Page 1 of 2

Runes and fishing nets stackable?

PostPosted: Mon Mar 22, 2004 3:51 pm
by Macitor
Hey Drocket,
Is there any chance we could get unmarked runes and fishing nets to stack?

The runes would not be as much appreciated at the nets would be. They are so big and take up so much space. Or maybe the graphic could be shrunk a little?

Forgive me if they already do stack.. I am pretty sure they do not but ... as I have in the past, I could be doing something wrong. :-)

Thanks for all you do. :-)

PostPosted: Tue Mar 23, 2004 4:11 am
by Drocket
I'll try to put some of these things in with the next update of the WoD files (changing stackability can only be done with an update to the UO client files.)

PostPosted: Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:41 pm
by Macitor
Ah... ok. You will forgive my lack of knowledge on the subject, won't you?

It is jut a suggestion mind you.

Thanks for hearing me out. :)

PostPosted: Tue Mar 23, 2004 4:23 pm
by Eldric
Drocket wrote:I'll try to put some of these things in with the next update of the WoD files (changing stackability can only be done with an update to the UO client files.)


I know stacking is a problem, but would it be possible to make nets "charged" items and having some way to combine the remaining carges of nets into a single item?

Say you had 2 nets with four charges each and a net with 2 charges combining them into a single net graphic with 10 charges?

If such a thing is possible it might help to cut down some on item count with regard to buff wands as well.

PostPosted: Tue Mar 23, 2004 4:36 pm
by von Hel
Eldric wrote:I know stacking is a problem, but would it be possible to make nets "charged" items and having some way to combine the remaining carges of nets into a single item?

Say you had 2 nets with four charges each and a net with 2 charges combining them into a single net graphic with 10 charges?

If such a thing is possible it might help to cut down some on item count with regard to buff wands as well.


This is not a good idea as one can sell a net for 1Kgp.

PostPosted: Tue Mar 23, 2004 4:41 pm
by Dell-Leafsong
I'm not sure how making them stackable could harm their commercial use. If they became charged, you'd have to find a player and sell to them in person because vendors aren't smart enough to pay more for items with more charges. If they were stackable, you could just drop them on a vendor one at a time.

PostPosted: Tue Mar 23, 2004 4:47 pm
by Ehran
hmm i am having visions of the hellfire wand with 874 charges. which leads me to taking up dragon hunting since it's pretty simple to zot an ancient out of existance with a wand. may not be such a great idea to make wands work that way.

PostPosted: Tue Mar 23, 2004 4:59 pm
by Eldric
Ehran wrote:hmm i am having visions of the hellfire wand with 874 charges.


Hehehehe, thats why I said buff wands, to allow the stacking with attack wands would be bad ...

PostPosted: Tue Mar 23, 2004 5:01 pm
by Dell-Leafsong
Agreed, wands would have to have a chance of exploding if you overcharge them or maybe just a maximum of 50 charges or something. That's the kind of balance issue I'm really glad are left up to GMs. :)

PostPosted: Tue Mar 23, 2004 5:02 pm
by Ehran
Eldric wrote:
Ehran wrote:hmm i am having visions of the hellfire wand with 874 charges.


Hehehehe, thats why I said buff wands, to allow the stacking with attack wands would be bad ...


how am i supposed to have any fun playing Cassandra if you keep bringing facts into the discussion.

mea culpa btw i didn't read as carefully as i should have. :(

PostPosted: Tue Mar 23, 2004 5:06 pm
by Eldric
Ehran wrote:sed to have any fun playing Cassandra if you keep bringing facts into the discussion.


Playing cassandra? Google dosn't really seem to be helping me much here.

PostPosted: Tue Mar 23, 2004 5:15 pm
by Ehran
Cassandra was the greek woman that was always right about the future but no one listened to her. this led to all sorts of pain and misery that could have been avoided had anyone listened to her warnings.
why we studied greek mythology in grade ten english instead of learning to parse a sentence or something useful always escaped me.

PostPosted: Tue Mar 23, 2004 5:20 pm
by Joram Lionheart
Eldric wrote:
Ehran wrote:sed to have any fun playing Cassandra if you keep bringing facts into the discussion.

Playing cassandra? Google dosn't really seem to be helping me much here.


Cassandra, prophetess of Apollo, cursed by the God when she refused to be his lover (the deal was He would give her the gift of prophecy and she would give in to Apollo's advances but at the last minute she changed her mind). The curse of Cassandra was that even though she could predict the future, no one believed her prophecies [If you've read Aeschylus' Agammenon--she's one of the main characters. She's mentioned in the Iliad; Cassandra is one of Priam's daughters.]

I guess Ehran wants to be a prophet, but he knows we're not going to believe him anyway, hehe.

PostPosted: Tue Mar 23, 2004 5:26 pm
by Joram Lionheart
Ehran wrote:why we studied greek mythology in grade ten english instead of learning to parse a sentence or something useful always escaped me.


Parsing is not all that useful unless you plan to read greek texts on a regular basis. It's much easier to read the translations and then pretend you know what the Greeks were all about, hehe.
Incidentally, Cassandra was ruled by fate (just like all the other Greek characters), so I fail to see how foretelling the future really helps any. Take Oedipus for instance, knowing his (predestined) future only made him more miserable than he otherwise would have been (in fact, he helped fulfill his destiny by trying to escape from it). If my life was fated, I don't think I'd want to see a future I cannot change.

Btw, Cassandra is usually referred to in literature as a prophet of doom. You sure you want to be a prophet of doom, E? :P

PostPosted: Tue Mar 23, 2004 6:16 pm
by Eldric
Thanks guys, guess I should have done more than just speed skim a couple lines of the pages google turned up. Oops.