Knackered?

Hmm... given the range of negative effects possible, debilitated seems a bit vague. Lethargic seems good, but not quite on. Sleep-deprived is certainly appropriate, if not dramatic. That's a good one for the short-list.


I see what you are saying. Sort of like how "I'm starving!" is used frivolously.

But, with the caveat that I am not particularly fluent in physiology or anything, it does seem to me that it's not so simple with "exhaustion," because the word is used by both casual and rigorous English speakers to refer to two different kinds of states (depletion of energy, and sleep deprivation -- two very different kinds of forms of tiredness, though they do impact each other). And in both ways, from what I can tell of both usage (whether modern or archaic -- that I have seen, of course) and dictionary definitions, its use reasonably encompasses commoner and milder states (or even a different state) than the kind we're discussing.

In the sense of depletion of energy, once can exhaust main energy reserves in blood sugar and muscle. A gazelle can become "exhausted" and literally give up running from the predator, resigning itself to its death out of sheer lack of energy to keep running. But, if, somehow, the predator were scared away before it could consummate the chase, and the gazelle survived, sure, the gazelle would be severely out of breath. It would be tired and its muscles would ache; it would be what people would reasonably call "exhausted." But it would not be in the same state it would be if it had been literally denied sleep and kept active for four straight days, and it would get over the exhaustion much more quickly (at least in terms of sleepiness -- obviously accumulation of lactic acid in the muscles and so forth will take longer).

On the other hand, one advances through extreme stages of sleep-deprivation despite bodily energy conservation. Those of us who work hard and yet put on bellies can attest to the fact that one can become extremely fatigued in this sense, and yet experience a net increase in bodily energy reserves. Of course, where there is both strenuous physical activity and sleep deprivation, the effects of both are exacerbated.

So, it seems to me that it's not so much a matter of the cheapening of a word that is already, by definition, used loosely, as it is a matter of a distinction that really is not made very much by our language itself (and therefore by our casual thought). Sensation and range of forms of discomfiture and distress being relative, "exhausted" could be said to refer to any state in which one's normal, routine energy level has been depleted, and the body is showing some substantial level of distress and shifting into energy-conservation mode. And it could also be reasonably used to refer to mild sleep-deprivation as well.

So, "exhaustion" would, I'd say, be appropriate for the second-to-last level of tiredness. Fatigue is really a very good word for this paradigm, but the designers' usage of it for the wrong concept (the physical exhaustion concept, as in the gazelle) makes it less desirable for other uses. Sure, it also fits the bill -- the person is exhausted, but we're talking about an advanced stage of exhaustion itself, accumulated over an extended period of sleep deprivation, and in such a way that blood sugar and normal energy reserves do not ameliorate. (And, hence, the medical dictionary definition for "prostrate" at Dictionary.com, http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/prostrate, uses the term "extreme exhaustion.")

The stage at which, say, you might fall asleep while in the physical process of putting a large tray of bacon into an industrial-strength oven because of long-term, severe lack of sleep and overexertion.

It's strange. Prostrate comes pretty close in a way, but, aside from a strong interpretation of exhausted, I really don't think we have a word for this kind of extreme sleep-deprivation in English, do we? (And I absolutely refuse to use the word "pooped," those of you in the peanut gallery!)

EDIT: Wow. I need to have background music for this post -- someone singing a variant of the old pop song "Let's Get Physical," but with the words being "Let's Get Pedantic!" :nerd: :hehe:

Okay, if the idea is to emphasize the lack of sleep rather than the lack of energy, what about:

comatose (no, this doesn't necessarily mean unconscious)
torpid
somnolent
lethargic
zombified (just kidding)

[edit] While we're on the subject, I think you should at least consider swapping the order of "extremely hungry" and "famished"

Regarding the food vendors...

I agree that the vendors scattered around the country is unrealistic (not to mention improbable in any sense), and it is also not in keeping with the times of a sword-bearing, pre-industrial society.

If we consider how food might have been acquired during such periods, the reality is actuall y easier than the vendors and merchants. If you had traveled in that time period (or indeed in some 3rd world countries today) you would find no Wal-Mart, no Safeway, No grocery stores, and few if any merchants.

What you would find is a farmer on the way to market with a cart of foodstuffs that he had grown or items he had crafted, or meats that he had salted or prepared for barter in nearby villages and towns.

A friend of mine was telling me about going hunting as a boy in his home land ( with a fully automatic AK-47 yet ) , and when dinnertime rolled around you just knocked on a farmer's door and invited yourself to supper... If your hunt had been successful, part of your bounty would stay with the farmer, or you would trade news, gossip, and unfamiliar company for your dinner.

While all of that is a bit hard to work into our game world setting, random encounters with a farmer or hunter and a guar cart loaded with produce, or a few scattered farmers shacks would be easy (relatively) to set up. In cities, in reality there was just a street or section of town that was bascially called the marketplace where such farmers brought their crops, and no buildings need be dedicated to "food stores".

A farmer headed to market would have litle or no money with which to buy things from a PC, but would be able to sell the produce in his cart, so it would leave a sense of balance, Don't you think?

EDIT: An afterthought about one other thing... Can we get rid of the "potion" sound when we pick up or eat our steak, or are we stuck with it?

Do you mean tongs in general, or these tongs in particular? If tongs in general - probably. If these in particular - I think it would take someone with more skill than I have to make more antique-looking tongs with a reasonable poly count. I did make another set that looks quite handmade, since it was actually a model of some I made myself when I was a kid (for easier cooking on the campfire - otherwise I had to use sticks, and I kept setting fire to my dinner ), but the poly count on those is just too high I think (I just checked, it's 3260 tris).

Anyway - maybe someone else could do something better :poke: :hehe:
And if you want to know what barbecue tongs look like when they're made by an unskilled kid, http://img109.imageshack.us/img109/8096/cap1.png a (rather badly lit) CS screen of both.

One of the changes in Morrowind Crafting associated with converting food to potions was that the potion up and potion down sounds were changed to be identical to picking up and dropping a miscellaneous object. I never understood why a potion should make a bubbling noise when you pick it up. That goes even more so when the potion you're picking up is a baked ash yam or piece of kwama quiche. We're definitely not stuck with it.

And I agree that we probably should get rid of it, but I suppose that much is probably obvious.

[edit] Re: tongs, the same mesh used for the fork of horripilation looks virtually identical to the big grilling fork I use with my barbecue grill. It's not tongs, but it definitely goes with a grill, it has the advantage of being of period design, and apart from that one item, it's otherwise unused.

True that comatose doesn't necessarily imply unconsciousness, but most people are going to associate it with total lack of mobility. How about instead the word 'listless' - less severe than comatose, and someone could be on their feet but listless.

Torpid and somnolent, being rather esoteric words, might require players to have to pause the game in order to look up the meaning. Tho somnolent is probably the most appropriate definition related to extreme sleep fatigue.

I already suggested lethargic - most people should know what that means, it's a more commonplace word and get's the targeted condition of sleepiness across adequately IMO.

Another word strongly associated with sleepiness: weary (probably not strong enough of a description tho, maybe better for a step up on the scale from the lack of sleep description we're hunting for). :snoring:



That would actually do nicely - more crude than the wooden-handled tongs. :thumbsup:

What about just having two long pieces of flat cut bamboo, like giant chopsticks? One placed on either side of what needed to be grilled before cooking and held together to clamp the food for easy turning / retrieval.

Weary is definitely not strong enough. Weary is how you feel after a long day's work, not when you've been awake for 72 straight hours. Also, weary is already on Gluby's list of "sleepy" words.

Now "vegged-out" is how you are after you've been awake for 72 straight hours, but I don't think slang is the direction we're going to want to take this.

I agree completely, and thank goodness we're not stuck with it!

About the barbecue grill...

I've never really liked it... for thing the "barbecue" grills of the period circal late 1600s) was made of wood, and used to smoke meats rather than cook them in the traditional sense.

The grill was called a "boucan" and was originated by natives in Brazil and popularized on the the island of Tortuga, becoming the origin of the word "bucaneers". So, for an authentic grill, you're looking for a crude wooden frame that need not be heavy or cumbersome. A few bamboo ( though the real bamboo would probably not do well in this use) style sticks that could be arranged over an open fire ( actually coals ) would do.

Or alternatively... a sharp stick in a rabbits butt held up by two forked branches...

Agreed. I'm kinda feeling that way at the moment - more likely due to a combination of sleep deprivation and hunger, actually need to "veg-out" (cravin' nature's vitamins). :cold:

And a couple more for good measure:
Delirious
Dopy

[Censored]-tired?

Ack, maybe that's because that's how I feel myself, right now. But I imagine it would be objectionable.

Actually, Melian, strangely enough, I quite like your child-made tongs.

For the grill, I like the wooden thingy you're talking about, Neil, though I think anything that looks vaguely Morrowindish could pass.

Spent a few minutes with a thesaurus and I see what you mean about the fatigued problem. Best I found was:
consumed
drained
drowsy
enervated
faint
haggard
prostrated
spent
wasted
worn out
depleted
expended
zonked

...Though it's probably not worth worrying about too much since it won't often happen anyway, I would guess. I kind of like "haggard" myself though. :shrug:


Oh, OK. :blink: Well, you can have those too if you want - but like I said, they're not really within the standard MW poly-count bracket. I'll see what I can do about that, I might be able to do a better job now (I made those ones a while back). BTW, you may get a few complaints that they don't have handles (at least, the couple of people who've seen them before complained about that). You have to wrap a rag round them to protect your hand.


I like the idea of being able to smoke meat and fish. Is that likely to be added? (And if so: does anyone have a pic of one of these smoking-frames? )

---

Edit: I tried, but I can't make tongs like that without a lot of polys. http://rapidshare.com/files/305806718/oldTongs.7z the old version if you want it anyway - it should be OK to use as long as you don't fill a room with them or something, and I don't expect anyone will want to do that. Anyone who wants to redo/alter it is welcome. Just mesh and icon in this dl, it's set to use a vanilla texture.

Here's a pic of a boucan that was a little more complex. Note that some of the rack portion burned away. It's very similar to that firepit with the kettle in vanilla MW, but lower down has a tree-sided framework across which the sticks are laid to form the "rack".

In a full blown smoker, the 3 outer sides would be covered maybe by big leafy fronds, forming it into a kind of teepee.

Edit Dang, I fogot the link...
http://pagure.canolblog.com/images/t-Pira__boucan_.jpg

Okay, so on the hunger/thirst/sleep/fatigue discussion, I figured I would spend some time thinking on it and then weigh in my thoughts on the subject. My personal feeling, at the moment, is to run with 6 levels for Hunger, 4 for Thirst, 5 for Sleep, and 1 for Fatigue actually. Some of this pulls from the OP, others posts, and some fresh examples as well. I also provided examples of display messages for each.

My Choices:

Hunger (6, Least to Worst): Peckish, Hungry, Famished, Ravenous, Edacious, Dying of Starvation		Example: "You are peckish and should find food soon." (No Penalty)				 "You are hungry and need to eat."				 "You are famished from a lack of food."				 "You are ravenous from a lack of food."				 "You are edacious from hunger and must eat!" (Apply Auto Eating Save)				 "You are dying of starvation!" (Start draining health?)Thirst (4, Least to Worst): Parched, Thirsty, Dehydrated, Dying of Thirst		Example: "You are parched and should find something to drink." (No Penalty)				 "You are thirsty and need to drink."				 "You are dehydrated and must drink!" (Apply Auto Drinking Save)				 "You are dying of thirst!" (Start draining health?)Sleep (5, Least to Worst): Drowsy, Tired, Haggard, Lethargic, Torpid		Example: "You are drowsy and will soon need sleep." (No Penalty)				 "You are tired and need to sleep."				 "You are haggard from a lack of sleep."				 "You are lethargic from a lack of sleep."				 "You are torpid and must rest!"Fatigue (1, At 0 Fatigue): Exhausted 		Example: "You are exhausted and need to catch your breath."

"Lethargic" seems to reflect a reduction in drive and energy, as you would be if you were somewhat tired. It reads like a "mild" or "moderate" state of tiredness, not a severe one.

Maybe "Totally exhausted" would work where plain old "Exhausted" doesn't. When something is "empty", it can be considered "exhausted". The term can mean a severe state, but is typically misused as a mild one, making it less than ideal either way. In the example of the Gazelle, the exhaustion is only temporary, but very real.

At some point, "Hallucinating" might come into play at extreme stages of sleep deprivation. With a MWSE version, that could be accentuated by fading the edges of the screen or blurring things.

I didn't mind the grill artwork, aside from the huge size of the thing. It looked like it should have weighed 50-100 units at the very least. An alternative could be a Roman-style brazier, with a cylindrical open iron framework where you could place "slats" across the fire at different levels; essentially a set of 3-4 iron hoops with vertical bars seperating them, and a few of the vertical bars extending further to become legs.

I can agree with the sentiment to adjust the number and "fit" of the various food vendors. The Food Stations felt totally out of place, and the food tables in the Legion forts seemed like an unnecessary addition where a simple vendor with a pack or bag could serve the same function. The MCA-added farmers with pack Guars were a plausible addition, and finding the occasional random merchant or farmer making a stop along the side of the road would seem perfectly natural. Publicans could be better utilized, in my opinion, rather than seperate vendors in most towns, although a few random food vendors appearing in the market area (some local growers, others importers) or a temporary stall here and there wouldn't hurt. Again, the woodsellers in MC fall into that category, except that they're a bit on the "permanent" side.

All things considered, I still think "exhausted" is the best word. It might not carry all of the connotations that Gluby is wanting regarding sleep deprivation, but any word that DOES fit the situation completely is either going to be ridiculously hyphenated (dead-on-ones-feet), overly esoteric (torpid), excessively clinical (somnolent), or regional slang (Knackered).

I'm with Kovacius on this one. I think "Totally exhausted" is a good compromise.

@ Red Eye: umm, edacious? That sounds like a good word for how hungry a person has to be before they'll start eating things like... dictionaries.

Damn. I hate it when I accidentally replace a previous post instead of making a new one.

Restating this post, the gist of it is that I'm in agreement with the sentiments expressed. "Total Exhaustion" seems like it's about the best thing we're going to come up with.

What, are you guys tired of the conversation?

[Waiting for groans.]

And that has about knackered out the conversation on tiredness.

I am still trying to get this stubborn RoF out, and Red Eye has told me that his OS has been eaten by a virus, so perhaps it's a good time for a lull.

Or maybe not. Toccatta, what do you think about the Choice Cuts methodology, so to speak, which would allow us to sensibly keep different artists' art for the same meats?

It's gonna put a burden on your cooking scripts to have multiple cuts of meat from various animals when it comes time to figure out if the player's carrying everything needed for a recipe. It's bad enough having two different sizes of eggs, and four different mushrooms (mushroom soup was a mess to code). But at least they were interchangeable. Resolving the conflict by saying THIS meat is racer briast and THAT meat is racer thigh strains the credibility of the recipes, since that's basically a difference which makes no difference. To be honest, I haven't got any sure-fire ideas on how to resolve it. This isn't just an issue with MC and TR, either. I expect we're going to see quite a few mods with overlapping ingredients, and there's just no simple way to resolve it.

And while there's nothing that says they should HAVE to care about what items have already been introduced via other mods, it's pretty obvious that the TR team doesn't. That means the next time a map section is released, and possibly each time after that, someone (most likely you, Gluby) will have to go back and try to resolve a new conflict as they add several private versions of various ingredients that are already in use by someone else.

The most reasonable solution would be one where the reagent is picked which causes the least disruption to the community. Items with custom meshes and textures should take precedence over items with generic artwork, but in cases where both ingredients have custom art, it simply boils down to: "Which one is easier to replace?" Quite frankly, since the racer briast in TR isn't actually used in any scripts (at least not that I've detected yet) there's nothing which relies on those objects having a specific ID. So it would be less disruptive to replace them. Unfortunately, that may require issuing a new patch each time the TR team releases a map unless they decide to accept the NoM_data.esm as a standard and start using those items in their building projects.

I'm guessing that's unlikely. Call me cynical, but I just don't see it happening. They've shown an indifference to other mods bordering on arrogance. Perhaps they have their reasons, and as I said earlier, there's nothing that says they HAVE to care about what items have already been introduced. But there's nothing that says they CAN'T make an effort to support compatibility either. So far, they haven't shown much interest in it that I can see.

While I see a need for some complexity to bring realism to game play, I kind of wonder just how complex we really need it to be. There are no doubt hundreds of mods floating around that could conceivably have conflicts with NoM... I really dont see how we could accomodate them all.

There's another consideration here as well that may not be a popular subject, but I'll give it aa try anyway. Many mods have been patched to get rid of conflicts with NoM... Not because they care about NoM, per se, but because doing so makes thier mod more attractive and playable.

There's nothing wrong with that, but the point is that if one has a mod and wants it to be adaptable to entertaining and realism adding components like NoM, then it's at least in part up to them to make patches and what changes are needed from their mods perspective.

Anyway, the secondary point is that the simpler NoM's scripting is, the simpler such patches are for other modders. If NoM is so complicated that nobody wants to attempt to make apatch, then NoM patches won't get made.

I have a little sign on my desk, it contains perhaps the most valuable and most often ignored piece of advice I've ever received... it says "KISS". It means "Keep It Simple Stupid".

Re TR stuff... I think TR have a policy of not requiring anything "extra" (ie no chance of dependency on a NoM esm)?? In any case, I really think it's best to leave TR alone entirely with the base version, and just make a TR patch. I'd like to see more integration with MC, myself - after all, Toccatta is here and contributing, and it's a major mod that affects the same type of things, and above all it's stable and not (AFAIK?) likely to ruin compatibility with an update anytime soon.


Agree 100%

Hoping on and dealing with the BS on my PC for now while I back some last minute things up before a reformat.

Anyways, in regards to the current debate, something to also consider, tied to what Tocatta mentioned, would be utilizing Ref Replacers with Mash as NoM has in the past. However, I do think some various major projects should be taken into account as well. In regards to MC, we need to work really hard to make these work wonderfully together, especially (as mentioned), having Tocatta here and available to help make this possible with much more ease. I think TR should also be a consideration, though, as Ref Replacers (to my knowledge) do not work on ESM files (though I could be wrong). If that is the case, patches should be done to help ensure survival under the NoM settings on such a large landmass that could easily isolate a PC from various needs. If Ref Replacers can work, TR would still need to be considered to get their item IDs so they can be properly replaced by NoM equivalents. I find this important, in large, due to what Tocatta mentioned about the general TR stance in these matters. They don't tend to account for other mods, focusing on their project due to just how massive it is, but do not care about people making things work nice with their product. In the terms of projects like NoM and TR that move for such drastic changes, it would be better to see more inward working between the projects to help this along. As this may or may not be the case, depending on how going about asking their team would go, would mean a large portion of this effort would lie on us and if we want NoM to work with that mod.

Granted, as I said, on the flip not, I am all for modders taking up the stead on their own as they have in the past - this why it will be essential to release the proper resources with this as has been done in the past to further facilitate this matter. I imagine any major project that already has NoM compatibility will update as long as we do not make it a Herculean effort to do so and further succeed in making NoM a more desirable mod as well by cleaning things up and polishing it as this project intends. However, this still leaves massive and popular projects that did not ever have NoM functioning to begin with. Some will be no problem, as they use many vanilla items, but updating Inns on the TR landmass and adding in some support for special ingredients over there, or a patch to throw our items into some of their leveled lists, would be of a great help to many players and widely appreciated and accepted (though this will put more on us to maintain this as TR makes future releases, or to the community at large by giving an open EULA with the patch ESP so anyone is allowed to update it).

Anyways, just some general thoughts, back to dealing with this darn virus

To be clear: I'm not saying there shouldn't be a TR patch, I'm just saying I don't think that basic design decisions and such should be influcenced too much by TR compatibility issues because it's very unlikely that the TR team would cooperate in fixing them, and updates could mess it all up. So making it part of the base mod isn't really a good idea IMO. A patch is easier to update and change.

I agree, though possibly include some resources in the base file I do not have issues with either (especially since I believe TR already gave the go ahead for this to Gluby). Some of them could be nice additions to the world, possibly, though I would imagine so more detailed looking into these items should be done and a consensus drawn upon what goes in and what is handled by a patch.

Re: How to Integrate Variant Meats



Honestly, I am not so concerned with maintaining strict functional difference. Sure, if we use this method, the difference between the meat cuts would be, as you point out, a superficial difference, and it would put a little extra burden on is to implement equivalents in our scripts.

But, like the mushroom types and kwama eggs, it's that intangible personality thing. The older I've gotten, the more I've come to realize that, in games as in life, silly little things often make an impact, in terms of enjoyability, disproportionate to their actual function. Even if we can rationally explain variants away as duplicative, they still may add an immersive element.

The limiting principle to that is that, of course, there's a balance, and too much is still too much. But if done right and with the proper restraint, I don't see this solution as necessarily bad. We won't likely want to incorporate *all* variants of all ingredients in each case (quality matters, for example), but I still think it's an option on the table we that could resolve the quandary in a technically-viable and minimally-abrasive way.

(On the technical side of it -- as far as I've seen with NoM scripts that deal with equivalents -- well, that was what I was alright prepared to do when I decided I would contribute to revising it.)

I don't imagine it would be safe to call anything a sure-fire solution -- everything will involve discretion -- but I don't think it will be so bad. First, we're working openly and inclusively here, and I know at least I am willing to take on a bit of extra burden to work out ways of coming up with workable compromises where choices necessarily involve discretion. That's no panacea, but if we run things right we can avoid or patch up a lot of problems.

Second, though, many of the choices really aren't as difficult or wild and woolly as they might seem at the abstract level we've been discussing them at. As I have said earlier and you have said here, there is no need to even be concerned with object definitions by other modders that do not use custom artwork (it's labor we're respecting here, not mere claims upon this or that object definition). Thus, to go back to the cliff racer meat example, this effectively leaves us with TR's and MC's. That's it. Kagouti meat? Same. Guar meat? Same. Alit meat? In that case, I don't believe you made one for MC, so that leaves only TR for Alit meat.

In fact, in most cases, we have one or two viable choices, the rest being casual reuses of Bethesda's stock art that are best addressed by Wrye Mash replacers.


Working in Parallel with the TR Team and/or Integration




Hmm... I can see what you guys are saying.

Here's my take on it. Overall, given the fundamental and pervasive nature of both mods (both of which, whatever the case, are de facto standards), I think we are more likely to see conscious collaboration from the TR team than might other projects. But, even if the TR Team chooses not to work directly or indirectly with us to make the projects specifically cooperative and compatible, that fact also means that we need to deal with it one way or another, and just excluding or categorically overriding TR resources where they conflict would, to me, be a bit aggressive.

I see what you mean, Melian, but to effectively put it off for a later patch seems like it would effectively turn us inward on the project, avoiding resolution of a key and fundamental problem (the resolution of which is a prime motivation for the revision of NoM), when the whole goal is to rebuild it from the ground up as a broader thing that can serve as a workable community standard and resource.

But, that said, even that may not be so much of a concern. Fortunately, even in a poor scenario in which our project team and the TR team only enjoy an icy mutual tolerance (which I don't think needs to or is likely to be the case), I don't think we really need to choose between TR mutual compatibility or not. I think we can work quite well under the assumption that NoM would be applied on top of TR, just as with many other mods, and that we don't need to expect them to integrate/incorporate our work here.

Further, I am not quite sure how much at risk of future incompatibilities we are, given the scope of what we're talking about. Basically, so far, we're discussing integrating object definitions and their inclusion in relevant leveled lists for TR food-ingredient, creature-part ingredients and (possibly) alcohols into our data ESM. So far, that's it -- no other data will come from TR, and none will be placed in non-stock regions (TR regional placements are properly the province of a NoM extension mod for TR). That's fairly narrow.

(And remember, at minimum, the original proposal is to include object definitions and an unreachable interior with one ref for each ingredient from other mods, making it so that NoM scripts *could* recognize those mods' ingredients if they happen to come into the game, even if NoM itself doesn't introduce them anywhere into actual play. I am just thinking we could find a better solution than mere passive recognition for quality additions by a de-facto-standard mod that use new art.)

But whatever potential impact there is from future TR object definition updates, it's true, that's something we (those currently involved in the project or whoever has taken ownership of the mod if we are retired/absent from it) will have to deal with.

But so far we've been pretty abstract about this all -- is there some specific area you are thinking of that will prove particularly problematic this way?


I agree here on overall policy. We're dealing first and foremost with making an engaging, immersive and eminently-usable addendum to a game, for player use, and that requires us to be very conscious of other major and pervasive mods. Again, TR is a standard now, and, perhaps, should be assumed as such for the future of MW modding -- as is, to a comparable extent, NoM. Even if we fail to secure a working relationship with explicit cooperation with the TR team, it seems appropriate to me that it would fall more to us to accommodate TR than the reverse, given the comparative scopes and intensity of the two projects.

On that note, though, I should say that I am very glad to have you helping out, advising and working with us here, Toccatta, and am committed to maintaining and building upon the mutual viability of NoM and your work. I think all here agree that your work, made specifically for NoM compatibility and use, should enjoy a high priority where a choice must be made between competing works for the same function/niche/object. And it will. So, as circumspect as I try to remain here, I just wanted to make sure that clear.


Definitely, a big priority goes to extensibility and ease of incorporation of NoM elements into mods.

Our putative license stands very clearly open, with incorporation into other mods and adaptation being highly encouraged, so that should be no problem. (This has also been something I've been meaning to ask you, Toccatta -- how do you feel about this? Assuming we proceed as discussed, a lot of your and Drac's work would be used and incorporated, and your permissions have some restrictions based on use and purpose. Assuming we proceed, would you be willing to open up license on them to maintain openness of the project, or would you prefer to retain your restrictions on usage of those resources?)


Re: Concern About Overcomplexity


Perhaps I am oversimplifying in my mind about the scope of the project, but what exactly are you talking about? Gameworld location refs? As far as I am concerned, NoM has a sort of recognized claim to the areas it has built substantially in, and, while enjoying the status of an important and pervasive mod, still needs to balance further usages with respect for other mods. (Balancing meaning we accommodate here, but build the bypass over Arthur's house there.) But, I think, this will not be so much of a problem, as I think consensus seems to be that we want to leave an equal or lesser gameworld footprint than we have in NoM 2.x.


Agreed in principle. But I'm not quite sure which area you're addressing. Much of what we are discussing means lessening complexity and increasing opportunity for spontaneous compatibility (though a contra tendency has been the concern expressed by several participants in the thread to keep the configurability -- that would be the main area that would increase complexity -- if the cost/benefit balance comes out favorably).

I'm probably missing your point, though -- what area are you specifically addressing?