Taming Mounts - Suggestions

[Cerelum]

Someone else brought up in a post about how most of the tamable mounts (I won't list them, as I don't know if it's considered things everyone would know) are absolute shit when it comes to endurance.

Which seems odd both in the fact that to tame a critter your ride skill needs to be fairly high as well as the fact that most tamable critters are in more dangerous territory where you can be killed fairly easily if you're not a combat character.

Would it be fair to expect things like tamable mounts to be more hardy than a typical war beetle?

Seeing as the dangers and skill required to tame and bring them into civilization are pretty high, why not make them more hardy, or some other benefit.

For example, I've always wondered why you can't train a mount to attack critters?  We ride essentially huge Drov Beetles, that will kill most people if you type kill purple instead of kill beetle on accident, so why are they not able to be added to the battle situation?

Also, why don't aggressive critters attack mounts?  You could lead a mount one room away from a drov beetle and the beetle will ignore it.  I know because I've found mounts one room away from where the drov beetle is, with a corpse of a player at their feet.

When you assess a mount, it shows their health and their tiredness, yet health is rarely even useful as it doesn't get hit, unless it's an AOE spell or falls down a pit because the player flees into one, or is stupid (mostly how I fall into pits heh) the health of a mount never comes into play.

So the suggestions I make are:

1. Make tamable mounts have more stamina than store bought ones.

2. Allow some type of skillcheck, maybe if you're super advanced riding, for your beetle, sunlon whatever to take a bite outta your enemy you're fighting.

3. Make mount wrangling actually a worthwhile cause for more than possibly someone to pull a -redacted- mount outta the stable to show off.

What do you think?

[PriestlySiren]

I think it would be interesting if having a high enough charge would initiate combat with your mount too.

[Dresan]

1. I believe mount stamina is random but I could see this being nice to have...
2. Charge/trample are in the game to perform attacks with mounts while taking balance in consideration. I think there used to be a skill that allowed animals to attack or perform an attack (pull reins), it was broken and it was not fun having this done to you.
3. Taming mounts has pretty good uses beyond keeping them in the stable. ($$$)

[Jihelu]

I think it was just sunbacks that had 'will slap you' code, but I wasnt around for that period of Arm

[Dresan]

I think the first implementation of charge was also busted too, not sure anymore if it was pull reins or charge which caused so much grief.

[Brytta Léofa]

Pull reins was before my time. Maybe 8ish years ago trample didn't exist and, IIRC, you could charge in the middle of combat.

There was a specific incident where a very buff PC got annihilated by someone just charging over and over. Not too long after, charge was changed to be useable only for opening combat, and trample (presumably less powerful) was added.

[Brokkr]

Once upon a time...

There was the noble kank.  Just as many movement points as the war beetle, nearly as fast as the supersonic erdlu.  A plague upon them.

There was no trade off, with kanks.  You rode a kank because everything else was subpar.  Then that changed.  Do you want to go further, slower?  Or faster, not as far?

There are stamina bonus's for mount races at the racial level, in terms of total amount of stamina a mount can have.  Which then have slight variations that probably aren't really noticeable based on the individual mount endurance.  Which is why you don't see differences between domestic and tamed mounts.

[Cerelum]

Granted, I haven't tamed anything for about three years, but back then, there was a distinct difference between a certain mount and a war beetle. I could ride a war beetle from Allanak to Tuluk on one "tank" of stamina and others would be exhausted by hitting Luirs.

If you guys changed this, then I love you and disregard.

[gotdamnmiracle]

Granted, I haven't tamed anything for about three years, but back then, there was a distinct difference between a certain mount and a war beetle. I could ride a war beetle from Allanak to Tuluk on one "tank" of stamina and others would be exhausted by hitting Luirs.

If you guys changed this, then I love you and disregard.

I just wish there were more rewarding things to tame out in the wilds. You get the best bang for your buck (for most players) from the stables in half the starting locations. It's like having high-end salarri gear in the starting shops. After you have it there's not much need to replace it ever unless it gets damaged or stolen.

_____________________

This is somewhat relevant.

Can we make it possible to tame something without having to actually mount it? If your race is large enough you severely reduce the amount of things you can tame because you can't actually ride them.

I would be totally down to have a form of rope as a necessary tool and you rope them instead of mounting them.  Also this could allow for less bipolar rolls like:
The inix pulls away from you! (Wasted stamina points, nothing happens)
The inix yanks away and knocks you over! (Wasted stamina points, minor damage, prone)
The inix rushes at you and attacks!
The inix flees, taking your rope with it! (Inix flees into random room, you lose the rope)
The inix appears to relax and follows you as you rope it in. (Tamed)

These would be instead of simply Tame or be attacked.

[Brokkr]

That might make sense if we differentiated pack and riding animals, but we don't.

[Cerelum]

That might make sense if we differentiated pack and riding animals, but we don't.

He's saying if he's an expert half giant rider/tamer he can't tame anything but an Inix, because the code won't allow him to sit on the critter.

Maybe instead of mount critter just make it hitch critter to see if you tame it.  Then anyone could tame it regardless of how big you are or small they are.

[gotdamnmiracle]

Delves too.

Sorry for making that a mishmash of suggestion and complaint. The biggest issue is that certain races can't sit on most mounts, thus cannot tame most possible mounts, whether they intended to sit on them or not.

[Jihelu]

That might make sense if we differentiated pack and riding animals, but we don't.

An entire race uses animals as pack animals so perhaps there should be code to help them out.

[rinthrat]

You can't even title a mount without... mounting it. I mean, you can still sit on it, as an elf, but try explaining that if anyone sees you 

[John]

You can't even title a mount without... mounting it. I mean, you can still sit on it, as an elf, but try explaining that if anyone sees you 

OOC: Not sitting. Only titling.
Wish all I'm not riding my mount. Only giving it a name.

:p

[Brokkr]

How would a HG tame anything they can't mount? And why would they want to?  This might be an issue if there weren't a ton of NPCs they could tame, but there are. Failing to see the issue, unless it is make it easier for HG, in which case I disagree.

As for desert elves, I am pretty sure I addressed that concern with the new classes?

[Cerelum]

How would a HG tame anything they can't mount? And why would they want to?  This might be an issue if there weren't a ton of NPCs they could tame, but there are. Failing to see the issue, unless it is make it easier for HG, in which case I disagree.

As for desert elves, I am pretty sure I addressed that concern with the new classes?

Money sir, money to sell big furry things to fancy nobles and rich folks.

Half giants already take a village worth of Sid to outfit, so they are extremely expensive to have around.

Besides for selling mounts for money, there really is no other benefit I could think of to tame more than one mount ever.

[Brokkr]

Well, I mean, your HG is obviously not going to figure that out on their own.  So once they have been told they can sell X to a fancy noble by someone, I suggest doing the obvious HG thing and subduing it to bring to them.

[Jihelu]

"As for desert elves, I am pretty sure I addressed that concern with the new classes?"

How was that concern addressed? Can the new classes tame without mounting or do the new delve's using the new classes have no need of pack animals anymore?

[Cerelum]

Well, I mean, your HG is obviously not going to figure that out on their own.  So once they have been told they can sell X to a fancy noble by someone, I suggest doing the obvious HG thing and subduing it to bring to them.

Lmao, I guess.  I do always forget half giants are supposed to be THAT stupid.

[gotdamnmiracle]

"As for desert elves, I am pretty sure I addressed that concern with the new classes?"

How was that concern addressed? Can the new classes tame without mounting or do the new delve's using the new classes have no need of pack animals anymore?

I'm confused by this statement as well. Desert elves, due to their size have several things they can't tame despite having the skills and ability to do so. I can think of three different NPC races off the top of my head.

I'm certain a HG and possibly an elf could hog tie and eventually lead along a wild animal and they'd get the idea. It's less poetic than Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron, but it gets the job done and it isn't based off of whether you made a semi-arbitrary decision weeks ago at chargen (The decision of whether you wanted to be 70 or 71 inches tall). Since weight apparently has very little bearing on it (considering dwarves aren't having any difficulty and can apparently ride mounts that only halfling really tamed) height appears to be the only thing disallowing this. Which is ridiculous. You're telling me because my toes would drag on the ground I couldn't break a pony? If anything I'd have an EASIER TIME getting it to understand I'm the boss.

All I'm looking for is an alternative to make it so it's based off of skill and knowhow, parallel with the class change, and not a primarily flavor number determined at "birth".

Also I'm not sure what your really asking when you ask "Why would they want to?". Because that's the aspiration your PC has? Because you wanna make some cash? I'm certain there are as many reasons as people could think up. After all, you're the one with the access to player bios, not I. I'm certain folks find plenty of reasons to do things that they want. All we're asking for is relatively equal ability that isn't gated by clunky code.

[Brokkr]

I dislike using RL examples, but you can absolutely halter break a horse and never get on it.  While it helps, it doesn't really mean it is broken if you try to ride it.  You actually have to ride it to see how it will react.

My intention is that desert elves would not even be able to try to tame things, but it looks like what I asked for didn't exactly go in like I thought it would.

[Jihelu]

Why not? Do Desert Elves not have any need of pack animals? Some pack up their camps and move shit long distances and we've already established Elves are weak bitch bois who can't carry much.

Are Delves, the xenophobic pieces of shit they are, reliant on other tribes (Dare so, those idiotic humans) to sell them mounts?

Are we going to start enforcing the idea that elves are so shit with animals now they shouldn't even use them as pack animals?

I suggest we start removing Elvish limbs and their arms next, elves don't need weapons anyway with their pride in running.

[Cerelum]

While I get what Brokkr is saying, I also get what everyone else is saying.

Why not just switch taming check to hitch versus mount? All the worlds problems are solved.

It is a game after all.  We handwave all sorts of shit, why is this any different?

[Brokkr]

Because hitch is what smart players use to tell if a mount is already tamed, so it doesn't PWN them when they fail a tame attempt trying to mount it.

[th3kaiser]

I've always used pack.

[Jihelu]

If hitch is 'what smart players use to not get owned' change it up to use a different command for taming animals/make it so that hitch can tame animals and add in a 'you get owned' failure if they are just a wild animal.

If the player is 'smart' they won't be spamming hitch on every animal in the wild just incase they happen to be tame. (With my suggested "If you use hitch on a wild animal it beats your ass" remedy)

[Brokkr]

Actually I was referring to tamed mounts in clan corrals, primarily.

[Namino]

I dislike using RL examples, but you can absolutely halter break a horse and never get on it.

Good, then we're all in agreement. Looks like we need to change the code so delves can halter break things without mounting them, given they never intend to mount them in any capacity.

My intention is that desert elves would not even be able to try to tame things.

I'm starting to wonder if there's some IRL elf racism going on here with the constant desire to further delegitimize the race as a viable play option.

Did an elf hurt you?

[Jihelu]

I don't see the issue then? I assume the code can make the difference between tamed and not, and having hitch count as the 'hitch' and 'tame' command wouldn't break anything.

Or maybe it will IDK.

I don't see the reason for two races, one especially, to be incredibly locked out of being self-sustaining with its mount creation.

[gotdamnmiracle]

I dislike using RL examples, but you can absolutely halter break a horse and never get on it.  While it helps, it doesn't really mean it is broken if you try to ride it.  You actually have to ride it to see how it will react.

My intention is that desert elves would not even be able to try to tame things, but it looks like what I asked for didn't exactly go in like I thought it would.

Oh jeez. Welp, I hate that. I hope if this ever gets implemented then those poor elvish stalkers get reimbursed for the two useless skills and one mostly useless one being bumped up to a full three useless skills (riding, trample, charge). I assume the class was built around having these skills to properly balance it amongst it's peer classes, right? Perhaps there should be Delf specic classes to remedy this gap?

[Cabooze]

I dislike using RL examples, but you can absolutely halter break a horse and never get on it.  While it helps, it doesn't really mean it is broken if you try to ride it.  You actually have to ride it to see how it will react.

My intention is that desert elves would not even be able to try to tame things, but it looks like what I asked for didn't exactly go in like I thought it would.

Oh jeez. Welp, I hate that. I hope if this ever gets implemented then those poor elvish stalkers get reimbursed for the two useless skills and one mostly useless one being bumped up to a full three useless skills (riding, trample, charge). I assume the class was built around having these skills to properly balance it amongst it's peer classes, right? Perhaps there should be Delf specic classes to remedy this gap?

Desert elves can't tame animals, but by god, if they summon one with magick they're gucci.

But no really, it doesn't make thematic sense at all for a large population of tribals to have no interest in, or skill related to, taming animals that they in fact do rely on to carry mass amounts of weight long distances.. Because even though elves pride themselves greatly on being able to travel on foot, they are also the most intelligent race in zalanthas (based on their wisdom score) and as such should then realize that it's ineffective and idiotic to carry their entire camp on their backs when they can delegate the hard work to a lesser creature while still continuing to travel on foot.

[Brokkr]

I'm not saying it doesn't make sense for elves to use pack animals.  It might make sense for them even to tame them, assuming they are one of the tribes that rears pack animals (just because a tribe is tribal doesn't mean they raise their own mounts even for humans), but I think I addressed that already:

That might make sense if we differentiated pack and riding animals, but we don't.

[Alesan]

I'm not saying it doesn't make sense for elves to use pack animals.  It might make sense for them even to tame them, assuming they are one of the tribes that rears pack animals (just because a tribe is tribal doesn't mean they raise their own mounts even for humans), but I think I addressed that already:

That might make sense if we differentiated pack and riding animals, but we don't.

Sorry, I'm just trying to make sense of this post. Are you saying it doesn't make sense for elves to use pack animals, because Armageddon technically does not have pack animals? Because all pack animals are also rideable animals?

[gotdamnmiracle]

I am very surprised this is receiving pushback. It appears like an easily remedied oversight.

[Riev]

I'm not saying it doesn't make sense for elves to use pack animals.  It might make sense for them even to tame them, assuming they are one of the tribes that rears pack animals (just because a tribe is tribal doesn't mean they raise their own mounts even for humans), but I think I addressed that already:

That might make sense if we differentiated pack and riding animals, but we don't.

Can you... maybe... clarify your position on this?

Every other post sounds like "We could do this and it makes sense", but then its sprinkled with "But we're not going to because we don't want to".

What do you feel the 'tame' code attached to mount should be, and what are the coded resources available to an elf who decides that ox would make a great pack beast for trading with the roundears?

[Brokkr]

Our current code status is that taming halter breaks (that is teaching something to lead), breaks something to being rode, and breaks them to carry a pack (which again, is different).  Desert elves can't really do that second bit.  Within the current code, it doesn't make sense for desert elves to be able to tame mounts, because the mounts aren't differentiated.

You aren't going to see us commit to code changes in a thread like this.  Often my own personal position may not be apparent either.

[Riev]

So your stance can be summarized as follows (?):

Taming in the game, currently, allows mounts to both be tamed to ride and to carry large loads.
Both of these "types" of taming are, realistically, two different things.
Desert elves cannot really tame a beast to carry a large load, because "taming" codedly includes making them rideable as well.
Desert elves cannot ride things, so they cannot tame things to be beasts of burden.

Staff have no interest in committing to a change here, but not for any specified reason.

[Cerelum]

Pro-tip I just discovered after fucking YEARS of playing this game.

Nosave combat, and then just flee from the critter if it attacks you.  Since you didn't hit it back, it doesn't chase you all the way across the Known.