Issue with the new persistant storage system

[Maecius]

There's no intention to outlaw muling at the moment. This system is to enhance RP, and to allow PCs to store items in an in-character fashion.

I don't know that there will ever be a general ban on "muling" or "twinking" items. We try not to make rules that the DMs can't evenly police, with a handful of exceptions. Muling doesn't really impact anyone but the player who's doing it, however, so it's not one of the exceptions.

[Aspect of Sorrow]

However we should not only look into how the data are stored, but how they are rpesented in game through the UI.

I like the direction the Mudd UI was going, and set a delay against players from click spamming the query that handles the pagination.

Anyway, to reduce the technical stuff, i think the 500 hundrend limit looks good. However i think we should start lower and as we test it slowly increase it. I think this is better than have to reduce it - just in the slightest case a player has filled his storage.

Agreed, perhaps at the exact equip / item limit of the player as Endy mentioned. This allows an uninterrupted RCR that would otherwise still require a muling action for people like Hinzel who have a full inventory. 14 Equip + (32x4) for 142 total.

[mrm3ntalist]

However we should not only look into how the data are stored, but how they are rpesented in game through the UI.

I like the direction the Mudd UI was going, and set a delay against players from click spamming the query that handles the pagination.

Anyway, to reduce the technical stuff, i think the 500 hundrend limit looks good. However i think we should start lower and as we test it slowly increase it. I think this is better than have to reduce it - just in the slightest case a player has filled his storage.

Agreed, perhaps at the exact equip / item limit of the player as Endy mentioned. This allows an uninterrupted RCR that would otherwise still require a muling action for people like Hinzel who have a full inventory. 14 Equip + (32x4) for 142 total.

Spot on! I think we should be discussing such technical stuff in the QC forum.

Good info about Hinzel too.

[Akroma666]

I have to agree.. I think the bank should be ooc with the ability to be account wide. It would help with muleing and frankly it be nice to do so. Can we perhaps have two? One IC on the actual map, and one in the nexus for ooc account wide transferring and storage?

I haven't used the system yet, is there a gold deposit system? That would be nice for the ooc nexus version.

[Eclypticon]

My main issue with this storage system is that it does not have categories to organize things yet. At least on my mule, I can group potions, scrolls, weapons, and armor together. I'm glad we have a storage system now and I appreciate the work involved into making it work. Thanks!

In the mean time, I will just use my mule.

Regarding multiple toons using a storage system on the same account, organization is going to be needed. Categories and alphabetizing would do it great. If the system ever gets real taxing, which I am not sure it will, a separate server could be made to handle all SQL stuff I think.

[Endelyon]

My main issue with this storage system is that it does not have categories to organize things yet. At least on my mule, I can group potions, scrolls, weapons, and armor together. I'm glad we have a storage system now and I appreciate the work involved into making it work. Thanks!

In the mean time, I will just use my mule.

Regarding multiple toons using a storage system on the same account, organization is going to be needed. Categories and alphabetizing would do it great. If the system ever gets real taxing, which I am not sure it will, a separate server could be made to handle all SQL stuff I think.

It literally has a search bar... Just type part of your item name and it will filter for that item. If you want to get crazy OCD with your organization you can even rename items with specific unique tags to easily find one grouping by typing in that tag.

[Maecius]

We'll also try to refine the system over time of course. One thing at a time though. This alone has been years in the making. Though, in all honesty, it could have been implemented three years ago if we had had an Endelyon on staff or if Luna had been a little more active at the time.

The skeleton's been in place for years, we just didn't have the SQL database set up yet.

For right now we're going to add banking as a dialogue option for Elad in the Merchant's League so that there are two bank access points in BG. One in Soubar. One in FAI. And one in the Underdark.

We'll discuss whether we want them to work as cross-character bank accounts, or whether we want a Nexus banker. I'm personally opposed to both because I feel like that takes an IC thing and makes it super OOC, but I'm not opposed to deferring to others if it turns out that I'm the minority opinion.

[Eclypticon]

The search function is good for sure, and tagging is a good idea. But an improved GUI would be nice too, kind of like the IG auction.

[Boddynock]

I admit when I started this thread I did not intend for it to go the direction it did at first, nor did I intend on it ending up in the place it did (which is entirely off topic, shame on all of you ).

Perhaps I was unclear, my intent wasn't to have the bank access removed entirely from the SCCE, but to make sure the singular access in the city of BG was not controlled by a PC faction. Pulling it from there to move to another location was an option, simply adding another banking option elsewhere is another option that serves the same ends.

And while Maecius is correct in his assertion that PCs should have an impact on the server... having this be the only banking node in the city makes it off limits for certain types of role-play down the line. Liam despises Endelyon, for example, and may want to have the SCCE razed to the ground for revenge. Well now my RP is handcuffed by the fact that this is the only mechanical banking access in BG. I am not saying that particular revenge scheme was in the works, but now it is entirely off the table because destroying the only access to IG storage in BG would never be allowed, and even if by some slim miracle it was, the public outcry over it's destruction would be immense. Whether it was intended or not, that building is now under de facto protection from certain types of opposing/conflicting roleplay. And even if that is not true, that is the perception, and as is often said; "Perception is reality."

[Maecius]

Fear not, Boddynock. As above, banking will be allowable through Elad at the Merchant's League as well (we just have to make the dialogue changes, not live yet). We don't want to handcuff anyone, and the SCCE node will probably be the most convenient one for most people, so I don't think we'll be robbing them of any fun RP either.

Hopefully it's the best of both worlds.

[Maecius]

In regards to the above, as fair warning, please just be aware that this sort of compromise won't be possible for all future changes, especially those that are initiated by a guild.

If a guild starts selling specialty items because they reflect that guild in particular, we won't make an "open to all" NPC shop that does the exact same thing next door. I don't want people to feel like they're entitled to everything on the server just because it's on the server: There will most likely be some unequal access to content in the future as a means of encouraging cooperation, travel, and roleplay. None of it will be game-breaking or must-have content, of course; but it will be something a little different than what you can get elsewhere to set that area or that guild apart, like Candlekeep's scroll shop or glow rings, or the White Mask Theater's low-level quest.

This is a roleplaying server, after all, and you will sometimes have to interact with or confront another PC to get what you want. Some things will even require an in character choice or compromise, like whether or not your character's prepared to deal with a Red Wizard or a Zhentarim agent to get ahead in life. These sorts of decisions enhance roleplay. And it may be at the expense of "fairness" sometimes, but if roleplay is a reflection of life in a fantasy world, it can't always be fair. For the world to be dynamic, players have to have the power to influence it, and "power" is so frequently nothing more than the freedom to make these choices.

So please no one think that everything, everywhere will be 100% available to everyone. I know the Underdarkers are already very familiar with the fact that it won't be, but other players need to realize it as well. It's not our goal to make a game that's completely fair and balanced (that sounds like a single-player game to me), it's our goal to make a game world that's fun and dynamic and influenced by you.

[Moltrazahn]

A fair statement Maec . I don't think any disagree on what you say... however I think the primary concern was with the concept of an overall feature that all should have access towards, so avoid mulig etc.

I'm the short term's it basically is saying that we do not want to see major features controlled by pc factions. Banking, ressurection, general item shopping etc. Now when it comes to faction specific shops, quests and/or items... I'd actually love to see such. Elven specific bows, Dwarven crafts and hell, even a specific item shop for... well... HELL! (See what I'm doing there? ).

That type of flavor is something great! Which enforces that if my grey orc barbarian.... REALLY would like that dwarf-crafted two handed battle axe? .... well he'd have to start figuring out how to get his grubby hands on it! (A dress. Flowers. A hat = profit!). If possible said factions should even have discounts if such a system is even possible (faction system?).

Either way. That would be my own dreams! Not per say equality for all in all in-game (in character?) content. But at least base access to the major things .

[Charraj]

Hey, I've always been upfront about the fact that I am probably overzealous about the fairness thing. If you want to ignore my mad ravings, I won't be offended. I know sometimes I am like this:



(I know I already PM'd this to you, Maecius and Elly, but it still amuses me. )

[ComeAndSee]

The storage system is based off of KEMOs storage. I converted it from using NWN2 database to SQL. There is a NWNX SQL command function called SCORCO which converts an item into a string on the database and then it can reverse that. I've not done anything yet to sort it into categories. Kind of just updated it to SQL and moved on from them. It displays items starting with the 1st one you deposited.

On Haven we have 11,463 items in standard storage right now and its using 92.56 MBs of space. It's small change compared to the way standard NWN2 database stores stuff (3 files PER person). Right now its not configured to be account wide, but could be with a few script modifications.

The system actually supports guild storage which requires tokens in your inventory. Each token is for withdraw/deposit only and you'd get a selection on the GUI. You may store a maximum of 1000 items in a single storage.

Source code is here.

[LISA100595]

The storage system is based off of KEMOs storage. I converted it from using NWN2 database to SQL. There is a NWNX SQL command function called SCORCO which converts an item into a string on the database and then it can reverse that. I've not done anything yet to sort it into categories. Kind of just updated it to SQL and moved on from them. It displays items starting with the 1st one you deposited.

On Haven we have 11,463 items in standard storage right now and its using 92.56 MBs of space. It's small change compared to the way standard NWN2 database stores stuff (3 files PER person). Right now its not configured to be account wide, but could be with a few script modifications.

The system actually supports guild storage which requires tokens in your inventory. Each token is for withdraw/deposit only and you'd get a selection on the GUI. You may store a maximum of 1000 items in a single storage.

Source code is here.

Thanks ComeAndSee, we really appreciate the Help!