You never define how the bag should be returned nor give an example.

The problem states the following:

However, an enemy can attack you (whatever your orientation is), as long as you are on an adjacent cell to the enemy (vertically or horizontally, not diagonally) and if one of those conditions is fullfilled:

• If you turn your character during the turn.
• If you move away from them (D&D's opportunity attack :D).
• If you use a potion. You will still recover your life points, but then you will be attacked.

But the enemies can also attack you if you attacked this round which is not stated above, the statement should be updated to reflect that.

There will only be one demon lord per map

No, at most one.

Python Fork

• Fixes typo in description
• Explicitely imports from solution and preloaded
• Slightly restructures tests to add @it blocks (this makes it look like lots changed in full tests, but that is mostly just indent)
• Added one simple fixed test for product types with more than 2 subtypes (since both I and TFeld below ran into problems with this, only in the random tests)

Very nice kata btw :)

First of all I would like to thank you for this kata. It was a very interesting and good challenge. First of all, I am sorry that after 4 years it is still in beta, that few people are trying to solve it and only a few have solved it. I would really like to see it get some attention and get it to release.
I would like to add that some corner cases are not tested.

1. For example, there are only three maps in fixed tests where there is a first aid kit. Perhaps we should add such a case to the random tests?
2. Also not tested are maps in which enemies are near the player's starting position on the map. That is, cases when the player in any case initially receives damage, for example, something like this. Perhaps we should take into account such cases?

field = [
  'SHM   |EX',
  '###   ###',
  'CCK     C',
  ' E      E',
  'DEE    E<',
]

3. All the cards except the one you gave as an example in the description are 5x9. I think we should do some tests with larger maps?

These are just thoughts after solving the problem, perhaps you have a different opinion on this? Anyway, thank you very much, the evening was well spent:D

Shouldn't this maze return True? If you look at this path and count steps (blue dots), then they sum exactly equal to 10, as in requirement (print at the bottom). And health (3-1+2-3) is ok. Am i missing something?

https://www.codewars.com/kata/reviews/5e9a335aa66a4c00019dc931/groups/5e9c6a7536c5250001495cb4

The description has been out of sync from the tests; the example still writes e_digit.

This kata is a subject to deduplication process here: https://github.com/codewars/content-issues/issues/200.
Please join the discussion to help us identify duplicate kata and retire them.

Hi,

The exact set of allowed characters should be given in the description. Showing the functions doesn't explain what chars are actuelly usable or not.

Cheers

(PS: quite an interesting one, yeah)

There should be test cases with overlapping occurrences of the left hand side of a rule, e.g.:

word_problem([('aa', 'bb')], 'aaa', 'abb', 1)  ->  True

otherwise this kind of solution can pass.

You solution seems to expect the treasure to be reachable in n-1 steps, example:

+------+
|#SEE#S|
|#EE#SE|
|#SEE H|
| EH#H |
|#SSEEE|
|ETE#E#|
+------+
Starting at (1, 1) with 10 steps allowed

[(1, 1), (2, 1), (2, 5), (3, 5), (3, 0), (3, 1), (3, 2), (4, 2), (0, 2), (5, 2), (5, 1)]
The test expected me to return False but it is reachable in 10 steps exactly.

Description says maximum of 5 hits but test cases include up to 6 hits.