Quest for the Dragon Spit?

[rain]

I stumbled upon something interesting today about the dragon spit. I've been making an editor for various CSB raw files and i discovered that there is a list of attacks designed for the dragon spit, but for some reason, the dragonspit didnt get them.

Keep in mind i'm referring to CSB for Atari (ported to windows), so if an amiga version or other version of DM/CSB has this, ignore me =]

Anyway: Attack-list number 34 contains the 3 attacks: "Swing", "Parry", and "Spit". I looked up Spit in CSB code, and it executes a 250 pt powered fireball. how much damage exactly i do not know.

Also, when checking the ascii dump by CSB4win, i notice that this showed up (Note: I added "byte3" information myself, byte3 is the number for the list of attacks it contains. Its tough to explain, but this does look ackward no?


Object Index 61 = Weapon Type 38 Byte3 31 Object Type = 62 = STAFF OF IRRA
Object Index 62 = Weapon Type 39 Byte3 32 Object Type = 63 = CROSS OF NETA
Object Index 63 = Weapon Type 40 Byte3 33 Object Type = 64 = SERPENT STAFF
Object Index 64 = Weapon Type 41 Byte3 5 Object Type = 65 = DRAGON SPIT
Object Index 65 = Weapon Type 42 Byte3 35 Object Type = 66 = SCEPTRE OF LYF
Object Index 66 = Weapon Type 43 Byte3 36 Object Type = 135 = HORN OF FEAR

If byte3 were 34 (like it looks like it was at 1 point), the dragon spit would contain the ability to shoot extremely powerful fireballs.

I just thought this was extremely interesting, seeing as i always remembered the dragon-spit as being a completely useless item, and had no point being in the game at all.

-rain

[Paul Stevens]

Maybe a debug aid? To help the debugger run through
parts of the game quickly? Any idea how much it costs?
How quickly you can recover and throw another one?

[rain]

I checked the fatigue on it (time it takes to recover) and its 22 (the Fireball option from the "Fury" is 42, "Melee" on various other weapons is 20). Its about half that of the fury, and the fireball is 60% more effective.

If it were a debug item, i would assume it would have had infinite charges as well (but it doesn't).

Very strange that they would leave out such a weapon, then again, theres a lot of very strange things in CSB (like the "garbled scroll"). CSB still shocks me after so many years =]

[Gambit37]

Many objects were created with an intended use in DM, and many properties were originally made available for use with these items, but due to a rush towards the end of development, a lot of objects remained with properties unassigned.

More info like this available in my new website, coming soon...
www.dmcodex.com

[Sphenx]

Maybe it could be interesting to make available again these features in the CSBWin&Linux code? There were also the "broken" and "poisoned" bit for weapons, for example.

[beowuuf]

I concur, it would be interetsing to see althese rumoured efffects in action

Even more interesting will be Gambit's site so we know what secrets might still lurk in the game code and supporting files : )

[rain]

I'd much rather see new dungeons with these features.

The possibilities aren't endless (unless you modify the CSB4win source, which i would see as very very cool) when creating a dungeon. But even now theres plenty of new things you can do (New attacks, new spells, etc... You can make a spell that puts water in a flask, or a spell that puts a piece of food in your hand/ground, all without the source! Obviously it may make it too easy, but then again maybe the spell will be really hard to cast!)

With upcoming discoveries being made about formats of files, and editors becoming more available, it may soon take 2-3 people to make a good quality dungeon (changing graphics, spells, items, etc etc etc)


I hope a new interest spawns in this community within the next month, because possibilties are endless =]

[PaulH]

Hmm there has been plenty of 'discussion' regarding new spells and graphics in the older pages of this forum. I myself have been in a few heated debates about this, but I am all for development. A lot of people think that changing the game in this way is a sin: have a look through , it makes interesting reading...

[PaulH]

There has already been a lot of 'discussion' regarding changes to the game (spells, items, graphics etc) in older pages of this forum. I myself have been in a few heated debates but I am all for development. Many people think that the original should be left untouched as it is a classic (don't rewrite the Bible).

Have a look through it makes an interesting read....

[Sphenx]

I think there are 2 directions here:
implementing planned features is not 'changing' the game in my opinion, but rather 'completing' it. It is somewhat like we always miss something but that we did not know it. Since we are now aware of that, I would not consider it a sin to add them. Of course it can change something in the game play, but if it is done well, it can't be a bad thing.
The other direction, suggested by Rain, is that we can change/create new spells.. and other stuff.. This can be considered as 'customisation', since it would not change part of the code. In that case, anyone would be able to make is 'custom' dungeon and able to play it as he/she wants.

I can remember there was at least one bug in the original dungeon, that allowed the eye switch to be triggered by any item. I think fixing it would make the dungeon closer to what it supposed to be.
See it like a patch, but I think the fixed dungeon should be considered as the reference dungeon. Even if it is not the original.

[rain]

After reading the 77 post long discussion (not all of it, i dont have 7 hours =[), i see some of the points made by people, but I must say you can't force other people not to do something they want to do, its simply not possible.


So: I would not waste Paul Steven's effort on CSB4Win by not creating editors for such basic things. Personally, when all my projects are completed, i plan on making a full fledged all-out new CSB4win app, dungeon, and graphics.dat for my dungeon, with maybe even a new storyline, and alot of new items/spells etc. Why you ask? Because so much effort has been put into this game from this "community" that I believe it would be a waste not to.

But these are just my opinions, and I hope I'm not waking up a sleeping flamefilled debate =[

-rain

[beowuuf]

I for one support your idea, and would love to see the hidden coding in the dm files : )

[ChristopheF]

I agree with you, rain. If people don't like what you'll do, then they should just not use your work, and that's all.

[Lunever]

I also would like to see a DM/CSB were all features of all versions and also all unfinished features are fully implemented.

[WolfHeart]

Many objects were created with an intended use in DM, and many properties were originally made available for use with these items, but due to a rush towards the end of development, a lot of objects remained with properties unassigned.

More info like this available in my new website, coming soon...
www.dmcodex.com

Did this website ever go up? I knowtice it says under construction now..

[PicturesInTheDark]

Gambit is taking a break to persue private issues and said he might get back to it in his own time. So it's there but making no progress at the moment - still a lot of great infos already to be found in there!

Regards, PitD

[andyboy_uk]

Sounds like that dragon spit might just have made the game a bit easy with its behemoth fireballs and hardly any recovery time.

In regard to changing the game/expanding the game, Im personally of the crowd that says, make the engines as powerful as they can be. So long as they can reproduce the original DM and CSB games without any problems then so be it. If they are powerful enough to put in the extra functionality, then so be it, you dont have to play these new modules. And if its poweful enough for a person to replace graphics, spells, sounds, monsters, and all the rest of it. It will STILL have the feel of Dungeon master. Just a laterchapter in the same book.

Thats all personal opinion so I hope it doesnt upset anyone. But Im all for RTC and CSBWin being completley adaptable to new items, monsters, spells, potions, graphics, sounds, and all the rest. With all sorts of new objects to do more and more advanced things, so long as the basics of DM are there, the spirit of the game is not lost, but the games created can becore more challenging and more fun.

hope that makes sense.

[WolfHeart]

Gambit is taking a break to persue private issues and said he might get back to it in his own time. So it's there but making no progress at the moment - still a lot of great infos already to be found in there!

Regards, PitD

Ahh I cant get into the site even, it does not appear to have a way to enter, just seems to be a single page that says the name.

[Gambit37]

You can view an incomplete and rough sample here:

http://www.dmcodex.com/sample/

There's not much of interest there yet. As PiTD said, I will be returning to this within the next few months. The last two years have been very bad for me perosnally and I lost all enthusiasm for this site. I'm working on other stuff right now, but rest assured, the site *will* be an ongoing project once I have the first version up and running...

[PicturesInTheDark]

I sure hope it will be. I still like the graphics a lot and if you keep up the detail level to be found in the bestiary (as far as it's available) it will be a real treasure store of information. Yeah, pun intended.

Regards, PitD