Simple Ideas

1215216218220221231

Comments

  • AeldraAeldra , using cake powered flight
    Mrak said:
    Get rid of how "say to" works now.

    Create new command called "sayto" which checks for the target in the room, and returns an error if they're not there. 

    If Ianir is in the room:
    say to Ianir I am a duck
    You say, "To Ianir I am a duck."
    sayto Ianir 
    You say to Ianir, "I am a duck."

    If Ianir isn't in the room:
    say to Ianir I am a duck
    You say, "To Ianir I am a duck."
    sayto Ianir I am a duck 
    Nothing can be seen here by that name.
    this already exists and is called sayto.
    Avatar / Picture done by the lovely Gurashi.
  • AeldraAeldra , using cake powered flight
    Shameless double post.

    Can we please have a way for others to see what we can make for them in terms of items? using letters to pass designs and lists back and forth is really painful and time consuming, not to mention requiring a lot of copy and paste. :(
    Avatar / Picture done by the lovely Gurashi.
  • I’ve asked before and I will ask again, please make miakoda give you one leaf that you can use multiple times like Glom gets with their web.
  • Lilyin! said:
    I’ve asked before and I will ask again, please make miakoda give you one leaf that you can use multiple times like Glom gets with their web.
    I don't care either way, but "They have X so we should have it" has never been an effective line of request in my experience of IREs.
  • I lied the last time I asked it to be changed I asked for it to be where you got the amount of leaves to equal the pixies in the forest. The spam is awful and usually seems to happen right in the middle of conversation. Pls change.
  • LuceLuce Fox Populi
    edited April 2018
    Even then, you're going to end up with one novice lost in the woods with two pixies while two or three come by and get eight leaves each and greet two more times fruitlessly. EDIT: Unless you mean greet once, get eight, in which case carry on while my brain sits the next eight hours out
  • Replace the leaves with a giant butterfly net.
  • Don't know that refining is necessary. Offerings seem like a decent idea, though.
  • LuceLuce Fox Populi
    Also not sure what herbalists, poisonists, alchemists, or enchanters would make. It feels like forgers and cooks would get the brunt of them, actually.
  • TremulaTremula Banished Quasiroyal
    Herbalists: INCENSE. All those useless herbs that are only used for cooking and alchemy now? Well, turns out they smell p good if you know how to group, bind, and smoke 'em. Some of them might give a boost to sanctifying or something.

    Poisonists: Remember how crotamine was once the most deadly poison in the world? God slurpee. They just...lap that shit up like a kitten with milk. Mildly less ridiculous: if I was a warrior god I'd want a flask of poison that mortals offered me because they love me, that's all I'm saying.

    Alchemists: Gods can make some pretty epic shit, but they need specialised flasks and/or pre-done stuff at times that mortals have just enough time to make and prepare. IDK, alchemy is kinda difficult I'll grant you that but also consider I'm dumb and it's 7am.

    Enchanters: This one is the easiest, tbh, you just enhance all those votives that have already been made to make them worth more, and have it take like 2 powerstones (idk what our stock of powerstone surplus looks like but I remember back in the day you couldn't give them away fast enough).
                          * * * WRACK AND ROLL AND DEATH AND PAIN * * *
                                         * * * LET'S FEEL THE FEAR OF DEATH AGAIN * * *
              * * * WE'LL KILL AND SLAUGHTER, EAT THE SLAIN * * *
      * * * IN RAVAGING WE'LL ENTERTAIN * * *

    Ixion tells you, "// I don't think anyone else had a clue, amazing form."
  • PortiusPortius Likes big books, cannot lie
    Libation sacrifices have been pretty common throughout history. Mostly alcohol, admittedly. Within the realm of Lusternia, it'd be reasonable to include potions and whatnot, since they are so important. That gets alchemists and poisonists.

    Gods love corpses, so tattooists just make fancy corpse bits to sacrifice.

    As Tremula points out, smell also tends to be a big deal in historical sacrifices. Herbs work there.

    Enchanting can be anything that takes magic. Enhancing existing ones is neat variety for it, new items can be arbitrary magic-holders.

    Other trades work well with either food or treasure sacrifices, both of which were fairly common. Not always things that were valuable, either. You might sacrifice a clay foot to the god that you think healed a foot injury, for example. History is neat!
    Any sufficiently advanced pun is indistinguishable from comedy.
  • I like the idea overall. However the bit I'm missing is, why would a player go through all of it just to offer essence to a god? 
  • Taking as given the various motivators and specs of order affinity, why not do the following:

    -Remove 50% malus on offering for foreign order members.
    -Give all In-Org members a 100% bonus on offering.
    --(This bonus will apply last, after a percentage is moved to cults etc.)
    -Adjust the drain from foreign order members, if need be.

    This has the same net effect, in that foreign order members have half the offering potential of in-org members. However, now foreign order members aren't weirdly worse than foreign outsiders at offering. I... still think there are tremendously more elegant solutions, but just flipping the buff/malus factor would instantly make the mechanic less frustrating for everyone. 
  • TremulaTremula Banished Quasiroyal
    Enya said: 
    I like the idea overall. However the bit I'm missing is, why would a player go through all of it just to offer essence to a god? 
    Because unlike her secular husband, Trem is very religious much as a great amount of Lusternia is. Besides wanting to be high up on the offerings list and roleplay purposes, there's also the benefit of more activity for tradesman and shopkeeper.
                          * * * WRACK AND ROLL AND DEATH AND PAIN * * *
                                         * * * LET'S FEEL THE FEAR OF DEATH AGAIN * * *
              * * * WE'LL KILL AND SLAUGHTER, EAT THE SLAIN * * *
      * * * IN RAVAGING WE'LL ENTERTAIN * * *

    Ixion tells you, "// I don't think anyone else had a clue, amazing form."
  • XenthosXenthos Shadow Lord
    Tremula said:
    Enya said: 
    I like the idea overall. However the bit I'm missing is, why would a player go through all of it just to offer essence to a god? 
    Because unlike her secular husband, Trem is very religious much as a great amount of Lusternia is. Besides wanting to be high up on the offerings list and roleplay purposes, there's also the benefit of more activity for tradesman and shopkeeper.
    I don't know that it's good activity though; it's just dumping gold into commodities, and then wiping the commodities out of the game.  Some commodities are already very difficult to generate, and people need those for their tradeskills (metals are especially problematic).  Orgs do have stockpiles, but if people are buying comms just to delete them for no actual purpose, those are going to dwindle faster than they already do.

    Then you also have the issue of commodities being priced differently; offering things made out of leather or rope will be far more cost-efficient than things made out of steel.  How do you balance this?  Commodity prices fluctuate, there is not really a 'base' value to tie anything off of, so some tradeskills are going to be able to have a big leg up over others.  Herbs are plentiful (just time-consuming), and poisons have no real cost at all which will make them the best offerings of all, price-wise.

    I'm just having difficulty seeing how this would work in a good way.  It seems very difficult to balance, and the net result of wiping commodities without also addressing the difficulty of generating some will be very difficult on metal-heavy tradeskills especially.

    It also seems like a fair bit of design and coding to put together something that effectively mimics figurines (only instead of imbuing with esteem, they just have a hard offering value).  Why not just spend your gold on esteem?  If the thing is to just have "more types of offering designs," you could add figurine-like vessels to other tradeskills (function mechanically the same, can be imbued with esteem and offered), but then you are not constantly burning comms to make them (only when you offer the end result).

    I think the biggest issue with that one would be coming up with some way of leveling the newItems (no point in using them if you can't get them up to the same net effect as a level 40 figurine).

    No matter what, though, this certainly isn't a "simple idea." :p
    image
  • Have sandals not hide the socks you're wearing!
  • Kali said:
    Have sandals not hide the socks you're wearing!
    Likewise for cloaks not hiding jewellery on your neck & ears; coats hiding the clothing beneath like gowns/dress  etc.

  • edited May 2018
    Anita said:
    Kali said:
    Have sandals not hide the socks you're wearing!
    Likewise for cloaks not hiding jewellery on your neck & ears; coats hiding the clothing beneath like gowns/dress  etc.
     There may be one case it's useful. If you have a charity rune on jewellery or charity in slot on enchanted armour/robes, then you can layer over that to cover prestigious jewellery/armour and keep the charity bonus. Xiran used to swap between shirt and tunic to hide/show a runed armband.
    Active: Monday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday EST

    Avatar made through Picrew
  • XenthosXenthos Shadow Lord
    Xiran said:
    Anita said:
    Kali said:
    Have sandals not hide the socks you're wearing!
    Likewise for cloaks not hiding jewellery on your neck & ears; coats hiding the clothing beneath like gowns/dress  etc.
     There may be one case it's useful. If you have a charity rune on jewellery or charity in slot on enchanted armour/robes, then you can layer over that to cover prestigious jewellery/armour and keep the charity bonus. Xiran used to swap between shirt and tunic to hide/show a runed armband.
    You can just CLOTHING HIDE now.
    image
  • Hiding a cloak still hides any neck jewllery.
  • XenthosXenthos Shadow Lord
    Anita said:
    Hiding a cloak still hides any neck jewllery.
    I don't think you understood what I was saying.

    Xiran said that there could be a use to the current behaviour.  I replied by saying that there is a better way to fulfil that function (clothing hide).

    The whole layers thing really is not necessary in my mind now that you can choose what to show/hide.  Why have an extra system to mechanically hide things on top of user choice?

    Only thing that is still worth keeping layers in for is under-clothing imo.  This way people don't have to expressly remember to hide those garments every time they buy something new.
    image
  • edited May 2018
    Xenthos said:
    Anita said:
    Hiding a cloak still hides any neck jewllery.
    I don't think you understood what I was saying.

    Xiran said that there could be a use to the current behaviour.  I replied by saying that there is a better way to fulfil that function (clothing hide).

    The whole layers thing really is not necessary in my mind now that you can choose what to show/hide.  Why have an extra system to mechanically hide things on top of user choice?

    Only thing that is still worth keeping layers in for is under-clothing imo.  This way people don't have to expressly remember to hide those garments every time they buy something new.
    I did a test in-game (with a coat) and found that CLOTHING HIDE doesn't take it out of the prestige shown in STAT. It might only be cosmetic for when people look at you.
    If I want to lower prestige for charity and but still wear the runed armband with the charity buff, armband under shirt/blouse would be better than armband with tunic.

    Edit: Apologies, I should have re-read a couple times to understand. Nice idea.
    Active: Monday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday EST

    Avatar made through Picrew
  • Xenthos said:
    Anita said:
    Hiding a cloak still hides any neck jewllery.
    I don't think you understood what I was saying.

    Xiran said that there could be a use to the current behaviour.  I replied by saying that there is a better way to fulfil that function (clothing hide).

    The whole layers thing really is not necessary in my mind now that you can choose what to show/hide.  Why have an extra system to mechanically hide things on top of user choice?

    Only thing that is still worth keeping layers in for is under-clothing imo.  This way people don't have to expressly remember to hide those garments every time they buy something new.
    Right, I mis-understood your reply was meant for Xiran. But the layers thing is still an issue. If I wear..let's say a choker, then wear my cloak (which has my runes on it), it hides my choke from view because it is obscuring it. Even if I use CLOTHES HIDE CLOAK, the choker is still hidden from view, which.. it'd be nice to show off that choker, yeah? Otherwise, I'm going to have to save up for a lot of credits/goop to get me some pliers just so I can show off my fancypants neck jewellery to shift runes off my cloak to other clothing garment :(
  • LuceLuce Fox Populi
    To clarify what I think Xenthos meant and expand, it might be nice to be able to CLOTHING HIDE (LAYER<layer>|<slot>) (ON|OFF|PRESTIGE) to  be able to semipermanently filter out undergarments, for instance.
Sign In or Register to comment.