Topic

Furniture trading and multiple characters (alts)

 What's TS's position on furniture trading between alts?

What I would like to do, if it is kosher, would be for my subscriber character (Fnibbit) to upgrade some furniture for this character to furnish her dwelling in the style she is accustomed.  But I expect there are some use cases w.r.t. furniture trading and alts that TS would definitely consider abusive, and I definitely want to stay on the right side of the rules.

Posted 7 months ago by Granny Weatherwax Subscriber! | Permalink

Replies

  • Granny - if you read the sticky post, you'll see more on the subject. Items given to players at the start of F3 are bound to those players and can't be given away or traded. Crafted items can be traded freely. If I'm understanding all that correctly.
    Posted 7 months ago by Aviatrix Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I knew those things, yeah.  I was thinking of crafted furniture, not starter furniture.

    Looking again at the sticky post, it appears that the mechanisms available at the start for furniture trading are all ones that require both players simultaneously in-world (player-to-player trade, "give" verb, drag+drop to avatar).  That would in itself preclude Fnibbit and Granny trading furniture, since the Guidelines do not allow them to be in-world simultaneously.

    But in the future they plan to add furniture auctions.  Those, or allowing furniture to be attached to mail, would allow furniture trading between alts without running afoul of the rule against being in-world simultaneously -- which then leaves us with the point in the Community Guidelines forbidding using alts "to gain significant and unfair advantage".  Which is rather open to interpretation; I don't think one character using subscription credits to spiff up some furniture for the other character to place in their house would be a problem, but I was wondering if TS thought otherwise.  
    Posted 7 months ago by Fnibbit Subscriber! | Permalink
  • My guess, if you paid for the credits, you can use them any way you want. If you run out and want to buy some extra, all the better :D
    Posted 7 months ago by Sturminator i` Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Pretty sure this is a no no. You aren't supposed to have your characters interact in any way that could give them an unfair advantage that a single player would not have. In other words exchanging resources, having one tithe the others icons, having one glitch use the garden of the other etc.
    Posted 7 months ago by Melting Sky Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Here's what you do:

    1. Throw the item of furniture really high into the air
    2. Log off one character
    3. Log in as the other character
    4. Catch the item as it comes down!
    Posted 7 months ago by dm Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I just wish we could have two characters on one account, or linked, or something, so the subscriber status would work for them and also make us unable to log in on them simultaneously (and maybe make tracking unfair advantage activity easier). 

    I'd prefer that over being able to reset my character; I don't want to reset my main character ever. If I could have a second character on the same/linked to one account though, I might reset it to start from scratch for funsies sometimes though.

    Another thing... I wish (unless this has changed during this update; so in some ways I hope) that there were non-subscriber backdrops for each type of area that old houses were in (bog/mountain/savannah/forest), and that only previous non-housing or fancier, more detailed versions of old housing areas might (emphasis: might, not necessarily must) have the subscriber only tag. It's kinda sad that someone that might have lived in the bogs as a non-subscriber would have to be a subscriber to get even a simple bog backdrop. 

    The furniture/decor doesn't bother me, because they should have the option to get those through subscriber players if they want.

    Also: lol @dm
    Posted 7 months ago by Little Miss Giggles Subscriber! | Permalink
  • what about giving a key to your alternate just as you would do to a friend. they are then able to use the gardens in your back yard. if friends can do it why not an alternate account? just wondering.
    Posted 7 months ago by CatoriTala Subscriber! | Permalink
  • CatoriTala, what you described is not allowed. I'll try to dig up stoot's words on the subject.

    ETA: Found it.
    Posted 7 months ago by Millie Subscriber! | Permalink
  • so...it's ok for friends you've given keys to, to use your garden, but if you have an alternate account, you can give them a key but the character is not allowed use of garden? doesn't seem right if each character is being played in a different way, also NEVER at the same times.  seems a moot point now anyway since all characters are able to grow both veggies and herbs. i do understand that before the new housing one character having the herb garden and the other crops caused unfair advantages for both characters.
    Posted 7 months ago by CatoriTala Subscriber! | Permalink
  • It's ok for you to help out other glitchen in any way you like (within reason); that's part of the social aspect of the game.  Helping yourself with an alt is not the same as helping another person.  And having exclusive access to more garden plots than you would otherwise be able to afford is definitely a gameplay advantage (we've been spoiled since R2 with the vast amounts of garden plots available to us; I think that'll be throttling down quite a bit when the game comes back up).  I agree that it's less of a thing now than it was when there was the divide between bog houses and crop houses.
    Posted 7 months ago by Fnibbit Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I love how people read way more into postings than is there.  I doesn't really say you can't share a key with your alt to your main home (some though choose not to because of the example used)...it just says you can't use an alt solely to gain an unfair game play advantage in one of the accounts.  If you play your alt like a different character or another friend (who you would give a key to)...that is acceptable game play to share a key.  If you feel you can't distinguish the difference between the two types of game play...just have a friend that you trust give your alt a key to their house, and you give a key to your house to their alt to cover yourself.

    I believe stoot made it pretty clear that furniture was a cosmetic thing, not a 'game play' thing. It's the reason why furniture upgrades cost credits...because it is considered cosmetic (like wardrobe items). Therefore, upgrading of furniture requiring credits was not providing an in game advantage. The same logic could be applied to mains making upgraded furniture for alts...since it doesn't provide a 'game play' advantage, it is likely allowed as long as the alt uses it for their own home.  However, if you feel really strongly about it 'being wrong'...just trade the furniture with a trusted friend, who can then trade that piece of furniture with your alt.  Where there is a will, there is a way.
    Posted 7 months ago by b3achy Subscriber! | Permalink
  • It doesnt seem like your idea has any monetary advantages to it. You just want to spiff up the house of your unsubscribed glitch character. I dont see why that would be bad. And as far unfair advantages over a player who has only one account (say, like me) I dont see how that would be an unfair advantage. I choose to have one account, just like you choose to have two. I dont think it should be considered an unfair advantage since I chose to have only one account. Does that make sense?
    Posted 7 months ago by Serenity's Mommy Subscriber! | Permalink
  • If my partner and I have two characters between us and both play them both,  is that not the same as each only playing one?

    We are careful to play them practically evenly, though the original is more advanced, but they are both high level and almost equally active.  Since we share a computer they are never online together.

    I can see no practical difference between this scenario and one where a player has two characters on their own.  If my partner no longer wishes to play, or I don't, the other would keep both subs up and play both characters.  This would give less time to each character, but what would be the difference in other ways in relation to co-operation etc?

    Neither gives an advantage to the other, they co-operate as friends would.  So if my partner no longer played would I be expected to 'kill' one of them?  Since we both play both of them, which one? 
    Posted 7 months ago by Cassandria Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Cassandria, as said above, what you have described is OK by the Devs.  It is when you use one alt solely as a resource for the other that it is unfair gaming practice.
    Posted 7 months ago by Carl Projectorinski Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @Carl Projectorinski.  This is what I had assumed, but some people seem to believe that having an alt is, in itself, banned.  This is not true, it is only the mis-use of alts which is not allowed.
    Posted 7 months ago by Jolycan Subscriber! | Permalink