Setting a maximum stack value?

[fruviad]

Putting this forward as a possible enhancement request.

It would be nice have the ability to set a maximum number of items you wish to carry for a given type of item that you possess. This maximum would be independently configured for each item type.

For example, consider a rogue with some "Magic for Beginners" spellbooks and non-magical arrows.

The non-magical arrow maximum could be set to 60. If the character has 45 arrows, has "auto-pickup" enabled, and finds 40 non-magical arrows, then 15 of the newly discovered arrows would be added to the inventory, maxing out at 60 arrows in the inventory, with 25 still on the floor.

The "Magic for Beginners" books slot, on the other hand, would be set to a smaller maximum...4, perhaps. The character who has 2 spellbooks would automatically add a newly-discovered spellbook to their inventory, whereas the character with 4 of these spellbooks would ignore additional spellbooks they might encounter.

This would be a nice option, as it would prevent one from inadvertently collecting 15-20 pounds of spellbooks (or other items) during a dungeon crawl. (Those extra spellbooks don't seem like much when you see them on the floor, but they add up to a lot of weight.)

[Magnate]

Nice idea - added it to ticket #586, where I discovered that UnAngband already has this functionality ...

[Nick]

I had just come up with this idea too - it must be in the air.

Gets rid of the old "99 mushrooms takes up the same space as 99 suits of plate mail" problem.

[Magnate]

I had just come up with this idea too - it must be in the air.

Gets rid of the old "99 mushrooms takes up the same space as 99 suits of plate mail" problem.

Well, the OP is talking about player-defined maxima, which is present in Un. I think you're talking about splitting MAX_STACK_SIZE by tval, or similar, which is just evil ;-)

[Nick]

Well, the OP is talking about player-defined maxima, which is present in Un. I think you're talking about splitting MAX_STACK_SIZE by tval, or similar, which is just evil ;-)

Oh yeah, I see. But evil? I see it as the answer to supply of consumables - there's infinite stock of them, but you can only carry a limited number.

[fizzix]

I agree with Nick here. Although when it comes down to it, you're really only punishing warriors.

[Derakon]

Depends. What if the max stack size on books was 1?

[BreathesFire]

I've got space for 99 CCW but a CSW ain't one.


I would be very entertained if parallel stacking was removed and inventory items were restricted by physical volume rather than uniqueness. This way you can limit supplies, but allow more diverse consumables. Maybe warriors could hold larger packs too!

[Shockbolt]

A graphical inventory tile system would fix that

I've got space for 99 CCW but a CSW ain't one.


I would be very entertained if parallel stacking was removed and inventory items were restricted by physical volume rather than uniqueness. This way you can limit supplies, but allow more diverse consumables. Maybe warriors could hold larger packs too!

[fizzix]

I've got space for 99 CCW but a CSW ain't one.


I would be very entertained if parallel stacking was removed and inventory items were restricted by physical volume rather than uniqueness. This way you can limit supplies, but allow more diverse consumables. Maybe warriors could hold larger packs too!

I've thought about this too. I even came up with the idea that wearing certain armor should allow you to carry extra weapons (by strapping them on the back). However, I think the player would spend way too much time arranging inventory only to have everything fall to the floor when they test-wield a robe.

[Derakon]

I've thought about this too. I even came up with the idea that wearing certain armor should allow you to carry extra weapons (by strapping them on the back). However, I think the player would spend way too much time arranging inventory only to have everything fall to the floor when they test-wield a robe.

You'd have to make that armor a container that holds the items you've strapped to it, rather than having it expand the player's "default" inventory.

...kinda a weird way to run a railroad though.

[buzzkill]

I've thought about this too. I even came up with the idea that wearing certain armor should allow you to carry extra weapons (by strapping them on the back). However, I think the player would spend way too much time arranging inventory only to have everything fall to the floor when they test-wield a robe.

I played a little net-hack not terribly long ago. It's got more armour types than Angband (and an, entirely unrelated to this post, cool 32x32 tile set), some of which need to wielded in the correct order. Wear the shirt, then the vest, then the cloak. Want to change your shirt? Take it all off. More trouble than it's worth.

[fizzix]

Actually I still sort of like volume based inventory but perhaps with little clevel bonuses along the way. For example at clevel 30 the largest volume weapon doesn't count towards total inventory space.