Kinning Villages

[Jackard]

Villages could have a kinlist with permissions accessible from the idol by "officers". All "members" would show
up here, allowing removal of offline players and promoting/demoting by color permissions. Might be an effective
way of allowing allied villages.

2011 edit:
Villages should use icons instead of colors for setting territory permissions and authority abilities, that way the
opinions of both you and your village can be displayed at the same time

Possible Icons
banner/flag <-- current villager icon
skull
crown
knife
shield
heart
laurel
cross
coin
leaf
pig
etc

Basic Permissions
Options for normal claims and village claims. In the event there are conflicting normal and village
permissions, the normal should take priority as they are more localized.

[ ] Allow [color] to enter claim <-- Only for normal claims.
[ ] Allow [color] to collect resources
[ ] Allow [color] to use containers
[ ] Allow [color] to use objects
[ ] Allow [color] to remove objects
[ ] Allow [color] to destroy objects
[ ] Allow [color] to build on claim

[ ] Allow [color] to use gates <-- Replaces (abstracts) keys, with optional timed levers.
[ ] Allow [color] to use strongboxes

Advanced Permissions
Options for village claims only. Many of these cost authority, all changes are logged into the village
history along with the date, name and icon of the player that made the change.

[ ] Notify [icon] when villagers login
[ ] Notify [icon] when permissions change <-- And who edited them
[ ] Deny [icon] from entering village
[ ] Deny [icon] from using crossroads
[ ] Allow [icon] to use charterstone for Travel
[ ] Allow [icon] to use village chat
[ ] Allow [icon] to set chat topic
[ ] Allow [icon] to view kinlist
[ ] Allow [icon] to view village history <-- Keep a log of all government actions
[ ] Allow [icon] to describe player <-- Add players to the village kinlist without inviting them.
[ ] Allow [icon] to invite player
[ ] Allow [icon] to remove player
[ ] Allow [icon] to stake claim
[ ] Allow [icon] to destroy scents <-- Which ones this applies to is up for debate.
[ ] Allow [icon] to delete objects
[ ] Allow [icon] to set player icon
[ ] Allow [icon] to [DIFFERENT GOVERNMENT OPTIONS] <-- authority abilities and government buildings
[ ] Allow [icon] to modify permissions <-- Change which icons can do what.
[ ] Allow [icon] to designate a successor to their permissions
[ ] Allow [icon] to reincarnate with their permissions
etc

[Chakravanti]

If this could also somehow be tied not only to the idol...but to individual authority objects...like statues. Such that you can allow people access to only specific parts of your village. Would work especially well with satellite claims.

[Chakravanti]

this post is no longer relevant.

[Onionfighter]

I don't know what the deal with banana peels is, but sounds good to me.

[Jackard]

I've asked for this before, but now we are making a new and even bigger city, its very necessary for the sanity of those in charge.

We need people to be able to apply for village membership, leaving their name on a list which can be accessed at all times by the lawspeaker-chieftain. Either of these two should then be able to add new people (or remove existing people) without directly clicking on their avatar.

I rank this request as ++++++++ URGENT +++++++++

Pretty much the thing I want before anything else. For the sake of enabling this 'emergent complexity' ideal Devs, please please please...

http://www.havenandhearth.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=5598

Players could request membership when clicking on the idol, leaving their name, allowing those with permissions to invite them even while offline.

[Jackard]

This change would allow players a much more flexible and possibly interesting system than the current lawspeaker/chieftan/hirdsman/member hierarchy.

[Killface]

This. All of this. Cheers.












Also... Keyrings.

[Potjeh]

This change would allow players a much more flexible and possibly interesting system than the current lawspeaker/chieftan/hirdsman/member hierarchy.

Especially if you combine it with Chakravanti's idea. So, the lawspeaker could assign someone to handle mine access right, another person for field access right etc.

[Jackard]

Especially if you combine it with Chakravanti's idea. So, the lawspeaker could assign someone to handle mine access right, another person for field access right etc.

I updated the OP with something I feel works better than tying them to individual authority objects.

Also... Keyrings.

ill smack you

[McGriddles]

[ ] Allow [color] to use gates <-- With the addition of gatelevers?[/list]

So the gatelevers are magic or something?