Talk:Extinction
I believe that summoning ghosts from altars where the priest where killed also don't respect extinction. (I killed 200+ ghosts and they wheren't extinct) --Soyweiser
Also I wonder if the kops respect extinction. Could you steal from a shop and get kops over and over again? --Soyweiser
- I looked at the code and it looks like you can make kops extinct. I edited the main article to reflect this. Addps4cat 17:46, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Can Rodney be made extinct? I mean if I kill him 121 times will he be still returning?
- He'll keep returning. Tjr 17:18, June 15, 2010 (UTC)
Are there any actions at all that sometimes respect extinction? The main article has a heading for it, but nothing under the heading. --Uncreative Username 20:03, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Why is the beehive thing under both "respects" and "doesn't respect"? I don't know which one is right. Aeronflux 05:07, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
- I believe that this means that existing beehives will continue to generate monsters indefinitely but new hives will not be generated if Killer Bees are extinct (as per Beehive). DemonDoll 14:13, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Contents
Monsters specific to aligned dungeon branches
Some monsters can only be generated in aligned dungeon branches or levels.
- What are these monsters?
- Chaotic levels are quite deep, and lawful/neutral quite shallow. Can it happen certain monsters cannot be randomly generated at all due to these restrictions?
- According to the spoiler, this concerns only baby monsters (crocodile, dragon, naga).
Tjr 17:29, June 15, 2010 (UTC)
Exinct
So I am toying with a cheap version of Extinction. Tha being genociding everything that is genocidable and then killing 120 of everything else. I've genocided 158 creatures. My question is what happens when I've made everything go extinct if possible. Will the dungeon simply be empty?Ndwolfwood 20:43, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- In that all random monster generation would stop, yes. However, if you're lonely, you could go read the cursed Book of the Dead: this would still generate nalfeshnees and ghosts, which cannot be genocided; the nalfeshnees in turn could bring even more company, as their nasty little summoning spell doesn't respect extinction either. Sadly, if you'd genocided everything, the only friends they'd have left would be iron golems and couatls. Still, your new nalfeshnee friend could gate in some of his friends as well, which might include other chaotic demons (including foocubi!). You could also polyself into a lawful demon and attack something, if you want your demonic friends to be lawful evil instead.
- Sorry for the slightly snarky nature of the above, but I believe that those are the only actions that a) don't respect extinction, b) aren't affected by genocide and c) don't deal with exploring more of the dungeon (since a character who has gone this far has probably explored all of it) -Ion frigate 03:11, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Why?
A simple question: why does extinction even exist? It seems like it might be to make it so one cannot play a single game indefinitely, but why then does it have so many loopholes (including big ones, like pudding farming)? Even with genocide + extinction, it's still relatively trivial to generate an indefinite number of monsters. Or is its purpose to prevent create monster from being easy to spam for infinite experience? Again, though, it's not hard to use a nalfeshnee for the same goal. -Ion frigate 03:19, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
- My guess? It's to reduce exploitation of specific monsters (wraiths, nurses, etc.), and they extended it to all random monsters for consistency. Sort of like how instead of just fixing the stone->unstone->uncancel exploit for foocubi, they did it for all seducing monsters (i.e. nymphs) as well. It's a little more plausible than just setting a cap for a few arbitrary (in narrative terms) monsters. --Darth l33t 09:39, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Could it be the dev team just wants to give a player another goal? To make every creature extinct is really hard to do or at least time consuming but so is playing a pacifist game so it does not really affect the average game. It could be they just wanted another conduct challenge to add to the game Ndwolfwood
Golems
Two questions on golems. I have a theory that golems created through polypiling would not respect extintion. Is this true? I also have a theory that stone golems created through hitting susceptiable golems with a cockatrice corpse would not respect extinctionism. Ndwolfwood 01:03, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Skeleleton
Same question as above. Skeletons created through polypiling bones, do they respect extinction?Ndwolfwood 01:10, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
- Same answer as above. Read the extinctionism spoiler. (the quick answer is no) -- Qazmlpok 02:15, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Extinction Method
I believe I have come up with the best way to remove all Angelic being from the game. It requires some wishes, stone to flesh, a ice box, and you guessed it cockatrice corpses. It benefits from scrolls of charging and a method to induce confusion. You need to wish for a statue of each of the Angelic beings perfrably in reverse order of difficulty. WHile you may encounter some of the weaker Angelic beings mid game if you extinct them then during the end game back you are liable to be fighting exclusively Archons and in Slashem Solars and Planetars. Either spam create monster for cockatrices corpses or wish for them. Name each corpse and place all but one into the icebox. Then just spam stone to flesh and hit with a cockatrice corpse on the Archon statue until you run out of power. Place the cockatrice corpse in to the ice box. Either rest to recover power or if you have a scroll of charging availble, confuse yourself and then read it in order to recharge your power. Then grab a corpse from the ice box and repeat. Obviously there are a lot of variations on this but the important thing is that you can eliminat Solars, Archons and Planetars early on. If you play a extinction game then you could easily be fighting exclusively those classes all the way up since Solar and Planetars are not generated until after you recover the amulet. Anyway that's just my 2 cents. I didn't think it was important enough to change the article but I think its worth noting that extincting the weaker Angelic beings can create some very bad results for you after you recieve the amulet and on the Astral Plane unless you come up with a strategy to remove the top Angelic beings. Doing this also will presumably make the Astral Plane much easier although I haven't found out yet. Ndwolfwood 00:18, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
- Removing easy species from the game does make the remaining monsters much harder. Usually, this hits only people who went over the top with genocide. They will find a chain reaction of Archons and titans summoning Archons and titans in the (vanilla) Endgame.
- Your procedure works even without wishes. High-level angelic beings can be generated in Vlad's Tower, Frankenstein's Lab, and perhaps a few other dungeon branches. In case that isn't deep enough for Solars, they can be granted as minions if you are high-level and lawful (helm of opposite alignment). In vanilla, my wishless pacifists usually level up and create lots of monsters at the Castle until they can charm an Archon, or do that in Vlad's if they can't level up.
- Minor improvements are a boulder+Elbereth fort, the Eye of the Aethiopica, an amulet of flying, and a powerful pet patrolling outside. The fort will protect you from the hordes spellcasters like to summon. --Tjr 01:25, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
I went a little over the top with genocide pretty early on. Let's say that the number one creature in the castle are steel golems. I am still deciding whether that wand is worth it. On the bright side massive genocide in Slashem has a very postive aspect. It force the creation of ruby, diamond and sapphire golems. It also forces the creation of gypsies killing two bird with one stone. WIthout wishes how do you cordinate having a cockatrice corpse and the Archon being around? Ndwolfwood 01:34, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
- Cockatrices have a much lower difficulty than Archons. You can cast create monster on a shallow dungeon level until a few cockatrices leave corpses, and then go deeper and cast create monster until an Archon appears. --Tjr
Life saving
Does killing life-saved monsters count toward extinctionism? On talk:Juiblex someone noted they don't show up in your end-of-game kills. --Tjr (talk) 23:04, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
- Life saving code appears to simply restore the HP of the original monster and not create a new one. I'm not seeing any calls or makemon, which is what calls propagate and marks monsters as extinct. -- Qazmlpok (talk) 00:30, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
In light of this information, along with stth's recent provings that life saving did not increment kill counters, I removed this bit from the page:
Finally, monsters that resist stoning and leave no corpse can usually wear amulets of life saving and can be extincted with enough amulets, though gathering that many amulets in a non-Wizard mode game is a task that borders on impossible.
This needs Real hard evidence to be reinstated.
Omegacenti (talk) 12:49, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
In-game Extinction Status
Is it possible to check one's extinction progress while still within the game? If so, how?
--Mitlcl (talk) 21:59, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
- No, there's no way to check this until the game is over. You can of course record your game and play it back to see what you killed, or just keep notes, but there are valid reasons for the game not showing you the vanquished list in-game: for instance, a blind character would be able to tell what every killed monster is by checking the lists before and after killing it.
- Most extinctionist games that I know just cast create monster ad infinitum, in various places to cover all possible monster generation circumstances, until monsters just stop showing up. --Phol ende wodan (talk) 22:08, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
dual purpose
On rereading this page, it's a bit odd, in that half of it discusses the game mechanics, but the second half only gently hints at the conduct - if you don't already know what an extinctionist is, you might be confused. I'll think about that. Pinkbeast (talk) 05:49, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Move this article to Extinction?
Extinctionism is the playstyle/pseudo-conduct and extinction is the game mechanic. This page currently describes both the game mechanic and the playstyle. I think this article should be primarily about the game mechanic, and discussion of the playstyle should be a subsection (this is already the current state of the article). While most players who care about the mechanic are probably playing extinctionist games, it is somewhat common for players to make soldiers extinct without deliberately intending to, which may have a significant effect in the Castle or Fort Ludios, so it's not only relevant to extinctionist players. I propose moving this page to Extinction. (Non-admins such as myself cannot implement this move because Extinction has non-trivial page history.) Cathartes (talk) 04:12, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
- Yeah, I feel like this is a sensible move. --Umbire the Phantom (talk) 20:31, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
- Agreed, did the move. I'll go check and see if there are any other broken redirects. -Ion frigate (talk) 05:38, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
