Chairs and Feasting Table

[TheTraditionalGentleman]

For the longest time I have thought it would be great to be able to sit down. Imagine sitting around your fire at nighttime, or just lounging around during the day, taking in the fresh air   I would like to have it as an emote, but barring that I think that being able to craft chairs would be fine for sitting too. Hopefully have a chair that looks like a log to sit on as well.

Along with that, does anyone think that being able to create a Feasting Table would be nice? I always like the look of the meal when it's on the crockpot. It looks nice, and more like a meal than just something in your inventory to refill your stats with. What the Feasting Table would do is allow you to place meals on it (probably three) and it would display them in the same manner that a crock pot does. If we were to combine this with the ability to make chairs/sit, just imagine having the characters all gathered around the table for Christmas, with a Honey ham, a Fist full of berries, and a Dragon pie on the table  

I think that would be pretty cool. Purely aesthetic of course, but I'd still enjoy it. What about all of you?

[Arlesienne]

It's adorable. I'd at least want a mod like that.

[JohnWatson]

A sitting gesture would be nice.

[Trenix]

Think we need a house before a table and a chair. Would be nice to go inside a house and be teleported to a small room with a few tiles to do whatever you want in it.

[Ecu]

19 hours ago, TheTraditionalGentleman said:

For the longest time I have thought it would be great to be able to sit down. Imagine sitting around your fire at nighttime, or just lounging around during the day, taking in the fresh air   I would like to have it as an emote, but barring that I think that being able to craft chairs would be fine for sitting too. Hopefully have a chair that looks like a log to sit on as well.

Along with that, does anyone think that being able to create a Feasting Table would be nice? I always like the look of the meal when it's on the crockpot. It looks nice, and more like a meal than just something in your inventory to refill your stats with. What the Feasting Table would do is allow you to place meals on it (probably three) and it would display them in the same manner that a crock pot does. If we were to combine this with the ability to make chairs/sit, just imagine having the characters all gathered around the table for Christmas, with a Honey ham, a Fist full of berries, and a Dragon pie on the table  

I think that would be pretty cool. Purely aesthetic of course, but I'd still enjoy it. What about all of you?

Not sure I really see a point to this.  It seems like even more decorating items that honestly aren't really beneficial to gameplay.  I'd personally rather see content to improve the difficulty of the game.  I see requests like this as a desire to push the game towards a sort of Don't Starve/Minecraft hybrid, where it is more about building pretty bases than survival.  I cannot really agree to this direction of design suggestions.

So I would say that there would need to be legitimate gameplay tied to such features.  Which I don't really see good gameplay that could be tied to these.

7 hours ago, Trenix said:

Think we need a house before a table and a chair. Would be nice to go inside a house and be teleported to a small room with a few tiles to do whatever you want in it.

I fully disagree.  We already have housing in the form of tiling and walls.  I replied to another thread discussing the idea of perhaps allowing certain floor tiles to transfer warmth (or provide insulation when warmed) from active firepits.  This would be the closest thing I could see to more advanced housing mechanics.  Only reason I could even see things like this being beneficial is that it could add gameplay elements to the various tiles to encourage people to layout bases.

[TheTraditionalGentleman]

23 minutes ago, Ecu said:

Not sure I really see a point to this.  It seems like even more decorating items that honestly aren't really beneficial to gameplay.  I'd personally rather see content to improve the difficulty of the game.  I see requests like this as a desire to push the game towards a sort of Don't Starve/Minecraft hybrid, where it is more about building pretty bases than survival.  I cannot really agree to this direction of design suggestions.

So I would say that there would need to be legitimate gameplay tied to such features.  Which I don't really see good gameplay that could be tied to these.

I fully disagree.  We already have housing in the form of tiling and walls.  I replied to another thread discussing the idea of perhaps allowing certain floor tiles to transfer warmth (or provide insulation when warmed) from active firepits.  This would be the closest thing I could see to more advanced housing mechanics.  Only reason I could even see things like this being beneficial is that it could add gameplay elements to the various tiles to encourage people to layout bases.

I completely see what you mean. Long term survival and difficulty should be a higher priority by far  

I think it might be nice if it was added though. I really enjoy the whole base building and stockpiling, so it appeals to me, but I know the nature of DST is survival, and we certainly don't want to take away from that. If nothing else though, I would still like to be able to sit (and I'd actually prefer sitting on the ground than a chair). I just really enjoy the emotes! 

As far as legitimate gameplay, maybe the table could somehow allow you to portion your meals? Say you make a Meaty Stew, rather than hork it all down for the 150 food (*cough* Wolfgang *cough*) you could divi it up into three portions, each for 50 food? Then you can actually share food with others. Or meals, rather. 

 

I completely agree on you with the idea of a house though. I personally don't think that we need any if that. As a mod, maybe, but not in the core game. Unless the devs want to change it into more of a sandbox, but that's their call. If we got roofs like from Shipwrecked, except in a tiered fashion (Grass, Wood, Stone, Thucelite, and Moonrock roofs), I'd be really happy. But I'm with you when you say that houses would be detrimental to the theme of the game. 

[Ecu]

49 minutes ago, TheTraditionalGentleman said:

I think it might be nice if it was added though. I really enjoy the whole base building and stockpiling, so it appeals to me, but I know the nature of DST is survival, and we certainly don't want to take away from that. If nothing else though, I would still like to be able to sit (and I'd actually prefer sitting on the ground than a chair). I just really enjoy the emotes! 

Yeah, I don't really see any issue with adding a sitting emote to the game.  It should be relatively easy to create the assets for.

52 minutes ago, TheTraditionalGentleman said:

As far as legitimate gameplay, maybe the table could somehow allow you to portion your meals? Say you make a Meaty Stew, rather than hork it all down for the 150 food (*cough* Wolfgang *cough*) you could divi it up into three portions, each for 50 food? Then you can actually share food with others. Or meals, rather. 

Food is already something that is incredibly easy to manage.  I don't really feel we need additional methods to manage food in the game.  In addition, to do this well, it would require adding a series of new assets for each individual food item that can be split in this manner.  A huge undertaking for very little gameplay benefit.  I personally just don't feel it is a very reasonable use of time.

That said, I'm not completely opposed to the concept.  It would make the table functional both decoratively and mechanically.  So definitely an intriguing idea.

55 minutes ago, TheTraditionalGentleman said:

I completely agree on you with the idea of a house though. I personally don't think that we need any if that. As a mod, maybe, but not in the core game. Unless the devs want to change it into more of a sandbox, but that's their call. If we got roofs like from Shipwrecked, except in a tiered fashion (Grass, Wood, Stone, Thucelite, and Moonrock roofs), I'd be really happy. But I'm with you when you say that houses would be detrimental to the theme of the game. 

Yeah.  My stance is that any benefits you can gain from a structure need a method for the game to destroy them.  Currently, it is already quite easy to achieve perfect stability regarding your base, leaving you to really only worry about hound attacks (and eventually, not even those are a problem).  In addition, it is a bit awkward to have actual housing (roofs, walls, etc.) when we have tents, lean tos, pig houses, bunny houses, etc.  The stylization doesn't really account for actual player housing in the game.

I feel that giving tiles effects is definitely an interesting way to make different tiles more appealing to utilize when constructing a base, but said effects need to be tied to prefabs that can be destroyed by gameplay in order to really keep things balanced.  Having effects that are always on and cannot be destroyed by enemies, is too strong from my viewpoint.

[Trenix]

So a house doesn't fit the theme of the game but a chair and a feasting table does? That sure doesn't explain why there are pig houses, rabbit hutches, igloos, and rundown houses within the game. I think it's rather silly that mobs get a house and we only get a measly tent. Also I can't imagine how weird it would be sitting on a chair while it's raining. A wall with flooring isn't a house, we need a roof.

[Ecu]

21 hours ago, Trenix said:

So a house doesn't fit the theme of the game but a chair and a feasting table does? That sure doesn't explain why there are pig houses, rabbit hutches, igloos, and rundown houses within the game. I think it's rather silly that mobs get a house and we only get a measly tent. Also I can't imagine how weird it would be sitting on a chair while it's raining. A wall with flooring isn't a house, we need a roof.

Honestly...go play a different game, or create a mod.  I hate to be blunt, but this game isn't a building simulator and I personally don't want it to become one.  The goal of the game is for the game to kill you and your base is just another resource that the game attempts to destroy (abiat not hard enough currently).

We do not need roofs as wetness not meant as a mechanic you go inside and ignore, but a difficulty increase.  You have to either choose to give up equipment slots to protect against it, or deal with the wetness itself.

Honestly @Trenix, I really feel like your recent slew of suggestions here on this forum really showcase that you don't actually want to play DST, but something more akin to DST meets Minecraft.  That is not a design focus that I wish to see happen, nor does it seem like something a majority want either.  Potentially, something like that could be interesting as a different game (or modded overhaul), but not DST itself.

[Trenix]

15 hours ago, Ecu said:

Honestly...go play a different game, or create a mod.  I hate to be blunt, but this game isn't a building simulator and I personally don't want it to become one.  The goal of the game is for the game to kill you and your base is just another resource that the game attempts to destroy (abiat not hard enough currently).

We do not need roofs as wetness not meant as a mechanic you go inside and ignore, but a difficulty increase.  You have to either choose to give up equipment slots to protect against it, or deal with the wetness itself.

Honestly @Trenix, I really feel like your recent slew of suggestions here on this forum really showcase that you don't actually want to play DST, but something more akin to DST meets Minecraft.  That is not a design focus that I wish to see happen, nor does it seem like something a majority want either.  Potentially, something like that could be interesting as a different game (or modded overhaul), but not DST itself.

Ecu, I don't think it's me that's troubled, but rather you. You need to respect others opinions. I mean really, who do you think you are by telling me to go play a different game? Talk about rude and intolerant to excessive proportions. I'm going to say it one last time to you, you're not a developer of Don't Starve Together. Your words, your thoughts, are mere opinions. You do not dictate the end results of the game and what the game stand for. You need to reword the things you say, stop saying things are certain when they're instead possibly true, where I would say, highly unlikely true due to common sense, evidence, and facts.

For example, "This game isn't a building simulator" because I want a house in the game when there are already buildings in the game. You can build pig houses, therefore building simulation already exists. There is your common sense, evidence, and facts. Should I now go tell you to go play a different game? No, because I'm not going to go to your level. It's clear you're just overall terrible to argue with because it isn't constructive. Your ego is so high that you actually believe you are a developer rather than just arguing as a customer or a fan.

He's another example.

Quote

We do not need roofs as wetness not meant as a mechanic you go inside and ignore, but a difficulty increase.  You have to either choose to give up equipment slots to protect against it, or deal with the wetness itself.

Interestingly enough, there is a tent which can be constructed in the game which proves you wrong by reducing wetness by going inside of it. Therefore what you think of this wetness mechanic is wrong, it's not just about equipment or dealing with it. Also what's your deal with Minecraft? No one brings it up but you. I see no comparison. Your logic is that if a house is created in a game, it's therefore Minecraft. Seriously?

[Tosh]

I think what Ecu is saying is that at this stage the core mechanics of the game have already been decided by the developers. At most they might add in a house as a longer lasting tent, but if they don't and you still feel it's lacking in your game you could very easily mod it in. If you're not able to do the work yourself, someone ported Silentine's Yurt mod to the Steam DST workshop. 

At this stage in the development cycle of the game there's not going to be a massive redux of a core gameplay mechanic. Rather than suggesting complete overhauls you should maybe try to give tweaks or improvements to the current systems. 

 

Back on topic:

I'm sure some people would love a sit emote. As for the feasting table, seeing as it is mostly cosmetic I think that at most it should be a crockpot skin that folds into a table when the food is cooked. Otherwise, maybe it could be an alternate version of the end table without the vase, and with the added functionality of being able to place trinkets or crockpot dishes on it? I feel like this would be the simplest way to do it as the coding is already there (Christmas tree) and it would only require a slight modification of the existing skins. 

Actually, just imagine how cute a crystal ball sitting on a Dragonfly end table would look...

[Trenix]

15 minutes ago, Tosh said:

I think what Ecu is saying is that at this stage the core mechanics of the game have already been decided by the developers.

Even if he was saying that, it's still highly inaccurate. There is no proof or any evidence to backs that up. In fact, there is evidence that states the opposite. Majority of this game's development has been about moving Don't Starve and it's expansion into multiplayer. Multiplayer overhauls and additional content has only just begun. Here is the proof.

Here is the actual quote that states it.

Quote

One of our biggest concerns has been making large scale changes in one go without the constant feedback of the community. We hoped that a major expansion could provide a lot of the things we all feel DST could benefit from: more creatures, more long term challenges, more ways to cooperate, more ways to manage servers, more lore, and so on. We still feel that the game could benefit from these things, but we are concerned about the impact of adding everything all at once. We decided that doing this incrementally, with your feedback, is the better way to go.

 

[Tosh]

6 minutes ago, Trenix said:

Snip

All Bigfoot is talking about there is adding new features, not overhauling other ones. I know it may not look like it initially, but adding a character house could cause a lot of balance Issues. If it was an upgraded tent I'd be okay with this, but anything beyond this wouldn't fit without some heavy compromises. If you wanted a separate world space for a house (as I've seen some people do), that's not going to be implemented due to the loading screens and the issue of having multiple server shards. If you want protection from the rain: suggest a parasol (with durability). If you want to have a dwelling that functions like a tent, but both lasts and looks like it would last longer: suggest that. There's no need to overhaul certain parts of the game to get the functionality you want.

[Trenix]

44 minutes ago, Tosh said:

All Bigfoot is talking about there is adding new features, not overhauling other ones. I know it may not look like it initially, but adding a character house could cause a lot of balance Issues. If it was an upgraded tent I'd be okay with this, but anything beyond this wouldn't fit without some heavy compromises. If you wanted a separate world space for a house (as I've seen some people do), that's not going to be implemented due to the loading screens and the issue of having multiple server shards. If you want protection from the rain: suggest a parasol (with durability). If you want to have a dwelling that functions like a tent, but both lasts and looks like it would last longer: suggest that. There's no need to overhaul certain parts of the game to get the functionality you want.

Beefalo weren't overhauled to be domesticated and used as a means of transportation? Some animals weren't overhauled to be fenced and farmed? Characters weren't overhauled for balance purposes in multiplayer? Monsters weren't overhauled to have more HP for balance purposes multiplayer? I can go on and on. I do however understand the loading screen and multiple servers part, but I feel there are ways to go around that and to not require another server to go into another instance. Simply stating it wont happen, is like saying that chairs and a feasting table wont be added because we're supposed to stand and the game isn't a sitting simulator.

[Tosh]

18 minutes ago, Trenix said:

Beefalo weren't overhauled to be domesticated and used as a means of transportation? Some animals weren't overhauled to be fenced and farmed? Characters weren't overhauled for balance purposes in multiplayer? Monsters weren't overhauled to have more HP for balance purposes multiplayer? I can go on and on. I do however understand the loading screen and multiple servers part, but I feel there are ways to go around that and to not require another server to go into another instance. Simply stating it wont happen, is like saying that chairs and a feasting table wont be added because supposed to stand.

All of those (aside from character balancing) are cases of something being added rather than overhauled. Any animal that can be fenced and farmed could've been walled and farmed before. The most extreme of these is beefalo taming and even that doesn't affect early game beefalo, or the fact that the walking cane is the most practical utility for getting around faster. 

I was referring to your topic on farms when I was talking about overhauls, apologies if I spoke too generally. I agree with the intentions behind a fair few of your suggestions. However, I believe that their simplicity and synergy could be improved. I don't want to derail this thread any more, so if you want more detailed feedback on your ideas feel free to pm me.

[Rellimarual]

Houses seem pointless to me: what are you going to do in there? It's bad enough waiting out the changeover from surface to cave servers as it is. On semi public servers it would fill up with noobs trying to hide from hounds,etc. However, something resembling the palm leaf hut in SW would be good. You can stand under it to keep dry, at the cost of not being able to actually DO anything, and it could also be a nice addition to the base, depending on how it looked.

[Ecu]

7 hours ago, Trenix said:

Ecu, I don't think it's me that's troubled, but rather you. You need to respect others opinions. I mean really, who do you think you are by telling me to go play a different game? Talk about rude and intolerant to excessive proportions. I'm going to say it one last time to you, you're not a developer of Don't Starve Together. Your words, your thoughts, are mere opinions. You do not dictate the end results of the game and what the game stand for. You need to reword the things you say, stop saying things are certain when they're instead possibly true, where I would say, highly unlikely true due to common sense, evidence, and facts.

I'm sorry, I can respect an idea without agreeing with it.  The majority of your recent ideas have not been things that I feel are right for DST, and I've voiced my opinion as to why.  As for how I word things, while I agree my words are only opinions, I have actually been studying game design for the past 5-6 years as a personal hobby.  Specifically speaking, I've been focusing heavily on studying various survival games.  As such, I have reasonable clarity regarding what would and would not be good ideas for the game.  If an idea does seem like it could add good gameplay while not feeling out of place, I am generally one of the first people to state as such.

7 hours ago, Trenix said:

For example, "This game isn't a building simulator" because I want a house in the game when there are already buildings in the game. You can build pig houses, therefore building simulation already exists. There is your common sense, evidence, and facts. Should I now go tell you to go play a different game? No, because I'm not going to go to your level. It's clear you're just overall terrible to argue with because it isn't constructive. Your ego is so high that you actually believe you are a developer rather than just arguing as a customer or a fan.

There is a difference between the housing you want and the housing you are trying to use as support.  The housing you are using as support are essentially just creature spawners.  The tent and/or lean-to are tools to regain statistics at the cost of food.  The game is very clearly not designed around the type of gameplay you seem to want to implement.  This isn't just evident to myself, but to others here who have liked my post or supported my viewpoints.  As such, I suggested that you look into modding and/or other games instead.

6 hours ago, Trenix said:

Even if he was saying that, it's still highly inaccurate. There is no proof or any evidence to backs that up. In fact, there is evidence that states the opposite. Majority of this game's development has been about moving Don't Starve and it's expansion into multiplayer. Multiplayer overhauls and additional content has only just begun. Here is the proof.

I read through your proof and that actually doesn't specifically state anything that would say I am wrong regarding them having a set concept as to what DST is.  At most, they say that they are making extensive changes in A New Reign, which as we have seen, they did.  However, said changes did not really move away from the core gameplay concept DST has had this whole time.

The most out of place thing that A New Reign did so far has actually been pets, and those don't actually have an effect on gameplay at all.  As such, I would say that I am rather accurate in my understanding of the core mechanics of the game.

5 hours ago, Tosh said:

All of those (aside from character balancing) are cases of something being added rather than overhauled. Any animal that can be fenced and farmed could've been walled and farmed before. The most extreme of these is beefalo taming and even that doesn't affect early game beefalo, or the fact that the walking cane is the most practical utility for getting around faster. 

@Trenix, as @Tosh has stated here, the changes you mentioned were really additions for the most part.  Even tweaks to the characters have not really been massive overhauls for the most part.  They have just been minor changes to balance things out.  Very far from them changing the direction of their game towards the style you seem to desire.

4 hours ago, Rellimarual said:

Houses seem pointless to me: what are you going to do in there? It's bad enough waiting out the changeover from surface to cave servers as it is. On semi public servers it would fill up with noobs trying to hide from hounds,etc. However, something resembling the palm leaf hut in SW would be good. You can stand under it to keep dry, at the cost of not being able to actually DO anything, and it could also be a nice addition to the base, depending on how it looked.

Agreed.  Actual zoned housing or roofing to go over floor tiles would both really be out of place in DST, however, something akin to Shipwrecked's Palm Leaf Hut could definitely work as an alternative method to using a tent/lean-to to dry off.  It better fits in with the design of the game and already has precedence by being in Shipwrecked.

Really though, such a structure is basically akin to standing under a tree with a hat, I believe.

[TheTraditionalGentleman]

7 hours ago, Rellimarual said:

 However, something resembling the palm leaf hut in SW would be good. You can stand under it to keep dry, at the cost of not being able to actually DO anything, and it could also be a nice addition to the base, depending on how it looked.

That's what I think would look nice. Having a wood, hay, stone, and thucelite version similar to that, but that "snaps" on walls. Then you're still outside (don't need a pocket server), and it's not really a house, but it feels nice and looks nice, all without breaking the game. Heck, if balance is an issue, make it need repairs every so often.

[Arlesienne]

1 minute ago, TheTraditionalGentleman said:

That's what I think would look nice. Having a wood, hay, stone, and thucelite version similar to that, but that "snaps" on walls. Then you're still outside (don't need a pocket server), and it's not really a house, but it feels nice and looks nice, all without breaking the game. Heck, if balance is an issue, make it need repairs every so often.

I would like a leaf roof to have mobs attacking me push it on my head like the quakes or end up set on fire. I don't believe we would make anything durable, but I will be damned if Willow won't make the boys to try some shade.

[Ecu]

5 hours ago, TheTraditionalGentleman said:

That's what I think would look nice. Having a wood, hay, stone, and thucelite version similar to that, but that "snaps" on walls. Then you're still outside (don't need a pocket server), and it's not really a house, but it feels nice and looks nice, all without breaking the game. Heck, if balance is an issue, make it need repairs every so often.

If you're actually suggesting building walls and roofs akin to floor tiles and walls...I have to disagree with this.  Assets aren't 3D like that.  While you could probably make something really clunky work, it just isn't the way the game was designed.  I also feel it would create some real stylization issues with the player having large house-like structures, while you have more cartoony pig, bunny, and merm housing.

So honestly, I cannot agree with this.

[TheTraditionalGentleman]

5 hours ago, Ecu said:

If you're actually suggesting building walls and roofs akin to floor tiles and walls...I have to disagree with this.  Assets aren't 3D like that.  While you could probably make something really clunky work, it just isn't the way the game was designed.  I also feel it would create some real stylization issues with the player having large house-like structures, while you have more cartoony pig, bunny, and merm housing.

So honestly, I cannot agree with this.

Well, what I was thinking was something similar to this: 

But that would have straight sticks, and have one of the aforementioned materials for the top, rather than palm trees. Heck, it might even take one of these per wall (imagine them about the size of the wall pieces). The sticks on the inner roof pieces (once you surround them with other roof pieces or walls) may disappear for aesthetics and practicality's sake, but that's what I was imagining, rather than a giant tile piece.

[Ecu]

12 hours ago, TheTraditionalGentleman said:

Well, what I was thinking was something similar to this: 

But that would have straight sticks, and have one of the aforementioned materials for the top, rather than palm trees. Heck, it might even take one of these per wall (imagine them about the size of the wall pieces). The sticks on the inner roof pieces (once you surround them with other roof pieces or walls) may disappear for aesthetics and practicality's sake, but that's what I was imagining, rather than a giant tile piece.

Yeah, essentially square house structure.  I understood what you meant and my explanation already stated why I feel that is a very poor design decision.

[TheTraditionalGentleman]

29 minutes ago, Ecu said:

Yeah, essentially square house structure.  I understood what you meant and my explanation already stated why I feel that is a very poor design decision.

Ah, then perhaps I misunderstood what you were going for. Care to re-explain? I can see how it would look out of place compared to pig houses and whatnot, and how if you had a ton of individual roof pieces it could get clunky, but that's why they'd latch together to form bigger sections.

I think I see what you mean, although honestly, I think it just drives me crazy that we can't make anything (structures are what I mean) to keep the rain off. I'm all for the challenge, and being exposed to the elements is a way to do that, but I like my challenges to make more sense (within the realms of what makes sense with Don't Starve logic). Not be due to my characters just being masochistic and deciding to tough it out in the rain "for the challenge"  

I know we can make umbrellas and rain coats, which make perfect sense when traveling in the rain, but only being able to resort to these things when in your permanent camp feels like an artificial way of keeping things difficult. Or at least in my opinion (and I really don't mean that to sound snarky) 

 

Out of curiosity, do you have any suggestions for dealing with rain in base camp? I'd love to hear any.

[Ecu]

Just now, TheTraditionalGentleman said:

Ah, then perhaps I misunderstood what you were going for. Care to re-explain? I can see how it would look out of place compared to pig houses and whatnot, and how if you had a ton of individual roof pieces it could get clunky, but that's why they'd latch together to form bigger sections.

I think I see what you mean, although honestly, I think it just drives me crazy that we can't make anything (structures are what I mean) to keep the rain off. I'm all for the challenge, and being exposed to the elements is a way to do that, but I like my challenges to make more sense (within the realms of what makes sense with Don't Starve logic). Not be due to my characters just being masochistic and deciding to tough it out in the rain "for the challenge"  

I know we can make umbrellas and rain coats, which make perfect sense when traveling in the rain, but only being able to resort to these things when in your permanent camp feels like an artificial way of keeping things difficult. Or at least in my opinion (and I really don't mean that to sound snarky) 

 

Out of curiosity, do you have any suggestions for dealing with rain in base camp? I'd love to hear any.

Regarding keeping rain off, you could already make a decorative tree and wear a straw hat to have something in base to since trees themselves can be used a rain blocker.  I have already stated support of adding Shipwrecked's Palm Leaf Hut (which is the image you linked) to the game as well.

[TheTraditionalGentleman]

24 minutes ago, Ecu said:

Regarding keeping rain off, you could already make a decorative tree and wear a straw hat to have something in base to since trees themselves can be used a rain blocker.  I have already stated support of adding Shipwrecked's Palm Leaf Hut (which is the image you linked) to the game as well.

We can make the decorative tree for now, but is it known yet if we'll get to keep it after the Christmas season? And you did show support for the palm leaf hut. What are your thoughts on a grass/wood/stone variant, if it stays the same dimensions of the palm leaf hut, rather than the idea I had listed above? As for the roof itself, at this point I'll simply agree to disagree (after all, we're both aware that these are just our opinions and preferences)