Profile for PoD person

Error message

Deprecated function: implode(): Passing glue string after array is deprecated. Swap the parameters in drupal_get_feeds() (line 394 of /var/www/pied-piper.ermarian.net/includes/common.inc).

Field	Value
Displayed name	PoD person
Member number	4445
Title	Shock Trooper
Postcount	293
Homepage
Registered	Saturday, May 29 2004 07:00

Recent posts

Pages

Author	Recent posts
Concentrated Linearity Debate (New Voices Welcome to Participate and Vote) in Blades of Avernum
PoD person Shock Trooper Member # 4445	written Sunday, March 6 2005 08:30 Profile #24 Why I liked Canopy, actually. Posts: 293 \| Registered: Saturday, May 29 2004 07:00
Concentrated Linearity Debate (New Voices Welcome to Participate and Vote) in Blades of Avernum
PoD person Shock Trooper Member # 4445	written Saturday, March 5 2005 19:37 Profile #8 Dahak, I shall quote you a piece of my article, I addressed that, actually: quote: Firstly, despite my characters' importance to the story, and the other characters' preoccupation with them, I didn't feel like they were the center of the world. TM made Canopy seem, to me, like a living, breathing reality, with a dynamic existence beyond that of the party, and he did so by limiting me, not empowering me. My characters couldn't go everywhere or do everything, and their actions weren't the be-all and end-all of causality in the game world. These touches made Canopy more real for me than any amount of choices ever could have made Geneforge-land. And another: quote: Although the end of Canopy was more passive than the first, say, three quarters, this did not bother me because the events in the cutscenes were both a culmination of the drama that the narrative had built up to that point, and evidence that a lot was going on around the party; again, the world of Canopy existed outside of the challenges that my party faced and the actions they took. It was a case study about Canopy and why I liked it, obviously. Thuryl, a scenario is a service beyond my present capabilities, unfortunately. I felt a need to point out what a designer has done well, and why I liked it, as opposed to calling the community pretentious and egotistical. Hence, my article. Kelandon, the story is the best part of your scenario, and it is developed in the cutscenes. That said, I'd like to be able to turn them off, just for when I have to reload from a save before a cutscene I've already seen. Posts: 293 \| Registered: Saturday, May 29 2004 07:00
Nature Of The Beast: Why Game-Style Nonlinearity Just Doesn't Work In Blades in Blades of Avernum
PoD person Shock Trooper Member # 4445	written Saturday, March 5 2005 11:45 Profile #4 Oops. How could I forget about Kill Ogre, Win Prize, its amazing continuation Kill Ogre, Win Nothing, and, finally, the near-orgasmic Sir Psycho Sexy? My humblest apologies, noble Alec. Posts: 293 \| Registered: Saturday, May 29 2004 07:00
Nature Of The Beast: Why Game-Style Nonlinearity Just Doesn't Work In Blades in Blades of Avernum
PoD person Shock Trooper Member # 4445	written Saturday, March 5 2005 10:46 Profile #2 Excellent. Excellent. Excellent. This is the most exceedingly rational, pragmatic thing I've seen in the whole mess. I'm normally a lurker, but I felt compelled to post an article so that other lurkers, who may be blessed with actual designing talent, don't feel pressured to waste resources in exactly the manner you describe because what I perceive to be a vocal, and stringently so, minority says so. Now that a more respected member of the community has made his point more eloquently and decisively than I had done, I think it's time to fade back into the shadows. Alec, you have proven why you are an extremely important member of the community, despite not having released as many scenarios as some others. Posts: 293 \| Registered: Saturday, May 29 2004 07:00
In Defense of Pure Linearity: a Case Study in Blades of Avernum
PoD person Shock Trooper Member # 4445	written Saturday, March 5 2005 08:20 Profile #8 Umm, Kelandon is a "new person" and he's been accepted with open arms. And this isn't calling the advocates of non-linearity wrong, I'm just saying how and why I like linearity. Oh, and I didn't see your point before, ADoS, I'll get right on that. I don't want to remove the spoilers, because the whole case study concept of the article would kind of be ruined if there were no specific references to the plot. I shall, however, mark the offending paragraph. [ Saturday, March 05, 2005 08:26: Message edited by: PoD person ] Posts: 293 \| Registered: Saturday, May 29 2004 07:00
In Defense of Pure Linearity: a Case Study in Blades of Avernum
PoD person Shock Trooper Member # 4445	written Saturday, March 5 2005 07:15 Profile #5 This article was more for one or two hypothetical invisible newbs with some designing talent than anyone else. I read all the articles when I first registered BoA, and tried (failing miserably) to make a scenario by all of their tenets. Because the designers themselves have mostly abstained from the discussion, I felt that any designers of the future who may happen to be lurking should know that there is a counterpoint to the points which have been presented. If you'll notice, I said a masterfully crafted non-linear scenario could be just as good as a masterfully crafted linear one like Canopy. I just said it was ridiculous to expect the same kind of drama from the former. Really, this article was just meant to return the debate to "a matter of choice," because there have been a lot of articles saying that a non-linear scenario can be more than another, linear, scenario can ever be. I meant simply to show that there are some things a linear scenario can provide, which a non-linear one cannot, as well as the reverse, which had already been shown in other articles. Also, I made sure to include the points that silver made, although they weren't nearly as well or directly stated. Posts: 293 \| Registered: Saturday, May 29 2004 07:00
Linear Scenarios v. Non-Linear Scenarios: The doctrine of time = money in Blades of Avernum
PoD person Shock Trooper Member # 4445	written Saturday, March 5 2005 06:50 Profile #5 This was probably a better idea than my more abstract defense of linearity. Kudos, silver, for saying what needed to be said. Posts: 293 \| Registered: Saturday, May 29 2004 07:00
In Defense of Pure Linearity: a Case Study in Blades of Avernum
PoD person Shock Trooper Member # 4445	written Friday, March 4 2005 21:23 Profile #0 This is about BoX (BoA primarily, I don't own BoE) scenario design. There are several spoilers about Canopy in the paragraph marked as such. Don't read it if you haven't played the scenario. Much has been made of the desirability of a dynamic, non-linear world for a scenario. Some have even spoken desparagingly of the designers of linear, story-driven scenarios, saying that their desire to tell a story through the BoA medium is pretentious, even egotistical. Is it any less egotistical, however, for the player to indict the designer for not giving him/her enough choices? In this case, I say let the "egotism" of the person putting hours into the development of a scenario take precedence. So, in light of all the non-designers sharing their opinions on the subject, I am going to do a fairly detailed case study, using Canopy, because it is my favorite scenario out for BoA, because TM has often been (somewhat unjustly, IMO), accused of egotism, and because it is an excellent example of linear design done very, very well. Its foil, for this discussion, will be Geneforge, because it is an example of a lot of things that annoy me about a lack of linearity, and because, while not a BoX scenario, its interface (particularly the dialog system) is similar enough to merit its inclusion in an article about BoX scenario design. Before I get into the case study, I'll delve a bit into what I want from a scenario. When I put a new directory in the scenario folder and fire up BoA, I do so with the objective of being entertained. I want interesting things to happen to my character(s). Those events should include challenges, which I must overcome, whether they be tactical challenges posed by combat, a difficult puzzle, or the necessity of pumping all the NPCs for info. This, I feel, more than choices or lack thereof, separates the BoX medium from more passive media like books, movies, etc. What I do not want is for me to be responsible for creating interesting events through my character(s). The whole reason that I play computer games is to free myself from the obligation of creating my own fun; it has been created for me. I want the designer to create an enjoyable experience for me, the player, not facilitate doing so on my own. Also, I do not mind being presented with a clear choice in a plotline, as long as I know what I'm choosing (redundant, I know). I do not, however, want to worry overmuch about the consequences of all my IC actions. Responsibility isn't fun in real life, why transpose it to a computer game? Detractors of linearity have also said that the lack of choice destroys the immersion of the player in the game world; however, of all the boA scenarios released thus far, I have felt most immersed in Canopy, the epitome of linearity. Why? That's what I hope to explain. Did I understand TM's philosophy? No, but if you think about it, it's sort of incidental to the plot. Why, then, did I find Canopy so enjoyable? Why did I feel so involved in it? Firstly, despite my characters' importance to the story, and the other characters' preoccupation with them, I didn't feel like they were the center of the world. TM made Canopy seem, to me, like a living, breathing reality, with a dynamic existence beyond that of the party, and he did so by limiting me, not empowering me. My characters couldn't go everywhere or do everything, and their actions weren't the be-all and end-all of causality in the game world. These touches made Canopy more real for me than any amount of choices ever could have made Geneforge-land. I also think that Canopy's narrative was, by far, more integrated with the gameplay than that of any other scenario to date. Every challenge that was posed to me as a player was accompanied by some narrative by way of justification. The action never lapsed for explanation, and I always knew why I was doing what I was doing. This is why I feel that Canopy was superior to Bahssikava (which was, however, very good in its own right). In Bahssikava, long intervals of action and description were followed by long intervals of plot development. This structuring made it feel disjointed, despite the excellent quality and coherence of Kelandon's cutscenes and prose. Although the end of Canopy was more passive than the first, say, three quarters, this did not bother me because the events in the cutscenes were both a culmination of the drama that the narrative had built up to that point, and evidence that a lot was going on around the party; again, the world of Canopy existed outside of the challenges that my party faced and the actions they took. ///// SPOILERS Now, to return to the thrust of this article. How can one hope to achieve the level of drama that TM achieved at Canopy's end, with the duplicity of Spiegelbrecher, the return of your vengeful fallen foes, the death of Leader, and Moerder's defeat of her counterpart to save the party, in a world where the plot is determined by the different actions of different players? ///// SPOILERS Many have said that, executed well by a good designer, a non-linear scenario would totally surpass its linear counterparts in terms of quality. I just don't think this would be true. It could be just as good, but I don't see any way that any designer, no matter how talented, could create a non-linear scenario in which the narration integrates as seamlessly with the gameplay and all the scenario's characters combine to create as much drama as Canopy, nor could large-scale events develop around the party quite the way they do in Canopy. A final note: look at it from the designer's perspective for a second, too. Less of the work you do translates directly into fun stuff for each player to do; rather, you have to expend a lot of time and effort preparing for contingencies. [ Saturday, March 05, 2005 08:23: Message edited by: PoD person ] Posts: 293 \| Registered: Saturday, May 29 2004 07:00
Article -- Non-Linearity: The Doctrine of Causality in Blades of Avernum
PoD person Shock Trooper Member # 4445	written Friday, March 4 2005 21:19 Profile #6 Well, as you'll see in the article I am about to post, I'm more an advocate of linearity in general, because it lets the designer implement realism without a huge amount of work, it's just that the whole time thing makes non-linearity a little more attractive to me. Posts: 293 \| Registered: Saturday, May 29 2004 07:00
Article -- Non-Linearity: The Doctrine of Causality in Blades of Avernum
PoD person Shock Trooper Member # 4445	written Friday, March 4 2005 18:40 Profile #3 I like this article a lot better than the previous flat denunciation of linearity. The point you make that I like the most is the one about time. A big quarrel which I previously had with non-linearity was that it reduced the game world to a static collection of possible actions for the party, that changed only in response to the party's actions. With the way in which you suggest that the designer handle the passage of time, actions are opportunities that the party has to seize, and the game world becomes more than just a set of hurdles for a small group of adventurers. Posts: 293 \| Registered: Saturday, May 29 2004 07:00
Article - bjlhct2 On Scenario Design pt 1: Linearity in Blades of Avernum
PoD person Shock Trooper Member # 4445	written Tuesday, March 1 2005 19:10 Profile #55 I agree with you, Dastal, I just think that it is pretty much impossible, especially for one person working on his or her own time, to come up with the kind of drama that you see in a Canopy and, to a lesser extent, a Bahssikava or a Perfect Forest, without restricting the player to a chain of causality. The chain can branch, but you just aren't going to see huge, dynamic worlds made for BoA. For one thing, it is hard to make four (+/- a few) people affect a dynamic world all that much. If the designer just gives the party a realistic simulation, with consequences for all the party's actions, and lets them run amok as they wish, it is hard to make their actions anything but drops in the bucket. Linearity, on the other hand, equips the designer much better to explain how the party has an effect on anything. I think that for a scenario to be truly non-linear and realistic, it would have to reflect how hard it is for a small group of people to have any effect at all on anything, how hard greatness really is to achieve. Otherwise, you get geneforge, where your smallest actions all aggregate to determine the fate of the world, which, frankly, gives me a headache. Responsibility is one thing that assaults me every day in real life, and I don't need to experience it vicariously. So, yeah. I prefer to be thrust into my destiny. That said, I'm not knocking your tons-of-choices scenarios, I'm just saying that they're far from my cup of tea, and also that, perhaps, the greatly increased difficulty of making them would both detract from the things I care more about in scenarios, and just not be, in general, worth the effort. [ Tuesday, March 01, 2005 19:13: Message edited by: PoD person ] Posts: 293 \| Registered: Saturday, May 29 2004 07:00
Article - bjlhct2 On Scenario Design pt 1: Linearity in Blades of Avernum
PoD person Shock Trooper Member # 4445	written Tuesday, March 1 2005 18:10 Profile #53 Debates on what an "RPG" should or should not resemble aside, the sense of urgency that Canopy was able to create, along with the limitations that TM put on me as a player, made me feel much more a part of that world than the myriad choices with which I was presented in geneforge. Reality is linear, and I think that even hardcore anti-linearists would like their scenario experience to be essentially linear, they just want to trace that line themselves, and not have it traced for them by the designer. However, the more freedom that the designer gives the player, the more disjointed and generic the events of the scenario are going to become, because instead of constructing a single chain of causality, and constructing it well, he must always make sure that he is not restricting the player. As to the comparison between games, books, and movies, what is any kind of media but a substitute for experience? Personally, I can't understand this intense aversion to blurring the line between what are essentially several sides of the same piece of currency; all art can be boiled down to vicarious experience (and yes, I count trying to visualize or auralize pure abstractions as a vicarious experience, albeit of a very trippy nature), and I don't know about you, but I prefer my vicarious experiences well-defined, and if that means removing the illusion of choice from them, then so be it. After all, how much difference is there really between figuring out that tough combat or puzzle, finally understanding that brilliant author's syntax, and picking up that complex film's finer nuances? I think that all of us, playing an RPG like this, are after an imaginary world in which we can immerse ourselves. However, I think that some of us crave the immediacy of an actual narrative, one in which the characters we control have motivations and identities, whether agreeing with ours or no. Others of us want to feel as few restrictions as possible, and, to me, insisting on this seems like it would be sacrificing my own enjoyment to anal-retentiveness, but then, they probably feel the same way about my point of view, so, let's just chalk it up to de gustibus non disputandum est Oh, and SkeleTONY, "screamingly loudly" is a fairly good way to describe unrelenting avalanches of condescending verbiage, especially when the arguments contained therein are really neither eloquent nor coherent enough to justify the condescension. Posts: 293 \| Registered: Saturday, May 29 2004 07:00
Article - Party vs. Designer in Blades of Avernum
PoD person Shock Trooper Member # 4445	written Saturday, February 26 2005 06:10 Profile #22 I am of the opinion that I would rather have TM being egotistical than pandering to the player's egotism. Personally, I very much like TM's scenarios, especially their linearity. They don't feel like preaching or flimsily justified strings of interesting combats. Rather, they create a sense of the party's residence in a world bigger than itself and its experiences, caught up in a swirl of events of a similar scale. For instance, in EM, the party has its problems with the Aquos gem, etc., but there are problems that it cannot solve (i.e. Lyfan). In Canopy, there is no way to actually win, nor can you ever get to visit Ygdrassil. These touches, IMO, do more to give the player the impression that his party inhabits an actual world than an enormous collection of generic quests and scenery like A3. I think that this is a truer form of role-playing than giving the player complete control over everything and letting him visit everything within the scenario and solve every problem. In conclusion, keep up the good work, TM, and nice article. [ Saturday, February 26, 2005 06:11: Message edited by: PoD person ] Posts: 293 \| Registered: Saturday, May 29 2004 07:00
Graphic Requests... in Blades of Avernum
PoD person Shock Trooper Member # 4445	written Friday, February 25 2005 05:37 Profile #33 You know, I don't think DreamGuy actually cares much about copyright law, rather, he is trying to satirically point out that some pillars of the community acted with no small amount of hypocrisy during the 5-page bonanza of pettiness that was the BoAC/Overwhelming debacle. His problem with the whole issue, and mine as well, is that you, collectively, used a law which you do not yourselves follow and for which, in fact, you have little to no regard, to crush Overwhelming's website, crappy though it most certainly was, simply because you didn't like him. He is implying, and I agree, that one should not apply the law only in situations where it aids him in some dispute. This thread basically reveals that the earlier thread was not, in fact, a question of legality or of ethics, but a personal grudge between Overwhelming and, well, the more respected members of the Community. I am glad that someone else saw it the way I did. Just my $.02. Posts: 293 \| Registered: Saturday, May 29 2004 07:00
is there any body know auto translation tool in General
PoD person Shock Trooper Member # 4445	written Thursday, February 24 2005 15:57 Profile #9 Also, regarding the difference between European and Latin-American Spanish, in Spain, c's and z's are pronounced with a lisping sound that's a bit softer than a -th, while in the Americas those are pronounced more sibilantly and sound basically like s's. [ Thursday, February 24, 2005 15:57: Message edited by: PoD person ] Posts: 293 \| Registered: Saturday, May 29 2004 07:00
Complete the Wallset Project in Blades of Avernum
PoD person Shock Trooper Member # 4445	written Sunday, January 30 2005 08:37 Profile #1 I'd certainly be interested in using the results; I don't know how well I'd be able to participate. I think you should probably have people claim individual wallsets, so you don't end up with, like, ten different copies of one completed wallset. Posts: 293 \| Registered: Saturday, May 29 2004 07:00
Is there a call. . . in Blades of Avernum Editor
PoD person Shock Trooper Member # 4445	written Sunday, January 30 2005 08:34 Profile #2 Ah, well, that's what I thought. I'll just have to do a rather ugly workaround then. Posts: 293 \| Registered: Saturday, May 29 2004 07:00
Is there a call. . . in Blades of Avernum
PoD person Shock Trooper Member # 4445	written Sunday, January 30 2005 08:34 Profile #2 Ah, well, that's what I thought. I'll just have to do a rather ugly workaround then. Posts: 293 \| Registered: Saturday, May 29 2004 07:00
Is there a call. . . in Blades of Avernum Editor
PoD person Shock Trooper Member # 4445	written Saturday, January 29 2005 20:25 Profile #0 that runs the "spell targetting" interface thingy and returns the character ID of the target? like, for instance, `short run_target_interface_thingy()` I ask because I want to make a special ability (as in not an item, for which who_is_custom_item_target() will suffice) that will damage an enemy/enemies. I've scoured the appendix and not found one, but I'm not yet ready to give up. Posts: 293 \| Registered: Saturday, May 29 2004 07:00
Is there a call. . . in Blades of Avernum
PoD person Shock Trooper Member # 4445	written Saturday, January 29 2005 20:25 Profile #0 that runs the "spell targetting" interface thingy and returns the character ID of the target? like, for instance, `short run_target_interface_thingy()` I ask because I want to make a special ability (as in not an item, for which who_is_custom_item_target() will suffice) that will damage an enemy/enemies. I've scoured the appendix and not found one, but I'm not yet ready to give up. Posts: 293 \| Registered: Saturday, May 29 2004 07:00
Root of all evil in General
PoD person Shock Trooper Member # 4445	written Saturday, January 29 2005 20:11 Profile #203 quote: Dispute away! Give us a single example of an event that is best explained by God. The Resurrection, for one. Lazarus, as a subsidiary example. Don't bother trashing the bible, I know it's coming; you don't believe anything from that book. So, for more modern examples, there have been several healing miracles performed with water from Lourdes. A Latin-American priest, either already a saint or in the process of becoming one, named Padre Pio, when asked to pray for a terminally ill person, whom he had never seen, did so, and they were healed. That, I might add, happened on more than one occasion, and each time doctors were completely unable to explain the patient's recovery. Finally, one priest, whose faith had begun to waver, prayed for a sign as he celebrated the Eucharist. As he performed the ceremony, the bread in his hand literally became flesh, and the wine in the chalice similarly became blood. The resulting flesh has been preserved as a relic of the Church, and tests performed on it have revealed that it was cardiac tissue from a man who had died at the age of 33 and one-half, or the age of Jesus when he was crucified. quote: You are the latest in a long line of people who misunderstand Occam's razor. "God did it" is far from the "simplest" explanation. In fact, you cannot get any more needlessly complex than that! OR states that we do not unecessarily multiply entities for explanation(not "the shortest sentence wins!"). If I find a nail in my flat tire then the nail is what likely caused the flat. I do NOT invoke magical, nail-lobbing gremlins because they are an unecessary multiplication of entities. A nail suits just fine adn the most reasonable explanations for the nail are all mundane(e.g. the nail fell off a truck hauling lumber or somesuch). God is omnipresent, so he did cause your flat tire, but so did the nail (don't reply to this). On to Occam's Razor. I think you missed the qualifier, about traipsing through meta-science. While it (the good old Razor) is indeed against a single instance of divine intervention, the existence of a God is the simplest explanation for the existence of an infinite collection of laws governing almost all natural phenomena, as well as for anomalous phenomena, which we shall label "miracles." So, really, my argumentation here is more Deist than my natural Catholic, except for the part about the occasional miracle but, let's face it, it's nice to be unconditionally loved, and it's also motivation to live morally, in the quest for eternal reward. Finally, on to why there is absolutely no parallel between God and cartoon characters. No adult believes that Wile E. Coyote exists as anything but an animation on the television screen. No one has credited Wile E. Coyote with saving him/her from alcoholism, cancer, or suicide. Even temporarily, for the sake of argument, assuming that God is a figment of the imagination, Wile E. Coyote does not cause the same amount of wacky neurochemical or psychosomatic effects. Once again, belief in Wile E. Coyote has driven no one to hallucinate or speak in tongues, so they differ entirely in terms of their intensity as constructs of the human mind. Lastly, in a bit of a darker vein, no crusades or inquistions have taken place in the name of Wile E. Coyote. Since this difference seems entirely obvious, at least to me, you seem to be making that comparison, not to make any actual logical point, but to insult and belittle anyone who would be so stupid as to believe in a god. [Off-topic, pointless little addendum] No one has used the argument, brought up earlier, of "Can He make a stone so heavy..." His "stone so heavy" is humanity. He gave us free will so that there would be something in His universe outside of his control.[/Off-topic, pointless little addendum] Posts: 293 \| Registered: Saturday, May 29 2004 07:00
Repeal Amendment XXII in General
PoD person Shock Trooper Member # 4445	written Saturday, January 29 2005 11:34 Profile #29 quote: except that all other indications (how he talks, etc) suggest that he's not the sharpest marble in the barrel. Except that it's entirely possible that he exaggerates his stupidity in order to pander to an increasingly anti-intellectual working class, to whom his policies do not pander at all. Furthermore, it tends to be easier to convince oneself that the liberties a stupid person takes with the truth are honest mistakes, whereas one tends to interpret the same liberties, when taken by a smarter person, as evidence of connivance. I think Alec is right to assert that President Bush is more intelligent than his opponents give him credit for, and I would add that he seems to take ruthless advantage of others' "mis-underestimations." Posts: 293 \| Registered: Saturday, May 29 2004 07:00
Root of all evil in General
PoD person Shock Trooper Member # 4445	written Saturday, January 29 2005 07:43 Profile #187 quote: See what I mean? Hand models adn runway models are both models but clearly the guy in the above analogy is fishing for a non-applicable example to rationalize a dissenting view. Enter Wile E. Coyote and the Smurfs . . . Only kidding; however, if someone continually compares an important, gravely serious cornerstone of your belief system to cartoon characters, basically just for effect, it can grow irksome in the extreme. On the other hand, I believe that your "disproof" of a Transcendent God is seriously flawed. By the same logic you use, string theory and its eleven dimensions are impossible. Also, it relies on the assumption that God has not intervened in the realm which we can perceive, and the Creator and I would obviously dispute that. You also insist on considering the concept physically, as opposed to metaphysically. Science and Logic can, with time, provide an infinite amount of answers concerning the laws of the universe, but when asked "Why?" the laws are a certain way, it can point only to other laws. e.g. Atoms act a certain way because their particles act a certain way, and their particles act that way because they are composed of quarks and gluons, which in turn act a certain way. Somewhere along this chain of reasoning, however, we run into a wall. Science can define the reasons for phenomena with ever-increasing accuracy, but where it fails is defining the reason(s) for that/those reason(s). When one traipses along through such meta-science (although the word science does not apply at all here, sans the existence of any sort of Scientific Method), one finds that Occam's Razor, which you feel compelled to invoke to disprove instances of supernatural intervention, is actually on one's side. The simplest reason for all the various reasons defined by science is the existence of a God. I believe in God because "That's just the way things are," is simply not adequate explanation for me. Posts: 293 \| Registered: Saturday, May 29 2004 07:00
Canopy: Manufactured Womb is Released! in Blades of Avernum
PoD person Shock Trooper Member # 4445	written Monday, December 27 2004 13:56 Profile #21 There is another error, but I am inclined to believe that it is Jeff's fault than yours. When anyone besides the lead character uses any of the special spells, it fails to deduct from the users' AP. While it made the Trahison fight more managable and the Shroud fight downright easy, I doubt it's what you intended. Posts: 293 \| Registered: Saturday, May 29 2004 07:00
Canopy: Manufactured Womb is Released! in Blades of Avernum
PoD person Shock Trooper Member # 4445	written Sunday, December 26 2004 15:31 Profile #11 The problem lies in the script for Schwertschrein, at state 19. I have a corrected version of the code here: town_status() is a function, and you use it like a variable. Additionaly, you are missing a closing brace. If someone examines the box, the town script gets (I think) unloaded because of the errors in this state, so the special at the stairs doesn't take place. Oh, by the way, the scenario so far is excellent. Edit: Do you have to make all the script files read-only? [ Sunday, December 26, 2004 15:38: Message edited by: Prophet of Doom ] Posts: 293 \| Registered: Saturday, May 29 2004 07:00

Pages