|Anonymous | Login | Signup for a new account||2019-02-22 10:15 CET|
|Main | My View | View Issues | Change Log | Wiki | Tavern | News|
|Viewing Issue Simple Details|
|ID||Category||Severity||Reproducibility||Date Submitted||Last Update|
|0005781||[DCSS] Bug Report||minor||always||2012-06-16 02:15||2015-08-17 17:57|
|Status||closed||Product Branch||0.11 ancient branch|
|Summary||0005781: Saving the game with 128+ MP leads to negative MP on load|
|Description||As the description says. I got this in wizmode while messing around to see what the max possible MP was. This will probably never come up in a real game though.|
|Tags||No tags attached.|
|I should probably also mention that maxmp is saved just fine, it is just that you will have negative current mp when you load.|
|How is that even possible? A deep elf with all skills at 27, high mp 3, staff of power and two rings of magical power has 77 maxmp, an octopode with eight rings -- 112.|
edited on: 2012-06-19 13:41
Don't forget the Hat of Pondering, wearable by both. Still though, it doesn't seem like it'd be enough. Does wizard mode let you create artefacts with +MP on them?
And certainly it'd be relevant, for example, if any shields or amulets with +MP are introduced at some point. You'd only need a total of 15 from those to get over 128 MP with the octopode. Marginal, but still possibly relevant.
|+30% MP mutation, hat of pondering, 8 mp rings, staff of power, divine vigour with 27 invo. You get to 154 MP or something. Like I said this is extremely unlikely to occur in an actual game.|
Hrm, the +MP artefact property has misleading names in the source. It can be set with &t to any value, though, so there's no limit on maxmp you can get in wizmode.
In real games, it's Divine Vigour what's the main offender. You don't even need the mutation, hat or staff: an octopode with eight rings is enough. So I guess the field needs to be extended.
Turns out you didn't even need to extend the field; just using an unsigned byte gets you more than enough space to handle the highest MP I could manage in practice.
If needed, it wouldn't be hard to extend the field (I actually implemented that fix first!), but it'd require a minor tag - no need to go through the hassle for now.
|2012-06-16 02:15||crate||New Issue|
|2012-06-16 02:17||crate||Note Added: 0018423|
|2012-06-19 12:29||KiloByte||Note Added: 0018476|
|2012-06-19 13:31||ion_frigate||Note Added: 0018477|
|2012-06-19 13:41||ion_frigate||Note Edited: 0018477|
|2012-06-19 15:05||crate||Note Added: 0018480|
|2012-06-19 15:46||KiloByte||Note Added: 0018481|
|2013-05-26 02:10||mumra||Issue Monitored: mumra|
|2014-08-29 03:38||PleasingFungus||Note Added: 0027100|
|2014-08-29 03:38||PleasingFungus||Status||new => resolved|
|2014-08-29 03:38||PleasingFungus||Fixed in Branch||=> 0.16 development branch|
|2014-08-29 03:38||PleasingFungus||Resolution||open => done|
|2014-08-29 03:38||PleasingFungus||Assigned To||=> PleasingFungus|
|2015-08-17 17:57||crate||Status||resolved => closed|
|Mantis 1.1.8[^] Copyright © 2000 - 2009 Mantis Group|