EternalUndeath

...How would you place it on anything? It's just a shape, not an actual object... And how on earth would you manage to make full on heiroglyphs less space consuming than a 5x5x1 mini-block structure?

You get dragon mounts by rolling diplomacy, not handle animal. Make it like the wolves, but where you can 'tame' them by giving them gold ingots or gems instead of bones.

...Brofist. Edit: 'I wonder...'Dim intCode As integer()Dim strOut As stringDim strEnd As stringDim strCheck As string 'basic declarations'intCode = 0strEnd = "[/Âcode]"strCheck = "[code]" 'initial constant declarations' If line.start = strCheck Then While press.keydown = 13 Do intCode = intCode + 1 Loop Until line.stop = strEnd 'counter' strOut = "You have " + intCode + " lines of code typed." Else strOut = "That's not code" End IfPrint strOutHA! It DOES recognize common scripting words! It even comments out when I use an apostrophe! <3

Honestly no clue. The formatting is terrible on this board. I end up using the ` character most of the time (tilda w/o holding shift. I forget what it's called), because it's small and unobtrusive.

that was... very detailed. Shame none of your formatting made it into the post...

To quote the Medic, 'You are trying my patience, dumkampf'

but the sulphur 'ore' is already a powder when you collect it... and idk about shapeless recipe, making gunpoweder IRL is a pretty exacting process

How about fruit trees with fruit-bearing leaf blocks convert to just regular leaf-blocks at a certain time of year unless harvested. When said fruity leaf block converts to the normal one, a fruit tree sapling has a small chance of spawning within the chunk

Um... I'll agree to disagree with you on the runes thing. I think that making them optional but incredibly useful is enough. For the single-level enchants... you do bring up a very valid and concerning point. Thinking out loud here... perhaps increase durability of the enchant with higher levels? ...No, that's stupid... either it undermines the unbreaking enchant, makes it OP, or requires a whole new system for separate enchantment durability... ...hmm... maybe your solution is best... Make lower tier gems more likely to be destroyed in the enchanting process. Perhaps along the lines of: Exquisite = 0.1%, flawless = 2.2%, [] = 15.8%, flawed = 49.9%, chipped = 84%?

What about them? It's just like everyone's been saying - rubies can host fire-based enchants like fire aspect for a sword, auto smelting for a pick (you'd have to have empty molds in your inv tho), carbonization for an axe (making shit up at this point). You'd choose which enchant you wanted (by picking out the rune to use, same way you'd pick which plan you were making on a scribing table), and pick which gem you wanted to enchant. There would be overlap for a few gems obviously, so say that beryls have - not fire enchants, but sword specific enchants. Well if you wanted fire aspect II, you would have to put in either a ruby or a beryl (not much luck of getting aspect II tho. Use flawless for a better chance, or exquisite for guaranteed), and get a ruby of fire aspect II. However if you wanted an axe of carbonization, you couldn't put that enchant on a beryl because it can't hold it (each gem type would have the list of possible enchants they can accept hard-coded into their class). And say you're enchanting a flawless beryl with sharpness - well each gem level would have a 50% chance of getting the appropriate enchant level, 25% chance of getting the level below it, and 25% chance of the level above. The aforementioned flawless beryl would then come out with sharpness IV half the time, sharpness III a quarter of the time, and sharpness V the other quarter. If you're at the top or bottom level, it counts as its own higher or lower level respectively, so enchanting chipped beryl has a 75% chance of sharpness I while an exquisite beryl will give sharpness V 3 out of every 4 tries Boiling it down; different gems can hold different enchants, with some overlap. Gem type determines the variety of enchant, and gem quality determines strength (with slight randomization). Rune type determines specific enchant. The limited-quantity catalyst usually required (such as EXP in vanilla) is in this case the difficult-to-obtain specialized markings. [EDIT:] Perhaps it could also be possible to enchant WITHOUT a rune as an option, but then you get a random enchantment suitable for the type and quality of gem inserted. This process would also use up experience or some other valued thing as a catalyst in lieu of the special markings. Random lightning strikes on your table could provide a rare but welcome surprise, allowing you to make a random enchant without using up any of your materials other than the gem. That way you don't HAVE to find (read: 'look up') the runes, they just make things way easier on you. Also, kudos for not only guessing the reference but actually remembering his name lol. I miss Dexter's Lab. Omlet du fromage.

... ADD GENERATED RUNE STRUCTURES ONLY TO HELL. BAM. Doesn't change the overworld generation Adds a good reason to keep going back to hell (if you wanna stay legit) Keeps enchants fairly mid-endgame Keeps magic fairly out of the way for people that don't want it *plays I'm Sexy And I know It while doing hipthrusts and pumping fists*

Also, this should require a crafting table, and would end up using 8 slots. Gunpowder is made with a 15:2:3 ratio of saltpeter to sulphur to charcoal. Since that's a bit impractical, I think a 6:1:1 ratio could be acceptable. It would be too high-yeild for firearms without the proper ratio though, and therefore only suitable in explosive charges such as TNT. Assuming saltpeter is K, sulphur is S, and charcoal is C, it would be something like this: K S K K `` K = 4 gunpowder K C K

I'm now trying to picture someone - ANYone - doing this IRL, and all I can come up with is a visual image of The Mask

Word from the top is that this mod will NOT incorporate anything from the last 400 years. This coming from Dunk, who says it comes straight from Bioxx himself.

lol I doubt Azanor would take kindly to Bioxx suddenly adding growing crystalline structures used in magic. OFFTOPIC ANSWER: open the thread and lightly tap your monitor

Lol your post didn't show up for me till I'd posted mine, you must have added it just as I was typing mine out XD

1) I'd say keep it in a 1-chunk radius. Keep in mind, that's still 9 chunks, which is a considerable area. A 4-chunk radius is 25 total chunks, at 16x16 each for a total of 6400 blocks. Which - if you're in a forest biome - is potentially a processor-melting number of chunk updates for a low end system. 2) Magic A is Magic A. It doesn't have to be realistic, but it does have to be consistent. If Bioxx makes regular trees drop seeds like regular trees, then people will become upset when fruit trees do not drop their seeds like fruit trees (that is to say, inside their fruit). We've established that fruit trees and woody trees are different in-game. If we make them behave wildly differently on most accounts (like they do), but then give them both one property that's totally the same and only makes sense for one of them, it breaks immersion like a kneecap in a brooklyn slum. See also Like reality unless noted

I don't need Steve to 'level up' in smithing. That's because, as I work better and better metals and figure out by trial and error the best button combos to make higher quality (less damage) tools, I'M 'leveling up' in smithing. There should be as little separation between steve and the player as possible, imo

And now you know how I feel lol

...you forgot sulphur

...*twitch* He's messing with you, there's no such thing as 'water mellons' It's 'watermelons'. All one word, only one 'L'.

Ooh, me gusta Also it would fit in great with TFCs believability focus

The proper word for that situation would be 'somebody'. 'Someone' refers to a specific but unidentified individual, whereas 'somebody' is much more vague and can refer to any person at all, with no specificity implied. So, as you said~

Okay, so- This thread is just... wow. Lots-o-stuff. Umm, idk if I like the whole 'research' bit. Smacks a little too much of Steve knowing stuff instead of me, and Lumy, me, and a few others have already crucified posts for suggesting a separation of steve from the player. Also smacks a bit too much of thaumcraft, but that's another matter. I also am very much not on-board with the idea of steve's number of hearts increasing. I remember this being a problem in the end-game of many Zelda games as well, where I had so many fucking hearts I was getting killed because I couldn't see the damned game behind them all. If you MUST increase steve's starting health (which I also think is a bad idea, but at least it's better than bars and bars of hearts), then simply add progressively smaller multipliers to damage received (x 0.75, x 0.5, x 0.25, etc...)to make the 10 hearts you get count for more. As for the ailments, I'm a bit torn - on the one hand, I can definitely see negative stat effects as a viable option, to be listed in the area to the left of your inventory where potion effects go... but on the other hand, it also makes me feel like it wouldn't be long before I'm walking into the nearest cave with 2 antidotes, a splint, 3 hi-potions, and a fucking phoenix down. It just seems a little too jrpg, while at the same time feeling like a good idea. I think the solution may be to implement it, but first rework it so that there's a bit of a different feel. Not yet sure quite how.

...speaking of having metals for days, is it just me or is cassiterite a little TOO common now? I hit 3 very large veins all within a few blocks from each other, hollowed out an area that could comfortably house 20, and now have enough tin to last the rest of my life. However, I am now finding it near impossible to locate copper. Possibly because of the extra tin generation? also lol, I now have 2 stacks of posts