Beacon Permissions

I’ve been having a discussion with @Havok40k, @Vastar and @Smoothy about beacons permissions, so I thought I’d start a new thread for it.

The way the system works currently is that you can have Mayor or Villager permissions on a given beacon. The Mayor, “owns” the beacon and is the only person who can add plots, remove plots, or completely remove the beacon. Villagers cannot do those things, but they can place any block and remove any block within the beacon.

@Havok40k’s original question was about Villagers having access to plinths, storage etc. which was a surprise to him; however, it’s like that because, as it currently stands, a Villager can break a plinth or storage block and take all the contents, so they may as well have access.

So the questions are:

  • Do you want to be able to allow people to build in your beacon without being able to interact with your plinths, storage etc?
  • If so, would you be happy that they could not place or break any interactable blocks / props?
  • Can you think of other things you would want to allow people to do, or prevent them from doing in your beacon?
13 Likes

I would love multiple fiends of choice what rights which player or group of player has … this includes (all seperated!): …

Open unlocked doors
Open Unlocked Containers (and put stuff in)
Open Unlocked Containers (with item removal)
Open Locked Doors
Open locked Containers (and put stuff in)
Open locked Containers (with item removal)
use Sell Plinths

  • Access gained coinage for sold stuff
    use buy plinths
  • access bought items from plinth
    Add/remove blocks

Of cause all including plotting and removing the plots is only for the owner

It is important that we can set such levels, not only for singhle people but may be also for groups, which would lead to easier Guild-management (BUT, the Group settings can wait till we get guilds, where we then should have more then 2 or 3 levels of people (may be settable to up to 10 groups?) which then would have a “group token” to regulate their user permissions as guild members of seperated ranks. Also, we could have a base setting for ALL users so if you want to let your open doors to be opened for everyone just set the “global/unknown” token to the setting that they can open them.

less then the above would be quite dissattisfying (I’m used to have settings also “per container” at Shroud of the avatar, so this is quite a basic suggestion here ^^)

9 Likes

I can definitely see the case where I wouldn’t want some users to be able to interact with certain intractable blocks such as storage and plinths and other cases where I would. For example, if it’s a player I met online, I might trust them enough to let them help with my build but I don’t want them to be able to access my materials, items, and coin. If I were playing with my friends from real life though or had built up enough trust with someone online, I would be willing to share access to these objects.

However, there could be scenarios where I am working on a community build where I do want to share storage with other players but only certain storage. I’d want my rare items and blocks to be safe in a separate container. The locking system kind of accomplishes this but isn’t quite robust enough because it locks everyone out. I may still want my close friends to be able to access my private storage.

Perhaps the solution is to allow the beacons to have multiple levels of permission and to be able to manage what each level of permission can do? For example, I would be able to set up 4 levels of “villager” and set their permissions as follows. (For sake of spacing I’m assuming that each level inherits the previous level’s permissions but this doesn’t have to be the case)

  1. Level 1 - “Basic Villager”
    a. Can open unlocked doors.
    b. Can open unlocked storage.
  2. Level 2 - “Builder”
    a. Can edit non-interactable blocks.
  3. Level 3 - “Business Partner”
    a. Has access to Buying Plinths
    b. Has access to Selling Plinths.
  4. Level 4 - “Trusted Friend”
    a. Can open locked doors
    b. Can open locked storage
    c. Can edit interactable blocks
7 Likes

Yes.

Yes.

I think anything that can be locked for people outside of a beacon should be lockable for people inside a beacon. I think beacons should dictate breaking/placing permissions while locks dictate using/interacting permissions.

For example. If I am one of Havok’s villagers, I should have access to place and remove any blocks in the beacon so long as they are not interactable blocks that have a lock next to them (likewise I shouldn’t be able to remove the lock or the block the lock is placed on).

If Havok accesses the lock and gives me permission to a lock on, for example, a workbench, then I think I should have all of the permissions from the beacon in addition to being able to access/use/take from the workbench. I should NOT be able to remove the lock or mess with the permissions on it. That should be exclusive to whoever owns the lock.


Not sure how realistic the above is, but that would be my personal ideal world.


I just spared your life!
-Havok40k

10 Likes

Is it possible to have tick box system for everything ? Like: remove/place blocks, use of crafting machines, use of locked doors for example.

2 Likes

#TRIGGERED!

1 Like

yes, thats what i think too

No.
if we had a seperate option for all why not for this too. I will have the option to add/remove plots for for my friends. delete the beacon block only owner, but add plots should be possible. maybe only add plots. remove plots maybe not but add plots should be possible

1 Like

My b hahaha, there’s a guy in my wow guild named Havoc so I’m used to typing that :stuck_out_tongue:

1 Like

Would it need to be set up so that only the mayor could place locks within a beacon then?

Say Havok was the mayor and I was a villager. I have permission to place blocks inside the beacon and Havok has a lovely workbench inside the beacon. I could under this system put a lock on Havok’s workbench and he wouldn’t be able to interact with it anymore or remove the lock unless I gave him permission.

2 Likes

i definitely want to protect my storage’s and machines where my resources would be, one solution would be, allow villagers to access all storage’s that are not locked (mayor can access every storage even if locked), villagers cant destroy the beacon owners blocks (beacon owner can destroy villagers blocks). best would be to allow beacon owner to control everything what villagers can do and what not

Definitely an excellent question. My thought is that it would be on Havok to place the lock for his workbench and that the locking permissions would only look to whichever lock was placed first.

However, this brings about another scenario too. What if someone just places locks everywhere inside a beacon and the beacon owner cannot remove them?

Tricky questions :sweat_smile:

In this case, a solution would be if a mayor boots a villager, locks placed by that villager are destroyed.

3 Likes

Agreed. And mayors should likely have control over all locks placed in their area too, even when a villager has placed them and remains part of a beacon, as a precaution.

but in this case as a villager you cant protect your resources since mayor have access to everything you have there and many people want to protect they’r own resources so they will make they’r own beacons and use this village system only as secondary if at all?

I see the village system for more communal, guild builds. My guess is people will likely have their own beacons within guild builds for their personal use, their own shops, etc. That’s how I see it anyway.

Edit: what I’m trying to say is that IF the devs use this proposal and IF you want to use the village system, you should probably make sure you trust the mayor. Otherwise design your area well enough that you can be as close to the action as possible while maintaining autonomy.

2 Likes

Not entirely true, by my thinking. In this instance, as a villager, you alone have access to your own locks for as long as you are a villager. However as a check to that system, you can only have your locks removed if the mayor removes you from the village. This ultimately puts the players in control though, as a mayor who abuses their responsibilities will find themselves with no villagers.

that is true

I think what @Clexarews suggested seems to be the simplest way of achieving what everyone is asking for. Simple “permission subsets” enabled and managed via locks sound way more convenient than creating & assigning player groups.

I also think that the required rules would be rather comprehensible in comparison:

  • Only the mayor can place and remove locks inside his beacon || The mayor has access to every lock inside his beacon by default
  • Locked objects can only be interacted with if you have access to the corresponding lock (that’s already how it works afaik)
  • Objects can only be removed if you have access to the lock and are a villager of the corresponding beacon
3 Likes

i like a permission system like this.
you can create 10 diffrent free ranks, and can give every rank every permission you want

this system should be nearly perfect :wink:

5 Likes

What about an option for defining permissions plot-by-plot? So, for example, mayor can have his house locked for everybody except him - and the other land opened for villagers (or different land plots for different villagers), all with only one beacon. Similar system is used in Factions plugin for Minecraft - it lets you to control access to the individual chunks of your land. It also contains several player ranks.
This thing may be a bit too complicated for players though - maybe a “hybrid” approach will suffice.

2 Likes