Quest givers being palisaded

[Hasta]

Genuine problem? Yes.

How is this a problem and not a claim of a person to the area he has no desire to share with others?

I'd say it's a valid action, if the person/group can sustain and upkeep all the questgivers to themselves, they're completely and absolutely in their right to do so. If someone dislikes it and wishes to challenge the situation - there are ways to do so or quite an abundance of land to resettle to.

[TerriblePerson]

Not a bug.

Genuine problem? Yes.

Programming error/oversight resulting in game behaving in unintended ways? Nope.

Moved to 'Critique & Ideas'

I guess you can debate if it's a bug or a "feature", but it blocks taking and completing quests and credos, making this part of the game unfunctional.
Sure people can say the issue is not global enough, or you can siege the pali. If it's the intended way, then fine.

[serVar161]

Currently, fencing off the quest giver with a palisade makes sense – to prevent it from being broken. It's a good tactic. The bad thing is that they don't allow access to it.

People have the right to do this, and there are solutions – social, physical. You can move. But what if everyone does this? Bad example is contagious. If all kingdoms start isolating quest givers, what should most players do?

And the same can be said about global resources. There are ways to solve the problem. However, for some reason, they were forbidden from being covered by personal claims.
(Yes, they provide many more benefits than quest givers, but everything is relative. For some, a regular quest giver is more important than a pool of salt or guano.)

There is a simple way to make isolating quest givers pointless. The only question is should everyone be able to access quest givers (like global resources) or not?
And I don't see the point in fighting against isolation by a palisade while quest givers can be easily and with impunity destroyed.

[Händler]

The actual problem I see here isn't the quest NPCs being able to be gatekept by walls, but the fact that quest NPCs even exist in the form that they do.

That being said, the smaller a pclaim, the easier it is to upkeep. A tiny claim barely enough to wall a questgiver in will last a year and still not run out of authority even if the claim owner never studies any curiosity in that time.
The actual quest givers (toads/frogs) change locations every so often, so this problem only exists for the trees, stones and what not that serve as permanent quest NPCs.

An "easy" fix (though I'm sure on the implementation side it's not quite so easy) for this would be
- for these NPCs to not remain stationary, the same as the frogs already behave like.
- remove the stationary NPCs as parts of the quests in general (cause they really aren't needed). Let quests point to random trees/stones anywhere or to other frogs instead.
- remove or rework questing entirely.

The 1 good thing about questing is that it gives an activity to do something productive even up to the lategame ad infinitum that you can always do even if you are otherwise completely covered in everything else that is material.


Utilizing my brain for under 1 second, it is very obvious that the decision to make the quest NPCs tangible, stationary, fixed to a location, they may be intended for the same purpose as anything else in the game:

To be fought over.

Same for local resources and why they added the "push" action to the game.
The reality is, nonetheless, I have never seen anyone push someone before, nor do I see anyone fight over resources. At times a village claims a local resource.
Note that you can not claim local resources with pclaims for a reason, which makes it obvious that the claiming of quest NPCs with pclaims can only be attributed to a diagnosis of a condition most grave: Developer shit-taste syndrome.


Seeing how the quest givers and resources never caused a single fight, ever, it is at least comforting to see that they are the center of fights on the forums.
May hatred fill all of our souls and torture be upon us, satan bless.

[jordancoles]

because it's fucking Ainran, their goal is to be the most insufferable scum on the continent

Just move

[vatas]

That being said, the smaller a pclaim, the easier it is to upkeep. A tiny claim barely enough to wall a questgiver in will last a year and still not run out of authority even if the claim owner never studies any curiosity in that time.
The actual quest givers (toads/frogs) change locations every so often, so this problem only exists for the trees, stones and what not that serve as permanent quest NPCs.

Smaller pclaim is easier to keep refilled, obviously. But all pclaims, when stocked full with Presence, should last around a month. The upkeep cost and the maximum Presence scale up with (at least roughly) the same ratio.

[serVar161]

Smaller pclaim is easier to keep refilled, obviously. But all pclaims, when stocked full with Presence, should last around a month. The upkeep cost and the maximum Presence scale up with (at least roughly) the same ratio.

Even one month is enough. And the total area of ​​16 plots (9х9) will be 144 x 144, approximately = 20,736. Such a land claim can be maintained indefinitely.

[gravesmerch]

quest interactions should be allowed over distance, the player view is tiny enough

theres plenty of "engaging" mechanics already in thingwalls, localized resources and roads...

[Nightdawg]

Another retarded mechanic I complained about 6 years ago and nothing has been done to fix

viewtopic.php?f=48&t=69350

back when I thought the devs cared

[Hasta]

making this part of the game unfunctional

I got a quest to talk to a boulder on cave lvl 4 and I only got down to lvl 2. GAME UNFUNCONAL DELETE ALL CAVE LEVEL BELOW 2 LITARALLY UNPOLAEBLE!!!!1

That's how you sound. Drop the quest and move on, you got bested on that particular NPC,it's not the only one and the world is huge.

Unfunctional my arse