[crossfire] use_skill change proposal

[Nicolas Weeger]

>   I'm presuming you are saying that the same skill, like now, has multiple
> ways to be used, and different commands should be used.

I'm talking about alchemy-like spells, actually.
The proposed change is for those skills to only do alchemy and not 
identification, and add a new 'identify' *global* command which will identify 
based on all skills at once.
This avoids the need to add a 'bind use_skill thaumaturgy ; use_skill 
alchemy ; use_skill woodsman' and change it for each skill :)




>   Maybe something like 'use_skill smithery identify'.  An advantage here is
> that if there are yet other ways to use skills, we're not creating new
> commands to use them (which then probably just call the same skill routine
> with different parameters).

It'd split the code between alchemy-like use and identification use.


>   Also, what about skills that don't have an identification component
> (meditation comes to mind, but search is also there) - do you still use
> use_skill for those?  I'd think you would, but it sort of means use_skill
> has a bunch of different functionalities, and it is unclear what the
> default should really be (I'd sort of argue that one is more likely to be
> identifying items than crafting stuff)

Not concerned, right now - only alchemy-like skills.



>   In an ideal world, the players should really never need to know that
> arcane usage - the client should provide some mechanism for them to do that
> (nothing would actually prevent players from using those explicit commands,
> but probably not the best user to have to have players to know that they
> should do use_skill even right now.

Yes, but we're not yet in an ideal world :)



>   I'm quite sure how to do it, but one could click on the skill name in the
> client and it would to the appropriate action (or if a skill has multiple
> ways to be used, bring up a menu asking them how they want to use it).  The
> hard part for that right now would be communicating to the client what
> skills have what actions (it wouldn't be too hard to hard code in values,
> but that is sure to break down the road).

I'd even go as far as saying to have the available options for any item - 
drop, apply, and such. Though it could restrain creativity - who would think 
of applying a key [which when applied spawns a strange monster asking for a 
riddle and rewarding you if you reply corrctly]?



>   If we are going to keep in those commands that players need to issue, I'd
> prefer for them to have some semblance to natural english language.
>
>   For example, 'cast fireball' or 'use_skill smithery' seem, while a bit
> verbose, seem somewhat natural.  'identify smithery' would seem to suggest
> something different from a pure language perspective.

I'd just go with 'identify' and the server would use all available skills.
It's pretty rare imo to want to only use one skill for identification 
purposes.



Nicolas
-- 
http://nicolas.weeger.org [Mon p'tit coin du web]
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://mailman.metalforge.org/pipermail/crossfire/attachments/20100118/2e631651/attachment.pgp