Re: any reason to keep opened chests?

R. Dan Henry wrote:
> On Sun, 02 Mar 2008 08:21:49 -0500, The Wanderer
> <inverseparadox@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> 
>> Eddie Grove wrote:
>>
>>> My question is why even keep an opened chest around? Why isn't every
>>> chest automatically deleted when it is opened?
>> Because it doesn't make 'realistic' sense for a large, heavy chest to
>> just vanish when its contents emerge. (The same basic claim could be
>> made about the bottles which contain potions, among perhaps other
>> things, but those are small and destructible enough that it seems less
>> unreasonable for them to just vanish.)
>>
>> Whether or not this is a good enough reason to justify the problems it
>> may cause is another question, but I'm morally certain that that is the
>> reason why they were kept in the first place.
> 
> It is much more likely it simply was not considered worth the bother to
> write the code to remove them when chests were introduced in Moria,
> which had no TMJ problem.

Early angband didn't have TMJ problem either. And it did give you much 
less what you see anf get anyway. Ever wondered what that "extend power 
of the look command" did? You couldn't "look" anything that wasn't in 
your LoS.

Also without stacking there is no problem with chests left there. Items 
couldn't pile over chest. It was actually tiny bit of work to get max 
amount of items out of one of those, you might need to carry it into 
open space before opening. Too bad that those were almost never worth 
opening.

Timo Pietilä