Yes, and that's fine for that map. I don't want my
prisondemadness suddenly becoming worthless, or my
maps suddenly becoming easily traverable because OMG
WE SHOULD WALK THROUGH WALLS WITH WRAITHS (else
brain esplode!).
Why should anyone make maps if you're going to
implement this. I'm not
On 10/19/05, Anton Oussik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When activated the wraith becomes invisible, stealthy, can move
through walls, and can not cast spells, or hold items in inventory
(except invisible ones of course), The only attack then avaliable is
wraith touch, which deals ghosthit,
Please do not implement this passing through walls
stuff.
I /strongly/ oppose passing through walls. I do not
want my maps to become worthless because someone
decided we need to make the game worthlessly easy.
--- Anton Oussik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 19/10/05, Brendan Lally [EMAIL
Yay, a let's break everything by allowing passage
through walls idea!
Crossfire should NEVER allow passage throug no_pass
tiles. No Pass means no pass, walls shoud _always_ be
no_pass (by default). Don't make the maps worthless
please.
--- Brendan Lally [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/19/05,
On 19/10/05, Brendan Lally [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/19/05, Anton Oussik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 19/10/05, Brendan Lally [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm inclined to say that at least there should be a /big/ hit points
penalty as well (maybe 50% - though with a small ac bonus too ?)
On 10/19/05, Mitch Obrian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please do not implement this passing through walls
stuff.
I /strongly/ oppose passing through walls. I do not
want my maps to become worthless because someone
decided we need to make the game worthlessly easy.
If it were a new movement type,
All of them.
No player should ever beable to move through walls
(unless specified by the map perhapse).
Walls should remain no_pass. Now if you wanted walls
that things could pass through... up to the map maker,
but don't change the default behavior.
Don't f**k up the existing maps or my maps
If there were an etheral movement type added it would not be implemented
in existing maps by default (they still have block all) just like the
other movement changes. In archived movement related threads this
'ghostwalk' type movement was proposed. I would also put forth an
addition to the
On 19/10/05, Todd Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would also put forth an
addition to the suggestions, the idea that etheral travelers would not
be able to pass 'iron' either so it would only work against wood walls
and stone and the like.
That may work. That would make some areas
There isn't any real difference between walls and other blocked tiles
(like water) currently - everything is either blocked or not blocked.
This is all part of the changes Mark is making to the movement code.
Changing the blocking code has a lot of interesting repercussions.
That's why it's
On 10/19/05, Anton Oussik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 19/10/05, Todd Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would also put forth an
addition to the suggestions, the idea that etheral travelers would not
be able to pass 'iron' either so it would only work against wood walls
and stone and the
On 10/20/05, Todd Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A quick summary of ideas I have:
very high mountains (mountain_5) remains blocked
high mountains (mountain_4) require 'climbing' or 'flying' movement type
to pass
On a related note, whilst all these tiles need updating, flattening
the tiles
Brendan Lally wrote:
On 10/20/05, Todd Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A quick summary of ideas I have:
very high mountains (mountain_5) remains blocked
high mountains (mountain_4) require 'climbing' or 'flying' movement type
to pass
On a related note, whilst all these tiles need
I should clarify this - I meant we should consider adding new
'impassible' forest and jungle arches which only those with woodlore or
flying creatures could pass. This would be really dense forests but
elves and halflings and those with woodsman skills could get by. I
didn't mean to replace
On 10/20/05, Todd Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brendan Lally wrote:
with reference to back to the future - hoverboards don't work over water.
But you can still fly over seas... until you tire. The reason I suggest
we need to restrict rivers is because they are so often used to direct
I agree
I think that mountains give the world more surface
area - there more
nooks and crannies to develop. They also make
travel meaningful and to
direct movement to areas of interest. Also over
time the idea was for
people to carve out areas in the mountains like was
done with the
And so says Brendan Lally on 10/18/2005 09:19 AM...
On 10/17/05, Mitch Obrian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gaia is a diety who has it's own lore, other dieties
have other lore. We should not make one lore primacy
above other (_especially_ gaia's).
Is there actually a proper set of lore for the
On 10/18/05, Lalo Martins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And so says Brendan Lally on 10/18/2005 09:19 AM...
Is there actually a proper set of lore for the various gods in crossfire?
If so, where is it?
It was a pet project I was working on, many, many years ago. It's on
the wiki. It's not
I've found the lore very interesting. More would be
wonderful! Once it's in we'll add it to the ingame
random reading materials.
--- Lalo Martins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And so says Brendan Lally on 10/18/2005 09:19 AM...
On 10/17/05, Mitch Obrian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Gaia is a
19 matches
Mail list logo
