PDA

View Full Version : Lurker + items == untouchable lurker?


fruviad
November 13, 2011, 01:58
Is this a bug?

The system on which I encountered this is 3.1.1, but I do not know how to test this intentionally on my system running the latest release, so I cannot verify whether it would be a problem still.

I believe that this started when I encountered a lurker that was in a space already containing a stack of items.

I walked through the space at least once (I think!) but my auto-attack was never triggered. All I knew was that something kept dealing me damage in that area of a double-wide corridor.

After walking through the area twice, I cast a Shock Wave in the direction of the damage dealing entity and was subsequently informed that the lurker died and the Potion of Healing was destroyed (ouch!)

If a Lurker is in the same space as an item or a stack of items, should it be immune to attack-by-direction-key? Or did I simply not walk through the space it was in?

buzzkill
November 13, 2011, 02:26
Sounds like a bug, but I think??? that the + key (followed by a direction) is the actual attack command. I'd try that if you find yourself in a similar situation n the future.

Greetings from central Indiana.

CivBesch
November 5, 2017, 15:14
I had a similar situation.

My human priest kept getting messages about a 'lurker' hitting. Detect evil, detect invisible, sense invisible did not make it visible.

So he started shooting arrows around himself (and quaffing many CLW's) and finally it died.

Is it possible that the bug is still 'bugging'?

Sideways
November 5, 2017, 16:36
I had a similar situation.

My human priest kept getting messages about a 'lurker' hitting. Detect evil, detect invisible, sense invisible did not make it visible.

So he started shooting arrows around himself (and quaffing many CLW's) and finally it died.

Is it possible that the bug is still 'bugging'?That sounds like simply normal lurker behavior.

CivBesch
November 5, 2017, 16:47
Shouldn't an invisible creature become visible using one of the above means?

Derakon
November 5, 2017, 17:19
Did you have See Invisible? Lurkers and Trappers are both invisible, in addition to the usual mimic hidden-ness.

Pete Mack
November 5, 2017, 17:26
You shouldn't ever be able to step on the square with the trapper actually present. That sounds like a bug.

CivBesch
November 5, 2017, 17:38
I used Detect evil, detect invisible, sense invisible.

I have no idea what mimic hiddenness is

Pete Mack
November 5, 2017, 17:40
Sense Invisible should certainly make it 'visible' if you look around for it. But it still will look like a '.'

Derakon
November 5, 2017, 17:42
I used Detect evil, detect invisible, sense invisible.

I have no idea what mimic hiddenness is

Creeping Coins will look and behave just like a normal pile of coins until you stumble into them or they take damage. Likewise, Lurkers and Trappers will look just like an empty floor space even if you can "see" them; you have to disturb them (walk into them, make them take damage) to render them visible, and even then you need See Invisible.

CivBesch
November 6, 2017, 07:41
O, thanks for that clarification.

So I actually saw it, but didn't know about it.

I curious how many very interesting surprises I'll be getting going further down.

PowerWyrm
November 6, 2017, 09:16
Shouldn't an invisible creature become visible using one of the above means?

The problem is not that the lurker is invisible, it's that it's a '.' symbol, so it looks like plain floor. If you don't want the hassle, edit monster_base.txt and replace '.' by something else. Or use tiles (Shockbolt tileset).

CivBesch
November 6, 2017, 09:24
O, no, I am fine with that. It was just confusing I had never met a Lurker before.

emulord
November 6, 2017, 16:45
I think lurkers should be a colored "."
With only "It" as the REAL annoying hidden monster. I hate having to use the look command to see the square a lurker is on.

Pete Mack
November 6, 2017, 18:25
Yeah, it doesn't make a lot of sense to keep them hidden after they are exposed by melee.

kandrc
November 7, 2017, 00:04
Yeah, it doesn't make a lot of sense to keep them hidden after they are exposed by melee.

Somebody, 30 years ago, thought it was clever. In the intervening time, we've learned a lot about game design. We know it's not clever. We know it is annoying.

I think that Nethack gets this right, actually. Mimics, after disturbed, change to an m. Furthermore, there is an ability that allows you to see them from the start (protection from shape changers). There aren't many things I'd be willing to claim that Nethack does better than Angband, but this is one of them. I don't like trappers and lurkers for the reasons discussed in this thread. I even more dislike new (I guess it goes back about 10 years by now, so not that new) mimic code that makes them undetectable until disturbed, especially with respect to how it interacts with squelch, and the justification for it, that if you (a human behind a keyboard) are squelching coins, then you (an adventurer in a dungeon) are so godlike that they are beneath your notice, is pure BS and interferes with suspension of disbelief and conflates interface with gameplay.

Why is it bad? @ is waiting for a Big Bad to come around a corner into an corridor. @ TOs Big Bad, but the (squelched) $ or . is TOd instead. Big Bad breathes. @ dies.

Ingwe Ingweron
November 7, 2017, 00:43
Lurkers and their big brothers, Trappers, always bring to my mind the T-1000 terminator when it posed as a checkerboard floor in Terminator 2-Judgment Day. I'm just glad they don't turn into psychopathic robots that chase @.

Derakon
November 7, 2017, 01:13
Lurkers and their big brothers, Trappers, always bring to my mind the T-1000 terminator when it posed as a checkerboard floor in Terminator 2-Judgment Day. I'm just glad they don't turn into psychopathic robots that chase @.

BRB, making a new mimic monster that can be disguised as literally anything in the dungeon.

Patashu
November 7, 2017, 02:12
BRB, making a new mimic monster that can be disguised as literally anything in the dungeon.

Not impressed unless it can generate a Morgoth, Lord of Darkness Mimic.

Derakon
November 7, 2017, 04:41
Not impressed unless it can generate a Morgoth, Lord of Darkness Mimic.

A monster that could be disguised as any other monster could actually be an amusing concept. Give it only +0 speed and it should be readily detectable by observant players (plus it might choose to mimic an already-dead unique). But what abilities would it get besides the shapeshifting?

PowerWyrm
November 7, 2017, 10:56
TomeNET has an amusing item that can be generated during Halloween and Xmas weeks: the costume of (monster). You equip it instead of your current armor and you can disguise yourself as the corresponding monster. So you can mimic Morgoth if you want. I had the chance of finding a costume of Santa Claus (TomeNET is based off ZAngband), so I equip that during Xmas and wander around in town shouting "Ho Ho Ho!"

kaypy
November 7, 2017, 11:40
But what abilities would it get besides the shapeshifting?
Someone fell victim to an orc-captain-mimic a while back, and reported that they have a paralysis attack...

Nick
November 7, 2017, 19:48
A monster that could be disguised as any other monster could actually be an amusing concept. Give it only +0 speed and it should be readily detectable by observant players (plus it might choose to mimic an already-dead unique). But what abilities would it get besides the shapeshifting?

FAangband has this :)