Remove farmer level requirement for cook


#1

Currently there is only one support path to having a cook: farm, level him/her up enough to become a cook, and be a cook.

But say you want to set out and make a mountain village. Mountains don’t currently allow for farmland. So this means you are Basicly locked out of a cook.

Also it doesn’t make thematic sense: why should just a farmer know how to cook?

So I propose to keep the spoon item as a requirement but to remove the farmer requirement, or, alternatively, add the trapper as an optional alternative.

Alternatively - to that:
Spawn some random patches suitable for farmland on your rocky mountains.


#2

Cooks still farm when they’re not cooking in the game. So having them learn the basics makes sense. If they were to drop the farm requirement that could alternatively create a heavier burden on food growth forcing players to commit more hearthlings to farming.

Adding the trapper as an alternative and having cooks raised that way continue to trap on their down time would prolly get a Butcher. That seems like a nice idea.

The ability to move soil to create your own farmlands/flowerbeds would be ideal. It’s been a much sought after feature for some time. I imagine it’s just been low on priority list, barring any technical difficulties.


#3

It always bothered me, that even though cooks can farm, they do it less efficiently, even though they already have plenty experience with farming. Like they pick up the spoon and suddenly forget how to farm.


#4

this is probably for gameplay reasons: otherwise there wouldnt be a reason to not turn a farmer into a cook and just go without farmers

kinda like the who problem with the cleric/herbalist.
currently the cleric blows the herbalist out of the water: there just isnt a reason to stay a herbalist.


#5

@BrunoSupremo actually made that happen for the swamp biome! So it might not be such a far fetched idea :slight_smile:


#6

@CrazyCandy One of the marks of their inefficiency at farming is that they can only farm the basics: turnips, pumpkin, and carrots. On their own, that is. If you plant a patch of corn before you promote them to cook, they can perpetuate that crop. It seems once you have the plot down for any farmable, you can keep that crop going despite losing the farmer of appropriate level.

So, if you only set them to a specific number of dishes to cook, the cook can keep things going in the kitchen and field for a small group of Hearthlings. I do ten meat stews and ten veggie stews. Seems to be enough to keep all but the largest groups fed while giving the cook time to farm.


#7

time top poke-a-dev! :P? /gameshow music


#8

This would probably be the best way to address that, or something that enabled you to create and put down “growable” soil like I was trying to do with compost at one point.

After reading this thread, I tried putting together a quick mod to try to remove the requirement and farming functionality from the cook, but…ehhhhh…it’s proving messy >.<


#9

Honestly, I would prefer something that allowed for us to use the rotting food as a means to create portable grow beds. Something one block high and varying in width/length to grow food in rocky terrain that you could pack up and move when it was empty. Toss them in a building and you could have a lovely indoor garden/greenhouse.

If I could code, I’d have already come up with an extra class: a forester with an axe talisman (created by the blacksmith) being the primary first. Likely as a promotion from the base carpenter class. He would be a boon to carpenters. You lay down a field for him to work in and he’ll plant saplings or seeds for trees. When they reach maturity, he’d auto-harvest them. If you want to control how many logs you produce, you can decrease or increase the fields.

Maybe I should do something with my free time and teach myself how… le sigh.


#10

I disagree with the idea, unfortunately.
Though I do think that the level is too high for promoting to a cook

I like that farmers move onto cooks, and that cooks help tend to the farms in their downtime. It means I don’t have to devote so many Hearthlings to farming just to keep everyone fed. By the time I usually get one, however, I’ve got stockpiles of uncooked food and everyone complaining they had to eat raw turnips for dinner.

I prefer where this compost idea is going.

To have growing beds or specially-made plots for getting crops up onto mountains, or in otherwise inhospitable areas for farming. Perhaps this can be done with the Potters and mud? I know this means you have to go ahead and get a Potter but your Mason will have so much stone up there it shouldn’t be too hard for them.

Either way, building on the top of a mountain is going to be a challenge, naturally, so you shouldn’t expect the difficulty of it to be lowered for you. Whatever the solution you will need to work to survive.


#11

Right now, level requirements are about the best way to guarantee you can’t get a class until slightly further into the game. There’s also the class talismans, but when they’re made by the same class that can be promoted (herbalist → cleric, blacksmith → engineer), they have about the same effect. And when it’s made by the carpenter, it’s pretty easy to unlock, since I generally have my carpenter working all the time.

When some of the abilities or roles transfer, it makes sense thematically, IMO (herbalist → cleric, farmer → cook). But I agree it’s not the prettiest solution. I’d love to see trappers upgrade-able to a cook-type job, but that would take some revamping of the class system entirely. I know Radiant was working on redesigning classes (and their abilities), but I haven’t heard much since.


Last I remember, they showed off a prototype involving exploring to unlock new classes, made it clear that it was just a prototype and not a definitive direction, got loud complaints about the direction of the game anyway, put even more prototype disclaimers on their next video, and then moved that all behind the scenes as the new building editor and recently revealed multiplayer took the focus.

That was… not a particularly good time in the DIscourse. Or the video comment sections. So I’m worried they’ll try to avoid changing some things entirely when maybe they should be pushing forward on that (but dealing with the fallout more appropriately.)


#12

@TheCursedJester It only requires a level 2 farmer to become a cook. That’s not that high at all, especially when you compare it to an Ascendancy Mason needing to be level 4 to become a Potter. It’s more of a matter that it seems to take forever for a farmer to get to level 2 so they can be promoted. This ensures that you do have a stockpile of food for them to cook, however, rather than promote them and they have to wait.

Any modders out there wanna work on making grow beds for us? I’m willing to pay in Oreos.


#13

Still planning on Animal Trainer. Magma Smith already has its workshops and outfit in the game, just no recipes beyond that. At one point they were talking about even more than just Animal Trainer, Magma Smith, and Geomancer. Whether it be pressure from all the complaining, time crunch, or management goals, seems like the rest may have landed on the chopping block.


#14

Did you ever get around to finishing? I desperately want a mod that fixes this - it’s so odd to me.


#15

Not a matter that I didn’t get around to it, so much as I couldn’t figure out how to do it.


#16

A mixinto into the cooks class file would do it. There is a sort of “from what class do you promote?” part. Followed by “what level of that class do you have to be?” I’m parafrasing ofc (had to fight with that stuff for my nordlings)


#17

I think it was the removing farming part that I had trouble with (I don’t recall at this point)


#18

Ah, now you mention it the cook would still do that, yes XD, and that is indeed trickier


#19

Wouldn’t you just override the cook_abilities.json to remove the ai pack "stonehearth:ai_pack:farming"? (I think you’d have to override the whole file and just remove that line from it since it’s in an array.)


#20

Or make a different ai pack and point at that one, might be cleaner, no overrides (or have that one load up the original and overwrite it in your own pack…)