Wear Locations Idea

[Rhyden]

I got an idea for wearing locations.

Since, I don't really enjoy looking at characters wearing a whole page of equipment, I was thinking it'd be nice if wearing locations were more realistic. Instead of having all wear locations visible minus body, waist and belt while wearing something about and rings while wearing something on your hands, it would be a lot nicer if there were more wear locations that hid different types of equipment. For example, you have a really expensive necklace that you like wearing but would rather not seen by everyone else. With the current wear location system, you can't wear a necklace about your throat, under your shirt and cloak. So why not be able to wear your necklace about your throat then wear your shirt on your body to cover it up? If you'd rather wear your necklace over your shirt, wear the shirt first then the necklace. This could also work for things worn on ankles, wrists and shoulders.

Eg.

Code Select Expand


>wear necklace
>wear shirt

>wear bracelet
>wear sleeves

>wear pouch
>wear pants

equip
You are using:
<worn about neck> a necklace
<worn on torso> a shirt    
<worn around body>  a large cloak
<worn on arms> some sleeves
<worn on wrist> a bracelet
<worn on legs> a pair of pants
<worn on ankle> a pouch
<worn on feet> a pair of boots        

look self
Some guy is in excellent condition:

<worn around body>  a large cloak
<worn on arms> some sleeves
<worn on legs> a pair of pants
<worn on feet> a pair of boots


And if you'd rather wear your necklace, bracelet and pouch over your clothes, wear the shirt, sleeves and pants first then necklace, bracelet and pouch after.

Don't know how difficult this would be to code, but it seems like it could work.

Discuss.

[Maybe42or54]

I like it. I do.

[Maybe42or54]

Do you suggest that it works with backpacks and cloaks as well?

To have the backpack easily accessable you need to wear the cloak first, and the pack second?

And vice versa?

[Rhyden]

Yeah, that'd be awesome too.

I also forgot forearms, sleeves could cover that.

And as well, it'd be nice if cloaks, shirts and sleeves could cover shoulder tattoos. I hate seeing people's tats on their shoulders when they got a huge cloak on.

[Zharal]

I like this as well, it be nice to be able to hide areas that would be covered. Tattoos seem to have a problem
with this too.  If you wear a cloak with long sleeves, it should cover your arms and possibly wrist.  Not that
you cant possibly notice armor under the cloak, but it would be nice to cover tattoos on the back, forearms
and shoulders.  Not to mention the sheath strapped to your forearm that a lot of times you would not see.

[Seeker]

It might make the peek command suddenly ultra-powerful in comparision to look.  And there would certainly be debates about those pesky dull black gems.

It would take some work, I think.  Likely every single wearable item would have to be carefully read and evaluated, and new fields added for every location not just that it could be worn at, but that it might cover.

Interesting, though, and I like most of the effects.


Seeker

[FightClub]

Sure it would be similar to the covering of tattooes or scars.

[Falconer]

Fantastic idea and one, I think, that will only serve to further roleplaying.  One change I'd suggest would be that use of the eq command should place an asterisk (*) by every piece of clothing or jewelry that has been obscured by another layer.

Code Select Expand

equip
You are using:
<worn about neck> a necklace*
<worn on torso> a shirt  
<worn around body>  a large cloak
<worn on arms> some sleeves
<worn on wrist> a bracelet*
<worn on legs> a pair of pants
<worn on ankle> a pouch*
<worn on feet> a pair of boots  

That would, I believe, solve a number of issues that could crop up in terms of RP.  "My mistake, Lord Templar, I didn't realize that my gem/token/et al was hidden by my puffy shirt!"  After the five hundredth time, that would quickly grow iresome.

[Larrath]

Items could be hidden or unhidden based on the item type and wear location.  While it's possible to wear a necklace and hide it, wearing a gorget and hiding it is a much more demanding feat.
All jewelry-type items should be possible to hide or unhide as long as objects are worn on proper slots.

Code Select Expand


Jewel              Clothing
In hair             On head
Neck/throat     About body
Shoulder            Nope
Ankle                 Feet
Waist                 Legs
Wrist                 Arms
Forearms           Nope
Fingers              Hands


Objects could be hidden using the Tuck command and be made visible only with Peek.  Only jewelry and treasure-type items under a certain weight could be hidden, and would show with (tucked in) before or after their sdesc in the command line.

About the dull black gems, either they could get some special code to prevent/discourage hiding them or gemmers could simply hide them away and kill you.

I like the idea, and as a bonus it would also allow us to wear our rings over our gloves which, really, makes more sense as it is.

[Bogre]

I think a better solution would just be to have the body, hands, and about body wear locs to have a switch from 'covered' to 'open'.

So a person wearing a cloak in covered mode would look like we currently have, and if they typed 'uncover cloak' or whatever command it would then reveal what they are wearing on their body and all.

The hands wear loc set at cover would cover up rings, while at uncovered would reveal them.

So on an so forth.