Print

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

[The Architect]

Oopsies, looks like the laugh is on me!

Seriously though, if you are going to post minutes after someone else, twice, in an answering fashion without including a name or quote, everyone is going to believe you are responding to that poster. You need to use the quote feature.

[SirHoneyBadger]

I'm just posting. You got in the way.

[The Architect]

I think you should take a minute to reread my post, and possibly edit your last one to be as polite as your others and my own. There's no need to turn this into an argument, just learn from it and use the quote feature like everyone else. Or accept that mistakes will be made and you will only have yourself to blame.

[SirHoneyBadger]

The Architect: I'm not, and never have been, trying to get into any sort of argument with you. Why are you continuing this? This is the second post in a row where you're suddenly right in the way of an altercation with me.

I have no issues with you, friend.

I never have, and I'd rather not, so unless there is something deeper going on with you and me, and it's starting to seem like you think there is, let's just try to coexist in a civil manner?

I'm tired. I've had a long day and I'm foggyheaded. If I've said anything to upset you or anyone else, I appologise.

Can we get past whatever this is already, please? Get on with something constructive? Or atleast take it to PMs.

[The Architect]

It seems we are in agreement then. Any fogginess on what is going on should be easily cleared up by reading the posts.

[DarthCloakedDwarf]

I understand it is possible to achieve the same effect using a hole in the ceiling and a circle of fortifications, but... well, somehow I find that less satisfying.

I'll do that until some far off day when murder holes actually get implemented.

And, Badger, I understand your preference to "alternative" means of killing things rather than the "fill it with arrows" one, but I'm not clever enough to create other deathtraps.

[SirHoneyBadger]

Arrows are fine, and arrows and bolts in these sorts of implementations could certainly have their place (we've already got crossbow weapon traps, afterall. I like those, and their use is short range.). I just feel arrows aren't a final solution, and that in places where other objects could work as well or better, the arrow supply might be spared.

The best tool for the job, in other words. 

[Pilsu]

I'd prefer to keep murder holes and the descending ceiling of spikes separate really

[SirHoneyBadger]

Pilsu: In what ways do you feel they should be separated?

[The Architect]

I'd prefer to keep murder holes and the descending ceiling of spikes separate really

Ok, I don't even see how these are related. One's a hole in the floor, the other's a mechanical trap. I don't see anyone objecting to separating them nor indeed anyone suggesting they are related.

We already have spike traps; Whether you want to imagine them as descending from the ceiling, shooting out from the walls, or coming up from the floor is totally up to you. They are unlikely to be edited in the future and indeed there is no real reason to do so. At most they might cross more than one tile (or z-level) at some point.

[SirHoneyBadger]

In both cases, you have a hole through which a violent act is committed.

I agree that traps and whatever is meant by "murder holes" here, is quite possibly circumstantial, but I still think the basic definition of what we're talking about here is not being defined.

If it is just a classic "murder hole", then the difference is that you've got a dwarf committing the act, directly, as opposed to a mechanical mechanism.

That's fine--other than the need for a dwarf on the other side of the hole to do the violence.

But if both are meant to somehow be automated, the differences themselves become only circumstantial, and you might as well group these holes with every other type of trap.

[The Architect]

Umm... yes, no (it's well-defined in the first post), yes (that is what this topic is about), no (who suggested they be automated, didn't I just say that, and isn't it obvious that a hole in the floor can't be automated and anything else is very off topic?)

Honestly I can't follow any logical line of reasoning with any of these recent posts. I'm giving up. When people start saying things like "mechanical mechanism", I just don't know how to competently respond without hurting feelings or causing conflict. I feel very bad for the original poster, for the record you had a good idea and I hope my suggestion will serve until something like this can be added. You could try adding it to the official mechanical requests thread, even though it isn't really a mechanical request. It would get more attention there.

[SirHoneyBadger]

A Murder Hole is a floor/ceiling with an arrow slit, allowing an attacker to fire point blank at an enemy directly beneath them with lethal accuracy.

How is this well-defined?

The very first thing ever stated in the OP is an incorrect, or atleast incomplete, definition.

[DarthCloakedDwarf]

You're right. I am dumbsauce.

A murder hole is an arrow slit carved in a floor, allowing a defender above to sneak attack a foe below with lethal accuracy, while shielding his presense from the eyes of an invader, and body from any return fire. Essentially, an arrow slit would be a floor construction that also acts as a one-way fortification denying bonuses to targets below.

My OP was dumb, for I am dumb, and if my dumbness offends or causes strife, I apologise.

[The Architect]

It seems to me like you were making a joke with that post. I see sarcasm oozing from it and sticking out in menacing spikes.