Difference between revisions of "Talk:Ochre jelly"

From NetHackWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(engulfing attack in SLASH'EM: new section)
(Are some jellies included among Amoeboids?: new section)
 
Line 22: Line 22:
 
"You are covered in slime!  It burns!  Your Key of Neutrality corrodes!  [4 pts.]"
 
"You are covered in slime!  It burns!  Your Key of Neutrality corrodes!  [4 pts.]"
 
--[[Special:Contributions/94.109.109.35|94.109.109.35]] 08:12, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
 
--[[Special:Contributions/94.109.109.35|94.109.109.35]] 08:12, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
 +
 +
== Are some jellies included among Amoeboids? ==
 +
 +
The amoeboids page claims that they are only blobs, puddings, and oozes: https://nethackwiki.com/wiki/Amoeboid
 +
 +
Ochre jelly is called an amoeboid on the current page, which might make sense, but is the notion of amoeboid part of the code base too?

Latest revision as of 06:51, 3 July 2020

IS the passive attack really 3d6? I remember something about 1d(<level>+1), where level is the victim's level. --Tjr 23:44, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

nhtohtml is giving me 'Engulfing 3d6 acid, Passive 3d6 acid'. Other passive attacks are level-based, although I always assumed it was the creature's level, not the victim's. -- Qazmlpok 00:14, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
You're right twice. Monst.c confirms 3d6. In those cases of 0d<number> damage in monst.c, the 0 is replaced with the jelly's level+1, mhitm.c, line 1292 and Uhitm.c, line 2150. --Tjr 00:34, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Attribution

I'm removing the attribution for two reasons:

1) It's based on this page, which contains nothing that isn't just a rephrasing of the source code and the makedefs array. We could regenerate the page with the bot we used to make SLASH'EM monster articles and get the exact same result; in that sense, the attribution isn't needed because the monster stats and attributes are "common knowledge."

2) The other information in the wiki article, so far as I can tell, is original. Moreover, having attribution for relatively generic articles is weird and confusing. IMO we shouldn't be using templates for that to begin with; it's ugly and implies that the article is an exact copy of the original site (and might I add that if the wiki page *is*, it should be rewritten). Upgrading objects is an example of how we should be attributing sources: integrate the attribution into the article text, while writing an article that's based on the source, not a copy of it.

Anyway, if no one objects, over the next few days I'm going to do this to a few other articles that have similar unnecessary tags. -Ion frigate 04:44, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. --Tjr 13:06, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

engulfing attack in SLASH'EM

I got engulfed, and my alignment key got corroded, sniff sniff :'(

"You are covered in slime! It burns! Your Key of Neutrality corrodes! [4 pts.]" --94.109.109.35 08:12, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Are some jellies included among Amoeboids?

The amoeboids page claims that they are only blobs, puddings, and oozes: https://nethackwiki.com/wiki/Amoeboid

Ochre jelly is called an amoeboid on the current page, which might make sense, but is the notion of amoeboid part of the code base too?