You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository was archived by the owner on Oct 22, 2022. It is now read-only.
When a carried block is dropped on damage or death within a claim, it should be possible for the owner to take back their possessions, instead of being prevented from doing so due to the claim.
Save the "owner" somehow (by name?) when the block is forcibly dropped
Ignore permission check if the same player attempts to pick up their own block again
Do not change any other behavior: Other players can still interact with, pick up, destroy a dropped block (as long as they have permission to do so within a claim)
Intentionally placing carrying blocks does not save the "owner" property - and shouldn't be a problem as you aren't allowed to place them in claims anyway
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Update: Considering that on death, items would be dropped for any player to pick up, I think it would be important for any player to be able to pick up the dropped block as well.
This prevents an exploit where a player could intentionally drop a block in a protected area (such as a Trader's, or a server's protected spawn) without others having the ability to clean it up, potentially blocking pathways.
Unfortunately, I can't at the moment think of a way to show to players the difference between a regular block and one that could be picked up despite of the permission restrictions. There is also an issue where dropped blocks could potentially mess with blocks that are replaceable (water, grass, certain plants), so this should be considered as well.
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
When a carried block is dropped on damage or death within a claim, it should be possible for the owner to take back their possessions, instead of being prevented from doing so due to the claim.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: