isaffected checks

Duranamir · Post by **Duranamir** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 2:31 pm

I want to check the players for having certain spells cast on themselves. From reading the builders help the best bet seems to be

"if isaffected($n) == XXXX"

I can not get this to work currently as it complains that it is checking for an unkown affect, what i think i need is the correct syntax for the right hand side...

Specific spells i am after currently are "True sight" and "invis".

Duranamir

Harroghty · Post by **Harroghty** » Wed Mar 25, 2009 12:45 am

Have you tried this?

== 'true sight'

Duranamir · Post by **Duranamir** » Wed Mar 25, 2009 9:34 pm

Actual syntax below.

if isaffected($n) == 'invisibility'

But still complains.

Duranamir

Caelnai · Post by **Caelnai** » Wed Mar 25, 2009 9:53 pm

wouldn't that be 'invis' ?

Duranamir · Post by **Duranamir** » Wed Mar 25, 2009 10:07 pm

Nope, below does not work either.

if isaffected($n) == 'invis'

Enig · Post by **Enig** » Wed Mar 25, 2009 10:18 pm

It's sort of strange, but I think it ought to work if you try...

if isaffected($n)= invisible

I'm not sure about the true sight, but I'll give a whirl later on with some trial and error.

Dalvyn · Post by **Dalvyn** » Thu Mar 26, 2009 8:12 am

What you could try to do is this:

Get a hold of an imm online, cast the required spell, and ask the imm to "mstat" you. The imm should see a line saying "Affected: ..." followed by a series of names. Try using that name.

I would guess that it is

isaffected($n) == invis

isaffected($n) == true_sight

but I'm not 100% sure.

(The whole check is actually nonsensical in its form ... it should be something like "isaffected($n,invis)" instead of using ==)

Duranamir · Post by **Duranamir** » Thu Mar 26, 2009 9:11 am

Dalvyn, thanks for the help. Points up an error in the help files as they say..

isaffected checks if $whatever is affected by rhs
if isaffected($n) == Detect_magic

Duranamir

Duranamir · Post by **Duranamir** » Thu Mar 26, 2009 10:11 pm

Thanks to everyone for there help. Got it working now. If anyone is interested syntax was correct as per lesson. Values needed were the words invisible and true_sight.

Duranamir

Lathlain · Post by **Lathlain** » Thu Mar 26, 2009 10:35 pm

No problem mate - glad we could set you right!

Dalvyn · Post by **Dalvyn** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 10:47 am

Duranamir wrote: If anyone is interested syntax was correct as per lesson.

Ah, I wasn't suggesting that you should use "isaffected($n, invisible)", just pointing out that the current form (which is the one that works) does not make sense.

What does not make sense in it is that something written as "isaffected($n)" should have a unique value.

For example, "inroom($n)" is the vnum of the room where $n is ... and thus writing "inroom($n) == 8030" makes sense: it checks that this value IS 8030.

But "isaffected($n)" does not have a single value, and "isaffected($n) == invisible" and "isaffected($n) == true_sight" can both be true at the same time, which ... just does not make sense because something cannot be equal to both "invisible" and "true_sight". But yes, that's the ay it is, currently.

Harroghty · Post by **Harroghty** » Tue Oct 16, 2012 12:06 am

This is now if isaffected($n) == truesight

isaffected checks

isaffected checks

Re: isaffected checks

Re: isaffected checks

Re: isaffected checks

Re: isaffected checks

Re: isaffected checks

Re: isaffected checks

Re: isaffected checks

Re: isaffected checks

Re: isaffected checks

Re: isaffected checks

Re: isaffected checks