a multiplayer game of parenting and civilization building
You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
i like this idea! i think it should only be for buried graves with a tombstone though, to give us a reason/more meaning into burying someone.
My thoughts exactly.
Yes, I'm starting to see now why something like this is needed to make the system relevant. If you don't have a leader by the time you are old enough to say "I follow you", and there aren't any leaders around already, you tend to not even start the process; at least that's my personal experience. I like Kinrany's suggestion.
Or be able to turn them into clothing.
Fluffy disturbing the smith?...
Why'd you do it Fluffy?
On the porch...
So, if you're standing right next to the king when he issues the order, you don't hear it until your baron or whatever gets to you? That seems kinda silly.
Would it be better if everyone would get the message within a radius of the issuer, but only immediate followers could spread it within their own radius? I guess one interesting side effect of this is that there would be a reason to follow a king directly, even without followers of your own - you could become his personal messenger.
I'm not against better communication tools, but I wonder if this is too convenient. Being able to instantaneously message people, without having to find them and regardless of distance - I feel these sort of challenges are better overcome with more advanced technology at some point.
I was thinking you could have a town crier of some sort - someone who runs around town with a permanent message above his head, so long as he holds onto an "order", which is just that message written in permanent ink on a sheet of paper and stamped with a seal of authority. The message could have the leader's badge displayed somewhere in the corner, so everyone will know who it was from have some sense of how authoritive it is.
So, one thing is still not clear to me. If I'm a lone traveler, and I walk into a town with a pre-established hierarchy that goes all the way up to King, and I choose to follow that King directly, does that make me a Duke? If so, then I forsee this being a problem - most people are going to want to be as highly ranked as they can in society, which is going to make it harder to keep multiple tiers in an organization and the robustness that comes with it. Also, when a Duke dies, do all of their immediate followers become Dukes suddenly? That's not how titles are supposed work.
If this isn't the case already, I would say rank should always depend on the tiers of followers beneath you, and should be independent of the rank of your own leader, who is more like your point of contact in the organization. If you follow a King, you are just a follower, but you can still recruit followers beneath you and become a lord. You probably don't want to follow the king then, because if he dies you're no longer part of the organization. This means that you don't have the strict branching hierarchy of all lords under a baron, all barons under a count, etc, but I don't think there's anything wrong with that.
Special male-only feature: adopt a stranger into the family line.
This would not change normal game-play but it would impact the long view, for players who are interested in that.
The mechanism could be something like this: 1. A male takes a certain object in hand and says "You are (name_of_family)", and drops the item. 2. The player who wants to join the family picks up the item and says "I am (name_of_family)". The item could be a leaf or a bone needle (alludes to mixing of blood) or something.What do you think?
That kind of sounds like marriage. If we had a patrilineal marriage system, men could pull women from other families into theirs by marrying them; at least, women would be the only ones worth pulling in. That might be a little too screwy though, would all the woman's children switch to the new family as well? They might have to, otherwise you'd have brothers and sisters from different families, and I imagine that'd be more work to implement than it's worth.
If marriage helped increase fertility though, that could be something. It would give men a role in reproduction, but also delegate most of the child rearing to players that affirm that role by getting married in the first place. I think matrilineal marriage would work best, with the father retroactively adopting all of his wife's former children as his own - that just fits within the system as is without any hitches I can think of.
Personally, I think men are just fine as is, but I would like to be called "Dad" in game, one of these days.
I think having more coded mechanisms for communicating ideas like this is great imo... It's important to remember that because time is so sped up there would presumably be many, many more interactions in the analogous full length life so things like keeping everyone in sync about direction and values and such would be happening many times every second. A second is basically a bit less than a week so imagine trying to communicate as many things as need to be communicated across the span of a month in 5 seconds or so... It's just not possible, so it makes sense to have the game facilitate some of that data syncing between humans to bring it slightly closer to how in sync humans would be at normal speed
I think this is a good point - one reason at least we haven't seen complex societies arise in the game is the time and effort it takes to communicate relative to everyone's life span. As cool as it is to see social systems develop organically, I don't think there's anything wrong with using game mechanics to help facilitate some of the interactions, so long as it's handled well. That's basically what private property and fences do at the moment.
Huh, I actually didn't know you could just throw a carrot into a pie crust. I don't think you can do the same with rabbit meat.
I'm going with consistency, considering how the other permutations of carrot pies are made I could see it being frustrating for a new baker to learn that you don't make a normal carrot pie the same way.
I'm not really fond of either idea, to be honest. It seems like we're adding arbitrary restrictions when the tools to deal with this sort of thing are already there. If new players are having trouble using those tools, we should try to do something about that; perhaps a /follow <name> command, where your character automatically follows another character until you click the mouse again, if that's feasible. I'm also concerned that clamping down on one form of griefing will only lead to other forms taking its place. It's hard to say whether picking people off is any worse than killing all the animals in town, or stealing diesel engines.
If we are going down this path though, maybe each murder could require and use up a tool slot? That puts some restriction on career killers at least, and it means you can still threaten outsiders since no one really knows how many kills you have left in you. It also means you only have to keep track of one number.
Just saying, if the main point is to get rid of the beans you don't have to use a full stack of cooked tortillas either. Put one on a plate and add the beans for one burrito per bowl. That way you don't have to break your yum chain.
Dang, that's a lot of food for one pumpkin. 13 pips per bite, 8 bites per pie, 4 pies per custard, that's 416 altogether! I think OHOL has a new staple food item.
Sounds like a good idea, for all the reasons stated. It also means that a community will have to rely on new blood to advance in technology, which feels right and might help to make advancement more gradual than it currently is. I usually get roped into doing one thing for most of my life anyway, so it probably won't be changing my personal experience all that much, outside of the larger framework of people interacting more and so on.
One suggestion, maybe you should require the player to hold Shift in order to learn a skill? Since each skill is a permanent fixture, it'll be important to minimize misclicks that set them in place. The fact that you have to interact with a specific tool first helps, but I think I'd still be paranoid about it.
As someone confronting this issue for the first time, I think the keyword might be: deprioritize. Try to focus on making and consuming the efficient foods first, and leave the rest for an emergency. I'll admit that carrots, fresh corn, and green beans are a regular part of my early diet in the game right now; I'll try to change that and see how it goes.
Still, it would be crazy to avoid eating any one of those when the alternative is to break your yum chain, unless it's not all that high in the first place. I'm sure those of you telling everyone to avoid these foods already know this, but that's what's going through my head as I read the arguments. It's just so easy to go over and grab a carrot when you can't find anything else close by.
Also, the foods are appealing when you are young because your hunger bar is smaller and many of the higher value foods would be better used on adults. Is it more efficient to go through a yum cycle or two with bread, berries, and popcorn, than to turn to the other raw foods?
I liked being able to return to recognizable areas of the map and seeing how they changed over time.
I liked most of the lives I lived. The only kind of griefing that really got to me was being born in an enclosed space with no way to get out and a dwindling food supply, but that only happened once. Being forced to live as a nomad in a mad max world certainly would have gotten old after a few days, but it was an interesting change of pace at the time.
I liked that I was forced to think about the game on a meta level, though if I hadn't already signed up for the forums I may have been turned off to it instead.
I liked seeing towns that had walls built around them. Some of the mechanics around this need to be improved so people don't get trapped inside, and aesthetically I'd like to see something other than fences play this role, but its a cool feature nonetheless.
Twisted said it was "same-y" toward the end, with everyone living in fenced towns with plenty of resources. That doesn't sound like nomadic scrounging to me.
I think the nomadic lifestyles came later, after the scarcity of juniper trees made it impossible for some players to advance past basic farming (thankfully there were still plenty of bowls laying around). I know I only started being born into those lives in the last day or two.
Pages: 1