Dungeon Master Forum

A question especially to George Gilbert, but also for the others, who read this: I wonder if it would be possible, maybe in next RTC edition in the future (v0,37?) to make a possibility of editing a monster INSIDE allready killed monster (like an object may appear after killing)? For example, if You kill a demon, from demon`s body appears his ghost, etc., as if it`s allready possible in CSbuild? What d You think about that?

you can already simulate this with RTC.
the demon must be prisoned into a room (use teleporters onto the exit tiles) and must carry a special object (a ring, a jewel or something invisible).
each tile of the room must have :
- a generator for 1 ghost (the demon's one)
- a trigger that will react with the object leaved by the demon and enable the corresponding generator + a relay
this relay is here to destroy all the generators a second after the ghost appeared.

anyway, quite long to make if you have a big big room

Huh? When did RTC stop supporting chesting monsters? The only bug with it used to be a dropped monster also took the damage the old one took (instantaneous effect).

where did you find this ? only 'standards' can be carried by monsters, as i can see in the editor.
chesting monsters = 2 monsters on the same tile/position ? in that case, what's happening if they move to different directions ?

Aha, well you can't do it through the editor then, but there's nothing to stop you doing it through the text file - just put a monster at -1,-1,-1 and refernce it being carried by the creature required.

I haven't done it since before the editor was released, but it worked fine except for that one caveat about damage. If it's not to be a specialist monster, then you could clone a monster that drops another monster, umm, if anyone knows how to alter the item carrying property yet.

To Linfas: hmm... theoreticly IT IS possible, but what if I have 20 demons walking in the whole huge level? maybe a better way would be to make ghost generators (in each level`s tile), reacting on some special object, that only demon has itself (that object couldn`t be anywhere else in the game, except demon`s body, of course). Each ghost generator could also have an order to destroy this "special" thing, that reacts with, and NOT to destroy himself (and another generators), because what if You kill 2 demons, or more, in the same tile? Each generator could be ready to work every time when meeting a special thing, that demon contains inside (and destroy that thing immediately after generating one ghost, of course). Then we have a system: one demon -makes- one special thing -makes- one ghost, while all ghost generators are ready instantly. Why do i think it`s a better way? Because it would be a real horror for me to make an order to each generator to unactive or destroy all other generators: if You have 30 generators, You have to make 30 * 30 orders... etc...
it will be much easier, if George would put this function into the next RTC Editor edition. I think that wouldn`t be a big problem for him.

In the meantime, simply place the monsters editing the text file - if you use the editor to put a unique item into the demons you want, then it will help you go throuh the text file and you can delete the item reference.

One of the simple examples will let you see the structure of the text file easily enough. Placing the ghosts , as I said above apart from giving them a dungeon reference of -1, -1, -1 (sitting in limbo) they will have exactly the same structure as the demons - use common sense to create a unique ID for them - anything different from the editors numbering system to save problems I would reckon

bumped - my first post on the forum abowe

would it be possible to store monsters inside another without changing txt file (maybe in 0.35....)?

ohoh ! i'm so glad to read my grammar mistakes again : 'leaved' instead of 'left'

This can now be done in V0.36

In V0.36 you can have an action that is triggered on a monsters death. By default this action is to generate a cloud, but there's no reason why you shouldn't create a monster instead (or any other object for that matter)...