#tfl@irc.freenode.net logs for 18 Sep 2006 (GMT)

Archive Today Yesterday Tomorrow
tfl homepage


[00:31:15] <-- Crysta has left IRC ("Trillian (http://www.ceruleanstudios.com")
[01:15:14] --- Marzo_away is now known as Marzo
[01:15:26] <wizardrydragon> So Im pondering needlessly reinventing the wheel again
[01:15:50] <wizardrydragon> Well not again as in the same code, but it's not the first time I've needlessly rewritten things :)
[01:16:02] <Marzo> :-)
[01:16:11] <Marzo> What is it this time :- ?
[01:16:19] <wizardrydragon> Im considering changing or at least adding to the spells code
[01:16:38] <Marzo> What art thou planning?
[01:16:51] <wizardrydragon> I want to have magic function differently in TFL
[01:16:59] <Marzo> How so?
[01:17:41] <wizardrydragon> Well remember that not all its people are followers of virtue (theyre the far minority actually) and therefore the magic they practice would likewise probably differ
[01:18:36] <Marzo> That doesn't neccessarily follow, but it would be a nice addition
[01:19:04] <wizardrydragon> Well the magic of Ultima 4 onward is tied to the Mages, followers of Honesty
[01:19:31] <Marzo> And it seems to be very similar to what is used in SI, were they are not followers of Honesty...
[01:19:44] <wizardrydragon> I was considering since it is the feudal lands, having them have spells akin to the earlier Ultima games
[01:20:13] <Marzo> I haven't yet played the previous Ultima games, so you'll have to enlighten me :-
[01:20:41] <wizardrydragon> But they do follow Truth. Remember, they come originally from Moon (I always loved the irony that Monotorians hate the Virtues so much and British with them, but theyh follow the principle of Courage :) )
[01:20:49] * Marzo played only from Ultima IV onwards
[01:21:03] <wizardrydragon> Ah. Perhaps I'll let it be a surprise then :)
[01:21:25] <wizardrydragon> It'd be more extensive anyways as theres what, maybe ten spells in the original ones? Lol
[01:21:28] <Marzo> One thing that I thought was nice was the duality between Moonglow and Moonshade
[01:21:42] <Marzo> They both come from Moon
[01:21:44] <wizardrydragon> And the move up/down spells are kinda useless in a U7 engine.
[01:22:07] <wizardrydragon> So really eight.
[01:23:24] <Marzo> What would be nicer would be to have a different spell system, similar to what they did in Pagan
[01:24:06] <wizardrydragon> Well Im not straight taking the spells - I rather was going to use them as a template for coming up with some sort of system
[01:24:10] <Marzo> Perhaps even for Britannian magic -- maybe have a 'mixing bowl' where you mix reagents for spells
[01:24:35] <wizardrydragon> As U4 :)
[01:24:40] <Marzo> Yep
[01:24:42] <wizardrydragon> Yes that was another idea.
[01:25:10] <wizardrydragon> That one would be rather easy if you don't want to keep track of how many spells you have prepared.
[01:25:13] <Marzo> On an unrelated tangent: I was thinking of disabling the editing of chunk-defined objects unless in terrain-editing mode
[01:25:29] <wizardrydragon> Its keeping track of prepared spells that could be tricky if swe did that.,
[01:25:49] <Marzo> There is simply too many problemsassociated with it that have been surfaced recently
[01:26:02] <wizardrydragon> (terrain edit) that would be good. It could be useful to have an option to disable that thoug
[01:26:23] <Marzo> (spells) I think that doing something similar to Earth magic in Pagan could be the key
[01:26:36] <wizardrydragon> Perhaps
[01:26:42] <Marzo> The spells you have become 'icons' in the inventory which you can double-click to use
[01:26:48] <wizardrydragon> I dont reallyh want Necromacy
[01:26:57] <wizardrydragon> Well i do want it, but itd clash with the theme :P
[01:26:57] <Marzo> And for ease of management, they should stack like coins and reagents
[01:27:01] <wizardrydragon> But the icons could work
[01:27:35] <wizardrydragon> (random idea) I was considering having some references to pagan's magic such as the candles as easter eggs
[01:27:37] <Marzo> (I was thinking more about the manner that the spells were implemented than the spells themselves)
[01:28:29] <wizardrydragon> Aye, I figured, just had to sayh that less you think otherwise :)
[01:28:36] <Marzo> Another random idea that I just had, based on your idea: maybe add a Britannian ritual magic which uses candles and stuff with the Codex symbol instead of a pentagram
[01:29:17] <wizardrydragon> Eh ... I could see that for Laurianna/whatever the guys name was, and maybe Chahiero, but I dont think it would be player accessible (that is learnable by the player)
[01:29:39] * Marzo thought about having a spell to create a golem in the Keyring mod, but golems are *though* in BG...
[01:30:05] <wizardrydragon> (I don't want to oversaturate the player with magic. Perhaps we could have it so that (s)he can choose to follow only one magic system at a time)
[01:30:08] <Marzo> Zauriel?
[01:30:43] <Marzo> I tend to agree with you
[01:30:44] <wizardrydragon> Yes, him.
[01:31:17] <wizardrydragon> Limiting the avatar like that would be a good way to make them player accessible and avoid oversaturation that way - it'd just be annoyhing to implement
[01:32:16] <Marzo> Hold that thought -- I'll be right back
[01:32:30] <wizardrydragon> I am starting to like the idea of having to mix spells in BG/virtue-based magic - it's a good way to prevent the Avatar from just completely overpowering things with death spells after his/her stat raise from FoV
[01:40:11] <Marzo> Back
[01:40:25] * wizardrydragon points up :)
[01:41:45] <Marzo> Also, the spellbook could be done differently -- we wouldn't have to wait until I implement the Gump manager/builder
[01:42:16] <wizardrydragon> If we could just indicate in the spellbook how many spells are prepared, that would be much easier than icons or what have you
[01:42:32] <wizardrydragon> Have it default to unlimited for normal BG, but make it setable for mods, perhaps?
[01:42:37] <Marzo> And not that death spells are the only problem after FoV too -- the avatar carrying the Black Sword can kill anything pretty quickly, especially if insivible
[01:42:38] <wizardrydragon> (And hide it if it's unlimited?)
[01:43:31] <Marzo> That would need the Gump manager/builder
[01:43:35] <wizardrydragon> (Black Sword) Indeed, I'm going to nerf it to a degree.
[01:43:49] <Marzo> Or the Death Scythe
[01:43:55] <Marzo> Or the Hoe of Destruction
[01:44:01] <wizardrydragon> "To a degree" meaning using the death power makes a huge karma hit
[01:44:34] <Marzo> I was thinking about implementing the need to kill something to use the Black Sword's restoration
[01:44:47] <wizardrydragon> Yes, that also.
[01:44:50] <Marzo> Right now, you can use it as many times as you like as long as it is night
[01:45:00] <wizardrydragon> Indeed.
[01:45:12] <wizardrydragon> Hmm
[01:45:19] <Marzo> An invisible, all powerful nocturnal Avatar :-)
[01:45:24] <wizardrydragon> Indeed
[01:45:39] <wizardrydragon> with 60 in all stats
[01:45:54] <wizardrydragon> (I am *definetely* ghoing to nerf that stat raise somehow)
[01:45:54] <Marzo> No, that is strength and hit points "only"
[01:46:15] <Marzo> The others are limited to 30
[01:46:34] <Marzo> Me, I will see if I can raise the mana limit to 60; makes for better wizards
[01:46:48] <wizardrydragon> FoV is to game balance as I am for Exult.
[01:46:52] <wizardrydragon> Not very good :)
[01:47:04] <Marzo> :-)
[01:47:24] * Marzo restrains himself from making a commentary due to Compassion
[01:47:52] <wizardrydragon> I dont want to have combat being too difficult to the point of frustration thats not the point of Ultima games, but I do want them to not be cakewalks
[01:48:00] <wizardrydragon> either.
[01:48:04] <wizardrydragon> Damn enter key.
[01:48:17] <Marzo> People can always adjust the combat difficulty in Exult
[01:48:28] <Marzo> But it is too easy even in the hardest level, though
[01:48:34] <wizardrydragon> True, but the avatar just tanks period after FoV
[01:48:38] <wizardrydragon> Speaking of,
[01:49:00] <Marzo> On a related note, I am thinking of nerfing the XP awards for the Keyring mod quests
[01:49:16] <wizardrydragon> I am also going to implement it so that when you travel between worlds, your stats get nerfed (since thats supposedly what happens when you travel between worlds :P )
[01:49:29] <Marzo> Right now, you can get a total of 1500 for doing the whole Keyring quest, plus another 1500 for the Shrine/Codex quest
[01:49:43] <wizardrydragon> That is a bit much.
[01:49:48] <Marzo> Nerfed by how much, do you think?
[01:49:57] <wizardrydragon> That's what Im playing around with.
[01:50:00] <Marzo> Which is why I am thinking of toning it down :-)
[01:50:25] <Marzo> I was thinking about halving the XP awards
[01:50:43] <wizardrydragon> Keep in mind at the end of the quest Laurianna is (plannedly) jhoinable, and thats definetely a huge reward in and of itself, if her magic ever gets implemented :)
[01:50:48] <Marzo> (and I didn't even include the exp you get for killing the enemies)
[01:50:53] <wizardrydragon> Seeing as shes supposed to be all powerful or something like that :P
[01:51:41] <Marzo> Well, she starts with int/mana 30 and combat 4 :-)
[01:51:56] <wizardrydragon> Hehe
[01:52:06] <Marzo> It is true that she will be the only NPC other than LB that can cast Mass Resurrection :-)
[01:52:08] <wizardrydragon> Hmm that brings up another issue
[01:52:17] <Marzo> Oh, and Dex 25
[01:52:20] <wizardrydragon> She will need a spellcasting item.
[01:52:24] <wizardrydragon> If you don't have one already.
[01:52:31] <Marzo> She has a spellbook
[01:52:46] <wizardrydragon> Hmm
[01:52:46] <Marzo> Like Mariah and Jaana
[01:52:59] <Marzo> I was thinking of making a 'Druid's Staff' for Jaana
[01:53:10] <wizardrydragon> I was considering having her use the aforementioned ritualistic magic
[01:53:20] <wizardrydragon> (Jaana) that would be quite appropriate.
[01:53:26] <Marzo> It would severely limit her combat usefulness, though
[01:53:33] <Marzo> (the ritual magic)
[01:53:40] <wizardrydragon> Not neccesaarily
[01:53:52] <wizardrydragon> I was considering have that magic be like Sorcery from Pagan
[01:54:03] <Marzo> That is what I was just writing :-)
[01:54:16] <wizardrydragon> YHou have to go through the ritual to charge a focus with the spell, but then it works until you run out of charges
[01:54:24] <Marzo> It would force the player to prepare lots of spells beforehand
[01:54:25] <wizardrydragon> It would also explain how mages craft wands and such :)
[01:54:57] <Marzo> Which reminds me of the 'Detect Charges' and 'Recharge Magic' spells I coded
[01:55:01] <wizardrydragon> Not the player (unless they choose that instead of "normal" magic, but Laurianna, to a degree)
[01:55:15] <wizardrydragon> Hmm I misplaced my closing parenthesis :)
[01:56:26] <wizardrydragon> But it would help balance the fact that she would have access to more powerful spells
[01:57:05] <wizardrydragon> I am
[01:57:12] <Marzo> Another thing I have thought: the AI system (as well as the healing services) can use the new scripted schedules when they are working
[01:57:13] <wizardrydragon> blarg damn enter key
[01:58:00] <wizardrydragon> I am considering have the normal spell system two-tiered: first yhou have to find a scroll and transcribe it or buy a spell, then you have to prepare the required reagents ahead of time.
[01:58:01] <Marzo> I was thinking of having (potentially annoying) 'mini-cutscenes' of the healer healing the hurt NPCs
[01:58:35] <wizardrydragon> (cutscenes) If you don't want to have such a cutscene yourself, you'll refrain :)
[01:58:58] <Marzo> :-)
[01:59:00] <wizardrydragon> I definetely want to have magic scrolls. Damn gump business :P
[01:59:06] <Marzo> lol
[01:59:30] <Marzo> Yeah, the gump manager/builder is definitelly something useful which I should work on
[01:59:52] <wizardrydragon> Remember we're also adding player classes (in a way) - scrolls would allow a magic-lacking player the ability to cast spells
[02:00:49] <Marzo> We would have to be careful about Laurianna's foci, though
[02:01:08] <wizardrydragon> Im still figuring out how to balance Katrina and player shepherds, though.
[02:01:21] <Marzo> And if we go with the Necromancy-style spell 'icons' for Britannian magic, them too
[02:01:37] <wizardrydragon> No; I definetely want to keep Britannian magic to spellbooks.
[02:01:40] <Marzo> Maybe having them start with higher stats/level and have regeneration?
[02:01:52] <wizardrydragon> Regeneration is something I am seriously considering.
[02:02:02] <Marzo> Hm.
[02:02:04] <wizardrydragon> Stats shouldnt really be a huge focus though; keep FoV in mind.
[02:02:28] <Marzo> I was thinking more about Katrina than the Avatat
[02:02:31] <Marzo> *Avatar
[02:02:36] <wizardrydragon> True
[02:02:47] <Marzo> Perhaps the avatar should be 'avatar' class like U5?
[02:02:57] <wizardrydragon> That could work for just Katrina, the problem is I want it to be consistent across the two
[02:03:12] <wizardrydragon> That's kind of a cop-out in my opinion Marzo :)
[02:03:25] <Marzo> :-)
[02:03:53] <wizardrydragon> Mages - perhaps they could be allowed to practice more than one different spell system as their advantage.
[02:03:54] <Marzo> But seriously -- even a 'fighter' avatar should be able to use magic
[02:04:35] <wizardrydragon> Well "lacking" wasn't the best wording preciously; I mean that relatively speaking, a fighter avatar is poor in magic where a mage avatar is excellent with it
[02:04:39] <Marzo> Hm. About thinkers: maybe have thinkers also able to craft/recharge wands?
[02:04:53] <wizardrydragon> Tinkers you mean
[02:05:09] <Marzo> Yeah, too many 'h's in that sentence :-)
[02:05:21] <wizardrydragon> Tinkers do have rudimentary magic; I definetely agree that their magic would be related to item creation and enchantment
[02:06:40] <Marzo> Re: mages and different spell systems: that would mean Mariah should also be able to use ritual magic
[02:07:09] <Marzo> And what of druids? They are also one of the main spellcasting classes
[02:07:11] <wizardrydragon> It would make sense, though. it would be a pain programming wise, but in terms of gameplay, it would make sense, I think.
[02:07:17] <wizardrydragon> Im not sure about druids.
[02:07:31] <Marzo> Maybe a celtic-flavored druidic magic system?
[02:07:39] <wizardrydragon> Im toying with the idea of having Rangers and Druids have a unique magic system.
[02:07:53] <wizardrydragon> (See what I meant when i said reinventing the wheel?)
[02:08:16] <Marzo> If you like, there is an interesting approach in one GURPS book
[02:08:23] <Marzo> GURPS Celtic Myth, to be precise
[02:08:33] <Marzo> A tree-based magic system
[02:09:04] <Marzo> (GURPS it is a pen&paper RPG, FYI)
[02:09:13] <wizardrydragon> I actually rather like the falvour of Guild Wars' system when it comes to nature magic, based on spirits as celtic myth was, but I would change the implementation
[02:09:17] <Marzo> Could be adapted for druids
[02:09:34] <Marzo> What was Guild Wars' system like?
[02:09:43] <wizardrydragon> Also we have to keep in mind Ultima flavour; we can't contradict the canon with anything new, and must keep in mind that Ultima druids are followers of Justice.
[02:09:50] <Marzo> True
[02:10:08] <wizardrydragon> Some ideas as catalyhsts:
[02:10:12] <Marzo> Maybe have some spells like 'Detect Falsehood'?
[02:10:28] <wizardrydragon> In ultima 4, Jaana is found in a circle of mages, suggesting ritualistic magic
[02:10:32] <Marzo> It would make conversations a pain, though
[02:10:36] <wizardrydragon> *chanting mages
[02:10:58] <wizardrydragon> well druids (I have a tendancy to call anhy spellcaster a mage :P )
[02:11:00] <Marzo> But she doesn't need the circle of mages for the rest of the game, though :-)
[02:11:24] <wizardrydragon> I know, but she just uses normal magic for the rest of the game :)
[02:11:48] * Marzo has just realized that Jaana is the only druid in U7
[02:12:26] <wizardrydragon> Druids seem to be in Ultima a protective force, and that's the way we should approach the magic for druids I think: spells focussing on protecting companions, healing them, and then ferreting out falsehood.
[02:12:42] <Marzo> Agreed
[02:13:01] <Marzo> Which is why Jaana is a healer in U7, I think
[02:13:07] <wizardrydragon> I agree.
[02:13:30] <wizardrydragon> It represents the split of Justice - love and truth :)
[02:13:44] <Marzo> Dispelling of illusions should also be in
[02:14:00] <wizardrydragon> Agreed - but were there any illusions in U7?
[02:14:04] <Marzo> And (magical) detection of traps
[02:14:13] <Marzo> Not that I recall
[02:14:17] <wizardrydragon> Reveal is one that instantly comes to mind.
[02:14:19] <Marzo> Maybe in the Test of Truth
[02:14:32] <wizardrydragon> Those weren't illusions per se.
[02:14:42] <wizardrydragon> Rather supposedly invisible obstacles.
[02:14:59] <Marzo> Also, some things that might be interesting -- Julia could have a dialog option to search an area for traps and disarm them
[02:15:17] <wizardrydragon> Im thinking that would perhaps be more Shamino / rangers' thing
[02:15:36] <Marzo> I was thinking about Shamino being able to tell about nearby monsters
[02:15:53] <wizardrydragon> Shamino perhaps to detect them (being a tracker as a ranger) and then perhaps Julia to be able to disarm them (mechanical knowledge)
[02:16:19] <Marzo> True; although it would force the player to have both in the party to make use of the ability
[02:16:40] <Marzo> (or to use magic to do one part and the NPC to do the other)
[02:16:40] <wizardrydragon> Well perhaps each could have both, but the other skill they would be less proficient in.
[02:17:10] <Marzo> And the mechanical knowledge could conceivably help Julia find the traps too
[02:17:21] <wizardrydragon> To a degree.
[02:17:33] <wizardrydragon> In either event we're getting a little ahead of ourselves :)
[02:17:37] <Marzo> Also, maybe we could give Shamino a 'hunt' skill
[02:17:39] <Marzo> True
[02:17:59] <Marzo> Hard not to, though :-)
[02:18:12] <wizardrydragon> Im still considering the spellcasting changes; so perhaps we should focus on that - I have a pretty good handle on how I'm going to work classes
[02:18:59] <wizardrydragon> (By the way, you mentioned the neccesity of having both - that is a goal in a way, I want the classes to be interdependant and work together towards goals, to a degree)
[02:19:00] <Marzo> In any case, the 'hard' part is mostly done -- all spells have been reimplemented and there is a spellcasting framework working
[02:19:12] <Marzo> Interesting
[02:19:24] <wizardrydragon> How hard would it be to implement some of the SI spells in BG?
[02:19:30] <wizardrydragon> Namely Transcribe and Translate.
[02:19:31] <Marzo> Not very difficult
[02:19:41] <Marzo> Translate I have already implemented
[02:19:47] <wizardrydragon> Good :)
[02:20:08] <Marzo> Transcribe would be trickier, as it relies in an intrinsic that adds spells to the spellbook
[02:20:11] <wizardrydragon> I think the transcribe/mix pair is how I will handle normal magic.
[02:20:31] <wizardrydragon> Well remember, the idea was to have the spellbook be a "container" that can contain X spells of X circles.
[02:20:42] <Marzo> We could implement a workaround until the Gump manager/builder is up and running
[02:20:45] <wizardrydragon> (That way we could add new spells)
[02:20:51] <Marzo> I remember
[02:21:03] <wizardrydragon> (workarounds) I would like that, as Im not holding my breath waiting for the gump builder :)
[02:21:19] <Marzo> In any case: I have backported the usecode container into BG
[02:21:35] <wizardrydragon> A workaround for spell scrolls would be nice - perhaps they could be backported from SI.
[02:21:50] <Marzo> You just have to create an 'usecode container' item in BG and it will go into the hidden spot
[02:22:20] <wizardrydragon> (Spell scrolls could also allow players to cast spells of other spell systems, which is the big appeal for me when we're juggling several magic systems)
[02:22:26] <Marzo> I was thinking of a dialog-based workaround for the scrolls
[02:22:46] <Marzo> The avatar describes what the scroll does, and asks if he/she should cast it
[02:22:57] <wizardrydragon> Urg, it has to be combat-capable, or the majority of spells arent going to be feasible in scrolls.
[02:23:12] <Marzo> They aren't in SI, are they?
[02:23:30] <wizardrydragon> Double click scroll goes into target mode.
[02:23:38] <wizardrydragon> Then select target and voila!
[02:23:54] <wizardrydragon> The one concern for me is how to display what spell is on the scroll.
[02:23:56] <Marzo> Yes, but what if the player wants to know what the scroll does?
[02:24:02] <Marzo> Precisely
[02:24:05] <wizardrydragon> I can easily code the actual spell handler.
[02:24:17] <Marzo> That would be trivially easy
[02:24:21] <wizardrydragon> It would be a huge help (and useful in other places too) to be able to display shapes on GUMPs.
[02:24:46] <wizardrydragon> *book/scroll GUMPs
[02:24:47] <Marzo> Gump manager/builder
[02:24:54] * wizardrydragon stabs Marzo.
[02:25:15] <Marzo> For normal books and scrolls, it would be easy; I am postponing it, but a couple of new intrinsics would do the job
[02:25:25] <Marzo> Spell scrolls would be another matter, though
[02:25:32] <wizardrydragon> How so.
[02:25:48] <wizardrydragon> Just display the normal scroll graphic with a graphic representing the spell
[02:26:03] <Marzo> Well, a 'book_mode_ex' intrinsic which allows you to select the gump to use and the font to draw the text with
[02:26:25] <wizardrydragon> Wouldn't be ideal, a whole new shape for the gump would be ideal, but it would do the job.
[02:26:51] <Marzo> The problem is that double-clicking the scroll should fire the spell
[02:26:55] <wizardrydragon> True
[02:27:09] <Marzo> *That* is what would require the Gump manager/builder
[02:27:20] <wizardrydragon> Perhaps double clicking it while in gump mode could trigger it
[02:27:31] <wizardrydragon> That is, when its displaying the spell
[02:27:54] <wizardrydragon> That's how SI handles it
[02:28:18] <Marzo> Gump manager/builder
[02:28:27] <Marzo> :-)
[02:28:31] <wizardrydragon> I dont even think youd need that
[02:29:01] <wizardrydragon> Set a variable when you go into gump mode, then when checking the double click, see if the var is set and if it is fire the spell
[02:29:52] <Marzo> You mean double-clicking the scroll as opposed to the gump?
[02:30:07] <wizardrydragon> Yes
[02:30:15] <Marzo> It *could* work
[02:30:19] <wizardrydragon> (Im thinking workarounds here, not ideal situations, obviously :P )
[02:30:45] <Marzo> It would still require being able to show a graphic gump, though
[02:30:56] <wizardrydragon> Hmm
[02:31:01] <Marzo> Hm
[02:31:10] <wizardrydragon> Not by neccesityh but rather for aesthetics :)
[02:31:40] <wizardrydragon> Nothings stopping us from just displayhign a scroll with the text with the spell name, except good taste :)
[02:31:45] <Marzo> What about a 'graphic_gump' intrinsic with 4 parameters:
[02:31:57] <Marzo> (1) The base gump shape;
[02:32:06] <Marzo> (2) The graphic to display;
[02:32:29] <Marzo> (3) The relative position of the graphic relative to the base shape;
[02:32:46] <wizardrydragon> Hmm perhaps display_graphic_gump(gump_shape, graphic, graphic_x, graphic_y)
[02:32:49] <Marzo> (4) The usecode function # to call when the graphic is double-clicked
[02:32:58] <wizardrydragon> Ah I forgot 4 :)
[02:33:21] <Marzo> I was thinking of parameter 3 as a 2-component array
[02:33:23] <wizardrydragon> Should be able to have 4 null in case they don't want anything special to happen though
[02:33:29] <Marzo> Indeed
[02:33:37] <Marzo> Maybe -1 instead of 0
[02:33:45] <wizardrydragon> For horribly overdoing a map, for example :)
[02:33:57] <Marzo> lol
[02:34:17] <Marzo> You could, instead, pass -1 to the second parameter instead
[02:34:28] <wizardrydragon> (Or, as comes to mind now, paintings - have the base be a frame, and then use a conditional check to determine the graphic to show in the frame for the picture)
[02:34:38] <Marzo> And add a 5th 'modal' parameter
[02:34:54] <wizardrydragon> That sounds good
[02:35:00] <wizardrydragon> Modal howso though
[02:35:18] <Marzo> Think about a map; you can do nothing else while a map is showing
[02:35:30] <Marzo> Hm.
[02:35:38] <wizardrydragon> Yeah I got that, Im just thinking of how to implement it parameter wise
[02:35:40] <Marzo> We need support for the check mark too
[02:35:55] <wizardrydragon> hmm
[02:36:07] <Marzo> Just add a fifth parameter accepting a true or false value :-)
[02:36:11] <wizardrydragon> All GUMPs should have it.
[02:36:25] <Marzo> They should, but we must tell Exult where it is :-)
[02:36:31] <wizardrydragon> True
[02:36:43] <Marzo> Hm
[02:36:47] <wizardrydragon> The fifth would be [x, y] for the loc then
[02:36:58] <Marzo> For maps at least, I think I am going to implement a different intrinsic
[02:37:05] <wizardrydragon> Indeed
[02:37:08] <Marzo> 'show_map' or something like it
[02:37:14] <wizardrydragon> The picture idea would be neat though :)
[02:37:24] <Marzo> They come from 'sprites.vga' instead of 'gumps.vga'
[02:37:31] <wizardrydragon> Yeah
[02:37:42] <wizardrydragon> And we don't need another parameter at this point :)
[02:38:08] <Marzo> But we would still need the check mark's location for the graphical gump
[02:38:16] <wizardrydragon> [22:36] wizardrydragon: The fifth would be [x, y] for the loc then
[02:38:26] <wizardrydragon> by loc I meant the checkmark :)
[02:38:31] <Marzo> We'd still need a 'modal' parameter
[02:38:42] <Marzo> Or might still need it, in any case
[02:39:05] <wizardrydragon> I dont think we would need it but it would simplify it
[02:39:06] <Marzo> Think about books and signs
[02:39:18] <Marzo> Or tombstones
[02:39:28] <wizardrydragon> Otherwise we'd have to do some complicated hacks for pausing the game everytime we call the gump
[02:39:38] <wizardrydragon> So it would be best to encapsulate it in the gump code itself
[02:39:49] <Marzo> Although books and scrolls would be another intrinsic
[02:40:04] <Marzo> And tombstones and signs...
[02:40:07] <Marzo> Hm
[02:40:08] <wizardrydragon> We should make three intrinsics I think
[02:40:16] <Marzo> Maybe we don't need the modal parameter after all :-)
[02:40:38] <Marzo> 'book_mode_ex', 'graphical_gump' and 'show_map'
[02:41:04] <Marzo> Right?
[02:41:22] * Marzo is glad to have recently increased limit of intrinsics to 1024
[02:42:01] <Marzo> The 'book_mode_ex' intrinsic is very easy to do
[02:42:02] <wizardrydragon> ui_book_mode_ex(gump, shape, [x,y], [check_x, check,_y], font)
[02:42:02] <wizardrydragon> ui_graphical_gump(gump, shape, [x, y], [check_x, check_y])
[02:42:02] <wizardrydragon> ui_show_map_ex(gump, sprite, [x, y], [check_x, xheck_y])
[02:42:08] <Marzo> The 'show_map' too
[02:42:23] <Marzo> The 'graphical_gump' will be trickier
[02:42:41] * wizardrydragon points up. He's not thyping for his own entertainment yknow :)
[02:42:49] <Marzo> I saw
[02:42:59] <Marzo> I am thinking Exult-wise :-)
[02:43:01] <wizardrydragon> :)
[02:43:07] <wizardrydragon> Im thinking UCC wise.
[02:43:14] <wizardrydragon> Everything is UCC to me :)
[02:43:19] <Marzo> And I don't think that 'book_mode_ex' will need the checkmark
[02:43:28] <wizardrydragon> Hmm
[02:43:31] <wizardrydragon> Perhaps not.
[02:43:39] <Marzo> None of the books/scrolls/tombstones/signs have it
[02:43:48] <wizardrydragon> Indeed.
[02:44:04] <Marzo> It is only that freakish spellbook :-)
[02:44:19] <Marzo> UCC-wise it is going to be completelly trivial
[02:44:31] <wizardrydragon> It should be in its own function if we touch it, the spellbook that is.
[02:45:01] <Marzo> The spellbook will have to wait for the gump manager/builder
[02:45:07] <wizardrydragon> (Eventually I plan on this, so that the NPC spellcasting can be done through the gumps and not through dialog, at least less dependant on dialog, but that will be in the far, far future)
[02:45:19] <Marzo> True
[02:45:43] <wizardrydragon> Im thinking of it as thus: choose what spells they "prepare" in the gump, then tell them how to use them in dialoge
[02:45:45] <Marzo> The main reason I coded everything dialog-wise is that I know the gump manager/builder is a distant and far off dream :-)
[02:46:34] <wizardrydragon> So the nuts and bolts of the spells is all in the gump - the ai on the other hand is handled by dialoge, thats how it makes sense to me anyways
[02:47:05] <wizardrydragon> (Intrinsics) If you could code these a.s.a.p. so I can at least code workarounds that'd be much appreciated.
[02:47:24] <wizardrydragon> The book mode one namely, I less require the other ones
[02:47:40] <Marzo> The book_mode_ex is not going to be as trivial as I think; we would need to be able to specify the text areas for custom gumps
[02:47:51] <wizardrydragon> Hmm.
[02:47:57] <wizardrydragon> Do we need text areas?
[02:48:06] <wizardrydragon> I suppose someone would bitch :P
[02:48:14] <wizardrydragon> But we don't for spell scrolls anyways.
[02:48:18] <Marzo> If we don't use the custom gumps, we will
[02:48:29] <Marzo> *don't->do
[02:48:42] <wizardrydragon> (You could just bastardize an intrinsic like that for spell scrolls, it's all I want :) )
[02:48:48] <Marzo> If we stick to the ones in BG/SI, we won't
[02:49:04] <wizardrydragon> Im just stealing the graphics for scrolls from SI
[02:49:18] <wizardrydragon> Other than to add spell scroll graphics for new spells and such.
[02:49:20] <Marzo> The problem is the shape #
[02:49:31] <wizardrydragon> So perhaps
[02:49:38] <Marzo> The text areas are based on the gump's shape
[02:50:03] <wizardrydragon> UI_show_spellscroll(gump, spellshape, framenum, function#)
[02:50:16] <wizardrydragon> Since the location of the graphic doesn't change on the scroll X and Y are needless.
[02:50:21] <wizardrydragon> Same with the checkmark.
[02:50:25] <Marzo> That would be the graphical_gump :-)
[02:50:34] <wizardrydragon> (To cancel without casting)
[02:50:56] <Marzo> The problem would be that the checkmark's position is defined by the shape number
[02:50:57] <wizardrydragon> Do you think we'd need framenum for the gump as well? (I dont)
[02:51:13] <wizardrydragon> Marzo: we're using new shapes anyways - new to BG anyways.
[02:51:38] <Marzo> We do; see the magic scrolls in SI
[02:51:38] <Marzo> Oh, nevermind; got your meaning
[02:51:50] <Marzo> Precisely the problem
[02:52:12] <wizardrydragon> Well if we're writing a function from scratch, we can set it ourself, presumablhy?
[02:52:15] <Marzo> Since the shape is new, Exult would not know where to place the checkmark
[02:53:14] <Marzo> Which is why I was thinking of having the chackmark pos as a parameter
[02:53:27] <wizardrydragon> Hmm
[02:53:46] <wizardrydragon> But if we just bastardize the code a bit, and always use the same gump, we could hard code it
[02:54:09] <wizardrydragon> Just have ui_spell_scroll(spell_graphic, spell_funcnum) perhaps.
[02:54:29] <Marzo> That goes against the de-hardcoding bit :-)
[02:54:43] <wizardrydragon> Well this is a temporary workaround anyways, Marzo :P
[02:55:34] <Marzo> Which I would not want to add any more hard-coded data :-)
[02:55:49] <Marzo> It would be even more things to de-hard-code in the future :-)
[02:55:52] <wizardrydragon> Well it'd just be nuked when you get to adding the graphical_gump intrinsic anhyways
[02:56:05] <wizardrydragon> :)
[02:57:12] <Marzo> Lets see:
[02:57:22] <wizardrydragon> Or perhaps kept for back portability with previous TFL versions, but Im not terribly concerned about that.
[02:57:37] <Marzo> UI_book_mode_ex(gump, font, [x1, y1, w1, h1], [x2, y2, w2, h2])
[02:57:41] <wizardrydragon> It is pre-alpha anyways
[02:57:44] <wizardrydragon> :P
[02:58:12] <Marzo> UI_graphic_gump(gump, graphic, fun, [x, y], [check_x, check_y])
[02:58:14] <wizardrydragon> If anything in pre-alpha versions work without catastrophic system failure, we're doing well :)
[02:58:25] <Marzo> UI_show_map(sprite, show_pos)
[02:58:37] <Marzo> Take two:
[02:58:49] <Marzo> UI_graphic_gump(gump, graphic, frame, fun, [x, y], [check_x, check_y])
[02:58:55] <wizardrydragon> heh
[02:59:01] <wizardrydragon> Marzo, I had a thought
[02:59:06] <Marzo> UI_show_map(sprite, frame, show_pos)
[03:00:04] <wizardrydragon> When graphic_gump is implemented, spellscroll could just be a callback to it, which automatically supplies the spell scroll gump and the checkmark position.
[03:00:05] <Marzo> Shoot
[03:00:20] <Marzo> I had though that already
[03:00:34] <Marzo> I think it already is somewhat like that
[03:01:02] * wizardrydragon just wants a workaround for the meantime, because I want to have the Britannian spell system changes implemented for the alpha 0.1 release.
[03:01:21] <wizardrydragon> (note, implemented, not neccesarily working without bugs :) )
[03:03:30] <Marzo> For the workaroud: have it be dialog-based unless the player is in combat
[03:03:37] <wizardrydragon> Hmm
[03:03:38] <Marzo> You can check it with UI_in_combat
[03:03:50] <wizardrydragon> Could make a lookup table
[03:04:03] <wizardrydragon> If it's a combat scroll, then put in target mode if in combat
[03:04:11] <Marzo> If not in combat, present the targeting cursor at once
[03:04:14] <wizardrydragon> Other wise put in target mode if not in combat
[03:04:18] <Marzo> Better than a lookup table
[03:04:34] <Marzo> You can use the frame and the quality of the scroll
[03:04:45] <Marzo> Scrolls of the same circle with the same frame
[03:04:52] <Marzo> The quality is the spell into the circle
[03:05:20] <wizardrydragon> Well you'd have to do a lookup anyways
[03:05:36] <wizardrydragon> Thats just what you'd be looking up, silly
[03:05:44] <Marzo> You would then pass these two to 'getSpellFunction(var circle, var spell)'
[03:05:47] <wizardrydragon> (It makes it not one huge table, though)
[03:06:13] <Marzo> Also for 'isTargetedSpell(var circle, var spell)'
[03:06:31] <wizardrydragon> Indeed
[03:06:32] <wizardrydragon> Hmm
[03:06:36] <wizardrydragon> So do a check:
[03:06:43] <Marzo> Then cast with indirect calling
[03:06:54] <Marzo> Like this:
[03:06:56] <Marzo> var spell_function = getSpellFunction(circle, spell);
[03:06:56] <Marzo> event = DOUBLECLICK;
[03:06:56] <Marzo> if (isTargetedSpell(circle, spell))
[03:06:56] <Marzo> {
[03:06:56] <Marzo> if (!target)
[03:06:57] <Marzo> target = UI_click_on_item();
[03:06:59] <Marzo> npc->(*spell_function)(target);
[03:07:01] <Marzo> }
[03:07:03] <Marzo> else
[03:07:05] <Marzo> npc->(*spell_function)();
[03:07:28] <Marzo> You might want to add the following lines before the above lines:
[03:07:31] <Marzo> npc->begin_casting_mode();
[03:07:32] <Marzo> npc->halt_scheduled();
[03:07:43] <wizardrydragon> indeed
[03:07:57] <wizardrydragon> If I try that and it doesnt work I blame you entirely :)
[03:08:06] <Marzo> The spellcasting framework does it like this
[03:08:20] <wizardrydragon> By the way,
[03:08:34] <wizardrydragon> How much of your spellcasting code would multiple systems break? :)
[03:08:34] <Marzo> Check the 'src/spells/npc_spells.uc' file
[03:08:57] <Marzo> I don't think it would so much break as it would require extra handler functions
[03:09:05] <wizardrydragon> Thats good :)
[03:09:26] <Marzo> If the spells themselves (i.e., the motions and words spoken) are the same accross all systems, then not much at all
[03:09:39] <wizardrydragon> Hmm
[03:09:53] <wizardrydragon> Probably in most cases but not in all cases, I imagine.
[03:09:54] <Marzo> If the spells can be divided in 'circles', not much problem too
[03:10:07] <wizardrydragon> Hmm
[03:10:25] <wizardrydragon> Worse come to worse we can programatically enforce levels of some sort and just not show it in game
[03:10:39] <wizardrydragon> For the other systems I mean
[03:10:41] <Marzo> (by 'circles' I mean any amount of spells divided -- however unevenly -- in levels of spells)
[03:10:56] <wizardrydragon> Indeed
[03:11:40] <Marzo> The way the current system is set up, you could have one spell in level '0' ('linear'), no spells in levels 1-7 and 250 spells in level 8
[03:11:48] <Marzo> :-)
[03:11:48] <wizardrydragon> Lol
[03:11:53] <wizardrydragon> Indeed
[03:12:11] <Marzo> You would have to construct the appropriate lookup functions, like those in the aforementioned file
[03:12:16] <wizardrydragon> Perhaps we should distinguish a ninth circle for SI backporting
[03:12:32] <wizardrydragon> Since it has a ninth circle but no linear ones
[03:12:39] <Marzo> As far as usecode is concerned, that would be a dialog-only thing
[03:13:00] <Marzo> SI's 1st circle spells work like BG's linear spells, IIRC
[03:13:01] <wizardrydragon> Well we need not have them available
[03:13:18] <wizardrydragon> I was thinking of having a seperate circle for "NPC-only" spells
[03:13:27] <wizardrydragon> So they're all in one place.
[03:13:39] <Marzo> It is just a matter of having NPCs know or not the spells
[03:13:45] <wizardrydragon> (Mostly for bad guys, since the "evil" magic in TFL is unavailable to the playher)
[03:13:49] <Marzo> I still have to set up that part for the existing NPCs
[03:14:24] <Marzo> (for now, the default is everyone knowing all spells)
[03:14:36] <Marzo> (makes for easier testing :-p)
[03:14:36] <wizardrydragon> Umm yeah thats no good lol.
[03:14:56] <wizardrydragon> One Lord British is enough thank you :)
[03:14:56] <Marzo> The spells are limited by the NPC's level, though
[03:15:13] <Marzo> But it is rather easy to fix this
[03:15:34] <wizardrydragon> I think a good idea as well is to have spell-like effects governed by spells as well.
[03:15:40] <Marzo> Oh, let me correct this: only LB and Laurianna know Mass Resurrect
[03:15:52] <wizardrydragon> And the Avatar eventually :)
[03:16:06] <wizardrydragon> (And Chahiero most likely, but he doesn't offer healing services :) )
[03:16:13] <Marzo> Well, the avatar still uses the standard spellbook -- so he will never know it :-)
[03:16:39] <wizardrydragon> In fact, one dialoge thing Im going to add is have it so the player can ask after spells and reagents and have Chahiero make a snippy remark that he's not a scroll rack :)
[03:16:54] <Marzo> lol
[03:17:51] <Marzo> The way I set it up, the 'unknown' spell list can be edited in 'src/spells/spell_items.uc'
[03:18:08] <Marzo> Which reminds me that I will need a spellbook or something for LB
[03:18:17] <Marzo> (if he is to join the party, that is)
[03:18:32] <Marzo> (which I am not sure I will allow)
[03:18:43] <wizardrydragon> Woahwoahwaoh LB is SO not joining the party.
[03:19:02] <Marzo> It would be a fun easter egg, though
[03:19:49] <wizardrydragon> We already have Laurianna who is an uber mage, Chahiero (who joins temporatily at several story points) who is an extraplanaer archmage, and the uber FoV-avatar, enough powergaming already :P
[03:20:02] <Marzo> Maybe requiring the player to go through all sorts of contortions and jump thgough all kinds of hoops only to have LB join... and completelly prevent the game from being finished :-)
[03:20:14] <wizardrydragon> Lol
[03:20:30] <wizardrydragon> Or maybe have it so if LB joins and you go to SI or TFL Britannia goes to hell :)
[03:20:33] <Marzo> But you are probably right
[03:20:41] <Marzo> lol
[03:20:44] <Marzo> That is a good one
[03:20:59] <wizardrydragon> Guardian walks in, looks around, goes, where the hell is everyone?
[03:21:05] <Marzo> (quite in keeping with Shadow of Light dragon's fan fiction, too)
[03:21:53] <wizardrydragon> Cut to guardian and avatar and chaherio and crew camping in a field with a ton of demon bodies :P
[03:22:21] <Marzo> Talking about camping: maybe improve the bedroll thing
[03:22:32] <Marzo> A party of eight and only *one* bedroll?
[03:22:36] <wizardrydragon> Indeed.
[03:22:39] <wizardrydragon> Its on the todo list.
[03:22:42] <wizardrydragon> Near the bottom :)
[03:22:46] <Marzo> Thou hast lost an eighth, avatar!
[03:22:51] <Marzo> :-)
[03:23:04] <wizardrydragon> Which eighth? Lol
[03:23:09] <Marzo> Compassion
[03:23:13] <wizardrydragon> I can think of many :)
[03:23:44] <Marzo> Avatar: "No, thou shalt not sleep tonight either, Iolo. Just watch while *I* do!"
[03:24:12] <wizardrydragon> Lol
[03:24:36] <wizardrydragon> That might not be the case with party members of the other gender but lets not go there :)
[03:24:46] <Marzo> lol
[03:25:15] <Marzo> Will there be many NPC mages in TFL?
[03:25:44] <wizardrydragon> Yes.
[03:25:50] <wizardrydragon> And no
[03:25:53] <wizardrydragon> Depends on the region
[03:25:57] <wizardrydragon> Dawn is magic rich
[03:26:03] <wizardrydragon> Virtues Hold somewhat so
[03:26:10] <Marzo> I am thinking about a way to improve the initialization of the unknown spell list of mages
[03:26:24] <wizardrydragon> in New Baratia praticing magic is punishable by death, so not so much there :)
[03:26:48] <Marzo> Right now, it initializes only for joinable NPCs, but the other mages could probably use it as well
[03:27:00] <Marzo> Well, and for LB too
[03:27:42] <wizardrydragon> Hmm
[03:27:44] <Marzo> And it would be convenient to have a basic list of spells which no Britannian mage knows
[03:27:55] <wizardrydragon> I wonder how much more overhead that would cause though
[03:27:56] <Marzo> And the same for SI and TFL
[03:28:03] <Marzo> Not much, I guess
[03:28:07] <wizardrydragon> Perhaps have "spell profiles" in the same vein as equipment profiles?
[03:28:27] <wizardrydragon> Reverse the order of those two sentences :)
[03:28:29] <Marzo> Or maybe use the usecode container
[03:28:46] <Marzo> Yes, it could work
[03:28:48] <wizardrydragon> I think spell profiles would be more efficient
[03:29:02] <Marzo> What do you mean?
[03:29:32] <wizardrydragon> If you used usecode containers, yhoud need to set it on each NPC, if hyou use a profile you can use a profile across swaths of NPCs
[03:29:53] <Marzo> I am thinking more about NPC mages such as Rudyom, Nystul and the Moonshadians rather than generic NPC mages
[03:30:21] <wizardrydragon> True
[03:30:32] <wizardrydragon> I still think spell profiles would be a better approach
[03:30:44] <wizardrydragon> Special NPCs are exceptions rather than the rule.
[03:30:44] <Marzo> The generic mages could use something like the current system
[03:31:57] <Marzo> The basic Britannian/SI/TFL list, plus a few additions/deletions for liches and such
[03:32:34] <Marzo> And maybe having a spells *known* list would work better than a spells *unknown* list
[03:32:34] <wizardrydragon> Should check for what realm you're in
[03:32:51] <wizardrydragon> Yes! Known would be shorter than unknown in all likelihood
[03:32:57] <Marzo> Precisely why it should probably be handled in usecode, as it is right now
[03:33:06] <Marzo> At least initially
[03:34:00] <wizardrydragon> Well profiles I meant in usecode
[03:34:14] <Marzo> Ah, well
[03:34:22] <wizardrydragon> Have a few preset lists of spells (probably jsut arrays, even?)
[03:34:25] <Marzo> Then I should just switch to known spell list
[03:34:32] <Marzo> It is arrays
[03:34:38] <Marzo> Arrays of strings
[03:34:49] <wizardrydragon> for example default_britannian_list[...] default_si_list[...] default_tfl_list[...]
[03:34:54] <Marzo> Yes
[03:34:58] <wizardrydragon> then just add to that list as neccesary
[03:35:12] <Marzo> Current;y, I subtract the spells in the unknown list before displaying the strings
[03:35:22] <wizardrydragon> for example Chahiero = default_tfl_list[...] + (other spells)
[03:35:27] <Marzo> But it would be just as easy to intersect the lists instead
[03:35:30] <Marzo> Yes
[03:36:19] <Marzo> And since I already have written an 'intersectLists' function, it will be a matter of replacing text here and there
[03:36:54] <wizardrydragon> You see what I mean, though
[03:37:31] <Marzo> It is this thing called 'Yes' I have been saying :-)
[03:37:50] <wizardrydragon> Ah so thats what the affirmatives were for :)
[03:37:55] <Marzo> Yes :-)
[03:38:02] <wizardrydragon> It makes sense to me, though.
[03:38:21] <wizardrydragon> That way all the basic cases are already handled, and it's just a matter of catching exceptions.
[03:38:45] <Marzo> The way it is currently set up, it will be rather easy
[03:39:13] <Marzo> I can't honestly claim I saw that it would be needed for this, but the system can handle it with rather mild changes
[03:39:13] <wizardrydragon> :)
[03:39:34] <wizardrydragon> Itd solve the whole spell weapon hack, at least
[03:39:44] <Marzo> Not completelly
[03:39:52] <wizardrydragon> And force NPCs to actuallyh use Mana
[03:39:55] <wizardrydragon> :)
[03:40:07] <Marzo> I was thinking about having them carry wands
[03:40:17] <wizardrydragon> That'd still be better
[03:40:29] <Marzo> No self-respecting mage that can afford a wand would go without one into battle
[03:40:34] <Marzo> IMHO, of course
[03:40:35] <wizardrydragon> (And very feasible flavour wise as a hack too when we have the ritualst system)
[03:40:57] <Marzo> True
[03:41:27] <Marzo> The attack spells could be weapon foci
[03:41:34] <Marzo> (in the ritual system)
[03:41:46] <wizardrydragon> Hmm
[03:41:55] <wizardrydragon> Im not sure whether I want to do that
[03:42:09] <wizardrydragon> (It could hack up tinker enchanting weapons)
[03:42:11] <Marzo> You want the player to select the spell to cast?
[03:42:20] <Marzo> What do you mean?
[03:43:00] <Marzo> For completness, I think that Laurianna, LB and Mariah should be able to use both, the standard Britannian magic and the Britannian ritual magic system
[03:43:13] <wizardrydragon> Im trying not to have overlap in the spell system, so as not to be redundant - it's inevitable, but I want to minimize it.
[03:43:25] <Marzo> (although for LB, it would be a matter of principle more than anything...)
[03:43:36] <wizardrydragon> Not entirely
[03:43:53] <wizardrydragon> Mostly, but not entirely :)
[03:44:40] <Marzo> You haven't answered my previous question
[03:45:03] <Marzo> [00:41] Marzo: The attack spells could be weapon foci
[03:45:03] <Marzo> [00:41] Marzo: (in the ritual system)
[03:45:03] <Marzo> [00:41] wizardrydragon: Hmm
[03:45:03] <Marzo> [00:42] wizardrydragon: Im not sure whether I want to do that
[03:45:03] <Marzo> [00:42] wizardrydragon: (It could hack up tinker enchanting weapons)
[03:45:04] <Marzo> [00:42] Marzo: You want the player to select the spell to cast?
[03:45:06] <Marzo> [00:42] Marzo: What do you mean?
[03:45:26] <wizardrydragon> I thought I had?
[03:45:31] <wizardrydragon> [23:43] wizardrydragon: Im trying not to have overlap in the spell system, so as not to be redundant - it's inevitable, but I want to minimize it.
[03:45:52] <Marzo> You mean that you don't plan to have attack spells in the ritual magic system?
[03:46:06] <wizardrydragon> Hmm?
[03:46:17] <wizardrydragon> I took that to mean you wanted weapons to be the foci for attack spells
[03:46:26] <Marzo> No, the other way
[03:46:37] <wizardrydragon> Which would obviously overlap with Tinkers enchanting weapons
[03:46:37] <Marzo> The foci of attack spells be themselves weapons
[03:46:55] <Marzo> Not weapons as in 'sword', but as U7 weapons
[03:47:24] <Marzo> As in, you can equip the foci in your hand and attack with it, thus casting the spell
[03:48:04] <wizardrydragon> Ah
[03:48:06] <wizardrydragon> That makes sense
[03:48:33] <Marzo> Although depending on the capabilities of scripted schedules, it might be unneccessary
[03:49:05] <wizardrydragon> Hmm
[03:49:26] * Marzo is thinking of having 'spellcaster' combat-like schedules
[03:50:53] <Marzo> It would certainly help in making the AI system
[03:51:26] <Marzo> Well, the brainstorming has been fun but I think I am going to sleep
[03:51:39] <wizardrydragon> Remember:
[03:51:48] <wizardrydragon> To return to the awaking world seek the pillar of flame!
[03:51:48] <wizardrydragon> :)
[03:51:57] <wizardrydragon> *waking, although I suppose that works too
[03:52:02] <Marzo> lol
[03:52:05] <Marzo> Good night
[03:52:12] <Marzo> exultbot: bye
[03:52:12] <exultbot> goodbye!
[03:52:26] <-- Marzo has left IRC ("Marzo vanishes suddenly.")
[06:04:51] <-- wizardrydragon has left IRC (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
[15:49:35] --> wizardrydragon has joined #tfl
[15:49:39] --- ChanServ gives channel operator status to wizardrydragon
[18:12:23] <-- wizardrydragon has left IRC (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
[21:55:27] --> Crysta has joined #TFL
[22:13:13] --> Marzo has joined #tfl
[22:13:13] --- ChanServ gives channel operator status to Marzo
[22:13:27] <Marzo> Hi
[22:13:32] <Crysta> hiya
[22:38:56] * servus considers linking something to Crysta so she can rip it up... :p
[22:39:06] <Crysta> lol
[23:44:49] --> wizardrydragon has joined #tfl
[23:44:55] --- ChanServ gives channel operator status to wizardrydragon
[23:45:18] <wizardrydragon> moo
[23:45:27] <Crysta> hi
[23:53:36] <Crysta> so whats up with everyone
[23:54:16] * servus can come up with some "creepy menacing moo pics".
[23:56:10] <wizardrydragon> Were being quiet. it's expected behaviour for the TFL chat.
[23:56:36] <Crysta> bleh