Is there a way to tie the scope of a Suggestion statement to a specific Convnode.
Currently, two or more conversation trees are interfering with each other.
One appears to be seeing the suggestion statements of the other.
Must admit that the documentation isn’t much help here.
It seems more geared to showing how to do only one conversation. That’s a great start.
However; I need to go a bit further in the adventure I’m trying to write.
Unfortunately; there are few if any good “go-bys” or tutorials on the web.
Only one conv-node should be the active node, and only that conv-node’s suggestions should be displayed when you list topics. If the problem isn’t the topics list, but rather the responses, the responses are a rule book so all the usually rules of rule ordering apply. Are you doing anything like giving one conv-node a default response rule that invokes the response rules of another node?
I’ve been careful to not cross-connect convnodes. Actually, my question is more “how does one associate specific suggestions with a particular convnode?”.
My understanding, from the limited documentation available, is that one makes a similar statement to the following to define a node and the associated suggestions (This assumes you have already defined ‘Quest’ and what appears to be null node suggestions. Also, that one has defined a set of rules for responses with the last being the default response for the convnode):
[Conversation with the Master when in the West]
master-in-west-node is a closed convnode.
The tell-suggestions are { yourself, Quest }.
[Response rules follow]
However; this does not appear to make the association specific to only the quest-in-west-node, since it does not actually mention the node to which it pertains. On the other hand; if this works like a room description and is associated with what it follows, then I’m stumped as to why the scoping is not working correctly.
The example in the Conversation package (Example Consultation) actually confuses the matter further, since it introduces a set of almost identical suggestion statements before any convnode has been explicitly defined. Wonder if these statements apply to the null node in this case. The documentation doesn’t really seem to say.
To parallel this as best I could, I used the following prior to what I noted above:
[Establish the conversation topics, presumably for the null node]
The node of the Master of the Lodge is master-in-west-node.
The ask-suggestions are { S W Pedestal, Masonic Apron, Lodge Notice }.
The tell-suggestions are { yourself, Quest }.
Thanks, Bleki.
It worked perfectly. Your input is very much appreciated.
I tried something similar before with no luck. I must have had the syntax slightly off.
Sort-of makes sense in an object-oriented language to say,“The ask-suggestions of master-in-west-node are {…}.”
The suggestions appear to be attributes of the convnode instantiation.
Guess one must explicitly define the scope of the suggestions, when there are multiple convnode trees.
This is definitely not mentioned in the documentation and probably should be.
From an Inform7 perspective, the absolute “need” to do this is a bit odd.
One can implicitly set the description attribute of a specific room by simply stating it right after the room definition.
Yet; one obviously can’t do that for a convnode and its subsequent suggestions.
Wonder if this could just be a slight idiosyncrasy of the way the extension was written?
The node of the Master of the Lodge is master-in-west-node.
The ask-suggestions are { S W Pedestal, Masonic Apron, Lodge Notice }.
The tell-suggestions are { yourself, Quest }.
I’d expect it to try to set the ask-suggestions of Master of the Lodge.
In
master-in-west-node is a closed convnode.
The tell-suggestions are { yourself, Quest }.
I’d expect it to set the tell-suggestions of master-in-west-node. There’s nothing at all special about convnodes, they are just a kind of object like any other.