00:12:47 Unstable branch on cbro.berotato.org updated to: 0.33-a0-619-gcdb383b4eb (34) 00:47:27 Monster database of master branch on crawl.develz.org updated to: 0.33-a0-619-gcdb383b4eb 04:33:34 Experimental (bcrawl) branch on underhound.eu updated to: 0.23-a0-5249-g4a8afe7061 05:07:06 Unstable branch on crawl.akrasiac.org updated to: 0.33-a0-619-gcdb383b (34) 09:02:15 03nlavsky02 07* 0.33-a0-620-g97e6b1a4fe: docs: update copyright date 10(7 minutes ago, 3 files, 3+ 3-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/97e6b1a4feb0 11:18:26 <04dracoomega> I wonder how much anyone uses the equipment listings on [ and ". They seem more or less strictly worse than %. 11:21:31 <12ebering> screenreaders 11:21:32 <04dracoomega> (I find myself wondering this as I try to figure out how this works with flexible slots. There's some relatively inflexible formatting to put octopode rings into multiple columns, for instance) 11:22:07 <04dracoomega> Hmm 11:41:45 <02Monkooky> pitch for a tomb enemy schtick- applies dehydration status, which is cleared by drinking any potion 11:44:59 <02Monkooky> actual effect is probably pretty interchangeable, but my first thought is ramping damage over time, where getting it inflicted a second time ~resets the duration but doesn't reset the ramp, so it gets massively worse if you let it get reapplied 11:51:18 <04dracoomega> Cute anti-deathform tech there 11:54:37 <04dracoomega> (I find it interesting how it's directly bad for death form without actually caring about undead specifically, and while 'drink any potion' is a nealy free item cost by that point, Tomb can be hectic enough that the turn cost of it might actually be relevant) 11:56:24 I use [ and " all the time - I can see the map with them, and the information I want is top left. 11:58:19 I'll also note I recall them going back to original rogue, so older players may have muscle memory 12:34:47 (well, that too!) 13:36:20 03hellmonk02 07* 0.33-a0-430-g2d3314aca4: fix descent portal messages (again) 10(6 weeks ago, 1 file, 10+ 7-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/2d3314aca4bb 13:36:20 03hellmonk02 07* 0.33-a0-431-gd38a5f2e37: Add extreme couponing 10(5 weeks ago, 17 files, 84+ 69-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/d38a5f2e37c7 13:36:20 03hellmonk02 07* 0.33-a0-432-g8d44b91d9a: checkwhite 10(5 weeks ago, 1 file, 1+ 1-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/8d44b91d9a3e 13:36:20 03hellmonk02 07* 0.33-a0-433-g97b8356728: add vouchers to $ and typo fix 10(5 weeks ago, 2 files, 6+ 1-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/97b8356728fb 13:36:20 03Hellmonk02 {GitHub} 07* 0.33-a0-625-g6b0abae525: re-enable descent mode (#4196) 10(29 seconds ago, 0 files, 0+ 0-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/6b0abae525cc 13:36:21 <04dracoomega> // XXX: Monsters can only equip body armour and shields (as of 0.4). Nice comment. 13:36:43 <09hellmonk> man we have a lot of pull requests now huh 13:37:56 <09hellmonk> some of these aliscans prs seem safe to merge, might do that in a minute 13:40:44 <04dracoomega> There's a bunch of relatively unobjectionable ones there, probably, yeah. (I've not really looked closely at most of them lately, as busy as I've been) 13:41:07 <09hellmonk> going to look at evoker stacking today 13:41:12 <09hellmonk> unless you started that already 13:42:07 <04dracoomega> Oh geez, no. It is just all equipment slots forever T.T 13:42:31 achylon (L24 DgCj) ERROR in 'mon-act.cc' at line 2454: infinite handle_monsters() loop, mons[0 of 55] is death cob (Zot:1) 13:42:43 <04dracoomega> I am making continual progress, but still lots more work left yet. 13:43:29 <09hellmonk> uh oh 13:44:03 <04dracoomega> The plan is to finish off this stuff, and add a couple fun unrands to show off some of it before merging it. (And then I will actually be able to start work on poltergeist/revenant for real, while I keep an eye on trunk for inevitable equipment bugs) 13:44:31 <04dracoomega> Also: that infinite loop thing is something that I've seen happen extremely rarely before. Not clear what the cause is, but it seems extremely rare. 13:49:24 <04dracoomega> Big picture plans for 0.33 are the new species, then a bunch of talisman work (I have at least... 6 new forms planned, along with some changes to existing ones and talisman randarts. Might also include some form data refactoring.). Given the timeframes involved for all this, I think the big pass on evocables I'd wanted to do (ie: adjust the scaling on a bunch of them, add a bunch more new ones, change pooling behavior, etc.) is 13:49:24 getting deferred to 0.34. (There's a handful of other smaller things I also would like to do, but we'll see how they fit in around the playtesting of these other things) 13:50:17 <04dracoomega> This equipment slot undertaking has ended up being... very large >.> 13:57:06 <04dracoomega> Like "I have completely replaced plural gods in as much effort" 😛 13:57:35 "We do the things we do not because they are easy, but because we thought they would be easy when we started" 13:58:09 <04dracoomega> Nah, I expected this to be pretty massive after just a short while looking into it 13:58:24 <04dracoomega> But I still wanted the end result, so.... 13:59:11 <09hellmonk> I also want the end result 13:59:14 <09hellmonk> go get em champ 13:59:18 <04dracoomega> Hehe, thanks ^^; 14:05:49 <02Monkooky> tempted to make this another mummy so I can title the commit 'thirsty mummies in your area' 14:08:00 <09gammafunk> what started as a "simple" refactoring of some item prop issues to remove redundant handling turned into something more involved than I suspected it would be 14:08:31 <09gammafunk> kind of harder than the original set of fixes/enhancements to artprops that I pushed earlier 14:09:47 <09gammafunk> but I can keep poking at it when I'm in the mood to shift code around so it's not that bad 14:10:19 <09gammafunk> reminded yet again why you don't refactor code until you really need to 14:15:11 <09gammafunk> gonna merge/close a PR or two right now, looking at this wonderful code in passing: cpp // Naively prefix A/an to a noun. string article_a(const string &name, bool lowercase) { if (!name.length()) return name; const char *a = lowercase? "a " : "A "; const char *an = lowercase? "an " : "An "; switch (name[0]) { case 'a': case 'e': case 'i': case 'o': case 'u': case 'A': case 'E': case 'I': 14:15:11 case 'O': case 'U': // XXX: Hack for hydras. if (starts_with(name, "one-")) return a + name; return an + name; case '1': // XXX: Hack^2 for hydras. if (starts_with(name, "11-") || starts_with(name, "18-")) return an + name; return a + name; 14:15:19 <09gammafunk> Hack^2 for hydras 14:15:37 <09hellmonk> lol 14:15:45 <04dracoomega> I did still want to do that 'random mummy dynasty per floor' thing for Tomb, but that's also going to be waiting for the big extended revamp in 0.34. This feels like the sort of mechanic that could stand to have a weaker, early version of it also - where the turn cost is not nearly so high, but the item cost could be. A combination of 'tutorialize in somewhere less awful than Tomb' and 'use the same mechanic in a way where its 14:15:45 costs are contextualized differently' 14:16:02 <09hellmonk> desert branch confirmed for 0.34 14:16:08 <09hellmonk> I'll hit up lightli 14:16:23 <09gammafunk> also credit mikee 14:17:09 <09gammafunk> have to wonder if "dehydration status" isn't just mostly a tax on curing potions 14:17:14 <09gammafunk> which we have that 14:17:45 <09gammafunk> obviously there's a point in the game where you don't have many of those, but they are a very common early potion as well 14:17:59 <09gammafunk> maybe there'd be a sweet spot (literally, in terms of a sugary potion) 14:18:05 <09hellmonk> it should make your potions slow to drink as well 14:18:13 <09hellmonk> bc your throat is so dry you see 14:18:26 <09gammafunk> reverse pangolin mutation? 14:18:37 <09gammafunk> or wait were those in fact slow drinking, I'm hazy now 14:18:40 <09hellmonk> and standing in water should cure it 14:20:03 <04dracoomega> Gee, I sure love slacking my crippling thirst through my shins 14:20:54 <09gammafunk> hellmonk is talking about players that have the beloved shinteeth mutation 14:22:05 <02Monkooky> I think if it's common throughout the game the status is pretty bad, pretty much for this reason 14:22:44 03Aliscans02 {gammafunk} 07* 0.33-a0-626-g397e312dc0: Use article_a() instead of "a article" in a few places. 10(3 days ago, 9 files, 19+ 17-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/397e312dc012 14:23:43 <02Monkooky> but for a tomb exclusive enemy, I don't think it's gonna reasonably tax your potion count; it's more of a status you can spend a turn to remove unless you're in deathform/a mummy 14:27:05 <03implojin> oh 14:27:44 <03implojin> these infinite handle_monsters crashes all seem to have a line with the monster blinking beforehand 14:34:59 <04dracoomega> Hmmm... that does seem to be the case 14:35:08 <04dracoomega> (Not that this immediately suggests a cause to me) 14:35:46 <04dracoomega> I can't tell why they're blinking in some of these logs, actually 14:35:47 I could imagine something not being updated until later such that it hits "a second" instance of the monster and cycles back to the "first" 14:36:07 <04dracoomega> Which is the more cryptic part. I first assumed a dispersal trap, but there's a specific message for that 14:36:23 but that would require a rather strange iterator, to my mind 14:36:28 <04dracoomega> And this level 11 MiBe isn't exactly casting dispersal 14:37:26 <04dracoomega> Well, an infinite handle_monsters loop seems to require that a monster is either passing its turn without spending energy, or is being given energy at the same rate that it spends it doing nothing, somehow 14:38:24 <04dracoomega> (I have run into the former locally a few times, if I forget to do something in custom behavior code for things like hellfire mortar or boulder) 14:38:57 <04dracoomega> But it's not at all clear to me what codepath a more 'normal' monster could go down that would result in this 14:39:23 right, that's why I'm pondering something that causes it to hit a monster a second time and think it's looping, when it's just an incomplete blink 14:40:55 <04dracoomega> Well, it can't be looping in whatever is doing the blinking 14:41:14 that would depend on how handle_monsters is looping, which I haven't looked at yet, and whether an earlier monster somehow triggering a blink would cause some other monster already processed to be encountered a second time 14:42:04 no, I was thinking the result of the blink caused a monster to be encountered a second time, which assumes there's some queue of active mosters that gets added to 14:42:19 I should look at the code and see if that's even sensible 14:42:21 <04dracoomega> handle_monsters() puts monsters with energy into a queue, handles them in order, possibly pushes other things onto the queue or changes order based on changes to their energy. 14:42:45 <04dracoomega> (If a monster still has energy left after acting, it gets put back onto the queue) 14:44:22 03Aliscans02 {gammafunk} 07* 0.33-a0-627-g9754aa523c: Stop mortars from colliding with "a floor" and then being "destroyed!". 10(3 days ago, 1 file, 12+ 9-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/9754aa523ce5 14:44:32 <04dracoomega> The fact that mysterious blinking is ocurring before this in multiple cases is conspicuous, though. I wish I could understand the source of it. 14:46:21 <04dracoomega> Oh! More conspicuous. 14:46:32 <04dracoomega> All of these I'm looking at seem to be in the process of going upstairs 14:50:19 "possibly pushes other things onto the queue" is the part I'm wondering about, but looking at the code I can't see that happening in the way I was wondering about 14:51:24 some weirdshit having to do with monsters all playing catch-up when you re-enter a floor? 14:52:24 <04dracoomega> I am wondering if it's possible, but looking at the catchup code, it doesn't actually say that they're blinking 14:52:38 <04dracoomega> (At a glance, anyway) 14:53:18 <03implojin> %git c485ba435c 14:53:19 <04Cerebot> DracoOmega * 0.32-a0-1887-gc485ba435c: Refactor and simplify how monsters follow the player across stairs (5 months ago, 4 files, 88+ 158-) https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/c485ba435ccd 14:54:21 <04dracoomega> These crashes definitely predate that 14:55:04 <04dracoomega> (Not sure exactly how far back, but a couple crashlogs I'm looking at are 0.31, at least) 14:55:41 <04dracoomega> Oh, possibly that is as old as they are - that were announced here, anyway 15:01:37 03Aliscans02 {gammafunk} 07* 0.33-a0-628-g1c515a75a4: Update the default message_colour for two portal messages. 10(3 days ago, 1 file, 2+ 1-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/1c515a75a402 15:07:11 <09hellmonk> design q: do we want to keep xp evoker recharge rate dependence on evo skill? It is somewhat more elegant to cut it and have rate depend only on evoker type and plus, but there is perhaps a "playstyle" that could be developed if you get benefits to recharge rate from skill as well 15:08:50 <04dracoomega> I think it's actually fairly important that evo boosts recharge rate. Some evokers barely even have anything else to scale for that matter (ie: phantom mirror), but I think being able to use your stuff a bunch more often and actively is good as a 'evocations playstyle' even if one could fold all of skill into just power boosts 15:09:28 <09hellmonk> alright, I'll keep it with a formula adjustment (once I figure out what the formula needs to look like now) 15:09:55 <04dracoomega> (I really don't have a sense of how high one would expect to be able to stack evokers if they could generate more than once now, tbh) 15:10:16 <04dracoomega> I had a vague sense of like... stopping at +3 or something anyway 15:10:27 <09hellmonk> I am unsure as well, for safety I was going to cap max plus at 9 like for weapons and figure something not insane out from there 15:10:40 <04dracoomega> That seems way high to me, honestly 15:10:40 <09hellmonk> think it's fine if the tenth phial of floods isn't useful 15:11:32 <09hellmonk> I suspect it's a number that won't be hit often, but I think that's okay 15:11:33 <04dracoomega> Like, the generation rate surely isn't going to let anyone realistically get more than a handful of one thing, right? (So I'd be wary of designing a system that scaled with any expectation that those numbers were attainable) 15:11:53 <09hellmonk> might be cool to rarely get a big plus and be able to really spam something 15:12:00 <04dracoomega> Perhaps 15:12:29 <09hellmonk> it's easy to adjust later if we decide that's bad, can reduce the cap to 5 or something 15:13:02 <04dracoomega> I guess I was slightly wary of it affecting expectations also. Like, maxing plusses is a 'normal' thing to do for weapons/armour, and I don't know if 'only a +2 phial' is going to seem like it's a low power one if +9 is theoretically possible (but never realistically attainable outside of megazigging) 15:13:19 <04dracoomega> But yeah, it's hard to even guess exactly without knowing how many are liable to generate 15:13:45 <09hellmonk> right, there's also the possibility we'd want to re-enable misc acq or something after pushing this 15:13:52 <09hellmonk> which would affect the numbers 15:14:04 <09hellmonk> (or pakellas could return in 0.34 wow whoa) 15:14:12 <04dracoomega> (I guess I had kind of assumed a still-low generation rate and low-ish cap so that we didn't need to make 'just one' take bloody forever to charge compared to now, and finding just one could still be exciting. And the rest would just be a modest bonus, if that makes sense?) 15:14:37 <09hellmonk> yeah, I will work with that in mind 15:14:52 re-enable misc acq> it's always nice when doing nothing gets us back to you :-) 15:15:28 <09hellmonk> I honestly forgor it had been disabled and was wondering why spamming wizard acq wasn't generating them 15:16:04 <04dracoomega> I remain weirdly tempted to make Pakellas a demigod unique at some point or something >.> 15:16:27 <04dracoomega> "See. I brought them back." 15:16:29 <04dracoomega> >.> 15:16:34 <09hellmonk> do not steal my hellcrawl2 lore 15:17:33 <04dracoomega> I could never decide exactly how snide that sounds in the context of people regularly asking for them back. 15:17:38 <04dracoomega> Though it amuses me 16:32:16 New branch created: evokerstacking (1 commit) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/tree/evokerstacking 16:32:16 03hellmonk02 07[evokerstacking] * 0.33-a0-434-gac51adc483: Feat: reworked xp evokers 10(5 minutes ago, 10 files, 64+ 41-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/ac51adc4834c 16:32:25 <09hellmonk> here's my first pass, I went with +5 like you suggested because it seemed to make the numbers elegant 16:33:24 <09hellmonk> nerfed the effect of skill slightly so that 27 skill halves charge time instead of multiplying it by 3/7.15 ish, and then a max evoker plus can also halve charge time 16:35:16 <09hellmonk> would suggest lengthening evoker time in the debt table before messing too much more in the formula, I tried some other things there but it's not super fine-grained on the formula side 16:37:03 <04dracoomega> Wow, that was fast 16:37:47 <09hellmonk> I haven't done a lot of testing but it does not immediately crash, so that's a plus 16:38:10 <04dracoomega> C++ if (you.inv[inv_slot].plus + it.plus +1 > MAX_EVOKER_ENCHANT) { continue; you.inv[inv_slot].plus += it.plus +1; } This looks kinda broken >.> 16:38:20 <09hellmonk> oh, unbrace fucked something up again 16:38:25 <09hellmonk> will fix 16:40:29 Unstable branch on underhound.eu updated to: 0.33-a0-628-g1c515a75a4 (34) 16:41:59 03hellmonk02 07[evokerstacking] * 0.33-a0-435-gfefe4e6647: fix unbrace 10(31 seconds ago, 1 file, 0+ 2-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/fefe4e664784 16:43:08 <04dracoomega> Unclear without testing the code what actually happens if you try to pick up an evoker when you already have one maxed. 16:43:27 <04dracoomega> It kind of looks like it just picks it up as another +0? 16:43:35 <09hellmonk> I believe it would do that, yes 16:43:43 <04dracoomega> Shouldn't it not? 16:43:49 <09hellmonk> could change behavior to destroy it instead? 16:44:15 <04dracoomega> I mean, I don't think we want to let the player have multiple of them. Not sure if 'destroy' or just 'leave on the ground' makes most sense. 16:45:00 <12ge0ff> it could work as picking up an already known book 16:45:26 <04dracoomega> I mean, I guess that's 'destroy' (although, unlike books, one could actually drop the one they already have at a future time) 16:46:02 <12ge0ff> can you drop a max enchanted, say, phial and pickup +0 and start enchanting it again? 16:46:19 <04dracoomega> (There should probably also be something to prevent people from buying ones from shops that couldn't actually upgrade the existing one they have) 16:46:44 <04dracoomega> Since we probably should be destroying shop inventory throughout the game when one hits +5 16:46:50 <[> what's unbrace? 16:47:10 <04dracoomega> (A script that attempts to enforce certain code bracing and indentation standards) 16:47:14 utility to clean up C indentation and braces 16:48:03 it's under util/ in the crawl distribution 16:50:18 <12ge0ff> i could imagine a new player doing that in hopes of having two max enchanted evokers of the same type, which won't work as they expect 16:51:28 <04dracoomega> Not 100% sure how one prevents this, exactly. 16:52:22 <04dracoomega> We can't prevent a player from dropping an item they have, or force them to pick up every one they come across in a timely fashion 16:52:49 <04dracoomega> Even if we autodestroy on 'pickup' if it can't be used, they can always drop first 16:52:57 charge the user, but they can only discharge using the evoker? 16:53:10 <04dracoomega> I mean, internally it already works that way 16:53:14 <12ge0ff> by goldifying misc evokers (:kobold: , but maybe for real) 16:53:17 <04dracoomega> This is more about player expectations 16:54:07 <12ge0ff> "would you like to permanently trade one of you inventory slots for having a phial" 16:54:18 <04dracoomega> That feels like an uncomfortable choic 16:54:46 <04dracoomega> (I mean, it's a completely fair trade to make in almost all situations, but you know that someone is going to do it and regret it) 16:54:47 <12ge0ff> maybe in the big inventory world it'd be less scary 16:55:44 <04dracoomega> How realistic do we think it actually is that someone would drop a +5 evoker, grab another +0, and then expect this would do anything useful if they cannot even put both in their inventory at the same time? 16:56:16 <12ge0ff> me from 10 years ago would at least try it once 16:56:48 <09hellmonk> not sure there's an easy way around this one, no 16:57:07 <09hellmonk> at best we can try to make the messaging clearer I think 16:59:16 <09hellmonk> another concern: idk what to do about savecompat for this. It feels silly to keep marshalling and unmarshalling evokers that have generated forever so I guess we should probably tag minor all of that stuff? 16:59:22 <04dracoomega> Yes 17:00:49 <03implojin> hmm 17:01:30 <03implojin> not sure whether i want to fix issue 4190 or canonize it 17:01:55 <03implojin> (linepass confusing things ahead of the linepass target shouldn't be happening, but it's been happening for ... years) 17:02:30 <04dracoomega> It has? Really? 17:02:30 <03implojin> (the issue has nothing to do with rampage, it's just the linepass beam piercing) 17:03:07 <04dracoomega> Wow, that sounds... bizarre. 17:03:07 <03implojin> i tested it back as far as 0.25 at least, suspect it's been broken since a 2017 commit but crawl won't build that far back for me 17:03:36 <03implojin> at this point pllayers are surely used to the unintended behavior 17:04:18 <04dracoomega> I... I am not sure how many people are even aware of it? 17:04:25 <04dracoomega> I wasn't! And I've won my share of Usk games, too >.> 17:04:31 <03implojin> probably everyone who plays usk has seen it? 17:05:06 <04dracoomega> I mean 'something happened' and 'someone noticed it happened when they weren't expecting it' aren't the same thing, as it turns out 17:05:09 <04dracoomega> >.> 17:05:13 <03implojin> well, sure 17:06:06 <03implojin> maybe i'll just fix it and see if anyone complains 17:07:26 <04dracoomega> That would be my inclination, at least 17:08:35 <04dracoomega> Wow, it tends to the edge of LoS 17:09:19 <04dracoomega> You're basically just firing a full-screen piercing confusing beam in the direction you move (except without the targeter indicating the path of it at all) 17:09:24 <03implojin> yep 17:10:04 <04dracoomega> I think some of this not coming up more obviously is that there is often no enemies the direction you're trying to move (or at least that I'm trying to move) when one is actually doing that 17:10:19 <04dracoomega> Like, beyond the cluster one is moving through 17:10:42 <03implojin> yeah, probably, i've definitely noticed this behavior while playing but didn't think for a moment about what was actually happening / whether it was intended 17:10:47 i tested it back as far as 0.25 at least> it's true in 0.23ish here 17:11:04 I would not have expected it to work until now. 17:11:10 <04dracoomega> I hadn't noticed it myself at all, but I do tend to have a bit of 'tunnel vision' about things I expect to happen >.> 17:13:46 <03implojin> kinda hate to do a bugfixnerf on a god that's already not picked that frequently 17:13:57 <03implojin> could just buff it later ig 17:14:53 <04dracoomega> Yes, like... this is less a power level concern and more that this is extremely unintuitive and janky-feeling, imo. If we want to nudge Usk in some other small way, that's fine. 17:26:24 <04dracoomega> Ah, the feeling of progress: (More than might be apparent here, tbh) 17:26:25 <04dracoomega> https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/747522859361894521/1324171906144010373/image.png?ex=67772eb0&is=6775dd30&hm=8b76950489e349809707207dc10f80f664e9b7d6954c6ba2a87a54f7a336f5cb& 17:28:02 <04dracoomega> (During all this, I have been incrementally converting more and more parts of the game over to using the new equipment system instead of the old one, and finally got some of this UI working again - with extras, as you can see :P) 17:34:53 03Implojin02 07* 0.33-a0-629-g3f35e1a551: Fix Uskayaw linepass confusion targets (klement) 10(43 minutes ago, 1 file, 1+ 0-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/3f35e1a551a4 17:43:31 03Aliscans02 {gammafunk} 07* 0.33-a0-630-gc0fec7c300: Fix the way the scroller works when a menu grows. 10(3 days ago, 1 file, 1+ 0-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/c0fec7c300aa 17:48:01 <09gammafunk> actually I'm pretty sure merfolk have always head two heads and four hands 17:53:54 <04dracoomega> Don't forget 3 pairs of feet! 17:54:40 and merfolk tails are like hydra heads >.> 18:27:47 <02Monkooky> does the tail grow two torsos, or the torso two tails? 18:28:39 hm. I guess that'd be a way to get the other gear 😛 20:52:19 -!- gbmor1 is now known as gbmor 23:35:27 Unstable branch on crawl.develz.org updated to: 0.33-a0-630-gc0fec7c300 (34) 23:58:15 Windows builds of master branch on crawl.develz.org updated to: 0.33-a0-630-gc0fec7c300