Talk:Elven broadsword

From NetHackWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
"All elf creatures, such as Woodland-elf, Gray-elf, Elf-lord, etc, may be 
spawned with one in their starting inventory. Any given elf has a 1 in 3 chance 
of being spawned with an Elven broadsword."

I'm fairly certain I got that right, but the referenced page was awfully confusing about it:

elf               an elven mithril coat or cloak (50%); an elven leather
                   helm (50%) or if that fails, elven boots (25%); an
                   elven dagger (50%); and either:
                   * an elven shield (25%); an elven short sword (66%);
                     an elven bow; 3-14 arrows, or
                   * an elven broadsword; an elven shield (50%), or
                   * an elven spear and an elven shield

Specifically, the line "or if that fails." This could be taken to mean that the latter section only applies if the former check FAILS, and not always, as my 1 in 3 comment says. The fact that there was a semicolon afterwards makes me think the two are to be taken singly, with "and either" to mean they're equally weighted, three options, ergo, 1 in 3.

I can speak from personal experience, however, that the odds of getting one is pretty good. They're actually sort of hard to avoid, especially in the early game being on the receiving end, rather than minmaxing end.

Feagradze 14:11, June 29, 2010 (UTC)

Fire damage (burn/erosion) to elven broadsword/daggers *not* relevant?

While being made of wood, elven broadswords/daggers should never be burnt by fire while wielded, in your inventory, or by attacking a monster. So in practice they are nearly as good as if erosion-proofed already.

I am *not* 100% sure about this (and I'm also looking for a confirmation), but I don't think that I have ever had a burnt elven dagger.

So I think that this is the case for any other wooden weapon as well.

Hal Novek (talk) 12:00, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

This may be new behavior (I play 3.7-dev on hardfought). I have definitely burned wooden weapons in melee against monsters with a passive fire attack (red mold and fire elemental in my experience). Uncertain about ranged attacks...

--Jimeikner (talk) 15:33, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Yeah no, your inventory and wielded weapon (EDIT: including thrown ones) can totally be subjected to burning while attacking a monster with a passive fire attack, and I believe that's been the case for several versions. --Umbire the Phantom (talk) 01:31, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
Ok, thanks for the clarification. Maybe then it was only the case with thrown weapons (and while in your inventory), or something has changed since 3.6.3 and later versions. I'll have to check.
Hal Novek (talk) 13:18, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
I'd meant to include thrown weapons as well as wielded ones, and the fact that corrosion/rust has applied to both when dealing with oozes and acidic jellies in both cases leads me to think it's the same for wooden weapons and projectiles against fire passives. --Umbire the Phantom (talk) 16:29, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
I just did a test on 3.6.0 with both an elven broadsword and a (thrown) elven dagger against a fire elemental. Both suffered erosion. I'm pretty sure this has always been the behavior; I think it's just that most weapons aren't made of wood so you don't see this erosion very often. And if you are using wooden weapons by the time you encounter fire elementals, you've probably had a chance to erode proof it, or at least bless it combined with high luck. -- Qazmlpok (talk) 02:24, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
In addition, as the article previously implied before I trimmed it, you get plenty of elves, which means in all but the worst cases you have at least a couple of backups (though admittedly that may be a projection of my own pragmatism). --Umbire the Phantom (talk) 04:42, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification to you too, Qazmlpok!
Then, if I understand correctly, wooden weapons are not as good as fireproofed as I thought, but only passive fire attacks can actually damage them in melee (when wielded) or when thrown (and of course gelatinous cubes could also eat them when on the ground regardless of their fireproof status). And the only monsters with passive fire attacks are red molds (that only have a passive attack and do not move, so you just can ignore), fire vortex (mostly relevant for elven broadswords, as you usually fight them while engulfed), and fire elementals (very late in the game). I'm thinking about pyrolisks (whose fire gaze is not reflected if you are invisible), wands of fire, fire breaths, fire traps, etc...
So it is just that in practice there is not much benefit in fireproof them, unless you have extra scrolls that you could not use for other things. Is it right or not? Hal Novek (talk) 09:39, 28 November 2020 (UTC) elementals aren't as late as you'd think but in any case it's more "don't assume the viewer is completely new" and taking it as granted that the player will take steps to properly guard/proof a weapon that they regularly use, plus putting such a tip on ever pages would be kinda nattery in practice anyway. --Umbire the Phantom (talk) 12:25, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
I think it could be useful to add a sentence to the section Erosion#Strategy, that is more general. But I want to be sure first that there is no other way to burn wooden weapons (that you are carrying) than attacking (in both melee and ranged) with them a monster having a passive fire attack. Hal Novek (talk) 14:31, 28 November 2020 (UTC)