Re: CF: Object decay, and various other matters of direction

[Mark Wedel <mwedel@scruznet.com>]

David Andrew Michael Noelle wrote:

> [...material archetypes...]
> >  But it has to point to something.  If you are pointing to predefined values,
> > then arguably you don't even need the pointer - just set up appropriate
> > materials or something.
> 
>     The idea was to get away from hard-coded (ick) numbers.  By making the
> materials objects, the pre-defined values for basic materials would be
> archetypes, editable in the arch tree like any others, instead of buried in
> the code.  And special material objects could be written into maps.  Of
> course, the standard materials would all use pointers to the same standard
> material object, the archetype's "clone", instead of each object having its
> own copy.  There shouldn't be any need to change an object's material, but
> if it happens, a new object of that archtype can always be created when it
> is needed.

 At some level, you need some 'constant' world facts.  For example, you can't
see below a floor, players have these 6 (or is it 7 now) stats, and so on.  I'm
not sure at what level to go for that abstraction - of course the benefit of
such a system is that it is easily expandible.  This disadvantage is that it
creates more links to other objects.  For example, that sword will point to the
iron material object.  If someone comes up with some new maps that has an object
taht points to the steel material object, yet failed to include that arch,
something now break someplace.


> 
>     Allowing sub-types and arbitrary materials would be less important if we
> had a few more materials to choose from.  I had very little trouble adding
> liquid to the list, since there are rather few places materials ever come
> into play.  Perhaps this material archetypes business is too much trouble
> for too little gain.  With enough hard-coded (ick) materials, the only
> benefit would be cosmetic.

 Internally, materials are probably used for descriptions and saving throws (so
you looked at it recently, you may have spotted a few other locations).

 In terms of descriptions, that can just as easily be done by using the
description of the object.  Ie, for a ring it could be:

 This ring is intricately carved gold and platinum, with three small
emeralds surround the large central diamond.  The gems pulse at an
irregular rate, and you get the feeling this object protects you from
fire attacks.

 Then all you need is adequate selection of things for saving throws.  The
current list is:

#define M_PAPER         1
#define M_IRON          2
#define M_GLASS         4
#define M_LEATHER       8
#define M_WOOD          16
#define M_ORGANIC       32
#define M_STONE         64
#define M_CLOTH         128
#define M_ADAMANT       256


 Looking at my AD&D chart (which is not perfect, but does give some guidance),
things that are missing:

 bone or ivory
 ceramic
 crystal or vial (which can be included in glass above)
 liquid (which I think you added)
 metal hard (we have as iron)
 metal soft
 mirror (really a combo of metal and glass, so don't need to worry about that)
 wood or rope, thick
 wood or rop, thin

 So we cover most of the bases.  I could see adding a metal soft (not
quite as durable as iron).  Don't really know if we need a ceramic - that
probably matches pretty closely with glass in terms of most saving throws.

 I think the issue may be the addition of a material when coming up with a new
item which just doesn't really match the behaviour of the current materials and
is different enough.
-
[you can put yourself on the announcement list only or unsubscribe altogether
by sending an email stating your wishes to crossfire-request@ifi.uio.no]