I don't know if this is a bug, but yesterday my fighter with 0 points in piety lost another point with a level-up and suddenly had 31 in piety!
I'm not complaining, now I could finally make him samurai, but I would like to know what happens if you receive another point in piety (if that's possible) Do you get 32 or 0? I can't test it anymore, because i've already changed him into a samurai and didn't keep a savegame.
Is this also possible in the other way, e.g. you have 18 points in something and with a level-up you reach 19?

(P.S. I'm playing the Wizardry Archives version)

- Prutske

• Sounds like a bug,Llevram, 09:50 AM, May-02-01
  • RE: Sounds like a bug,Prutske -ur, 09:55 AM, May-02-01
  • RE: Sounds like a bug,Willow, 03:04 PM, May-02-01
• RE: 31 points in piety,Snafaru -ur, 09:41 PM, May-03-01
  • thanks for the explanation n/t,Prutske -ur, 09:30 AM, May-07-01

Since their number system for attributes only runs from 0-31, zero minus 1 = 31 I imagine when tehy rewrote it, they never thought 0 would be valid, so that test case probably slipped through the cracks.

I doubt it would happen the opposite way (meaning that you would never see 31 go to zero in a level up, but who knows).

Tools for your Wizardry(r) toolkit

Like I said, I'm not complaining. From now on I'm gonna cheer every time they lose a point They 're closer to zero anyway. Who knows, maybe there's some hope to get a ninja after all without the dagger!

- Prutske

>I doubt it would happen the
>opposite way (meaning that you
>would never see 31 go
>to zero in a level
>up, but who knows).

how many times in how many games have i accumulated so much gold and / or experience that the number wrapped around, resulting in a near-zero or even negative number!

i wouldn't put it past a programmer...for i am one.

Willow
ICQ# 110226531

Hi, here's the explanation:

It is not exactly a programming bug. What happens is that the characteristics range from 00 to 1F in the hexadecimal type of numbering all computers use. That translates into 0 to 31 in 'our' way of counting us humans. Since programming space was extremely limited in 1980's they probably did not bother to write code that would check/take care of a value going below zero to stay at zero, thus the wrap-around effect.

Snafaru