Difference between revisions of "Talk:Confirming skill use through mocking"

From DWPriests
Jump to: navigation, search
(New page: I'm having my doubts about the process described. I think I have reason to think that mocking, when it's used like this, may only target the ''last'' skill used (the one used in the last ...)
 
Line 6: Line 6:
  
 
--[[User:Ilde|Ilde]] 18:29, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 
--[[User:Ilde|Ilde]] 18:29, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 +
 +
:Cinnamon claims to have [[Creeping Doom#Skills_Used|confirmed two skills for Creeping Doom]] using this method.  I've yet to try it out myself (not had the free time recently), so I can't make any claims besides that :)  Nice work with everything today, by the way! -- [[User:Mishal|Mishal]] ([[User talk:Mishal|talk]]) ([http://discworld.atuin.net/lpc/secure/finger.c?player=mishal MUD finger]) 19:44, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:44, 10 March 2009

I'm having my doubts about the process described. I think I have reason to think that mocking, when it's used like this, may only target the last skill used (the one used in the last step of the ritual). So, performing the ritual and then being mocked will give fairly limited information... I think it might be better to be mocked during the ritual. That might give a chance of having different skills increase, though I'm not sure.

I think this because doing it the way that's described here with Dust Devil, I got of.area increased three times and no other skills... but I thought we knew that misc.area and def.area were used for that one, too. (Or maybe only one of those--if rituals work like spells, each step uses one skill. Dust Devil has two steps so that would imply at most two skills, I'd think. I guess that's a big "if", but I don't see any reason rituals would use a different mechanic.)

So, I'm not sure we should necessarily delete skills that we can't seem to get mocked up, unless we're really sure about it.

--Ilde 18:29, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Cinnamon claims to have confirmed two skills for Creeping Doom using this method. I've yet to try it out myself (not had the free time recently), so I can't make any claims besides that :) Nice work with everything today, by the way! -- Mishal (talk) (MUD finger) 19:44, 10 March 2009 (UTC)