• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Reylaark last won the day on August 6 2012

Reylaark had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

764 Excellent

About Reylaark

  • Rank
  • Birthday 07/04/17

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Texas, US of A


  • Epic
  • Xan
  1. Thank you for the correction I think the difficulty is part of the compromise. It's not magically protected by GM's anymore, but is likely not worth running around wrecking highways just to grief people. Point being though, if you plow through a neighborhood without any regard for others, they do have a recourse of their own initiative. I hear ya, and I'm all for nothing in Wurm being permanent. Welcome to Wurm btw . The difficulty in destroying things, I think, is to prevent wanton griefing. That mine someone wants to make public may well be someone's home, or just a hideout but still with items they value. It's probably not easy finding the right compromise between making it hard enough to destroy so people can feel like building something is worth it... and yet still make it feasible to alter it if doing so is really worthwhile/needed.
  2. Never liked the old highway rules. A player-driven, mechanical solution has long been my preference and I'm happy to see one come to fruition. If deemed too unsightly, there is the option of not using them and counting on the road's usefulness to the community for survival. After all, roads should be planned in such a way that the entire surrounding community wants it. If I understand what you said, @Ayes , it will still require GM approval to make changes. Therefore, it is still possible for one individual with a shovel and bricks to make unilateral decisions affecting an entire community by paving large swaths of wilderness, and subsequently have GM protection. Anyone who doesn't like the cats eyes is not required to use them, but they then may have to live with the notion that their unilateral decision to pave large swaths of wilderness may not ultimately be up to them alone. Personally, I think that's how the entire system should work anyway, without tacit protections. Ultimately, I would prefer to see the cats eyes be removable without GM intervention, but at significant investment to the one removing them. That way, it's not a simple matter of griefing. People like to say if we don't want a highway plowing through our backyard, we should deed it. Yet someone paving through it at no cost has instant GM protection. To me, that is what should be revisited. Not that it may now require a bit more work if expecting ultimate protection for unilateral decisions at no cost. Crossed out section that does not apply after Retro's correction.
  3. Not a biggie at all. Was wondering this morning if it's ever confusing for new players that a lot of veggies (and cotton/wemp) have a "pick seed" option, but pumpkins have "crush." Add to that wemp crushing gives fibre, as opposed to wemp pick seed. I would imagine crushing a pumpkin would give me pumpkin fibre/crushed pumpkin. If only for the sake of consistency, I propose a minor cosmetic change in the menu language from "crush" to "pick seeds" for pumpkins to bring it in line with other items.
  4. As the title says, suggestion to allow TAKE command to work on the contents of an equipped backpack or satchel just as it functions for anything else. I have TAKE bound to Q. Still after all these years, I open up my backpack and try to use Q to move something into my main inventory. IRL, I take stuff out of backpacks all the time. Sometimes even from my own. I don't think this would have any negative effects on how anyone operates currently. Changes nothing except for those who would like to make use of the functionality. Thank you much
  5. I like the idea and maybe 30 deep water is enough of a limitation... but I'd really like to keep wild, pitch black, disorienting parts of the world you're not sure you'll make it out of. In other words, +1 as I don't want to -1, but with the caveat that it's done within some realm of reason and we don't wind up with Disney under the sea. Disney's great, but I'd take a Hemingway ocean in Wurm every time. Just makes it more interesting to me. I love dark tunnels of insane length with only my lantern to light it, hoping I don't run out of tar, never sure what's further down. I might be somewhat extreme, but I use this site when dreaming of travel IRL: so yeah, I'd always vote to limit light pollution in Wurm.
  6. Welcome to Wurm, Letter! I don't know if Vanna White is still handing you out, but I'd buy you a vowel. I presume you have found the subforum: Also, I don't think I saw Mootred represented in there (I didn't look that hard), but just in case: Sounds like you're off to a great start. I'd also imagine you have found the best reading material ever created for bathroom breaks, metro rides, office meetings, etc. : Have fun, don't let the crocs bite.
  7. What's to say I wasn't the first one off?
  8. I'm confused, offended, and angry! This is a really cool idea though, loved Planetside 2 and a medieval take on it would be really cool. Viking invasion of England type of thing. I think Gloria Victis is maybe trying, but it lacks a lot of what I really like about Wurm. No idea if this should be implemented or not, but Wurm rocks and Planetside 2 was fun... rocks+fun can't be wrong.
  9. ^ +1
  10. 20c + a free cart wash** **wheels not included. Void where prohibited. Expires August 4, 2013. Not redeemable Mon-Sun. This is not the coupon you are looking for.
  11. you mean, if there's no adjacent floor tile to match? What about matching the wall(s) opposite the paved corner? Not sure anyone would like how that would look. Trying to picture it in mind, but just tossing it out there as a thought.
  12. 5c
  13. Really like how natural that path looks! Looks like a great place to travel.