non-owned brick

[Paddy m16]

So I was wondering if someone could make a "non-owned" brick, that anyone can build on. I think it would go good on a city rp if you are making a hotel or apartment. I posted this on my IPod touch XD!

[Ad Bot]

[Daenth]

Do you understand how abusive and handicapped this is?

[naturemon]

I also thought of something similar, it would be very useful, for example, if I made a landscape out of cubes like this, people could build on them if I wanted them to without giving everyone on the server trust.

[paulcall]

I also thought of something similar, it would be very useful, for example, if I made a landscape out of cubes like this, people could build on them if I wanted them to without giving everyone on the server trust.

Another example, I built a hotel that took me 4 hours. Then, I let them delete it without any server trust.

[IkeTheGeneric]

Another example, I built a hotel that took me 4 hours. Then, I let them delete it without any server trust.

Don't build with the non-owned bricks then.

[naturemon]

Another example, I built a hotel that took me 4 hours. Then, I let them delete it without any server trust.

Can only be deleted with destrcto wand, and only placed by admins/Sa, problem solved.

[Paddy m16]

Do you understand how abusive and handicapped this is?

in what way is that a use or handicapped. Here's what should happen. Anyone can build on it, but that can be deleted by the non-owned brick owner, and only the owner can delete the non-owned brick. That right there is pretty much it. Ps. I am Dr. Bob in-game

[Paddy m16]

Abusive not a use lol

[Kalphiter]

The moment you save, ownership will fail because Blockland saves from the bottom brick-up.

[naturemon]

The moment you save, ownership will fail because Blockland saves from the bottom brick-up.

I can't think of a situation in which that will matter.

[Kalphiter]

I can't think of a situation in which that will matter.

Let's say you save, and when you load it again, whoever built the hotel owns all the bricks inside of it.

[JamestheLeet]

non-owned brick owner

Thats a fine example of a contradicting statement.

[DrenDran]

Actually I can picture this working. Just assign a value such as $brick.public = true; and package the trust checks to return true if the brick being checked is 'public'.

[naturemon]

Actually I can picture this working. Just assign a value such as $brick.public = true; and package the trust checks to return true if the brick being checked is 'public'.

That sounds do-able.

[DrenDran]

That sounds do-able.

Maybe give them a fancy hammer that when you hit your own bricks, they become public.
Or a toggle server command like, /buildpublicly and /buildprivatly to turn it off.
Either would do.