Idea about when a project finishes you started.

[Arenti]

I think we all have experienced that when you start a project and others work on it and you are not at the location when it finishes, and it goes on the floor that sometimes or often people take it who should not take it.

Now what if you can assign someone who is in the room or outside that when you are not in that room our outside that the person gets it in his or her inventory instead that it falls on the floor or ground. So you won't be irrated when someone else picks it up.

[SekoETC]

Allowing people to pass the "ownership" of a project to another person might be doable but a system where you could assign a secondary owner and still get the results yourself if you happen to be on the spot would require adding something to the database and that's unlikely to happen. If it was possible to pass the project ownership to someone else, there would be no automation to get it back. Only if the new owner gave it back when their player gets online then you might get it back.

[snm2001]

if you would have them as secondary, I would hope you would be able to trust them enough to pass back project ownership the same way you would trust them to give you the items involved.. either way. You pass the ownership, make sure you are willing to leave it there. Make sure the person you are trusting is trustworthy, then you wont have any issues (hopefully)

[Arenti]

Too bad but I understand. But passing ownership could also happen with letting that person start the project so that won't be needed. I just like my idea because it can avoid frustration and things being stolen.

[Elros]

Yeah this isn't a bad idea. I wouldn't mind having that option, because sometimes on large projects you might have to leave and would rather pass the ownership to your apprentice or something. Once you pass it to them it would be permanent though so make sure you trust them

[nateflory]

I understand the potential for abuse and additional programming if a "list of owners" type thing is implimented (as I believe Arenti originally implied).

However, the potential to pass off a project to another character would be an excellent idea. There have been many times a character sets up a long-term project, (such as smelting, or cooking big batches of food, or gathering enough stone to build a Harbor, etc, etc) then much pop inside/outside a building, or attend to a thief, or other minor detail which makes them leave the original project. If another person does the final tick of work, that effort could be lost to the next active person to see things on the ground.
If a leader could setup a project and pass it off to an active worker, this would be helpful for the leader to attend to other projects.


It's a minor thing, I know, and there are workarounds already in-place in-game, but I can see great possibilities for such an option in my head already. Mainly to help larger communities with leader-types who control resource gathering/harvesting/etc and still need to move between buildings to coordinate stuff. They could start the project, then pass ownership to an apprentice if other business comes up unexpectedly which takes short-term priority.

It would still be up to the 'new owner' to pass the ownership back if necessary, and it probably wouldn't be used all the time by most characters, but the option to do so would be potentially easy to impliment and quite useful in a few situations.

Of course if the new owner could still move off that location and lose the results too, just like the original starter does currently, but this suggestion could add a bit of 'insurance' to some active community projects.

I like it!

[SekoETC]

So far it looks like this is leaning towards accepted. It's a pretty minor implementation but could have its merits. One possible problem could be that it could be used to secretly pass resources to sleepers, like if you started a project for gathering something unedible, then moved ownership to a sleeper and kept working on it so that they become so burdened that no one could pass them food. But if handing over project ownership created an event visible to everybody, that would eliminate the exploit. Can anyone think of any other reasons why this shouldn't be implemented?

[Arenti]

Yes I think it's a good idea to make it create an event when ownership of a project is handed over. As indeed it could be misused if an event is not created when the ownership is handed over.

[nateflory]

That's an excellent point I hadn't thought of, to fill up sleepers with a gathering project to prevent food... I was looking at it more from the change-in-code side which seems pretty easy and could benefit characters in certain situations.
Making it a public Event would at least warn people of any potential issues with the thing, but couldn't prevent them from changing it.
Along with that, I'm thinking that setting up some sort of "accept/decline" thing to prevent such nefarious uses would be more difficult to code than the potential benefits would help. Hmm...

I'd love to see some more discussion over the next week, before anything's rushed into though. This could have some rather sweeping consequences we might not have considered yet....

[Arenti]

Yes I agree, more people should be able to give thier opinion as indeed we might be forgetting something that might be a problem in some way.

[Dudel]

I see people passing all their projects to one person or one group of people and making it so the character's activity page is a little cluttired with "owned" projects.

Unsure about the "exploit" on sleepers. It would be no different then HANDING the sleeper people a bunch of worthless garbage so others can't give'em food so an event would be good.

I foresee a small problem when the initiator hands the project off and then that person leaves and the old person possibly becomes the initiator again.

I'm sure that could be "coded around" but I still think that might be a problem, some place.

But really I see nothing bad coming from this... or that it will be used too often.

[SekoETC]

Yes, if there was no public even then passing a project instead of passing resources would be a much more discreet way of murdering a sleeper, but with the event message people could either drag the sleeper into safety or warn anyone against working on the junk project, or just loading them up with food so that they won't have room for the junk resource.

Edit: I was aware of you understanding it, I'm just repeating things.

[Dudel]

Unsure about the "exploit" on sleepers. It would be no different then HANDING the sleeper people a bunch of worthless garbage so others can't give'em food so an event would be good.

[Elros]

I agree that we should have an event as well. As long as there is an event I see no problems with this suggestion. I agree that not many people will probably use it, but it will be very helpful to some people and should not be difficult to implement.

I am still for this.

[Genevieve]

Perhaps the "given" person would have to accept it somehow? Then a sleeper couldn't be given a project in a building with nobody to see them do it.