Post by Janis PapanagnouPost by B. R. 'BeAr' EdersonA shopkeeper can be assumed to know the content of each container, that
was inside the shop from the beginning. (Locked or not.)
Not necessarily. He could have obtained it without key from another
person. As a shopkeeper I'd like to know the contents, and force the
lock open to see; to adjust price for best profit, and also because
customers typically want to know what they buy. I think knowing the
contents is thus crucial for a shopkeeper.
Your reasoning from the first part of your paragraph contradicts that
of the second part. (= Shopkeeper might not know vs. shopkeeper would
avert not knowing with all means imaginable.) Both are valid, though.
With game mechanics, each path can be followed or a mix from both. I
suggested a mix:
Containers created inside shops during level creation ("stock items"
of the shop) have their content known to the shopkeeper. The chain of
reasoning being around the lines from the second half of your paragraph:
A shopkeeper would badly want to know the /exact/ value of each item in
possession. When purchasing locked containers, (s)he'd usually insist
on temporarily open said container. If the seller does not comply, the
shopkeeper would pay only as much as the container value, assuming the
content being total junk. (But, nevertheless, hoping otherwise.)
After the purchase, a shopkeeper would use the first opportunity to take
a glimpse at the content, using either a method available to him (key
in stock or the like) or paying the first customer - with the means for
opening the container - to temporarily open it. When the player arrives
in a shop, the shopkeeper therefore knows his/her stock item values.
This assumption /has/ to be false for items added to the shop /after/
level creation. Because the player would (at least: might theoretically)
know, that the shopkeeper would have no means to learn about the content
of the container since first entering the level. Therefore, I suggested
Post by Janis PapanagnouPost by B. R. 'BeAr' EdersonWhen buying a locked container, a shopkeeper should only pay the worth
of an empty one. When reselling such a container (or a locked container
dropped by a monster), the shopkeeper shouldn't know anything about the
content and therefore charge randomized fantasy prices for "a box of
unknown content". - Or sth. like that...
Boxes are cheap, so it seems not appropriate to charge just for the
container, given the huge price of the magical items that you find
typically in containers.
It is up to the player to sell locked boxes for just the container value.
In most circumstances, this would be ridiculous. Therefore, the player
wouldn't do it. But /if/ the player did it, anyways, or if a monster
dropped a locked container, the situation would change, dramatically.
Now, my suggested "fantasy prices" apply: Even after just buying a
container for few zm from a player, the price of re-acquiring it (for
the same player character!) would be astronomical. The shopkeeper (in
an attempt to not selling at loss) would charge, as if the container
"of unknown content" would be filled to the brim with dilithium crystals.
(Maybe, shopkeepers should refer to this as selling a "treasure chest",
or the like...)
Post by Janis PapanagnouOptions are to sell only empty containers, or only open containers;
removing a bit of game-play variance from the games. It depends what
we want here, focus on more realism or most interesting game-play.
IMHO, there are more options (as described above), adding to both:
realism /and/ interesting game-play.
BeAr
--
===========================================================================
= What do you mean with: "Perfection is always an illusion"? =
===============================================================--(Oops!)===