Talk:Potion card

From CrawlWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

potion card in an ornate changes deck produced an unexpected effect

I've been playing 0.16.1 and found that a potion card in an ornate changes deck produced an unexpected effect: all my skels received agility same time as my character. -- Bwijn (talk) 17:07, 14 July 2015 (CEST) See the screenshot I made: Potioncard massAgility016.png

This is how the card works. The articles says: "The potion card gives the effect of a potion to you and any allies in line of sight." -- Edsrzf (talk) 02:49, 18 July 2015 (CEST)
Hey, sorry but you just repeated the text for a plain deck of changes and didn't catch the clue. Have a closer look at the screenshot: it says an ornate deck of changes produced mass agility. Our wiki up to now states that ornate (=power level two) has got other effects. And I pointed to the fact that the wiki obviously leads astray in that detail. Regrettably I don't know to which extent the info needs to be rewritten. Some code diving should achieve clear outlines. -- Bwijn (talk) 11:28, 18 July 2015 (CEST)
According to our Card article, ornate decks have a chance to produce a higher-level card effect depending on the card power, and they can only boost it up to a level 1 effect (as opposed to a normal deck of cards, which always produces a level 0 effect). So, unless you've got really high card power (from having high Evocations and/or being in good standing with Nemelex), ornate decks can produce normal card effects on a fairly regular basis. --spudwalt (talk) 03:16, 19 July 2015 (CEST)
Sorry, I misinterpreted which part of the effect you thought was unexpected. But anyway, Spudwalt is correct. -- Edsrzf (talk) 11:03, 19 July 2015 (CEST)
Thank you, Spudwalt. Your interpretation could explain the occurence. OTOH, I admit that I've never before interpreted the actual text like that. I think that the text as it is doesn't explicitly states this approach (while the game experience does). So the text should be rewritten to be unmistakable. Do you agree? -- Bwijn (talk) 17:20, 19 July 2015 (CEST)