> > These items should be able to be worn under or over shirts since Frodo > > was able to wear his mail coat in this fashion.
> Under a cloak If I recall correctly and that can be done in nethack.
If the movie counts, which I watched again a few days ago, it was under *both* a shirt and a cloak. Actually, we probably need to pin down exactly what a 'coat' means wrt armor, since I don't think they referred to it as a 'coat' in the movie.
In any event, technically the OP is correct, one should be able to wear 'inner garments' inside the armor, and 'outer garments' over your armor. Historically, inner garments were necessary with heavy armor to act as padding to prevent cuts/scrapes/bruises from your own armor (don't want to be beaten to death by your own armor, especially if on horseback).
NH deliberately provides the t-shirt effectively as an additional armor slot though, so we can't really change this in NH without a serious rethink of the whole armor/protection system.
>>> These items should be able to be worn under or over shirts since Frodo >>> was able to wear his mail coat in this fashion. >> Under a cloak If I recall correctly and that can be done in nethack.
> If the movie counts, which I watched again a few days ago, it was > under *both* a shirt and a cloak. Actually, we probably need to pin > down exactly what a 'coat' means wrt armor, since I don't think they > referred to it as a 'coat' in the movie.
> In any event, technically the OP is correct, one should be able to > wear 'inner garments' inside the armor, and 'outer garments' over your > armor. Historically, inner garments were necessary with heavy armor > to act as padding to prevent cuts/scrapes/bruises from your own armor > (don't want to be beaten to death by your own armor, especially if on > horseback).
> NH deliberately provides the t-shirt effectively as an additional > armor slot though, so we can't really change this in NH without a > serious rethink of the whole armor/protection system.
LOTR portrays it as more of a shirt/coat than a suit of armour, although obviously that isn't feasible in nethack due to the ease of getting ridiculously low AC as it is. I get the impression that the progression looks more like shirt-mithril-coat-cloak, although again nethack's definition of cloak (ex oilskin, since protects your entire inventory as well as your body armour/shirt when a normal cloak should not even cover half) seems to encompass more than the traditional one—it could even be considered more of a robe, although the name "robe" itself is naturally taken.
Although a radical rethinking of the AC system would not necessarily be a bad idea from late game balance's perspective... at least wrt EA scrolls and/or divine protection.
>>>> These items should be able to be worn under or over shirts since Frodo >>>> was able to wear his mail coat in this fashion. >>> Under a cloak If I recall correctly and that can be done in nethack. >> If the movie counts, [...] >> In any event, technically the OP is correct, one should be able to [...]
> LOTR portrays it as more of a shirt/coat than a suit of armour, although > obviously that isn't feasible in nethack due to the ease of getting > ridiculously low AC as it is. [...]
Speaking of ridiculous situations; LotR (the film), especially the scene where the troll hits Frodo with that huge spear... - I don't know what's more ridiculous, that Frodo survives that situation, or the idea to make Nethack more, umm, realistic, by changing the armor system in any way.
On Oct 14, 4:53 am, Nybes <nybe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 14, 11:21 am, "hepta...@gmail.com" <hepta...@gmail.com> wrote: >> These items should be able to be worn under or over shirts since Frodo >> was able to wear his mail coat in this fashion.
> Frodo's mithril coat was dwarven, not elven. Made by dwarfs, gifted to > Bilbo by Thorin II. Elves had nothing to do with it.
It is quite explicit that the mithril coat given to Bilbo and later passed on to Frodo was made for a young elf. That's why it would fit on a hobbit. Armor made for a dwarf would have been too big, particularly in the shoulders (something that Tolkien paid attention to; nethack chooses not to do so).
From _The Hobbit_ (page 228 in the 30ish year old Ballantine Books paperback edition I've got):
| Now the dwarves took down mail and weapons from the | walls, and armed themselves. Royal indeed did Thorin | look, [...] | "Mr. Baggins!" he cried. "Here is the first payment of | your reward! Cast off your old coat and put on this!" | With that he put on Bilbo a small coat of mail, wrought | for some young elf-prince long ago. It was of silver-steel, | which the elves call /mithril/, and with it went a belt of | pearls and crystals. [...]
There's also a later passage where the Elvenking says to Bilbo that he's more worthy to wear "the armour of elf-princes than many that have looked more comely in it."
> >>>> These items should be able to be worn under or over shirts since Frodo > >>>> was able to wear his mail coat in this fashion. > >>> Under a cloak If I recall correctly and that can be done in nethack. > >> If the movie counts, [...] > >> In any event, technically the OP is correct, one should be able to [...]
> > LOTR portrays it as more of a shirt/coat than a suit of armour, although > > obviously that isn't feasible in nethack due to the ease of getting > > ridiculously low AC as it is. [...]
> Speaking of ridiculous situations; LotR (the film), especially the scene > where the troll hits Frodo with that huge spear... - I don't know what's > more ridiculous, that Frodo survives that situation
Have to agree with this. The sheer power of a troll applied to a puny hobbit would have, at a *minimum*, meant broken bones underneath that armor, even if it prevented penetration.
>, or the idea to make Nethack more, umm, realistic, by changing the armor system in any way.
Who said anything about realism? The previous commentators (myself included) seem to be referring just to the out-of-whack nature of NH's AC system, where its possible in the late game to become practically immune to physical attacks. Making it 'realistic', by most people's definition, would be virtually impossible, at least not without effectively rewriting the game itself.
>> , or the idea to make Nethack more, umm, realistic, by changing the armor system in any way.
> Who said anything about realism?
Here's the quote from the OP that implies seeking more realism...
"These items should be able to be worn under or over shirts since Frodo was able to wear his mail coat in this fashion."
You may take the stance that a movie is not realism (which is true), but the plain physical act to put one clothing above or beneath another piece is implemented in movies as to match realism as much as possible, nothing magical or fiction or unsurprising with that; the movie is only the carrier of a realistic dressing act as we know and expect it from Real Life.
> The previous commentators (myself > included) seem to be referring just to the out-of-whack nature of NH's > AC system, where its possible in the late game to become practically > immune to physical attacks.
I have no doubts that there were (apparently) more details expressed than the realism part, which I was refering to. But this intention applies not to all postings in this thread, and certainly not to the OP's.
> Making it 'realistic', by most people's > definition, would be virtually impossible, at least not without > effectively rewriting the game itself.
No, I didn't want to say that the poster(s) would want it as realistic as possible, just that the motivation was that dressing to be more realistic, thereby associating the appearance of the armor with the one from the film.
[Sorry that this posting had first appeared under a wrong name.]
Ed Cogburn wrote: > On Oct 15, 3:41 pm, Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanag...@hotmail.com> > wrote: >> Sean Harrap wrote: >>> Ed Cogburn wrote: >>>> On Oct 13, 11:11 pm, APLer <AP...@floor.tilde> wrote: >>>>> "hepta...@gmail.com" <hepta...@gmail.com> wrote >>>>> innews:3d788ad8-1633-4277-8aa2-aca03843aafe@a32g2000yqm.googlegroups.com: >>>>>> These items should be able to be worn under or over shirts since Frodo >>>>>> was able to wear his mail coat in this fashion.
>> , or the idea to make Nethack more, umm, realistic, by changing the armor system in any way.
> Who said anything about realism?
Here's the quote from the OP that implies seeking more realism...
"These items should be able to be worn under or over shirts since Frodo was able to wear his mail coat in this fashion."
You may take the stance that a movie is not realism (which is true), but the plain physical act to put one clothing above or beneath another piece is implemented in movies as to match realism as much as possible, nothing magical or fiction or unsurprising with that; the movie is only the carrier of a realistic dressing act as we know and expect it from Real Life.
> The previous commentators (myself > included) seem to be referring just to the out-of-whack nature of NH's > AC system, where its possible in the late game to become practically > immune to physical attacks.
I have no doubts that there were (apparently) more details expressed than the realism part, which I was refering to. But this intention applies not to all postings in this thread, and certainly not to the OP's.
> Making it 'realistic', by most people's > definition, would be virtually impossible, at least not without > effectively rewriting the game itself.
No, I didn't want to say that the poster(s) would want it as realistic as possible, just that the motivation was that dressing to be more realistic, thereby associating the appearance of the armor with the one from the film.
On Oct 16, 11:25 pm, Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanag...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Ed Cogburn wrote:
> > Who said anything about realism?
> Here's the quote from the OP that implies seeking more realism...
> "These items should be able to be worn under or over shirts > since Frodo was able to wear his mail coat in this fashion."
Oops.
Note to self: 'previous commentators', by definition, includes the 'original poster' as well.
> You may take the stance that a movie is not realism (which is true)
Well if we're just talking about the over/under idea, then the movie has nothing to do with it, since NH itself already has the over/under idea, e.g. a t-shirt under armor (and all of them under a cloak).
What I'm not sure of is what the OP was actually suggesting. Another armor slot, or just allowing armor under a t-shirt? The former would be a problem because the AC system is already unbalanced, and I don't see the point of the latter.
Ed Cogburn wrote: > [...] > What I'm not sure of is what the OP was actually suggesting. Another > armor slot, or just allowing armor under a t-shirt? The former would > be a problem because the AC system is already unbalanced, and I don't > see the point of the latter.
Here you've precisely spotted the inhenernt problems with YANI postings.
> Well if we're just talking about the over/under > idea, then the movie has nothing to do with it, > since NH itself already has the over/under idea, > e.g. a t-shirt under armor (and all of them under > a cloak).
> What I'm not sure of is what the OP was actually > suggesting. Another armor slot, or just allowing > armor under a t-shirt? The former would be a > problem because the AC system is already > unbalanced, and I don't see the point of the > latter.
Well, wearing a Hawaiian shirt outside of ones body armor could at least have _some_ YANI effect, that the shopkeepers would continue to gouge you on prices for looking like a tourist.
If you w=re on some mission to leave all your gold in the most trustworthy hands, this might be a useful tactic, I suppose.
xanthian.
Wearing a print T-shirt with some sexy message on it, in a slot where it was visible, might be YANIed to improve ones interactions with foocubi, too.
> > What I'm not sure of is what the OP was actually > > suggesting. Another armor slot, or just allowing > > armor under a t-shirt? The former would be a > > problem because the AC system is already > > unbalanced, and I don't see the point of the > > latter.
> Well, wearing a Hawaiian shirt outside of ones body > armor could at least have _some_ YANI effect, that > the shopkeepers would continue to gouge you on > prices for looking like a tourist.
OK, I forgot about the Hawaiian shirt effect. The question is would it be worth coding this idea just for this effect? After all, this would only be applicable to an unspoiled player, and how many unspoiled players are really left now?
I was too focused on the idea as some new wrinkle of the armor protection system, e.g. some new kind of shirt-type that either could protect conventional armor underneath it from some kind of damage, or provided some kind of protection to the player only if worn over all other armor, not counting the cloak.
Of course, a cloak already has some of this kind of behavior, but extending this idea to shirts, and then allowing it to be fully circular (a shirt above *OR* below armor, *plus* cloak) will require some plumbing work on the code. Without knowing what the intent of this is, its hard for me to decide whether it would be a valuable/useful change.
> Wearing a print T-shirt with some sexy message on > it, in a slot where it was visible, might be YANIed > to improve ones interactions with foocubi, too.
Readable t-shirts? Hmm, then we could add a 't-shirt imprinting kit' thats a one-shot item allowing the player to put any message they want on their blank t-shirt... And the 'right' message might get the attention of particular NPCs in various ways (good and bad)... Wait, we'll also need to provide a 'clothing iron', or would that be part of the kit? And getting the shirt wet would ruin the message (like non-permanent floor writing)... And we'll need fortune cookies to hint what kinds of messages may be useful (or not!)... Heh, never mind me, I'm not helping here. :)
Yea, I can see the opportunity for a some good YAFMs and LOLs, but as for Foocubi, to me they provide too many 'good' interactions to a spoiled player already (their gain-level really should be capped/limited).
I guess what I think we need more of are YANIs that make the game (optionally) more challenging for any player, spoiled or otherwise, at least deeper down in the dungeon (mid/late game).
On 2009-10-26, Ed Cogburn <edwcogb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yea, I can see the opportunity for a some good YAFMs and LOLs, but as for > Foocubi, to me they provide too many 'good' interactions to a spoiled player > already (their gain-level really should be capped/limited).
You probably want to focus more on their full Pw restore, but in general I agree.
> I guess what I think we need more of are YANIs that make the game (optionally) > more challenging for any player, spoiled or otherwise, at least deeper down in > the dungeon (mid/late game).
Funny you should ask... I should refer you to my .signature at this point.
One of the things I'd like to do is make spoilers both less useful, and less mandatory. There's already rather a lot in that makes the mid- and late-game more challenging, though.
-- Derek
Game info and change log: http://sporkhack.com Beta Server: telnet://sporkhack.com IRC: irc.freenode.net, #sporkhack
Pat Rankin <ran...@pactechdata.com> wrote: > On Oct 14, 4:53=A0am, Nybes <nybe...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Oct 14, 11:21=A0am, "hepta...@gmail.com" <hepta...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> These items should be able to be worn under or over shirts since Frodo > >> was able to wear his mail coat in this fashion.
> > Frodo's mithril coat was dwarven, not elven. Made by dwarfs, gifted to > > Bilbo by Thorin II. Elves had nothing to do with it.
> It is quite explicit that the mithril coat given to Bilbo > and later passed on to Frodo was made for a young elf.
Made for, yes. Made by, not necessarily. It could well have been forged in Khazad-dûm, on order. In fact, in tLotR (chapter "The Ring goes South") Bilbo calls it "my dwarf-mail"; and although he may not be the most expert witness - the old gossip - in "The Black Gate Opens" Sauron's Messenger, who we may assume has information from someone considerably more old-knowledgable, refers to Frodo's possessions as "dwarf-coat, elf-cloak, blade of the downfallen West". So it appears that Frodo's mithril coat, if elven in cut, was dwarvish in origin. In fact, AFAICT from Gandalf's words in Khazad-dûm, the dwarves were the only ones to turn mithril into metal suitable for armour; though that does not necessarily mean that they were the only ones to make armour of that metal. But, apparently, they did make Frodo's coat, elvenprince-sized.
I sort of cringe that this whole discussion is going on under its original subject line, since the thread has drifted, but...
I just realized, that, unlike t-shirts for the shirt slot, Hawaiian shirts should have one additional feature: a pocket.
Not only could this somehow be used to increase inventory slots by 1, or as a sack suitable only for carrying small items like gems, or a fine place to keep magic markers, but also it is a target for a YANIed "pocket protector", a bit of barely useful armor that only has effect if the Hawaiian shirt is on the outside, with no body armor or cloak.
|
