I have a quick question about using ‘or’/‘and’ command for *if statements. I’ve provided the choicescript guide pages which addresses these commands below:
And/or/not (with mandatory parentheses) And: (leadership > 30) and (strength > 40) Or: (leadership > 60) or (strength > 70)
Not: not(strength > 70)
Complex parentheses: ((leadership > 60) and (agility > 20)) or (strength > 80)
The bolded ones are the ones I’m interested in currently. I was wondering if it’s possible to put more than one ‘and’ or put more than one ‘or’ operator in the same line of code for an *if statement to be available.
For example, can I do something like this?
Example 1
*if (weapon = 1) or (weapon = 3) or (weapon = 5)
#Use this weapon
*elseif (weapon = 4)
#Throw this weapon
*else
#Flail
Example 2
*if (p1met = false) and (p2met = false) and (p3met = false)
Description of three NPCs not previously met
*goto nextscene
*else
*goto nextscene
The examples basically show there are more than two possible conditions that will result in the same option. Or do I have to do it two at a time, even if the option is the same?
Please let me know if my question isn’t clear or if I need to explain further. Thank you!
Edit: I’m still looking through the forums for any previous posts about this topic. I haven’t found any yet, but if you know of one, please point me in the right direction, thanks!
Okay, I saw the bit about the complex parentheses, and I was wondering if that could work with the same type of operator.
I’m glad to know it works! Thank you very much! I’ll be trying that out, and I assume it’ll work for 3+ commands as well? If it does, would the code be something like this?
*if (((w = 1) or (w = 2)) or ((w = 3) or (w = 4)) or ((w = 5) or (w =6)))
You place parentheses for pairs and the last would be a single if it is uneven, or paired if an even number of variables come into play?
I’m a little confused by it myself; I believe choicescript can only process two conditions at a time, so they have to be paired. Here’s code that I wrote that worked (not sure if ‘or’ instead of ‘and’ will change things):
*if (((((sympathy > 50) and (sympathy > discipline)) and (sympathy > independence)) and (sympathy > caution)) and (sympathy > bravado))
Basically, every time I added on another condition, I put another set of parentheses around everything
@Alexandra’s right, ChoiceScript processes variables by pairs. I tend to code them this way, which helps me to make sure I have the parenthesis in the right place—especially if I’m mixing ands and ors, like this:
*if ((((wisdom > 65) and (fable > 65)) or ((strength > 65) and (determination > 65))) or ((devices > 75) and (study > 65)))
(That could all be done with only and for a super-stats choice, too, instead of having or as well.)
That may be more parentheses than I strictly need, I think, but at least I’m sure about what goes with which. Plus I code in CSIDE, which highlights matching parenthetical sets for me. I’ve found that to be super helpful.
Just for reference, here are two previous posts from way back when on this topic.
The summary version: you’ve got to (a) give ChoiceScript no more than two things to deal with at a time, and (b) if using a combination of “and” and “or” statements, remember that order matters and take care to group the things that logically need grouping.
Well, (b) is true in any language, just more explicitly obvious because of (a) in the case of CS. I mean, how does a non-coder parse: if ( foo == true && bar !== "false" || foobar >= 10) {} ?
@Fiogan Yes, thank you for the example! Notepad thankfully has the feature of highlighting parentheses too now, so I can check if they’re properly paired. It’s certainly more complex, but now that I know CS works with pairs, it’s a lot easier to handle.
@Havenstone Thank you very much! I guess I should have hunted around a little bit further.
So far, it’s worked, but if not, I’ll definitely be referencing back to this thread and the two others you posted for help.
Thank you, I just tried the first version and it worked. I was trying to put more than one "not()"s in the phrase, rather than lumping it all into one not().
So it seems. I only happened to notice it because the scene wasn’t playing out according to the weapon used. If I hadn’t, I doubt I would have noticed it at all.
Thank you again! I definitely will stick to grouping it together in future.
Another way to parse it is using !=, which is basically ‘does not equal’, and = false for booleans. So you’d have something like:
*temp five 50
*temp heffalump false
*temp woozles "where are the woozles"
*if (((five != 5) and (heffalumps = false)) and ((woozles != "here")))
We're all right for now!
*goto onwards_friends
