Store Page
Don't Starve Together
All Discussions Screenshots Artwork Broadcasts Videos Workshop News Guides Reviews

Don't Starve Together

Store Page
Don't Starve Together >  Workshop > Isosurface's Workshop > Ownership > Discussions
Ownership
Description Discussions7 Comments306 Change Notes
Shequan 6 Jun, 2015 @ 2:50pm
Idea for Future Consideration
Hi Isosurface,

In response to the discovery that the Storm Cellar container mod could be easily griefed on our server I ran some additional tests. I wasn't able to get the console command you provided to return a true/false result to the console in my tests, but I confirmed on my own (less modded) server that Cellars were properly 'locked' but could still be emptied with a hammer.

My guess is that this issue is NOT related to your mod. When attacked by giants the cellars had the same behavior so maybe hammer griefing of that container mod was possible all along (or as of a game patch). In response to a request to make the cellar more imprevious to giants, that mod author provided an update yesterday with a configuration option that prevents hammering an/or destruction by giants. With that update, the griefing potential is pretty much eliminated except for one hole which is a function of OTHER mods we are running.

We are running a couple mods that enable cave/ruins content in game (extended map gen, craftable ancient alter, & minable gems). This adds a lot of depth in a large-long-endless world, but it also introduces a new griefing item: the deconstruction staff. This staff can be used to destroy any structure (regardless of ownership).

I realize this is WAY outside the scope of your mod, which is designed (beautifully I might add) to work with the game content, as it exists today. If in some future update you could tie the use of a deconstruction staff to ownership (so only owners could deconstruct structures) this would close that griefing hole.

The other idea (which I mentioned in the mod comments) is the concept of ownership related to telelocator focuses. Again this is something only made possible by the group of mods mentioned above and is well outside the scope of what one cold reasonably expect of a mod like this. That said, if anyone could pull it off..

I absolutely understand that you are not paid for your hard work related to these mods and this is just for fun. I’m also amazed by what you and other top-mod-authors can accomplish with these mods in terms of improving /extending the game. If at some point you found these cave-content related issues were something you could take a look at that would be awesome.

Best Regards,
Shequan
Last edited by Shequan; 7 Jun, 2015 @ 7:45am
< >
Showing 1-9 of 9 comments
Isosurface  [developer] 9 Jun, 2015 @ 1:56am 
Shequan, empty-upon-hammered is an original game feature designed to release container contents, and it is applied to all containers. My mod overrides that so content of a container cannot be stolen in any way, however, this comes at a cost that the content will be destroyed if the container is destroyed.

I CAN apply this to storm cellar, but if the cellar is destroy by a giant, all contents will be lost (which can be a tremendous loss). Distinguishing a player-destroyer from a giant-destroyer is not that straight forward. It’s hard and probably not fair to decide whether I should release the content if a giant comes, or destroy the content if a player is nearby, etc. What should I do if the owner, a griefer and a giant are all present at the scene?

This mod does not intend to make everything absolutely indestructible. Actually, I consider ancient staves as high tier weapons and I should allow them to be used in the way they are designed to do. I know some mods make ancient staves extremely cheap to craft, but trying to counter-balance it would affect normal gameplay in an undesirable way.
#1
Shequan 9 Jun, 2015 @ 10:41am 
Your thinking re the game mechanics, situations, and high tier items is sound and I appreciate that you took the time to consider my idea and provide this thoughtful response. I believe the current state of the two mods (cellar & ownership) now provides significant options for world admins to provide various layers of security. Thank you.
#2
raka 13 Jun, 2015 @ 10:48pm 
Need to add flowers to protected harvest. If i will plant flower near mine Box and then someone picked it, this guy can leave me without honey.
#3
NPCMook 1 Jul, 2015 @ 9:34pm 
Any chance you can add compatability with Larger Chest mod? http://steamproxy.net/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=396026892&searchtext=chest
#4
Gonz008 23 Jul, 2015 @ 4:33pm 
Hey, I was wondering if you have applied your changes to the Large chest mod. I run a public dedicated server and I'd like for people to be able to build a regular chest to be under your mod (for them to have sole ownership), but I was wondering if the large chests would be available to be open or "free" to everyone else to go about since its not part of the "original" game.
#5
Muche 9 Dec, 2015 @ 8:40pm 
It seems that Woodie's werebeaver form ignores Fortify buildings setting. Would it be possible that he will be subject of it?
#6
Muche 8 Jan, 2016 @ 5:11am 
Originally posted by Muche:
It seems that Woodie's werebeaver form ignores Fortify buildings setting. Would it be possible that he will be subject of it?
This patch fixes this:
--- modmain.lua +++ modmain.woodiefix.lua @@ -252,17 +252,23 @@ end) -- Fortify buildings ------------------------------------------ if Fortify_Building < 1 then local old_hammer_action = GLOBAL.ACTIONS.HAMMER.fn - + GLOBAL.ACTIONS.HAMMER.fn = function(act) if act.doer.Network ~= nil and act.doer.Network:IsServerAdmin() then - if act.invobject and act.invobject.components.tool then act.invobject.components.tool:SetAction(GLOBAL.ACTIONS.HAMMER, 1) end + if act.invobject and act.invobject.components.tool then act.invobject.components.tool:SetAction(GLOBAL.ACTIONS.HAMMER, 1) + elseif act.doer and act.doer.components.worker then act.doer.components.worker:SetAction(GLOBAL.ACTIONS.HAMMER, 0.25) + end return old_hammer_action(act) elseif act.target:HasTag(ownershiptag) and act.doer.userid ~= nil and not act.target:HasTag('uid_'..act.doer.userid) then - if act.doer ~= nil and act.doer.components.talker then act.doer.components.talker:Say("Get wrecked!") end - if act.invobject and act.invobject.components.tool then act.invobject.components.tool:SetAction(GLOBAL.ACTIONS.HAMMER, Fortify_Building) end + if act.doer ~= nil and act.doer.components.talker then act.doer.components.talker:Say("Get wrecked!", nil, nil, true) end + if act.invobject and act.invobject.components.tool then act.invobject.components.tool:SetAction(GLOBAL.ACTIONS.HAMMER, Fortify_Building) + elseif act.doer and act.doer.components.worker then act.doer.components.worker:SetAction(GLOBAL.ACTIONS.HAMMER, 0.25*Fortify_Building) + end return old_hammer_action(act) else - if act.invobject and act.invobject.components.tool then act.invobject.components.tool:SetAction(GLOBAL.ACTIONS.HAMMER, 1) end + if act.invobject and act.invobject.components.tool then act.invobject.components.tool:SetAction(GLOBAL.ACTIONS.HAMMER, 1) + elseif act.doer and act.doer.components.worker then act.doer.components.worker:SetAction(GLOBAL.ACTIONS.HAMMER, 0.25) + end return old_hammer_action(act) end end

Also here: http://pastebin.com/FaggQ608.
Last edited by Muche; 8 Jan, 2016 @ 5:28am
#7
Isosurface  [developer] 13 Jan, 2016 @ 12:51am 
Sorry I haven't checked the discussion boards for a while. I'll take a closer look at Woodie now.
#8
Joelle(Linux) 8 Dec, 2016 @ 7:10pm 
Hi,

I use the mod Fire Resurrection, however, with the Ownership mod installed, only owners of firepits and so forth can use them to resurrect. Is there a way, or could you, add a way to either exude firepits from the mod, or add "allow all" to them?
#9
< >
Showing 1-9 of 9 comments
Per page: 1530 50