01:34:49 <06mumra> Thanks, comments all noted. And yes I slightly missed the point of windblast, I was just thinking they are balloons and can blow out air whenever they like 🙂 I have further thoughts on the rest but will mull on it for a while... 03:33:25 Experimental (bcrawl) branch on underhound.eu updated to: 0.23-a0-5199-gb287095a7e 05:31:32 Unstable branch on crawl.akrasiac.org updated to: 0.32-a0-953-g5080204 (34) 07:44:33 03dolorous02 07* 0.32-a0-954-gd68e888341: Count foul stench as a retaliatory DS mutation. 10(3 minutes ago, 1 file, 5+ 1-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/d68e888341d3 07:53:42 @regret-⸸nde※ Made a bunch of tweaks to the non-yred tiles as you suggested (I think I'm going to wait a bit on the yred stuff until I feel like I understand this medium better) https://tavern.dcss.io/t/tile-art-creation/706/9 08:12:39 <12ge0ff> > VISUAL:The ground beneath @The_monster@ churns. ^-- this becomes "The ground beneath Your seismic cannon churns." for your cannons 08:15:49 <12ge0ff> ah, it should be just @the_monster@ instead of @The_monster@ 08:23:54 03dolorous02 07* 0.32-a0-955-g871480c51d: Fix capitalisation in monster message (Ge0ff). 10(3 minutes ago, 1 file, 1+ 1-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/871480c51df6 08:24:07 <06dolorous_84348> Good catch. It's in. 10:34:38 03dolorous02 07* 0.32-a0-956-g0afd68cec4: Fix typo. 10(87 seconds ago, 1 file, 1+ 1-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/0afd68cec460 10:54:30 <04dracoomega> I literally didn't know this alternation was a thing 10:54:52 <04dracoomega> I just assumed the game assigned proper capitalization based on sentence position on its own >.> 11:18:05 <06mumra> I did a quick search, there are a few other bits of speech that get it wrong 11:20:55 <04dracoomega> Mine? Or, like, in general? 11:23:19 ArbitUH (L25 DrFE) ASSERT(!invalid_monster(&mons)) in 'mon-death.cc' at line 1780 failed. (Zot:3) 11:49:16 <04dracoomega> So, I was fixing seismic cannons getting angry with you when you attack them, and then realized that this doesn't stop you getting penance from good gods when doing so, and evidently spellforged servitor works the same way: it doesn't care if you hit it, but the gods do. So I was looking into changing that and realized some of it's slightly a mess under the hood. There's a mons_is_object which is separate of mons_is_conjured and has 11:49:17 a comment explicitly excluding golems from the counting as objects (whether that remains appropriate or not?) but also a number of things which clearly seem like they are objects are not on this list (which I assume is rarely ever thought about). For instance, Ely will penance you for hitting a friendly block of ice. 11:50:12 <04dracoomega> (I think it's currently only possible to get a friendly block of ice in the first place through Sculpt Simulacrum, which they dislike for other reasons, but it's still very silly) 11:57:38 03DracoOmega02 07* 0.32-a0-957-g1362d298d4: Don't turn seismic cannons hostile when you hit them (ge0ff) 10(3 minutes ago, 2 files, 2+ 0-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/1362d298d440 11:57:38 03DracoOmega02 07* 0.32-a0-958-g284280803b: Improve seismic cannon shot damage at higher spellpower a little 10(2 minutes ago, 2 files, 2+ 2-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/284280803b55 12:30:01 <06mumra> Just in the whole codebase. In some of the instances you would never notice because they're uniques. Is it possible to get unique speech in a situation where capitalization matters? e.g. one example is Snorg VISUAL:A flash of anger passes briefly over @The_monster@'s face. 12:30:22 <06mumra> Would it be possible to get "over Your Snorg simulacra's face" ?\ 12:30:50 <06mumra> will push a fix shortly for the ones i found, might as well be correct 12:31:54 <12ge0ff> that's more likely to happen with a mirrored Snorg 12:45:39 <12ge0ff> Interesting, it looks like friendly Snorg never says her usual lines. She just uses the generic friendly speech. Is it supposed to work this way? 12:56:42 <06mumra> doesn't sound intended certainly 12:56:50 <04dracoomega> Trying to catalogue which things in the game actually care about which of category of 'is an object' 12:57:23 <04dracoomega> Did you know what makhleb doesn't give you health for killing dancing weapons? 12:57:34 <04dracoomega> Nor will killing them allow orb of mayhem to proc 12:57:51 <04dracoomega> You can imprison a twister, but not a fire vortex 12:59:29 <12ge0ff> cpp // Band members are a lot less likely to speak, since there's // a lot of them. Except for uniques. ^--- a bonus question, are there any band members uniques? i can't think of any 13:00:39 <12ge0ff> (that was added in b4b81e6, 2015) 13:01:36 I vaguely recall Urug popping up in a Saint Roka band at some point? 13:02:21 <06mumra> The @at_foe@ and @to_foe@ are intended so that monsters can direct speech at people other than the player. So it seems quite odd if by default friendlies don't use normal speech. Would have thought that "friendly Snorg" can just be used if you want to override what friendly Snorg will say. 13:06:08 <06mumra> I'm guessing it's because the prefixes take preference so "default friendly humanoid" wins if it can't find "friendly Snorg" 13:06:44 <12ge0ff> %git 65cdfd2ee2 13:06:44 <04Cerebot> kilobyte * 0.6.0-a1-334-g65cdfd2ee2: Uniques like Pikel or Grum shouldn't be less chatty when in a band. (14 years ago, 1 file, 3+ 2-) https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/65cdfd2ee2a3 13:07:25 <12ge0ff> ^--- aha, it's for Pikel, Grum, Robin, etc. 13:10:48 <06mumra> By the way when friendly Snorg was saying generic speech, were there any enemies in LOS? 13:11:40 <06mumra> Because it'd make sense to only say friendly lines when it's just the aligned player in view 13:16:09 <12ge0ff> i put a hostile goblin on an island, so friendly Snorg can see it, but i got only generic lines out of her, like "Snorg says, "I'll never leave you." 13:16:52 <06mumra> ha 13:23:43 03mumra02 07* 0.32-a0-959-gf62624241c: Fix more rare caps issues in speech 10(67 seconds ago, 3 files, 6+ 6-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/f62624241c2f 13:37:56 <06pleasingfungus> xposting: https://betelgeuse.shalott.org/graphs/9083146eecd6b72e89400346e5ff545b6a4a5640.html vs https://betelgeuse.shalott.org/graphs/8ca35c3d45aea08d4a9ff3afa8bd16d3f6525e2d.html is interesting. very crude data, but it suggests that "casters" are currently better than they've ever been, whereas "melee" is... well, probably around where we want it to be, or at worst very slightly under target 13:38:23 <06pleasingfungus> time for the fabled 'mage nerf'...?! 13:39:19 <06pleasingfungus> would be interesting to see a gammafunk/rypofalem-style "difficulty by xl" chart specifically for "mages" 13:40:19 <04dracoomega> When did mage starts get given their potion of magic? 13:41:05 <06pleasingfungus> around 0.27, i think! 13:41:26 <06pleasingfungus> oh, 0.29 13:41:27 <06pleasingfungus> %git eff9672185c 13:41:28 <04Cerebot> PleasingFungus * 0.29-a0-256-geff9672185: Improve characters' starting kits (Hellmonk) (2 years, 3 months ago, 7 files, 72+ 59-) https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/eff9672185ce 13:41:34 <06pleasingfungus> ah, time flies... 13:43:38 <04dracoomega> Without a detailed analysis, I do feel that mage starting spell kits have generally improved over time (even as latergame spells were removed from their start) and the very earlygame is where mage starts generally have the biggest advantage over melee ones 13:44:38 <04dracoomega> (In my own experience, I honestly feel like melee archeteypes are generally stronger latergame characters on average - whether that's just how I play or not, who knows? But mages offer a lot more consistency against earlygame threats) 13:46:42 Are you including extended and ziggurats in latergame? 13:47:02 <04dracoomega> Er, no 13:47:57 <04dracoomega> Well, I mean, Zigs are their own weird beast off to the side. But honestly, my melee-focused characters probably had an easier time in extended than blasters, too? But I've not played nearly enough extended in modern versions to say much confidently there. 13:50:46 <06pleasingfungus> adjusting starting spells does seem like the easiest balance knob to tweak 13:51:29 <04dracoomega> I'm not... really convinced from that graph that there's a problem, though? Like, it's widely agreed that a lot of mage starts are among the stronger ones, but is that... actually bad? 13:52:12 <04dracoomega> (There's also the part where warriors are probably the significantly more commonly recommended choice for beginners. I don't know how much that plays into that) 13:53:19 <06pleasingfungus> We have some broad and vague sense of targeted difficulty, right? Some wide band within which the game feels challenging but (mostly) fair. If the difficulty is too high, the game feels less fair; if the difficulty is too low, the game feels boring and unengaging. Hugely subjective, huge variance, but there's something there, right? 13:54:02 <06pleasingfungus> something to keep an eye on, at least. (and i have had my eye on this for a while, and have heard both experienced and inexperienced players voice the opinion of 'mages are too strong' for some time now) 13:54:07 <06pleasingfungus> (on and off) 13:54:52 <06pleasingfungus> re start recs: "inexperienced players are more likely to play warriors" was equally true in older versions, right? it shouldn't affect the changes in those graphs 13:55:33 <04dracoomega> Okay, that is probably true 13:57:28 <04dracoomega> And sure, we have some vague sense of intended difficulty, but even in modern days the mage chart is like... ~20-35% higher winrate than warriors, which I imagine is a lot smaller than variance between strong and weak species, even. (I will say that in terms of interest level, mage starts at least have more distinct playstyle variation from each other, even if they are overall 'stronger' in non-mage starts, which I imagine 13:57:29 ameliorates this somewhat. I would be curious to see this chart split by xl to some degree, though. 14:01:03 <04dracoomega> For what it's worth, I've also anecdotally heard people say that mages are too good sometimes, but I think there's a fair variety in what people actually mean when thy say that (I and I have actively disagreed with it for latergame characters at least, for whatever that's worth; sure, you get high burst power compared to melee, but at the same time you usually have worse defenses, run out of gas much quicker, and generate more noise. 14:01:04 It's flashy, but bruisers have staying power that is not to be underestimated). 14:01:19 <06pleasingfungus> yeah, i don't know that this is screaming to be rectified 14:02:08 <06pleasingfungus> just something i'm looking at and tapping my chin thoughtfully about 14:02:22 <04dracoomega> It's interesting to see and consider what may have caused this drift over time, sure 14:02:43 <04dracoomega> ...actually 14:03:05 <04dracoomega> Those two graphs don't have equal scale on the left, if you notice, which exaggerates the difference. 14:04:00 <04dracoomega> (Mages are still higher these days, but the difference looks a bunch bigger than it is) 14:06:38 <06pleasingfungus> yeah, i did notice the scale 14:06:40 <06pleasingfungus> graph crimes! 14:19:02 hmm why is it that statement reminds me of weird al and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Gv0H-vPoDc <-- word crimes... 14:39:15 03dolorous02 07* 0.32-a0-960-g3814254bd7: Add two nouns and one modifier to gizmos. 10(8 minutes ago, 1 file, 6+ 0-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/3814254bd7a9 14:58:23 <04dracoomega> I have spent probably too much time being thorough here, but behold a comprehensive list of this conjured/object nonsense: 14:58:24 <04dracoomega> https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/747522859361894521/1229913811025268889/conjured_object_effects.txt?ex=6631697f&is=661ef47f&hm=3b7d3f0d1ef5e07e16926bb4d5997728c3118e349d7452d1a1939750ddbf68e2& 14:59:50 <04dracoomega> It feels like some simplification ought to be done here (and maybe make 'object' a real monster flag?), but not currently sure exactly what 15:07:11 <06dolorous_84348> I've noticed that casting Brom's Barrelling Boulder, and then destroying your own boulder (if you use the right wizard mode commands, you can accomplish this), will not give you the "That felt strangely unrewarding." message, and will in fact train skills according to FULLDEBUG messages. I figure it's a difference between conjured things and summoned things, but it's weird. 15:08:56 <04dracoomega> Oh, right, I guess this also means that while you can LRD a boulder, you can't shatter it? 15:09:02 <04dracoomega> Which is additionally weird 15:09:44 <06dolorous_84348> I hadn't tested that; I was just destroying them via melee. But if that's true. it is definitely additionally weird. 15:10:51 <04dracoomega> I actually had no idea that conjured objects dodged shatter, IMB, and irradiate, and in a bunch of cases I don't think I've expect them to do so? 15:11:34 <04dracoomega> I mean, using IMB in range of a prism without detonating it is actually utility that I could see ocassionally being relevant, but I still wouldn't expect it to work 15:13:17 <06dolorous_84348> And the difference between conjured and summoned is spelled out in code, but not so well in actual gameplay, as your list shows. 15:15:37 <04dracoomega> From a purely personal subjective perspective, I think the game treating conjured stuff like it's not a being with feeling or intelligent is intuitive, and some of these that seem to treat them like they're not tangible is a lot less so 15:16:05 <06dolorous_84348> Exactly. 15:16:11 <04dracoomega> (And this also makes the line between 'conjured' and 'object' almost entirely unintuitive) 15:16:38 <04dracoomega> The thing is, several of these conjured things are things you're often expected to be able to damage in some situations 15:17:05 <04dracoomega> Killing foxfires before they reach you or- wait, living spells aren't on that list, are they? 15:17:34 <04dracoomega> Yes, living spells are not flagged as conjured 15:18:09 <04dracoomega> So you can shatter a living spell, but not a boulder 😛 15:18:35 <06dolorous_84348> That is bizarre. 15:18:36 <04dracoomega> (I mean, the game expects you to actively blow up living spells sometimes, but I think that's true for enemy foxfires also) 15:18:48 <04dracoomega> They even have a very similar tile 15:19:43 <06dolorous_84348> With boulders, you might be able to fudge it by claiming that they're magic boulders and can't be destroyed by some ordinary means, but that opens up a different can of worms. 15:20:13 <04dracoomega> I mean, boulders are fairly readily destructible by a variety of means 15:20:18 <04dracoomega> And enemies will also do that to them 15:21:05 <06dolorous_84348> Indeed. Shattering should at least work on them, in my opinion. 15:37:16 Unstable branch on underhound.eu updated to: 0.32-a0-960-g3814254bd7 (34) 15:57:53 <04dracoomega> The seismic cannon feels only hate for you! x3 15:58:08 <04dracoomega> You're not blocked from casting it when worshipping Oka, but they still hate your guts when you cast it 15:58:23 <04dracoomega> tbh, it's rather impressive that an inanimate cannon can feel anything at all 15:58:59 <04dracoomega> I... I wonder if you can charge them up against your own body, then still fire a shockwave at an enemy 15:59:01 <04dracoomega> You probably can 15:59:25 <04dracoomega> Yup 16:16:44 <04dracoomega> The more I mull this over, the more I wonder if 'conjured' is even the right word here. Like, the only reason ballisto spores aren't 'conjured' but are in mons_is_object (but ball lightning is conjured) is presumably because they're produced by a biological instead of magical process, but mechanically they are basically the same for almost all purposes. I don't even think the 'some conjured objects dodge a very small number of 16:16:44 direct attacks' even makes a lot of sense to me? We have conjured objects that avoid attacks in general (ie: iood and battlesphere), but why are foxfires singled out for other protection? Especially if the player is ever encouraged to shoot one? And is there any good reason why you can't get Makh healing from dancing weapons in particular? Nonliving is valid in general, but them specfically? (Most 'conjured' monsters don't require special-casing 16:16:45 since many are summons and you already can't heal off of those). It seems to me there are sort of two different broad categories of things at play here: -Things are mechanically transient or projectile-like. Not 'full' monsters and should be fine by Oka and arguably immune to a handful of things that only make sense for 'proper' monsters (like cloning or being mesmerised by) -Things that aren't 'beings' in a way that good gods should care about the 16:16:45 well-being of. (Although then we could get into debates about the sentience of golems and somesuch >.>). I wonder if this could mirror more closely the list of 'monsters that don't care if you attack them. Like, sure, zombies are on that list, but good gods are already upset with you for even having them as friends, so it doesn't seem like a problem if they were. 16:19:23 <04dracoomega> One potentially relevant manifestation of the current behavior is that good gods won't get upset at you attacking a friendly lightning spire, but the spire itself will (which causes it to immediately despawn). This actually can matter for, say, being able to tap it to desummon it and get it out of your way if one is behind you in a corridor. And if it behaved as a servitor does, it would just sit there unmoving. I am not sure if 16:19:23 this is a problem, but it would be a change. 16:25:21 <04dracoomega> Index points out that everything on the above object/conjured list is brainless, but of course a bunch of brainless things also are obviously not objects and are even alive (ie: jellies and eyes) and you wouldn't expect to respond that way 16:32:49 <04dracoomega> (You can mostly only get other golems from ?summoning, but they still get angry in ways that servitor doesn't.) 17:51:17 <06pleasingfungus> conjured has mostly been relevant to me in terms of 'spell autotargeting' 17:51:33 <06pleasingfungus> 'should plasma beam shoot at a foxfire?', etc 17:51:40 <06pleasingfungus> i agree it's a big mess of a category at present and needs some detangling 17:51:57 <06pleasingfungus> do think it's fairly detangleable - doesn't seem like nearly as much of a mess as, say, tentacle spaghetti code 18:10:00 <04dracoomega> Yeah, it's mostly a matter of deciding exactly which of these behaviors to keep, picking appropriate names for them, and then doing a consistency pass, I think 18:31:41 <09hellmonk> yum tentacle spaghetti 22:35:16 Unstable branch on crawl.develz.org updated to: 0.32-a0-960-g3814254bd7 (34) 22:58:06 Windows builds of master branch on crawl.develz.org updated to: 0.32-a0-960-g3814254bd7 23:13:49 Unstable branch on cbro.berotato.org updated to: 0.32-a0-960-g3814254bd7 (34) 23:17:36 <06mumra> that needs to be a new food cache tile 23:24:06 <06mumra> all this projectile stuff ... i wonder if there should really be another class of actor in addition to player/monster. (i know this is itself problematic because there are probably a lot of places that assume that if !is_player() then is_monster() and vice versa). but some of these things are only monster-like in having a tile and a position (i seem to recall feeling the same when i was looking at projectile code way back) 23:49:49 <04dracoomega> I mean, a lot of these are very explicitly still supposed to be interacted with as monsters. They have health and you can damage them, they have normal movement behavior (some of them). 23:51:15 <04dracoomega> (I was actually just chatting with Index about this categorization problem a bunch just now, and I am wondering if 'ephemeral' is a better word to use instead of 'conjured' here, which can subsume non-'conjured' things like spores and seems to still reasonably fit the category) 23:51:52 <04dracoomega> They're pretty much all emphermal in some way. Either they're naturally short-lived or immediately die upon dealing damage or similar 23:53:26 <04dracoomega> (Spatial vorticies do not self-destruct in any fashion, but that may be the only thing on the list where that isn't the case? Which could either mean they should or that they shouldn't be on that list at all.) 23:54:55 Monster database of master branch on crawl.develz.org updated to: 0.32-a0-960-g3814254bd7