Subject: "Intoxicate & drunkenness generally" Previous topic | Next topic
Printer-friendly copy Email this topic to a friend CF Website
Top General Discussions Gameplay Topic #39202
Show all folders

IsildurThu 28-Jul-11 04:50 PM
Member since 04th Mar 2003
5969 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list
#39202, "Intoxicate & drunkenness generally"


          

What are the effects of "intoxicate" and, generally, being drunk, in the case of a non-bard?

Does it make you vuln to anything? Mental maybe? Or resistant? Does it degrade your fighting ability in some way other than simple stat loss? Does it make you cast spells at a lower level or have a higher chance of losing concentration? Something else I haven't even thought of?

  

Alert | IP Printer Friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Reply I found the code for "drunk" in Rom 2.4 awhile ago, BaronMySoul (Anonymous), 29-Jul-11 01:22 PM, #2
Reply RE: I found the code for , Daevryn, 29-Jul-11 01:54 PM, #3
Reply Sure? Look in your fight.c file, BaronMySoul (Anonymous), 29-Jul-11 02:13 PM, #4
     Reply RE: Sure? Look in your fight.c file, Daevryn, 29-Jul-11 02:46 PM, #5
          Reply Dang... I have *got* to find that codebase..., BaronMySoul (Anonymous), 29-Jul-11 07:58 PM, #6
               Reply RE: Dang... I have *got* to find that codebase..., Zulghinlour, 29-Jul-11 08:51 PM, #7
                    Reply Then you wouldn't still call it a ROM 2.3 :), BaronMySoul (Anonymous), 29-Jul-11 11:14 PM, #8
                         Reply RE: Then you wouldn't still call it a ROM 2.3 :), Daevryn, 30-Jul-11 12:02 AM, #9
                         Reply RE: Then you wouldn't still call it a ROM 2.3 :), Isildur, 30-Jul-11 09:17 AM, #11
                         Reply I love when you tech boys talk nerdy to me, BaronMySoul (Anonymous), 30-Jul-11 12:53 PM, #12
                         Reply It is still a derivation of ROM 2.3, Zulghinlour, 30-Jul-11 12:28 AM, #10
Reply Makes you vuln_STD.~, Homard, 29-Jul-11 08:00 AM, #1

BaronMySoul (inactive user)Fri 29-Jul-11 01:17 PM
Charter member
posts
#39237, "I found the code for "drunk" in Rom 2.4 awhile ago"
In response to Reply #0
Edited on Fri 29-Jul-11 01:22 PM

          

if (dam > 1 && !IS_NPC(victim) && victim->pcdata->condition > 10)
dam = 9 * dam / 10;


So, if you would get hit for 10 damage, your received damage would then be:
9 * (10)/10 = 9

So, the original unedited code* had you receiving 10% less damage if you were drunk. I'd reckon that the basic MUD fighting mechanics are pretty close to intact, though (if it ain't broke, don't fix it).


* keep in mind that CF is ROM 2.3 codebase and has been modified over the last 16 years

//EDIT NOTE// Actually, I think it's dam redux, not dam output, based on the code directly after drunk -
if ( dam > 1 && IS_AFFECTED(victim, AFF_SANCTUARY) )
dam /= 2;

  

Alert | IP Printer Friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
DaevrynFri 29-Jul-11 01:54 PM
Member since 13th Feb 2007
11117 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list
#39238, "RE: I found the code for "
In response to Reply #2


          

I'm pretty sure we don't have that.

  

Alert | IP Printer Friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
BaronMySoul (inactive user)Fri 29-Jul-11 02:13 PM
Charter member
posts
#39241, "Sure? Look in your fight.c file"
In response to Reply #2


          

Of course, the versions could be totally different. I can't find ROM 2.3 anywhere.

I found it within this statement:

/*
* Inflict damage from a hit.
*/
bool damage(CHAR_DATA *ch,CHAR_DATA *victim,int dam,int dt,int dam_type,
bool show)



....


Then notated as:


/*
* Damage modifiers.
*/

if ( dam > 1 && !IS_NPC(victim)
&& victim->pcdata->condition > 10 )
dam = 9 * dam / 10;

if ( dam > 1 && IS_AFFECTED(victim, AFF_SANCTUARY) )
dam /= 2;

if ( dam > 1 && ((IS_AFFECTED(victim, AFF_PROTECT_EVIL) && IS_EVIL(ch) )
|| (IS_AFFECTED(victim, AFF_PROTECT_GOOD) && IS_GOOD(ch) )))
dam -= dam / 4;

immune = FALSE;

  

Alert | IP Printer Friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
DaevrynFri 29-Jul-11 02:46 PM
Member since 13th Feb 2007
11117 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list
#39242, "RE: Sure? Look in your fight.c file"
In response to Reply #4


          

I'm pretty positive that none of those exact lines of code exist in ours.

There's a pretty big gulf from 2.3 to 2.4, and a lot of deficiencies in 2.3 that we solved that 2.4 also solved, but in fairly different ways.

  

Alert | IP Printer Friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
BaronMySoul (inactive user)Fri 29-Jul-11 07:58 PM
Charter member
posts
#39264, "Dang... I have *got* to find that codebase..."
In response to Reply #5


          

Because... well, I like to know how things work.

  

Alert | IP Printer Friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
ZulghinlourFri 29-Jul-11 08:51 PM
Member since 04th Mar 2003
9792 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list
#39266, "RE: Dang... I have *got* to find that codebase..."
In response to Reply #6


          

>Because... well, I like to know how things work.

Even if you found stock ROM 2.3, it'd be nothing like what is in CF after 15+ years of changes.

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

  

Alert | IP Printer Friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                    
BaronMySoul (inactive user)Fri 29-Jul-11 11:14 PM
Charter member
posts
#39267, "Then you wouldn't still call it a ROM 2.3 :)"
In response to Reply #7


          

Even heavily modified, you're not going to change everything - especially a lot of the core workings of the MUD. But, yeah... thanks for the info.

  

Alert | IP Printer Friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                        
DaevrynSat 30-Jul-11 12:02 AM
Member since 13th Feb 2007
11117 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list
#39268, "RE: Then you wouldn't still call it a ROM 2.3 :)"
In response to Reply #8


          

I wouldn't say everything, but close to it. What survives is more the very high level architectural decisions than anything else.

You would be amazed at what people can find reasons to rewrite over 17 years, when you factor in that CF has had probably a couple dozen coders with different ideas of what's interesting or important, and when you factor in the changes in hardware over the years.

(Example: the command parser was gutted and completely replaced at one point in the mid-90s because at the time it was becoming a performance bottleneck. With today's hardware I doubt that'd ever have happened.)

Not that any of that diminishes the huge debt of ideas that CF still owes to the DIKU/ROM folks.

  

Alert | IP Printer Friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                            
IsildurSat 30-Jul-11 09:17 AM
Member since 04th Mar 2003
5969 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list
#39273, "RE: Then you wouldn't still call it a ROM 2.3 :)"
In response to Reply #9


          

That was all pretty exhilarating, but...uh...what's "drunk" do?

  

Alert | IP Printer Friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                            
BaronMySoul (inactive user)Sat 30-Jul-11 12:53 PM
Charter member
posts
#39276, "I love when you tech boys talk nerdy to me"
In response to Reply #9


          

I don't suppose any of y'all have the original, untouched 2.3, do you? I'd still like it.

  

Alert | IP Printer Friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                        
ZulghinlourSat 30-Jul-11 12:28 AM
Member since 04th Mar 2003
9792 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list
#39269, "It is still a derivation of ROM 2.3"
In response to Reply #8


          

>Even heavily modified, you're not going to change everything
>- especially a lot of the core workings of the MUD. But,
>yeah... thanks for the info.

There has been a lot of the core that has been changed, and some of the core that hasn't been touched. At the end of the day it is still a derivation of ROM 2.3, and we stood on the shoulders of those who built ROM 2.3. So yes...we would still call it based on ROM 2.3 no matter how far we have deviated from their codebase.

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

  

Alert | IP Printer Friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

HomardFri 29-Jul-11 08:00 AM
Member since 10th Apr 2010
959 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list
#39216, "Makes you vuln_STD.~"
In response to Reply #0


          

n/t

  

Alert | IP Printer Friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Top General Discussions Gameplay Topic #39202 Previous topic | Next topic