Pets

Tyr · Post by **Tyr** » Wed Jul 16, 2003 4:14 pm

Mobs flagged with ACT_PET that are not in pet shops can be claimed by characters with the animal empathy skill.

For mobs IN pet shops:
WITH ACT_PET will go in the the pet field.
WITHOUT will go in the horse field.

Therefore only flag a mob ACT_PET if it is only in a pet shop and you want it to go into the pet field, or if you want characters to be able to claim it as a pet.

Tyr

Dalvyn · Post by **Dalvyn** » Wed Jul 16, 2003 10:23 pm

Just to be sure I understood it. There are now 2 kinds of "companions", pets and mounts.

Mounts: can only be "bought" in pet shops. They should NOT have the ACT_PET flag. They can be ordered without the 'handle animal' skill.

Pets: can be "bought" from pet shops, or called with 'companion' or 'find familiar' . They should have the ACT_PET flag. You use the 'handle animal' skill to order them. People can claim mobs with the ACT_PET flag by using the 'animal empathy' skill.

A few questions...

- I guess that you cannot claim a mob that is someone else's pet.

- Does killing a pet and/or a mount still produce a log and require 'murder' instead of 'kill'?

- Do wizards have to use the 'handle animal' skill to order their familiar?

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Jul 17, 2003 12:08 am

For further clarification, mobs that are ACT_PET can still be ACT_MOUNT, right? So a ranger could say, tame a wild horse and use it as a mount for instance? Or is the mount flag what now restricted in some way?

Tyr · Post by **Tyr** » Thu Jul 17, 2003 7:15 pm

Dalvyn wrote:Mounts: can only be "bought" in pet shops.

A few questions...

- I guess that you cannot claim a mob that is someone else's pet.

- Does killing a pet and/or a mount still produce a log and require 'murder' instead of 'kill'?

- Do wizards have to use the 'handle animal' skill to order their familiar?

Horses from the warhorse spell go into the horse field, not pet.

You cannot claim someone elses pet.

Killing a pet works the same as before and horses work just like pets.

I will exempt familiars from handle animal, but to order any other pet or horse will require the skill.

ACT_MOUNT has no relation at all to ACT_PET. You can have ACT_MOUNT mobs that are not pets or horses. If a mob is ACT_PET and ACT_MOUNT it can be claimed and ridden. RACE_HORSE mobs will be claimed as horses, anything else will be claimed as pets.

Mask · Post by **Mask** » Wed Jul 23, 2003 6:11 am

I'm not sure I like this idea. Wouldn't it be better to have a 'tame' skill for rangers in which they could attempt to tame wild creatures ? That way we wouldn't need to add ACT_PET all over the place.

Marty

Tempus · Post by **Tempus** » Wed Jul 23, 2003 7:57 am

Or you could use the existing animal handle skill and exempt rangers and druids from the act_pet check when using the skill, if you want them to be able to tame animals that others wouldn't be able to.

Dalvyn · Post by **Dalvyn** » Wed Jul 23, 2003 1:03 pm

What about animal mobs that are used in quests? We certainly do not want them wandering around different areas (if they are not meant to) and following a character.

It's (nearly) impossible to distinguish between programs used in a quest an programs that have been added to make the mob more IC (rand_prog with echoes for example). So, you would have to make it so that mobs with at least 1 program cannot be affected by the skill.

Basically, the ACT_PET flag is a good idea to determine which mobs can be tamed (no matter what their programs are if they have any).

Mask · Post by **Mask** » Wed Jul 23, 2003 1:29 pm

Well, obviously if an animal was tamed all of it's programmes would be shut off, the same as we shut off the programmes on charmed mobiles.

My feeling is that we should try and avoid making you and Sharon wade through every mob in every area file, and having to think 'Could this mob be tamed?'.

Additionally, I'd be concerned about the usage of ACT_PET willy nilly, as it is checked for in a large range of places and it may cause problems if a mob has ACT_PET, but exists in the wild.

Marty

Tempus · Post by **Tempus** » Wed Jul 23, 2003 2:32 pm

Have some food values been changed already then? That would explain why i've started getting hungry every 20 mins or so when mining on Tan...

Tyr · Post by **Tyr** » Wed Jul 23, 2003 3:09 pm

Mask wrote:Additionally, I'd be concerned about the usage of ACT_PET willy nilly, as it is checked for in a large range of places and it may cause problems if a mob has ACT_PET, but exists in the wild.

What I did before coding this was go through and check where ACT_PET was used. It was only a few places. I changed IS_PET to something like:
ch->master and ch->master->pet == ch

The only place it was really used besides determing if a mob was a pet is in shops to determine if a mob should be sold, and the way pet shops are designed ALL mobs in the room are there to be sold anyway so it was redundant.

Greg

Dalvyn · Post by **Dalvyn** » Wed Aug 06, 2003 10:37 pm

And what should we do about "pets" that are not mounts and do not require animal handling to order (e.g., golems)?

Tyr · Post by **Tyr** » Thu Aug 07, 2003 7:47 pm

Using animal handler on a pet that is ACT_CITIZEN will be considered theft of property and therefore you will be wanted for doing so. The penalty will be the same as for CRIME_MUGGING

Andreas · Post by **Andreas** » Fri Aug 08, 2003 2:50 am

Err... so if I accidently order the wrong mob (when there's several horses in the same room it sometimes takes a few tries to figure out which is which), my character will be accused of a crime?

Tempus · Post by **Tempus** » Fri Aug 08, 2003 8:16 am

Err... so if I accidently order the wrong mob (when there's several horses in the same room it sometimes takes a few tries to figure out which is which), my character will be accused of a crime?

No. Attempting to claim a mob belonging to someone else for your own will be a crime - theft of property.

Attempting to order a pet/mount which does not belong to you should fail as it does now.

(Disclaimer - this is my interpretation of how it works, i may be wrong

)

Talos · Post by **Talos** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 2:58 am

So, if I have programs to summon a mob and make it the pc's pet, instead of being bought in a shop, what part of the following needs to change?:

Code: Select all

if haspet($n)
  mpechoat $n You already have a pet.
else
  mpmload 16975
  mpforce m16975 follow $n 
  mpforce m16975 mpmset self master $n
  mpecho {80}a skeletal horse appears in a a black fog!!
  mpforce m16975 look $n
  mpforce m16975 emote walks over to $n's side.

I want this mob to be a mount and go in the appropriate field. So it won't have ACT_PET.

Tyr · Post by **Tyr** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 1:25 pm

I think just mpforce m16975 mpmset self master $n
to
mpforce m16975 mpmset self master $n horse

Tempus · Post by **Tempus** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 2:21 pm

What about the haspet($n) check ? Does that check horse field AND pet field, and return true if either contains a pet/mount? or is there now a separate hasmount($n) check? If there isn't, can you add one please

Tyr · Post by **Tyr** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 3:52 pm

haspet just pets. there is already a hashorse. I am way ahead of you for once

Kregor · Post by **Kregor** » Tue Jun 07, 2005 4:02 pm

What flag(s) need to be set on a unique horse mob to make it behave like a stallion/warhorse, as opposed to a riding horse/pony? eg, it will fight along with its rider, instead of nofight or fleeing if not mounted.

Pets

Pets

ACT_PET

ACT_PET

Re: ACT_PET