Talk:Loadstone - Revision history

Derekt75: uncursed loadstone odds in a container I think are slightly different from what's written?

2023-03-21T20:44:45Z

uncursed loadstone odds in a container I think are slightly different from what's written?

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:44, 21 March 2023
Line 8:		Line 8:

	::It's 1/11 uncursed, 10/11 cursed. {{sourcecode\|mkobj.c\|184}} is responsible - it reassigns rocks to other gems without updating curse status, and 1/10 of all *-class are rocks. --[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] 19:29, 6 August 2011 (UTC)		::It's 1/11 uncursed, 10/11 cursed. {{sourcecode\|mkobj.c\|184}} is responsible - it reassigns rocks to other gems without updating curse status, and 1/10 of all *-class are rocks. --[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] 19:29, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

			:::When the call goes to mkobj(GEM_CLASS, TRUE), I think all possible gems are valid? so a touchstone is possible? a cursed loadstone is generated 1.00% of the time, and a rock is generated 10.00% of the time. If a rock is generated, then the otyp gets reset. When this happens, a loadstone can be rolled 10 times out of 902, or 1.11% of the time. So the probability that the gem_class is an uncursed luckstone is ~0.111%. Therefore the probability of an uncursed one is ~.111/1.111 = 9.98%. [[User:Derekt75\|Derekt75]] ([[User talk:Derekt75\|talk]]) 20:44, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

	== faff about kicking ==		== faff about kicking ==

Bodark: /* Weight proportion to utility */ new section

2015-04-28T15:56:18Z

Weight proportion to utility: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:56, 28 April 2015
Line 37:		Line 37:
	I can't wiztest this at the moment, but wouldn't it theoretically be possible to get rid of a loadstone by repeatedly putting it in and taking it out of a cursed Bag of Holding? --[[Special:Contributions/12.207.212.134\|12.207.212.134]] 16:25, 7 August 2014 (UTC)		I can't wiztest this at the moment, but wouldn't it theoretically be possible to get rid of a loadstone by repeatedly putting it in and taking it out of a cursed Bag of Holding? --[[Special:Contributions/12.207.212.134\|12.207.212.134]] 16:25, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
	:It says "The stone won't leave your person.", so that's impossible. --[[User:Bluescreenofdeath\|Bluescreenofdeath]] ([[User talk:Bluescreenofdeath\|talk]]) 05:44, 8 August 2014 (UTC)		:It says "The stone won't leave your person.", so that's impossible. --[[User:Bluescreenofdeath\|Bluescreenofdeath]] ([[User talk:Bluescreenofdeath\|talk]]) 05:44, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

			== Weight proportion to utility ==

			Loadstone could be considered for buffing into a HARD gem in future releases/variants, which would make it suitable for engraving. Academic, but neat, I think.

			Possibly as something that never dulls.

			This game is big on useless items that do one or two neat tricks. ——[[User:Bodark\|Bodark]] ([[User talk:Bodark\|talk]]) 15:56, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Bluescreenofdeath: /* Another method of removal */

2014-08-08T05:44:18Z

Another method of removal

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:44, 8 August 2014
Line 36:		Line 36:
	==Another method of removal==		==Another method of removal==
	I can't wiztest this at the moment, but wouldn't it theoretically be possible to get rid of a loadstone by repeatedly putting it in and taking it out of a cursed Bag of Holding? --[[Special:Contributions/12.207.212.134\|12.207.212.134]] 16:25, 7 August 2014 (UTC)		I can't wiztest this at the moment, but wouldn't it theoretically be possible to get rid of a loadstone by repeatedly putting it in and taking it out of a cursed Bag of Holding? --[[Special:Contributions/12.207.212.134\|12.207.212.134]] 16:25, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
			:It says "The stone won't leave your person.", so that's impossible. --[[User:Bluescreenofdeath\|Bluescreenofdeath]] ([[User talk:Bluescreenofdeath\|talk]]) 05:44, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

12.207.212.134 at 16:25, 7 August 2014

2014-08-07T16:25:44Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:25, 7 August 2014
Line 33:		Line 33:
	:I recall trying loadstones in wizard mode to see if you could leave a bones with an uncursed loadstone in your possession. In all of my attempts every loadstone was cursed; this is hardly conclusive but it is possible that dropping equipment by dying is considered "leaving your inventory". -- [[User:Qazmlpok\|Qazmlpok]] 13:13, 6 August 2011 (UTC)		:I recall trying loadstones in wizard mode to see if you could leave a bones with an uncursed loadstone in your possession. In all of my attempts every loadstone was cursed; this is hardly conclusive but it is possible that dropping equipment by dying is considered "leaving your inventory". -- [[User:Qazmlpok\|Qazmlpok]] 13:13, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
	:My guess is whoever added that simply forgot that loadstones autocurse when dropped. It's a moderately obscure property, since one does not normally pick up loadstones again after dropping them. So this person was thinking of a bones file where someone had uncursed a loadstone and dropped it, forgetting that the loadstone would still be cursed. So yes, a good removal. -[[User:Ion frigate\|Ion frigate]] 20:54, 6 August 2011 (UTC)		:My guess is whoever added that simply forgot that loadstones autocurse when dropped. It's a moderately obscure property, since one does not normally pick up loadstones again after dropping them. So this person was thinking of a bones file where someone had uncursed a loadstone and dropped it, forgetting that the loadstone would still be cursed. So yes, a good removal. -[[User:Ion frigate\|Ion frigate]] 20:54, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

			==Another method of removal==
			I can't wiztest this at the moment, but wouldn't it theoretically be possible to get rid of a loadstone by repeatedly putting it in and taking it out of a cursed Bag of Holding? --[[Special:Contributions/12.207.212.134\|12.207.212.134]] 16:25, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Derekt75: /* faff about kicking */

2012-04-14T02:25:58Z

faff about kicking

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:25, 14 April 2012
Line 12:		Line 12:
	the warnings about super-kicks and variance only apply if there is overlap between the load and not-load ranges. any chance somebody could put some numbers to the ranges? i'd guess that the absolute minimum distance you can kick a non-load stone without modifiers of any sort is way noticably more than the absolute maximum you can kick a loadstone with every single modifier. this needs numbers. --[[Special:Contributions/194.116.198.188\|194.116.198.188]] 11:47, 13 April 2012 (UTC)		the warnings about super-kicks and variance only apply if there is overlap between the load and not-load ranges. any chance somebody could put some numbers to the ranges? i'd guess that the absolute minimum distance you can kick a non-load stone without modifiers of any sort is way noticably more than the absolute maximum you can kick a loadstone with every single modifier. this needs numbers. --[[Special:Contributions/194.116.198.188\|194.116.198.188]] 11:47, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
	:Not really. You won't kick loadstones anywhere without at least having gauntlets of power or kicking boots; my wizmode tests with a L30 monk, with 18/** strength and Grand Master in martial arts, suggest that only the former works, actually. If you're going to kick-ID gray stones, take off such enhancers. Numbers would just clutter up the article. -[[User:Ion frigate\|Ion frigate]] 18:32, 13 April 2012 (UTC)		:Not really. You won't kick loadstones anywhere without at least having gauntlets of power or kicking boots; my wizmode tests with a L30 monk, with 18/** strength and Grand Master in martial arts, suggest that only the former works, actually. If you're going to kick-ID gray stones, take off such enhancers. Numbers would just clutter up the article. -[[User:Ion frigate\|Ion frigate]] 18:32, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
			::Taking off the enhancers is unnecessary if the stone is in the open. If you're that strong and the stone only moves one or two squares, it's a loadstone. Other gray stones will go like 10+ squares, so it's not even close. If you only have Str 7, you might kick a luckstone only two squares, but in that case, the fact that the stone moved proves it's not a loadstone. [[User:Derekt75\|Derekt75]] 02:25, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

	== weapon? ==		== weapon? ==

Ion frigate: /* faff about kicking */

2012-04-13T18:32:46Z

faff about kicking

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:32, 13 April 2012
Line 11:		Line 11:
	== faff about kicking ==		== faff about kicking ==
	the warnings about super-kicks and variance only apply if there is overlap between the load and not-load ranges. any chance somebody could put some numbers to the ranges? i'd guess that the absolute minimum distance you can kick a non-load stone without modifiers of any sort is way noticably more than the absolute maximum you can kick a loadstone with every single modifier. this needs numbers. --[[Special:Contributions/194.116.198.188\|194.116.198.188]] 11:47, 13 April 2012 (UTC)		the warnings about super-kicks and variance only apply if there is overlap between the load and not-load ranges. any chance somebody could put some numbers to the ranges? i'd guess that the absolute minimum distance you can kick a non-load stone without modifiers of any sort is way noticably more than the absolute maximum you can kick a loadstone with every single modifier. this needs numbers. --[[Special:Contributions/194.116.198.188\|194.116.198.188]] 11:47, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
			:Not really. You won't kick loadstones anywhere without at least having gauntlets of power or kicking boots; my wizmode tests with a L30 monk, with 18/** strength and Grand Master in martial arts, suggest that only the former works, actually. If you're going to kick-ID gray stones, take off such enhancers. Numbers would just clutter up the article. -[[User:Ion frigate\|Ion frigate]] 18:32, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

	== weapon? ==		== weapon? ==

194.116.198.188: /* faff about kicking */ well, i do, anyway; guessing == wrong

2012-04-13T11:47:42Z

faff about kicking: well, i do, anyway; guessing == wrong

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:47, 13 April 2012
Line 8:		Line 8:

	::It's 1/11 uncursed, 10/11 cursed. {{sourcecode\|mkobj.c\|184}} is responsible - it reassigns rocks to other gems without updating curse status, and 1/10 of all *-class are rocks. --[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] 19:29, 6 August 2011 (UTC)		::It's 1/11 uncursed, 10/11 cursed. {{sourcecode\|mkobj.c\|184}} is responsible - it reassigns rocks to other gems without updating curse status, and 1/10 of all *-class are rocks. --[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] 19:29, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

			== faff about kicking ==
			the warnings about super-kicks and variance only apply if there is overlap between the load and not-load ranges. any chance somebody could put some numbers to the ranges? i'd guess that the absolute minimum distance you can kick a non-load stone without modifiers of any sort is way noticably more than the absolute maximum you can kick a loadstone with every single modifier. this needs numbers. --[[Special:Contributions/194.116.198.188\|194.116.198.188]] 11:47, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

	== weapon? ==		== weapon? ==

Ion frigate: /* Bones and uncursed loadstone */

2011-08-06T20:54:37Z

Bones and uncursed loadstone

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:54, 6 August 2011
Line 27:		Line 27:
	Loadstones always autocurse when leaving the player's inventory in any way. The only ways to get an uncursed loadstone on the ground are 1) to #force a chest with one of those rare uncursed loadstones, 2) presumably for a character with an already-uncursed loadstone in inventory to leave bones, and to hit that 20% chance it is not cursed again. Yes, it is theoretically possible this was done/carried by the late player of a bones file, but I believe this is so rare it only clutters up the article. That's why I removed the above. --[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] 02:27, 6 August 2011 (UTC)		Loadstones always autocurse when leaving the player's inventory in any way. The only ways to get an uncursed loadstone on the ground are 1) to #force a chest with one of those rare uncursed loadstones, 2) presumably for a character with an already-uncursed loadstone in inventory to leave bones, and to hit that 20% chance it is not cursed again. Yes, it is theoretically possible this was done/carried by the late player of a bones file, but I believe this is so rare it only clutters up the article. That's why I removed the above. --[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] 02:27, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
	:I recall trying loadstones in wizard mode to see if you could leave a bones with an uncursed loadstone in your possession. In all of my attempts every loadstone was cursed; this is hardly conclusive but it is possible that dropping equipment by dying is considered "leaving your inventory". -- [[User:Qazmlpok\|Qazmlpok]] 13:13, 6 August 2011 (UTC)		:I recall trying loadstones in wizard mode to see if you could leave a bones with an uncursed loadstone in your possession. In all of my attempts every loadstone was cursed; this is hardly conclusive but it is possible that dropping equipment by dying is considered "leaving your inventory". -- [[User:Qazmlpok\|Qazmlpok]] 13:13, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
			:My guess is whoever added that simply forgot that loadstones autocurse when dropped. It's a moderately obscure property, since one does not normally pick up loadstones again after dropping them. So this person was thinking of a bones file where someone had uncursed a loadstone and dropped it, forgetting that the loadstone would still be cursed. So yes, a good removal. -[[User:Ion frigate\|Ion frigate]] 20:54, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Tjr at 19:34, 6 August 2011

2011-08-06T19:34:18Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:34, 6 August 2011
Line 7:		Line 7:
	: Sadly, a loadstone in a container is highly likely to be cursed. I believe the proportions are about 93% cursed, 7% uncursed, although these ratios are only estimates (I have not source dived). [[User:Djao\|Djao]] 05:31, 16 October 2007 (UTC)		: Sadly, a loadstone in a container is highly likely to be cursed. I believe the proportions are about 93% cursed, 7% uncursed, although these ratios are only estimates (I have not source dived). [[User:Djao\|Djao]] 05:31, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

	::It's 1/11 uncursed, 10/11 cursed. {{sourcecode\|mkobj.c\|184}} is responsible - it reassigns rocks to ~~another~~ gems without updating curse status, and 1/10 of all *-class are rocks. --[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] 19:29, 6 August 2011 (UTC)		::It's 1/11 uncursed, 10/11 cursed. {{sourcecode\|mkobj.c\|184}} is responsible - it reassigns rocks to other gems without updating curse status, and 1/10 of all *-class are rocks. --[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] 19:29, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

	== weapon? ==		== weapon? ==

Tjr at 19:29, 6 August 2011

2011-08-06T19:29:48Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:29, 6 August 2011
Line 6:		Line 6:

	: Sadly, a loadstone in a container is highly likely to be cursed. I believe the proportions are about 93% cursed, 7% uncursed, although these ratios are only estimates (I have not source dived). [[User:Djao\|Djao]] 05:31, 16 October 2007 (UTC)		: Sadly, a loadstone in a container is highly likely to be cursed. I believe the proportions are about 93% cursed, 7% uncursed, although these ratios are only estimates (I have not source dived). [[User:Djao\|Djao]] 05:31, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

			::It's 1/11 uncursed, 10/11 cursed. {{sourcecode\|mkobj.c\|184}} is responsible - it reassigns rocks to another gems without updating curse status, and 1/10 of all *-class are rocks. --[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] 19:29, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

	== weapon? ==		== weapon? ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:54, 6 August 2011
Line 27:		Line 27:
	Loadstones always autocurse when leaving the player's inventory in any way. The only ways to get an uncursed loadstone on the ground are 1) to #force a chest with one of those rare uncursed loadstones, 2) presumably for a character with an already-uncursed loadstone in inventory to leave bones, and to hit that 20% chance it is not cursed again. Yes, it is theoretically possible this was done/carried by the late player of a bones file, but I believe this is so rare it only clutters up the article. That's why I removed the above. --[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] 02:27, 6 August 2011 (UTC)		Loadstones always autocurse when leaving the player's inventory in any way. The only ways to get an uncursed loadstone on the ground are 1) to #force a chest with one of those rare uncursed loadstones, 2) presumably for a character with an already-uncursed loadstone in inventory to leave bones, and to hit that 20% chance it is not cursed again. Yes, it is theoretically possible this was done/carried by the late player of a bones file, but I believe this is so rare it only clutters up the article. That's why I removed the above. --[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] 02:27, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
	:I recall trying loadstones in wizard mode to see if you could leave a bones with an uncursed loadstone in your possession. In all of my attempts every loadstone was cursed; this is hardly conclusive but it is possible that dropping equipment by dying is considered "leaving your inventory". -- [[User:Qazmlpok\|Qazmlpok]] 13:13, 6 August 2011 (UTC)		:I recall trying loadstones in wizard mode to see if you could leave a bones with an uncursed loadstone in your possession. In all of my attempts every loadstone was cursed; this is hardly conclusive but it is possible that dropping equipment by dying is considered "leaving your inventory". -- [[User:Qazmlpok\|Qazmlpok]] 13:13, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
			:My guess is whoever added that simply forgot that loadstones autocurse when dropped. It's a moderately obscure property, since one does not normally pick up loadstones again after dropping them. So this person was thinking of a bones file where someone had uncursed a loadstone and dropped it, forgetting that the loadstone would still be cursed. So yes, a good removal. -[[User:Ion frigate\|Ion frigate]] 20:54, 6 August 2011 (UTC)