Difference between revisions of "Talk:Unofficial conduct"
(→Zen) |
Schneelocke (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
: Who was the player? If possible, would you please linkify the article to point to a reference for this ascension? -[[User:Tjr|Tjr]] 15:32, September 18, 2009 (UTC) | : Who was the player? If possible, would you please linkify the article to point to a reference for this ascension? -[[User:Tjr|Tjr]] 15:32, September 18, 2009 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Popular conducts == | ||
| + | |||
| + | Are "inventoryless", "god's will" and "no identification" actually popular conducts? The first two in particular I've never really heard about, and I'm not sure they shouldn't be under "other conducts" instead. If noone objects, I'll go ahead and move these later. -- [[User:Schneelocke|Schnee]] 12:30, May 27, 2010 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 12:30, 27 May 2010
Contents
Toolless
If you want to get in to chests or large boxes, can #forcing the lock with a blunt weapon to attempt to destroy the container (and zapping a /oLocking if you fail) break this unofficial conduct? Would using the unused (deferred?) feature #tip to upend a bag of its contents also break it? -- Kalon 00:32, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
Inventoryless
The inventoryless conduct sounds like an extremely difficult one. Has it ever been done? I think the article needs an example or two about this. —ZeroOne (talk / @) 23:34, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Zen
First zen rogue that I am avare of was "3.4.3 4331546 7 -5 49 161 161 0 20060806 20060802 1031 Rog Hum Mal Cha ix,ascended" at NAO. Before crash ttyrec: http://alt.org/nethack/getoldttyrec.php?player=ix starts from 145. and ascend in 152. --84.248.118.187 15:52, September 18, 2009 (UTC)
- Who was the player? If possible, would you please linkify the article to point to a reference for this ascension? -Tjr 15:32, September 18, 2009 (UTC)
Popular conducts
Are "inventoryless", "god's will" and "no identification" actually popular conducts? The first two in particular I've never really heard about, and I'm not sure they shouldn't be under "other conducts" instead. If noone objects, I'll go ahead and move these later. -- Schnee 12:30, May 27, 2010 (UTC)
