Barren Realms MUD

Is it true that spell_weapon hits less than a normal weapon? Or is that spell just an additional damage?

That spell takes the place of a normal attack. This is good and bad. Good, because it automatically hits regardless of defense (although, saving throws have some say in spell damage). Bad, because spells do much less damage than high-powered weapon damage. A level 20 elf would be very happy with spell_weapons, but an avatar would do better with normal weapons.

Spell damage... eh... depends on the spell and the eq that the character's using. For the most part, spell weapons are good (especially with flaming eq elves/druids) until you hero, at which point hit/dam skyrockets and standard weapons are more useful. Until that point, the spells on spell weapons will do comparable (if not better) damage than a normal weapon would.

every time i ask whether the spell replaces the attack or not i get a different response. 1) what is the intention, to be an additional spell or a replacement. 2) is that intention actually what happens, or is the code doing it's own seperate thing? 3) on a related note, how do dual, second attack, third attack and spellweapons interact? does a dwarf get a maximum of 6 normal hits (normal, 2nd, 3rd, *2 for dual)? or does a dwarf get a max of 4 hits (normal, 2nd, 3rd, dual)? or are neither of these true?

This is probably of another topic but how come a spell weapon can hit 2-4 times a round? Even if the wielder doesn't have dual or second attack...

dwarf has max 4 hits per round, as all the fighters do (normal, 2nd, 3rd, dual). This is affected by the player's level, as higher leveled characters have a random chance to get extra attacks each round. I believe that spell weapons, when they kick in, replace the attack. Obviously, they can only replace attacks where weapons are used (i.e. not five style fist, 1000 palms, claw or mind thrust). The interaction between number of attacks and spell weapons should be simple, yet... the code decides the number of attacks this round, what they are, then applies the random factor on all the weapon attacks to see if the spell kicks in instead.

I can pretty much state with 99% certainty that a spell from a weapon replaces an attack.

Being a squishy elf, I have no second or third attack (I have dual, but I have different damage types).

When I k hobgoblin, one of four things happens:

I smack him with Windsong and he hates life.

Windsong casts expose and we stare at each other, since no attack was actually made.

I miss with Windsong (yes, I'm a caster elf, not a meleeist) and my swordchucks make him unhappy.

I miss with Windsong, dual doesn't go off, and I get a room of hobgoblins beating on me.

The first two are the situations that are actually interesting for the purpose of this discussion.

Since a spell does not anger the hobgoblin, if follows that there is no attack made. As a corrilary, we can assume that since I ordered an attack, and none was made, that the spell actually replaced the attack in the first place.

ok, there seems to eb a common consensus that a spell attack replaces a normal attack. now, the million dollar question: is that how it's SUPPOSED to work?

My magic 8-ball says yes.

Spell weapons would be overly-powerful if they were extra attacks... unless they were only able to be fired once per round instead of each round.

One way to look at it, especially as a warrior, if you make that roll to have your spell weapon fire, you don't have to hope you "hit" to get your second or even third attack. So if you get the spell, you automatically get a chance at the next level of strike. If you miss the spell, you still have your normal chance to hit. You have a higher likelihood of second/third attack being successful. That makes spell weapons powerful as it is.

This kinda bugged me yesterday. I have a weapon:

Object 'staff efreeti' type weapon, extra flags anti-good anti-neutral spell_weapon.
Weight 0, value 232560, level 152.
Damage is 39 to 121 (average 80).
Weapon casts the spell 'sleep' on hits.
Affects constitution by 2.
Affects wisdom by 2.
Affects intelligence by 2.
Affects dexterity by 2.
Affects strength by 2.
Affects armor class by -200.
Affects hit roll by 65.
Affects damage roll by 65.

Being the same curious me, I tried it in the arena. It didn't hit (Anakin).

You furiously attack Anakin!
You *** THRASH *** Anakin!
Anakin twists aside and dodges your attack.
You *** PUMMEL *** Anakin!
Your 1000 palms *** JOLT *** Anakin!
Anakin has a few scratches.

It just keeps on doing the same thing. I was hoping it would be "Your crush *** THRASH *** Anakin!" but it didn't say anything at all for the whole fight. So I thought it doesn't work in the arena, like the spell 'sleep' doesn't work in the same manner. So I tested it in a mob...

You furiously attack an Elite Guardsman!
You <-<-<*** DISCOMBOBULATE ***>->-> an Elite Guardsman!
Your deadly talons *** THWAP *** an Elite Guardsman!
Your five style fist *** WHACKS *** an Elite Guardsman!
Your mind thrust misses an Elite Guardsman.
An Elite Guardsman has quite a few wounds.

It still didn't show any damage type... but on one occasion...

Staff of the efreeti suddenly glows bright and power rushes through your veins.
An Elite Guardsman goes to sleep.
You miss an Elite Guardsman.
You <*** CLOBBER ***> an Elite Guardsman!
Your five style fist *** WHACKS *** an Elite Guardsman!
Your 1000 palms *** THWAP *** an Elite Guardsman!
An Elite Guardsman is DEAD!!

So yes, I know the sleep spell works on the guardsman. Is this affected by the spell 'sleep' by any chance? Is it a bug that it doesn't do anything but to cast sleep?

i THINK (imms, check me on this) that it's a problem with the item when it comes to determining its damage type. likely just a typo. MAYBE it's some sort of more complex interaction between damage type and spellweapon code, but it's probably juts a typo in the object.

After a whole day of bother one imm to another, I finally got my answer.

The damage type of the staff is 0 so it doesn't show any damage type, though you still do the same damage like one with a damage type.

Yeah, it's technically damage type "hit," which registers the same damage output message as though you aren't wielding a weapon, although does the correct damage, etc.

Heres another question on the spell weapon topic....

Using a pool cue as an example

Object 'cue pool death' type weapon, extra flags spell_weapon.
Weight 5, value 0, level 1.
Damage is 4 to 7 (average 5).
Weapon casts the spell 'faerie fire' on hits.
Affects damage roll by 1.

If a level 20 player were to use this weapon would it cast a level 1 or level 20 spell?

Good question.
If I remember correctly, my spell weapon damage went up as I grew in levels. Also, it was affected by flaming eq. This may have been changed.