Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[zilpin]

Magmawiki states that CANNOT_UNDEAD and NOT_LIVING are essentially synonyms for each other.

Is there any known way to prevent a creature from becoming undead, but still be living so that creatures with OPPOSED_TO_LIFE still attack it on sight?

[Murrk]

The description for NON_LIVING

Cannot be raised from the dead. Also prevents ghosts of that creature appearing.

So I think it's safe to assume that the creature lives, but it cannot be revived.

[Quietust]

The only creatures which currently have NOT_LIVING are the same ones that used to have CANNOT_UNDEAD - blood men, gabbro men, amethyst men, bronze colossuses, fire men, magma men, iron men, and mud men.

[blackmagechill]

Only real constructed men are that tough.

[Tabithda]

Either [CANNOT_UNDEAD] or [NOT_LIVING] will prevent a creature from becoming a werebeast, vampire, husk, and undead.  That said, it is the [OPPOSED_TO_LIFE] token that makes zombies friendly to a creature or not, so as long as a creature does not have the [OPPOSED_TO_LIFE] token all undead will gleefully attack it.


Furthermore, the wiki's claim that [CANNOT_UNDEAD] and [NOT_LIVING] will keep ghosts of that creature from appearing is a false one.  My custom race has had the [CANNOT_UNDEAD] token before ghosts were in the game, and since ghosts have been put in I have seen plenty of ghosts of my race appear.

[Quietust]

Both [CANNOT_UNDEAD] and [NOT_LIVING] will prevent a creature from becoming a werebeast, vampire, husk, and undead.

That's technically true, but only because [CANNOT_UNDEAD] and [NOT_LIVING] are the same thing. It's just like [MISCHIEVIOUS] and [MISCHIEVOUS] or STONE/METAL versus INORGANIC - they correspond to the exact same values in memory.

Magmawiki states that CANNOT_UNDEAD and NOT_LIVING are essentially synonyms for each other.

Not essentially - literally.

[Trapezohedron]

From what I understand, CANNOT_UNDEAD makes the creature non-resurrectable, but the creature's alive?

And NOT_LIVING is the same, aside from the fact that the creature does not have a life/is an animate object?

[Tabithda]

Both [CANNOT_UNDEAD] and [NOT_LIVING] will prevent a creature from becoming a werebeast, vampire, husk, and undead.

That's technically true, but only because [CANNOT_UNDEAD] and [NOT_LIVING] are the same thing. It's just like [MISCHIEVIOUS] and [MISCHIEVOUS] or STONE/METAL versus INORGANIC - they correspond to the exact same values in memory.

Er, sorry about that, I worded that poorly.


I meant to say that either [CANNOT_UNDEAD] or [NOT_LIVING] will prevent a creature from becoming a werebeast, vampire, husk, and undead.

[Quietust]

From what I understand, CANNOT_UNDEAD makes the creature non-resurrectable, but the creature's alive?

And NOT_LIVING is the same, aside from the fact that the creature does not have a life/is an animate object?

Specifying [CANNOT_UNDEAD] is 100% exactly the same as specifying [NOT_LIVING]. The code effectively reads something like 'if (tag == "CANNOT_UNDEAD" || tag == "NOT_LIVING") { set_flag(NOT_LIVING) }'.

[zilpin]

Either [CANNOT_UNDEAD] or [NOT_LIVING] will prevent a creature from becoming a werebeast, vampire, husk, and undead.  That said, it is the [OPPOSED_TO_LIFE] token that makes zombies friendly to a creature or not, so as long as a creature does not have the [OPPOSED_TO_LIFE] token all undead will gleefully attack it.

If this is the case, why do vampires and zombies ignore each other?

[narhiril]

Either [CANNOT_UNDEAD] or [NOT_LIVING] will prevent a creature from becoming a werebeast, vampire, husk, and undead.  That said, it is the [OPPOSED_TO_LIFE] token that makes zombies friendly to a creature or not, so as long as a creature does not have the [OPPOSED_TO_LIFE] token all undead will gleefully attack it.

If this is the case, why do vampires and zombies ignore each other?

The way I understand it, [OPPOSED_TO_LIFE] makes them attack anything else that...

1) Does not have [CANNOT_UNDEAD] or [NOT_LIVING].
2) Does not have [OPPOSED_TO_LIFE].

...  As opposed to [CRAZED], which makes them attack absolutely everything.


So, since vampires have [NOT_LIVING], zombies tend to ignore them.

[Trapezohedron]

Either [CANNOT_UNDEAD] or [NOT_LIVING] will prevent a creature from becoming a werebeast, vampire, husk, and undead.  That said, it is the [OPPOSED_TO_LIFE] token that makes zombies friendly to a creature or not, so as long as a creature does not have the [OPPOSED_TO_LIFE] token all undead will gleefully attack it.

If this is the case, why do vampires and zombies ignore each other?

The way I understand it, [OPPOSED_TO_LIFE] makes them attack anything else that...

1) Does not have [CANNOT_UNDEAD] or [NOT_LIVING].
2) Does not have [OPPOSED_TO_LIFE].

...  As opposed to [CRAZED], which makes them attack absolutely everything.


So, since vampires have [NOT_LIVING], zombies tend to ignore them, and since necromancers have [OPPOSED_TO_LIFE], zombies should generally ignore them as well.

Isn't the bolded part supposed to be NO_AGING? Because I tested the example necromancer interaction, which does not have OPPOSED_TO_LIFE, and the necromancer was never a target of the non-living.

[narhiril]

Either [CANNOT_UNDEAD] or [NOT_LIVING] will prevent a creature from becoming a werebeast, vampire, husk, and undead.  That said, it is the [OPPOSED_TO_LIFE] token that makes zombies friendly to a creature or not, so as long as a creature does not have the [OPPOSED_TO_LIFE] token all undead will gleefully attack it.

If this is the case, why do vampires and zombies ignore each other?

The way I understand it, [OPPOSED_TO_LIFE] makes them attack anything else that...

1) Does not have [CANNOT_UNDEAD] or [NOT_LIVING].
2) Does not have [OPPOSED_TO_LIFE].

...  As opposed to [CRAZED], which makes them attack absolutely everything.


So, since vampires have [NOT_LIVING], zombies tend to ignore them, and since necromancers have [OPPOSED_TO_LIFE], zombies should generally ignore them as well.

Isn't the bolded part supposed to be NO_AGING? Because I tested the example necromancer interaction, which does not have OPPOSED_TO_LIFE, and the necromancer was never a target of the non-living.

Looking back on that, I thought necromancers had [OPPOSED_TO_LIFE], but apparently they don't.  I'm not sure what it is that makes their undead minions friendly, then.  Maybe a behavior linked to [I_EFFECT:ANIMATE]?

[Meph]

OPPOSED_TO_LIFE attacks everything that does not have the opposed to life tag, even cannot_undead and not_living.

I am wondering about the undeads as well, since I have a dwarven necromancer that raises friendly corpses, that dont attack my dwarves, but they still flee when they see the undeads. Strange behavior.

[smirk]

It's possible that faction loyalties trump [OPPOSED_TO_LIFE], to prevent loyalty cascades. So the zombies don't attack yer dwarves because they're attached to your civ when raised, and they don't attack necromancers because they're.. attached to the necromancer faction as well?

Speculating ex cloaca here, but it kinda makes sense O_o