00:12:54 Unstable branch on cbro.berotato.org updated to: 0.31-a0-1612-g4aaf141004 (34) 01:09:10 <04dracoomega> Strange crash. But looking at that log, they seem to have just killed an elionoma, who turned into a wand, which means we can actually know for sure that mons.type == MONS_ELIONOMA only a short distance before it appears to have become MONS_NO_MONSTER 01:10:04 <04dracoomega> Though some staring at this later, I'm really not sure how 01:32:13 <04dracoomega> It seems like type has to be MON_ELIONOMA at line 2707, where the corpse is made (since the type of this corpse is later used to determine that a wand should drop). And then by line 2806, it has to have become MONS_NO_MONSTER. But I have been reading every single bit of seemingly-reachable code between those two points for anything that could theoretically change its type, and still see nothing. 01:39:59 Fork (bcrawl) on crawl.kelbi.org updated to: 0.23-a0-5140-g5775ae71e1 01:56:55 <04dracoomega> Yeah, I've still got no idea 02:01:45 <03implojin> this crash seems to go back ~2 years, searching this channel for the assert produces several rare instances of it happening 02:01:52 <03implojin> https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/747522859361894521/1194204379939618946/elio-crash.png?ex=65af807f&is=659d0b7f&hm=56115dd160c172474d0f3858094e9b993f515af66db5f3632c54a6c0499594b3& 02:02:47 <03implojin> based on the timing i wonder if it was introduced all the way back in a36b043db1 02:06:14 <04dracoomega> I was going to say that this assert isn't the same as there, but apparently it was added shortly after that 02:06:20 <03implojin> yeah 02:06:28 <03implojin> the assert was added in response to that crash as far as i can tell 02:06:58 <04dracoomega> The 'turn corpse into wand' code doesn't seem to do anything to the monster itself, though. It seems to just draw info from the corpse itself. 02:13:58 <04dracoomega> I've been really going over this with a fine-toothed comb and getting nada 02:20:33 <04dracoomega> Like, searching for past examples of this crash, it's very conspicuous that they all seem to involve eleionoma or fenstrider witches, but the special code for them looks completely harmless 02:22:13 <04dracoomega> Doesn't even reference the monster itself 02:41:02 <04dracoomega> Looking through a lot of these old crash logs, it feels conspicuous how almost all of them have You have identified the last wand. at the end. That might just be coincidence since the newest crash doesn't have it, but it feels weird that like... 6 of 6 of the other ones I looked at did. 02:49:06 <03implojin> > * @param[in] item the item to be checked. Note that any references to this > * item will be invalidated by the swap_inv_slots call! 02:49:09 <03implojin> hmm 02:52:27 <04dracoomega> Is there somewhere this gets called for an item not in your inventory? 02:58:41 <04dracoomega> Actually, how does this message order happen? You have identified the last wand. An eleionoma bone magically twists into a wand of digging (10). when the code is C++ if (you.see_cell(pos) && !silent && !feat_eliminates_items(env.grid(pos))) { mprf("%s bone magically twists into %s.", mons_type_name(mtyp, DESC_A).c_str(), item.name(DESC_A).c_str()); } set_ident_flags(item, 02:58:42 ISFLAG_IDENT_MASK); 02:58:56 <04dracoomega> ie: isn't the wand only identified after the message about it? 02:59:54 <03implojin> i think(?) the identify is happening in move_item_to_grid? 03:07:56 <04dracoomega> For what it's worth, I made a few characters and killed witches until I'd identified the last wand that way, and nothing happened. It may be coincidence. 03:32:25 <04dracoomega> I think I'm driving myself batty by this point ^^; 03:33:13 <03implojin> i looked at this once before and couldn't figure it out then, either 03:35:05 <04dracoomega> About 34 crashes in nearly 2 years (and they don't even seem easily repeatable for the same player on the same seed) 03:35:32 <04dracoomega> Given that very few of them have been triggered by the same person twice in a row 03:38:52 <04dracoomega> So, I decided to look at all cases where this bug happened to the same person twice in a row (which seems to be 3 times) 03:39:05 <04dracoomega> And in each case, despite many turns between crashes, each pair had the same type of wand generate 03:39:08 <03implojin> the most recent SMASHER crash doesn't have an identified the last wand, at least 03:39:34 <04dracoomega> Like, it was a different wand for each person, but each pair of crashed had the same wand type in each crash 03:39:57 <04dracoomega> (Was the final wand type in 2 of those pairs, also, but not the 3rd) 03:40:11 <04dracoomega> This also feels conspicuous 03:40:36 <04dracoomega> That the type of wand generated does seem to matter in the specific weird circumstances that exist here 03:41:10 <04dracoomega> (Unless that would be seeded in some way that would be consistant for each witch killed? I don't think it would be?) 04:23:55 Experimental (bcrawl) branch on underhound.eu updated to: 0.23-a0-5140-g5775ae71e1 04:49:40 <08wormsofcan> was the wand type an item set wand? 04:50:06 <08wormsofcan> or was the unidentified wand an item set wand? 04:59:36 <04dracoomega> It's been digging/polymorph plenty of times 05:06:41 Unstable branch on crawl.akrasiac.org updated to: 0.31-a0-1612-g4aaf141 (34) 05:08:28 <08wormsofcan> and you get the "last unidentified wand" message every time? 05:10:53 <08wormsofcan> strangely I'm inconsistenly getting that message 05:13:56 <08wormsofcan> yeah I'm not sure how related this is to the crash but when the last wand is an item set wand it doesn't identify it in the message log, but the wand is still identified 05:13:57 <08wormsofcan> https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/747522859361894521/1194252717804236870/42ef798579.png?ex=65afad84&is=659d3884&hm=22a35ee5c5a72b0c9bae45a37ce84617fe7c223167c57bd1bb561bba3e76ac81& 05:19:57 <03implojin> re item sets, these crashes predate the item set commit, which was june 2022 in c28e0ee30e (doesn't mean wand sets aren't interacting with the crash somehow, but maybe not the root cause?) 05:20:27 <08wormsofcan> there's another bug related to wands of charming, I don't know when it was introduced 05:20:46 <08wormsofcan> but the game leaks the identity of unid'd wands of charming if you have a conduct that ban allies 05:21:12 <08wormsofcan> this is noticeable when you have the conduct and autoexplore will ignore the unid'd wand of charming 10:33:28 03PleasingFungus02 07* 0.31-a0-1613-gd52d5dbe6e: Give a gem an unswirly (Ge0ff) 10(66 seconds ago, 1 file, 1+ 1-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/d52d5dbe6e98 10:34:31 03PleasingFungus02 07* 0.31-a0-1614-ge65d87d18d: Make ribbon worms catch their breath (Monkooky) 10(66 seconds ago, 1 file, 1+ 1-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/e65d87d18d48 10:52:33 Unstable branch on crawl.kelbi.org updated to: 0.31-a0-1614-ge65d87d18d (34) 12:18:22 <04dracoomega> Go to sleep, wake up, kill more eleionomas.... (I actually taught myself just enough lua scripting to have a bot make and kill them over and over, and have rerun this test a lot of times without ever actually getting a crash, of course. 12:45:29 <06pleasingfungus> wow 12:47:29 <06pleasingfungus> oh my god 12:47:52 <06pleasingfungus> @dracoomega look at this bit in some slightly earlier code cpp // monster_drop_things may lead to a level excursion (via // god_id_item -> ... -> ShoppingList::item_type_identified), // which fails to save/restore the dead monster. Keep it alive // since we still need it. unwind_var fakehp(mons.hit_points, 1); monster_drop_things(&mons, YOU_KILL(killer) || pet_kill); 12:48:26 <06pleasingfungus> we don't have that kind of protection for maybe_drop_monster_organ (hides, scales and wands)... 12:48:48 <04dracoomega> Wait, is this about removing the wand from a shopping list?? 12:49:09 <06pleasingfungus> that’s my bet 12:49:32 <06pleasingfungus> well, not removing it, but updating its price 12:49:41 <04dracoomega> Right, right 12:50:04 <04dracoomega> And I guess this never matters for hide drops 12:50:07 <06pleasingfungus> level excursions and their consequences were a disaster for the human race. 12:50:32 <04dracoomega> I compared the hide-drop and wand-drop code back and forth carefully, repeatedly, and it seemed like they were doing close enough to the same thing 12:50:43 <04dracoomega> But armor and wands don't behave the same on shopping lists, of course 12:51:13 <04dracoomega> (And so of course no amount of stress-testing could catch the problem if I don't put anything on a shopping list myself >.>) 12:51:20 <06pleasingfungus> if I’m right, seems easy enough to repro - esp if you rig the eleio to always generate a given wand type 12:51:28 <06pleasingfungus> (but i’m currently afk) 12:51:35 <04dracoomega> I'll try to test 12:54:29 <04dracoomega> Hmmm... made an antique shop with an un-ID'd wand, put it on shopping list, then left the floor and killed witches until all wands generated. No crash. 12:57:15 note god_id_item? 12:58:05 <06pleasingfungus> hm? 12:58:38 the comment says the call chain that does a level excursion goes through god_id_item, does it even happen otherwise? 13:14:13 <04dracoomega> Okay, after getting a shop with all un-ID'd wands and killing waves after waves of witches and it still not happening (while confirming that level excursions were occurring), I was going to say that I wonder if the problem that comment talks about no longer exists. But then I finally got it to crash once. 13:15:06 <04dracoomega> (On the very last un-ID'd wand again) 13:15:20 <04dracoomega> So it still doesn't usually happen, even under these circumstances, but this seems to be part of it 13:46:58 <04dracoomega> For what it's worth, crashes seem consistent now, and are fixed by doing the same guard in the codeblock above. But I'm still concerned because it seemed less consistent earlier and also it only happened when a kill created the last unID'd wand, but a couple of these crashlogs (including the most recent) crashed on something that didn't print the last ID'd wand message 13:48:09 <04dracoomega> I'd like to figure out why it only seems to happen on the final wand, since level excursions are happening repeatedly for the other wands without issue. Sort of feeling like this will end up boiling down to "I still don't entirely understand exactly what happened, but this mostly seems to fix it. Fingers crossed" 13:50:13 <06pleasingfungus> the dream 13:52:01 <04dracoomega> I don't like pushing fixes that only seem to work without concretely knowing the exact circumstances under which it does or doesn't matter, but if I can't track that down in a little bit more, I'll do that anyway 13:53:25 <08wormsofcan> does the game actually update prices from the wands that aren't the last? 13:53:46 <08wormsofcan> I can't tell if the game actually identifies the wand in those cases, since the message log describes them as unidentified 13:53:53 <04dracoomega> I does trigger the shopping list excursion/refresh. I checked. 13:54:05 <04dracoomega> (Like, I put in code to print messages whenever it does this) 13:54:10 <08wormsofcan> interesting 13:54:15 <04dracoomega> And it does this for every un-ID'd wand drop, but only crashes on the last one 13:54:48 <04dracoomega> Oh, wait a sec 13:56:59 <04dracoomega> Okay, yeah, it does seem to be doing an excursion for every new dropped wand 14:08:31 <08wormsofcan> ok I got the crash to happen 14:08:37 <08wormsofcan> let me see if it's replicable 14:08:48 <08wormsofcan> do offline games produce crash logs 14:08:59 <08wormsofcan> yeah found it 14:10:24 <04dracoomega> Yeah, I've replicated it a ton of time by now. I've just been trying to track down some very specific things about it 14:11:11 <08wormsofcan> i've done it twice in a row 14:11:13 <04dracoomega> One interesting thing, if you look at this code block, is that the level excursion is triggered by set_ident_flags if the wand isn't the last, but triggered by (I think) move_item_to_grid if it is the last wand C++ move_item_to_grid(&w, pos); item.plus *= 2; if (you.see_cell(pos) && !silent && !feat_eliminates_items(env.grid(pos))) { mprf("%s bone magically twists into %s.", 14:11:14 mons_type_name(mtyp, DESC_A).c_str(), item.name(DESC_A).c_str()); } set_ident_flags(item, ISFLAG_IDENT_MASK); 14:11:20 <04dracoomega> And I wonder if that somehow matters 14:11:23 <08wormsofcan> are you on the same level as the shop when the last wand is generated? 14:11:34 <04dracoomega> Not for any of them 14:11:46 <08wormsofcan> this is the save I used to replicate the crash 14:11:47 <08wormsofcan> https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/747522859361894521/1194388069336502292/Iqari.cs?ex=65b02b92&is=659db692&hm=f88226a16bd86546a7f796c4523c58796ade08da17920eb622fdc72ba831e17e& 14:12:11 <08wormsofcan> should start you in swamp, just spawn elei until the last wand (mindburst) is generated 14:12:41 <08wormsofcan> done it a third time, it seems to be very consistent on that save 14:14:12 <04dracoomega> Yeah, I have a consistent crash situation save locally, too 14:15:17 <04dracoomega> (I just want to figure out why a level excursion only causes this problem for the last wand) 14:22:12 <04dracoomega> Like, maybe this doesn't matter, but it might and I want to know T.T 14:22:45 <08wormsofcan> what code path does the game use to print the "you have identified the last wand" message anyway 14:23:23 <08wormsofcan> so far I can avoid triggering the crash if the shop is located on the same level as the player if the last wand is spawned there 14:37:53 <04dracoomega> I swear, the more debugging statements I put in to trace the exact place in code where the monster type becomes MONS_NO_MONSTER, the more often the crash stops happening, even when it used to be ~100% consistent 14:39:59 <06pleasingfungus> ah, a heisenbug, 14:41:57 <04dracoomega> This all may be very unnecessary on my part, but it just feels that if a level excursion cleaning up 'dead' monsters in the problem, then it should either always happen or never happen, and not this 14:42:53 <04dracoomega> The monster is just as dead in either scenario 14:43:29 <06pleasingfungus> cursed 15:03:01 <04dracoomega> My log is a mess at this point: You shoot an arrow. The arrow hits the fenstrider witch! You kill the fenstrider witch! 651 x5; A; 651 x6; A; 651 x6; B; 651 Last? 651; C; 651 Maybe excursion. Actual excursion to Level 1 of the Dungeon. Brrr; E x2; 1000; Return; Brrr; Done excursion; D; 1000 x2 You have identified the last wand. 1000 x2; A; 1000 x2 A fenstrider witch bone magically twists into a wand of polymorph (2). Ident: 1000 15:06:07 <04dracoomega> A weird thing seems to be that crawl_state.mon_act (which normally holds the dying monster during much of its death) seems to somehow become null during the level excursions (and then change back) for wands that aren't the last one, but is maintained as something for wands that are the last one?? No idea if this is relevant to anything (but it's what I'd been using to try and track the state of the dying monster on its wild 15:06:07 identification journey) 15:11:31 <04dracoomega> Starting to think I need to just cut my losses and put in the same guard monster_drop_things uses and call it a day. My brain is a pretzel =/ 15:12:01 <04dracoomega> Woke up and sunk 4 straight hours into this instead of, like, having breakfast 15:12:42 <04dracoomega> (After spending like 3+ hours on it right before I went to bed) 15:13:31 <04dracoomega> I suspect at this point, this bug has cost me more time and inconvenience than it has for the entire Crawl playerbase put together in the last 2 years 15:36:12 03DracoOmega02 07* 0.31-a0-1615-ga12eea24be: Avoid a rare crash with eleionoma/witch wand creation (PleasingFungus) 10(15 minutes ago, 1 file, 3+ 0-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/a12eea24be46 15:40:40 <03semi_tonal> a heroic effort either way! also glad to see i'm not the only one whose debug messages are just random assortments of letters sometimes 15:44:03 <04dracoomega> Hehe. I think it's a pretty common thing, tbh ^^; 15:50:32 Unstable branch on crawl.kelbi.org updated to: 0.31-a0-1615-ga12eea24be (34) 15:57:05 03DracoOmega02 07* 0.31-a0-1616-gbeaec30b81: Let monsters cast ensnare on other monsters (Oneirical) 10(55 seconds ago, 1 file, 2+ 0-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/beaec30b815a 16:05:17 Unstable branch on crawl.kelbi.org updated to: 0.31-a0-1616-gbeaec30b81 (34) 16:26:08 Unstable branch on underhound.eu updated to: 0.31-a0-1616-gbeaec30b81 (34) 17:09:12 -!- Log is now known as Loggers_VIII 17:17:06 -!- Log is now known as Loggers_VIII 19:08:20 <04dracoomega> So, I haven't talked a lot about my experimental Beogh revamp plans here, largely because they're mostly synthesizing a lot of things I've already seen repeatedly positively discussed on the topic over time: opening worshipping up to non-orcs, greatly reduced number of perma-allies that are more easily revivable (though still less-so than Hep ancestor), removed item gifting, high-level invocation that temporarily calls in an 19:08:20 old-fashioned orcish horde.... Along with an angle I want to try with regarding your perma-allies that involves getting regular challenges from randomized named orcs (think like... mini Pan lords that can scale in challenge over the course of the game) which you can then choose to recruit when you beat them (if you want them to replace an existing Apostle - capped at 3 in total, probably). 19:08:42 <04dracoomega> But I'm grappling a little with some of the flavor of orcification. I kind of felt the literal "Beogh physically turns your body part-orc because Beogh thinks orcs are Peak Humanoid Form" is kind of weird, and I'd wanted to lean more towards a more... figurative take on that. An 'honorary' orc. But then I think there are... additional awkwardnesses with a non-orc outsider being inducted as a messianic figure to all these orcs. 19:08:52 <04dracoomega> Friend of mine suggested that rather than being seen as a messiah, and conflicts with other orcs being a religious schism, it's more like "You are being asked to prove your earnestness by Beogh.", but I fear something might end up lost that way? (Friend also suggested different flavor on all these things if you were playing an orc to start with as opposed to a different species, but that's a big writing burden and also I thought 19:08:52 Hill Orc was not long for this world after a Beogh revamp is accepted anyway) 19:10:19 <06pleasingfungus> my feeling is that dwarfifying hill orcs would be a core part of orcification, yeah 19:11:14 <06pleasingfungus> not being a messiah does seem sad. i liked the idea of all orcs being orcified, a ragtag horde of former other species members 19:11:26 <06pleasingfungus> you’re not an outsider, everyone is an outsider 19:11:40 <04dracoomega> (I thought a little about making Orcs a sort of... not actually a race, but a sort of... group moniker for a group of assorted outcasts who turend to Beogh as their god. The whole inherant 'evilness' of Beogh was sort of always weird, and I suspect has roots in old DnD racism) 19:11:48 <04dracoomega> Oh, huh, sort of like what you said, but not quite 19:12:00 <06pleasingfungus> i think i was riffing on your earlier pitch of this 19:12:01 <04dracoomega> Again, more figurative than literal, huh 19:12:04 <06pleasingfungus> someone’s 19:12:14 <06pleasingfungus> might take a little explaining to players 19:12:35 <04dracoomega> I've probably mentioned some of this before (maybe in the other channel), but some of this was being hilighted as I tried to write parts of these things 19:12:44 <06pleasingfungus> sure 19:12:59 <06pleasingfungus> i mean, i feel like it could still be literal? idk 19:13:09 <04dracoomega> I mean, maybe it could be 19:13:16 <06pleasingfungus> just everyone literally becomes orcy, to greater or lesser extent 19:14:19 <04dracoomega> (I think I am probably more okay with "This is the nature of the influence of Beogh's power, which followers gladly accept for protection and even come to see as a mark of kinship" than I am "Beogh thinks looking tusky and long-eared is Peak Worshipper", I guess?) 19:14:38 <06regret-⸸nde※> (I'd suggest making the current orc monster tiles be a little more variant in their faces and colours and shape than currently, to drift away from the weirdness of everybody Being Made To Look Like The One Thing) 19:14:44 <06pleasingfungus> sure 19:14:48 <06pleasingfungus> sounds fun 19:14:59 <04dracoomega> I very, very lightly dabbled at trying to do this myself, and it... did not look good 😛 19:15:34 <06pleasingfungus> wow, this is what we pay our artists the big bucks for! 19:15:38 <06regret-⸸nde※> possibly the tile artist devs may work great wonders as they regularly do 19:17:15 <04dracoomega> I was actually thinking of doing something very minorly cute and give Beogh a different title whether you're worshipping them or not. Like, 'evil' in Crawl has always been very much 'These 3 gods don't like you' and I think there's room to suggest that an 'evil' god is only subjectively so (a lot more than Mxter 'Give me everybody's blood' Makhleb over there. But rather that Beogh has been sort of looking out for a bunch of people 19:17:16 that have been some combination of downtrodden or pejorated, and they're just trying to carve out a fair share for themselves. And, well, some people don't like how they're going about it. 19:17:54 <06regret-⸸nde※> do people even notice titles on gods that aren't Xom or Jiyva, I wonder? :P 19:18:01 <04dracoomega> "Beogh the Brigand" is a silly current title, but I'd pondered something like "Beogh the Pariah" which reads as "Beogh the Liberator" (or Shepard or other somesuch term) if you are worshipping them 19:18:18 <06regret-⸸nde※> beogh the where's the free curare 19:18:24 <04dracoomega> Haha 19:20:37 <06regret-⸸nde※> (entirely outside of the orcs as always evil due to d&d thing I think there's something to be argued about the pain and summon demon prominent orc priests already in the game, but I think there's also a reasonable counterargument to note that multiple gods already provide demons but don't count as evil) 19:20:45 <04dracoomega> (The fact that invoking Beogh canonically allows other orcs to summon demons feels just slightly weird with all of this, considering Beogh has never even slightly done similar things for the player) 19:20:49 <06regret-⸸nde※> (or do xom and nemelex not count as evil because their demons aren't reliable? :P) 19:21:16 <04dracoomega> I mean, you can literally go worship Nemelex with the hope of summoning demons, which is something one can't say for swapping to Beogh 😛 19:21:48 <04dracoomega> (Also, if one looks at Orc High Priest's description, it's rather implied they are being summoned from Tartarus of all places >.>) 19:22:14 <04dracoomega> At least that is the literal only other textual ocurrance of 'netherworld' in the whole game 19:22:33 <06regret-⸸nde※> the true place the orcs' mines are digging towards, since all the dwarves evidently were digging towards gehenna 19:22:34 <04dracoomega> Tartarian Sixfirhy 19:24:53 <04dracoomega> "Beogh has an uneasy alliance with Mahkleb and he'd rather send demon mercenaries to their deaths than his own orcs and Makhleb themselves sure doesn't care." >.> 19:26:11 <04dracoomega> "You don't get those powers because he's hoping you'll do better than to need them." 19:31:27 <04dracoomega> (On a mechanical level, I'm sort of split. It's kind of cool that orcification actually changes passive things about you, but I'm not exactly sure how interesting I think it is if a god like this just kinda slants you slightly towards being a heavy armor axe user - but also not enough to be especially ood at it unless you already were at least 'okay') 19:31:45 <04dracoomega> I wonder if there's a mildly more interesting take on that which is still simple 19:32:39 <06regret-⸸nde※> (get +2 fire apt) 19:42:40 <04dracoomega> I wonder about like... what if instead of +1 to some skills, it set the skill to some positive level if it wasn't already higher? So instead of a -3 going to a -2, the -3 goes straight to a +1 (but doesn't get lowered if you're already a minotaur or dwarf). That definitely would make you sometimes do different things in a way that '+1 to a thing you probably still won't ever want to use' wouldn't. Though I wonder if it would 19:42:40 also be a little homogenizing in a different way 20:16:28 <06pleasingfungus> i’ve never been excited about mechanical orcification 20:16:37 <06pleasingfungus> the apts stuff that hellmo was talking about 20:16:50 <06pleasingfungus> i think the theme changes and species renames are fun 20:17:18 <06pleasingfungus> but apt changes feel very… mechanistic without being impactful 20:17:27 <06pleasingfungus> like the goofy armour bonus beogh gives now 20:17:43 <04dracoomega> Yeah, I mean not doing anything is also mostly fine by me. Like, I've wondered if there's some potential there, but I've not felt sold by it 20:18:02 <06pleasingfungus> would rather concentrate beogh’s power into the powers 20:18:06 <04dracoomega> "Worth considering possibilities, but definitely not a key part of the plan", let's say 20:18:23 <06pleasingfungus> (inc allies ) 20:19:12 <04dracoomega> Yeah 20:21:40 <04dracoomega> Prior to 0.19, Beogh increased the benefits of armour and shields. I didn't think I'd noticed this still around 20:23:59 <04dracoomega> (I feel slightly sad about taking the 'desperately pray to a hostile orc priest to be saved' thing, but at the same time, I don't want a giant Beogh light showing up all the time for literally every species in the game after this) 20:24:36 <06regret-⸸nde※> ...surely it could just appear only with the very first orc priest you see? :P 20:24:36 <06pleasingfungus> yes 20:24:48 <06pleasingfungus> re not wanting too many lights 20:25:13 <06pleasingfungus> i was wondering about only providing it for some random subset of orc priests, maybe 20:25:23 <04dracoomega> (I wondered if it would be fine to just guarantee an overflow altar in the normal range, but otherwise not have Beogh in Temple. Less unique, but still mild flavor) 20:25:29 <06regret-⸸nde※> (could guarantee a beogh altar in orc entry vaults, also) 20:25:34 <06pleasingfungus> sure 20:26:58 <04dracoomega> I wonder if it would it be too opaque if you got the offer to convert only while at low health, with no other god worshipped? (The bit about the other nearby orcs actively welcoming you as one of their own is good flavor that I'm a bit sad to lose - it makes even more sense under the proposed flavor schema, too, imo) 20:27:02 <06regret-⸸nde※> (do wonder if I should plan anything around my idea for the shortening of orc by making the floor with the orc entry be like orc, complete with vault guarantees and layout_caves, while still containing D spawns) 20:27:47 <06regret-⸸nde※> (though I also kind of want to take a break after getting this dozen+ new decorations batch incorporated quickly post-tourney >_>) 20:28:27 <06regret-⸸nde※> ...beogh prompt only appearing while atheist might also cover for it plenty, hmm 22:10:16 <06pleasingfungus> think i’m very nervous still about impact on Optimal Play of offering that many conversions opportunities in dangerous circumstances 22:10:18 <06pleasingfungus> but idk 22:10:41 <06pleasingfungus> maybe i’m worrying about nothing 22:11:24 to my mind, if the possibility of hostile Beogh conversions were to start around post-Temple - late overflow - early Mines depths, for atheists only, one keeps all of the above: the possibility of "escape conversions" among those diving for a late-overflow god (downside: these are the same players least likely to take the offer, but is that a 22:11:24 downside if the alternative is *everyone* feeling pressed to take Beogh?), not bombarding the majority of players with status lights, the flavor / uniqueness, no deliberately taking damage to convert, and Jiyva proves a god *can* start later than average and work (and this is a lot less later). could have a remote possibility of getting the offer 22:11:25 much earlier, similar to the chance of getting a specific god off a faded altar? 22:18:11 <04dracoomega> Do you mean like... scaling the chance of being offered a conversation by depth? 22:18:24 <04dracoomega> Er, conversion 22:20:06 <04dracoomega> I am slightly concerned that if it were probabilistic like that, it would either be awkwardly spoily (ie: "Am I deep enough that I can expect the possibility of an 'out' from this fight) or just inconsistent enough that people wouldn't even notice when they were presented the chance. 22:20:16 <09hellmonk> Allow conversion from high priests only and add high priests to late dungeon spawns 22:20:18 not specifically, it wasn't a weigh-in on the exact mechanic by which the conversion would be offered 22:20:26 <04dracoomega> (Nor am I really fond of having a Force More attached to it, for the many people who won't want it) 22:21:20 <04dracoomega> Can't tell how serious this is. I'd certainly rather put any revamped Beogh into the 'normal' depth pool for picking a god, effectively - whether by priest or altar means 22:22:05 <09hellmonk> hmm, it's a bit awkward then. Perhaps overflow only is really the way to go 22:23:39 <09hellmonk> There is awkwardly not really an orc in the right depth range to match altars, orc warrior probably closest but that is weird 22:24:54 in my case, I did still mean before D:10... still in the normal depth pool, but biased toward the deep end of it, so to speak 22:28:16 could be the same average depth as Temple, but that circles us back to the earlier questions that probably just lead to an overflow altar 22:28:54 <04dracoomega> I do like the current flavor a bunch, though... 22:29:48 same, hence my desire to find a means that preserves it 22:33:39 <09hellmonk> beogh could take a while to do anything useful (like now) I guess, so there's still a tradeoff against slightly later altars 22:34:00 <09hellmonk> maybe that is enough to allow d2 orc priest conversions 22:34:50 <04dracoomega> (I plan to put any revamps I do here onto an experimental branch first, so maybe it's okay to try out the 'conversion offered at low health, only while atheist' thing and at least see how it feels. I'm not sure there's anything inherent in Beogh being more shallowly available than average, especially if - as you say - the immediate payoff is less) 22:35:38 <06regret-⸸nde※> (https://github.com/crawl/crawl/blob/master/crawl-ref/source/mon-pick-data.h#L173 orc high priests are already D spawns, technically! :P) 22:36:17 <06regret-⸸nde※> (definitely in the same danger tier as the flayed ghosts and sphinxes right by them, right) 22:42:09 <09hellmonk> I think I have just never seen one get generated in D 22:42:17 <09hellmonk> or else it wasn't memorable 23:01:46 could do that. I've *slight* reservation about the image of holding '.' while orcs beat you up if you *want* to join Beogh (or silently letting one convert without a light) but it's no dealbreaker... effectively a UI question in disguise, more than a gameplay one 23:10:19 <04dracoomega> "You're attempting to convince them you want to surrender" 23:10:26 <04dracoomega> I agree it's a little goofy, but... 23:13:42 only relevant for a few turns of a minority of runs in any case 23:34:20 Unstable branch on crawl.develz.org updated to: 0.31-a0-1616-gbeaec30b81 (34) 23:54:59 Windows builds of master branch on crawl.develz.org updated to: 0.31-a0-1616-gbeaec30b81