Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[thatkid]

Let's say an adventurer acquires a slab or other book that teaches a secret, and carries it with them to a fort where they are then retired. The fort is then resumed, and the slab placed in the library.

Let's also assume that this library is diligently cleared of any books other than the slab via a careful system consisting of haulers and magma.

Wouldn't anyone who visited the library and read the book acquire the secret and then be capable of the interactions? Or does it just not work that way?

[Vattic]

I've seen people turn large portions of their fort necromancer using the method described above.

[TheDorf]

I've seen people turn large portions of their fort necromancer using the method described above.

Do they become hostile?

[Vattic]

Apparently not. They only raise the dead when in combat situations and the undead turn on their masters.

I should have linked the Reddit post. In the example fort they trade for a copy of text they stole and retired into dwarven hands. It is quite popular even with other books in circulation.

[Rumrusher]

kinda wonder if it's possible to slap the tame token on the raise dead interaction for necromancers so that you can train any captured undead for war/hunting?

[Teneb]

kinda wonder if it's possible to slap the tame token on the raise dead interaction for necromancers so that you can train any captured undead for war/hunting?

I'm pretty sure OPPOSED_TO_LIFE overrides everything.

[Dirst]

kinda wonder if it's possible to slap the tame token on the raise dead interaction for necromancers so that you can train any captured undead for war/hunting?

I'm pretty sure OPPOSED_TO_LIFE overrides everything.

You're right, but I had this funny mental image of the trainer feeding braaaaaaaaaains to a caged zombie.

[Roxfall]

Inspired by thriggle's discoveries here, I created the following secret:

Code: [Select]

[INTERACTION:SECRET_FIRE]
[I_SOURCE:SECRET]
[IS_NAME:the secrets of fire]
[IS_SPHERE:FIRE]
[IS_SECRET_GOAL:IMMORTALITY]
[IS_SECRET:SUPERNATURAL_LEARNING_POSSIBLE]
[IS_SECRET:MUNDANE_RESEARCH_POSSIBLE]
[IS_SECRET:MUNDANE_TEACHING_POSSIBLE]
[IS_SECRET:MUNDANE_RECORDING_POSSIBLE:objects/text/book_instruction.txt:objects/text/secret_fire.txt]
[I_TARGET:A:CREATURE]
[IT_LOCATION:CONTEXT_CREATURE]
[IT_REQUIRES:CAN_LEARN]
[IT_REQUIRES:CAN_SPEAK]
[I_EFFECT:ADD_SYNDROME]
[IE_TARGET:A]
[IE_IMMEDIATE]
[IE_ARENA_NAME:fire mage]
[SYNDROME]
[CE_DISPLAY_NAME:NAME:fire mage:fire mages:fire magic:START:0]
[CE_CAN_DO_INTERACTION:START:0]
[CDI:ADV_NAME:Hurl fireball]
[CDI:INTERACTION:MATERIAL_EMISSION]
[CDI:USAGE_HINT:ATTACK]
[CDI:BP_REQUIRED:BY_CATEGORY:HAND]
[CDI:FLOW:FIREBALL]
[CDI:TARGET:C:LINE_OF_SIGHT]
[CDI:TARGET_RANGE:C:15]
[CDI:MAX_TARGET_NUMBER:C:1]
[CDI:WAIT_PERIOD:30]
[CE_CAN_DO_INTERACTION:START:0]
[CDI:ADV_NAME:Spray jet of fire]
[CDI:INTERACTION:MATERIAL_EMISSION]
[CDI:USAGE_HINT:ATTACK]
[CDI:BP_REQUIRED:BY_CATEGORY:HAND]
[CDI:FLOW:FIREJET]
[CDI:TARGET:C:LINE_OF_SIGHT]
[CDI:TARGET_RANGE:C:5]
[CDI:MAX_TARGET_NUMBER:C:1]
[CDI:WAIT_PERIOD:30]

Do you know if there is a way to add fatigue/exhaustion effects to spell casting, to balance out how OP some such spells can be?

EDIT: I believe adding a syndrome to each spellcasting under a common tag should work. I.e. concentrated spell drain could lead to dizziness, headache, vomiting, necrosis and even death. I have a good feeling about this.

[IndigoFenix]

Do you know if there is a way to add fatigue/exhaustion effects to spell casting, to balance out how OP some such spells can be?

EDIT: I believe adding a syndrome to each spellcasting under a common tag should work. I.e. concentrated spell drain could lead to dizziness, headache, vomiting, necrosis and even death. I have a good feeling about this.

There is a way, but it has a few caveats.

Basically, you need to make an interaction with two targets.  Target A is the regular target (LINE_OF_SIGHT), while target B is the caster (SELF_ONLY).  In the interaction, target A should have a manual input, while target B should not.  The syndrome added to target B (the caster) will be automatically used if and only if the interaction with target A occurs.

The main caveat is that USAGE_HINT:ATTACK doesn't work here, because the usage hint apparently applies to all targets, and the AI will never target themselves with an ATTACK, so the interaction will never actually be used.  If you want to add a negative effect to an ATTACK spell, one method is to make the interaction grant the target a 'counterattack' spell in addition to damaging the target, which will allow them to retaliate.  But of course, this is less elegant than it ought to be.

Also, if you try to use the interaction and don't select a valid target, you will still get hit by the negative effect.  If the counter-effect is positive (for instance, an energy drain spell), you can cheat by 'draining' nothing and still get the positive boost.  The AI will never do this.

Finally, since these are interaction syndromes and not material syndromes, you can't increase the effect due to multiple uses by using the SYN_CONCENTRATION_ADDED tag.

Here is an example interaction that increases the strength of nearby units, but also adds a temporary syndrome to the user preventing them from gaining the ability again until it wears off.  This method could be used to make a unit with multiple types of buff spells, but using one of them prevents them from using another shortly after.  You can also replace it with stuff like dizziness, nausea, etc.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Code: [Select]

[INTERACTION:STRENGTH_GRANT_WISH]
[I_SOURCE:CREATURE_ACTION]
[I_TARGET:A:CREATURE][IT_LOCATION:CONTEXT_CREATURE][IT_MANUAL_INPUT:wisher][IT_REQUIRES:CAN_LEARN:CAN_SPEAK]
[I_TARGET:B:CREATURE][IT_LOCATION:CONTEXT_CREATURE][IT_AFFECTED_CLASS:WISH_GRANTER]
[I_EFFECT:ADD_SYNDROME]
[IE_TARGET:A]
[IE_IMMEDIATE]
[SYNDROME][CE_PHYS_ATT_CHANGE:STRENGTH:120:0:PROB:100:START:0]
[I_EFFECT:ADD_SYNDROME]
[IE_TARGET:B]
[IE_IMMEDIATE]
[SYNDROME]
[SYN_NAME:wish granted]
[SYN_CLASS:WISH_USED]
[CE_FLASH_TILE:TILE:25:3:0:0:FREQUENCY:1200:120:START:0:END:33600]


[Roxfall]

That's awesome! Thank you for the info you saved me so much time. Time to do some !!SCIENCE!! on this thing.

[Roxfall]

I wonder if I can get it to happen by using usage_hint:major_curse instead

[Roxfall]

Major_curse doesn't look like the way to go. It's for gods doing things, not for mortals hating each other's guts.

But there may be another way.
http://dwarffortresswiki.org/index.php/DF2014:Interaction_token#USAGE_HINT

According to this, if there is no usage_hint, the AI will use the interaction whenever possible. So if the fireball spell marks its victim with a syndrome:manaburn, and the person who threw that fireball has a 'cleanse manaburn' FREE_ACTION ability that can only be used on people with manaburn, then maybe it'll clean it up and get the feedback effect (almost) instantly. The problem with that idea is that if there is ever a wizard duel you never know who is going to eat the manaburn first, and adventurers need a compelling reason to do that. Maybe cleansing manaburn, despite the pain etc makes your next spell more powerful somehow? Or maybe one cannot affect a manaburned target with any magic?

Still reading, but that's the best idea I've come up with so far.

[Roxfall]

And that's still a bad idea.

An AI opponent will cleanse empty tiles repeatedly and hurt themselves in the process via the 'cheating' mechanic you've described.

Game, set and match.

[Tiler]

Yeah, the interaction syndrome seems pretty open ended, until you realize it isn't in a lot of ways.

[Putnam]

And that's still a bad idea.

An AI opponent will cleanse empty tiles repeatedly and hurt themselves in the process via the 'cheating' mechanic you've described.

Game, set and match.

Wait, doesn't CONTEXT_CREATURE require a creature, not a tile? MATERIAL_EMISSION uses tiles, not creatures.