| Subject: Re: The Housing Situation |
Author:
Elwar
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 07:26:05 05/23/02 Thu
In reply to:
Drayab
's message, "The Housing Situation" on 22:09:08 05/22/02 Wed
Ok, these ideas seem to be a better path than anything
I was thinking.
What might be best is for each house you buy a key. Then
every month or whatever you need to pay rent or taxes or
whatever. If by the end of the month you don't pay up,
then your locks get changed and the new key goes up for
sale. So if you're an active player you'll be able to
pay month by month and not worry about a lock change. But
if you leave for six months you'll come back and your
house will have new locks. Though this might make for
a lot of people getting stuck in other people's houses.
Though a less automatic way of doing it will probably be
the final deal, this is conceptually a good route.
>Hmmm.... if the key was a 'no quit' item, it seems
>like it would be difficult to store things in your
>house safely, which is the practical reason I would
>own a house. If I was going away from home, I would
>want to take it with me anyway. And I might die with
>it and we'd still have the same problem. I mean, I
>want a house so that my things stay safe, but if I
>leave the key somewhere unsafe (while I go off
>somewhere) then if someone else finds the key, they
>have access to my house and all my things. So, I'd
>want to take it with me and might die with it. If I
>was quitting for the day, I could try to hide the key,
>but then, if I had the skills to make that work then I
>could just as easily have just hidden all my
>valuables. So that means I've got to keep all my
>valuables on my person when I quit anyway, and just
>leave the key behind.
>
>Here's a solution I thought of after reading Grunt's
>post:
>
>Ideally, the locks could be changed and re-keyed in
>the game dynamically. The problem as I see it is
>deciding when it is time to change the lock so that a
>new player can use the house. Maybe if it was like
>Grunt said and everyone was on a rental system this
>wouldn't be a problem; since, if a player hasn't been
>paying his rent, he gets kicked out at the end of the
>month.
>
>I used to play on a mud called Rauvyon for a while,
>and they had a rental system in place. If you didn't
>pay your rent, your key disappeared out of the game
>and a new one became available at the rental office.
>It worked well, but I have no idea how they coded it.
>
>Since lots of players had their own pad, there were
>things like furniture available to make it nicer.
>Maybe we could have something like that as well. I
>think if houses became more easily had that there
>would be more opportunities for people in the game.
>For example, there could be new things to craft and a
>new demand for locksmiths.
>
>As for Rauvyon's system, I always thought the
>disappearing keys were unrealistic. I would rather see
>some uppity Centurions going around hassling people
>for their rent and stuff like that. You know, taking
>their keys by force when they mess up. Maybe the owner
>of the house, like the government or a noble family,
>could be given a command to change the locks at a
>certain address at which time a new key could be
>generated at the housing authority. Maybe the housing
>authority could become something like the recruiter
>that the city governments now use to get guards. The
>house managers would have access to a merchant that
>'sells' them the key. Maybe it could even be set up so
>that there is no charge.
>
>The old key would simply become useless. And there
>would always be someone around to change the locks and
>manage the houses IC.
>
>Of course, for this to work all the houses would need
>to be assigned an address, and each key would have to
>be created dynamically to match the lock at the given
>address. But I don't really know how tough this would
>be to code. It may very well be a large project the
>way I described it. And Elwar probably has enough on
>his hands with the guard code without having something
>else on his plate.
>
>Maybe there is a simplier solution, but this was the
>best that I could think of.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 
