Alright, been working on a spell system for this Harry Potter game and had an idea. What if I were to remove all of the spells within tabs, making them all hidden. Then, with the skin I made, there would be a small box to the corner where you type commands, (you know, the commands box under almost every game). Now, putting the name of the spell into the box, it would cast the spell if needed. This Harry Potter game is a roleplaying game, so the person will have to have actually learned about the spell. (Of course, lower skilled wizards won't be able to use the spell, because the learning variable for that spell isn't 1).
Well, anyway, I can see downsides to this, but it would restrict the use of tabs would it not? Sure, people could use macroes, but it would lower the boredom of clicking a spell over and over again. There are overlays, but I'm not resorting to that yet. Anyway, is this a good idea or not?
ID:151900
 Oct 26 2008, 11:17 am
|
|
|
Oct 26 2008, 11:30 am
|
|
Popisfizzy
 |
There is a value you can use on verbs called "hidden". If you do set hidden = 1, they won't show up in panels. Of course, they will still show up if you type them out partially (I think). I.e., if you have "world-say" and type "world" then push "say", it'll make them show up in a box. A better way would be to parse the message typed, and see if there is a valid spell.
|
If hidden using 'set hidden' the auto-finish system of the input element won't detect the verb. If you want it to be detected but not listed in a tab you can do 'set category = null'.
| |
but it would lower the boredom of clicking a spell over and over again. If it's a roleplay game, using the same spell over and over again should be made unattractive anyway. Anyway, you could in fact even create your own input box, which doesn't function as default one, which in turn calls a proc that executes the spells. This way, there would be no way to set up macros for it. | |