On 30-Apr-03 Mark Wedel wrote: > Note that live action/human moderated games have the big advantage that a > human does moderate them. Well.. Mostly my point was.. the people at TSR were smart enough to know if you let people change bronze -> gold, you'd have a mess on your hands. Such a spell/ability/whatever is absurd. But is there anything wrong with changing iron to bronze? I think transmutation is a fine thing, it's just that you have to be selective about what you let people transmute something into. Platinum->gold seems fine to me.. lead->gold seems absurd. If we do it.. we have to think about the results of each transmutation, thats all. A fine thing IMHO would be to have a druid class that could only wear wood/hide. Such a class might benefit from turning rings/amulets into wood. Just an example of course.. > that said, you do raise an interesting point in the current code - the code > right now has logic for adjusting within the same material type (iron -> > brass > for example), but nothing for going between radically different materials > (iron > -> wood). I think it would be trivial to implement. All you need is a little chart with some base values. Say we take iron as the "base" material.. we say iron has a value and weight of 100. Now we just set "pine" to say, 80, 80. Now if you wanted to transmute mithril->oak you do: mithril->iron->pine->oak. Easier that way as we only have to have one set of transmutation values between types.. and we don't have to caluclate iron->oak, iron->spruce, iron->balsa. --- Tim Rightnour < root at garbled.net > NetBSD: Free multi-architecture OS http://www.netbsd.org/ NetBSD supported hardware database: http://mail-index.netbsd.org/cgi-bin/hw.cgi _______________________________________________ crossfire-devel mailing list crossfire-devel at lists.real-time.com https://mailman.real-time.com/mailman/listinfo/crossfire-devel