You should look through demos and libs and tutorials.

http://www.byondscape.com/ ascape.dmb?type=%2FForm%2FSearch&query=&category=Tutorials <--Those don't require BYONDscape subs.

http://developer.byond.com/hub/DM/Demos
http://developer.byond.com/hub/DM/Libraries
http://www.byond.com/docs/guide/

There are party system demos.

There are no large games' source code. None that work, anyway. Sure, you could try and find zeta, but it sucks. I forget who, but someone has a Dragon Question Online source, but requires libs which I can't seem to find. I have a maze or tag [can't remmeber which] source on my hub, but that's small.

The point is, make somthing yourself. Try. Learn. Use the forums if you need help.

Lither666 wrote:

Yeah that's exactly what I am doing right now :)

Just added a book writing system and I have a lot of features as of now in the game, just need to figure out how to make the party commands and party get deleted when you log out! lol

Thanks,
Lither

Well, try asking in the Newbie Central forum. Just try to be descriptive so that people know exactly what you're talking about. Something like "a party system" is usually to generic since they can differ so much from game to game.

THANKS, I saw the RPG Tutorial 1 but I I didn't real;ly need that cause I have stuff for all the basics, so I didn't bother go to RPG Tutorial 2. I wish I would have!

THANKS!,
Lither

There are no large games' source code.

Well I released my Racing Game source code. But it definitely isn't large since I write clean effecient code and keep my data seperate from my source :).

I should be releasing the messed up, bug riddled, fun filled jungle of my old Pirate Game soon, if you're interested... It will be available on my downloads page(http://www.nanoplay-online.com/BackUpSITE) when it's out, so keep checking, it'll be there soon.

Nothing wrong with clean and efficient, its just the bracket-riddled part I don't like.

Someone delete this post I solved my own problem.

That procedure separates the two, showing that src = the person deathcheck is called on, and usr = the person whos attacking procedure called the deathcheck.

Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! I really suggest you read LummoxJR's article http://www.byondscape.com/ascape.dmb/LummoxJR.2002-1104/ . According to the reference "The only time usr is assigned for you is when a player (in Dream Seeker) executes a verb, clicks something with the mouse, or any other such action." Which means an NPC should never be usr unless you set this up yourself so this should only work when a PC is the attacker and only if the attack was initiated from a verb by the attacker. So if you force a player to attack(maybe a berserk spell or something initiated by another player) usr won't be correct at all even in the PC case. Though according to the reference usr is only set by players actions there are various cases in which the rule is broken mainly in the movement procs but only if they are called by a default proc. If you call them directly it acts as it should which could cause all sorts of problems if you used usr which would definitly be hard to track if you didn't know this. I don't know if this is a bug or an undocumented feature but it's inconsistant so it should be avoided anyway to prevent possible hard to track bugs.

If people were taught how to use "usr" they would have no problem!

Exactly which is why you shouldn't try if you don't understand it yourself.

I am so damn sick of people telling me to take this out. It is PERFECTLY FREAKEN FINE right here. "Ungh. No put usr in proc." doesn't teach newbies anything.

Until you've gotten to the point where you know exactly how and when usr is set you should avoid it at all costs and even if you do understand it you should avoid it at all costs since it makes the procs behaviour dependant on the call stack which will result in many many problems if your source code is complex and there are many different entry points to the proc.

You guys want to teach newbies from a different point of view?! Make a freaken tutorial, damnit!!! Very few people have even considered that more tutorials might equal better taught newbies!

And more tutorials teaching them bad habits will only cause more negative habits that they should have never learned in the first place.

By the way, changing usr to Deathcheck(mob/M) may be better in a guru's point of view, but it isn't going to turn newbies into gurus!

No but it won't teach them the wrong way to do it. If you knew how to do the proc correctly why on earth did you do something which everyone who knows what they are doing heavily condones and for good reason?

It isn't going to do a damn thing to the newbie learning from the tutorial. It doesn't teach usr can be used as src anymore. Therefor, it is just FINE.

No it's not because as I stated earlier that proc will fall apart in various cases and as a teaching tool should be robust and handle all cases gracefully. Though you can't predict every problem that might occur you should definitly strive to fix the known problems!

Uhhg. Sorry for going off there, but if I get anymore complaining about it I am going to want to remove the damn tutorials if they are such a freaken neussance on the community. Good thing the over 1,000 newbies my tutorials have helped keep me motivated to keep them up.

Then if they weren't ambitious enough to check and make sure that the tutorial was good they just picked up a nasty habit and a large misconception.

Oh and anyone who replies a smart-ass response to this, is going to get a friendly, "Alright, be sure to put that in your tutorial."

If you want to be helpful you shouldn't take these as insults and just fix your broken code. Just because it works in the test case you've set up doesn't mean it'll work correctly in any case. Source code in tutorials and libraries should be robust and be able to handle any case thrown its way and if given a case it can't handle properly should gracefully exit and give an instructive error rather than cause unwanted effects or spit out run-time errors.