Search the Community

Statement: Please allow a more detailed permission list of different categories. For example Disallow harvesting of apples but allow everything else, kind of thing. Solution: Bring up a separate menu/window to disallow/ allow certain things. Possibilities to include in list of 'multiples' : Mine certain veins (not just iron) harvest certain fruit harvest certain crops chop down certain tree's Breed certain types of animals (regular horses, hell horses, etc...) etc... Also add option to disallow and allow like current system for people that don't like changing perms to be more in-depth.

So I was adjusting alliance settings on one of my deeds and noticed a setting for external village named Alliance Members and the other which seems to be the default role, ally for alliance members. I can't remember if I added the alliance members role or know how it got named external village. I deleted the external village role as I was uncertain what village it would be.

So I have an "External Village" role set for my friends deed on my settlement "Manage Roles" section. However I still have to manually add her village citizens/alts to the permissions menu on every single building, horse, cart, wagon, ship, etc etc etc. This is INFURIATING and a super time waster. Can you please make all "External Village" villages show up on the "Manage" under "Active Permissions" menu of everything else please? Alliances show up, so why don't added External Villages? Ideally her village would show up on the list for EVERY manage menu in the game. I click a few checkboxes next to the village name for whatever permissions I want her settlement to have access to my stuff, and I'm done! No fuss no muss. I know the permission system is new and will evolve. But I really think this was an oversight and I hope it gets added. ty

Currently for shared buildings on a deed you have to either have one person handle adding and removing people from writs OR you have to share the password of a writ holder with multiple people, neither of which is practical. Logging characters in and out in order to access the one who holds the writs is bothersome and if only one person has access to them people may become locked out of something they need if that person is away. Handing your password to others also exposes you to the possibility of account theft and vandalism for which you're held personally responsible in accordance with the game rules. The suggestion: Create a "Writ binder" that is a permissions group tied to the settlement token. How it works: - When a writ is part of the deed an entry of it is spawned in the writ binder -- The entries in the writ binder have the same functionality as you would have when holding the writ, including the ability to be able to attach a lock to the door - A permission check for handling the binder is included (which could be included either in the roles themselves OR at a management page of the binder only accessible to the mayor) - Different binder groups can be created, ex. "Resources", "Bedding" and different roles may have access to all, parts or none of the binder groups How to use it: - The mayor decides which roles should be allowed to handle the different binder groups -- Writs are placed in a standard binder group and may then be moved into a player created group -- Roles with access to the binder may also be given the ability to hand others binder access or to create binder groups, for example - To add or remove someone to a writ (or any of the other writ functions) you visit the token and choose the "Writ binder" option -- The binder then presents you with a window that displays the binder groups that you have access to and the writs that belong to them. The writs in each group are listed in alphabetical order and you choose which one you want to manage, which opens up a regular writ management window

The "Build" permission is not consistently applied to 2nd storey walls. After receiving the build permission on an alt's deed and being added as a guest to the writ for a stucture I was allowed to plan 4 walls on the second storey but forbidden to plan 4 others. I was able to actually start construction on the 4 planned walls and even finished one of them. The error message on the forbidden walls was: [21:19:59] Death Valley does not allow that. These are ordinary wooden walls planned with a wooden mallet. Some are on the edge of the writ footprint but others are not. The ground storey exterior walls are complete. I was able to plan and build the floors for the 2nd storey. Holding the writ did not help. You can see the current state of the structure in this screen shot - http://imgur.com/XO4DoTB I experienced the same or similar difficulty with an alt working on a structure on my own deed about 6 months ago. So far I haven't been able to figure out what is different between the walls that were allowed and those that were forbidden. My expectation is that either all planning be allowed or none. Half and half doesn't make sense to me.

Lets see if I can articulate this. I own (2) deeds, my main is a mayor of one deed (Deed A) and I have an alt who is the mayor of my second deed (Deed . I have always had "Deed A" added to the roles for "Deed B" with pretty much everything important checked to do chores and expand. I don't maintain the deeds with the alts, I use my main. I have noticed today that I could not do something post-role enhancements. When trying to Destroy a tree stump on Deed B for a tree that I cut down, I get the "That would be very bad for your karma and is disallowed on this server." message. After reading the descriptions of the new roles a number of times, I started to systematically check the roles that were not checked one at a time via my alt-mayor for Deed B. If it didnt work, I unchecked it and moved on. What I found to work is selecting the "Manage Roles" check-box. I can now destroy a tree stump on deed. Destroying a tree stump isn't a show-stopper for me, what concerns me is what else does "Manage Roles" unlock and why would Destroy for a tree stump be tied in with Manage Roles? Thanks for reading and PM me if you need further clarification (GM's, that is) Weatherwax -Exodus Server

I had started this a while ago, power surge killed my post, so no i'm taking up the ddos time to make this again. I guess we can agree that many of the village settings and such are kinda broken, or simply dumb (sorry but its true). The idea behind this thread is to make a comprehensive suggestion about changes to the overall village permissions and roles so we can have a bit better control on what happens inside our deeds. I'd like you guys to help out and don't just post -1, if you disagree with a point or all the points, do explain why (and "i want to grief people" isn't a good point). When you post try to be clear, like discuss stuff addressing each point, and separate suggestions and additions to counter arguments for changes already added. Read other people's posts please, i'll try to add suggestions (and if a mod chips in would be great) as soon as at least 3-5 other users agree to them (users with less than 50 posts will be excluded, i mean alt posts aren't welcome). Some of these also come from other player's suggestions, i'll post a link if i can find them: Taming and picking items Problem: So this is probably the dumbest thing someone ever thought up in wurm. I'm sorry devs, but there's really no way to put it. Why in god's green earth would you associate allowing people to tame a animal within our deed with picking stuff from the ground? And why did it have to be made a GLOBAL setting. To allow a ally to tame you have to allow EVERYONE to tame, and at the same time allow EVERYONE to pickup stuff from the ground on your deed. Suggestion: Separate those two settings for starters, then add them as a role permission, instead of a global thing. This will address several problems at once. First you'll fix the nonsense that is that setting. Second you'll allow people to give tame and pickup permissions either globally (by ticking non-citizens), locally or even select which level of citizenship (if they have many) is allowed to do so. Third you add the choice for people to disallow allies to pickup stuff on their deeds. Not the first time i've seen someone complain, or KOS a ally because a new player "stole" stuff from a allied deed. Set Roles by player name Problem: Sometimes you want a guy to do something in your deed (be it hired help, or whatever), but he already has a village. So what can you do? You either allow everyone in that village to do that task, or allow everyone to do that ask. Both potentially allowing people you don't know, or don't want, to do stuff on your deed. Suggestion: Keep the system as is, but change the village field to village or player (if there's a problem with unique entries, maybe add a toggle button between player and village). The pretty much the same, if the game encounters the name, it creates the role for that specific person. Filter Village Roles Problem: When you add a village to your deed's permissions as a role. You essentially add EVERYONE in that village to do those settings. But sometimes villages have new players on probation that they don't know yet which have reduced permissions, and yet those players will have all those permissions in your deed even if they can't do them on theirs. Its complicated, so here's an example: Player1 of DeedA is longtime friends with Player2 and Player3 of DeedB, so he has open permissions for them to cut wood, farm, dig and mine on his deed, because he knows them, and that they respect his things. Now Player2 wants to do a big terraform project, so he recruits Noob1 to his deed so he can help out with that. But since he doesn't know Noob1 and doesn't want Noob1 to ruin his oak grove, or any of the other stuff he only gives Noob1 permission to Dig in his deed, and nothing else. Noob 1 frustrated he can't get wood from DeedB keeps trying till he gets to DeedA, and basically is able to clearcut the place "cause he wantes some skillz". Not a pretty scenario, right? Suggestion: Do a check on player's permissions on their deeds before allowing on other deeds. If DeedA allows DeedB to cut trees, ok, but if Noob1 can't cut trees on DeedB, then he can't cut trees on DeedA either. Gate Management Problem: Since trolls and such were allowed to enter locked gates, the way gate management works has been left kind of obsolete. The way it apparently worked was if you "opened" them 24h on gate permissions, even if you had them locked they would count as unlocked for all intents and purposes. Which sucks. In my case i had a portion of my deed enclosed in tall stone, with gates open 24h so that players passing by would have a safe place to rest. Also, my mailbox, and water source are within those walls. Since the change happened i had to remove the 24 open thing so that i wouldn't get unwanted trolls bashing my priests while he was near the altar. And i'm sure i'm not the only one that changed this. Also there's the overall issue of how gates work. The gate management page basically either opens it for everyone or not, and the pass fences setting that either allows people to pass all your locked gates or not. We should be allowed to have more control over those things without having to resort to roundabout measures like building gatehouses. Solution: Well i can think of a few: - Remove the gate permission page from the writ and have each gate manageable individually (more or less like mine doors) when on deed. But instead of adding names you could have a check box like the house guest list that would show all roles on the deed so you could check which have access. This would be ideal IMO. - Keep the gate permission page, but modify it so that you can have more control. Add a new role option for "access selected gates" and then on the gates management page add a "select gate" check box. -Keep the gate permissions exactly as it is, but if it has a lock, then aggressive creatures will treat it as locked. Less desirable IMO. Add Lock Permission Got this idea from http://forum.wurmonline.com/index.php?/topic/91622-locking-items-restricted-to-writ-guest-only/ Problem: At the moment anyone that can walk into your deed can lock stuff that belongs to you. And on freedom you can't pick them. Solution: Either disallow it entirely on deed, add a role option on deed to allow locking of containers, or only disallow it inside houses, but allow it for guests. Wild Growth Problem: Having a Fo priest that doesn't belong to your deed cast Wild Growth on trees or Hedges within your deed keeps giving a error message, and apparently failing (although i read someone saying it would work after several attempts). Solution: Allow Wild growth in general, or link wild growth to forestry permissions on deed. So if you give permissions to do forestry to someone they can also cast wild growth. Expanded Branding: I've had these ideas throughout a few threads about several distinct issues, but i'll cover them here. So branding was a awesome addition to village settings, but imo it can be taken further on, here's some suggestions: Naming animals: Either add a equipable item (nametag or something) that when reamed and equiped on an animal (head or torso) will add a title to that animal. Title should be visible when examining offspring for breeding purposes (knowing who are the parents of a certain calf for example so you don't cross breed). Or add a option to name un-named animals (not horses) when branding. Pop up window with input box saying "You have branded venerable fat cow to your deed, do you wish to name it?". The name would be added as a title-like thing (So in this case Venerable fat cow [bessie]) and would show on examine of their offspring. Simmilar Suggestion Here. Allow villagers of the brand-deed to equip and unequip animals without having to tame and re-tame. Brand is already a testament of ownership. And taming is possible for non-deed members. Disallow non-brand deeds to equip and unequip animals (or maybe add a role option). Make branded agressive animals neutral to deed owners and allies (in and out of their village), as well as guards (unless at war or kos, or maybe a added checkbox on deed settings for guards not to attack branded animals). This would make templars more useful for breeders (although probably branded offspring would need to be auto-branded) of agressive animals as well as allow better use of hellhorses on PvP (including for hots). That's about it as far as i can remember, please comment and leave more suggestions.