More then one person on a mount...

[ashjpd]

You think it would be possible to have more then one person mount certain animals in arm? I know it would in real life and such, but codedly, I am not sure if it would be possible. Anyways, you couldn't have like more then one person on an erdlu, but I would think two average sized human beings could fit on an inix, with their big stregth and long bodies and all. Also, if you think it would be to "hard" to have two people mounted on an inix, maybe it would be a skill or something, and the second person on the mount would fall off now and then, or something of the sort. Just a thought.

[Tamarin]

Yes, in some instances I think it would work.  A mek for example.  But for the most part, no.  That's why there are wagons.

[UnderSeven]

You can do it with the subdue command at great expense to the defense of yourself and your rider.  Personally I think that's pretty reasonable.  If someone is doubleing up on a kank, the fact is they're not going to be able to do much fighting, nor the one doubled up.  There would simply be no space to move around.  The way the code currently works it seems reasonable to me.  For a larger mount, such as a mek, I don't find riding it without some sort of built on platform very realistic anyway. For smaller large animals, I can only really think of one beast that you could argue not too big but not to small, of course I mean the black inix.  But why code a whole new thing just for one rare mount anyway?

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Yes. The number of riders should depend upon the animal, and should be a hard coded number. For example, in a field given to a kank NPC, one might find the number 2. This number could dictate how many folks can ride that insect. The second person should not need the ride skill.

At the same time, the mount's movement points should go twice as fast. If it could go forty rooms without resting, expect it to only move twenty, with these two riders upon its back.

Half-giants should count as two people. If two humans/dwarves/half-elves can ride an inix, only one giant can.

[UnderSeven]

What about mounted combat.  Put two people on a mount and I'd like to see you effectively fight.  Which brings me back to my ealier point, in that case why not just leave it the way it is with the subdue skill.  It's more or less what you're doing to get that second person on the mount anyway.

[Bestatte]

Mounts can only carry a certain amount of weight. If you want to put a couple of halflings on a kank, go for it. Two fully-armored humans? Forget it. Half-elves, dwarves who carry a dozen 10-pound crushers each? Not a chance.

Now, if you want to take into consideration that each party need to be stripped down to the tattered bra on their head and the black lace thong, and assume neither of the people weighs more than the Zalanthan equivalent of 200 pounds, sure. But add on what -has- to be at least 80 pounds of armor and weaponry EACH - and a saddlebag to carry the tembo hides, and food, and waterskins (which sometimes can change your encumbrance from light to easily manageable all by itself!), and you've got yourself one mutha fucka knock-kneed kank who gets worn to exhausted by the time you've travelled 3 rooms away.

If you wanna consider the inix for humans and half-elves and dwarves only, AND take into consideration all that STUFF people wear on their bodies and carry around in their packs and strap to their mounts. sure.

Just don't forget that these creatures are not robots. They are living breathing eating animals, and some of them are killers in their own right. They have a limit on what they can - and are willing - to handle. If something like this was ever implimented, I'd suggest adding a "piss-off mode" so if you try to load two people with too much stuff on the animal, it gets pissed off and tramples one of you to death.

[ashjpd]

I didn't realize you could subdue and be mounted on animals, that is about all we need. I understand now, thanks, I just thought it would be nice, but with all the armor and stuff, it wouldn't make much sense.

[Forest Junkie]

What about mounted combat.  Put two people on a mount and I'd like to see you effectively fight.  Which brings me back to my ealier point, in that case why not just leave it the way it is with the subdue skill.  It's more or less what you're doing to get that second person on the mount anyway.

Have you ever been attacked by an aggro critter while having someone subdued on your mount? I have, and let me say this. There is nothing fair about it.

Reasons:

1) You can't even have your -weapons- drawn while letting your buddy "ride" with you.

2) Because npc critters have -no- lag whatsoever, you will be spam bashed right off your kank, and death shall obviously follow suite.

3) The person "riding" with you is -completely- defenseless. They cannot jump off and run, draw their weapons and at least -try- and fight, or even do so much as squeel. Why? They are subdued!

4) Due to #3, the subdued buddy, if attacked first, will die, without a doubt, unless you somehow get lucky. (Which won't happen with no lag npc's)

There is no "more or less" about it. It is almost entirely unplayable to let someone ride with you while subdued.

My vote goes for there being an actual coded syntax to let someone ride with you. That, IMO, is the only realistic way to do it.

[ashjpd]

I agree with Forest Junkie. There really should be a skill. Cause I would think the more experience you are with you weapons and riding, the better you would be on the mount with another person riding. But still, it would be extremely hard to code and stuff. You migth master it the same way to master riding mounts without any hands.

[Forest Junkie]

Mounts can only carry a certain amount of weight. If you want to put a couple of halflings on a kank, go for it. Two fully-armored humans? Forget it. Half-elves, dwarves who carry a dozen 10-pound crushers each? Not a chance.

Wrong. Kanks themselves are -extremely- large, with chitinous-like shells. They will easily be able to support the weight of two individuals clad in armor. They simply would have reduced mvs from the matter.

Now, if you want to take into consideration that each party need to be stripped down to the tattered bra on their head and the black lace thong, and assume neither of the people weighs more than the Zalanthan equivalent of 200 pounds, sure. But add on what -has- to be at least 80 pounds of armor and weaponry EACH.

I've never seen anyone able to wear eighty Ibs of armor Bestatte. Let's stick to more realistic numbers, eh? Besides, most mounts, ie the kank and inix, are -easily- strong enough to carry to individuals.

I'd suggest adding a "piss-off mode" so if you try to load two people with too much stuff on the animal, it gets pissed off and tramples one of you to death.

Cute, but no.

They are trained for a reason. Obviously a mount whose shown tendencies to bitch their masters will not be sold and used.

[UnderSeven]

Kanks I've always thought of like ants, so in that reguard Fj is right. But B- bes-bestea? Whatever.  Anyway, she said mounts.  To this she would of been refering to anything you can ride ( I guess Mansa too) so in the most extreme, kanks can carry a lot.  But erdlues? Sunbacks? Inix? Mansa? I don't think quite so much.

Eighty rocks.  Well it's not like it gives us a number anyway.  But I think FJ is right in this reguard.

[Forest Junkie]

But erdlues? Sunbacks? Inix? Mansa? I don't think quite so much.

1) Erdlu- no way.

2) Sunback- -maybe-, though very doubtful.

3) Inix- They are beastly behemoths. Humongous critters indeed. That's why hg's ride them. =)

[sacac]

I can see it now..
A mekillot walks into your area with 1500 halflings on its back.. then suddenly..
A halfling dismount.
and another.
and another.. and another.. and another.. and another.. Until you look and you see "There are an uber-amount of halflings here, ****! Run!"

I like it.

And I don't know about you.. mounted archery anyone?
l w
A war beetle stands here, carrying two ugly ass people in silk.
Two arrows come flying in from the west and strikes you in the chest and leg.
A war beetle arrives from the west, carrying two ugly ass people in silk.
Two arrows fly past your head as a war beetle runs.
A war beetle walks east, carrying two ugly ass people in silk.
Two arrows fly in from the east, striking you in the head and wrist.
(Drive by?)  :twisted:
Not too mention all the romantic rides through the bleeding north by rich House Tor nobles and ladies.

[ShaLeah]

If an inix can carry a half-giant, it can definately carry two humans.

[ashjpd]

Yes,
It would most definetly add more excitement to the game, it would be a lot of fun and it would be more realalistic to me.

[Angela Christine]

Meh.  

On the one hand this would have a major cool factor.  I've been in situations once or twice where this would actually have been useful.

Really, how often would it be useful though?  One guy rides into a pit, climbs out but now the group is short a mount, ok, but usually if one person rides into a pit everybody rides in with him.  :roll:  There are a few creatures that will attack mounts, I suppose while the monster is eating Bob's kank the rest of you run off, but now Bob is kankless.  Or two poor newbies want to go to the salt flats to collect salt, but they spent all their money on fancy pants, so now they can only afford one kank between them.

I have loaded a kank until it can't take anymore weight, jumped off and picked up more bags of rocks until I my encumberance was unbelievably heavy, then jumped back up and rode off into the sunset, and I can tell you that you don't get far weighed down like that.  Doubling up on a kank would only be useful for short trips like the Allanak to Red Storm hop.  A couple real light weights in light armor with no luggage might get a little farther, especially if they stuck to the roads, but you won't want to be wandering around the desert like that.  Two or three riders might not weigh an inix down more than a single half-giant, but inix already don't get far between rest stops.  

Since you will have restricted movement with additional riders, there should be a combat penalty in addition to the current mounted combat penalties.  It should be better than the old subdue-and-ride, but not a whole lot better.  

If you are in a group and short a mount, you can currently subdue and ride, and then have everyone else in the group guard the two riding double.  The subduer should be ready to release on a moments notice though.  

I'd rather be able to pack an unconcious person on a mount, that comes up more often for me than a shortage of mounts.  When you are short on mounts you might as well pack all your luggage on the mount and then walk, because while walking you won't suffer combat penalties and you can have two weapons out.


AC

[X-D]

I've never seen anyone able to wear eighty Ibs of armor Bestatte. Let's stick to more realistic numbers, eh

Ha! hahahaha.

Sorry, Fine, somebody needs to go to nak to the scales and start weighing his gear. The average human in game I see that wears armor is wearing WAY over 80lbs.

Now, talk RL, Lets see, thre quarter armor, 45lbs, leather and wood pavise shield 11lbs, greaves 9lbs, boots, plated leather boots 9lbs, There, thats near 80 now and we have not uncluded weapons and sundry, true, in medievil times most armors had a finished weight between 40-60lbs, hell, my SCA armor is 68lbs plus weapons, and I could wear more without too much of a hassle.

[Forest Junkie]

I've never seen anyone able to wear eighty Ibs of armor Bestatte. Let's stick to more realistic numbers, eh

Ha! hahahaha.

Sorry, Fine, somebody needs to go to nak to the scales and start weighing his gear. The average human in game I see that wears armor is wearing WAY over 80lbs.

Now, talk RL, Lets see, thre quarter armor, 45lbs, leather and wood pavise shield 11lbs, greaves 9lbs, boots, plated leather boots 9lbs, There, thats near 80 now and we have not uncluded weapons and sundry, true, in medievil times most armors had a finished weight between 40-60lbs, hell, my SCA armor is 68lbs plus weapons, and I could wear more without too much of a hassle.

People with that much weight in armor should be fucking tanks then. Perhaps that's one of the reasons I prefer elves and their speed, in that I wear light armors that weight nothing.

And as for SCA, what in the -hell- are you wearing? Most boys I've seen in it usually wear lighter armors, ie leathers or studded armors, and use heavier, two-handed weapons to make up for their less than adequate defense. Maybe that's because they are po-folk, *shrugs*.

[X-D]

And as for SCA, what in the -hell- are you wearing? Most boys I've seen in it usually wear lighter armors, ie leathers or studded armors, and use heavier, two-handed weapons to make up for their less than adequate defense. Maybe that's because they are po-folk, *shrugs*.

True, most do wear lighter and cheaper armors, when I started though, many years ago now, the requirements for armor was far stricter then it is now, which bugs me to no end simply because with lesser armor restrictions came stricter less realistic combat rules, blah.

My gear is as close to period as I could make it, true, it has taken a lot of years and a reasonable sum of money, but at the same time I learned the skills required to hammer steel/iron, cold welding, brass riveting and more. I wear a bronze scale tunic with steel articulate knees, elbows, plate greaves and vambrace and steel articulate gauntlets but then I fight in florentine style, so, since I do not use a shield I need more protective armor, plus I fight in a live steel group near home, which again means I need functional armor, not nylon plate and thin leather. I do look damm good at events though:)

Personaly, I have no problem with mounts carrying more people, but, that would mean huge combat negs and should dump all riders when melee starts with no check to the ride skill nor possibility to advance said skill.

[Angela Christine]

I have to agree with XD, don't assume that your armor is light unless you have visited a scale or successfully valued it.

"Made from the thin, chitinous exoskeleton ***** of the *****, these greaves are protective and lightweight, if crudely fashioned."

How much do you think that leg armor would weigh?  Would you guess 28 stone?  A stone is roughly equal to a kilogram, so 28 stone is 61.6 pounds.  Not light at all.  You could go way, waaay over 80 pounds without realizing it.

AC

[Carnage]

Generally, marines carry between 60-80 pounds in their backpacks while hiking. Add clothing and weapons, they can get to about 90 pounds. They march for miles and miles, and it's all centered on their back.

Armor, however, divides up and spreads the weight all over your body, making it much more managable and less strenuous.

[Angela Christine]

Armor, however, divides up and spreads the weight all over your body, making it much more managable and less strenuous.

That won't matter to the kank though.

In addition to armor, most riders in Arm will also have the pack, belt and cloak pockets stuffed full of junk.  And those packs will have 40-90 stone (88-198 pound) capacity.  Nearly all earth humans must have below average strength, because carrying around more than 100 pounds of crap is common on Zalanthas.  

AC

[ashjpd]

Votes speak for themselves, Staff members, would it be possible for something like this to happen in the game. And would it be realalistic to let it happen, with all the weight problems and such. And with the certain disadvantages with more then one person on a mount. Or should we just stick to the old subdue?

[Kalden]

As far as the whole ride thing, I don't think it would be worth it to code. It's not gonna be useful very often. I agree with AC.

But as for the armor, maybe it needs to be rethought and toned down some? It seems like bone and leather are too heavy... from what I've been hearing, and what I've experienced.

[ashjpd]

Hmmm, when the staff made the weight for the things in the game, did they do it realalisticly, and how did were they able to know that a bone helmet would way 20 ten-stone (just as an example, don't know if it is true or not). :wink:

[Carnage]

In addition to armor, most riders in Arm will also have the pack, belt and cloak pockets stuffed full of junk. And those packs will have 40-90 stone (88-198 pound) capacity

Whoa, what kind of cloaks and swordbelts are you wearing?

The cloak-type item my character has right now holds about 12 stones, max. His belt holds 4.

[Tamarin]

He said the packs have 40-90 stones in them...not the belts and cloaks.

[Angela Christine]

Whoa, what kind of cloaks and swordbelts are you wearing?

The cloak-type item my character has right now holds about 12 stones, max. His belt holds 4.

Yeah, I meant the backpacks hold 40-90.  Those are just the most common backpacks, I've seen packs that hold less than 40 stone or more than 90, but those are rare and I think the huge ones are meant for half-giants.

I've had belts that held up to 20 stone, though those are pretty rare too.  But there are other containers that can be worn in the waist or belt position that may hold 20 or more.

I don't think I've seen cloaks larger than 12, but there are other things that can be worn in the cloak possition that can hold more.  
Then there are belt packs, pockets in clothes, head-bags, and packs that can be worn around the neck or in other odd places.

I've had chacters that had over 150 stone in wearable container space.  A couple times I've had so much that if I took my containers off and packed them on my kank while they were full, then I wouldn't be strong enough to unpack them all, not even if I stripped naked to do it.  Had to hire a dwarf to unpack my kank for me, now that's embarassing.  :oops:

Yes, my love of shopping turned me into a container twink!  Oh, the humanity!

AC