Space Inside Houses

[eql]

I think we'd all prefer freeform building. Sadly, it's not really doable at the moment.

Like URW's way of building walls one by one then building a ceiling square by square?

I like the idea of Freeform building. Although it would suck if someone made the HUGEST HOUSE OVER9000. haha.

[Laremere]

I think a good solution would be to limit houses to be rectangle, and you get to chose the size and building materials. The better building materials you have, the bigger the maximum size of the building you can build. Additionally, you could chose where to build doors, and also build another building next to said building and have a door go between the two buildings.

[sabinati]

Mostly though I think it's just that a single log cabin isn't really suitable for storing the majority of any single hearthlings tools and possessions, and I don't think that's unreasonable, the solution is bigger buildings both outside and in.

yeah a log cabin should be small, suitable for one person to live in as a hermit, or for some kind of hunting outpost or something like that. the real solution is bigger buildings. you wouldn't really see log cabins in cities, you see modest stone or brick or wood + stucco houses and a few larger communal buildings and industry specific buildings.

[theTrav]

I think a good solution would be to limit houses to be rectangle, and you get to chose the size and building materials. The better building materials you have, the bigger the maximum size of the building you can build. Additionally, you could chose where to build doors, and also build another building next to said building and have a door go between the two buildings.

Even limiting to rectangle, changing the dimensions of the roof could make for some fun times drawing.
This may be one area for them to try experimenting with full on 3d assets for drawing houses.

Mostly though I think making larger or smaller rectangles wouldn't really satisfy too many people. What I'd like to see is some sort of mechanic for "architecting" a house, where you place the walls and doors, and then once you've finished you get a "blueprint" which can be used to create building sites.
Once you've finished building you find out whether your design was sound or not as the house either stays up, or crumbles in a big heap of materials (maybe lose some or a lot depending on how bad the design was)

[Frelock]

Once you've finished building you find out whether your design was sound or not as the house either stays up, or crumbles in a big heap of materials (maybe lose some or a lot depending on how bad the design was)

This could be easily achieved using the old dwarf fortress requirement; if there's a 7x7 area with no support, it collapses. However, this means you'd have to include the ability to build pillars and supports. Personally, I'd suggest an architecture skill to do as you described, and with it, you'd get a check to see if your design is stable enough before you build it (possibly influenced by your intelligence). If it would collapse, and your check succeeds, you get a warning before you build it. It doesn't take much to look at a blueprint and say "there's no way this will stand" for some constructions.

[Jackard]

Question: Should houses have larger areas available indoors than they actually take up space in the main world?

nah. i never really cared for the pocket dimension housing in games, i'd rather there just be a variety of buildings.

sides, isnt that what cellars are for?

ps. i am assuming mines will no longer be allowed in houses with the new map, since they are becoming similar to wells

[kriogenik]

It would be nice to be able to upgrade the houses
the bigger the better ^^

[VoodooDog]

"Question: Should houses have larger areas available indoors than they actually take up space in the main world?"

sure; like in fallout3, broken sword, zelda, mystic quest and so on.

[Yolan]

[Jackard]

mystic quest is literally the worst final fantasy game