jorb wrote:Figured it was a quite optional luxury, and that some relatively absurd cost would aid in not having random chess pieces scattered over the woodlands. Perhaps went overboard?
springyb wrote:jorb wrote:Figured it was a quite optional luxury, and that some relatively absurd cost would aid in not having random chess pieces scattered over the woodlands. Perhaps went overboard?
I think it's fine. Tafl boards could be buffed though.
And please don't let learned helplessness detract you, the 72 extra inventory slots when butchering livestock via hunters pouches are great.
HookedGrip wrote:It's not "great" it's good. If its intended for them not to accept stacked items that's fine, theres never been a clear answer though. some containers take stacks, some don't. The issue lies in that there is no clarity on what does and what doesn't similar to stockpile and stackable items.
springyb wrote:HookedGrip wrote:It's not "great" it's good. If its intended for them not to accept stacked items that's fine, theres never been a clear answer though. some containers take stacks, some don't. The issue lies in that there is no clarity on what does and what doesn't similar to stockpile and stackable items.
The issue is you've played for several years and wax is still a luxury to you.
jorb wrote:We would like items to stack in sacks, but non-trivial bc reasons(tm).
jorb wrote:Perhaps went overboard?
Users browsing this forum: Boosi, Claude [Bot], Discord [Bot], Python-Requests [Bot], Trendiction [Bot], ricky, woundteries and 46 guests