Talk:Spellcasting - Revision history

Qazmlpok: /* Error in Table? */

2016-03-24T15:39:56Z

Error in Table?

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:39, 24 March 2016
Line 1:		Line 1:
	==Error in Table?==		==Error in Table?==
	Playing as a Barbarian, I noticed a decrease in spell failure when removing an Elven shield. If I am reading the table correctly, this should not happen. Am I reading the formula incorrectly or is there a mistake? [[User:Yesennes\|Yesennes]] 12:48, March 24 2016 (UTC)		Playing as a Barbarian, I noticed a decrease in spell failure when removing an Elven shield. If I am reading the table correctly, this should not happen. Am I reading the formula incorrectly or is there a mistake? [[User:Yesennes\|Yesennes]] 12:48, March 24 2016 (UTC)
			::If you are wearing a shield larger than a small shield, the chance is then reduced to 1/4 its amount (except if it is the special spell for your class -- then it is only halved).
			:This is separate from the listed shield penalty. Wearing a small shield should give no change in spellcasting rates (For those roles with a 0 in the shield column). -- [[User:Qazmlpok\|Qazmlpok]] ([[User talk:Qazmlpok\|talk]]) 15:39, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

	==Penalty table==		==Penalty table==
	:I completely agree with Derekt75, no need for two copies of the same table. But I think the OTHER table, the one that was deleted, is better than the one we kept. Maybe we should swap them around or combine their designs to make an even better super table? [[User:Blackcustard\|Blackcustard]] 22:39, 6 March 2012 (UTC)		:I completely agree with Derekt75, no need for two copies of the same table. But I think the OTHER table, the one that was deleted, is better than the one we kept. Maybe we should swap them around or combine their designs to make an even better super table? [[User:Blackcustard\|Blackcustard]] 22:39, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Yesennes at 00:49, 24 March 2016

2016-03-24T00:49:05Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:49, 24 March 2016
Line 1:		Line 1:
			==Error in Table?==
			Playing as a Barbarian, I noticed a decrease in spell failure when removing an Elven shield. If I am reading the table correctly, this should not happen. Am I reading the formula incorrectly or is there a mistake? [[User:Yesennes\|Yesennes]] 12:48, March 24 2016 (UTC)
	==Penalty table==		==Penalty table==
	:I completely agree with Derekt75, no need for two copies of the same table. But I think the OTHER table, the one that was deleted, is better than the one we kept. Maybe we should swap them around or combine their designs to make an even better super table? [[User:Blackcustard\|Blackcustard]] 22:39, 6 March 2012 (UTC)		:I completely agree with Derekt75, no need for two copies of the same table. But I think the OTHER table, the one that was deleted, is better than the one we kept. Maybe we should swap them around or combine their designs to make an even better super table? [[User:Blackcustard\|Blackcustard]] 22:39, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

188.174.121.136: /* Necessity of the "older version" of spell calculator tool? */ new section

2015-10-06T13:52:31Z

Necessity of the "older version" of spell calculator tool?: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:52, 6 October 2015
Line 31:		Line 31:

	:[http://nethackwiki.com/mediawiki/index.php?title=Spellcasting&curid=8632&diff=84449&oldid=81669 fixed], thank you. --[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] ([[User talk:Tjr\|talk]]) 08:14, 1 May 2013 (UTC)		:[http://nethackwiki.com/mediawiki/index.php?title=Spellcasting&curid=8632&diff=84449&oldid=81669 fixed], thank you. --[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] ([[User talk:Tjr\|talk]]) 08:14, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

			== Necessity of the "older version" of spell calculator tool? ==

			Is there any necessity to reference the "older version" of the spell calculator tool?

			The (initial) versions are both from 2006 (from the same author), the "older" tool has just been an intermediate development step for the actual tool. The actual tool is still maintained, the "older version" one is not.

Tjr: /* Error in formula for difficulty? */ fixed

2013-05-01T08:14:08Z

Error in formula for difficulty?: fixed

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:14, 1 May 2013
Line 29:		Line 29:
	Martijn Lievaart		Martijn Lievaart
	--[[Special:Contributions/82.161.179.3\|82.161.179.3]] 19:53, 30 April 2013 (UTC)		--[[Special:Contributions/82.161.179.3\|82.161.179.3]] 19:53, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

			:[http://nethackwiki.com/mediawiki/index.php?title=Spellcasting&curid=8632&diff=84449&oldid=81669 fixed], thank you. --[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] ([[User talk:Tjr\|talk]]) 08:14, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

82.161.179.3: /* Error in formula for difficulty? */ new section

2013-04-30T19:53:15Z

Error in formula for difficulty?: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:53, 30 April 2013
Line 10:		Line 10:
	==Hit change==		==Hit change==
	I'm having trouble finding information about spell hit chance. What stats have an effect and so forth. All I can recall is that it's typically better than that of a wand counterpart, but I can't find information about that either. [[User:Denky\|Denky]] ([[User talk:Denky\|talk]]) 11:33, 26 September 2012 (UTC)		I'm having trouble finding information about spell hit chance. What stats have an effect and so forth. All I can recall is that it's typically better than that of a wand counterpart, but I can't find information about that either. [[User:Denky\|Denky]] ([[User talk:Denky\|talk]]) 11:33, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

			== Error in formula for difficulty? ==

			Looking in the source, we see:

			difficulty= (spellev(spell)-1) * 4 - ((skill * 6) + (u.ulevel/3) + 1);

			So

			:<math>\text{difficulty} = (\text{LVL} * 4) - (\text{SKILL} * 6) - \frac{\text{XL}}{3} - 5</math>

			should be

			:<math>\text{difficulty} = (\text{LVL} * 4) - (\text{SKILL} * 6) - \frac{\text{XL}}{3} - 3</math>

			Using this modified formula explains why my Valkyrie cannot cast identify yet (failure=100%), using the original formula I should have a mall chance.

			Martijn Lievaart
			--[[Special:Contributions/82.161.179.3\|82.161.179.3]] 19:53, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Denky: /* spell hit chance */

2012-09-26T11:33:33Z

spell hit chance

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:33, 26 September 2012
Line 8:		Line 8:
	:::I had missed that the deleted table had more links. I added some links to the existing table (including having [[Int]] go directly to [[intelligence]] rather than a disambig page). It's fine with me if you want to replace this table with the older one, though; to me they're both the same. [[User:Derekt75\|Derekt75]] 00:03, 7 March 2012 (UTC)		:::I had missed that the deleted table had more links. I added some links to the existing table (including having [[Int]] go directly to [[intelligence]] rather than a disambig page). It's fine with me if you want to replace this table with the older one, though; to me they're both the same. [[User:Derekt75\|Derekt75]] 00:03, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
	::::Actually I was mostly reacting to the annoying abbreviations, e.g. "EMERG". I patched that up and the new table is now perfect. You found a couple other good changes to make I hadn't noticed. For the record, you can look at the deleted table in the page's history, no need to go on memory. [[User:Blackcustard\|Blackcustard]] 23:30, 10 March 2012 (UTC)		::::Actually I was mostly reacting to the annoying abbreviations, e.g. "EMERG". I patched that up and the new table is now perfect. You found a couple other good changes to make I hadn't noticed. For the record, you can look at the deleted table in the page's history, no need to go on memory. [[User:Blackcustard\|Blackcustard]] 23:30, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
			==Hit change==
			I'm having trouble finding information about spell hit chance. What stats have an effect and so forth. All I can recall is that it's typically better than that of a wand counterpart, but I can't find information about that either. [[User:Denky\|Denky]] ([[User talk:Denky\|talk]]) 11:33, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Blackcustard: /* Penalty table */ Table is awesome now.

2012-03-10T23:30:25Z

Penalty table: Table is awesome now.

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:30, 10 March 2012
Line 7:		Line 7:
	::I figured that the column order didn't matter, and that the -4 was indicated in the text immediately preceding the table, so I chose the table that had the newer placement. Were there other differences that I missed? Is the "-4" useful? Was the previous column order useful? [[User:Derekt75\|Derekt75]] 23:49, 6 March 2012 (UTC)		::I figured that the column order didn't matter, and that the -4 was indicated in the text immediately preceding the table, so I chose the table that had the newer placement. Were there other differences that I missed? Is the "-4" useful? Was the previous column order useful? [[User:Derekt75\|Derekt75]] 23:49, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
	:::I had missed that the deleted table had more links. I added some links to the existing table (including having [[Int]] go directly to [[intelligence]] rather than a disambig page). It's fine with me if you want to replace this table with the older one, though; to me they're both the same. [[User:Derekt75\|Derekt75]] 00:03, 7 March 2012 (UTC)		:::I had missed that the deleted table had more links. I added some links to the existing table (including having [[Int]] go directly to [[intelligence]] rather than a disambig page). It's fine with me if you want to replace this table with the older one, though; to me they're both the same. [[User:Derekt75\|Derekt75]] 00:03, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
			::::Actually I was mostly reacting to the annoying abbreviations, e.g. "EMERG". I patched that up and the new table is now perfect. You found a couple other good changes to make I hadn't noticed. For the record, you can look at the deleted table in the page's history, no need to go on memory. [[User:Blackcustard\|Blackcustard]] 23:30, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Derekt75: /* Penalty table */

2012-03-07T00:03:09Z

Penalty table

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:03, 7 March 2012
Line 6:		Line 6:
	::* deleted table had a last column that contained a "-4" for every special spell		::* deleted table had a last column that contained a "-4" for every special spell
	::I figured that the column order didn't matter, and that the -4 was indicated in the text immediately preceding the table, so I chose the table that had the newer placement. Were there other differences that I missed? Is the "-4" useful? Was the previous column order useful? [[User:Derekt75\|Derekt75]] 23:49, 6 March 2012 (UTC)		::I figured that the column order didn't matter, and that the -4 was indicated in the text immediately preceding the table, so I chose the table that had the newer placement. Were there other differences that I missed? Is the "-4" useful? Was the previous column order useful? [[User:Derekt75\|Derekt75]] 23:49, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
			:::I had missed that the deleted table had more links. I added some links to the existing table (including having [[Int]] go directly to [[intelligence]] rather than a disambig page). It's fine with me if you want to replace this table with the older one, though; to me they're both the same. [[User:Derekt75\|Derekt75]] 00:03, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Derekt75: /* Penalty table */

2012-03-06T23:49:15Z

Penalty table

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:49, 6 March 2012
Line 1:		Line 1:
	==Penalty table==		==Penalty table==
	:I completely agree with Derekt75, no need for two copies of the same table. But I think the OTHER table, the one that was deleted, is better than the one we kept. Maybe we should swap them around or combine their designs to make an even better super table? [[User:Blackcustard\|Blackcustard]] 22:39, 6 March 2012 (UTC)		:I completely agree with Derekt75, no need for two copies of the same table. But I think the OTHER table, the one that was deleted, is better than the one we kept. Maybe we should swap them around or combine their designs to make an even better super table? [[User:Blackcustard\|Blackcustard]] 22:39, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
			::Here are the differences that I remember:
			::* different order of columns
			::* different placement in article
			::* deleted table had a last column that contained a "-4" for every special spell
			::I figured that the column order didn't matter, and that the -4 was indicated in the text immediately preceding the table, so I chose the table that had the newer placement. Were there other differences that I missed? Is the "-4" useful? Was the previous column order useful? [[User:Derekt75\|Derekt75]] 23:49, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Blackcustard: I think the other table is better actually.

2012-03-06T22:39:54Z

I think the other table is better actually.

New page

==Penalty table==
:I completely agree with Derekt75, no need for two copies of the same table. But I think the OTHER table, the one that was deleted, is better than the one we kept. Maybe we should swap them around or combine their designs to make an even better super table? [[User:Blackcustard|Blackcustard]] 22:39, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:30, 10 March 2012
Line 7:		Line 7:
	::I figured that the column order didn't matter, and that the -4 was indicated in the text immediately preceding the table, so I chose the table that had the newer placement. Were there other differences that I missed? Is the "-4" useful? Was the previous column order useful? [[User:Derekt75\|Derekt75]] 23:49, 6 March 2012 (UTC)		::I figured that the column order didn't matter, and that the -4 was indicated in the text immediately preceding the table, so I chose the table that had the newer placement. Were there other differences that I missed? Is the "-4" useful? Was the previous column order useful? [[User:Derekt75\|Derekt75]] 23:49, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
	:::I had missed that the deleted table had more links. I added some links to the existing table (including having [[Int]] go directly to [[intelligence]] rather than a disambig page). It's fine with me if you want to replace this table with the older one, though; to me they're both the same. [[User:Derekt75\|Derekt75]] 00:03, 7 March 2012 (UTC)		:::I had missed that the deleted table had more links. I added some links to the existing table (including having [[Int]] go directly to [[intelligence]] rather than a disambig page). It's fine with me if you want to replace this table with the older one, though; to me they're both the same. [[User:Derekt75\|Derekt75]] 00:03, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
			::::Actually I was mostly reacting to the annoying abbreviations, e.g. "EMERG". I patched that up and the new table is now perfect. You found a couple other good changes to make I hadn't noticed. For the record, you can look at the deleted table in the page's history, no need to go on memory. [[User:Blackcustard\|Blackcustard]] 23:30, 10 March 2012 (UTC)