Hunger and Thirst
Moderator: Gamemasters
I do not know the intended use of the traps that have been floating around in the game lately but if we are looking for an idea that would increase the desirability of baked goods I would suggest that traps be used in combination with cakes as a bait to trap certain monsters. The traps may snap shut and effectively hold the monster in place while the poachers could end the monster's life while out of harms way. The trap could of course break when used on stronger monsters and they could get free, so it would not be a free training mechanism but it would aid in the hunt of a few lesser monsters such as ogres.
I was reading and article at the Forge the other day that talked about the different types of elements in an RPG. It broke it down into three sections, Gamism, narrativism, and simulationism. This whole thread sounds like an argument between those who prefer simulation and those who prefer narrativism. I don't think anybody here wants a large emphasis on Gamism. Here's the URL if anybody wants to read it.
http://www.indie-rpgs.com/articles/1/
In an overdramatic newscaster voice: And now back to our regularly updated proposal.
I kinda like the idea of baiting traps with bread. Maybe bread could also be used for bait for some types of fish (we only have two now, but maybe there will be more later.) Other types of fish might prefer monster intestines. Perhaps druids could use food to help calm animals so that they don't have to kill them. In the developement section of the website it mentions luxury points. I'm sure this will help several of the professions like baking and tailoring.
http://www.indie-rpgs.com/articles/1/
In an overdramatic newscaster voice: And now back to our regularly updated proposal.
I kinda like the idea of baiting traps with bread. Maybe bread could also be used for bait for some types of fish (we only have two now, but maybe there will be more later.) Other types of fish might prefer monster intestines. Perhaps druids could use food to help calm animals so that they don't have to kill them. In the developement section of the website it mentions luxury points. I'm sure this will help several of the professions like baking and tailoring.
@Gro'bul Unlike you we all hold appreciation towards the illarion staff for their efforts, but we do not "suck-up" every chance we get at the loss of our human dignity.
@Serpardum I really don't see how hunger would not make food more needed. Actually, a majority believe that hunger would be a nice addition to illarion, but not all voice their opinions here. What you mentioned as would "eventually" happen is already implemented. Eating bread already increases your health at a rapid rate and more so than other foods, but not in a significant enough manner.
@Niniane What you speak of is "baited traps", but not all traps have baits. Some traps are sprung through a trigger-mechanism when stepped upon, and such traps need no bait. And I do not think that this would increase the need for food at all. Hunger would do the purpose much better as well as being realistic. Most people would just use fish, fruits, and other "free" foods.
@Kragmar No I do not think that will help the professions you mentioned in any significant manner.
@Serpardum I really don't see how hunger would not make food more needed. Actually, a majority believe that hunger would be a nice addition to illarion, but not all voice their opinions here. What you mentioned as would "eventually" happen is already implemented. Eating bread already increases your health at a rapid rate and more so than other foods, but not in a significant enough manner.
@Niniane What you speak of is "baited traps", but not all traps have baits. Some traps are sprung through a trigger-mechanism when stepped upon, and such traps need no bait. And I do not think that this would increase the need for food at all. Hunger would do the purpose much better as well as being realistic. Most people would just use fish, fruits, and other "free" foods.
@Kragmar No I do not think that will help the professions you mentioned in any significant manner.
@Elaralith
The vast majority of traps used to catch animals involve a bait of some kind, especially the traps that are sprung when stepped on. The baits entice the animals (or in this case, monsters) to the area of the trap at which point they step on the spring mechanism and are trapped. Now, if these traps only worked when used with a baked item (the baked items and not any other type of food was REQUIRED for the trap to work) then there is no way you can say this would not help the bakers in the game. Of course it would. We've for the most part ended the discussion on eating and drinking being implemented because it has been shown that there is not enough support for it and much greater resistance and have changed the topic to that of finding alternate means of increasing the usefulness of bakers, which was one of your supposed goals.
You have stated that the majority wish for hunger and thirst to be written into the game yet they do not post here. I can say that you think this because of the people you talk to in your limited amount of time in the game. I on the other hand also have talked to a great many people on this matter, in and out of the game, and all have been opposed to this proposal. Just because the group of friends you have in the game like this idea does not mean that the majority of the population does. You do not know everyone, nor do I. The many people I know do not like this idea and because of this we can only go on those of us who feel strongly enough about the welfare of the game to make a post, or you could also infer that the tide of this proposal has quite obviously swung to be against it. Therefore the many people who are against this idea feel no need to post because they feel as though it is already decided that this proposal will not be implemented, and thus are the hidden majority. If the ones who feel that this idea is a good idea are not posting, they either feel that it is not that great as they make it seem to you in person, or are fewer in number and already see that the cause is lost to the ones against the idea. As you can see, at best you can say that the two sides are split on the idea and there is no majority, but common sense shows from what I've just explained, that the majority are actually against it even if the majority of your test pool (ones you have surveyed) are for it. If the sides are equal the stronger of the two wills have spoken and this is what the programmers will listen to, and have. Thank you.
The vast majority of traps used to catch animals involve a bait of some kind, especially the traps that are sprung when stepped on. The baits entice the animals (or in this case, monsters) to the area of the trap at which point they step on the spring mechanism and are trapped. Now, if these traps only worked when used with a baked item (the baked items and not any other type of food was REQUIRED for the trap to work) then there is no way you can say this would not help the bakers in the game. Of course it would. We've for the most part ended the discussion on eating and drinking being implemented because it has been shown that there is not enough support for it and much greater resistance and have changed the topic to that of finding alternate means of increasing the usefulness of bakers, which was one of your supposed goals.
You have stated that the majority wish for hunger and thirst to be written into the game yet they do not post here. I can say that you think this because of the people you talk to in your limited amount of time in the game. I on the other hand also have talked to a great many people on this matter, in and out of the game, and all have been opposed to this proposal. Just because the group of friends you have in the game like this idea does not mean that the majority of the population does. You do not know everyone, nor do I. The many people I know do not like this idea and because of this we can only go on those of us who feel strongly enough about the welfare of the game to make a post, or you could also infer that the tide of this proposal has quite obviously swung to be against it. Therefore the many people who are against this idea feel no need to post because they feel as though it is already decided that this proposal will not be implemented, and thus are the hidden majority. If the ones who feel that this idea is a good idea are not posting, they either feel that it is not that great as they make it seem to you in person, or are fewer in number and already see that the cause is lost to the ones against the idea. As you can see, at best you can say that the two sides are split on the idea and there is no majority, but common sense shows from what I've just explained, that the majority are actually against it even if the majority of your test pool (ones you have surveyed) are for it. If the sides are equal the stronger of the two wills have spoken and this is what the programmers will listen to, and have. Thank you.
I like Niniane's baked bait idea, perhaps you could trap a sheep and then shear it without it moving for x number of seconds or minutes. The Hunger/Thirst bar/system/thingamajig would only make the non-roleplayers eat food, which they would probably just get off of trees or by killing pigs instead of buying from someone else. Also, the consequences of not eating would not effect the good role-players who already eat and drink.
@Elaralith: Just because you did not come up with an idea does not mean it is automatically a bad one. Many people have suggested many ideas, some of them good and some of them bad but you have shot them down with statements with no evidence backing them up. Perhaps you should be less stubborn.
@Elaralith: Just because you did not come up with an idea does not mean it is automatically a bad one. Many people have suggested many ideas, some of them good and some of them bad but you have shot them down with statements with no evidence backing them up. Perhaps you should be less stubborn.
@Roke Trap a sheep with a trap to shear it? Traps are meant to hurt in some way an animal to prevent it from escaping for capture. I do not think that sheep should be used with a trap to keep them from moving...a rope etc. would be much more reasonable.
Exactly, the consequences of hunger/thirst bars would not affect the good roleplayers who already eat and drink so why all the grumbling? As for the bad roleplayers sure there would be some that just relied on fruits, but a great majority would not. Just as with all things there would be the strange minority, but always the goal is to affect the majority.
Of course not! There is every possibility that an idea that I have not come up with is excellent; when have I said otherwise. If you visited every thread I posted in Roke you would see that I have applauded many proposals which are not mine. You have not visited every thread I have posted in, and therefore you have no right to assume that I think that every proposal that is not mine is autamatically bad. And perhaps you should be less judging and less of a rude criticizer.
Exactly, the consequences of hunger/thirst bars would not affect the good roleplayers who already eat and drink so why all the grumbling? As for the bad roleplayers sure there would be some that just relied on fruits, but a great majority would not. Just as with all things there would be the strange minority, but always the goal is to affect the majority.
Of course not! There is every possibility that an idea that I have not come up with is excellent; when have I said otherwise. If you visited every thread I posted in Roke you would see that I have applauded many proposals which are not mine. You have not visited every thread I have posted in, and therefore you have no right to assume that I think that every proposal that is not mine is autamatically bad. And perhaps you should be less judging and less of a rude criticizer.
I will restate my arguments for why it will not increase player interaction as substantially as you appear to think so:
-The good role-players already drink and eat therefor the system would have no effect at all.
-The bad role-players would be more likely to save up for that armor, weapon or book then spend their money on food and drink therefor they just pick the free food off of trees and drink water.
These are my arguments and I have not seen them disproven, these are also the arguments of some other people who have posted their oppinions on this topic. I believe that the time and work it would take the admins to implement it probably, although not definitely make this not worthwhile.
-The good role-players already drink and eat therefor the system would have no effect at all.
-The bad role-players would be more likely to save up for that armor, weapon or book then spend their money on food and drink therefor they just pick the free food off of trees and drink water.
These are my arguments and I have not seen them disproven, these are also the arguments of some other people who have posted their oppinions on this topic. I believe that the time and work it would take the admins to implement it probably, although not definitely make this not worthwhile.
@Elaralith Why don't you think that the luxury points would help the professions of tailors and bakers? The luxury point system is a designed to give a person rewards for buying items that aren't necessary. It might not help them with the lower (basic) items, but it would produce a market for the better quality items. Then at least, there would be a real market for some of their products.
Hmm, ideas for uses of baked items.
Druids use it to calm animals
Spell components (not used but could it be a possibility?)
Offerings to gods
Soak it in a druids potion to give it some effect.
Some NPCs (maybe slightly animalistic) need to be assured of your friendship before they will talk to you and they will accept bread as a gift of friendship.
Poison bread and give it to an enemy
Feed it to pets or domesticated animals (although this doesn't seem likely judging by the results of a recent thread on this subject.)
Breed maggots in it for fishing
RP uses (don't require any change in the technics)
Feed it to the birds
Offerings to gods
Eat it
Give it to the poor
Have food fights
Gag a kidnap victim with a loaf of bread
"brain" food
Hide evidence to a crime in it (anybody watch Nero Wolf?)
Kragmar
Hmm, ideas for uses of baked items.
Druids use it to calm animals
Spell components (not used but could it be a possibility?)
Offerings to gods
Soak it in a druids potion to give it some effect.
Some NPCs (maybe slightly animalistic) need to be assured of your friendship before they will talk to you and they will accept bread as a gift of friendship.
Poison bread and give it to an enemy
Feed it to pets or domesticated animals (although this doesn't seem likely judging by the results of a recent thread on this subject.)
Breed maggots in it for fishing
RP uses (don't require any change in the technics)
Feed it to the birds
Offerings to gods
Eat it
Give it to the poor
Have food fights
Gag a kidnap victim with a loaf of bread
"brain" food
Hide evidence to a crime in it (anybody watch Nero Wolf?)
Kragmar
Then you shouldn't worry about if you are a good roleplayer.Roke wrote:-The good role-players already drink and eat...
It could help to make good roleplayers out of the bad ones.therefor the system would have no effect at all.
If this system were put in than naturally just about all of the trees would be removed. Leave just a few scattered here and there for emergencies.-.....therefor they just pick the free food off of trees and drink water.
now you have.These are my arguments and I have not seen them disproven.....
@Crocket
They're not going to remove the fruit trees. They are a part of the essence of illarion. Bror himself once said something on these very boards about the importance of free food coming from fruit trees as it would allow for a more open roleplaying environment because less time would be spent working alone to create food because there is always food at hand and a headache kept away.
Another point, forcing bad roleplayers to eat is not going to make them into good roleplayers. They have shown time and time again that they will find a way around the current system for their own benefit while canceling out the intended effect. An example of this would be the most recent situation where people first found they were encumbered and a few decided that just because their character was encumbered they should still be able to walk so they started pushing themselves around. This is obviously not good roleplaying and something similar would happen if they were forced to eat, they would find alternate means.
Anyone can find a sickle and dig up strawberries and onions to eat even if the trees were removed, which they will not be. Anyone can find a fishing pole and fish for food. Anyone can kill pigs and cook the meat (the least expensive of all of these options as it does not require a tool so it is therefore free!). If these foods were for some reason made less 'valuable' then more would be found and eaten because it would be less expensive and have an actual better diet than eating only bread and cakes, and therefore should even be more 'valuable'.
Roke stated it very well when he said that one of the main arguments for this being implemented was that if the good roleplayers were already eating then why are the good roleplayers complaining?, because the good roleplayers ARE already eating and there will be no change in the usefulness of bakers from this system. The good roleplayers who are buying from bakers are already buying from bakers and the bad roleplayers would not, even if this system were implemented, thus, the advantage to the bakers from this system would be minimal to naught. They would find a way around this. Forcing someone to shove food and water down their throats by whatever means they can shall never make a person into a better roleplayer. It will only create an even worse roleplaying environment because the bad roleplayers taking advantage or working their way around the system will be very obvious and detrimental to the lifeblood if roleplay, realism.
They're not going to remove the fruit trees. They are a part of the essence of illarion. Bror himself once said something on these very boards about the importance of free food coming from fruit trees as it would allow for a more open roleplaying environment because less time would be spent working alone to create food because there is always food at hand and a headache kept away.
Another point, forcing bad roleplayers to eat is not going to make them into good roleplayers. They have shown time and time again that they will find a way around the current system for their own benefit while canceling out the intended effect. An example of this would be the most recent situation where people first found they were encumbered and a few decided that just because their character was encumbered they should still be able to walk so they started pushing themselves around. This is obviously not good roleplaying and something similar would happen if they were forced to eat, they would find alternate means.
Anyone can find a sickle and dig up strawberries and onions to eat even if the trees were removed, which they will not be. Anyone can find a fishing pole and fish for food. Anyone can kill pigs and cook the meat (the least expensive of all of these options as it does not require a tool so it is therefore free!). If these foods were for some reason made less 'valuable' then more would be found and eaten because it would be less expensive and have an actual better diet than eating only bread and cakes, and therefore should even be more 'valuable'.
Roke stated it very well when he said that one of the main arguments for this being implemented was that if the good roleplayers were already eating then why are the good roleplayers complaining?, because the good roleplayers ARE already eating and there will be no change in the usefulness of bakers from this system. The good roleplayers who are buying from bakers are already buying from bakers and the bad roleplayers would not, even if this system were implemented, thus, the advantage to the bakers from this system would be minimal to naught. They would find a way around this. Forcing someone to shove food and water down their throats by whatever means they can shall never make a person into a better roleplayer. It will only create an even worse roleplaying environment because the bad roleplayers taking advantage or working their way around the system will be very obvious and detrimental to the lifeblood if roleplay, realism.
So be it if the non-roleplayers decide to pick fruits off the trees etc. to keep their hunger level up. Anyone who wants to can usually get around something...the idea is not to totally stop but minimalize. Just like the email-application system does not stop all the bad roleplayers, this wont either, but it minimalizes. I don't see the point in further discussion of whether Hunger/thirst bars will or will not help non-roleplayers to roleplay better. The main reason for this proposal was to increase the level of realism for the benefit of the good roleplayers!
@Kragmar I did not say that luxury points would not help the economy. In fact some time ago I even suggested that luxury points been used for such items as dresses etc. I was referring to cakes being used as bait in traps as something that would not help in my opinion the baking industry.
@Kragmar I did not say that luxury points would not help the economy. In fact some time ago I even suggested that luxury points been used for such items as dresses etc. I was referring to cakes being used as bait in traps as something that would not help in my opinion the baking industry.
Last edited by Elaralith on Sat Mar 08, 2003 6:25 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Once again, since the effect the bars will have on the economy, which is your main argument Elaralith, to increase the demand of baked items the effects will probably be minimal which means that the timeit would take to implement the bars could be better spent doing something else, even if it has nothing to do with the game. What next, will we HAVE to spend a whole day tailoring a dress for more realism? Will we HAVE to spend weeks making other items for the purpose of realism? Will we HAVE to do many other things that I have not mentioned just for the purpose of realism? You want realism and that is fine however, once again, the time it would take to implement and the annoying messages it would create with your #me is famished #me is ______ would not be worth it. Having all these messages coming up would be like when there were the messages telling you who arrived or who left. Thank you.
@Roke Wrong. Illarion time runs differently than RL time so for the sake of realism one would not have to spend many RL days to tailor a dress etc. Your arguments are weak and flawed. The rate at which one does things for realism in illarion is perfect. And if you woudl read more clearly my recent posts you would see that my main point is not to "increase business" for bakers etc.
-
Loki Feuerhaar
- Posts: 353
- Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2002 9:20 pm
- Location: Trolls Bane
I have read all (well most of them) arguments against a Thirst and Hunger System.
I still want it.
Its not understandable for me, why you are that stubborn and rejecting something that rounds up your characters needs?
Is it only because you are "forced" to eat?
There are so many other games out there with a similar system, like the one proposed here.
I wont see this proposal as a "pressure" to play my character in anyway i might not like.
Hunger/Thirst will be a small remembering for me, as a Player, that my Character has some NEEDS i have to fullfill.
By the way, i noticed only american/english players a complaining/arguing about the fear of beeing forced to something.
Thats a strange fact to me ... and puzzles me.
I still want it.
Its not understandable for me, why you are that stubborn and rejecting something that rounds up your characters needs?
Is it only because you are "forced" to eat?
There are so many other games out there with a similar system, like the one proposed here.
I wont see this proposal as a "pressure" to play my character in anyway i might not like.
Hunger/Thirst will be a small remembering for me, as a Player, that my Character has some NEEDS i have to fullfill.
By the way, i noticed only american/english players a complaining/arguing about the fear of beeing forced to something.
Thats a strange fact to me ... and puzzles me.
@Loki
Can you eat now? Yes.
Can you act hungry now? Yes.
Can you buy from a baker now? Yes.
Do you need a little bar that lowers to tell you when you that in order to live you need to eat? No. (At least hopefully not. If yes then you have a little problem.)
Why do you need a little bar there to tell you to do those things when it will do absolutely no good? You can act out every thing that was suggested in this proposal as a supposed benifit of this system and you can act it out MUCH better than if there is a little bar that says you are now hungry, you are not famished, you are now dying. You can ACT it out or as some people call it, ROLEPLAY. You do not need more code or more graphics to tell you to do those things unless you're unimaginative and a bad roleplayer if you can not rely on your own mind to tell you to do those things.
Now, in the future you can still do all the things but the bad roleplayers still will not. They will do exactly what they do now and the good roleplayers will do exactly what they do now, if not less! Yes, less. There will be less variety in the life of a character because there will be unimaginative rigid structures in place. Use your imagination to do what you want, that is why it is roleplaying and not some low budget simulation.
This is a fantasy based roleplaying game that has many aspects of realism. If we go so far to the right and only incorporate realism then the fantasy side shall whither and die. Fantasy is a creation of the imagination, let that remain a part of the game or this will turn into a midieval version of the sims but much much worse. I can only say that the germans are not responding to this because there are many who can not fully understand the english or they do not care enough to post or they see that the post has already been somewhat decided against it according to one of the programmers. Some people catch on faster than others.
Can you eat now? Yes.
Can you act hungry now? Yes.
Can you buy from a baker now? Yes.
Do you need a little bar that lowers to tell you when you that in order to live you need to eat? No. (At least hopefully not. If yes then you have a little problem.)
Why do you need a little bar there to tell you to do those things when it will do absolutely no good? You can act out every thing that was suggested in this proposal as a supposed benifit of this system and you can act it out MUCH better than if there is a little bar that says you are now hungry, you are not famished, you are now dying. You can ACT it out or as some people call it, ROLEPLAY. You do not need more code or more graphics to tell you to do those things unless you're unimaginative and a bad roleplayer if you can not rely on your own mind to tell you to do those things.
Now, in the future you can still do all the things but the bad roleplayers still will not. They will do exactly what they do now and the good roleplayers will do exactly what they do now, if not less! Yes, less. There will be less variety in the life of a character because there will be unimaginative rigid structures in place. Use your imagination to do what you want, that is why it is roleplaying and not some low budget simulation.
This is a fantasy based roleplaying game that has many aspects of realism. If we go so far to the right and only incorporate realism then the fantasy side shall whither and die. Fantasy is a creation of the imagination, let that remain a part of the game or this will turn into a midieval version of the sims but much much worse. I can only say that the germans are not responding to this because there are many who can not fully understand the english or they do not care enough to post or they see that the post has already been somewhat decided against it according to one of the programmers. Some people catch on faster than others.
-
Loki Feuerhaar
- Posts: 353
- Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2002 9:20 pm
- Location: Trolls Bane
-
Loki Feuerhaar
- Posts: 353
- Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2002 9:20 pm
- Location: Trolls Bane
It just saddens me, that it seems to be impossible for both sides to discuss this in a profitable way.
None of you (perhaps including my person) does even consider to take a few steps from his point of view and take a look at the Proposal form another side.
I agree, it is fully possible to simply "play" hunger and thirst.
But it is also possible to "play" day and night ... but we are getting an game-side system for that.
So i say, why not enlarge it and put Hunger and Thirst in it.
There is one thing, that probably wont be ever played.
A starving Character. So if you realy reject eating, than you should face some consequenes, which are no longer in your hands.
I wish i could express myself as good as in german. But you and me have to live with the little english i am able to.
Also a deep sorry to you Niniane, i got carried away.
None of you (perhaps including my person) does even consider to take a few steps from his point of view and take a look at the Proposal form another side.
I agree, it is fully possible to simply "play" hunger and thirst.
But it is also possible to "play" day and night ... but we are getting an game-side system for that.
So i say, why not enlarge it and put Hunger and Thirst in it.
There is one thing, that probably wont be ever played.
A starving Character. So if you realy reject eating, than you should face some consequenes, which are no longer in your hands.
I wish i could express myself as good as in german. But you and me have to live with the little english i am able to.
Also a deep sorry to you Niniane, i got carried away.
I think that the day/night implementation is needed for the fact that nobody knows when it is day or night in the game. There are people playing from all over the world and so for one persons day it is another persons night and so we tend to live in a state of perpetual day because this is when work can be done. When it is light, and that is what many people do in the game. Work of one shape or another. That is why it should be shown when it is day or night, or at least a time scale printed for all to read so we would know when it's day and when it's night. Hunger and thirst on the other hand is something each individual can do regardless of it being day or night, they can do this on a regular interval without the need of a game-side interface. Sorry, just another rant from myself.
I really fear what this game could become if every aspect of life were forced upon us. Yes it is great to have realism but it is also good to have a little break from realith and step into fantasy in order to have a little more fun come from playing. If there is a bar for hunger, thirst, health, mana, stamina, weight carried as have all been brought up or implemented where does it stop? There could be bars for 'amount of time until next defication' or a 'random chance event' bar that would tell you when your next act of luck shall occur, when in fact you should not know all these things in bar form. There are so many things that have an equal chance of becomming a bar in the interface and there should be a lot of reservation before adding more. I know the two I listed are extremely off the wall but those are a part of real life just as hunger and thirst are and just go to show that if you're going for realism you can't have it perfect, that's why it's a game and not some simulation.
I really fear what this game could become if every aspect of life were forced upon us. Yes it is great to have realism but it is also good to have a little break from realith and step into fantasy in order to have a little more fun come from playing. If there is a bar for hunger, thirst, health, mana, stamina, weight carried as have all been brought up or implemented where does it stop? There could be bars for 'amount of time until next defication' or a 'random chance event' bar that would tell you when your next act of luck shall occur, when in fact you should not know all these things in bar form. There are so many things that have an equal chance of becomming a bar in the interface and there should be a lot of reservation before adding more. I know the two I listed are extremely off the wall but those are a part of real life just as hunger and thirst are and just go to show that if you're going for realism you can't have it perfect, that's why it's a game and not some simulation.
It seems to be those who don't want the hunger systems have mostly arguments that refute the pro-hunger reasons for implementation but there doesn't seem to be much good arguments that say it SHOULDN'T be implemented because of negative aspects of hunger, and this is the few that I was able to find:
1) Added messages would cause more server traffic and clog text box.
2) More time spend on food gathering, less on roleplaying.
3) You are forced into doing something.
4) Only the minority of players seem to want it.
And this is my response to it:
1) I don't believe so, because even with a hunger system, you should only start to get hungry for nothing less than every 30 minutes. It wouldn't "annoy" you or cause any more traffic than everytime someone smiths something and it says "What do you want to smith?"
2) It doesn't mean that you have to spend SO much more time looking for food, as so many people have already pointed out that food is abundant. It just means you can't go on forever without any food, so you can't do something like stay in the desert for hours on end. If you want to play a scene where you're stranded in a desert you can only do it for so long without food. If you can't play a scene then it means that it isn't logical in the first place, or that you need to plan it out better in order for it to work.
3) A hunger system doesn't have to make it so that you die if you don't eat. It could be that it just makes you more ineffective in many ways, such as moving slower like with the weight system. If you say you don't want to be forced to face consequences for starving yourself, don't forget that you face consequences for eating too much and becoming stuffed or carrying too many things. You aren't forced into anything, but you simply have to face the consequences of being less effective if you ignore it.
4) I think quality is more important than quantity, of both players and arguments.
So all in all I don't believe a hunger system will have any negative affects.
But what positive effects does it bring? There doesn't seem to be much either at the current time, and I don't believe it will affect roleplaying much on the actual surface and obviously right now the abundance of food prevents any significant economic change it could bring as well. However, I do believe it can bring possible effects on the economy in the future with the help of some other changes/balances and possible roleplaying conflicts to gain control of food supplies.
So in conclusion, I think a hunger system will not bring any negative effects and will bring positive effects, even though it is extremely minimal at this time. However, I see possible benefits in the further future, so therefore I'm for it.
1) Added messages would cause more server traffic and clog text box.
2) More time spend on food gathering, less on roleplaying.
3) You are forced into doing something.
4) Only the minority of players seem to want it.
And this is my response to it:
1) I don't believe so, because even with a hunger system, you should only start to get hungry for nothing less than every 30 minutes. It wouldn't "annoy" you or cause any more traffic than everytime someone smiths something and it says "What do you want to smith?"
2) It doesn't mean that you have to spend SO much more time looking for food, as so many people have already pointed out that food is abundant. It just means you can't go on forever without any food, so you can't do something like stay in the desert for hours on end. If you want to play a scene where you're stranded in a desert you can only do it for so long without food. If you can't play a scene then it means that it isn't logical in the first place, or that you need to plan it out better in order for it to work.
3) A hunger system doesn't have to make it so that you die if you don't eat. It could be that it just makes you more ineffective in many ways, such as moving slower like with the weight system. If you say you don't want to be forced to face consequences for starving yourself, don't forget that you face consequences for eating too much and becoming stuffed or carrying too many things. You aren't forced into anything, but you simply have to face the consequences of being less effective if you ignore it.
4) I think quality is more important than quantity, of both players and arguments.
So all in all I don't believe a hunger system will have any negative affects.
But what positive effects does it bring? There doesn't seem to be much either at the current time, and I don't believe it will affect roleplaying much on the actual surface and obviously right now the abundance of food prevents any significant economic change it could bring as well. However, I do believe it can bring possible effects on the economy in the future with the help of some other changes/balances and possible roleplaying conflicts to gain control of food supplies.
So in conclusion, I think a hunger system will not bring any negative effects and will bring positive effects, even though it is extremely minimal at this time. However, I see possible benefits in the further future, so therefore I'm for it.
-
Loki Feuerhaar
- Posts: 353
- Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2002 9:20 pm
- Location: Trolls Bane
You have to remember that many if not most players to not play for a full iilarion day in each session. Some are only on for a half an hour or an hour at a time. If this is the case it could take weeks for a person to have been online for accumulate enough online hours to correspond to an online day and to make them hungry. If this is the case then the majority of the people will be forced to eat because of the declining bar once a week, and we can generally assume that most players do not play for a full online day at a single sitting. To balance this out the time frame for getting hungry would have to be reduced, making people have to eat around 10 times a day which is also against the realism that this was designed to implement. I do see how this could benefit illarion but I also think that at this current time it will do more harm than good and should be kept on the back burner until more benifits would be created for this to effect before it is implemented if it ever is. These are just a few things I thought of after reading the most recent posts, I would think the best solution is to ignore the majority who can not play for 4 straight hours or longer but this also is unfair to the majority.
I rearranged the statements in the quotes a little bit.
When I'm doing something, however, I generally get engrossed in it. If I"m searching for something, scouting, fighting, mining, lumbering, talking, searching for something, etc... I'm role playing the character, in essence living the character.
When I'm in the middle of doing something and I start getting message, "you're hungry, you have to eat" or such it throws me out of what I'm doing and I'm back to playing a game again. Because the interface is talking to me again.
Then I have to stop whatever I'm doing, go look through my inventory for food, eat til the annoying messages go away, then try to get back into what I was doing.
I believe that the interfaces should be as inatrusive as possible. There should be the minimal there that allows one to get into the role. Extra bars, messages, etc.. tend to take away from that.
When I'm fighting, I'm watching my life meter. If I"m casting, I"m watching my life/mana meter. It is fairly easy to associate those with life and energy. More meters start taking away from the reality that is being built by the interface.
-----------------------
The main reasons I've seen FOR the hunger bars is for money. It will help the food economy. That seems to be the main reason some people want it, and are tryign to bring up artificial reasons why it would be good to have, it wouldn't be that difficult, it wouldnt' make tht much traffic, it would add realism, etc.. which all are very weak points, in my opionion, as I stated more gadgets and messages would take away from realism.
So, it comes down to some people want this so they can make more money baking.
And we are not going to take away from the realism of the game so people can make more money.
This is not an argument that I ever stated. Actual impact of IP traffic would probably be minimal.Dyluck wrote:1) Added messages would cause more server traffic and clog text box.
1) I don't believe so, because even with a hunger system, you should only start to get hungry for nothing less than every 30 minutes. It wouldn't "annoy" you or cause any more traffic than everytime someone smiths something and it says "What do you want to smith?"
It's not looking for food that's the hassle. When I play I normally always have food on me, apples, cherries, grapes.Dyluck wrote:2) More time spend on food gathering, less on roleplaying.
2) It doesn't mean that you have to spend SO much more time looking for food, as so many people have already pointed out that food is abundant. It just means you can't go on forever without any food, so you can't do something like stay in the desert for hours on end. If you want to play a scene where you're stranded in a desert you can only do it for so long without food. If you can't play a scene then it means that it isn't logical in the first place, or that you need to plan it out better in order for it to work.
When I'm doing something, however, I generally get engrossed in it. If I"m searching for something, scouting, fighting, mining, lumbering, talking, searching for something, etc... I'm role playing the character, in essence living the character.
When I'm in the middle of doing something and I start getting message, "you're hungry, you have to eat" or such it throws me out of what I'm doing and I'm back to playing a game again. Because the interface is talking to me again.
Then I have to stop whatever I'm doing, go look through my inventory for food, eat til the annoying messages go away, then try to get back into what I was doing.
I believe that the interfaces should be as inatrusive as possible. There should be the minimal there that allows one to get into the role. Extra bars, messages, etc.. tend to take away from that.
When I'm fighting, I'm watching my life meter. If I"m casting, I"m watching my life/mana meter. It is fairly easy to associate those with life and energy. More meters start taking away from the reality that is being built by the interface.
-----------------------
The main reasons I've seen FOR the hunger bars is for money. It will help the food economy. That seems to be the main reason some people want it, and are tryign to bring up artificial reasons why it would be good to have, it wouldn't be that difficult, it wouldnt' make tht much traffic, it would add realism, etc.. which all are very weak points, in my opionion, as I stated more gadgets and messages would take away from realism.
So, it comes down to some people want this so they can make more money baking.
And we are not going to take away from the realism of the game so people can make more money.
Well the new proposal shouldn't be a hassel then.Serpardum wrote:It's not looking for food that's the hassle. When I play I normally always have food on me, apples, cherries, grapes.
I agree, and the character has to eat.Serpardum wrote:... I'm role playing the character, in essence living the character.
I see no reason why we need the messages, just add another bar.Serpardum wrote:When I'm in the middle of doing something and I start getting message, "you're hungry, you have to eat" or such it throws me out of what I'm doing and I'm back to playing a game again. Because the interface is talking to me again.
I don't think one extra bar would be too much to keep up with.Serpardum wrote:I believe that the interfaces should be as inatrusive as possible. There should be the minimal there that allows one to get into the role. Extra bars, messages, etc.. tend to take away from that.
I'm not a baker and I'm all for it because it only adds to the realism. I can see no way whatsoever that it takes away from the realism.Serpardum wrote:So, it comes down to some people want this so they can make more money baking.
And we are not going to take away from the realism of the game so people can make more money.