[crossfire] Crossfire 2.0+ features/priorities

[Mark Wedel]

Miguel Ghobangieno wrote:
> Well Leaf said that it was so that if someone really
> wanted to recant their diety that they could, but they
> would have to mean it (not by accident, or by mere
> trifiling whim) and thus brace. A question I have is
> does brace have any ill effects. EX: if you are on a
> mover, and brace, does that stop you from being moved.
> If so then... well that's not supposed to happen and
> brace seems like it needs work, if not then nm.

  I'd make the case that this should just be handled better, like if you pray 
over an altar to another god, you get a message like:

You currently worship ...  Changing gods will result in a loss of experience in 
the praying skill.  Are you sure you want to do this (y/n)?

  This is one of those cases where hacks are currently in place - IIRC, there is 
a 1% chance when praying over the altar of a new god you won't get pushed off. 
This still means that occassionaly someone could be over an altar, pray (not 
intending to change gods) but hits that 1% chance when it doesn't push him off 
and thus change gods.

  The current method is to just repeat until you are not hit by that 1%, but 
that still seems like a bit of a hack.

  This could be changed without breaking any compatibility in clients, since it 
is just messages.

  That said, the current query status is IMO one of those things that could be 
done in a better fashion - currently, there is a ST_.. case statement with 
function to call.  It would be much more flexible to convert that into 
callbacks.  Eg, the function that prints out that message would do something like:

  set_reply_callback(change_god_confirmation, ...)

  Instead of having to set ST_ states.  I think one reason there isn't much in 
the way of actual questions from the server because it really is a pain to set 
them up.