Suggestions:Game mechanics

Suggestions for Shartak are always welcome, although there's no guarantee that anything will be added. Comments on or modifications for any of the suggestions below can be added by editing this page. Please be considerate and don't just remove ideas that you don't like.

Bug reports should go on the Bugs page.

This is the suggestions page for game mechanics. See also the Suggestions page for other suggestions.

Example

To use the template, enter the following, but replace emboldened text with text appropriate to your suggestion:

===Suggestion Name===
{{suggestion|
suggest_type=Skill, balance change, improvement, etc|
suggest_scope=Who or what it applies to|
suggest_description=Full description. Check spelling and be descriptive.|
suggest_time=~~~~~|
suggest_author=~~~|
suggest_comments=
<!-- COMMENT **BELOW** THIS LINE - DO NOT DELETE THIS LINE -->
Comment here
<!-- COMMENT **ABOVE** THIS LINE - DO NOT DELETE THIS LINE -->
}}

Game Mechanics

Conversion

When an Outsider/Native dies they are reborn as a Native (don't really understand the spirit thing too well). The Outsiders then get a new class/skill, "Religious Conversion" that requires a "Holy Scripture". This allows a "Priest" to convert one native into a Outsider". The converted native would most likely start off as a Settler. --One of many doctors 23:22, 16 February 2006 (GMT)

Comments

• I believe that Natives are reborn as Natives and Outsiders are reborn as Outsiders, but I could be wrong. From a game balance perspective, I am not in favor of type-swapping skills unless Natives are presented with an ability to counter or convert Outsiders as well. It does fit nicely with the theme though. --Lint 23:41, 16 February 2006 (GMT)

• That would probably be the shamans job, however it may have worked for Urban Dead but I don't think it will work in this game as whichever group has the most players to begin with will, once conflicts begin to arise, dominate by switching people from the side they are on the side the priest/"whatever the natives use" side making you able to graph one groups population by looking at the graph pop=(1/2)^x. Also since there wouldn't seem to be a way, short of finding a converter player to switch you back, to go back to playing as you once did would make the amount of people on one side quickly die off (even though thats what would happen in real life, favouring the outsiders) it would be a very unfun aspect of the game. And really these are HOSTILE natives, or so it seems, why would they let some devilman outsider tell it how it is? They wouldn't, they would simply spear them and laugh! In short all the converting ideas suck, I know I wouldn't want to log on to find I'm playing for the wrong side. -- Daylan 10:55, 17 February 2006 (GMT)

• So that means if my soldier dies, he's reborn as a native? Not only that, but to become an outsider again, first I would have to find a priest (which would be next to impossible with such a small number of players), and then he could convert me into a settler. That means I'll never be able to be a soldier again, which is a real punch in the throat for RPers. -- Grigoriy

• All valid points. I guess this wouldn't really work we have the same number of players as Urban Dead. But this would be a great way to balance out the sides later on. Say there are too many natives, you just drop more "conversion items" and balance out the sides. Too many Outsiders? Just drop the number of conversion items. Doubt it would catch on though. --One of many doctors 02:44, 19 February 2006 (GMT)

• Conversion doesn't have to be forced. It could require action on both sides, like a native doning a religious item and an outsider using the skill on that native. After all, conversion isn't real without true faith. The native counter to this could be similar, requiring an outsider to die holding a packet of that headshrinking powder while a shaman uses the Zombification (ala Haitian witchcraft) skill. -- frisco

• You don't change class or anything when you die. --Murk 12:31, 4 March 2006 (GMT)

• I gave a response t othis idea under "Holy Scriptures," I think, offering another idea for it that may piss a lot less people off. *points over there*--Wifey 07:15, 29 March 2006 (BST)

Capturing villages

Since this is like some war between Outsiders and Natives I thought this appropriate. If all the (say) Outsiders are killed in York and there are none left, then it becomes a Native village and vice versa. Probably needs harder requirements to capture settlements though. Maybe each side could have one permanent place that can never change hands? --One of many doctors 03:41, 1 March 2006 (GMT)

Comments

Not sure about this - what about all the idle players within the village? They might "wake up" after a couple of weeks to find they're in enemy territory. --Simon 11:00, 1 March 2006 (GMT)

You could have it so idle players goto the nearest friendly village-- Daylan 02:58, 3 March 2006 (GMT)

Turf control in a limited AP browser game like this just invites lame zerging behavior. I don't like it. --Jackel 00:00, 4 March 2006 (GMT)

Not villages, perhaps 3x3 square 'forts'? --Grigoriy 01:10, 4 March 2006 (GMT)

I do like the idea, but I think Jackel's observation hits a key point. --Lint 08:40, 5 March 2006 (GMT)

Agreed with Jackel and Lint and Simon. --Berry 13:32, 7 March 2006 (GMT) Additionally:

• Please don't impose your assumption that Shartak is at heart a "war between Outsiders and Natives" on the rest of us. That is not the only possible direction in which this game can go. For example, an Outsider village might turn out to be populated by a trading company that views the other Outsider villages as competitors whose extermination would be good for business, but it could just as easily develop into a peaceful scientific outpost, a pirate haven of drunken debauchery, or a missionary settlement devoted to finding the Natives and learning their language (gotta spread that old time religion). I believe it would be better to keep the objectives more freeform, and let the players create the course of history. --Berry 13:32, 7 March 2006 (GMT)
• On a hopefully more helpful and positive note, one could simulate/approximate capturing a village by amassing an army of suitable size, carving messages of ownership all over the territory of the village in question, killing all members of the village, and repeatedly killing the village shaman so they can't get back as easily. (Ouch. I hope no armchair megalomaniacs out there have been taking notes.) --Berry 13:32, 7 March 2006 (GMT)

Unique skills

I think that each class should start off with one unique skill that the others may never aquire. That way it stops all the classes from becoming too generic. For example Settlers could have a "farming" skill, Soldiers could have a "bravery" skill, etc. Or mabey they could just have a attribute like Soldiers have an extra 10% chance of striking the target, Warriors have an extra 10% chance of finding animals, Settlers have an extra 10% chance of finding an item, Scouts have a 3% chance of recovering 1 HP per AP spent, etc. --One of many doctors 02:34, 5 March 2006 (GMT)

• Perhaps a Research skill of some kind for the Scientist, maybe allowing them an advantage when doing things with dead animals (would need something to do with dead animals, obviously!).MorkaisChosen 16:09, 16 March 2006 (GMT)

Comments

I am in favor of this (if it is not in effect currently). We'd have to work out the details to make sure each class is getting their fair share, but something that encourages players to try other classes or team up with other players using different classes for a better playing experience sounds good to me. --Lint 08:40, 5 March 2006 (GMT)

I am in favor of each class being able to acquire (but not necessarily starting off with) a unique skill or attribute that the others may never acquire. Sounds to me like the kind of thing that would be unlocked as one's reward for a rite of passage, rather than granted as a right of birth. --Berry 12:53, 7 March 2006 (GMT)

Pirates should have a skill to steal their fallen enemies' gold coins. Arr. Would probably result in a lot of outsider in-fighting, though, and outsiders are currently outnumbered.--Wifey 07:18, 29 March 2006 (BST)

Pet System

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Lint	08:40, 5 March 2006 (GMT)	Game mechanics	All classes

I will combine aspects of the Animal and Pirate suggestions and propose a pet system that allows you to tame one of the animals on the island. First, you have to weaken the animal. Then you throw a sphere device at it and shout "SHARTAK SPHERE! GO!" for 1 AP. There's a slight chance that you have captured and tamed the animal. The more powerful the animal, the less success chance. You earn no XP for taming an animal. Players can only have 1 pet at a time. They can release a pet whenever they want. If the owner dies, the pet runs away. Pets have fixed HP, attack, and accuracy based on the type of animal they are (ie. they do not level up or heal, just to keep it simple to design). They follow the player around and only attack when the player attacks. It would be nice if they attacked while you were not playing, but auto-defense mechanisms are unnecessary. Enemy animals randomly determine whether they are attacking the owner or the pet. Other players will have an option for targeting the owner or pet. There is no XP gained for attacking or killing a pet to deter any attempts at farming pet killing (I can't believe we even have to consider preventing such a thing). For added flavor, owners can name their pets.

Comments

• ROTFL. Sounds a bit like Pokemon or Yu-Gi-Oh (don't worry, I'm not a fan, I have kids that were!). Perhaps instead of spheres, you could keep the monkeys on a leash, heal a tiger or elephant to make it less likely to attack you, tame deer by feeding them, etc. Some animals like the wild boar would have to be pretty difficult to tame. --Simon 15:14, 5 March 2006 (GMT)
• I was with you right up until you got to the "sphere device" bit, and I rejoined you afterwards. ;) The rest of your suggestion otherwise seems to be pretty well thought out. Personally, I'd prefer to attempt to tame the animal into becoming a pet purely by offering it food, rather than "weakening" it by other means. Especially since food is scarce enough that offering it to an animal would be a real sacrifice and therefore an interesting decision for the player to make. --Berry 14:49, 7 March 2006 (GMT)
• I will confess that I had a lot of fun with the references. The problem I have with using an existing item to tame a pet is how to implement it. The player can't click on the fruit, because that will just heal themselves. And I think it is unecessary to redesign fruits like First Aid Kits and Medical Herbs, just so they can feed it to an animal. And a database check to see if the player possesses a fruit before providing a "tame" command seems awkward. Perhaps there is just one item called "animal bait" (from the Trade Hut most likely). It works much like a FAK or Herb, but can only be applied to animals (though there will be a "Yourself" option by default for those players that decide they enjoy the taste). Animals will then have a value called "tame count" in the database. For each successful feeding, this number is incremented. When a specific number is reached, the monster is successfully tamed. If a monster is killed, the number is reset to 0. Acquiring a pet should not reduce the population of animals on the island (ie. one should respawn to take its place). Furthermore, those with Animal Affinity should have a better taming success rate. (This is another attempt to give Villagers and Settlers a little boost.) --Lint 17:32, 7 March 2006 (GMT)
• This idea, while somewhat interesting, is not very realitic. The animals of the island are wild. In reality, tigers, elephants, deer, "WILD boars" etc can only be made LESS WILD by extensive and careful training and handling when they are young, not be tamable by any means, certainly not enough to follow a person around and fight on their behalf. Maybe it would be possible with parrots and monkeys, but if Simon is going to implement changes, I'd rather see some of the more believable ones first. I do agree with Lint that it would give more value to Animal Affinity. Animal attacks, even from a tiger or elephant (which would realistically be very dangerous) are hardly to be feared, making this skill currently seem pretty useless.

---

Profile Effect Items

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Lint	08:40, 5 March 2006 (GMT)	Game mechanics	Inventory and profiles

These are useless baubles that take up 1 unit of a player's inventory space, but if anyone views their profile they will see that the players possesses the item. Using the item won't accomplish anything and merely produce flavor text. However, if a player is in the presence of another player, using the item would show it off. As with all items, there's no way to trade them with other players. We can have eyepatches and peglegs. We can have tribal masks and warpaint. Maybe some clans would require a certain dress code. Maybe they need 30 pieces of flair. I think it provides an outlet for the less serious gamers. Problems: Serious gamers might be plagued with finding such items and dropping them, wasting (in their opinion) AP and Page Hits. Also, arguing over what items fit with the theme of Shartak will be a headache-inducing process.

Comments

• I like this suggestion. How about finding the pieces of the masks and making your own - combine the baubles with mini-quests? --Simon 11:18, 8 March 2006 (GMT)

For example, to make the sacred warrior mask of Raktam, you must find 5 parrot feathers, a tiger tooth, some berries and a piece of driftwood that can be carved into the appropriate shape with a knife or dagger. Once you have all those items, you get a "create mask" option which then removes the required items and the mask appears in your inventory (and profile).

Having the database check to see if they have all the ingredients seems a bit unwieldly. After every action or inventory use it might have to run the check to verify that they are alive, still have the items, etc. I'd just settle for having them take the items to a specific NPC. But yes, a mixing quest would be fun. --Lint 18:02, 8 March 2006 (GMT)

• I just hope that this idea motivates players to try new things ("I'm going to join a clan that wears such-and-such a mask and attack the others! Yarr!") and not feel that the game is just about collecting items ("Well, I got all the masks. I guess I'm done with the game."). --Lint 18:02, 8 March 2006 (GMT)

• Maybe the different masks have different effects, from some simple ones (attracting/scaring animals, making them less likely to attack or easier to hit) to the downright blatavt video game reference that turns you into a huge brown rocky guy who can punch boulders apart. OK, maybe not the second one. MorkaisChosen 20:53, 9 March 2006 (GMT)

I think that's something to be worked on in a separate suggestion. The point of this suggestion is to make useless "fancy hats" that neither add or take away from the established gameplay. However, in the eyes of certain players, they may be invaluable because of how they can incorperate such items into their goals and roleplaying. --Lint 23:52, 9 March 2006 (GMT)

---

Conch Shell Hunt

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Lint	08:40, 5 March 2006 (GMT)	Game mechanics, minigame	Event

Capture the Flag-ish minigame. Somewhere on the island is a single conch shell item. It can be found by searching anywhere. It takes 1 inventory space and appears when anyone views their profile. When the conch holder is in the presence of other players, flavor text is added to the area description to inform the others that the conch holder is in the area. If the person in possession of the conch drops it, dies, or is idle for more than 5 days, the conch returns to the system. The person who holds the conch the longest gets recognized in the statistics. Killing the conch holder earns special bonus XP. Adept conch holder killers may also be recognized in the statistics. Problems: Someone with multiple characters could take advantage of having the conch on one character and reap the XP and fame with another. There will be a point where a race condition will occur and might result in multiple conches and a broken game.

Comments

• This kind of thing has been on my ideas list, although this is much more detailed version than the one-liner I had. --Simon 15:05, 5 March 2006 (GMT)
• I have the conch! I'm allowed to speak! *ahem* I mean, um... >.>--Wifey 07:21, 29 March 2006 (BST)

---

Know your foes

As a native, I get killed a lot by outsiders, but I just can't strike back when I come back to life, as nothing allows me to identify my agressors amongst the outsiders I meet. I expected some basic language skill to give me access to clickable outsiders profiles, but it doesn't. So. I don't like much the fact that, in this game, the only alternative you have is "attack random outsiders" or "attack none". I'd like to be able to protect myself without being too unfair to peaceful outsiders (and being part of some snowball effect).

This would be partly solved by some profile access (allowing to check people's amount of human kills), or some limited displayed info on the present players (it would make -almost- sense for natives to automatically carry visible scalps or shrunken head of their victims, but I'm not sure how to justify the kills display in the case of outsiders, despite of the fact white men were actually quite fond of indian scalps at some time). Another useful tool would be some urban-dead-like contact list.

Of course, ideally (but absurdly) the most useful stat to be able to see would be the number of kills of people without human kills at the moment of their death, but... -- Leaf

Comments Perhaps seeing the profile of someone on the opposite side if you or they have the advanced language skill would be good, it would be cool to hang around with some natives without worrying about aggressors. --Grigoriy 21:30, 18 March 2006 (GMT)

If you had a contact list and some way to target individuals on your list ala Urban Dead, I'm guessing that would probably help. Not so sure about the scalp display approach. --Simon 23:36, 18 March 2006 (GMT)

Forest Fire

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Lint	03:58, 17 March 2006 (GMT)	Game mechanics, natural disasters	Terrain

This is a potential temporary minigame that will either lead to players to band together and save the island or perhaps just lead to all-out chaos. A fire script is created which designates one block as fire (it is identified by a little fire.gif in the background). Every 20 minutes the fire script will check if there is Grassland or Jungle nearby with density from 1-10. If there is, it spreads to the next block. It will not spread to any other terrain (including villages and ruins). Thus, the best way to prevent the spread of the fire is by chopping vegetation down to 0. The initial fires will be placed randomly around the island. Actions performed in a fire occupied space deal 2 damage. For this event to be more devious, there should be a means to quickly restore vegetation (dropping driftwood, planting fruit, watering with gourds).

Comments

• I like some things about this suggestion, I think it could work really nicely if there was also a rain algorithingamajig, so that maybe, if some part of the island dried out, wildfires could break out, or if it rained too much villages could flood and get swamped. Its a neat idea. -BananaBear 04:55, 17 March 2006 (GMT)
• I like the idea of rain and fire, however there's no telling if the server would handle the database access/calculations required when the number of players gets into the range that Urban Dead has. --Simon 11:17, 17 March 2006 (GMT)
  • I thought it might be a bit much. Ah well. --Lint 19:32, 17 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Not the idea of fire itself, that may well be quite feasible. I meant having rain causing flooding, or not enough rain leading to fires might be a bit awkward.. unless I can think of some way to reduce the work that needs to be done regularly. --Simon 23:38, 18 March 2006 (GMT)
• Maybe fires could also destroy huts, and then there could be a skill to rebuild them. Maybe even give people the ability to start their own fires. It might make for interesting tribal wars. -BananaBear 18:22, 20 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Imagine what would happen if an ammo hut caught on fire!--Darkferret 04:32, 1 April 2006 (BST)
  • I kind of wanted to restrict fires to the Jungle (removed my Grasslands comment from the original suggestion) since a lot of Huts provide resources for starting players and players that have just been revived. I think it would be unfair to prevent them with the opportunity to gather supplies. As a tactic, it may also be unfair. Native villages appear to be completely surrounded by burnable Jungle, while Outsider villages are bordered by the Beach. --Lint 19:46, 20 March 2006 (GMT)
  • Good point. The pirates would be completely free of burning too. I still think a way to temporarily damage structures could be fun -BananaBear 19:59, 20 March 2006 (GMT)
  • As a general rule, real world jungles don't burn terribly well, although there are a few notable exceptions (such as the Indonesian forest fires in 1997-98). Grasslands, however, burn quite regularly, and in fact such fires are necessary for the good health of the grass. Fire kills off sapling trees in the area which would otherwise grow to the point that they overshadowed and killed the grass. I don't know whether the game has any grasslands large enough to make this kind of thing interesting, though. --Jackdaw 15:55, 25 March 2006 (GMT)

---

The Ghost Elephant

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Lint	03:58, 17 March 2006 (GMT)	Game mechanics, miniboss	Event

Somewhere on the island is an animal that exists purely as a temporary event. The Legendary Ghost Elephant - in reality, an aggressive albino pachyderm of incredible size - is said to roam the island of Shartak. Some Natives revere it, others desire to be recorded as the one who slayed it. Some Outsiders wish to study it, others desire to have it as a trophy. It behaves much like any other elephant on Shartak. However, it has a different label, an unfathomable amount of HP, and deals horrific damage. If you heal the Ghost Elephant with a FAK or Herbs, you receive double XP. And to further serve a challenge, don't place an HP cap on the Ghost Elephant, just give it a starting amount. If possible, a log of all actions performed on the Ghost Elephant should be kept by the server and revealed in the event that it dies.

Comments

• Ha! I like this one, Lint, and simple to implement. It should really have a boatload of HP, as I think few will consider expending valuable healing items on it, when its far easier (and more rewarding) to hack away at it for 40 AP then make a run for it! --Jackel 16:42, 17 March 2006 (GMT)

• Arr! I would ride that ghost beast like a horse jus' fer fun, then slay 't t' sell its tusks t' them outsiders an' th' meat t' them natives. --El Pirata Cofresi 17:46, 17 March 2006 (GMT)

• In the Congo they refer to it as Mokele Mbembe - he who stops the flow of rivers - and it is rumoured to be a lost dinosaur. The island could do with some cryptozoology. Would this creature be able to disappear or hide or move incredibly fast? If not, then once one person finds it, they can just call everyone over to the same square. This kind of defeats the mythical aspect as well as adding potential server problems. --Frisco 18:24, 17 March 2006 (GMT)

• I should make the animals attack back in near-realtime first (as in you attack them and they may or may not get an attack in).. just to add a bit of interest to it and stop people running up to the creature and hacking and then running away. Making an animal with an almost unlimited number of HP would be possible.. I guess probably start it with at least double a normal elephant and max of about a thousand HP to prevent people healing it to the point where it'd be impossible to kill. --Simon 18:37, 17 March 2006 (GMT)

• It could be cool, especially if it moved around in a way that made tracking it possible, maybe by destroying the foliage, or moving in a pattern. Also having it move might help keep people from all winding up in one square beating it up. -BananaBear 18:41, 17 March 2006 (GMT)
  • I've tried to offset the game's focus on combat by encouraging healing (double XP may be too much of a reward, so I'm willing to remove that), but that alone will most likely be not enough to counter the horde of blood-thirsty savages!
    Healing with the Herbs and FAKs may actually be seen as healing the Ghost Elephant spiritually rather than merely physically, which is why it's health can grow high. I don't see a problem if it became near-unkillable. I like keeping some myths and legends around.
    I thought that it would be best if it traveled like an elephant, but it is true that it limits the people that are able to participate in the event. Perhaps it should "teleport", after a certain amount of time in an area - "A wall of fog sweeps in through jungle. When it fades, you see that the Ghost Elephant has vanished as well."
    I requested for a log of actions to determine who killed it, who attacked it the most, who healed it the most, and who got hurt the most. Also, rather than a recurring animal, I thought it would be best to release it as an event that occurs every now and then. Or maybe only once! --Lint 19:32, 17 March 2006 (GMT)
    • Hmm, when the elephant reappears, it should give a loud trumpet which can be heard over a certain radius to increase the chance of players coming across it. Unless of course players would prefer that it were more stealthy. --Lint 23:25, 4 April 2006 (BST)

• I like it. And of course, you needn't stick to land animals; a mysterious sea creature that patrols the island waters and is reported to be 30ft long could prompt more people to vernture into the waters for a glimpse/trophy etc. Sharks will also be a problem for those searching! --Malphas 15:52, 19 March 2006 (GMT)

• I love this idea.--Wifey 07:08, 28 March 2006 (BST)

---

Auto Attack

I've never liked the fact that while I am away from the game, things can happen to my character, like being chewed on by a tiger or slashed with a machette. How about a setting where you can turn your character on to auto attack anything that hits you. It should, of course, be user selected. This would change the game mechanics a bit, as you could no longer move in on a target and attack it withough fear of a counter-strike. To me this is far more realistic, in that even if you are sleeping, when somebody hits you, you're going to wake up and do something about it with whatever engery you have left.

An alternative selectable action might be an auto-run. You can pre-specify the direction you want to run and how many squares upon being hit. A character with trekking could stay alive just by running a few square whenever they are hit. --Qberry 02:34, 20 March 2006 (GMT)

Comments

• The main problem with this is that players will be discouraged from attacking other players, as this will become extremely dangerous, and the native warrior who wants the outsiderts out will effectively be penalised.MorkaisChosen 15:47, 20 March 2006 (GMT)
• Sorry, but I don't like this. I feel that that this will lead to interactions with players that are no different than interacting with an NPC. Could someone theoretically max themselves out by just leaving this option on and checking in every now and then to make sure they haven't become a spirit? --Lint 17:28, 20 March 2006 (GMT)
• Yeah, I'm not a fan of being able to do something by not doing something, such as fighting or running without being there to fight or run. Also, would it be free of AP and IP hits, or would it be possible to come back and have no AP or hits left? It seems like these problems would wreck any sort of auto action. I can understand not enjoying being macheted while away, but I don't see any way around this. -BananaBear 18:20, 20 March 2006 (GMT)
• I must admit that I don't like the idea all that much, but if it was implemented it would probably be something that was user configurable. I don't think running away would make sense, but fighting back does. For example, no more than X AP to be used fighting back until you next log back in, and they wouldn't be used unless you had more than Y AP left. This way you could set X to 10 and Y to 6 and if you ran out of AP, set those values, it would be 2 hours (6 x 20m) before you were likely to attack, and it would use no more than 10 AP fighting back. Because the values are configurable, it would be hard to know who would fight back and who wouldn't. Setting X to 0 would disable the feature. I think probably the attacks would gain XP if successful, same as normal, but because you wouldn't be able to set the number of AP to use to more than your max AP value, it would be impossible to level up a character by simply leaving them alone (not to mention you would disappear from the map after being idle for a bit). --Simon 21:01, 20 March 2006 (GMT)
• i like the idea of counterattack , but with some limits. You have only a % of counterattacking someone (25%?) , you don't consume AP , you don't get XP. But , whit wich weapon do you attack?--JonesDye 10:05, 27 March 2006 (BST)
• The impetus behind auto-attack is to lessen the chance and impact of Badness happening to your character while you're away, but auto-attack isn't the proper solution to this. Shartak's appropriate skill would be jungle hiding, though a construction skill would work too, if we want to be more like that other game. --Frisco 13:51, 4 April 2006 (BST)

Flavor Text

this section is where "users" add "flavor" to the game, im just suggesting that every few steps the computer say a message depending on location, here ill give a few examples:

• grasslands
  • the grassy field sways under the wind's rush as you take a step.|
  • something far off squaks and makes a strange throaty bellow.|

• water
  • a wave crashes calmly in the distance|
  • a spalsh can be heard from far off|

• jungle
  • a parrot's call can be heard distantly|
  • the bushes nearby are rustling from the small wildlife in them|

• village (outsider)
  • the smell of gunpowder wafts into your lungs|
  • the smoke comming from a nearby hut smells of fresh turkey|

• village (native)
  • the shaman's voice can be heard traveling through the village|
  • you step on the bones of what appears to be a rattlesnake|

• beach
  • the hot sand burns your feet, yet feels wonderfully different|
  • several sea shells catch your eye from far off|

please feel free to update these with more, as they are just a list (if simon decides to) that will be used for flavor. i want to do this because the game gets kinda boring simply traversing through square after square

Comments

• One of the noticeable, distinct aspects of that other game are the different messages for each building; i really like this idea. A criticism, though - i'd refrain from mentioning living animals/people or useful items in the descriptions, they could be confusing to newbies. In other words, "a parrot's call can be heard distantly" isn't appropriate, and "the shaman's voice can be heard traveling through the village" might not be appropriate if the shaman is currently dead. The following could substitute: "You see a large ant colony busily rebuilding their hive" (an animal that has no game impact) and "The spirit of Shubar is felt all around you" (doesn't matter if Shubar is alive or dead). --Frisco 14:05, 4 April 2006 (BST)
• I sort of feel like this is something that could easily be put together with a Greasemonkey script. It would be nice, but it isn't really necessary. --Lint 05:35, 5 April 2006 (BST)

slots/ new inventory

slots and inventory could be implemented where, a picture of a silhouette was shown, with names of equiped items in slotted areas, ex: you skin a goat, find some sharp rocks and fashion yourself some claws, you then put them on, giving you +1 damage to all melee attacks animal wearings

"Comments below"

Making Claws? and not "all melee attacks" but only punch attacks --Slith 06:45, 29 March 2006 (BST)

I don't see why you need item slots for this. Having a pair of claws in the inventory would just improve punch damage by 1. That said, I don't like the idea of making oneself claws. Seems a little silly, when you have actual weapons around. Seems a little silly, either way, really. Perhaps that's just my sense of aesthetics, though, and not that of the majority of the players.--Wifey 06:37, 4 April 2006 (BST)

Boat Construction

Boats wouldn't be able to go into The very deep water people can't go into because the tides would rip them apart but could go move in all water for only 1 AP and it also prevents sharks from biting you. Multipule people could get into a boat based on how much wood is used, like n*.001 x 1 = People Where n = The amount of wood used.

Edit

When Boats are being boarded each player may vote on who they decide should be the captain. The captian may move boat, call the boat any non vulgar name and anyone may jump off the boat at any time except the captain. Boats could only be built on a beach and automaticly once built move the person who constructed it into the nearest water square. Players may board the baot at any time by moving into the same square as it and selecting enter. When the captain moves the boat onto a land square the boat is destroyed and all people who boarded are thrown onto the beach. Players may change the captain at any time by changing there vote. Natives can not board Outsider boats and outsiders can not board native boats. What the boat looks like and is called depends on the size of it.

1 person: Raft

2 people: Large raft

3-4: Small boat

5-6: Boat

7-9: Large Boat

10-24: Huge Boat

25 and up: Gigantic Boat

--Slith 06:42, 29 March 2006 (BST)

Comments

• check out the skills section, i already suggested something like that.... anyway, check it out --Richard Rose
• While the huts are handled in Richard's suggestion, I am interested in the boat aspect. I think that placing multiple players on a boat will be troublesome. Who decides where the boat goes - the server? the first player on the boat?
  It's also important to keep in mind that we already are offered a skill to help with moving in water - Swimming. If we are to introduce rafts, there should be some mechanics set in place to minimize their usefulness.
  Perhaps carrying a raft through non-water terrain doubles movement cost to discourage players from carrying one everywhere. Perhaps the raft only has a limited amount of moves in deep water before breaking up. --Lint 22:44, 29 March 2006 (BST)
  • Yeah I changed the suggestion based on your suggestion's :) --Slith 04:40, 30 March 2006 (BST)
• "Welcome to the Shartak ferry sevice. Please pay the captain your fee of 3 coins. We will be departing for the pirate ship in 3 hours. The captain has locked the destination coordinates and will not change directions unless the boat's integrity is threatend. We will arive in 50 AP + 10 AP per passenger + 5 per day due to drift. You are encouraged to help paddle the boat as this will help us arive sooner. If you decide to leave the boat at any time we will not refund you or allow you to reboard. Please do not pull out any corks or kick any boards as the boat is fragile and will sink if badly damaged."--Darkferret 05:06, 1 April 2006 (BST)
  • Yeah ^^ That too --Slith 00:48, 3 April 2006 (BST)

Poisoning

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Lint	18:38, 6 April 2006 (BST)	Game mechanics, status effect, balance	All classes, primarily Warriors

Currently, the blowpipe can only carry 1 dart, yet weighs the same amount of inventory space as a rifle with 2 bullets. If you were to pit a fully leveled Soldier armed with loaded rifles against a fully leveled Warrior armed with loaded blowpipes, the battle is in favor of the Soldier who requires less time to reload while inbattle and dealing superior damage. (rifle's 5 to blowpipe's 4).

To address this, I would propose that poison darts actually cause poisoning. Poisoning would behave much like a shark bite - causing 1 HP damage per action performed until they are administered a FAK or medical herbs. A character can die if poison is left untreated. The attacker receives no additional XP for this kill or the damage dealt from poison. Poisoning would not stack, but it would be possible for a character to suffer from both poison and shark bites. The introduction of poison may require the dart's damage to be reduced to something substantially lower. Perhaps a default of 2 HP inflicted.

Up for discussion - does poisoning have a percent chance of occurring, an AP lifespan (only lasts 10 moves), and perhaps only works on non-npc characters?

Comments

• Sounds great! I've heard that some of the toxicins used to poison darts can induce illutions. It would be interesting if poisoning increases AP usage for certain actions or even better imagined enemies (that Sixth Sence could pick out).--Darkferret 08:24, 7 April 2006 (BST)
• Have you seen the size of the some of the blowpipes that certain tribes carry? They're anything from 6 to 10 foot long! It's hardly surprising that they occupy the same inventory space as a rifle :) On the other hand, poisoning from darts sounds like a good idea.. I don't know that they should poison forever though, maybe for a limited number of AP, but perhaps have the effect be cumulative up to a certain point? Get shot 5 times and you lose 1 HP for every AP used for 5 x whatever the limit is. Does that make sense? --Simon 21:16, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  • • Exactly - e.g., each poison dart that hits adds 2 AP to the poison duration, and while poisoned, you lose 1HP per AP used. The Poison Dart would eventually inflict 6 hp of damage, offsetting the extra damage and double barrel of the rifle. --Tycho44 07:22, 12 April 2006 (BST)
  • That might work, that way the Warrior has incentive to continue using the blowpipe multiple times on a target rather than just switch to their machete after the poison takes effect. Add to the character table a boolean flag (Poison = True) and give it a Poison Timer int. When the timer reaches 0, the Poison gets flipped to False. When the character dies or a FAK or Herb is applied, the Poison gets flipped to False and the timer gets set to 0. If the flag is True and they're poisoned again, stack the timer. I'm going to put forth this suggestion to the Forum. I don't have a lot of experience with using the blowpipe (I'm a machete guy) so they should weigh in on this. --Lint 22:17, 7 April 2006 (BST)
• Or how about you can find frogs and use them to put differnt posion effects on your darts? --Slith 04:57, 11 April 2006 (BST)

• If we're adding poison dart frogs, I demand that they be lickable. It wouldn't be right, if you couldn't lick the poison dart frogs.--Wifey 20:14, 11 April 2006 (BST)

• Ok... then some benifical frogs too! And people can't tell the diffrence between them unless they get some skill? --Slith 06:27, 17 April 2006 (BST)

---

PvP Protection

Author	Timestamp	Type	Scope
Iamtas	10:00, 13 April 2006 (BST)	Game mechanics, pvp, nopvp, vs, player versus player	All Classes

A full implementation of player versus player protection. This would be a nice feature for newbies allowing them time to adjust to the game without getting slaughtered. I envisage something allowing you to enable nopvp without the ability to disable for at least 100AP. Also when you hit a player who is flagged nopvp then you would get a message along the lines of "As your blade bounces off an invisible shield you suddenly notice a shamanic medicine pouch around the neck of target, they are protected, it would be pointless to continue to attack target." where target will be replaced by the players name.

Comments

• This is a good, well-thought suggestion. But while I don't generally like PKing, I think it is important to keep it available to those that do enjoy it. With XP penalties and easy resurrection, PKing not ruining the game from my perspective and it shouldn't be restricted further. I would not mind a method of informing players that view my character profile to see that I am flagged for pvp or not, but I am against preventing PVP without purchasing such an ability. --Lint 21:16, 13 April 2006 (BST)
• New players already get an AP bonus and need less XP to level; I don't see the need for a newbie specific ability. I'd rather see a safe area over a moveable system - something like a sacred hut in native villages and a guard hut in outsider villages which anyone who hasn't attacked another player in 100 AP can enter and within which all PvP activity is prohibited, wastes AP, or perhaps results in HP loss only to the attacker ("Your attack has angered the mighty (spirits or guards) in the area; they smite you").--Frisco 04:12, 14 April 2006 (BST)
• Having both a PvP pirate and a pacifist shaman, and having been PKed on both... I don't like this idea. I like the 100AP newbie status. I don't like the "enabling" nopvp. Sorry. Death is a part of the game. If you walk into a tribe of hostile headhunters, they aren't going to just stand by and let you through--no matter how peaceful your business.--Wifey 04:27, 14 April 2006 (BST)
• I'm aware that new players get extra AP and newbie protection isn't what this is about. It is more useful for being protected from the players that sit in their home town bashing away at their own folk. Even with that said my main reason for nopvp was for another idea I have for a skill track that at the time of thinking about it I thought would require a nopvp implementation. I may post the skill track idea sometime when I have finished thinking about all the details.--Iamtas 12:07, 14 April 2006 (BST)

---