Talk:Unicorn horn

From NetHackWiki
Revision as of 07:30, 28 May 2007 by Killian (talk | contribs) (Polypiling unicorn horns: source-diving and number-crunching would give a better result)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Why does this appear as a cyan weapon? In-game, it's a white tool. I don't know how to change it so it's a tool and has the weapon information at the same time. --Someone Else 16:36, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I fixed the color by adding color=white to the template. I used the weapon template instead of the tool template because the former includes everything the latter has, and more (such as damage information). The only two tool-weapons are the unicorn horn and the pick-axe, so I don't think it's much of a problem, nor is it worth devoting a whole template to these two items. --Eidolos 16:54, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
But... it's the wrong bracket...
I'm somewhat of a perfectionist, and it's kind of bugging me that it uses ther weapon template for something that isn't really a weapon. Also, I don't see any reason to not make a template that's for tools that are weapons. What's the reason? --Someone Else 16:58, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Fixed. To get ( instead of ), instead of making a new template, I added an optional parameter to {{weapon}}, since I know the MediaWiki template syntax for that. --Kernigh 18:31, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Sorry about that, Someone Else, I hadn't realized that it was displaying the wrong glyph. --Eidolos 04:24, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay, guys, this article advises to quaff unidentified potions instead of dipping a unicorn horn into it. I have a very hard time seeing how this can possibly be good advice. The article cites as justification the fact that you will lose your unicorn horn if you dip it into a potion of polymorph, but this reason is bogus, because you can test for potions of polymorph by dipping junk objects first. (The article already mentions this in section 2, but curiously fails to grasp the implications of this in section 3.)

Even if you rule out polymorph, quaffing the potion is not usually a good idea, because by quaffing the potion you lose the potion, whereas by dipping a unicorn horn into it, the potion (if bad) will turn into water or fruit juice, both of which are very useful for making holy water (and if it's good you can still quaff it anyway after dipping). In most cases, it is more useful to have an additional potion of water, since people in real games do sometimes tend to run out of holy water, and distinguishing between the various bad potions is not all that useful or difficult. In fact, the most useful of the bad potions (confusion and booze) are easy to identify anyway (by having monsters throw them at you, and using amethyst stones respectively), and the other two are easy to tell apart since one becomes water and the other becomes fruit juice after you dip into it.

So does anyone here want to pipe up in defense of quaffing unidentified potions? If not, I'll go ahead and change the article to reflect what I just said. --Djao 05:41, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, I went ahead and made the changes. --Djao 20:11, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

"Unihorn" listed as an acronym

Unihorn is listed in Category:Acronyms for some reason... http://nethack.wikia.com/index.php?title=Unihorn&redirect=no --88.108.198.28 21:28, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Polypiling unicorn horns

I could start a wizard game and polypile 100 horns to see what they turn into, should I?

It would probably be more accurate and helpful to crunch the numbers mathematically, based on the relative item probabilities and the polymorphing code. Of course, this requires a certain level of familiarity with the code... -- Killian 07:30, 28 May 2007 (UTC)