Player mounts

[Alesan]

Couldn't decide where to put this, in the end decided this was the most appropriate, considering...

When you lose hold of a mount's reins, can that mount be lost forever?

[greasygemo]

If you quit out or wander off without the reins, sure, I'd totally take it. As would most elves, hunters, tribals, tribal elven hunters etc..
Also if the game resets and your mount is sitting somewhere, that'll send it virtually into some elves stable.

[hyzhenhok]

Yes, anyone can hitch and take a mount if you are not mounted on it OR both hitched to it and in the same room as it.

However, mounts themselves will (usually) never move unless someone acts on them. If you are confident no one is going to show up and grab your mount's reins than you can relax a bit.

[Barsook]

It has happened to someone and my PC got that mount for free from a hunter who brought in.

[Alesan]

Okay. Just wondered if it was a coded thing or if it's a "don't leave it, somebody'll nab it" thing.

Good to know. Thanks. 

[Lizzie]

Okay. Just wondered if it was a coded thing or if it's a "don't leave it, somebody'll nab it" thing.

Good to know. Thanks.  

You can also return it to a stables and stable it. Syntax for that is "rent <mount>"

To get it out of the stable, have your ticket loose in your inventory (not held or wielded), and 20 coins loose in your inventory, and type "offer ticket."

If you have a couple of different types of tickets in your inventory (like a ticket to the armor tailor for example), you can "offer 2.ticket" or "offer green.ticket" (or of course you can just put the tickets you don't want, back in a bag or pack or pocket).

Other mount info that can be helpful:

Once you're mounted atop your mount, you can *title* it. Give it a name. "Title inix fudrucker"

That way, you can target your mount by name, which avoids a lot of confusion if you're in a group of people who all have mounts, and come across other people with mounts, or other animals with the same keywords.

You can hitch fudrucker, mount fudrucker, (once it's hitched, you don't have to target it at all - just type MOUNT). Rest fudrucker, rent fudrucker, pack bag fudrucker.. etc. etc.

[hyzhenhok]

It's a very good idea to put tickets in backpacks or pockets that can be closed except when you're about to use them.

[InsertCleverNameHere]

Giving your mount a name is very helpful if you're with a lot of other people who have mounts also. Just remember it has to be named every time you unstable it.

[ShaLeah]

Giving your mount a name is very helpful if you're with a lot of other people who have mounts also. Just remember it has to be named every time you unstable it.

* ShaLeah would like it if you just had to title your mount once and that would forever be its name.

[Barsook]

Giving your mount a name is very helpful if you're with a lot of other people who have mounts also. Just remember it has to be named every time you unstable it.

* ShaLeah would like it if you just had to title your mount once and that would forever be its name.

+1

[Patuk]

When you give a stablehand a ticket you don't get the same mount you returned, you just get the same species.

[Ben Arie]

When you give a stablehand a ticket you don't get the same mount you returned, you just get the same species.

[LauraMars]

When you give a stablehand a ticket you don't get the same mount you returned, you just get the same species.

It can be the same mount if you want it to be.  The code doesn't support saving hundreds of uniquely titled inixes and beetles.  There is no IC reason the title doesn't stick - it's just the way the code works.

[ShaLeah]

When you give a stablehand a ticket you don't get the same mount you returned, you just get the same species.

I just got the mental picture of the hundreds of times I've given my car to a valet... and how I'd stab him in the face if he brought me the wrong one.

I know, I know, this is Arm, not real life, still, no reason why a stablemaster wouldn't have a system to organize the mounts in accordance of arrival and departure.

* ShaLeah shakes ^me fist at the sky!

[Patuk]

When you give a stablehand a ticket you don't get the same mount you returned, you just get the same species.

It can be the same mount if you want it to be.  The code doesn't support saving hundreds of uniquely titled inixes and beetles.  There is no IC reason the title doesn't stick - it's just the way the code works.

It makes a lot more sense to me ICly, it does. Instead of saving up your single inix all this time, feeding it, giving it water, a stable can just let the inix come and go, thereby requiring less space and supplies.

Why do you think rent costs aren't proportional to staying time in the first place?

[Alesan]

Okay. Just wondered if it was a coded thing or if it's a "don't leave it, somebody'll nab it" thing.

Good to know. Thanks.  

You can also return it to a stables and stable it. Syntax for that is "rent <mount>"

To get it out of the stable, have your ticket loose in your inventory (not held or wielded), and 20 coins loose in your inventory, and type "offer ticket."

If you have a couple of different types of tickets in your inventory (like a ticket to the armor tailor for example), you can "offer 2.ticket" or "offer green.ticket" (or of course you can just put the tickets you don't want, back in a bag or pack or pocket).

Other mount info that can be helpful:

Once you're mounted atop your mount, you can *title* it. Give it a name. "Title inix fudrucker"

That way, you can target your mount by name, which avoids a lot of confusion if you're in a group of people who all have mounts, and come across other people with mounts, or other animals with the same keywords.

You can hitch fudrucker, mount fudrucker, (once it's hitched, you don't have to target it at all - just type MOUNT). Rest fudrucker, rent fudrucker, pack bag fudrucker.. etc. etc.

Yep. I read all of the help files and things I could find regarding this. Though I take it the feeding and other maintaining of said mount is virtual? Since I've not seen any mention of it anywhere.

[Feco]

Okay. Just wondered if it was a coded thing or if it's a "don't leave it, somebody'll nab it" thing.

Good to know. Thanks.  

You can also return it to a stables and stable it. Syntax for that is "rent <mount>"

To get it out of the stable, have your ticket loose in your inventory (not held or wielded), and 20 coins loose in your inventory, and type "offer ticket."

If you have a couple of different types of tickets in your inventory (like a ticket to the armor tailor for example), you can "offer 2.ticket" or "offer green.ticket" (or of course you can just put the tickets you don't want, back in a bag or pack or pocket).

Other mount info that can be helpful:

Once you're mounted atop your mount, you can *title* it. Give it a name. "Title inix fudrucker"

That way, you can target your mount by name, which avoids a lot of confusion if you're in a group of people who all have mounts, and come across other people with mounts, or other animals with the same keywords.

You can hitch fudrucker, mount fudrucker, (once it's hitched, you don't have to target it at all - just type MOUNT). Rest fudrucker, rent fudrucker, pack bag fudrucker.. etc. etc.

Yep. I read all of the help files and things I could find regarding this. Though I take it the feeding and other maintaining of said mount is virtual? Since I've not seen any mention of it anywhere.

Correct.  You could always roleplay feeding with creative use of the "discard <item>" command, however.

[LauraMars]

It makes a lot more sense to me ICly, it does. Instead of saving up your single inix all this time, feeding it, giving it water, a stable can just let the inix come and go, thereby requiring less space and supplies.

It's cool that you've found an explanation that makes sense to you.  If you like roleplaying that you get a different mount out every time, I'm sure nobody is going to stop you.  However, trying to pass this off as an IC fact in the new player questions forum may lead to misunderstandings, and newbies who think they can't roleplay a relationship with their mount, which is not true.

Why do you think rent costs aren't proportional to staying time in the first place?

Realistically, the different breeds of animals should also have differing rent prices due to greater or lesser food consumption needs - the documentation even says that inix are more expensive to keep.  The price never changes, because it isn't coded to change.  Sometimes the code is just the code, and that's ok.  Someday, maybe the staff will implement a different pricing model for the stables so that different breeds and storage times are taken into consideration - and that will be ok too.  But I doubt it's high on their priority list.

[X-D]

I have always thought the pricing does not change because stables make money the same way nenyuk does.

[Rhyden]

What LauraMars said.

It's generally assumed when you stable a mount, you unstable the same mount.

But code-wise, it's a different mount with a different score (hence why they are sometimes bleeding lightly, cause of increased hp).

To address the original post, having your mount 'hitched' to your character is important! If your mount is unhitched, it could very well be lost forever. Someone else may 'hitch' it!

If your mount is hitched to you but resting, and you leave the room, it will automatically become unhitched.

[musashi]

Yeah, I have ALWAYS RP'ed getting my same mount back.

But codewise the game just spawns a "random inix/erdlu/beetle" and gives it to you when you unstable them. Thus you need to re-title them again.

Fun fact though ... The game apparently does remember and save their current health and stamina. Because sometimes they respawn with better stats than the had last time, and they look like they're bleeding lightly, because while last time they had 98/98 HP, this spawn they rolled better and thus have 98/112 or some such.

I always RP that off as them getting into a fight in the stables with another animal, or getting pissy with the breed for abusing my inix, etc.

[Patuk]

I'm not going to argue my point any further, but if I'm in the wrong here, I -will- set up a stable service working like that someday.

[catchall]

I'm not going to argue my point any further, but if I'm in the wrong here, I -will- set up a stable service working like that someday.

It's not that there's really anything substantial to argue here.  We are playing a game that doesn't represent every possible detail we might possibly want to know about how the world works, because first of all, it couldn't ever possibly do that, and second of all, there are some realistic details that would make the game worse if they were represented.  You will always find inconsistencies between the game code and what you might imagine as the "logical" way that a real world would work.

Sure, it doesn't make sense that a stable can house a mount for an infinite amount of time for a finite amount of coin.  That's because the game doesn't represent the detail about how a longer time certainly requires more resources, since in game code terms, a stable is not a business that actually feeds mounts and has to recoup those costs.

However, from a realistic standpoint, it doesn't make sense to have a mount-swapping service either.  Think about it: if you just bought a young, strong healthy mount, are you just going to turn it in to a mount-swapping service where it will disappear forever?  You may well receive a weak, sick mount in return, one that might die on you out in the wastes, leaving you possibly dead, and at the least out of a mount since you can't very well haul the carcass back in for a replacement.  In such a scenario, it only makes sense to stable the most worthless of mounts with such a service.  It only seems to make more sense to you because you're focusing on one realistic detail that the game code doesn't represent (mount feeding and maintenance over time), but ignoring another realistic detail that the game code doesn't represent (mounts aging, getting sick, and dying over time).

So in fact there is really no meaningful "argument" to be had here, just different perspectives on how the real coded game of Zalanthas might correspond to some imaginary "real world of Zalanthas"

[Lizzie]

There have been times when I (the player) had time constraints, but needed (ICly) to get something done before logging out for the night. In cases like that, where my IC time is limited by my OOC needs, I might actually RP asking the stablehand NPC to "switch out" for a public mount, and basically turn in my mount and get a fresh one out.

It's not something I do all the time, because usually I stable a mount and stick around for awhile before setting off again. But I assume there are "house mounts" and "public mounts" that people can switch out for. And ICly, you will get whatever similar animal they give you - and sometimes it can't carry as much as your other one could. But that's a risk you have to take when you trade. And of course it's RPing that someone else is getting the one you had, and you'll be turning the one you're in to some other stablehand at some point..and so on and so forth.

In essence, the only way you can be assured that you're getting *your* mount back, is if you keep it in a non-virtual stable. Public stables are for public animals, and your ticket is a ticket to any inix in the pen - even if yours is exhausted. The stablehand will see that it's rested and watered, and rent it out to the next person looking for an inix.

I should add - while some of my characters refer fondly to their mounts as "theirs" - they don't really believe the mounts are the same ones they purchased. They also know that they can't tell the difference between one and the other, but that the mounts will answer to a name if one is given, and that's good enough for my PCs.

[Desertman]

I have always roleplayed I get the same mount back. Why? Because a lot of characters develop an attachment to their mounts. Certain mounts would ALWAYS be the same mount you put in the stable, no matter what, find out IC.

I know codedly it is a "new mount" when it comes out, but that is just a coding issue. If that coding issue didn't exist, this conversation wouldn't exist.

The whole, "Its a new mount." IC reasoning problem, is just an unfortunate product of certain portions of the playerbase trying to create an IC reason for an OOC construct issue in my opinion.

I wish staff would chime in on this so we can stop having this debate every couple of years.

[Italis]

I'm pretty sure it's intended to be the same mount. The fact that it isn't seems like a code loophole that probably should not be exploited for instant stamina-regenerating mounts.

[Eurynomos]

I'm pretty sure it's intended to be the same mount. The fact that it isn't seems like a code loophole that probably should not be exploited for instant stamina-regenerating mounts.

I was going to say...

[Lizzie]

Huh. I've been doing it for a couple of years, as have many other people - that's where I got the idea of doing it in the first place: from other players who I observed doing it. It seemed to make sense at the time, and still does - it explains why my new mount suddenly can't hold one waterskin *less* than what it could hold 10 RL minutes ago, while at the same time allowing me to get my mount rested, without having to sit there outside, in a non-stable environment, for the next 20 RL minutes, just so that my mount can regen stamina to go to the next city, if I have to log out in 20 minutes - or possibly be stuck for another hour because after that 20 RL minute rest period it's gonna be time for the gate to close.

It means I don't have to tell people "sorry, I can't go on THAT RPT either" just because I can't risk having to leave while my mount is too exhausted to go further and not being allowed to "switch out" for a "house mount."

I've never heard of anyone objecting to this ICly or OOCly, and as I said, I an others have been doing it for years. I figure between all these people doing it for all this time, surely the staff would've seen *someone* doing it by now and have questioned it to the player by now. It never occurred to me to be "exploiting" anything at all.

[Desertman]

Huh. I've been doing it for a couple of years, as have many other people - that's where I got the idea of doing it in the first place: from other players who I observed doing it. It seemed to make sense at the time, and still does - it explains why my new mount suddenly can't hold one waterskin *less* than what it could hold 10 RL minutes ago, while at the same time allowing me to get my mount rested, without having to sit there outside, in a non-stable environment, for the next 20 RL minutes, just so that my mount can regen stamina to go to the next city, if I have to log out in 20 minutes - or possibly be stuck for another hour because after that 20 RL minute rest period it's gonna be time for the gate to close.

It means I don't have to tell people "sorry, I can't go on THAT RPT either" just because I can't risk having to leave while my mount is too exhausted to go further and not being allowed to "switch out" for a "house mount."

I've never heard of anyone objecting to this ICly or OOCly, and as I said, I an others have been doing it for years. I figure between all these people doing it for all this time, surely the staff would've seen *someone* doing it by now and have questioned it to the player by now. It never occurred to me to be "exploiting" anything at all.

I don't think anyone is accusing you of abuse. A lot of people (wrongly) have been roleplaying that they are getting new mounts out of the stables. It kind of made sense, since codedly you could tell that the mount item being generated by the stable code was a new mount item. It was an OOC explanation for an OOC issue that unfortunately got tossed in IC somewhere along the way.

IC'ly, it isn't a new mount.

Now we know that. We can go forward and roleplay the situation correctly in the future.

No harm, no foul.

[Lizzie]

It just looked to me like Italis and Euronymous were implying that they felt I was exploiting it for insta-regen mounts. That is OOCly why I'm doing it, sure. But I don't consider it an exploit. If I'm in a rush, I'm gonna switch out the mount and RP that I'm getting another mount. If I'm not in a rush, I have no problem resting the mount, or stabling it, doing whatever I went to the area to do, taking a reasonable amount of time, and then retrieving *a* mount (whether it's my character's original or not doesn't even matter at that point).

[TheBadSeed]

For what it's worth, it makes more sense that it's a new mount of the same type traded out. Some people store their mounts for a day, some for a year, yet all pay the same price. Maybe if you're a regular visitor to said stable, the stablemaster sets the same one aside for you, but for those guys who go a year before pulling their mount.. Not as much.

What would be cool is to have the same mount all the time and stabling fees based on actual time in.. But, I'm sure it's a coding nightmare. Better to stick with the suspension of disbelief.

[evil_erdlu]

It just looked to me like Italis and Euronymous were implying that they felt I was exploiting it for insta-regen mounts. That is OOCly why I'm doing it, sure. But I don't consider it an exploit. If I'm in a rush, I'm gonna switch out the mount and RP that I'm getting another mount. If I'm not in a rush, I have no problem resting the mount, or stabling it, doing whatever I went to the area to do, taking a reasonable amount of time, and then retrieving *a* mount (whether it's my character's original or not doesn't even matter at that point).

You were exploiting a code loophole, though not knowing it was a loophole. IC, you give the same mount and you take the same. It shouldn't have rested instantly. I do not think RPing getting a new mount is acceptable even if you were in a rush.

[Agent_137]

I find it easier to role-play that you're offering the stablemaster 20 sids to feed, water, and cool your mount while you have an ale. Then pop back over, pay the price, and ride off into the sunset.

[DustMight]

Another way is to have mounts at each stable and use a different one when you pull it out.

[evil_erdlu]

I do not know its reason but I had heard RL horses may die if they're not allowed to stop. Old Turkish tales tell of messengers riding horses, to the point they croak on the next tribe center, get a new one and proceed.

It would be logical for a well-traveling PC to have several mounts in each stables. And now the odd urge of today; make a dwarf with the focus: "First introduce a mind-blocking poison to all water supplies all around the world, then start a successful messenger service consisting of d-elves and half-elves."

[sebonner]

I concur on the idea that you're paying a stablehand to water, feed, and rest your mount while you're off having an ale.

When I was playing this game very regularly a few years ago, I would expect my character to be 'doing stuff' while I wasn't around.  So even if PHYSICALLY the mount had never moved, my character may have been doing tons of things while I was gone.  Taking it out, doing some jobs, getting paid, then blowing all that money by the time I logged back in.  There's several thousand people in those cities [X Character] could associate with while I was off doing real life stuff.

It was just coincidence that I still had the same amount of money  and the mount was back in the stables as when I had when I "logged out".

----

As for horses dying... well, if you ran 300 miles without stopping, you'd die too.

[Malifaxis]

As for horses dying... well, if you ran 300 miles without stopping, you'd die too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dean_Karnazes

[Riev]

As for horses dying... well, if you ran 300 miles without stopping, you'd die too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dean_Karnazes

Malifaxis? More like FACTSIS.

[Kismetic]

Are you claiming to be an ultramarathon runner?  Cause I sorta picture any one of us dropping dead after mile fifty of a forced run.

I'm trying to picture it, now.

[RogueGunslinger]

OH MY GOD


"Ran 350 miles (560 km) in 80 hours and 44 minutes without sleep in 2005"


That's the most incredible thing I've ever heard. Wow. This dude right here. WOW.

[evil_erdlu]

D-elf with A.I. endurance..