Talk:Vorpal Blade - Revision history

Umbire the Phantom: reply

2025-10-31T05:11:35Z

Aribog: /* I got it to go snicker-snack! */ new section

2025-10-30T22:26:29Z

‎I got it to go snicker-snack!: new section

Netzhack: /* The Logic of Probabilities */

2016-11-14T22:21:29Z

‎The Logic of Probabilities

Netzhack: /* The Logic of Probabilities */ new section

2016-05-26T20:28:16Z

‎The Logic of Probabilities: new section

Qazmlpok at 12:44, 9 October 2012

2012-10-09T12:44:29Z

Tjr: spelling

2012-10-09T08:37:47Z

spelling

Tjr: some thoughts about weapons

2012-10-09T08:36:34Z

some thoughts about weapons

Blackcustard: /* On the usefulness of Vorpal */ Sign your edits custard.

2012-10-09T03:26:30Z

‎On the usefulness of Vorpal: Sign your edits custard.

Blackcustard: /* On the usefulness of Vorpal */ new section

2012-10-09T03:25:04Z

‎On the usefulness of Vorpal: new section

Qazmlpok: /* Thiefbane */

2011-12-18T22:12:36Z

‎Thiefbane

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:11, 31 October 2025
Line 97:		Line 97:

	I was wielding the Vorpal Blade as a neutral gnomish archeologist and was crowned, giving me the message, among the other crowning messages, "The Vorpal Blade goes snicker-snack!" Can anyone else confirm if that's specific to crowning, potentially while already holding it (rather than getting it as a crowning gift)?--[[User:Aribog\|Aribog]] ([[User talk:Aribog\|talk]]) 22:26, 30 October 2025 (UTC)w		I was wielding the Vorpal Blade as a neutral gnomish archeologist and was crowned, giving me the message, among the other crowning messages, "The Vorpal Blade goes snicker-snack!" Can anyone else confirm if that's specific to crowning, potentially while already holding it (rather than getting it as a crowning gift)?--[[User:Aribog\|Aribog]] ([[User talk:Aribog\|talk]]) 22:26, 30 October 2025 (UTC)w
		+
		+	:Yep, it's a very specific message that's in the crowning routines for [[pray.c]]—it just hasn't been documented proper yet, which is probably what I'll be doing tonight! --[[User:Umbire the Phantom\|Umbire the Phantom]] ([[User talk:Umbire the Phantom\|talk]]) 05:11, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:26, 30 October 2025
Line 93:		Line 93:

	:No reaction ... so I changed that sentence and the one following it to fix the logic. [[User:Netzhack\|Netzhack]] ([[User talk:Netzhack\|talk]]) 22:21, 14 November 2016 (UTC)		:No reaction ... so I changed that sentence and the one following it to fix the logic. [[User:Netzhack\|Netzhack]] ([[User talk:Netzhack\|talk]]) 22:21, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
		+
		+	== I got it to go snicker-snack! ==
		+
		+	I was wielding the Vorpal Blade as a neutral gnomish archeologist and was crowned, giving me the message, among the other crowning messages, "The Vorpal Blade goes snicker-snack!" Can anyone else confirm if that's specific to crowning, potentially while already holding it (rather than getting it as a crowning gift)?--[[User:Aribog\|Aribog]] ([[User talk:Aribog\|talk]]) 22:26, 30 October 2025 (UTC)w

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:21, 14 November 2016
Line 91:		Line 91:

	I'd go on, but NetHack does not allow you to flog a dead horse. [[User:Netzhack\|Netzhack]] ([[User talk:Netzhack\|talk]]) 20:28, 26 May 2016 (UTC)		I'd go on, but NetHack does not allow you to flog a dead horse. [[User:Netzhack\|Netzhack]] ([[User talk:Netzhack\|talk]]) 20:28, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
		+
		+	:No reaction ... so I changed that sentence and the one following it to fix the logic. [[User:Netzhack\|Netzhack]] ([[User talk:Netzhack\|talk]]) 22:21, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:28, 26 May 2016
Line 83:		Line 83:
	:--[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] ([[User talk:Tjr\|talk]]) 08:36, 9 October 2012 (UTC)		:--[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] ([[User talk:Tjr\|talk]]) 08:36, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
	::Something else for vorpal blade's favor: healing. Even regeneration isn't going to help the monster much in normal combat (7.4 expected hit to kill demogorgon would mean 8 additional HP), but it's a big deal when dealing with covetous monsters. Demogorgon isn't going to let you hit him 8 times in a row unless you're on the upstairs. However, with vorpal blade, you don't ''need'' to hit him multiple times in a row; all you need to do is keep hitting him and eventually he'll be instakilled. This is probably more useful against the regular demon princes, as you can't teleport to the upstairs on their levels, and this would allow you to kill the prince without needing to backtrack to the start of the level, constantly trading blows but not doing any lasting damage. -- [[User:Qazmlpok\|Qazmlpok]] ([[User talk:Qazmlpok\|talk]]) 12:44, 9 October 2012 (UTC)		::Something else for vorpal blade's favor: healing. Even regeneration isn't going to help the monster much in normal combat (7.4 expected hit to kill demogorgon would mean 8 additional HP), but it's a big deal when dealing with covetous monsters. Demogorgon isn't going to let you hit him 8 times in a row unless you're on the upstairs. However, with vorpal blade, you don't ''need'' to hit him multiple times in a row; all you need to do is keep hitting him and eventually he'll be instakilled. This is probably more useful against the regular demon princes, as you can't teleport to the upstairs on their levels, and this would allow you to kill the prince without needing to backtrack to the start of the level, constantly trading blows but not doing any lasting damage. -- [[User:Qazmlpok\|Qazmlpok]] ([[User talk:Qazmlpok\|talk]]) 12:44, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
		+
		+	== The Logic of Probabilities ==
		+
		+	The article now says, "For example, after you hit a monster ten times, there is a 40% chance that you have beheaded it." That's not true. If VB has a 5% chance per hit of beheading a monster, then after the tenth hit, there is a 5% chance that the monster has been beheaded. Because if you behead it on hit 1, 2, ..., or 9, then you don't get a tenth hit.
		+
		+	While the sentence is apparently intended to say something meaningful, possibly even useful, as it stands it is nonsense.
		+
		+	I'd go on, but NetHack does not allow you to flog a dead horse. [[User:Netzhack\|Netzhack]] ([[User talk:Netzhack\|talk]]) 20:28, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:44, 9 October 2012
Line 82:		Line 82:
	:*Orcrist and Sting can be named to guarantee [[Stormbringer]] as your first sacrifice gift.		:*Orcrist and Sting can be named to guarantee [[Stormbringer]] as your first sacrifice gift.
	:--[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] ([[User talk:Tjr\|talk]]) 08:36, 9 October 2012 (UTC)		:--[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] ([[User talk:Tjr\|talk]]) 08:36, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
		+	::Something else for vorpal blade's favor: healing. Even regeneration isn't going to help the monster much in normal combat (7.4 expected hit to kill demogorgon would mean 8 additional HP), but it's a big deal when dealing with covetous monsters. Demogorgon isn't going to let you hit him 8 times in a row unless you're on the upstairs. However, with vorpal blade, you don't ''need'' to hit him multiple times in a row; all you need to do is keep hitting him and eventually he'll be instakilled. This is probably more useful against the regular demon princes, as you can't teleport to the upstairs on their levels, and this would allow you to kill the prince without needing to backtrack to the start of the level, constantly trading blows but not doing any lasting damage. -- [[User:Qazmlpok\|Qazmlpok]] ([[User talk:Qazmlpok\|talk]]) 12:44, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

@@ Line 79: / Line 79: @@
 :*Mean damage calculations are available at [[Artifact_weapon]]
 :*Demonslayer/Vorpal/Sunsword  are good for pets: you can enchant it and be sure your pet won't ever swap it out for an unenchanted but preferred-base-item weapon.
-:*Fire- and Frost Brand will not destroy [[death drop]]s, only the [[monster starting inventory]]. So all you lose are scrolls of teleportation/create monster/earth and various mostly-healing potions.
+:*Fire- and Frost Brand will not destroy [[death drop]]s, only the [[monster starting inventory]]. So all you loose are scrolls of teleportation/create monster/earth and various mostly-healing potions.
 :*Orcrist and Sting can be named to guarantee [[Stormbringer]] as your first sacrifice gift.
 :--[[User:Tjr|Tjr]] ([[User talk:Tjr|talk]]) 08:36, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:36, 9 October 2012
Line 76:		Line 76:

	[[User:Blackcustard\|Blackcustard]] ([[User talk:Blackcustard\|talk]]) 03:26, 9 October 2012 (UTC)		[[User:Blackcustard\|Blackcustard]] ([[User talk:Blackcustard\|talk]]) 03:26, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
		+
		+	:*Mean damage calculations are available at [[Artifact_weapon]]
		+	:*Demonslayer/Vorpal/Sunsword are good for pets: you can enchant it and be sure your pet won't ever swap it out for an unenchanted but preferred-base-item weapon.
		+	:*Fire- and Frost Brand will not destroy [[death drop]]s, only the [[monster starting inventory]]. So all you lose are scrolls of teleportation/create monster/earth and various mostly-healing potions.
		+	:*Orcrist and Sting can be named to guarantee [[Stormbringer]] as your first sacrifice gift.
		+	:--[[User:Tjr\|Tjr]] ([[User talk:Tjr\|talk]]) 08:36, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:26, 9 October 2012
Line 74:		Line 74:

	Like I said, brain dump.		Like I said, brain dump.
		+
		+	[[User:Blackcustard\|Blackcustard]] ([[User talk:Blackcustard\|talk]]) 03:26, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:25, 9 October 2012
Line 17:		Line 17:
	@Ion frigate - "Thiefbane is not better than Vorpal Blade, not by any means". Perhaps You are right, I forgot that Thiefbane beheads only "@". But what about it's level draining and cancellation? In combat with monsters without heads, it can be better weapon, but monsters with heads is propably more, more frequent. --[[User:S.K.\|S.K.]] 22:05, 18 December 2011 (UTC)		@Ion frigate - "Thiefbane is not better than Vorpal Blade, not by any means". Perhaps You are right, I forgot that Thiefbane beheads only "@". But what about it's level draining and cancellation? In combat with monsters without heads, it can be better weapon, but monsters with heads is propably more, more frequent. --[[User:S.K.\|S.K.]] 22:05, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
	:In combat against creatures without heads... use a different weapon. If the monster isn't an @ Thiefbane is no more effective than an (enchanted if you didn't wish for it) long sword. There aren't any @ (AFAIK) without heads, so there's no situation where you can take advantage of level draining but not beheading. Additionally, Thiefbane always has a chance to blast you because it's shopkeeper aligned, so switching to it when confronting a swarm of @ isn't the best idea anyways. -- [[User:Qazmlpok\|Qazmlpok]] 22:12, 18 December 2011 (UTC)		:In combat against creatures without heads... use a different weapon. If the monster isn't an @ Thiefbane is no more effective than an (enchanted if you didn't wish for it) long sword. There aren't any @ (AFAIK) without heads, so there's no situation where you can take advantage of level draining but not beheading. Additionally, Thiefbane always has a chance to blast you because it's shopkeeper aligned, so switching to it when confronting a swarm of @ isn't the best idea anyways. -- [[User:Qazmlpok\|Qazmlpok]] 22:12, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+	== On the usefulness of Vorpal ==
		+
		+	anselmus and I had a long debate tonight about the relative strength of certain artifact weapons. Mainly vorpal blade, frost brand, and grayswandir. I'm going to brain dump some of discussion here.
		+
		+	I'm also planning to add columns to that table on this page that show how much cumulative damage other artifact weapons would have done. aaxelb pointed out that [[excalibur]] is a good yardstick here, since it's damage is simple and consistent, and everyone has probably used and loved it. I'll get to this in the next day or so.
		+
		+	Silver saber vs. demons is (1d8 + 1d20 + enchant), demonbane vs demons is 2*(1d12 + enchant). Demonbane becomes better at enchant >=3.
		+
		+	It's not about survivability post castle, it's about minimum tedium. No one cares that grays cuts down asmo. Anything cuts down asmo unless you are insane and fight him without cold resistance off E. But the fact that grays cuts down normal &&&&&&&&&&& spam is awesome.
		+
		+	anselmus points out that no weapon combination lets you just mow everything easily; though I would say that that's basically what +7 grays/excal twoweaponed, dagger/arrowstorm, and magic missile come close to doing. Massive damage against everything in general.
		+
		+	I wondered idly how much item loss frosty/flamey _really_ caused; but without looking into it much. Burning up a bunch of crappy scrolls you don't need doesn't really count as item loss. And a lot of the potions would have been thrown or drunk anyway.
		+
		+	Some figures:
		+	-------
		+	minotaur average hitpoints = avg(15d8) = 67.5
		+	at +0 frostbrand averages 13 damage
		+	at +7 27
		+	that's 5.2 / 2.5 hits to kill the average minotaur
		+	a 23%/12% chance for vorpal to behead it first
		+	-------
		+	demo hp = 200
		+	7.4 hits to kill with +7 frosty on average
		+	32% chance for vorpal to get him first
		+	-------
		+
		+	5% beheading is fun; but doubling a +7 enchant for guaranteed damage against a good portion of the monsters in the game is better. But then you have the cold resistant monsters:
		+
		+	-------
		+	6.3 hits to kill archons (which have cold res) with +7 frosty on avg
		+	or 13.1 for +0
		+	27%/49% chance for vorpal to get the behead in that number of attacks
		+	-------
		+
		+	Vorpal is your preferred Archon killer, over frosty/flamey.
		+
		+	Vorpal is more consistent across monster types; there being few headless monsters; but less consistent across fights.
		+
		+	quipyowert had the interesting idea that Vorpal's behead chance should be luck dependent.
		+
		+	< anselmus> it's really a question of how fast each weapon kills over the entirety of the game
		+	< anselmus> which would seem to me to be a studependously complicated statistical problem
		+	< anselmus> as long it's granted that vorpy CAN be better against some monsters, i'll be happy
		+
		+	Perhaps that's the real point. We should have harder discussions on weapon choice in Nethack. Many roles have a weapon they do and should gravitate towards; like excal for valk, excal for samurai, excal for knight; stormy or bow/dagger for ranger, dagger for rogue; etc. Other classes (priest, tourist, monk) are less obvious.
		+
		+	Nethack has plenty of weapons, like giantslayer/demonbane, which we often portray as being complete crap. Giantslayer is a perfectly serviceable long sword with an unimportant to-hit bonus, nothing more, nothing less. Demonbane/vorpal/sunsword are slightly better than normal long swords. As someone once said to me: Grimtooth is almost a long sword with the form factor of a dagger (5.5 avg for Grimtooth vs 4.5/6.5 for long sword small/large).
		+
		+	And ultimately, a good part of the reason that giantslayer/demonbane/sunsword/grimtooth never get used isn't because they are terrible, but because they have no use-case. "I need a strong melee weapon!" Are you lawful? Excal. Are you neutral/chaotic? Did you get frosty/flamey/stormy? Yes? Use one. No? Keep saccing. Unless you FOUND one of those swords very early game (unlikely) and aren't able to sac yet, and are not a magic-wizard, dagger-rogue, dagger/arrow-ranger, using them isn't even a consideration. They might as well not exist.
		+
		+	Trollsbane, at 5/4.5, really IS floor trash. It should NOT be used. But here's what the Trollsbane page says: "Trollsbane is an artifact weapon that does double damage and +1d5 to-hit against trolls." Could be a bit clearer no? (The sarcasm is biting, but only if you know Trollsbane sucks.)
		+
		+	The role-specific pages do a better job of discussing weapon choice. Maybe some of that discussion needs to propagate into the weapon pages themselves.
		+
		+	Like I said, brain dump.

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:12, 18 December 2011
Line 16:		Line 16:
	==Thiefbane==		==Thiefbane==
	@Ion frigate - "Thiefbane is not better than Vorpal Blade, not by any means". Perhaps You are right, I forgot that Thiefbane beheads only "@". But what about it's level draining and cancellation? In combat with monsters without heads, it can be better weapon, but monsters with heads is propably more, more frequent. --[[User:S.K.\|S.K.]] 22:05, 18 December 2011 (UTC)		@Ion frigate - "Thiefbane is not better than Vorpal Blade, not by any means". Perhaps You are right, I forgot that Thiefbane beheads only "@". But what about it's level draining and cancellation? In combat with monsters without heads, it can be better weapon, but monsters with heads is propably more, more frequent. --[[User:S.K.\|S.K.]] 22:05, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
		+	:In combat against creatures without heads... use a different weapon. If the monster isn't an @ Thiefbane is no more effective than an (enchanted if you didn't wish for it) long sword. There aren't any @ (AFAIK) without heads, so there's no situation where you can take advantage of level draining but not beheading. Additionally, Thiefbane always has a chance to blast you because it's shopkeeper aligned, so switching to it when confronting a swarm of @ isn't the best idea anyways. -- [[User:Qazmlpok\|Qazmlpok]] 22:12, 18 December 2011 (UTC)