PDA

View Full Version : Dev Request: Account wide bank



Mad_Bombardier
10-10-2007, 11:03 AM
Just a brief request for bank slots (sample name, "Vault" to differentiate from "Bank") that can be accessed by all characters on an account. Could be the perfect reward for 400 House Kundarak favor (hopefully, coming soon™). Each character that achieves 400 House K favor unlocks one account-wide bank tab. Once created with your first 400 Kundarak favor, all characters, including newly rolled, would have access to the "Vault." The number of tabs in the "Vault" would be dependent on the number of characters that reach 400 House K favor. Max number of tabs could be limited to 5, 7, or 9 to prevent creation of characters specifically to unlock bank slots, then deletion, and recreation for unlimited tabs.

Edit1: Favor to unlock "Vault" slots, and then a transaction fee to add and remove items. 1% item base value on deposit and withdrawal adds to 2%, same as mailing an item through House Orien couriers. Same cost, added security (no worrying about misaddressed or lost mail, or mail timers) and convenience!

As an added idea, players could add to and remove coin from the vault. Coin could be deposited and withdrawn without additional fee (same as mail system). With the relatively low mail limit on coin, it would be an easy way to transfer from one character to another. And with some players approaching the coin limit on their characters, this adds an extra (2^32)cp capacity for carrying coin.

Edit2: To be absolutely clear, bound items cannot be stored in the "Vault"; only unbound/freely tradeable items. Bound items may be kept in character access "Bank" as normal.

Edit3: In regards to Character Transfers: Since your personal "Bank" would come with you, the "Vault" would stay. It would be server specific as the mail system; a "Server Vault." So, any items you wanted to take with you, you'd have to put in your inventory or "Bank." Just as you do now by collecting your goodies onto the one character that you are paying to transfer. Of course, if you transfered a character with 400 House Kundarak favor, you'd instantly unlock a new "Vault" on your new server in the same manner as you unlock 32pt builds with 1750 favor after transfer.

Thoughts, clarifications, suggestions?

Onubis
10-10-2007, 11:05 AM
/signed, could use to safely transport important items between toons and store stuff like lowbie equip, instead of mailling to anf from my 1 bank toon.

Magehound
10-10-2007, 11:24 AM
I would like to see something like this also. I don't know if they will every do it but would be sweet. They could make just one tab that shows up on all your alts.

Pfamily
10-10-2007, 11:24 AM
/signed

akla_thornfist
10-10-2007, 11:26 AM
/ signed this is a great ideal go for it devs

MrCow
10-10-2007, 11:38 AM
I concur. I like this idea.

Ziggy
10-10-2007, 11:43 AM
I agree with mad. would make things easier when looking through my mules.

Missing_Minds
10-10-2007, 11:50 AM
I like this idea as well. Granted I'd make it a vault person instead of a bank person and just give it, its own bank like interface.

This would be great for handling trades between personal characters without paying the mail system.
This would also be great for handling in game trades between people so they don't have to log off and log about to make a trade happen.

Borror0
10-10-2007, 12:03 PM
Sounds good. Count me in.

jjflanigan
10-10-2007, 12:26 PM
I like this idea as well. Granted I'd make it a vault person instead of a bank person and just give it, its own bank like interface.

This would be great for handling trades between personal characters without paying the mail system.
This would also be great for handling in game trades between people so they don't have to log off and log about to make a trade happen.

I highlighted the reason I don't think this would go in.

As much as I really would find this useful, I don't think it ever would for a couple of reasons.

1) Your characters are all unique and individual. Regardless of the fact that they are all on your account, they do not know each other and aren't friends to share a bank account (i.e. a guild bank)

2) I think they are always looking for ways to get money OUT of the system, not ways to help people keep their cash

Solstyse
10-10-2007, 12:28 PM
/signed

I recently had ro reroll my toon, and mailnig everything from him to my alt, then too the new toon took about an hour. his would be nice.

jjflanigan
10-10-2007, 12:31 PM
/signed

I recently had ro reroll my toon, and mailnig everything from him to my alt, then too the new toon took about an hour. his would be nice.

That, right there, is the single biggest reason I've not rerolled a lot of my characters. The thought of trying to transfer 3-4 pages of inventory and 2-3 pages of bank stuff makes me want to cry.

Mad_Bombardier
10-10-2007, 12:38 PM
I highlighted the reason I don't think this would go in. As much as I really would find this useful, I don't think it ever would for a couple of reasons.

1) Your characters are all unique and individual. Regardless of the fact that they are all on your account, they do not know each other and aren't friends to share a bank account (i.e. a guild bank)

2) I think they are always looking for ways to get money OUT of the system, not ways to help people keep their cashI thought about this aspect, too. Certainly, some players like to roleplay and if they choose not to use a shared "Vault" because their characters do not "know each other," that'd be ok. They would not be motivated to earn 400 Kundarak favor.

As to the money, well... The tiny bit of coin that House Orien takes out due to mail transactions really is inconsquential to most long time players. And, it's also a reason I proposed tieing the "Vault" slots to favor. Not everyone will have it right away, so money is still leaving the economy. But, if money was still a concern, how about this? Favor to unlock "Vault" slots, and then a transaction fee to add and remove items. 1% item base value on deposit and withdrawal adds to 2%, same as mailing an item through House Orien couriers. Same cost, added security (no worrying about misaddressed or lost mail, or mail timers) and convenience!

As an added idea, players could add to and remove coin from the vault. Coin could be deposited and withdrawn without additional fee (same as mail system). With the relatively low mail limit on coin, it would be an easy way to transfer from one character to another. And with some players approaching the coin limit on their characters, this adds an extra (2^32)cp capacity for carrying coin.

Missing_Minds
10-10-2007, 12:41 PM
I highlighted the reason I don't think this would go in.

As much as I really would find this useful, I don't think it ever would for a couple of reasons.

1) Your characters are all unique and individual. Regardless of the fact that they are all on your account, they do not know each other and aren't friends to share a bank account (i.e. a guild bank)

2) I think they are always looking for ways to get money OUT of the system, not ways to help people keep their cash

I can agree with 1 and 2. But also lets keep in mind,

1) this is a game to be played for fun.
2) At the favor required, it would take a bit of time and effort.
3) many players would tend to trust the bank vs mail system due to the fact of it losing stuff and typoed names so you never get your stuff.
4) the gold cost of mailing stuff for average people with high level characters is a pittance.
5) How many of us have a friend so we can just do multiple loggings with their help and never pay a thing? I'd say most of us.
6) If you keep to a legal system, the only thing plat represents is time. Time means money for both us and turbine. The more we can play the chances are the happier we will be to continue to pay for subscriptions. (well.. it is a way of looking at it.)

Would this ever happen? Like you I doubt it, but that won't keep me from hoping maybe it would be.

jjflanigan
10-10-2007, 12:48 PM
I like the adjustment to add a "transaction fee" to using the vault, it would resolve the money issue.

Just as a clarification, when I post things like this, I am normally not posting *my* reasons for not supporting something, I am just posting up the views / concerns I could envision coming from the developers. Normally, if you can work through the "system concerns" brought up by other players (not the concerns like "I don't like your idea", just ones that are based on facts of the current system / game), then it will give the idea a more rounded feel in case the developers read into it.

Mad_Bombardier
10-10-2007, 12:50 PM
Just as a clarification, when I post things like this, I am normally not posting *my* reasons for not supporting something, I am just posting up the views / concerns I could envision coming from the developers. Normally, if you can work through the "system concerns" brought up by other players (not the concerns like "I don't like your idea", just ones that are based on facts of the current system / game), then it will give the idea a more rounded feel in case the developers read into it.I totally understand. :) Any and all comments, suggestions, problems, etc. are welcome in my idea posts. I'd rather fully flesh out an idea now, than have Devs beating their heads against a wall later.

Lorien_the_First_One
10-10-2007, 01:00 PM
It would be nice. Especially for those people with only 1 Vorpal/Distruptor/etc. They can share it through mail now but it would be much easier (and thus better for the rest of the waiting party's game experience) if you could just leave such valuables in the shared bank to be grabbed by whoever needs them that day.

As for clearing out inventory on reroll... Why the heck can't they change the email system to allow multiple attachments? I mean really, it should be more like a trade window, let me dump whatever I want there. The Coin Lords will get the same cash from me on a big box that they would from 100 small boxes and it would be so much nicer for me.

Yvonne_Blacksword
10-10-2007, 01:12 PM
Ohhh....would be so nice...

But the way you worded it..(at least to me) it seems like it could cross servers...something I don't think they could do..

though, that would be nice too.

I am for an account wide bank...lol.

Onubis
10-10-2007, 01:51 PM
I highlighted the reason I don't think this would go in.

As much as I really would find this useful, I don't think it ever would for a couple of reasons.

1) Your characters are all unique and individual. Regardless of the fact that they are all on your account, they do not know each other and aren't friends to share a bank account (i.e. a guild bank)

2) I think they are always looking for ways to get money OUT of the system, not ways to help people keep their cash

whose to say mine toons don't know each other, they all have the sam name Blackfire. To me that means they are either family or earned a place in that family. No dev, or rule has said ur toons don't know each other.
(side note: besides the family name and bios, i dont role play)

Cinwulf
10-10-2007, 01:54 PM
/signed :)

Corran99
10-10-2007, 01:57 PM
/SIGNED

I would love to have some sort of shared invintory so that i could allow my characters to share their nice equipment between themselfs.

Delt
10-10-2007, 01:57 PM
Good idea - I like it.

Kerr
10-10-2007, 01:59 PM
I posted this a while back. The only caveat I could find was that the tab in particular could not accept a bound item, or if it did it would have to be sure it was bound to the character and not the account.

Garth_of_Sarlona
10-10-2007, 01:59 PM
Note to the dev implementing this as we speak: make sure to make it so you couldn't put bound items in your 'vault' :)

Edit: I got ninjaed

Garth

ArkoHighStar
10-10-2007, 02:00 PM
That, right there, is the single biggest reason I've not rerolled a lot of my characters. The thought of trying to transfer 3-4 pages of inventory and 2-3 pages of bank stuff makes me want to cry.

did this the other night got everything off him, but forgot to send his cash lost 30k plat oh well:(

jjflanigan
10-10-2007, 02:02 PM
whose to say mine toons don't know each other, they all have the sam name Blackfire. To me that means they are either family or earned a place in that family. No dev, or rule has said ur toons don't know each other.
(side note: besides the family name and bios, i dont role play)

Well, I can guarantee that, within the scope of DDO they have never worked together or run across each other in Stormreach :)

Just messing around with you on that - don't mean to derail the thread.

I had forgotten about that issue with bound items having to be blocked.

Twerpp
10-10-2007, 02:04 PM
Good idea.

binnsr
10-10-2007, 02:11 PM
As for clearing out inventory on reroll... Why the heck can't they change the email system to allow multiple attachments? I mean really, it should be more like a trade window, let me dump whatever I want there. The Coin Lords will get the same cash from me on a big box that they would from 100 small boxes and it would be so much nicer for me.

House Orion couriers are all halflings and can only carry one item at a time.

noneou
10-10-2007, 02:12 PM
I agree this would be nice. But don't think it will ever happen seeing as the banks are bugged right now and eating items.

How cool would it be if the system bugged out and ate items for ALL your toons?

(yes I have had items eaten and yes I have given up on getting them back)

Kerrn_Siff
10-10-2007, 02:38 PM
I would pay for this, Real money or some sort of maint. fee charged by the bank.

It seems like it would be a nice segue to Guild Banks too :)


p.s. and yes segue is spelled correctly... stoopid English

Mad_Bombardier
10-10-2007, 02:45 PM
I posted this a while back. The only caveat I could find was that the tab in particular could not accept a bound item, or if it did it would have to be sure it was bound to the character and not the account.D'oh! I thought it, but forgot to explicitly state it in my description. <Editing>

SneakThief
10-10-2007, 02:52 PM
I like this idea as well. Granted I'd make it a vault person instead of a bank person and just give it, its own bank like interface.

This would be great for handling trades between personal characters without paying the mail system.
This would also be great for handling in game trades between people so they don't have to log off and log about to make a trade happen.

I dont mind PAYING the mail system as much as I mind the mail system loosing my stuff. I swear Stormreach contracted with USPS or something.

/SIGNED!

Even if it was only a few slot on the bank (like the weapon sets on the inventory sheet), or a completely new person to talk to.

Twerpp
10-10-2007, 03:29 PM
Note to the dev implementing this as we speak: make sure to make it so you couldn't put bound items in your 'vault' :)

Edit: I got ninjaed

Garth

I think it would be great to move bound equipment within your own account only. For example you pull a SoS while raiding with your Bard, move it to your Barb and then bind on equip. As long as its within your own account theres no potential for farmer abuse, and no question as to whether or not you earned it.

KatanAztar
10-10-2007, 03:36 PM
/signed

muffinlad
10-10-2007, 03:41 PM
1) I think this would be a really good idea as suggested as a 400pt favor reward for house K, but I have one issue

2) Unless the reward unlocks the vault for the entire account, having each of your toons have to work up to 400 favor to access it makes it less than ideal.

I would suggest making it the long lost 2k (2000 pt) favor reward, as that is broader based, and the overall favor tends to impact accounts more than house favor.

One question -What happens in a transfer? If the toon goes from Server X to Server Y, does the vault stay? The Vault Contents? Access? What if no other toon has the right favor combo?

All of this could be solved, but would need to be prior to implementation.

Regs,

muffinbanker

Mad_Bombardier
10-10-2007, 03:46 PM
1) I think this would be a really good idea as suggested as a 400pt favor reward for house K, but I have one issue

2) Unless the reward unlocks the vault for the entire account, having each of your toons have to work up to 400 favor to access it makes it less than ideal.

I would suggest making it the long lost 2k (2000 pt) favor reward, as that is broader based, and the overall favor tends to impact accounts more than house favor.

One question -What happens in a transfer? If the toon goes from Server X to Server Y, does the vault stay? The Vault Contents? Access? What if no other toon has the right favor combo?

All of this could be solved, but would need to be prior to implementation.Both good questions, muffinlad! Thank you for helping me think this out. :) I can answer my intentions of the first. All characters, including newly rolled, would have access to the "Vault." The number of tabs in the "Vault" would be dependent on the number of characters that reach 400 House K favor.

As to the transfers, I hadn't even thought about it. :o I suppose since your personal "Bank" would come with you, that the "Vault" would stay. It would then be server specific as the mail system; a "Server Vault." So, any items you wanted to take with you, you'd have to put in your inventory or "Bank." Just as you do now by collecting your goodies onto the one character that you are paying to transfer. Yeah, that's the ticket. :)

muffinlad
10-10-2007, 03:59 PM
Both good questions, muffinlad! Thank you for helping me think this out. :) I can answer my intentions of the first. All characters, including newly rolled, would have access to the "Vault." The number of tabs in the "Vault" would be dependent on the number of characters that reach 400 House K favor.

As to the transfers, I hadn't even thought about it. :o I suppose since your personal "Bank" would come with you, that the "Vault" would stay. It would then be server specific as the mail system; a "Server Vault." So, any items you wanted to take with you, you'd have to put in your inventory or "Bank." Just as you do now by collecting your goodies onto the one character that you are paying to transfer. Yeah, that's the ticket. :)

A) Hmmm, ok, I like the tabs idea. First tab opens at 400, more tabs as others hit 400. ( I should have read your original post more closely).

B) Server Vault makes sense (empty your tab before you leave), but my question comes when you are talking about more than one tab....and if you had three "Tabs" and one toon was transfered, you are now down to two tabs, anything left in the old tab is....destroyed? Sold? Taken with you on your new tab on your new server?

Once again, I may be over thinking it, but if the details are solved, I think it would be a really nice reward.

AND - It would reduce the need for the MAIL system to keep track of all the items in transit. I wonder if this would be short term resource intensive, and long term resource saving (as fewer mail messages would be needed, and fewer items saved in the mail....)

Would love to see it implemented.

Regs

muffinvaultlover

Mad_Bombardier
10-10-2007, 04:06 PM
B) Server Vault makes sense (empty your tab before you leave), but my question comes when you are talking about more than one tab....and if you had three "Tabs" and one toon was transfered, you are now down to two tabs, anything left in the old tab is....destroyed? Sold? Taken with you on your new tab on your new server?Another great question! :) Perhaps for simplicity, the old server "Vault" could just remain with the same number of tabs. My model assumes that you would have a maximum number of tabs anyway, regardless of characters with 400 Kundarak favor. So, if you transferred one away, you'd temporarily get an extra tab, but not extra tab slot. Kind of like extra characters after the server merge (many characters, limited slots). How's that sound?

DoctorWhofan
10-10-2007, 04:37 PM
I like, good Idea! heck limiting it to 3 vault slots would free up so much space! There is alot of ways to limited this so it would not be too powerful. And maybe house K might get popular again!

VonBek
10-15-2007, 10:13 AM
/signed

(good thinking!)

DZX
10-15-2007, 10:14 AM
I would definitely like to see this.

HighJoe
10-15-2007, 10:23 AM
/signed

Though, like many here, I don't think we'll ever see this happen. But, here's to hope!

Aspenor
10-21-2007, 11:02 AM
I agree with this idea.

MrWizard
10-21-2007, 11:21 AM
/signed

Invalid_86
10-21-2007, 01:39 PM
whose to say mine toons don't know each other, they all have the sam name Blackfire. To me that means they are either family or earned a place in that family. No dev, or rule has said ur toons don't know each other.
(side note: besides the family name and bios, i dont role play)

That's just the oldest cop out excuse for rampant, unrealistic twinking in an MMO.

Sorry but I have never, never seen a D&D campaign with large amounts of characters who constantly go back and forth taking items from each other. It just doesn't happen.

I am of the hard core NO approach towards twinking, it's not in the D&D spirit. You earn items, you don't just run around taking them from other people's "bank" or just handing them off on the street.

Actually if it was up to me I'd have every non-consumable magic item bind when you pick it up. It would foster a more real D&D experience and practically kill off the farmers. Unfortunately it's too late for that now.

So, sadly, we may as well do as the op suggested.

Ron
10-21-2007, 01:42 PM
Well, I guess it's up to me to take the unpopular view, hehe. Sorry guys, can't get behind this. Let me say why, then you can tear me apart.

This game is based on D&D. No DM in their right mind would EVER allow the kind of twinking that goes on here to happen in their campain. And it is because of that that D&D works. Could you imagine level 1 characters running around in a PnP game with the sort of twinkiness we have around here?

For that reason, I can't go along with ANY system that makes it even easier to twink than it already is. If we do that, we may as well give up on the idea this game has anything at all to do with D&D and just call it something else altogether.

It is my honest belief that 9 out of 10 design problems with this game stem directly from the fact that we have rampant twinking going on. If I had been in charge of this game, every item would have been BoA, and there would be no transferring items/money at all. This would prevent the massive item inflation we have now (rare items would ACTUALLY be rare items!) which has led to serious changes in how the devs have designed dungeons and encounters (including but not limited to the ridiculous and arbitrary immunities boss creatures have), which has led directly to the squeezing out of the casual player in this game. Without twinking, we'd have a game that is a LOT closer to D&D, which, after all, was the entire point.

Twinking already happens obviously, and there's nothing that can be done about it now. But for the love of Dol Dorn, let's not make it any easier than it already is.

Or, we just throw up our hands and totally give up on the whole idea of this being a D&D based game and consider it just another MMOG. Whichever :)

Invalid_86
10-21-2007, 02:10 PM
Phew. I am not the only one that doesn't like the rampant twinking.

Ron
10-21-2007, 02:13 PM
Heh, yeah, we made the same argument at almost exactly the same time. At least there's two of us :)

Litz
10-21-2007, 02:42 PM
Account wide banks should be released at the same time as "Player" housing, and just before Trebuchets.

Mad_Bombardier
10-22-2007, 09:39 AM
Well, I guess it's up to me to take the unpopular view, hehe. Sorry guys, can't get behind this. Let me say why, then you can tear me apart.

This game is based on D&D. No DM in their right mind would EVER allow the kind of twinking that goes on here to happen in their campain. And it is because of that that D&D works. Could you imagine level 1 characters running around in a PnP game with the sort of twinkiness we have around here?Ron, I agree with you on the topic of twinking in D&D. However, twinking exists [in DDO] and is a planned result of gameplay development by Turbine. Turbine added the mail system and the AH, then less bound quest rewards/more named chest items. All of which contributes to making game goods readily available to everyone. I can't imagine them changing direction at this point. I could fully support a no twink, items BoA, no mail attachments, Barebones play server. But, they would have to start from scratch.

And nothing I have proposed is outside of the realm of what is currently possible. You are correct that my proposal does make things easier (even if at the same cost). But, convenience is part of player happiness and retention. :)

NKspeed
10-22-2007, 12:47 PM
Yup Yup totally agreed with account wide "vault" slots:D

Onubis
10-22-2007, 02:34 PM
That's just the oldest cop out excuse for rampant, unrealistic twinking in an MMO.

Sorry but I have never, never seen a D&D campaign with large amounts of characters who constantly go back and forth taking items from each other. It just doesn't happen.

I am of the hard core NO approach towards twinking, it's not in the D&D spirit. You earn items, you don't just run around taking them from other people's "bank" or just handing them off on the street.

Actually if it was up to me I'd have every non-consumable magic item bind when you pick it up. It would foster a more real D&D experience and practically kill off the farmers. Unfortunately it's too late for that now.

So, sadly, we may as well do as the op suggested.

Lucky for me i guess that i neve rhad you for a dm. I've played pnp twinking (normally just for 1 day campaigns) and total random creation campaigns. But w/e, seriously, if u dont like tweaking then don't. Don't stop other from playing that way if they like it. Personally, i like this idea, I wouldnt have to keep mailling the same +1 anything to my new toon, and i could get stuff to my other toons without fear of losing it to the mail, which happens more than losing stuff in the bank. ex. my sor loots a +1 tome that my capped ftr can use, i normally ask a guildie to transfer it for me, i trust them more than the mail. This bank would allow for ease of transfering mass loads of equips to rerolls too. Or it could hold onto rare stuff that a lower toon could use later. I don't really care about how you earn(just that you do earn it).

Ron
10-22-2007, 03:56 PM
Ron, I agree with you on the topic of twinking in D&D. However, twinking exists [in DDO] and is a planned result of gameplay development by Turbine.

Except I don't really think that's quite so true. At least not initially. I don't think Turbine really carefully considered the consequences of allowing free trade of items and what it would do to the game. In the beginning, dungeons were designed for 4 players with normal equipment for their level.

That's changed now. Now designers are now designing dungeons for 4-6 (or 12) players with uber equipment, which is a complete shift from the original vision of this game, IMO.

I don't really blame them so much for that initial blunder (allowing free trade). It is, after all, a deeply ingrained part of virtually all MMOGs. And at release, there was no mechanic for trading items while they were still in the chest (and it does make sense to allow trading between party members, happens in D&D all the time). I wonder if they had had the ability to trade items while still in the chest (like you can now) at release if all non-consumable items may not have been BoA. I personally think that would have made for a much more PnP D&D sort of game, and a better one overall (certainly the content would have lasted much longer than it does now, and we'd have a lot less bored people).

But you are right, it's now a part of the game, and there's no changing it at this point. As Rodian says, they may as well put it in. Maybe in DDO2 things will be different :)

Cowdenicus
10-22-2007, 04:08 PM
I asked for this in the Risia chat, but I also asked for more bank tabs too.

Mad_Bombardier
10-22-2007, 04:38 PM
But you are right, it's now a part of the game, and there's no changing it at this point. As Rodian says, they may as well put it in. Maybe in DDO2 things will be different :)Yup, they could (on a new server starting from scratch) apply the new sigil tech to all magic items in the game. See it in the chest, transfer it to anyone in the party. Pull it from the chest and it binds. It would make for interesting Barebones gameplay. But, that's another topic. :)

Invalid_86
10-22-2007, 06:28 PM
Lucky for me i guess that i neve rhad you for a dm. I've played pnp twinking (normally just for 1 day campaigns) and total random creation campaigns. But w/e, seriously, if u dont like tweaking then don't. Don't stop other from playing that way if they like it. Personally, i like this idea, I wouldnt have to keep mailling the same +1 anything to my new toon, and i could get stuff to my other toons without fear of losing it to the mail, which happens more than losing stuff in the bank. ex. my sor loots a +1 tome that my capped ftr can use, i normally ask a guildie to transfer it for me, i trust them more than the mail. This bank would allow for ease of transfering mass loads of equips to rerolls too. Or it could hold onto rare stuff that a lower toon could use later. I don't really care about how you earn(just that you do earn it).

Yeah you can goof around with a one shot day long campaign like you said. I was talking true campaigns- this twinking nonsense doesn't fly. It ruins campaigns and completely trashes any concept of continuity, earned reward, balance, and integrity. That simply is not a foundation for a D&D campaign.

No, sorry, its not a matter of I play the way I want you play the way you want. The rampant twinking hurts the game as a whole, meaning ALL of us.

But as I said it's too late and we are stuck with it. Barring Turbine coming to their senses and saying that on X date all non-consumable magic items will be bound to their current owners we may as well just go with it.

wemery73
10-22-2007, 06:42 PM
/signed Vault sounds good and sounds alot safer then the mail system:):D

Jundak
11-12-2007, 01:04 PM
/signed

A very well thought out idea. Very nice. *thumbs up*

Oreg
11-12-2007, 01:06 PM
/signed

EspyLacopa
01-29-2008, 09:34 AM
That simply is not a foundation for a D&D campaign.
I had always assumed the foundation of a D&D campaign was a good story and fun people to play it with.

ChildrenofBodom
01-29-2008, 09:38 AM
I highlighted the reason I don't think this would go in.

As much as I really would find this useful, I don't think it ever would for a couple of reasons.

1) Your characters are all unique and individual. Regardless of the fact that they are all on your account, they do not know each other and aren't friends to share a bank account (i.e. a guild bank)

2) I think they are always looking for ways to get money OUT of the system, not ways to help people keep their cash

lol, you can always ask a guildy to hold on to some stuff while you grab your other toon. Pretty easy to get around the mail.

dragnmoon
01-29-2008, 09:40 AM
I had always assumed the foundation of a D&D campaign was a good story and fun people to play it with.

You are all wrong... this is the Foundation (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vChEPj0dXXk) of D&D!

EspyLacopa
01-29-2008, 10:11 AM
You are all wrong... this is the Foundation (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vChEPj0dXXk) of D&D!
. . .Well played, Tolith, well played.

Invalid_86
01-30-2008, 02:37 PM
I had always assumed the foundation of a D&D campaign was a good story and fun people to play it with.

If the rules fall apart then you won't have a campaign for long. That's the heart of the game. Good friends and a good story are the soul. You pretty much need both.

I magic missile....the darkness!!!

EspyLacopa
01-30-2008, 02:39 PM
If the rules fall apart then you won't have a campaign for long. That's the heart of the game. Good friends and a good story are the soul. You pretty much need both.

I magic missile....the darkness!!!
A good group of friends can have fun role playing without any rules.

Invalid_86
01-30-2008, 02:44 PM
A good group of friends can have fun role playing without any rules.

This is absolutely true. But if you are playing D&D you are presumably using D&D rules, no? And these rules start unravelling when you run a Monty Haul campaign.

EspyLacopa
01-30-2008, 02:51 PM
This is absolutely true. But if you are playing D&D you are presumably using D&D rules, no? And these rules start unravelling when you run a Monty Haul campaign.
Unless that's what the DM wanted. In which case, he takes it into account, and the only thing that changes between that and the lower campaign is the size of the numbers involved.

Invalid_86
01-30-2008, 02:54 PM
Unless that's what the DM wanted. In which case, he takes it into account, and the only thing that changes between that and the lower campaign is the size of the numbers involved.

Ah but we don't have an active DM looking over us here. So the added twinkage problems this banking system would give would not have a DM to do any counterbalacing. That's the flaw in that plan.

Mad_Bombardier
01-30-2008, 06:01 PM
Ah but we don't have an active DM looking over us here. So the added twinkage problems this banking system would give would not have a DM to do any counterbalacing. That's the flaw in that plan.What added twinkage? The twinking is already there. My proposed system charges you the same as the mail system, but allows you to keep control of your item at all times, thus eliminating mail system errors.

If you want to roleplay that your characters don't know each other, more power to you. You don't have to earn the favor and pay for the vault system. My characters do know each other and share loot and I would like a non-mail system way to transfer gear/coin to myself. :)

Invalid_86
01-30-2008, 11:16 PM
What added twinkage? The twinking is already there. My proposed system charges you the same as the mail system, but allows you to keep control of your item at all times, thus eliminating mail system errors.

If you want to roleplay that your characters don't know each other, more power to you. You don't have to earn the favor and pay for the vault system. My characters do know each other and share loot and I would like a non-mail system way to transfer gear/coin to myself. :)

But the idea is to make twinking even easier, correct? And like it or not this creates balance problems. So no, if anything the rules on transfering equipment and binding should be even tighter. Perhaps with the new binding and equipment damage rules we'll be seeing some more of that?

Kromize
01-30-2008, 11:59 PM
Edit2: To be absolutely clear, bound items cannot be stored in the "Vault"; only unbound/freely tradeable items.


I have brought up this same(almost) idea before. But in my idea of it, you can transfer bound items. I think that bound items and dnd do not belong together at all, but if it's gonna happen, they should at least be transferable between your characters...

The vault will be the best IMO to have a first slot free to every account, and with people allowed to transfer bound items via the vault. There is little reason for bound items, but there is no reason at all for them to be more than account specific.

Mad_Bombardier
01-31-2008, 08:34 AM
But the idea is to make twinking even easier, correct? And like it or not this creates balance problems.No, not easier. Same cost, added favor grind, and only then you can transfer items to yourself. Again, I am not proposing anything that is not already possible in the game. I am proposing a way to make the existing process more secure by cutting out the mail system. Balance preserved.

EspyLacopa
01-31-2008, 08:41 AM
No, not easier. Same cost, added favor grind, and only then you can transfer items to yourself. Again, I am not proposing anything that is not already possible in the game. I am proposing a way to make the existing process more secure by cutting out the mail system. Balance preserved.
I bet this guy would be hardset against the idea of a Guild Bank as well.

Invalid_86
01-31-2008, 06:33 PM
No, not easier. Same cost, added favor grind, and only then you can transfer items to yourself. Again, I am not proposing anything that is not already possible in the game. I am proposing a way to make the existing process more secure by cutting out the mail system. Balance preserved.

It's the twinking itself that causes the balance problems. Regardless of the way it's done why encourage it more? I'd even be willing to wager that the new binding and death penalty rules are there to help curb this practice.

Basically your argument hinges on the idea that making it "more secure" to do something that upsets game balance is ok because we are already doing it. There's the flaw.


I bet this guy would be hardset against the idea of a Guild Bank as well.

How did you guess? This should never happen.

TFPAQ
02-01-2008, 11:25 AM
Come on Devs, fess up...

Your going to give us our "suprise present" in 6.1 for the second anniversary mod right?

Shared Banking
Druids ('cuz I know that Monks are being held off til 7...)
Lvl 20 Cap
Half-Orcs
Half-Elves
Plat Farmer Obliteration Button on mail system (push it and the farmer's account goes boom!)

Chocolate cake (but I do love pie....)


A pony?......