What do you want to see next?

Suggestions for additions and modifications to the existing Barren Realms code.
Solomnius
Newbie
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu May 01, 2003 1:53 am
Location: Brisbane Australia
Contact:

Post by Solomnius »

I could be wrong, but can't demons see sneaking players?
maybe we can give a demon flag - or whatever it is (eye) that gives demons this ability
Respect!
User avatar
Everybody
Needs Help
Posts: 542
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2003 2:14 am
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Post by Everybody »

Demons can. Disaster's suggestion is to have an affect bit that allows mobs to see sneaking players.
-EB
Your local know-it-all. ;)
User avatar
Joysinger
Avid Player
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 3:04 pm

Post by Joysinger »

i think solomnius went down the same road, and was just trying to suggest to simply use the bit on the fly eye that allows demons to see sneak for mobs. he just didn't really make much sense with his sentence ;) *ruffles sol*
*Unicorn hoofprint sparkling from glittering faerie-dust*
Solomnius
Newbie
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu May 01, 2003 1:53 am
Location: Brisbane Australia
Contact:

Post by Solomnius »

*nod* thanx joy - lucky i have you here to eloborate for me ;)
Respect!
User avatar
Joysinger
Avid Player
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 3:04 pm

Post by Joysinger »

well, if you won't stick up for yourself, someone has to! ;)
*Unicorn hoofprint sparkling from glittering faerie-dust*
User avatar
disaster
Needs Help
Posts: 572
Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2003 12:47 am
Location: the true north strong and free
Contact:

Post by disaster »

ok, here's another idea: instead of having just solitary or private rooms, have rooms that would allow X mobs/players in the room. Even better would be if there could be two types of such rooms, one where players+mobs <= X, the other where mobs <=Y and players <=Z.
That would allow for more variety in the types of challenges that could be set up, especially if combined with a no_logout flag that would boot players who try to log out in that room to some other room. preferably the vnumb to which people would be sent would be set by the builder.
"Freedom of speech" is not the same thing as "Freedom from consequences".
Exo
Newbie
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2003 10:11 am
Location: Texas
Contact:

Post by Exo »

dis, that was like being in my 9th grade algebra class all over again. thanks for bringing back the nightmares.
I am happy to let girls indulge themselves using my body.
User avatar
disaster
Needs Help
Posts: 572
Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2003 12:47 am
Location: the true north strong and free
Contact:

Post by disaster »

*grin* the evil math teacher strikes again
"Freedom of speech" is not the same thing as "Freedom from consequences".
User avatar
disaster
Needs Help
Posts: 572
Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2003 12:47 am
Location: the true north strong and free
Contact:

Post by disaster »

oh, i just had a nifty idea for an item flag. how about "cursed" items which would mimic the curse spell while worn, preventing players from recalling? *evil grin* those could be FUN.
"Freedom of speech" is not the same thing as "Freedom from consequences".
Kitsune
Newbie
Posts: 141
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2003 7:03 am
Location: Japan
Contact:

Post by Kitsune »

That sounds pretty cool actually. How about adding this: the only way to remove a cursed item is to drown it in a major city fountain, like Calathar. Maybe only Calathar. That would make a nice challenge with the no-recall feature.
"If you have a right to someone else's approval, then they do not have a right to their own opinions and values." - Dr. Thomas Sowell

http://ws6.blogspot.com
User avatar
disaster
Needs Help
Posts: 572
Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2003 12:47 am
Location: the true north strong and free
Contact:

Post by disaster »

that could work, but i think it'd be better not to add on extra code like that on the cursed flag. let cursed mean only that they can't recall while wearing it, and if the builder also wants ot make it noremove they can put that flag on it too. we could come up with another different flag if you want to make it only removable by drowning, but i think using hangman is sufficiently inconvenient that an extra type of noremove would be redundant.
"Freedom of speech" is not the same thing as "Freedom from consequences".
Kitsune
Newbie
Posts: 141
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2003 7:03 am
Location: Japan
Contact:

Post by Kitsune »

I want to see the drowning! :P Hangman is a fun little thing to do, but it takes off everything! I think it would be cool if would could do the "leach" item so it would bond to you and have to be drowned.

So, a leached no-remove item with curse would be bad.

This could also be used benefically like a "leached sword" that would be harder to disarm:

So, "leach" would be a toggle that imposed (maybe): no remove, -25% chance disarm, and -5 mv per hour. (I say mv because if being used beneficially, it can be cured. If being used harmfully, it will cause more frustration by being cursed. Though, I guess a mana or hp drain could work too.)

I would also like it if the leached item was destroyed by removing it.

I don't think anyone would mind if the Hangman could kill it too...

Anyway, because I am enjoing rambling about this, theoretically:

Kitsune(9999/9999/9999)>wield Leach_Sword
A leach sword bonds to your hand!

Kitsune(9999/9999/9994)>
A Leach_Sword draws strength from you.

Kitsune(9999/9994/9994)>remove Leach_Sword
You try to remove it, but it holds tight to you!

Kitsune(9999/9999/9994)>drown Leach_Sword
You drown a Leach_Sword in a nearby pool!
A Leach_Sword melts into the ground.


Would this be so hard to code? (To me, it looks like it could be built with a set of existing functions plus some text. But I've never coded MERC!)

What do you think?
"If you have a right to someone else's approval, then they do not have a right to their own opinions and values." - Dr. Thomas Sowell

http://ws6.blogspot.com
User avatar
xorex
Newbie
Posts: 89
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2003 12:00 am
Location: New Haven, CT

Post by xorex »

ah, this was a good thread...
--Xorex
Post Reply