Stash: The Unlimited Inventory Mechanic

[Bitula]

 

 

A proper RPG shouldn't encourage illogical out-of-character behavior.

 

Carrying everything, robbing everyone, breaking into houses, checking dumpsters - that is NOT how you'd expect a normal human to behave.

Yet the game enforces and rewards such behavior.

 

 

Going into a dungeon and HAVING to choose what to take and what to leave is how it should be.

I am talking about hostile territories like dungeons which comprise 90% percent of such game, not peaceful towns. Anyway a party would comprise at least one thief and one typical fighter/barbarian, so as a general consensus the party could opt to do battle as much as possible. It's quite realistic.

 

 

Disagree.

 

A thief wouldn't rush into battle just to rob a corpse of a few coppers. It ain't worth it. A thief also wouldn't pick up every single piece of scrap to sell it.

Barbarians are not stupid either. They wouldn't burden themselves with unnecessary crap.

 

When deep in enemy territory, you do scavenge IF NECESSARY.

But you don't pick up 20 swords and carry them with you to sell later.

 

"Trash" items have no purpose to boot - other than for flavor. I mean, how pathetic must your hero be to collect 100 pieces of old, smelly rags just to sell them for 1 silver?

 

Ah but no, I am not talking about trash but the possibility to check any corpse for loot and take what you need. Actually even 10 swords which are in good shape are not trash, you would pick it also if you’d live in a world where it sells good or mediocre. Imagine yourself.  Quite realistic. Also I am talking about cumulative decisions, maybe X doesn’t care for money but Y does so altogether it will be picked by someone due to compromise, well unless you make a party of 7 paladins or so.

 

Edit: note, this is a party based game, I have the feeling that several people forget this, possibly because the newer genre games where you have one PC with max. 1-2 follower or so, which allows for very different mechanics and changes game play substantially. A classical large party based game is very different. I like this latter better.

Edited February 7, 2013 by Bitula

[Giantevilhead]

Just make the unlimited stash an option you can either switch on or off.

 

In fact, a lot of these debates/pointless arguments can be avoided if they just make it so that certain features can be switched on or off.

[Amentep]

Ah but no, I am not talking about trash but the possibility to check any corpse for loot and take what you need. Actually even 10 swords which are in good shape are not trash, you would pick it also if you’d live in a world where it sells good or mediocre. Imagine yourself.  Quite realistic. Also I am talking about cumulative decisions, maybe X doesn’t care for money but Y does so altogether it will be picked by someone due to compromise, well unless you make a party of 7 paladins or so.

 

Edit: note, this is a party based game, I have the feeling that several people forget this, possibly because the newer genre games where you have one PC with max. 1-2 follower or so, which allows for very different mechanics and changes game play substantially. A classical large party based game is very different. I like this latter better.

 

In reality (even if your reality was a fantasy world) looting bodies would take a significant amount of time; most armor would probably be damaged, a lot of the weapons would be too. If you found a lot of significant weapons, how do you carry the swords back to town? You might have a few pack animals (if they weren't killed in the fight) so you might loot a few things to sell, but carrying 30 pounds of weapons over several miles sounds like more trouble than it'd be worth.

 

Frankly you're more likely to pry the large jewels from the chieftain's sword handle than to bother with the sword itself, because it weighs so much vs the amount you could get back.

 

Lets say you do take the time and carry back 10 swords to the nearest town though. Who would you sell the 10 swords to? The blacksmith? Does he have a market for 10 swords? Does he have the money to pay for 10 swords? The local guard? Do they have the money? Do they have the need? In other words you might be able to loot 10 good swords from a defeated group but there's a very possible chance that you wouldn't be able to do anything with them unless you plan to travel from town to town.

 

The problem is that ultimately this is all an abstraction. The reality of this situation is you'd probably take what you immediately needed (to repair or replenish your own supplies) and what was the easiest to carry and sell for the most profit. And leave the rest because carrying 30 pounds of swords 10 miles is going to be a pain in the ass with the real possibility that you can't do squat with them once you arrive. But the game version of the situation is that a lot of players want to min-max what they can get out of every encounter. Which is why we have people doing quests peacefully and then psycho-killing everyone for xp or in this case taking month long trips back and forth between dungeons they've cleaned out because it affords them a lot of spending money and there's no time penalty in most games.

[Bitula]

Well I like the idea of having a cart. Why not, at least one member of the party would be specifically interested in the loot and plans his journey accordingly. Like in many of dungeon style fantasy books some characters are just interested in getting rich and since others need his skills so a compromise evolves. You can RP it “to yourself” since the developers will never go so deep into supporting this via mechanics. And so it happens that even without a cart you have seven members who altogether can carry quite a lot of weight which when exceeded, items of lesser value can be dropped. This is far more realistic than having an infinite stash, which just encourages meta-gaming and breaks the atmosphere. I don’t think that much of the weapons should become broken. Why so, that is not realistic. Maybe some are damaged, which just lower their price and effectiveness. Broken or damaged, it is crucial to have them anyway, just for the sake of atmosphere, there is nothing worse than encountering a mailed foe whose armor cannot be picked, then encounter another whose can be picked, just because the game designers decided so. Or you see the weapon in ones hand, but you cannot pick it: makes the game feel wrong and unnatural.

 

Edit: regarding the issue, nobody will buy 10 swords. I don’t see why, it’s in any blacksmiths interest to buy usable weapons cheaply and sell it for a higher price or just use its material.

Edited February 7, 2013 by Bitula

[moridin84]

Just make the unlimited stash an option you can either switch on or off.

 

In fact, a lot of these debates/pointless arguments can be avoided if they just make it so that certain features can be switched on or off.

 

No, not really.

 

The game is going to be designed differently if the inventory space is limited than if it was unlimited. 

Edited February 7, 2013 by moridin84

[Helm]

 

Just make the unlimited stash an option you can either switch on or off.

 

In fact, a lot of these debates/pointless arguments can be avoided if they just make it so that certain features can be switched on or off.

 

No, not really.

 

The game is going to be designed differently if the inventory space is limited than if it was unlimited. 

True, albeit obvious. Even though it is a rather "ugly" mechanic. "Choice and Consequence" should also appy to the inventory system in my opinion.

 

I personally would certainly also miss the ability to build my characters inventory by finding items that allow me to carry more.

[Jodien]

I always prefer a RPG with a classic inventory feature because managing your inventory is one of the fun things in role playing games and I am sure most of the people like to make decisions and choices while managing it. But the thing in IE games I hated most was the ridiculous usage of the inventory slots. While you could stack items and carry lots of stuff that way, you just could not stack diferent items although they are the same type. I have 10 slots and able to carry 100 potions of healing in stacks of 10 each, BUT I am not able to carry 10 potions if they are all different spells. It is extremely silly. Just let the player stack all kinds of potions in 1 slot which has a (say) 20 bottle limit. When you click the slot you open a pulldown menu and see a list of all the potions in it. It is same with the ammunition, papers, scrolls, gems, rings, amulets and such small and lightweight items.

[Ffordesoon]

Yes, I think we can all more or less agree that however the final inventory system looks and acts, stacking should be a big part of it.

[Helm]

I always prefer a RPG with a classic inventory feature because managing your inventory is one of the fun things in role playing games and I am sure most of the people like to make decisions and choices while managing it. But the thing in IE games I hated most was the ridiculous usage of the inventory slots. While you could stack items and carry lots of stuff that way, you just could not stack diferent items although they are the same type. I have 10 slots and able to carry 100 potions of healing in stacks of 10 each, BUT I am not able to carry 10 potions if they are all different spells. It is extremely silly. Just let the player stack all kinds of potions in 1 slot which has a (say) 20 bottle limit. When you click the slot you open a pulldown menu and see a list of all the potions in it. It is same with the ammunition, papers, scrolls, gems, rings, amulets and such small and lightweight items.

Yes, it was certainly annoying. In Baldur's Gate 2 this was fixed by adding a potion case (and other goodies). The same for other items as well.

 

It was a great reward and I loved building my inventory with fantastic items like this.

 

 

[TrashMan]

Ah but no, I am not talking about trash but the possibility to check any corpse for loot and take what you need. Actually even 10 swords which are in good shape are not trash, you would pick it also if you’d live in a world where it sells good or mediocre. Imagine yourself.  Quite realistic. Also I am talking about cumulative decisions, maybe X doesn’t care for money but Y does so altogether it will be picked by someone due to compromise, well unless you make a party of 7 paladins or so.

 

 

Imagine myself? Would never do it.Think about it.

 

I'm on a long journey in hostile terrioty. I have no idea what's wating for me behind the next bend. And I'm already carrying lots of supplies, armor, weapons and whatnot. Fighting will all that? Go ahead - take a big campers backpack, stuff it full of stuf and go do some karate fighting. Then add armor and weapons.

 

If I would be taking anything at all it would be something who's weight/worth ratio is good. Small, valubale items. I'd only take a sword if I need a spare or backup.

[TrashMan]

Just make the unlimited stash an option you can either switch on or off.

 

In fact, a lot of these debates/pointless arguments can be avoided if they just make it so that certain features can be switched on or off.

 

 

Not that simple.

This is a mechanics and UI change - and one that would affect game balance. Not to simple as a switch.

[Bitula]

 

Just make the unlimited stash an option you can either switch on or off.

 

In fact, a lot of these debates/pointless arguments can be avoided if they just make it so that certain features can be switched on or off.

 

 

Not that simple.

This is a mechanics and UI change - and one that would affect game balance. Not to simple as a switch.

 

 

Ah but no, I am not talking about trash but the possibility to check any corpse for loot and take what you need. Actually even 10 swords which are in good shape are not trash, you would pick it also if you’d live in a world where it sells good or mediocre. Imagine yourself.  Quite realistic. Also I am talking about cumulative decisions, maybe X doesn’t care for money but Y does so altogether it will be picked by someone due to compromise, well unless you make a party of 7 paladins or so.

 

 

Imagine myself? Would never do it.Think about it.

 

I'm on a long journey in hostile terrioty. I have no idea what's wating for me behind the next bend. And I'm already carrying lots of supplies, armor, weapons and whatnot. Fighting will all that? Go ahead - take a big campers backpack, stuff it full of stuf and go do some karate fighting. Then add armor and weapons.

 

If I would be taking anything at all it would be something who's weight/worth ratio is good. Small, valubale items. I'd only take a sword if I need a spare or backup.

You should drop the backpack and then fight. To do this you would do some scouting to prepare for the battle. And then, you are not alone, so there are plenty people to share the weight. Even if some animations/mechanics are here not implemented and rather left to your imagination, it is still hundred folds more realistic than an unlimited stash. What the “hack” is that? You can’t even theoretically conceive any half-baked realism to support it…

[TrashMan]

You should drop the backpack and then fight. To do this you would do some scouting to prepare for the battle. And then, you are not alone, so there are plenty people to share the weight. Even if some animations/mechanics are here not implemented and rather left to your imagination, it is still hundred folds more realistic than an unlimited stash. What the “hack” is that? You can’t even theoretically conceive any half-baked realism to support it…

 

 

Drop the backpack? If I can.. if I'm not ambushed.. and of course, it will still be tireding to fight even without it.

 

Not alone? Yeah, in games generaly the entire party acts like pack mules, stuffed to capacity. Sharing weight makes sense (up to a point), but taking items of little practical value does not.

 

Unlimited stash SUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCKS.

[Bitula]

I think nobody would care to carry junk, it should be just there for the sense of realism and atmosphere. Related issue was: I simply do not consider a sword to be a junk. Even a simple iron sword is not a junk, unless it is broken or very rusty.

[Xienzi]

I honestly would be fine with just the slot based inventory and specific item bags system we've been using.. That's it. Nice and simple.

[Jodien]

 

 

I always prefer a RPG with a classic inventory feature because managing your inventory is one of the fun things in role playing games and I am sure most of the people like to make decisions and choices while managing it. But the thing in IE games I hated most was the ridiculous usage of the inventory slots. While you could stack items and carry lots of stuff that way, you just could not stack diferent items although they are the same type. I have 10 slots and able to carry 100 potions of healing in stacks of 10 each, BUT I am not able to carry 10 potions if they are all different spells. It is extremely silly. Just let the player stack all kinds of potions in 1 slot which has a (say) 20 bottle limit. When you click the slot you open a pulldown menu and see a list of all the potions in it. It is same with the ammunition, papers, scrolls, gems, rings, amulets and such small and lightweight items.

Yes, it was certainly annoying. In Baldur's Gate 2 this was fixed by adding a potion case (and other goodies). The same for other items as well.

 

It was a great reward and I loved building my inventory with fantastic items like this.

 

 

You don't have to find or buy an item in game, just to work around a silly design, do you? Edited February 11, 2013 by Jodien

[Amentep]

I think nobody would care to carry junk, it should be just there for the sense of realism and atmosphere. Related issue was: I simply do not consider a sword to be a junk. Even a simple iron sword is not a junk, unless it is broken or very rusty.

 

it is junk when you look at what it could sale for vs the weight vs how long you have to carry it to sell it vs the quality of your sword and whether you have any use for it.

 

Mind you in a game you don't feel the weight of the junk you're carrying, but that's why encumbrance systems exist, so that people don't carry everything that's nailed down because they either might someday need it or because they can get a shiny copper piece for it.  In reality, though, people aren't going to carry 7 swords and 5 full suits of armor for 700 miles to sell.

 

But the problem (IMO) isn't the inventory or the encumbrance system in games that encourage such action, its the economy. 

[Bitula]

 

I think nobody would care to carry junk, it should be just there for the sense of realism and atmosphere. Related issue was: I simply do not consider a sword to be a junk. Even a simple iron sword is not a junk, unless it is broken or very rusty.

 

it is junk when you look at what it could sale for vs the weight vs how long you have to carry it to sell it vs the quality of your sword and whether you have any use for it.

 

Mind you in a game you don't feel the weight of the junk you're carrying, but that's why encumbrance systems exist, so that people don't carry everything that's nailed down because they either might someday need it or because they can get a shiny copper piece for it.  In reality, though, people aren't going to carry 7 swords and 5 full suits of armor for 700 miles to sell.

 

But the problem (IMO) isn't the inventory or the encumbrance system in games that encourage such action, its the economy. 

It is not junk per se. It becomes junk after you become relatively rich and lose interest in selling common stuff. So it depends on the overall progress of your story. It’s all function of in-game time thus. More difficult dungeons have possibly better armed foes, so it could scale very well and make your income progressive along with other attributes/skills. For example, I’ve been really fond of finding my first dagger or leather armor. I think this sort of progression in personal wealth is a strongly motivating factor which keeps diligent gathering of loot entertaining. And no one cares to remove furniture, I think that is a different issue, I would make those immobile, and no one would care. I think no one would lobby to be able to remove furniture, that is not fun.

[Amentep]

It is junk; its only "not" junk because the economy of the game dictates that the player's sole source of income is what they can loot.  Which is the reason why players early on carry everything that isn't nailed down.

 

In reality if you have to add 3 lbs of weight for each longsword you've found and carry it on your person for several days and 100s of miles you're going to quickly decide carrying the sword is a waste of time (even if you swap the sword out, you'd be leaving your own behind).  Ergo its junk.

[Bitula]

It is junk; its only "not" junk because the economy of the game dictates that the player's sole source of income is what they can loot.  Which is the reason why players early on carry everything that isn't nailed down.

 

In reality if you have to add 3 lbs of weight for each longsword you've found and carry it on your person for several days and 100s of miles you're going to quickly decide carrying the sword is a waste of time (even if you swap the sword out, you'd be leaving your own behind).  Ergo its junk.

Yes “it is not junk because of the economy” and it’s only “junk because of the economy”. But objectively a useful sword is not a junk, so calling it a junk will just make the issue more difficult to understand, I don’t even know by now whether we essentially disagree anywhere at all or not at this point.

[Amentep]

 

It is junk; its only "not" junk because the economy of the game dictates that the player's sole source of income is what they can loot.  Which is the reason why players early on carry everything that isn't nailed down.

 

In reality if you have to add 3 lbs of weight for each longsword you've found and carry it on your person for several days and 100s of miles you're going to quickly decide carrying the sword is a waste of time (even if you swap the sword out, you'd be leaving your own behind).  Ergo its junk.

Yes “it is not junk because of the economy” and it’s only “junk because of the economy”. But objectively a useful sword is not a junk, so calling it a junk will just make the issue more difficult to understand, I don’t even know by now whether we essentially disagree anywhere at all or not at this point.

 

Oh I don't think we entirely disagreed; I think we're really looking at different desired solutions to the same problem.  You're looking at realistic inventory options (dropping backpacks in a fight (with I presume encumbrance penalties or extra attack opportunity if the player is surprised and unable to drop the pack quickly), pack animals, etc) I think, and I'm saying the fix needs to come looking at the in-game economy first (but I'm not against other things being added to that).

 

The deep stash could "represent" in the abstracted way games do things a backpack that each of your party member has dropped in a fight (thus making it inaccessible lest you open yourself up to attacks on your back).  I guess.

[Xienzi]

You know what would also be nice? A book bag for all those books you'll eventually be looting off shelves.

[JFSOCC]

You know what would also be nice? A book bag for all those books you'll eventually be looting off shelves.

I hope that, unlike other IE games, books are actually considered to be valuable, because, no printing press, low literacy, knowledge is power.

 

I went to the Dutch book museum in the Hague once, I was told that the cost for making a book was about equal to what would today buy you a villa.

[Xienzi]

 

 

 

You know what would also be nice? A book bag for all those books you'll eventually be looting off shelves.

I hope that, unlike other IE games, books are actually considered to be valuable, because, no printing press, low literacy, knowledge is power.

 

I went to the Dutch book museum in the Hague once, I was told that the cost for making a book was about equal to what would today buy you a villa.

 

 

A villa, eh? So did they have to be hand-written?

[JFSOCC]

I believe the biggest part of the cost was the material. not the labour. It was something like for every two pages in the book, you'd need to kill one sheep, tan it, then work the hide till it was thin and pliable enough. and then you'd have the labour intensive work of writing it in calligraphy, and if a mistake was made then entire page had to be redone.

 

yeah, it tends to get expensive that way I reckon.