Talk:Stalker - Revision history

Umbire the Phantom at 00:48, 18 December 2021

2021-12-18T00:48:06Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:48, 18 December 2021
Line 19:		Line 19:

	:Noting that I have reverted a similar edit by the same user. [[User:Kufat\|Kufat]] ([[User talk:Kufat\|talk]]) 22:06, 15 December 2021 (UTC)		:Noting that I have reverted a similar edit by the same user. [[User:Kufat\|Kufat]] ([[User talk:Kufat\|talk]]) 22:06, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

			::While silly, this doesn't seem like a particularly big deal, let alone one worth necroposting on a six-year old thread for. --[[User:Umbire the Phantom\|Umbire the Phantom]] ([[User talk:Umbire the Phantom\|talk]]) 00:48, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Kufat: /* Pointless appropriation */

2021-12-15T22:06:48Z

Pointless appropriation

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:06, 15 December 2021
Line 17:		Line 17:
	:		:
	: I reverted this because the History section should be factual and free of opinions, and stating that the decision to change {{white\|I}} from stalker to last known position of any invisible monster is (in my view) an opinion. This doesn't necessarily invalidate your view on whether or not the change was pointless (though differentiating on color alone makes things worse for people who play with colors disabled, like some NAO players and people using OS X's black-on-white terminal emulator), but such an opinion is probably better suited to this talk page than the main article. No offense was meant. --[[User:Tungtn\|Tungtn]] ([[User talk:Tungtn\|talk]]) 02:24, 24 May 2015 (UTC)		: I reverted this because the History section should be factual and free of opinions, and stating that the decision to change {{white\|I}} from stalker to last known position of any invisible monster is (in my view) an opinion. This doesn't necessarily invalidate your view on whether or not the change was pointless (though differentiating on color alone makes things worse for people who play with colors disabled, like some NAO players and people using OS X's black-on-white terminal emulator), but such an opinion is probably better suited to this talk page than the main article. No offense was meant. --[[User:Tungtn\|Tungtn]] ([[User talk:Tungtn\|talk]]) 02:24, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

			:Noting that I have reverted a similar edit by the same user. [[User:Kufat\|Kufat]] ([[User talk:Kufat\|talk]]) 22:06, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Tungtn: /* Pointless appropriation */ Reply to User:Kahran042|

2015-05-24T02:24:52Z

Pointless appropriation: Reply to User:Kahran042

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:24, 24 May 2015
Line 11:		Line 11:

	Yes, "pointlessly." If [[User:Bluescreenofdeath]] could use I for her flying fish monster class by simply making sure that none of them used a grey glyph, there's no reason the Dev Team couldn't have done the same for stalkers. --[[User:Kahran042\|Kahran042]] ([[User talk:Kahran042\|talk]]) 17:19, 23 May 2015 (UTC)		Yes, "pointlessly." If [[User:Bluescreenofdeath]] could use I for her flying fish monster class by simply making sure that none of them used a grey glyph, there's no reason the Dev Team couldn't have done the same for stalkers. --[[User:Kahran042\|Kahran042]] ([[User talk:Kahran042\|talk]]) 17:19, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

			: For reference, this is the passage in question (from the History section, word in bold added by [[User:Kahran042\|Kahran042]] and reverted by me):
			:
			:: Nevertheless, for a very long time the symbol {{white\|I}} was used to represent the stalker (I meaning "invisible"). This changed in [[NetHack 3.3.0]], when the {{white\|I}} symbol was '''pointlessly''' appropriated to indicate the last known position of any invisible monster.
			:
			: I reverted this because the History section should be factual and free of opinions, and stating that the decision to change {{white\|I}} from stalker to last known position of any invisible monster is (in my view) an opinion. This doesn't necessarily invalidate your view on whether or not the change was pointless (though differentiating on color alone makes things worse for people who play with colors disabled, like some NAO players and people using OS X's black-on-white terminal emulator), but such an opinion is probably better suited to this talk page than the main article. No offense was meant. --[[User:Tungtn\|Tungtn]] ([[User talk:Tungtn\|talk]]) 02:24, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Kahran042 at 17:19, 23 May 2015

2015-05-23T17:19:26Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:19, 23 May 2015
Line 7:		Line 7:

	: Looking at {{sourcecode\|eat.c\|832}}, it seems to last 50-149 turns. I also updated the article to reflect this. --[[User:Bcode\|Bcode]] 06:43, 19 February 2012 (UTC)		: Looking at {{sourcecode\|eat.c\|832}}, it seems to last 50-149 turns. I also updated the article to reflect this. --[[User:Bcode\|Bcode]] 06:43, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

			== Pointless appropriation ==

			Yes, "pointlessly." If [[User:Bluescreenofdeath]] could use I for her flying fish monster class by simply making sure that none of them used a grey glyph, there's no reason the Dev Team couldn't have done the same for stalkers. --[[User:Kahran042\|Kahran042]] ([[User talk:Kahran042\|talk]]) 17:19, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Bcode: /* Duration of Invisibility */ 50-149

2012-02-19T06:43:37Z

Duration of Invisibility: 50-149

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:43, 19 February 2012
Line 5:		Line 5:

	Anyone know how long stalker invisibility lasts? Probably not long enough for my satiation to run out, but would be nice to know. --[[User:AileTheAlien\|AileTheAlien]] 06:30, 19 February 2012 (UTC)		Anyone know how long stalker invisibility lasts? Probably not long enough for my satiation to run out, but would be nice to know. --[[User:AileTheAlien\|AileTheAlien]] 06:30, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

			: Looking at {{sourcecode\|eat.c\|832}}, it seems to last 50-149 turns. I also updated the article to reflect this. --[[User:Bcode\|Bcode]] 06:43, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

AileTheAlien: /* Duration of Invisibility */ new section

2012-02-19T06:30:35Z

Duration of Invisibility: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:30, 19 February 2012
Line 1:		Line 1:
	== Temporary See Invisible? ==		== Temporary See Invisible? ==
	I just partially ate a stalker corpse while not being invisible. I was interupted and put over Satiated, so I did not attempt to eat the entire thing, and my pet titan finished the corpse. After doing this, I had the See Invisible intrinsic, which I did not have before. Since I was able to see invisible suddenly, my pet titan also cast invisibility but I was able to see him fine (The titan suddenly becomes transparent!; tame invisible titan [seen: See Invisible]). I go down the flight of stairs and get blinded by a yellow light. When my vision returns, my titan vanishes. It would appear that I somehow temporarily gained See Invisible. According to the page, I should not have gained it at all because I was not invisible at the time and did not even finish the Stalker meat. I certainly did not get attacked by an intrinsic stealing gremlin, drink a non-blessed potion of See Invisible, or even had the intrinsic before hand. Is the wiki wrong or what? -- [[User:Qazmlpok\|Qazmlpok]] 22:01, 5 August 2009 (UTC)		I just partially ate a stalker corpse while not being invisible. I was interupted and put over Satiated, so I did not attempt to eat the entire thing, and my pet titan finished the corpse. After doing this, I had the See Invisible intrinsic, which I did not have before. Since I was able to see invisible suddenly, my pet titan also cast invisibility but I was able to see him fine (The titan suddenly becomes transparent!; tame invisible titan [seen: See Invisible]). I go down the flight of stairs and get blinded by a yellow light. When my vision returns, my titan vanishes. It would appear that I somehow temporarily gained See Invisible. According to the page, I should not have gained it at all because I was not invisible at the time and did not even finish the Stalker meat. I certainly did not get attacked by an intrinsic stealing gremlin, drink a non-blessed potion of See Invisible, or even had the intrinsic before hand. Is the wiki wrong or what? -- [[User:Qazmlpok\|Qazmlpok]] 22:01, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

			== Duration of Invisibility ==

			Anyone know how long stalker invisibility lasts? Probably not long enough for my satiation to run out, but would be nice to know. --[[User:AileTheAlien\|AileTheAlien]] 06:30, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Qazmlpok: Created page with '== Temporary See Invisible? == I just partially ate a stalker corpse while not being invisible. I was interupted and put over Satiated, so I did not attempt to eat the entire thi...'

2009-08-05T22:01:24Z

Created page with '== Temporary See Invisible? == I just partially ate a stalker corpse while not being invisible. I was interupted and put over Satiated, so I did not attempt to eat the entire thi...'

New page

== Temporary See Invisible? ==
I just partially ate a stalker corpse while not being invisible. I was interupted and put over Satiated, so I did not attempt to eat the entire thing, and my pet titan finished the corpse. After doing this, I had the See Invisible intrinsic, which I did not have before. Since I was able to see invisible suddenly, my pet titan also cast invisibility but I was able to see him fine (The titan suddenly becomes transparent!; tame invisible titan [seen: See Invisible]). I go down the flight of stairs and get blinded by a yellow light. When my vision returns, my titan vanishes. It would appear that I somehow temporarily gained See Invisible. According to the page, I should not have gained it at all because I was not invisible at the time and did not even finish the Stalker meat. I certainly did not get attacked by an intrinsic stealing gremlin, drink a non-blessed potion of See Invisible, or even had the intrinsic before hand. Is the wiki wrong or what? -- [[User:Qazmlpok|Qazmlpok]] 22:01, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:24, 24 May 2015
Line 11:		Line 11:

	Yes, "pointlessly." If [[User:Bluescreenofdeath]] could use I for her flying fish monster class by simply making sure that none of them used a grey glyph, there's no reason the Dev Team couldn't have done the same for stalkers. --[[User:Kahran042\|Kahran042]] ([[User talk:Kahran042\|talk]]) 17:19, 23 May 2015 (UTC)		Yes, "pointlessly." If [[User:Bluescreenofdeath]] could use I for her flying fish monster class by simply making sure that none of them used a grey glyph, there's no reason the Dev Team couldn't have done the same for stalkers. --[[User:Kahran042\|Kahran042]] ([[User talk:Kahran042\|talk]]) 17:19, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

			: For reference, this is the passage in question (from the History section, word in bold added by [[User:Kahran042\|Kahran042]] and reverted by me):
			:
			:: Nevertheless, for a very long time the symbol {{white\|I}} was used to represent the stalker (I meaning "invisible"). This changed in [[NetHack 3.3.0]], when the {{white\|I}} symbol was '''pointlessly''' appropriated to indicate the last known position of any invisible monster.
			:
			: I reverted this because the History section should be factual and free of opinions, and stating that the decision to change {{white\|I}} from stalker to last known position of any invisible monster is (in my view) an opinion. This doesn't necessarily invalidate your view on whether or not the change was pointless (though differentiating on color alone makes things worse for people who play with colors disabled, like some NAO players and people using OS X's black-on-white terminal emulator), but such an opinion is probably better suited to this talk page than the main article. No offense was meant. --[[User:Tungtn\|Tungtn]] ([[User talk:Tungtn\|talk]]) 02:24, 24 May 2015 (UTC)