Minerealm Community Forums

Ok, so this suggestion suggests (NOOO *sarcasm*) that we add some "classes" or "positions" to the realm users system. All the positions can place/remove blocks in that realm, except other people's chests (Excluding Owners of course, they can remove other people's chests). To remove a player's position the command would be: /realm remove <position> <username> (Only the owners and co-owners can use this command, but cannot remove the position from someone in their same class, excluding the original owner, that can remove any position from whatever player he wants). Below are some of the positions and what each propose:

Realm Owner:

When you buy a realm, you immediately become the owner of that realm. The owner can give whatever position he wants to whoever is an user in his/her realm. There can be a max of 2 realm owners per realm. The command to make someone owner would be: /realm owner <username.> (Only the original owner can use this command).

Realm Co-Owner:

The owner decides which user gets this position. The co-owner can only name the following positions: Realm Guest and Realm Member. There can be a max of 2 co-owners per realm. The command to make someone co-owner would be: /realm co-owner <username> (Only the owners can use this command). The commands that this "class" can do are:

• /realm member <username>
  /realm MOTD <message>

Realm Guest:

The owner or co-owner decide which user get this position. Guests can't name any position. There is no max of how much guests you can have in 1 realm. They can only open chests specified by the owner or co-owner (This class will come useful when you have a Hotel or are renting realms). Guests can't do any commands in that realm. The command to make someone Guest would be: /realm guest <username> (Only the realm owners and co-owners can do this command).

Realm member

It would stay the same as now except that it couldn't do any commands or remove others chests or open any chests.


I hope you vote yes and if you dont, please post why below.

And remember: Eat your snacks!

...so realm members would be exactly the same as realm guests?

How do you specify which chests can/can't be opened by guests?

In my opinion this adds unnecessary complexity to the realm system. I think simplicity is what makes the current system work so well.

The only change I want in the realm system is realm leaders, which the owner specify one or more people as leader(s), and the leader(s) can give permission to anyone they would like to. This has already been suggested and accepted, but not implemented yet. Other than this, I think the system is fine as it is.

Sounds complicated what benefit would this bring ?

cobaya18 wrote: Realm Guest:

The owner or co-owner decide which user get this position. Guests can't name any position. There is no max of how much guests you can have in 1 realm. They can only open chests specified by the owner or co-owner (This class will come useful when you have a Hotel or are renting realms). Guests can't do any commands in that realm. The command to make someone Guest would be: /realm guest <username> (Only the realm owners and co-owners can do this command).

Realm member

It would stay the same as now except that it couldn't do any commands or remove others chests or open any chests.

I'm rather confused here. So a realm guest can only open certain chests? And a realm member can't open ANY chests at all? This poses a problem..if I'm adding somebody to my realm then I presumably am OK with them being in the chests - IE, a bank. It would be a huge pain for a realm owner to have to allow guests access to every chest individually in a realm with a community bank. That's the biggest problem I see here.

I guess it just seems like it's adding complications without really helping much.

As others have mentioned, the issue of controlling chests i.e. specifying which chests are accessible to guests will need to be dealt with in order for this to be feasible.

I know that similar functions are available in third-party mods that servers can use to allow locks and passwords on chests, but I doubt those kinds of strategies would be easy to integrate with the land-based (rather than chest-based) security system that MR uses.

If this issue can be resolved, I'd support the idea, but frankly that seems like a rather high hurdle to clear.

actually i have already made an almost exact suggestion that was accepted so i guess this thread is invalid?

MrKeveCool wrote:actually i have already made an almost exact suggestion that was accepted so i guess this thread is invalid?

Wasn't your suggestion just for the ability to designate realm co-owners? This is way more complicated/different. This isn't really a duplicate.

Also for identical suggestions, the results of the newer thread overrule the vote in the older thread.

Well since this was rejected it means that my suggestion still is accepted