Windows Vista/7 64-bit Sneakiness cannot negate traps.

Discussion in 'Bugs' started by OmniaNigrum, May 8, 2012.

  1. OmniaNigrum

    OmniaNigrum Member

    I cannot find if this has been reported, so I am making the post here. With greater than 100 :sneakiness: you can and will still set off traps. Is this intended or not?
  2. Null

    Null Will Mod for Digglebucks

    Well I know that I don't set off traps with high enough sneakiness so it may not be intended (or it may require greater than 100 to be immune).
  3. OmniaNigrum

    OmniaNigrum Member

    Well, as I said in the other thread that spawned this one, I have set them off with over 200 :sneakiness: too.
  4. r_b_bergstrom

    r_b_bergstrom Will Mod for Digglebucks

    When you had over 200 :sneakiness:, was it because of a modded item that had over 100 :sneakiness:? If so, it's not impossible that such an item may have hit some limit and rolled over. Just a thought.

    I ask because getting over 200 :sneakiness: should be kinda difficult to do. Assuming the formulas on the wiki are correct, it's (0.75 x :)nimbleness: + :savvy:))-20. A character with 7 Rogue skills all maxed out should have around 100 points in each stat, right? (7 x 7 = 49 levels, 2 points of each attribute per level). So that's a sneakiness rating of around 130, pre-equipment (0.75 x 200 = 150, then subtract 20). There are various items and even a few spells that boost sneakiness, but it's hard to imagine anyone getting above 150 or so and still feeling the need to pile on more bit by bit. So I assume there must be some modded item or spell giving a single huge sneakiness boost.
  5. OmniaNigrum

    OmniaNigrum Member

    There are mods involved. But at current my usual builds have around 108 sneakiness at the peak without counting items. Again mods are involved, but anything that can be reached with skills in the base game should in theory work out as described, and you can get around 150 without modding at all.(As you said.)

    The game uses 4 byte integers for everything as far as I can tell, so rolling over is not an issue. And even if it was, a single byte integer can support 255, so I fail to see any possible situation other than something really odd that can account for this.

    But the source of the issues is mostly irrelevant. I could name the mods I use and how it works out to this, but I do not want to deflect the point of the thread away from the question of wheather or not :sneakiness: is supposed to be a percentile of not setting off traps, or if the flavor text needs revision.
    (If you want the exact list of mods I use and what accounts for my massive :sneakiness:, I will be glad to provide it.)

    I just now disabled all mods, and edited the itemDB.xml for a simple robe to give exactly 100 sneakiness and tested walking over traps with a new character. They went off. So either it is broke or the flavor text needs revision.
  6. Lorrelian

    Lorrelian Member

    I think he mentioned using the Diggle God of Secrets buff (+50 :sneakiness: ) in the underutilized stats thread. With a pre-equipment :sneakiness: of 130 that means 180 :sneakiness:, which is still an absurd amount, but I think you could get to 200 if you worked at it. Not that I know why you'd want that much, unless you were playing a Computer Wizard or something...

    EDIT: Nice Ninja moves, Omni.
    OmniNegro likes this.
  7. OmniaNigrum

    OmniaNigrum Member

    That was not me using Secrets Lorrelian. I have only found him a few times and never wanted the malus to :sight: since every character I had that found him was ranged. (Magic or xbow/throwing.)
  8. Lorrelian

    Lorrelian Member

    Either way, it's clearly possible, or close to possible, to do sans mods. Just replace one rogue skill with the 1.0.10 version of Magic Training and you should be there!
  9. r_b_bergstrom

    r_b_bergstrom Will Mod for Digglebucks

    Good points. I hadn't considered either.

    Though I will clarify, I was proposing that maybe having a single item with 100 sneakiness was where the bug might lie. As in, sneakiness itself works just fine, but perhaps exceeding two digits worth of boost on a single stat causes roll-over. And it's just a thought. "Once you've eliminated the impossible..."

    Now I'm just about curious enough to go test it myself by making an item with 99 :sneakiness: , another with 100 :sneakiness:, and a third with 260 :sneakiness:. Hmm.

    Roughly how many times do you have to step on a trap to make it happen? Are we talking a fairly common problem (1 in 10) or a freak rare bug (took 30 attempts or more to make it happen)? You say "they" went off, so you had it happen more than once?
  10. OmniaNigrum

    OmniaNigrum Member

    On average I had to knowingly walk over traps less times than I would have had to attempt a disarm of the same traps. Probably no more than ten tries.

    And yes, I tried different traps, then different types of traps, then even on different floors.
    r_b_bergstrom likes this.
  11. Glazed

    Glazed Member

    Also consider trying one item of each slot with just 10 sneakiness each. Or just ask Nicholas if 100 sneakiness is even supposed to provide complete trap immunity.
  12. OmniaNigrum

    OmniaNigrum Member

    Just a bump. I would like to have a clarification on the point of :sneakiness: though.

    Nicholas, if you or another overworked and underpaid Gaslamp Games slave employee happens to read this, can you tell us if :sneakiness: should make you immune to setting off traps at 100 or any other reachable number?

    Thank you for any responses. And thank you to everyone else involved in this thread or the one that spawned it.
  13. Daynab

    Daynab Community Moderator Staff Member

    I'll ask Nicholas when I get the chance, if he doesn't see this.
    OmniNegro likes this.