older than a day, very unlikely 11:16:59 <03wheals> and viewmap is specifically for the X screen, not the main display 11:17:59 <10PleasingFungus> that bug is as old as delvers 11:21:10 ah ok 11:26:03 i tried rolling a delver locally to test but it's console and so i bet the bug ain't there 11:27:35 <10PleasingFungus> no idea whether it's specific to any particular build 11:27:35 also it's harder to realize you're on d5 in console, i just started tabbing and surprisingly lived :O vamp spear in los too good 11:27:50 i wonder if an ignis altar is the best thing you can see in delver's initial LOS other than you know, actual upstairs 11:28:22 Vitality? 11:29:20 <10PleasingFungus> would argue that ignis altar is not the best thing delver can see in their initial LOS, but mainly on account of it not being possilbe 11:29:28 rip 11:29:55 there can be some real bangers, i wish i'd kept notes 11:29:59 delvers are a hootin blast 11:30:05 <10PleasingFungus> 🙂 11:30:47 hootin blast 11:30:55 oh, so playing TeDe, I get it 11:34:38 if an ignis altar is able to be in LOS then I'd argue the best thing to see would be the orb of zot 11:36:27 <10PleasingFungus> currently imagining a world in which, instead of evoking polearms to attack at range, you automatically attack whenever you try to move toward an enemy in range (hitting both adjacent & 1 tile distant enemies in that direction, as appropriate) 11:36:45 like brogue! 11:36:53 <10PleasingFungus> ui would be a lil better for players, but there are some weird corner cases - can't move adjacent to a centaur in a corridor without switching weapons, for example 11:37:11 <10PleasingFungus> and i think the mechanics for monsters might be a little worse - feels weird that you could hide in knight's move 'blind spots' 11:37:32 <10PleasingFungus> i forget how exactly the brogue version works 11:38:39 i think exactly the way you said. if something is 2 tiles away, you hit it, and don't move. if it's 1 tile away, you hit it, and don't move, and you zoop whoever's directly behind them as well 11:40:22 maybe in the first case you could be forced to step forward like a belated rampage? if getting adjacent to centaurs is important 11:40:22 Hm, my main concern would be the trickyness for when you actually want to move adjacent to them then 11:40:24 <10PleasingFungus> zoop is a good word 11:40:36 console is trippy. pikel looks like a keystone kop sergeant 11:40:40 zoop 👉😎👉 11:40:57 <10PleasingFungus> i think being forced to step forward removes a lot of the point of the mechanic, maybe? since you're no longer getting a free hit 11:41:02 What's wrong with how it works now, especially given Tab will attack _a_ target at range if you don't care much who? 11:41:23 <10PleasingFungus> the problem is that when you do care who you want to hit, life becomes very fiddly 🙂 11:41:33 <10PleasingFungus> attacking with a sword: press a directional key. You're done. 11:41:57 v (many buttons) (thinking) (another button) . 11:42:01 <10PleasingFungus> attacking with a spear: hit evoke. look at what the autotargeter picked. cursor around a few times until you find the right target. enter. 11:42:06 <10PleasingFungus> yeah, pretty much 11:42:25 <10PleasingFungus> it's a bit much for something you'll be doing many times per game 11:42:30 <10PleasingFungus> complexity is best in decision making, not in ui 11:42:36 and you have to remember what happens if there's enemies between you and the one you wanna hit 11:43:09 If I care about target selection at range I must necessarily select between the keys that attack specific targets - sword or polearm 11:43:20 s/at range /; 11:43:41 <10PleasingFungus> yes, but you need to hit many more keys for polearm use than for sword use. 11:44:40 <10PleasingFungus> and there's more context involved - with a sword, you know where your character and can immediately hit the right direction for the target you want. with a polearm, you have to first check to see additional hidden state (the default target for (v)) before you can start inputting directional commands. 11:44:47 <10PleasingFungus> or cycling with + or w/e. 11:46:49 <10PleasingFungus> fwiw, the weird corner cases i mentioned mean i'm at most moderately enthusiastic about the simplified polearms suggestion. do think that polearms are the worst currently extant weapon gimmick, though, now that riposte is gone. 11:46:49 could change it to make it so they "pierce" multiple monsters passively, whenever you attach in a direction (including a knight move?) that has two enemies in a row 11:47:26 <10PleasingFungus> that's what i was suggesting, yes. Except: 11:47:28 <10PleasingFungus> how do you attack in a knight's move? 11:48:02 if you have a../.a./.@. and attack up then it'd hit both 11:48:19 <10PleasingFungus> that seems very confusing 11:48:23 agreed 11:48:35 <10PleasingFungus> a.a .a. .@. Who do you hit when you attack up? 11:48:44 yourself 11:48:54 <10PleasingFungus> 🤔 11:48:59 i don't feel the game suffers for changing the number of squares you can target from 24 to 16; it's still a lot more than 8! 11:49:11 <10PleasingFungus> that part's a very small deal, yes 11:49:26 <10PleasingFungus> it's a little weird in that you sometimes want to wiggle at the start of a fight 11:49:40 <10PleasingFungus> so that an enemy will approach from an appropriate direction 11:49:45 <10PleasingFungus> but not a huge problem 11:50:02 I mean, that's not uncommon in other mechanics like WJC 11:50:20 It's one of the biggest warts on WJC IMAO 11:50:23 And I've found having to do and think about that type of mechanical positioning to be pretty fun 11:50:33 no it's fun >:( 11:50:58 <10PleasingFungus> fight! fight! 11:51:03 fwiw, i already have practice performing that wiggle thanks to ranged weapons. because if i get them to line up neatly, i can just shift fire in a direction instead of drawing tracers for 20 minutes 11:51:10 <10PleasingFungus> lol 11:51:28 ppl might be able to adapt quickly 11:53:12 <10PleasingFungus> could be fun to try 11:53:12 spicyCebolla: bindkey = [^I] CMD_AUTOFIGHT_NOMOVE 11:53:12 Yeah, I have that bound to c. It works wonders. 11:54:09 <10PleasingFungus> another downside of my proposal: you'd no longer be able to betray a charmed enemy while keeping a summoned ally interposed without hitting both 11:54:13 pink: but then i'll only hit one target at a time, instead of potentially hitting the one behind them via either lining them up, or moving the cursor around too much 14:18:57 This is �ber nitpicky, but the black background to the outside staircase is a bit janky here: https://i.imghurr.com/e/l8cXC6GN9o.png 14:19:20 It'd be kinda nice if it could be transparent and have a floor background that matches an adjacent tile, but I'm sure that's quite tricky to do 14:20:55 <08nicolae> is the background built into the tile or did the vaultmaker just forget to do FTILE for that glyph 14:20:55 oh, maybe 14:21:30 I would suicide so I can see what vault it was but I'll die soon enough so whatever 14:21:36 <08nicolae> i see it all the time but i forget to check up on what the vault names were 14:25:43 Ah, there we go. 14:25:44 !source kennysheep_arrival_seaside 14:25:45 Can't find kennysheep_arrival_seaside. 14:25:47 grumble 14:27:16 !source large.des:950 14:27:16 https://github.com/crawl/crawl/blob/master/crawl-ref/source/dat/des/arrival/large.des#L950 14:27:36 I'll PR a fix 14:33:14 New branch created: pull/2377 (1 commit) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/pull/2377 14:33:15 03Perry Fraser02 07https://github.com/crawl/crawl/pull/2377 * 0.28-a0-1629-g6ebec4a: fix: set FTILE in kennysheep_arrival_seaside stair 10(4 minutes ago, 1 file, 1+ 1-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/6ebec4a11f20 14:46:54 How is Sequell's tags file even generated? It seems like it uses an out-of-date one which is why I assume some functions/vaults don't show up in !source, but I don't see any documentation on how it's usually generated. 14:47:04 And how would a tagfile even be generated for vault names? 14:48:18 there are tags programs that can be configured. if you assume NAME: starts a new vault, as seems to be true, it's reasonably easy to define this 14:48:31 oh neat 14:48:44 see "exuberant ctags" 14:49:12 which these days is I think the default ctags on many linuxes 14:49:35 ah, looks like etags supports setting regexes to generate tags for 14:50:01 emacs tags, not exuberant tags in this case :P 14:51:46 03Perry Fraser02 {PleasingFungus} 07* 0.28-a0-1629-gf728b70: fix: set FTILE in kennysheep_arrival_seaside stair 10(22 minutes ago, 1 file, 1+ 1-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/f728b707aa7c 14:53:08 on my ubuntu both etags and ctags are exuberant ctags 14:53:08 that's confusing 14:53:08 etags for me has always been emacs's version of ctags 14:53:08 yes 14:53:23 it still is 14:53:53 "exuberant xctags" is not a ctags called etags (if anything that'd be ectags) 14:54:03 gah so complicated 14:54:25 "man ctags" and "man etags" both get me the same manpage for exuberant ctags, which provides both etags and ctags variants 14:55:00 "exuberant ctags" is just the variant that supports things like -r to define a new tag-matching regex 14:55:30 <09gammafunk> @PleasingFungus I think I asked you this before, but are you pretty firm on the idea that Hedge Wizard should be considered a distinct class from the historical Wizard class? The complications regarding this are that players tend to regard them as the same for tracking purposes, so we're going a bit against the majority expectation there, and that if we do regard them as distinct, I think it's pretty reasonable to change the hedge 14:55:31 wizard abbreviation to HW, in terms of consistency with how we abbreviate class names 14:55:58 <10PleasingFungus> no? 14:56:01 <10PleasingFungus> i don't think i've ever said that 14:56:07 <10PleasingFungus> maybe you're thinking of something else 14:56:12 <09gammafunk> If we go the opposite direction and treat is more like Assassin/Brigand, there's still a complication in that we need to treat them the same in Sequell/CAO 14:56:14 <10PleasingFungus> i've always considered them to be the same thing 14:56:34 <10PleasingFungus> would be nice to give them the as/br treatment, yes 15:01:53 <09gammafunk> I can't seem to find the convo where you allegedly expressed the idea that hedge wizard should be distinct from wizard, but that probably just means that my enemies hacked discord to remove the evidence 15:02:38 <09gammafunk> well, that makes things easier, we can just do the historical rename of Wizard -> Hedge Wizard, and I guess we actually need to change the class abbreviation as well? 15:02:50 Unstable branch on crawl.kelbi.org updated to: 0.28-a0-1629-gf728b707aa (34) 15:03:14 <09gammafunk> tempting to leave that latter change to 0.29 now that we're in the freeze 15:06:04 don't want to lose that AC bonus by moving around 15:06:17 <10PleasingFungus> seems reasonable 15:58:00 <06advil> I think there was a discussion about how it was slight ironic that hedge wizard actually did come with some apt changes but basically kept the abbrev, while br (iirc) was just a flavor change but came with a new abbrev 16:00:55 <10PleasingFungus> my logic was that it'd be easier to keep the same abbrev 16:01:27 <06advil> Yes, I’m just saying maybe that is the convo gamma is remembering 16:04:02 <10PleasingFungus> o 16:04:02 <10PleasingFungus> that could be 16:04:22 <10PleasingFungus> to try to clarify further: i agree that we should treat wizard and hedge wizard as the same class for scoring ("the as/br treatment"), i don't feel that we need to change the abbrev, but i think it's fine to change the abbrev if people are up to doing the associated work 16:23:56 Unstable branch on underhound.eu updated to: 0.28-a0-1629-gf728b707aa (34) 16:37:26 <09gammafunk> yeah, sounds reasonable to me, but if advil (or anyone else) has an objection, let me know 16:38:10 <09gammafunk> referring to said work to change abbreviation, since although there's support for it on the Sequell side, I'm not as sure about how much hassle it is on the CAO side 17:05:47 <09gammafunk> @advil I've finally made a first draft of a guide on using the DCSS knowledge bots, partially based on the old one I had for beem: https://github.com/crawl/crawl/wiki/Guide-to-the-DCSS-knowledge-Bots. I've put it on the wiki so we'll be able to edit it more easilly. Could go on the wordpress if we wanted to include some screenshots, but this seems sufficient for now. 17:08:05 <09gammafunk> Would be nice to expand the sequell section into something with some more comprehensive listing of good user-defined commands 17:08:53 <09gammafunk> I will have beem/Cerebot/LomLobot link to that after it gets a couple passes 23:34:43 Unstable branch on crawl.develz.org updated to: 0.28-a0-1629-gf728b707aa (34) 23:42:26 -!- tiobot is now known as Guest7664 23:52:07 One easily fixable UI inconsistency: if i want to [W]ear something, the keys of each item is the same as in the inventory, but not when i [Q]uiver something 23:56:09 Windows builds of master branch on crawl.develz.org updated to: 0.28-a0-1629-gf728b707aa