Mark Wedel wrote: > I'd think that the abil_ball_lightning could perhaps change names. The > monsters don't care what it is called :).
Seems to work: I did rename abil_xxx to "xxx ability". The actual spell cast by the monster was still "xxx". > I'm just not sure if that is used for dragon players to give them the > spell or something. The treasure lists dragon_ability_yyy (yyy=fire,cold,etc.) contain spell_xxx but not abil_xxx. Renaming these spells (perhaps to "ball lightning ability"?) also would allow DMs to learn the abilities. > Not even sure what spelldirect_ball_lightning is used for - the > archetype exists, but isn't used in the treasure for any monster nor > is it used by any other arch (quick grep spelldirect_ball_lightning */*) > - I _think_ this is here for compatiblity because some maps gave > the monster this object (old spell code) so needed an object to use > for that instead of getting a null object. IF this is the case, the > maps should perhaps be examined to see if anything is still using > this, and ideally, just fix up those references and remove this arch. No map (in maps-bigworld, both current and some old versions) references this archetype. Some more digging revealed: the ChangeLog file contains two references to spelldirect_xxx. And checking out old versions from cvs did show that dragon_ability_xxx did include spelldirect_xxx a while ago. At some time spelldirect_xxx was replaced by spell_xxx. Leaf did check the player files on metalforge: ten players include spelldirect_xxx objects. Therefore we probably should not delete these archetypes. > All that said, looking for objects that have spell_ as the archetype > name would probably be a safe workaround. With the above findings, I think we should use a slightly different approach: allow all objects with type 101 (SPELL) with the exception of arch names spelldirect_xxx. This, combined with the renamed abilities, and also an improved learn_spell command to prefer full matches over prefix matches should enable a DM to learn all existing spells other than the obsolete spelldirect ones. > It'd perhaps also be good to somehow get that multiple matches were > found and print a warning in that case, but not sure how easy that is > to do. Should not be too hard -- I'll implement that. And also improve the commands learn_spell and forget_spell to give more accurate failure messages, and to allow a direct match even if a longer one exists ("xxx" vs. "xxx ability", or "vitriol" vs. "vitriol splash"). _______________________________________________ crossfire mailing list crossfire@metalforge.org http://mailman.metalforge.org/mailman/listinfo/crossfire