Poisonable food.

[Konstantin K]

This proposal has been around forever, I will be shirt and direct.

1. Create a new object, named "poisoned apple". Make it an exact visual graphic copy of object "apple".
2. Give the object "poisoned apple" a functional property of poison - reduce life instead of healing it.
3. How to create "poisoned apple": Use object "poison potion" with object "apple". Poison + apple = poisoned apple.
4. Repeat this for all types of foods and drinks: grapes, cherries, mushrooms, wine, beer, milk, ham, pies, bread, rolls, etc.


This will require a number of duplicate objects - for every type of food, a poisoned graphical duplicate.

REASON: Poisons are freaking useless. Make them useful.

Thank you.

[martin]

Thanks for the idea, no: for the inspiration.
Instantly i had a great idea now

Martin

[Terook Telcove]

Id say make the food a bit darker than the regular food, not alot but if you look close enough you can tell, that gives the chance for people to say "Ahh Poison" before eating it.


*Can imagine everybody staring at their food for hours on end before eating it*

[falco1029]

I proposed something like this a while back, except with a spell poisoning the food...

[Bloodhearte]

K, we are like minded, I swear to God...

http://illarion.org/community/forums/vi ... hp?t=11574



Darlok had a point then though...just about anybody could be an assassin in such a case, or some jerk can play a joke on people and make a bundle of poisoned objects for no apparent reason and get away with it.

[Konstantin K]

Terook: If poisoned food is made darker, cheaters like me will take screenshots of the food, and paste them into paint, then compare colors with colors of normal food, and then - it's useless again.
So, no go.

Surely, anyone could become an assassin, but not really. IRL, don't you check your food before you eat it? Eat apples you pick yourself.

Joke or no joke, poison would require a good potionmaker on your side, thus, a druid's reputation would be stained. It's a worthy price to pay for a joke.

People with high perception could use some tool, like spoon, or, I dunno, fork, to poke at the food and recognize poison.

So far I only see one problem with it:

Object "poisoned apple" will not be stackable together with object "apple", hence - easy to recognize.


Now, a robust solution to this would be if object "apple" was actually modified, and added a method "poisonable". If a boolean check - confirms, the apple starts acting like poison.

Right now food has 3 methods I believe: eatable, cookable, and useable.
Actually, the use of a food as a component is probably coded in a script for that process instead.
So, 2 methods.

So, I say, modify the entire food class to have a "poisoned" variable.

[Aegohl]

It would be odd when the poisoned apple doesn't stack with the unpoisoned apples, no?

[Konstantin K]

Very odd.
That's why they have to be the same object, whether they are poisoned or not.

[Aegohl]

Therein lies the problem.

[martin]

Should we make food unstackable then?
I mean, this is serious. And I think it is reasonable also.

Martin

[Irania]

Is there a limitless amount of space in the depot?

[Aegohl]

They intend to implement/have implemented(not sure) depots that have limited space, but this is not determined by how many slots are used up. Rather, it is determined by the "volume" of the item.

[martin]

This is implemented, yes.

But 10 apples need the same space as a stack of 10 apples, since we measure it by volume.

Martin

[Konstantin K]

Unstackable food is a horror. Having 30 apples in different slots is awful.

Also, inability to carry extra bags is kind of awful. Before, you could have had your depot organized by bags. Now you cannot, because you can't carry a bag in the first place, to put it in your depot.

Is it possible to stack an apple, which is poisoned, hence has the value "poisoned" = true - together with unpoisoned apples?

A stack is handled by a linked list structure. Am I correct? Or is it an array?

Link lists usually store elements as Objects. I mean, objects of type Object. Each element can have several variables, one of which is boolean variable "poisoned".

That should not prevent the item from being a member of the stack.
Right?

Like, you have a linked list. A stack of 4 apples.

Node 1 - apple - poisoned=false - Nextnode=Node 2
Node 2 - apple - poisoned=false - Nextnode=Node 3
Node 3 - apple - poisoned=true - Nextnode=Node 4
Node 4 - apple - poisoned=false - Nextnode=null.

Is this how the game handles it?

Or is a stack - just an array, that displays the number of elements, and is of a predefined type? Apple array, grape array, etc.


What data structure determines a stack?

A vector, an array, or a list?

[Naybet Grint]

A stack of identical items you store as:
(<Item type>, <number of items>)
rather than an entry for each individual item. (I've not seen the code, this is just a guess, but it is common sense). If two items are different in any attribute, they can't stack.

I don't think it would be a nightmare to have unstackable food. Why do you have 30 apples? Won't they go off before you can eat them? By the way, I think having food that actaully goes off would be very annoying. Some characters only log on once a week (that is every 42 IG days) and it would be a real headache for them. But make food unstackable and people won't hoard it, although bakers will hate you for it, and selling someone 50 cakes for there wedding reception would get annoying if you had to pass them over one at a time.

[Konstantin K]

I have 30 apples in my pocket, because 1 apple heals very littlel ife and adds very little stamina. To get full - I need 15 apples. So... eeeh... one full hunger bar, one full meal for my avatar - is 15 apples.

Forced to.

[martin]

Is it possible to stack an apple, which is poisoned, hence has the value "poisoned" = true - together with unpoisoned apples?

If it were so, I wouldn't have mentioned, don't you think?

A stack is handled by a linked list structure. Am I correct? Or is it an array?

A stack is an item-ID with a number which gives the number of items.
Stacked items are all the same and have no individual properties anymore. This was explained in the news-posting in short, saying that individual properties can only be assigned to unstackable objects.

That should not prevent the item from being a member of the stack.
Right?

It does not work like that.

Or is a stack - just an array, that displays the number of elements, and is of a predefined type? Apple array, grape array, etc.

Exactly.

Martin

[Aegohl]

It seems a little ridiculous, yes, to have thirty apples. However, what about thirty mushrooms? That doesn't sound so bad. Or fifteen mushrooms, three apples, six cherries, three bottles of milk, four bottles of wine, and four slabs of salted ham? Perfect for a journey. Also, it would make a bag quite a mess.

On top of this, we have to deal with the problem that many herbs are also food, so the druid that buys a bunch of mushrooms of a given type is in for fun.

[Moirear Sian]

I thought this game was an anti-PG-MMORPG.

Food and drink and herbs not stackable? Yeah, I'm all for it!

[Bloodhearte]

In the Illarion world, one apple seems to contain 133 calories...which isn't bad, considering the average RL apple has 47 calories.

Get some Meat on them bones K, or you'll waste away.

Never thought of it that way. Anybody *can* be an assassin, but even if it's a jokester, the character will suffer if he doesn't know how to not get caught. Just like anybody *can* use yellow potions on somebody, the character will suffer the consequences...no need to fit "assassin" into a title/class only thing.

[Galim]

Um..no. that don't sounds good. don't forget that food or herbs are ressources for other things too. Poor bakers who have to move one apple after the other in his bag when baking. and especially poor baker when he has more than 30 single apples in his depot. and don't forget the time you need to sell apples or herbs than. damn, selling 150 apples would take you a life time because you have to move one apple after the other.

or poor apple collectors. at the moment they have to put the apples from the tree to the floor, one click. from the floor to their bag, two clicks. and now they should move one apple after the other too from back to depot? sounds hard.

But I like the idea of poisoned food. yes, it can't stack on normal food, but than, you have to trust in the other players rp abilitys.


oh, and there should be a possibility to poison himself while trying to make some food poisonous. like a failure while trying to do it. such work is dangerous work.

[martin]

Um..no. that don't sounds good. don't forget that food or herbs are ressources for other things too. Poor bakers who have to move one apple after the other in his bag when baking.

But then, we'd lose a very cool new thingie which could be implemented on the fly. It would add a lot of fun I think.

and especially poor baker when he has more than 30 single apples in his depot.

Which is PG anyway.

and don't forget the time you need to sell apples or herbs than.

We are talking about food, not herbs.
And then, apples will become more expensive.

damn, selling 150 apples would take you a life time because you have to move one apple after the other.

What kind of wicked argument is that?
"Damn, the new fighting system is crap. Killing a monster will no longer be possible with one hit!"

or poor apple collectors. at the moment they have to put the apples from the tree to the floor, one click. from the floor to their bag, two clicks. and now they should move one apple after the other too from back to depot? sounds hard.

Sounds realistic. Sounds anti-PG.

But I like the idea of poisoned food. yes, it can't stack on normal food, but than, you have to trust in the other players rp abilitys.

You can either have poisoned food or stackable apples. It's an alternative. Both at the same time do not work.

Martin

[Naybet Grint]

You can have both poisoned apples and stackable apples. The poisoned ones can't stack with the non-poisoned one, so you end up with players able to easily tell which are which. As such it would require good seperation of IC and OOC knowledge to play a character that gets poisoned, but it can be done.

And often having 30 or so of something going to be symptomatic of PG but not always. Considering the sort of catering effort it takes for a large wedding reception. That would become a real chore if no food stacked. But it wouldn't be impossible. What would you do with current stacks of apple if they become unstackable? Or would the code handle it automagically?

[martin]

You can have both poisoned apples and stackable apples.

1) Not without client and server update.
2) It would be rather easy to find out which apple (for example) is poisoned and which isn't. Once you have a stack of 2 apples you have a tool to decide whether or not an apple is poisoned or not. Just eat one of the apples, see if you get poisoned or not.
If you do, well, every apple that stacks with this remaining apple is poisoned (and the other way around). It would bypass the sense of everything.

The poisoned ones can't stack with the non-poisoned one, so you end up with players able to easily tell which are which. As such it would require good seperation of IC and OOC knowledge to play a character that gets poisoned, but it can be done.

Right, but I do not trust the players enough.

And often having 30 or so of something going to be symptomatic of PG but not always. Considering the sort of catering effort it takes for a large wedding reception. That would become a real chore if no food stacked.

Indeed. A lot of preparations and helpers needed. Again, like IRL.

But it wouldn't be impossible. What would you do with current stacks of apple if they become unstackable? Or would the code handle it automagically?

Probably they would remain as stacks for now, but you cannot add something to them. You can only subtract from them. I'd consider making some of them (per random) poisoned. Only a very few.


Martin

[Misjbar]

automagically?

I can do automagic!

[Konstantin K]

martin, since the stack is not implemented as a list, but in fact, as the simplest of the stacks, the good idea is screwed.

Do not trust the players. I am the worst example of the player.

I would use paint to check apple color.
I would stack apples to see if they stack.

And no one can stop me.
And everyone will do the same.
And the OOC will start ((boo hoo, you evil bitch, you try to poison meh player)).

However...

how about this:

A crude solution, but nevertheless.


As soon as a poisoned apple is stacked with normal apples - the entire stack becomes contamenated?
So it becomes a stack of "poisoned apple".

Of course, to justify this: food poison and weapon poison would have to be different items, since they would work differently. Weapon poison is a substance which gets into your blood and slowly drains your health, while food potion would be like a virus, a worm. Once you put a sick apple in a pile of healthy ones - it ruins the bunch, and you can throw them away.
Rather deadly type of poison, however, nobody is making you eat them.

Is such an algorithm possible? Upon adding an element of type "Poisoned" to a stack, subsituting a stack for another stack of equal amount but different object? So all normal apples become poisoned.

You know, if you guys went open source, it would be a lot easier to talk.
What's the code look like? C, C#, Java, - I can handle it all, throw it at me.


....

or the whole stack thing just needs to be overdone...
unstackable food in Illarion would suck.

In UO it doesn't suck, because bags are not slot-based, and you don't have to scroll through the bag, just mouse-grab the item. In Illa - bags are slotted. By the time you collect 100 grapes - you will hate the world.

And don't tell me 100 grapes is too much...

....

[Mimblethorp]

Ooo weapon poison? You mean we can poison weapons? That would rock!

As far as poisoning the stack goes, maybe make it a random thing, the dummy that sticks a poison apple in a normal stack won't even know if the apples are poisoned till he bites into one. Of course, people will then start saving time and effort by poisoning one apple, throwing it in a pile and checking for poison, but hey! is that really so wrong for RP?

As for putting bags in a depot, I hadn't noticed this yet but if it's true that you can't put bags in the depot, I agree, that will really make things tough to organize. My merchant used to have one for tools, one for herbs, one for baking goods, et... It could still be implemented, even with the limited volume code, you would just have to check the volume of the bags at the same time you check the volume of the depot. Bags I'm assuming are also going to have limited volume after all.

As for color differences in poisoned apples. I don't like this idea because people will cheat, for sure, definately, no doubt about it. So instead of that, how about hooking it into the perception stat or herb lore skill, the idea being that you notice a shine that shouldn't be there, or you lick the apple and can taste that it is off somehow. The messages could even be abstract, don't say 'That apple is poisoned!' instead say, 'That apple taste a little wrong.'

Anyhow, just my thoughts on it.

[Konstantin K]

all those neat props can be added once the main problem is solved: stackability.

[Galim]

You call it PG to have 30 apples, Martin? You can't be serious...thats mean every farmer is a powergamer because he has more than one apple or one pig or one grain or whatever <_<.

30 apples are perhaps one sack of apples, that has to do nothing with powergaming. You really want to say me that a baker does powergaming when he tries to bake and has more than 15 apples in his back or depot?

[John Irenicus]

And don't tell me 100 grapes is too much...

Not really, like 30 apples aren't. That may be impossible in real life without a refrigerator, but some things shouldn't be TOO realitic in a game. We had discussions about this many times, and we discuss it lately in the Anti-PG threats.
There was never a problem with selling 150 herbs or fruit, and no one really argued about that.