Dungeon Master Forum

Would it be possible for the dungeon-creator to choose which spells are available? The spellbook is one way of achieving that, but, for example, the runes of two spells may enable the player to use a third spell.

Do you get it? Let's imagine, that the designer wishes exclude ZO-spell from his/her (are there any women playing DM/RTC?) dungeon, but wishes to have the ZoKathRa-spell available. When the player gets the runes for ZKR, he/she also obtains the rune for ZO-spell.

that is a tough one.

the only thing that can be done so far I think is carefull limitation of certain runes and those things you want included that may prevent you from excluding the ones you don't well some of that can be done a different way.

From you example you could provide a Zokathra object in your dungeon. The player couldn't create them but they could still find them. Just like the Ful Bombs.

This can be done with potions, bombs, and wands/staffs. you can provide a spell without providing the spell.. get it?

Yup, it still exists as the large moster on the second last page i think

My comment at the tie was if spells were being scripted, have this script as a seperate file...it has a few bits, saying whether this spell should be allowed right away, of if the appropriate spell needs to be found first, and a second bit to say if it should be obvious to imported parties (ie, if they have done a previous dungeon and know this spell runes, should they know it in this dungeon too). There is also a similar section for runes, saying whether a rune should be known by a startying party, and by an imported party (so maybe natives know how to use the magic of the area better than an interloper)

So you could have zokathra a spell that can be found by trial and error, while zo , even if discovered, is not allowed to be used until the scroll is found...
it would be good as it would also allow a) porting parties to have more power..it's not just about stats, it's about knowledge, especially if each dungeon added more spell options to them, and b) it would mean tha tyou could have the runes for the fire spell and for the party shield without worryign that fireball would be allwoed too...

To Drake:

Note that my Zokathra-example was just an...example!
Another example would be to exclude the torch-spells, so that the party has to use real-life -torches. But what happens when the party obtains the fireball-spell?

To Beowuuf:

Sounds good. But what do you mean by "other options" for stronger parties? Shortcuts and treasures, so that they're even stronger while the weak parties fight desperately for their lives?

The initial idea was that if the spell codes were in a seperate file, then parties would be carrying around all these spell options...so a party that has done 10 dungeons won't be the same as a ported party from your first or second, even though both might have about the same stats. They might know three variations for fireball, so that attempting a sequal to any previous dungeons that used it they would know it right away...

It doesn't all have to go the ported party way..you could have it that starting enter parties know most of the useful runes, while imported p[arties don't know any...

It was just an idea from ages ago, you should read that long thread, and the one about the spellbook too...it seemed to cover most of the discussions you are thinkiking about - i'm trying to quote my bit out of context and it sounds very scary and undoable! : )

yes it was an example and i gave you a few more examples of how you can solve them.. for each example you give I could find a solution of how you could contain it.

Your fireball and torch dilema for instance.
You can provide a chest with flammit's or Fury's or rings of fire etc. you could give them unlimited charges or you could provide some way of charging them as in DM2.

any spell can be done from a staff, wand, ring, amulet, etc. Other options are as such providing things like the firestaff that has spells in it but ther is a mana cost to the user.

You could have spell books that contain 3 spells of your choosing and limit them to wizard level and have a mana cost. So you can't see the (inserte spell here) untill you reach (n'th level).

there is a world of possibilities.. you just have to think a little. Most of what I've said is already doable in RTC and are reasonable workarounds to controll spells and spell usage.

For instance. you could give out 4 'books of fire' (just a name) and then have 4 slots in one area that requires them to open a door. you go through the door and fight with out those spells. When you reach the end it hits a switch which sends your books over to pick up again.

It has it's benefits and problems alike but it's something that is already possible without rewriting the main code for spells.

The thing is if spells become customisable thigns too then the magic code will no doubt be re-written..so no point not to throw this into the mix

But yes, the way round it atm would be to have object based magic..like DM2 but without providing some runes then certain spells would onlybe possible through certain objects, while other of course could be associated with the object and transfered to the spellbook so you could ape them normally

"Any spell can be done from staff etc."

Really? Darkness and the footprints? (Not that I would ever use them, but...)

However, using magical objects with unlimited charges is also a bit...bad option. Or do they consume mana?

If the magic code would have to be re-written, then there truly is no point. At the moment I'd just like to have the RTC completed.

Yes any spell can be done from an item so far as I know and yes you can have them consume mana which the firestaff does.

The code is prety much in place for all of this. Or at least I thinks so? George?

This can now all be done in V0.35