Sign in to follow this  
mrmorlanius

Empty corpse release

Recommended Posts

As Libila followers we have this new ability to consume corpses which is great however it seems a little off for an evil character to have to ask the permission of someone to consume their corpse and doesn't really fit into the whole feel of the BL thing, therefor I propose a small change that would be great for Libila followers and should be very easy to implement. 

 

When a corpse is looted by its owner there is no need for the corpse to be protected any more, the real concern is the items in the corpse. I propose that the corpse, once empty, should auto release. The owner can still take it with them, someone come along and bury it or a Libila follower can consume or butcher it.

 

I think this would also make the whole experience smoother too as it can be a little jarring, for example;

I'm an evil guy and been out fighting, injured, tired and running for my life I see a corpse on the ground, "YES" the person came back and took their belongings and I need to heal.

<tries to grab or consume corpse and get permission blocked>

 

 

What do other people think? I think this would be a very simple thing to implement and with the new changes to Libila it seems like a loose end that got forgotten about.

 

 

 

~Morl

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a Vyn follower, I also disagree. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a CornyDog follower, I believe that all corpses should disappear on death.

 

I actually agree with this post.

Edited by Dadadah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a Fo priest and I don't care

  • Cat 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From a game play standpoint, some players like to make gravestones of their corpses.

 

From an RP standpoint, players would rather not be eaten or butchered. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I started out as BL on Epic in 2012. I loved the idea of butchering my own corpse and making meals out of it.


It probably was the best definition of "self-sufficiency" I've seen in a game, with a dark humour twist on it. That being said, Empty corpses should have no owner.

 

Another buggy think I hate is that sometimes when I hunt I kill a troll in a forest then I can't pick up its corpse, guess what? Someone put a random token in the middle of the forest without building anything. My fair kill. Can't bury the troll, can't pick up my own arrows, etc. Can we stop it with the exagerrated protectionism ?

 

The more you protect players' "belongings" the more irresponsible they become. Remove a few things and see how responsible people become about their own stuff.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Beastwolf said:

As a Mag follower, I disagreee.

Why, how would it affect you as a mag follower?

 

 

 

3 hours ago, Kelody said:

From a game play standpoint, some players like to make gravestones of their corpses.

 

From an RP standpoint, players would rather not be eaten or butchered. :)

 

There would be nothing to stop people from making gravestones, nothing about that would change, in fact very little would change at all and most people probably wouldn't even notice. Most corpses just get left laying about after the items are taken from it so this would actually help clean up too as a fringe benefit.

 

And from an RP standpoint, what difference would it make? if you don't want someone to butcher your corpse its easy enough to bury it, possibly get a coin, get some positive alignment (if thats your thing). You could even just take it with you to bury later or put in a gravestone burial as Beastwolf mentioned above. Also I think that most players don't really care what happens to their corpse once they have their belongings back.

 

~Morl

 

 

Edited by mrmorlanius
missed a spot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, elentari said:

Another buggy think I hate is that sometimes when I hunt I kill a troll in a forest then I can't pick up its corpse, guess what? Someone put a random token in the middle of the forest without building anything. My fair kill. Can't bury the troll, can't pick up my own arrows, etc. Can we stop it with the exagerrated protectionism ?

 

The more you protect players' "belongings" the more irresponsible they become. Remove a few things and see how responsible people become about their own stuff.

 

Maybe pay attention to your surroundings? The tiles can be examined and you get a nifty event message when you're on a deed. I have had many deeds that were just nature preserves because that is quite simply the only way to protect the forests that give my deed the feel it has. Otherwise there is no way to be sure someone won't come along and sand the whole thing to try and recreate madmax.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, CreZ said:

 

Maybe pay attention to your surroundings? The tiles can be examined and you get a nifty event message when you're on a deed. I have had many deeds that were just nature preserves because that is quite simply the only way to protect the forests that give my deed the feel it has. Otherwise there is no way to be sure someone won't come along and sand the whole thing to try and recreate madmax.

My experience with that unfortunately was on Deliverance recently. Found a champ troll in an olive forest. I scouted with my mouse for any buildings or walls. Nada.

 

So I proceed to archer the foul beast and then retrieve my arrows. "Stealing is against the law here". I run around and find a token in the middle of nowhere. .... Yay. Arrows gone. Some were 50-70 ql. RIP.

 

I just love how "ownership" transfers to the troll and then to the deed. Otherwise I usually pay a lot of attention to surroundings. But tokens are pretty small items viewed from a distance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps an exception needs making for arrows and kills could have some kind of variable set to who the corpse belongs to but that would be a matter of rewriting a lot of permissions code and out of the scope of what I'm suggesting here.

 

The idea I have here would be a much smaller change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this