Re: more on spells

[Peter Mardahl <peterm@po.EECS.Berkeley.EDU>]

Regarding Nick's proposed change to the spell system:
>It would be nice at some point if the spells were not hardcoded,
>allowing people to create new spells on the fly:  you could link with

  This is a very interesting idea, and suggests some very nice abstractions.
The spell system "as is" is very inflexible--my addition of a
spell_parameters file is perhaps a step in the right direction and perhaps
not.  Instead of everyting having to do with spells being in the archtypes
and the code, it's in the archetypes, the code, and in the spell_parameters
file.  The spell_parameters file is more convenient to change, but adding
new things becomes somewhat more cumbersome--but I wander.

  You're basically proposing the creation of a little language of magic
which causes spell effects.  That's not trivial, but we at berkeley
have already made one step in that direction.  We've made two spells
which accept parameters:  cast reincarnate < whomever>, and 
cast magic rune < whatever spell you fancy>.  This allows a player
to make a magic rune of any spell around, provided he knows it, and
has the spellpoints to cast both that spell the magic rune spell.

  For example, I've often wished for an area effect cold spell similar
to fireball.  'cast ball cold ', 'cast ball fire' , 'cast ball shock'
....  That'd triple the number of possible spells at very moderate
coding expense.  bolt and cone commands would also be nice.

>With such a "on-the-fly" spell idea, the learning of spells becomes more
>interesting.  You can have cantrips which are common spells known all

  We should postpone such a system to after server/client split.
It has interesting aspects.

  The system should above all not be cumbersome to use.  Having to
type too many keystrokes to ready a spell is fatal.
	

Regards,

PeterM