Attacking monsters in walls

[Repton]

You can target xorn/xaren when they're in the walls with special abilities, and attack them that way. But if you just want to wallop them, and try moving into their square, it doesn't work.

[beta 7, mac]

[yufra]

I actually ran into this problem in my module, and figured out why. The engine.Map:checkAllEntities function is what calls the block_move function on each entity in a coordinate, which for a piece of terrain can open a closed door and for an actor can either initiate a "bump" attack or a dialog. The problem is that the checkAllEntities function only checks entities until it finds the first true response and then immediately returns, never checking the others. In the Xorn case the terrain is being checked before the Xorn, so the Xorn's block_move function is never checked. My guess is that the current checkAllEntities behavior is meant to save a bit of time in checking entities, and potentially avoid getting multiple attacks when attacking a coordinate that has multiple actors, etc. There are some cases where checking all entities block_move would actually be desired, so maybe we should add an option to checkAllEntities to switch between the two behaviors. Here is my proposal:

Code: Select all

function _M:checkAllEntities(x, y, what, check_all, ...)
	local p = false
	if x < 0 or x >= self.w or y < 0 or y >= self.h then return end
	if self.map[x + y * self.w] then
		for _, e in pairs(self.map[x + y * self.w]) do
			p = e:check(what, x, y, ...) or p
			if not check_all and p then return p end
		end
	end
	return p
end

This would break backwards compatibility and require the current calls to be rewritten with an additional false/nil. Alternatively we can make the check_all behavior the assumed behavior and call the additional argument return_first, but I think the option to switch between them is the way to go. Thoughts?

EDIT: Changed the code above after I remembered the second argument in "or" is never evaluated if the first is true.

[darkgod]

Hum not sure I lke changing it maybe it could be a new method that does that