On foraging for food ...

[musashi]

I was thinking ... would it make a bit more sense if every class could forage for food in the wastes the same way they can forage for other stuff ... but rangers were much much more likely to find it, or maybe only rangers had the chance of finding water through such a means?

While on that topic, a ranger-only "forage water" type command might be nice so that you didn't end up running through 27 roots/grubs/sandhoppers/locusts in search of something with moisture in it.

[Clearsighted]

I was thinking ... would it make a bit more sense if every class could forage for food in the wastes the same way they can forage for other stuff ... but rangers were much much more likely to find it, or maybe only rangers had the chance of finding water through such a means?

While on that topic, a ranger-only "forage water" type command might be nice so that you didn't end up running through 27 roots/grubs/sandhoppers/locusts in search of something with moisture in it.

A forage water command would be terrific.

[brytta.leofa]

I was thinking ... would it make a bit more sense if every class could forage for food in the wastes the same way they can forage for other stuff ... but rangers were much much more likely to find it, or maybe only rangers had the chance of finding water through such a means?

I strongly support every class being able to attempt everything, but with very minimal chances for success where appropriate.

[Ammut]

I was thinking ... would it make a bit more sense if every class could forage for food in the wastes the same way they can forage for other stuff ... but rangers were much much more likely to find it, or maybe only rangers had the chance of finding water through such a means?

While on that topic, a ranger-only "forage water" type command might be nice so that you didn't end up running through 27 roots/grubs/sandhoppers/locusts in search of something with moisture in it.

A forage water command would be terrific.

I agree, although you shouldn't be able to find water everywhere.  Groves of trees or areas filled with numerous shrubs would be the obvious spots to look.

[AmandaGreathouse]

I was thinking ... would it make a bit more sense if every class could forage for food in the wastes the same way they can forage for other stuff ... but rangers were much much more likely to find it, or maybe only rangers had the chance of finding water through such a means?

I strongly support every class being able to attempt everything, but with very minimal chances for success where appropriate.

This one exactly. Though I'm slightly more in favor of having you pick skills that you're good at rather than classes, let you have a shitty chance to do other stuff, but letting all the skills, the ones you chose, and the others, increase with practice. Makes no sense that you can't even -look- for food unless you are a ranger.

[fourTwenty]

I was thinking ... would it make a bit more sense if every class could forage for food in the wastes the same way they can forage for other stuff ... but rangers were much much more likely to find it, or maybe only rangers had the chance of finding water through such a means?

I strongly support every class being able to attempt everything, but with very minimal chances for success where appropriate.

This, This like a motherfucker!
I strongly believe that every class should get almost every skill and just cap them off at a moderate level.
Ex. The ranger who hunts all his life should eventually be able to haggle a bit
Ex. The warrior who guards somebody everyday from 'Nak to Luirs and back should eventually be able to see some of the shit hiding in the sand

I believe this kind of thing has already been done with skills such as shield use and ride. Why stop there?

[Bilanthri]

It's thoughts like the afore mentioned that have caused me to really look deeply at my choice in subguild. No longer do I see it as a way to garner as many skills as I can, creating MUD Munchkins, but rather a way to refine a class based character into something unique.

The warrior/hunter who tromps around in the brush hunting and shooting and skinning makes a perfectly believable ranger archtype (even if they do get lost in a storm).
The pickpocket/con artist who spends all day in the marketplace makes a very effective merchant/dealer.

I do understand that people are looking for in game mutability, but at least with the choice in subguild, one can determine some of that character variability in the creation process.


And all this pseudo-classless, skill-based free form hippie-gaming sentiment makes me think of a particular Steve Jackson game.....what was that called? Starts with a G. 

[musashi]

Well, I enjoy the guild/subguild system, and don't overly mind the fact that without staff intervention and a really good IC reason, skills outside of the ones provided by that combination won't be available to your character.

I'm also pretty cool with non-skill abilities possessed by certain guilds/subguilds. (Like rangers not getting lost in the dark/a sandstorm - or quitting in the wilderness ... ... actually to be honest it seems like rangers are the only guild that has non-skill abilities but that's probably just my inexperience as a player talking)

But sometimes I do think that those non-skill abilities could be spread around a bit more. To me, a non-ranger type living in Under Tuluk for the majority of their life is probably pretty good at not getting lost in the dark too ... and that warrior/hunter combo you mentioned should probably know what roots he can and can't get away with eating, if he's spent a lot of time romping around through the brush.

Everything should be examined on a case by case basis obviously, but in this instance I don't think it would severely unbalance the game or kill anyone if non-rangers had a chance of finding some tubers growing in the scrub as well, while they're out there grebbing for rocks and wood.

[Shiroi Tsuki]

I think it would rock if nonrangers could forage for food, but would have a lower chance to find anything, and some of the things they did find would be either inedible or poison.  Part of the logic behind rangers finding food in the wilderness is that they know what is good to eat out there.  It would follow that other folks' finding food in the wilderness would not be as clued in to whether that root they found is going to cause them to vomit blood or not.

[FantasyWriter]

Maybe forage food should be added to subguilds hunter and scavenger. (italicized for a reason)
Both of these would make sense to me.  

Also there are some spawning objects in game, that are the same/similar to "forage food' items.
I think adding more of these to appropriate areas would, IMHO, solve the issue without any guild/subguild code changes.

One of these Items in particular should be able to be found just about anywhere where trees grow.
Some very weak (easy to kill, even for a magicker or merchant) desert rats or lizards could be added in the treeless southlands.

Maybe even just make the rats/lizards spawning food objects.
This would also solve the old playability question of what do scrabs, jozhal, etc. eat other than newbie PCs.

[musashi]

This would also solve the old playability question of what do scrabs, jozhal, etc. eat other than newbie PCs.

I think that is a perfectly sound answer that doesn't require further examination 

But I would rather everyone be able to try and forage for food, with rangers just doing it a lot better, than having more food bearing plant objects in the game. Since the world is supposed to be a lot bigger than it codedly is (and hence a lot more wildlife and vegatation than there codedly is) it strikes me as better from a world immersion point of view if you can forage in an area, rather than just having all the non-ranger playing folks memorize where the food-plants are and making their grocery shopping runs on them every time they log in.

[Tisiphone]

And all this pseudo-classless, skill-based free form hippie-gaming sentiment makes me think of a particular Steve Jackson game.....what was that called? Starts with a G. 

GURPS. There'll be no insulting my pet system on these boards.

[Bilanthri]

And all this pseudo-classless, skill-based free form hippie-gaming sentiment makes me think of a particular Steve Jackson game.....what was that called? Starts with a G. 

GURPS. There'll be no insulting my pet system on these boards.

Hee hee...we only really hurt the ones we love.