00:03:48 bed (L18 FoFi) Crash caused by signal #6: Aborted (D (Sprint)) 00:04:07 <08nicolae> do you mean "everyone within radius 2" or "everyone at radius 2 but not 1" 00:04:30 <08nicolae> mostly i just went with "everyone next to you" because that's what's already in the code 00:05:19 <10PleasingFungus> everyone within radius 2 00:06:02 <08nicolae> i briefly considered that ages ago but thought it would be Too Good, but i suppose it's better to make something too good and dial it back a bit than start with something that sucks 00:07:12 <08nicolae> also: let us say i wanted to make a function that would return whichever of SK_POLEARMS or SK_AXES was higher for the player, as a convenience function for the "hybrid skilling" gimmick. which file should it go in? player.cc with the other helper functions? art-func.h? skills.cc? 00:15:22 <10PleasingFungus> not art-func.h 00:15:32 <10PleasingFungus> as was mentioned earlier, that is a file for very specific weird functions 00:15:50 <10PleasingFungus> in general, it's bad to define the body of functions in .h files - those are for declaring functions normally, not populating them 00:15:53 <10PleasingFungus> skills.cc sounds good 00:28:54 <08nicolae> thank you, it is time for bed but hopefully i can get to this tomorrow 00:44:32 New branch created: great-cleavage (1 commit) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/tree/great-cleavage 00:44:32 03PleasingFungus02 07[great-cleavage] * 0.29-a0-618-ga9df766430: Support super-cleaving (for nicolae) 10(5 seconds ago, 1 file, 5+ 7-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/a9df76643089 00:44:38 <10PleasingFungus> @nicolae ^ for when you wake up 00:48:54 <08nicolae> sadly i have regained my caffeine habits lately which means that time for bed is not always time for sleep so i am able to see that post In Real Time 00:49:02 <08nicolae> thank you, you are amazing 00:51:04 <08nicolae> quick q: it looks like you still cleave 2 even if you're not reaching with the axe, is that intentional 00:59:22 <10PleasingFungus> yes 00:59:45 <10PleasingFungus> just like with normal cleave: the intended target takes full damage, everything else in cleave range takes 75% 01:35:08 Unstable branch on crawl.develz.org updated to: 0.29-a0-617-g7a6b98fccd (34) 01:51:54 <09gammafunk> wait, we're not doing reach-cleaving are we 01:57:07 Windows builds of master branch on crawl.develz.org updated to: 0.29-a0-617-g7a6b98fccd 02:06:32 -!- allbery_b is now known as geekosaur 02:14:06 <13Sastreii> Unfortunately that tile takes a lot of space, it’s really hard to display two distinct boots without making a visual mess, so i opted for two boots really close together, almost overlapped Note that my Mad mage maulers display only one glove! In the end i’m still a rookie pixel artist😅 02:38:03 Unstable branch on cbro.berotato.org updated to: 0.29-a0-617-g7a6b98fccd (34) 02:54:41 Monster database of master branch on crawl.develz.org updated to: 0.29-a0-617-g7a6b98fccd 03:36:53 Fork (bcrawl) on crawl.kelbi.org updated to: 0.23-a0-4719-g50af30713d 03:40:33 Fork (bcadrencrawl) on crawl.kelbi.org updated to: 0.03-777-g7138dfb037 06:21:53 Experimental (bcrawl) branch on underhound.eu updated to: 0.23-a0-4719-g50af30713d 08:15:09 Unstable branch on crawl.akrasiac.org updated to: 0.29-a0-617-g7a6b98f (34) 09:14:42 <08nicolae> couldn't hurt to try (unless you're standing too close to the wielder, of course) ¯_(ツ)_/¯ 09:15:52 03ebering02 07* 0.29-a0-618-g2e310f0204: text: remove a randart name with an unpleasant connotation 10(2 hours ago, 1 file, 0+ 2-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/2e310f0204e2 09:15:52 03ebering02 07* 0.29-a0-619-gd6e8e0e227: feat: re-vitalize Vitality 10(16 minutes ago, 4 files, 22+ 5-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/d6e8e0e227ce 09:23:39 <08nicolae> aha! well, you're still a better pixel artist than i. i love the orange 09:24:11 <09gammafunk> You could say that about any feature though. It's more "what does this design achieve" 09:24:52 <08nicolae> "fun effect to try for an unrand", if it turns out to be too much i think we can dial it back to what i originally had in mind 09:24:53 <09gammafunk> I'm not reflexively rejecting the idea or anything, but what's really the gameplay angle 09:25:18 <08nicolae> fair 09:29:24 <09gammafunk> this is not a stopping point or a decision for this unrand, but more a sort take on designing these effects in a purposeful way beyond simply "it's wacky" and "it just sounds fun" etc. A gut reaction to a funny concept is always a starting point, in that it tells you if an idea "feels" exciting. But it can't be the end point, otherwise you end up with something that exists pretty much for the shock/humor value, which for unrands we 09:29:25 tend not to use as a basis. So let me just go on a tiny bit about what I mean about the gameplay angle 09:31:30 <09gammafunk> what cleave does is achieve weapon class differentiation, each class needs strongly defining aspect, and what cleaving does is put you in harm's way but give you AOE, something no other melee class does. So that's what cleave is doing on a fundamental level. Reach, conversely, is about giving you extra safety (reaching behind monster-impassable terrain or allies or other monsters), and at the very least it gives you a free. 09:32:49 <09gammafunk> so if you combine reaching and cleaving, you get cleaving without a tradeoff of safety when you use the reaching form of cleave, since you're reaching to use cleave from one tile away (if I understand this unrand correctly) 09:33:59 <09gammafunk> now sometimes you can use an effect in a unique way other than what it was intended for, and you can get something interesting, but again it's not interesting simply by act of being used without the tradeoffs it previously had 09:34:29 <09gammafunk> it's interesting because there ends up being some other kind of tradeoff, or it's working in some other context where a new limitation is being imposed, etc 09:34:44 Unstable branch on crawl.kelbi.org updated to: 0.29-a0-619-gd6e8e0e227 (34) 09:35:57 <09gammafunk> I wouldn't deny there' a fun feel to getting a big AOE hit at distance, damnation is sort of an exercise in this regard with kind of little downside 09:37:07 <08nicolae> the original idea for the unrand was just "can reach and also can cleave", the radius 2 cleave came up in a discussion of the current implementation of cleave (which i think is a holdover from when you wouldn't hit the monster on the opposite side of the target) 09:38:56 <08nicolae> my current thought re radius 2 cleave is "players will enjoy doing big AOE melee swings", but was also thinking of increasing the delay to represent having to take time for such a big swing 09:39:26 <09gammafunk> yeah 09:40:00 <08nicolae> (there's also the side effect of having to pay extra attention to where the hydras are...) 09:40:28 <09gammafunk> right, one red flag that went up for me was the UI of this thing, in terms of how tedious target selection might be 09:40:43 <09gammafunk> not so much the hydra issue; that's basically just one monster type in the game 09:41:07 <09gammafunk> but in terms what it might encourage for optimizing selection 09:41:30 <09gammafunk> it's not really different from damnation if not reaching past allies/hostiles though 09:41:53 <09gammafunk> and same issue you face with stuff like fireball 09:45:27 <09gammafunk> I can't really reject the idea outright because we do have explosion targeters on a bunch of things that get used over and over (fireball, damnation), but my gut reaction was "reaching + cleaving because why not" was just very similar to "dual wielding because why not", and that's fine in that gyre and gimble exist, but that weapon design feels like it's a pretty good exploration of the idea you have two weapons but you do have this 09:45:27 innate downside of losing the other hand (which is obvious, but important and inherent) and you're using two weaker weapons to help balance things 09:46:00 <09gammafunk> versus this which might just give you the two things in one weapon without really exploring any kind of tradeoff. Maybe there aren't any nasty UI issues 09:47:34 <09gammafunk> you know, I sort of wonder if you could almost reverse the idea 09:48:11 <09gammafunk> cleave, and whenever you do so, you sometimes poke a monster in reach distance 09:49:00 <09gammafunk> that's really more addressing the UI burden than anything though, since it's likewise not offering much meaningful tradeoff, other than the fact that the reach it gives is limited (because you can't select the reach target) 09:49:18 <09gammafunk> but in some fights you'd be guaranteed to reach what you wanted 09:50:27 <09gammafunk> ebering was typing to tell me how wrong I am, hopefully he or another orange name will 09:50:58 <09gammafunk> but yeah I think it's just worth thinking through more of the "why" of this design, might lead to something slightly different that's more interesting 09:51:10 <12ebering> unrands get to be the space where "cool for cool's sake" is a compelling design point 09:51:38 <09gammafunk> the best ones don't just do that though, imo 09:51:47 <09gammafunk> agreed that it's a space where there are fewer rules 09:51:47 <12ebering> counterpoint: damnation 09:51:56 <09gammafunk> yes, we already got a damnation tho 09:52:26 <12ebering> anyway for this one, being a cool top tier 2h for either the axe or polearm skill category is a tradeoff 09:52:35 <10PleasingFungus> @ebering re recent commits, you might be interested in this earlier chat about Vitality: https://discord.com/channels/735056636644687913/747522859361894521/925047623000420393 09:52:38 <12ebering> maybe make it prevent shields for everyone (even fo) 09:53:09 <10PleasingFungus> oh no more fo special cases 09:53:55 <10PleasingFungus> i don't know why we'd want to single out fo here 09:54:10 <10PleasingFungus> not like they have any particular synergy with reach-cleaving; the opposite, if anything 09:54:13 <09gammafunk> it could be expensive skill wise, and possibly not have quite the base damage of a bardiche 09:54:26 <10PleasingFungus> i was just thinking low enchant, 09:54:34 <09gammafunk> yeah I don't love the fo exception either, think that's sort of a yred-no-gargoyles type feature 09:54:42 <09gammafunk> low enchant is a way, yeah, probably simpler 09:54:45 <10PleasingFungus> making it a third scythe unrand would be very funny 09:54:49 <09gammafunk> ooh 09:54:50 <09gammafunk> right 09:55:00 <09gammafunk> that has literally come up multiple times before, hasn't it 09:55:01 <10PleasingFungus> i know that goes against nicolae's design goals tho 09:55:05 <09gammafunk> mega scythe 09:55:05 <10PleasingFungus> it has come up many times yes 09:55:15 <10PleasingFungus> tho usually people want it to be on all scythes (not happening) 09:55:22 <09gammafunk> nicolae is anti-scythe? typical edmund stan 09:55:58 <08nicolae> yeah, the inspiration is partly because lochaber axes used to exist as bardiches, atm it's a bardiche with BASE_ACC: -1, BASE_DAM: +2, BASE_DELAY: +1 09:56:18 <10PleasingFungus> yeah i don't think you get to increase base dam on this unless you have, like, a negative enchant 09:56:41 <08nicolae> that was before the radius 2 cleave idea came up, admittedly 09:56:46 <09gammafunk> finally, the fabled lochaber of innaccuracy 09:57:05 <09gammafunk> rip knife of accuracy, you are not forgotten 09:57:35 <08nicolae> if i implement the radius 2 cleave for it, it will no doubt need a nerf from its current implementation, but for now since it only exists on my hard drive i can get to that later 09:58:01 <10PleasingFungus> gotcha 09:58:42 <09gammafunk> tbh what we need is a radius two cleave that's just like inverted hailstorm, double ring around the player, but it has the harm property 09:59:17 <09gammafunk> same perfect ui, that big aoe feel, but you die because harm, but maybe you don't because you hit a ton of mobs 09:59:33 <08nicolae> also last night it occured to me that radius 2 cleave, combining reach and cleave, could be nicknamed "reave" 10:00:38 <09gammafunk> just sort of feel that this UI for a reach+cleave is gonna be pretty fiddly 10:00:50 <08nicolae> i had considered putting harm on the lochaber, atm my mental space is "no magic theming, it's just a big brutal piece of metal that slices and dices and juliennes" but again that sort of stuff can be handled after the fiddly bits are implemented 10:01:08 <08nicolae> maybe. the targeter might need updating for sure 10:02:15 <09gammafunk> that may be, but I'm more thinking of how much you're forced to make weird targeting decisions 10:02:37 <09gammafunk> but it's not really clear to me they'll be much weirder than ones you'd make with damnation or fireball or something 10:02:51 <08nicolae> how so? 10:04:44 <09gammafunk> well, that's what I'm saying, I'm trying to imagine if this will differ from those things 10:04:47 <08nicolae> ah 10:04:54 <09gammafunk> one thing that comes to mind 10:06:26 <10PleasingFungus> (on the edge of my seat) 10:06:29 <10PleasingFungus> (also reave is a good name) 10:06:51 <09gammafunk> 222 .1. .@. 10:07:01 <08nicolae> oh fuck yes, ascii graphics 10:07:11 <08nicolae> we're doin it 10:07:12 <09gammafunk> so if my knowledge of reach is not misrembered 10:07:24 <09gammafunk> the ray path to uh...crap. let me edit this 10:07:32 <08nicolae> i'll allow it 10:07:37 <08nicolae> nice 10:07:44 <08nicolae> rip to the irc crowd 10:07:51 <09gammafunk> the reach path is unimpeded to 2, right? 10:07:59 <09gammafunk> if I remember how the reach ray works? 10:08:03 <10PleasingFungus> is this about failing to reach 10:08:04 <09gammafunk> is it symmetric? 10:08:15 <09gammafunk> partly, it's how you'd like to reach to hit 3 10:08:16 <10PleasingFungus> doubt it’s symmetric 10:08:25 <10PleasingFungus> you can hit 4 10:08:28 <10PleasingFungus> trivially 10:08:33 <10PleasingFungus> oh 10:08:38 <10PleasingFungus> you mean number 3 10:08:42 <10PleasingFungus> not 3 of them 10:08:45 <09gammafunk> right 10:09:03 <09gammafunk> so what I'm getting at is there can be unimpeded paths that hit fewer targets 10:09:07 <09gammafunk> and impeded ones that hit more 10:09:16 <10PleasingFungus> i don’t understand 10:09:45 <08nicolae> the thing about the implementation of Reave that pf posted last night is that it always hits radius 2, even if your target (or the target you hit instead of reaching past them) is at radius 1 10:09:55 <10PleasingFungus> regardless of who you target there, you should launch cleave attacks against all other enemies 10:10:36 <10PleasingFungus> yeah it’s just a radius 2 axeplosion around you 10:10:39 <08nicolae> that said, given the thematic element of "getting everybody in one big sweep", i wonder if the reaving lochaber axe should just never fail to reach 10:10:59 <08nicolae> although i guess you'd still hit the intended target anyway, just less so 10:11:19 <10PleasingFungus> would you hit the intended target regardless? i wouldn’t think so 10:11:23 <09gammafunk> it's a full radius two explosion? like the entire ring around you? 10:11:28 <10PleasingFungus> yes. 10:11:52 <10PleasingFungus> it’s reach + cleaving! 10:12:02 <10PleasingFungus> i don’t want any fiddly targeting 🙂 10:12:08 <09gammafunk> well, that's not the past reach+cleaving people proposed, yeah 10:12:12 <09gammafunk> so then 10:12:25 <10PleasingFungus> oh i don’t know or care about past proposals 10:12:29 <08nicolae> if you can try to reach them in the first place, they're in radius 2, and so they'd be in the reaving radius. i think the implementation you posted won't cleave against the defender, but i thought the defender in this case would be whoever actually gets targeted 10:12:33 <09gammafunk> this is getting you just a radius two explosion centered on the player? I feel I'm failing to understand still 10:12:53 <09gammafunk> it's cleaving at radii 1 and 2? 10:13:00 <08nicolae> yep. big swing 10:13:15 <10PleasingFungus> it’s attacks against everyone in radius 2 of the players, with folks who weren’t targeted taking reduced cleave damage as usual 10:13:25 <09gammafunk> gotcha 10:13:39 <09gammafunk> that definitely won't have UI issues 10:14:08 <09gammafunk> it just has the issue of holy shit that's hitting a lot of mobs 10:14:13 <10PleasingFungus> (could also play w cleave damage reduction for this weapon re balance) 10:14:14 <10PleasingFungus> lol 10:14:20 <10PleasingFungus> holy shit is a good unrand vibe 10:14:39 <09gammafunk> yeah it's not the only unrand to go down that road, that's for sure 10:14:45 <10PleasingFungus> i think it’s balanceable w the right numbers. that’s my intuition 10:14:47 <09gammafunk> singing sword, sceptre of torment 10:14:54 <10PleasingFungus> and i think it’s great for players to go wow 10:15:15 <08nicolae> yeah, there are a lot of ways to fiddle with the numbers, and again, if reave is Too Much we can just keep it as a radius 1 cleave with the option of reaching. like i said before, i feel like it's better and easier to start with something that's Holy Shit and dial it back later, rather than starting with something boring and trying to make it interesting 10:16:03 <09gammafunk> well I do like that a lot better than trying to do a more literal interpretation of reach+cleave, just because it's more straightforward (or can use the buzzword "elegant"). apologies, wasn't aware that's what you went with 10:16:12 <08nicolae> not a problem 10:17:34 <08nicolae> it is important to think about things and have discussions 10:17:42 <08nicolae> usually 10:18:25 <09gammafunk> @nicolae yeah, you're not off the hook wrt having to think through design stuff past "but it's cool!" though, those other orange names aren't always around to save you 10:18:40 <08nicolae> i'm an orange name and i'll always be around to save me 😎 10:18:49 <10PleasingFungus> sorry for confusion! to me, this was intuitive - but i can understand how other people would interpret otherwise 10:19:33 <09gammafunk> I should have read the commit, but yeah this is one of those things that's come up like 3 or 4 times (if not more) in the past, so I sort of assumed we were still talking about the same basic idea 10:19:42 <08nicolae> what idea were you thinking it was? 10:19:51 <09gammafunk> the same one people always suggest 10:19:58 <08nicolae> i don't know what that is 😦 10:20:03 <09gammafunk> "which if you could reach and cleave where your reached to" 10:20:15 <10PleasingFungus> right, i’ve just missed all those discussions! 10:20:19 <09gammafunk> imagine a more literal combination of reach+cleave 10:20:19 <08nicolae> oh, like hit everybody adjacent to the target? 10:20:22 <09gammafunk> yes 10:20:29 <08nicolae> aha 10:20:38 <10PleasingFungus> just saw ‘scythes should reach+ cleave’ w/o elaboration 10:20:39 <09gammafunk> neil was a fan 10:20:42 <10PleasingFungus> ahh 10:21:16 <08nicolae> but that's not how cleave works as it is, you don't hit everybody next to the cleave victim, you hit everybody next to your own self... 10:21:25 <08nicolae> oh well 10:23:57 <10PleasingFungus> yeah, that’s reach shilleiagh 10:24:12 <08nicolae> oh hey i have my next unrand idea, 10:24:15 <10PleasingFungus> lol 10:25:32 <09gammafunk> yeah to be fair there were probably some variations on this, like cleave at radius 2 annulus if reaching, otherwise just cleave normally, but "hey reach+cleave" came up a few times over the years. I think neil wanted it to be somewhat limited in number of targets, hence that 10:25:54 <09gammafunk> that meaning the first one I described 10:25:58 <08nicolae> yeah, cleave at annulus 2 when reaching was another idea i had but that seemed fiddly and a pain in the dingus to implement 10:26:14 <10PleasingFungus> annulus!!! 10:26:19 <08nicolae> it's a good word 10:26:30 <09gammafunk> cone: garbage, annulus: cool and good 10:27:17 <08nicolae> i remember some time back i was trying to think of how a cone would actually look given the chebyshev geometry and i think i might have ended up figuring out that there's no well-defined definition of "angle" in such a geometry and then i moved on to other math topics 10:28:23 <09gammafunk> well, the main issue I always had was that it didn't really add any cool positional aspect that didn't additionally make it awful to predict the targets 10:28:47 <09gammafunk> the glaciate thing had a "good if closer" aspect, but hailstorm is more how you do that right in crawl geometry, yeah 10:29:35 <09gammafunk> don't really have anything against cones per se other than they seem to be "hey look, a weird shape!" and then for that you get a bad UI and not much resulting gameplay 10:30:16 <08nicolae> we need hyperbolas 10:30:29 <09gammafunk> but could concede that there could be a design out there for a conish targeter with some more compelling tradeoffs, just think you need a much less fancy cone than the glaciate one was (wrt UI issues) 10:30:36 <09gammafunk> there I go saying "wrt" again, damn it 10:30:48 <09gammafunk> I think elliptic would agree with you 10:31:47 <10PleasingFungus> we have far too much hyperbole as is!!! 10:31:59 <09gammafunk> where a cone targeter might not have the UI concern so much is one where it's just not used very much, but glaciate is a "bread and butter" spells you have to get "online" 10:32:27 <09gammafunk> I wonder if lom lobon ever complains about the glaciate targeter, probably not 10:34:01 <10PleasingFungus> probably not. 10:34:19 <10PleasingFungus> i should have left tornado around exclusively for lom 10:34:28 <10PleasingFungus> so he could have two removed L9s 10:35:34 <10PleasingFungus> demon lord of forbidden spells… 10:35:36 <09gammafunk> need some lom lobon rare speech lines about using "removed magic" or something 10:35:49 <08nicolae> long-forgotten magicks. with a k 10:41:00 <08nicolae> anyway. thank you all for all your various help with my unrands and such. 😄 hopefully i can get the lochaber axe ready for a PR over the long weekend 10:42:26 <10PleasingFungus> no rush! also what long weekend 10:42:39 <10PleasingFungus> o 10:42:42 <10PleasingFungus> junetee 10:42:59 juneteenth, yeh 10:43:07 US only obvs 10:43:27 <10PleasingFungus> i actually got an email about that but didn’t read it… oops 10:43:44 <10PleasingFungus> saw 19th, thought ‘that’s a sunday!’ and didn’t read further 10:44:24 right, but federal offices and such close on monday for it 10:44:46 I know my apt offices are closed on monday 10:45:25 <10PleasingFungus> yeah my work also 10:45:28 <10PleasingFungus> apparently! 10:47:26 <08nicolae> more presidents should give me new days off imo 10:48:53 <08nicolae> i wonder if my county has gotten around to legislating free parking on juneteenth, they have it for almost all the other fed holidays 11:12:37 03nicolae02 07* 0.29-a0-620-g13ace881f2: Let randart bardings generate with rPois 10(3 minutes ago, 1 file, 1+ 2-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/13ace881f24b 11:13:06 <08nicolae> i thought "i should probably do some actual bug fixes instead of just making new stuff" and i remembered that thing i found a while back while looking at the randart code 11:14:18 <08nicolae> palentongas, please enjoy your new rpois bardings 11:17:47 Unstable branch on crawl.kelbi.org updated to: 0.29-a0-620-g13ace881f2 (34) 11:54:08 <08nicolae> thinking about the discussion earlier about the enchantment for the mountain boots: is there any room for an unrand aux armour whose entire Thing is just a ridiculous enchantment. like a +7 cloak with no other properties than the ridiculous AC 11:54:10 <08nicolae> actually, hm 11:54:17 <08nicolae> i could just make that a shop... 11:55:02 I think that's frowned on, which is why lear's hauberk has such a huge downside 11:55:31 <10PleasingFungus> i guess i don’t understand the appeal 11:55:44 <08nicolae> "need AC more than resists and etc" i guess 11:55:54 <10PleasingFungus> does it create an interesting or memorable game? 11:56:11 <10PleasingFungus> no, obviously it’s strong 11:56:17 <10PleasingFungus> i don’t care about that 11:56:34 <10PleasingFungus> i care about it producing interesting choices and fun stories 11:58:46 <10PleasingFungus> mountain boots produces no interesting choices, since it’s just strong, but it does produce fun stories - ha ha, ignis tried to shaft me and i was fine! 11:59:55 <10PleasingFungus> gong produces interesting choices (can this character really fight the whole floor at once?) and fun stories (oops, thought i could fight the whole floor at once, gong yasd) 11:59:55 GONNNNG! 11:59:56 <04Cerebot> GONNNNG! 12:00:07 <10PleasingFungus> echo! 12:00:42 <10PleasingFungus> we already have ring of the tortoise for ac unrands 12:00:43 hope there's no possibility of those two going ping pong 12:00:50 <10PleasingFungus> think that’s one more than enough 12:01:00 <10PleasingFungus> i do hope they can ping pong, personally 12:01:43 <10PleasingFungus> counterpoint to the above: “i got a busted good item!” can be a fun story 12:01:47 <10PleasingFungus> but that’s limited 12:02:39 <10PleasingFungus> it’s not that good a story, and the more busted things we put in, the less exciting any one of em gets 12:06:35 hm, how about a +AC item that needs to recharge? and can't easily be swapped out, so once it's discharged you've effectively lost a slot until it recharges or you get enough of a rest to swap it safely 12:07:12 slthough I guess that (possibly minus effetive slot loss) is bear spirit etc. 12:07:55 I'm thinking notably longer swap time than hat of the bear spirit though 12:08:13 closer to e.g. evoker recharge times 12:08:48 and contrariwise lasting longer before that recharge is needed 12:12:50 so now you have to make a decision before a fight, can you kill enough of a mob before your extra protection runs out and cna you recover sufficiently afterward before the next mob 12:13:56 <10PleasingFungus> maybe? not sure, think details would need to be solidified a little before i have a decisive opinion 12:14:05 <10PleasingFungus> vaguely feel like extra kill power is more exciting than extra ac for this sort of effect 12:14:20 <10PleasingFungus> (and evokers do that already, though there's probably more design space there, esp with alt items) 12:14:44 right, I was thinking most evokers already cover the kill side 12:16:16 <10PleasingFungus> sure. again, something like this could probably work 12:36:21 <09hellmonk> The +72 club of pakellas 12:37:05 <09hellmonk> Melee weapon with charges, recharges with xp and loses all enchantment when empty 12:42:12 <10PleasingFungus> lol 12:42:25 <10PleasingFungus> now that’s a swap weapon 12:42:41 <09hellmonk> Funny stories, evocative, references an old bug 12:42:55 <09hellmonk> Just make it *drain or whatever 12:43:01 <09hellmonk> *contam+++ 12:43:21 <10PleasingFungus> fragile (removed like pakellas) 12:44:35 <09hellmonk> "The weapon of a mad artificer with delusions of godhood; they briefly reached the divine but then vanished, leaving only this club behind" 12:44:47 <13Sastreii> Pakellas have to come back… is there even a chance? 12:45:24 <10PleasingFungus> there's always a chance. but there are a ton of problems 12:45:29 <10PleasingFungus> and not a ton of upside 12:59:47 pakellas's schtick was making a very strong set of items even stronger; either everything has to be rebalanced, or pakellas needs a significant downside to go with the upside (and I suspect ru already took over that space) 13:00:47 <06advil> Armor whose AC increases each time you dodge, resets on hit 13:03:00 <10PleasingFungus> huh 13:03:08 <10PleasingFungus> no idea how to evaluate that 13:05:44 <09hellmonk> Armor that goes to 100 ac every time you enter a new floor and loses 1 ac every 50 aut 13:13:56 <10PleasingFungus> wow, i can't wait! 15:14:06 <10PleasingFungus> huh, that last message was supposed to go to a different discord entirely 15:14:07 <10PleasingFungus> oops 15:14:17 <10PleasingFungus> it kind of fits? 15:22:19 <09hellmonk> lol 17:16:55 <10PleasingFungus> why don't we have species specific malmuts 17:30:09 <05kate> i feel like species-specific goodmuts are already a little questionable in terms of design but for badmuts you'd probably want them to be pretty common so they actually show up a noticeable amount, and then that just seems sort of mean to whichever species have them 17:33:08 <05kate> that frog article is very good though 17:38:41 <09hellmonk> Vampire specific mut that makes your character Morb uncontrollably 17:51:00 <08nicolae> is it the one about the frog that's too little to properly land its jumps 17:52:00 <05kate> it is! (https://defector.com/why-is-this-tiny-frog-so-awful-at-jumping/ for context for irc, PF posted it over in roguelikes discord) 17:52:07 <08nicolae> i love that lil guy 18:23:31 Unstable branch on underhound.eu updated to: 0.29-a0-620-g13ace881f2 (34) 19:11:32 <10PleasingFungus> kate: that’s completely fair. i’m glad you enjoyed the frogs 🙂 19:12:50 (Minor note, I personally think ring of the tortoise is kinda meh as an unrand) 19:13:10 It's a somewhat interesting choice since it's a ring slot and a fairly hefty boost, but it's just kidna boring 19:13:13 kinda, even 19:15:58 <10PleasingFungus> yep, that’s what i was saying - it’s not a very interesting unrand 19:16:43 <10PleasingFungus> ‘an ac ring with an illegally high value’ is sort of neat in some sense, but nicolae’s offbrand jewelry shop covers that better 19:19:30 Oh okay, I thought you had a differing opinion on the ring than me so I was concerned. Phew. 19:19:59 And the off-brand jewelry shops is easily one of, if not, my favorite shop. Lots of neat stuff going on with that one. 19:20:02 s/shops/shop 19:28:07 I'd also say I think I funner alternative to the ring of the tortoise would be something with a similar bonus, but greatly reduced you speed (or maybe it reduces your movement speed for the turn after you take damage), but I guess ponderus already takes that place right now. 19:28:18 By "funner" I mean crueler, of course. 20:22:28 <09gammafunk> I don't like ANY nicolae shops, not a SINGLE ONE, and I REFUSE to spend my money at such establishments 20:33:08 support small-ish business conglomerates! 20:37:59 <09gammafunk> I once asked a nicolae jewellery shop for a custom engraving: GAMMAFUNK - FUTURE WORLD RECORD STREAK HOLDER. They charged me for it, but my ring came back GAMMAGUNK - FUTURE WORLD RECORD !STRAEK HOLDER. 20:39:00 I fail to see the issue 20:39:04 the engraving is accurate 21:09:16 <08nicolae> engravings work on nethack rules, they fade over time 21:49:48 <08nicolae> @PleasingFungus i'm not sure the distance_iterator version of radius 2 cleaving is quite working 21:51:44 <08nicolae> if a weapon tries to cleave but misses, it should say "you miss the X", right? if it doesn't say anything, then it didn't cleave, right? 21:56:36 <10PleasingFungus> sure 21:56:46 <10PleasingFungus> certainly possible it doesn't work, i didn't test it 21:57:22 <08nicolae> hmmm 21:58:03 <10PleasingFungus> gimme a min 21:58:46 <08nicolae> it seems to work as expected if i'm using a regular axe, or if i'm attacking someone next to me 21:58:49 <08nicolae> maybe i fucked up the condition 22:00:03 <10PleasingFungus> no i think it just doesn't work 22:00:05 <10PleasingFungus> let me poke around 22:00:16 <08nicolae> okay 22:00:30 <08nicolae> like i said, it seems to work for Regular cleaves, so it's not completely busted 22:04:30 <08nicolae> so it's not the condition, that seems to have been set properly 22:07:53 <10PleasingFungus> i found it 22:08:02 <08nicolae> 😮 22:08:22 <08nicolae> i was looking at the iterator code but it was beyond my ken 22:08:29 03PleasingFungus02 07[great-cleavage] * 0.29-a0-619-g4a796c57d4: Support reach cleaving 10(11 seconds ago, 1 file, 5+ 3-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/4a796c57d488 22:08:35 <10PleasingFungus> the iterator was fine 22:08:47 <10PleasingFungus> the problem was later code that filtered out non-adjacent targets 22:08:51 <08nicolae> aha! 22:13:09 <08nicolae> you're a mensch and a half 22:13:27 <08nicolae> sesquimensch 22:14:29 <10PleasingFungus> np 22:14:35 <10PleasingFungus> sry for wasting ur time w the orig buggy ver 22:14:50 <08nicolae> lmao it's fine 22:15:11 <08nicolae> even with the bug fix it still would have taken me longer to figure out how to make the existing cleave code work at range 2 22:16:19 <08nicolae> oh yeah, there we go 22:22:31 <08nicolae> aha, another bug, although more fun: i should probably check that there is LOF between the attacker and each cleave target, since you can currently cleave through walls 22:23:08 <08nicolae> what function is used for checking if point A can hit point B 22:28:31 <10PleasingFungus> lol 22:29:04 <10PleasingFungus> i recommend checking can_see, so you also don’t cleave invis guys 22:29:11 <10PleasingFungus> probably? hm 22:29:20 <10PleasingFungus> how does invis work 22:29:21 <08nicolae> i think you can still cleave invis guys, i remember that was one of the things i liked about frostbite 22:29:29 <10PleasingFungus> otherwise use can see cell 22:29:32 <10PleasingFungus> _ 22:29:59 <08nicolae> you can also cleave through clear walls, is the thing 22:31:19 <10PleasingFungus> gotta set the right mode 22:31:21 <10PleasingFungus> hold 22:32:20 <10PleasingFungus> ok, use can_reach_attack_between 22:32:27 <10PleasingFungus> for dist > 1 stuff 22:35:13 <08nicolae> vielen dank 22:50:14 <08nicolae> is there an easy function in the distance_iterator class to return the current locations distance from the center 22:50:47 <08nicolae> is that radius() 22:54:07 <08nicolae> it is! 22:54:11 <08nicolae> wunderbar 22:58:36 <10PleasingFungus> uh 22:58:43 <10PleasingFungus> i think you want grid_distance 22:59:15 <08nicolae> how come? 23:00:26 <10PleasingFungus> on mobile rn, will look in a minute 23:24:41 <10PleasingFungus> ok. @nicolae what radius function are we talking about? 23:25:01 <10PleasingFungus> coordit.h: int radius() const; this one? 23:25:23 <08nicolae> yeah i think so 23:25:26 <10PleasingFungus> oh, you probably mean distance_iterator::radius 23:25:33 <08nicolae> yep 23:25:38 <08nicolae> if (attack_cleaves(attacker, which_attack)) { const coord_def atk = attacker.pos(); const bool lochaber = weap && is_unrandom_artefact(*weap, UNRAND_LOCHABER_AXE); const int cleave_radius = lochaber ? 2 : 1; for (distance_iterator di(atk, true, true, cleave_radius); di; ++di) { if (*di == def) continue; // no double jeopardy const reach_type cleave_reach = 23:25:39 di.radius() == 2 ? REACH_TWO : REACH_NONE; actor *target = actor_at(*di); if (target && !_dont_harm(attacker, *target) && can_reach_attack_between(atk, *di, cleave_reach)) targets.push_back(target); } } 23:26:05 <10PleasingFungus> yeah using that radius seems fine. lemme peek at ur code 23:26:23 <08nicolae> i time travelled back in time and posted my code before you even asked for it 8) 23:26:27 <08nicolae> B) 23:26:30 <08nicolae> oh come on 23:26:30 <10PleasingFungus> :p 23:26:34 <10PleasingFungus> anyway that's not quite right 23:26:53 <08nicolae> lay it on me 23:27:17 <10PleasingFungus> we don't want to call can_reach_attack_between at all if radius is 1 23:27:56 <10PleasingFungus> if (*di == def) continue; // no double jeopardy actor *target = actor_at(*di); if (!target || _dont_harm(attacker, *target)) continue; if (di.radius() == 2 && !can_reach_attack_between(atk, *di, REACH_TWO)) continue; targets.push_back(target); do this 23:29:24 <08nicolae> oh, much nicer than the complicated thing i wrote to replace it 23:29:38 <08nicolae> just out of curiosity, why do we not want to call it if radius is 1? just wasted time and computrons? 23:35:29 <10PleasingFungus> if you take a look at can_reach_attack_between (it's defined in the same file), it assumes that we're actually, well, reaching 23:35:41 <10PleasingFungus> it'll probably work in melee, but i'm not super trusting 23:36:29 <10PleasingFungus> hm, it does look we're already using it in melee in eg spectral_weapon_fineff::fire 23:36:33 <10PleasingFungus> so it's probably fine? but i don't like it