Unnamed Animal

[Rusalka]

What if we get rid of animals names? Instead of them we would have a discription like those for clothes. Everyone will have to name every animal and that can make some inaccuracy with naming in different areas, which could be fun . What do you think?

[Mykey]

Yes, you have correctly told

[Rusalka]

Depends on your definition of waste

[SekoETC]

Well if the description would point out wether the thing will give feathers or fur or hide, if the bones will be big or small, if it has special qualities such as shell, in those case it might be cool.

[Solfius]

That would be a useful function, and it would allow more scope for Cantr languages to develop (even if only a little)

[SuperSonicScientist]

That could be really cool - the animals are a little bit, well boring at the moment!

[Rusalka]

Well if the description would point out wether the thing will give feathers or fur or hide, if the bones will be big or small, if it has special qualities such as shell, in those case it might be cool.

I'm rather not sure about bones, but I'm absolutely sure about feathers, shells, horns and all other visible stuff. It just have to be in a discripion of an animal. Sounds realistic?

Besides everything - knowing that an elephant is an elephant is OOC knowledge.

[Solfius]

Knowledge of language is a grey area. I agree with your arguement, but then I didn't agree with the introduction of the wiki.

[SekoETC]

Well maybe just saying that it's a big animal, or a small animal, or something in the middle. And you could guess the size of bones based on that factor.

I would also like to see different animals carrying different kinds of fur, and you could then get different versions of fur loincloths and stuff. If you'd use just one type of fur, it would list it in the description, but if you'd use several, it would say mixed patches, as in the current fur cloak.

[Solfius]

having different versions of fur loin cloth would be very awkward as it would generate many different kinds of clothing entry on the menus.

I like having different kinds of fur in principle, but will only support it in practice if a system is put in place whereby a material can have a name (fur) and a descriptor (wolf, bear, etc).

Such a system could be extended to all materials allowing for regional varieties of the "same" material to be created.

[PRUT]

I'm a sailor.
I docked to piece of land and saw strange big animal which I hadn't seen before. It's an elefant!
O God?! How did you know that this is elephant? What the hell means elephant?
I would rather call this big grey thing!

I totally support dynamic naming of animals. Why my chars automatically know every animal in the world even if never met them?
Can be short description, but no given name

[Crosshair]

Yep. I like.

[Sarah]

I think that, although it could be interesting to come up with new names for the animals, this would overall be a waste of time for players, and for programming. Since you mention clothes, I personally would just rather see the names of them. (Not that the descriptions are bad or not useful, but names are quicker and easier. I think descriptions should just be on the build or clothing menus.)

If you want more descriptions and dynamic naming, why do you just single out animals? What about tools, weapons, vehicles, buildings, furniture, etc.?

[Solfius]

If you want more descriptions and dynamic naming, why do you just single out animals? What about tools, weapons, vehicles, buildings, furniture, etc.?

Hush now, little by little

I think clothes ought to display the name of the object as a link, which you click to view the description; similar to how you click the name of a person to view their description.

The same can work for animals, and anything else you may want to dynamically name.

[Sarah]

This would create even more work for the RD, though. They would have to write out descriptions of all the animals. . . . I like the idea of a link to the descriptions, though. And if this was to be implemented, I would prefer to have the names of the animals there by default, but be changeable.