Teh Pizza Lady

Any argument you could make for thrusting a spear into the side of a bear should come with the requirement that it be made while actually thrusting a spear into the side of a bear in real life. Then and only then you will understand why throwing > thrusting. I have to side with the devs on this one, no matter what the graphs say. The human body isn't a hydraulic press. It's a bag of fleshy snacks held together with bony toothpicks all wrapped up in a convenient wrapper called clothing and armor. A mere hindrance to the determined predator, really. to be perfectly fair, he started it.

sees changes to hunger system has authored at least 2 mods that use said hunger system Welp I guess I'll go update my mods now! XD

"It's a solo game" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here, because Vintage Story is not only a solo game. It has full multiplayer support, active community servers, and TOPS -- the official public test server -- is frequented by a large number of players as well as the developers themselves. Changes to base game mechanics don't exist in a vacuum where only one person will ever experience them. They ship to everyone. The concern wasn't hyperbole. It was a straightforward walkthrough of how the proposed change interacts with existing systems, using the game's own mechanics as the framework. Whether anyone would actually perform that specific sequence is beside the point -- the point is that the design space matters, because the devs have to consider it whether we do or not. I'm also not sure "fringe use" and "what is it to you" are really the counterarguments you want to be making here, because the answer to both of those is: game design. The reason we're all in a suggestions forum discussing whether a mechanic should exist is precisely because these things are worth thinking through before they ship. That's the job this forum exists to do: weigh ideas and demand better thought where they are found wanting.

hard to poke when the poking bit is pointing in the wrong direction, eh?

every source I could find said that wasn't feasible unless the wielder was charging with the spear. The thrust would only carry the mass of the arms used to thrust it. Also the speed would be slower around 3-4 m/s which is the average speed of a human male running with both hands occupied. KE = 1/2 * 80 * 3.5^2 = 490 J Even if it were a full fencing thrust, not all of the weight of the wielder would transfer. I would guesstimate somewhere between 30-40kg and a higher speed of maybe 6m/s instead. Plugging that in we get: KE = 1/2 * 35 * 6^2 = 630 J Both numbers are still lower than the thrown spear, which even if it slowed to 20m/s would still have 800 J of KE behind it at the moment of impact. KE = 1/2 * 4 * 20^2 = 800 J That's a lot of energy

Mistake on my part. In my defense I have a really bad headache that I've been trying to ditch since yesterday. But you are...more right than me. I actually considered this and see no issues with it. Only tall grass should yield the big handful that we use in that game.

In that case, let the player be rewarded for their efforts and ingenuity! There is no effort to be found in removing the basic requirement of a simple flint knife to harvest grass. It's not a genius solution to bypass the basic requirement of "cut grass; build fire" model that we have to advancing through the tech tree. Obtaining the items for trade will require a significant amount of luck and/or time. That's not nothing. Otherwise, I agree with you. Not everything has to start with the stone age, but the alternative path to iron and steel shouldn't be a shortcut.

I'd like to suggest the addition of moss as a harvestable resource in the game. It's something that genuinely feels like it should already be in the game given how grounded in realism the rest of the survival mechanics are. I think it has enough utility to justify adding it without breaking the other systems in the game. Where it grows: On trees, obviously, but I was thinking it could grow on the south side bark of large oak and maple trees or present as a wispy texture hanging down from tree branches like Spanish Moss does. This keeps it rare enough and situational enough that it's something you'd notice, bookmark and come back for later. Since it doesn't grow from new oak trees (similar to how resin won't spout from new pine trees) this keeps it as a finite resource and not something you can farm easily. Harvesting it would require the player to deliberately seek it out and its delicate nature means that yields would be small. Vanilla uses: The most immediate use would be as a replacement for grass in crafting a fire pit. Grass is used a tinder in that construction. Substituting moss would allow the player to get a fire going. The traditional firestarter takes one piece of grass and two sticks. Moss could also serve as a substitute for the grass component here. Both options would give players an alternative in situations where they haven't made a knife or are trying to conserve a nearly broken one. It's historically accurate, too. Moss has many well-documented uses as tinder and fire-starting material across many cultures. The Primitive Survival YouTube channel shows it being used as tinder many times. Moss also has antiseptic properties that make it a natural fit as an ingredient for poultices or bandages. It could also be used as an insulating material that could be sewn into clothing by a Tailor to give a small boost to cold resistance. Modding potential: Moss as a base resource also opens up interesting possibilities for the modding community. Mod authors could incorporate in ways that had smaller, niche uses such as water filtration, or as a material that could be tilled into the soil to boost nutrients or aid in water retention. Let me know what you think and whether you can think of any additional uses for moss that I hadn't considered.

Aren't sticks also a required component in pit kiln construction, along with grass? Because pottery is a pretty massive thing to allow the player to freely do without ever making or using a knife. I think the real issue here isn't the construction of firepits with sticks and grass harvested without a knife. The real issue is the fact that allowing the player to harvest grass without a knife allows them to ENTIRELY SKIP THE STONE AGE. With OP's proposed "simple" change, the player can now gather all the grass and sticks they need to construct a pit kiln which can be fueled with peat (or charcoal for faster firing times). And here's the kicker. Charcoal is now able to be freely produced without ever making a knife because it also has a grass requirement for getting the fire going and that grass requirement is now also toolless. Although charcoal is made with firewood which DOES require an axe...... .............But a copper axe head can be cast directly without ever picking up or using a knife. Here's how that would be done: Punch grass to harvest it Stuff into pit kilns with axe mold, pickaxe mold, hammer mold and crucible Pile on sticks Cover in peat Light with torch or firestarter and wait... and then.... Use loose bits of coal from the ground to smelt loose bits of copper from the ground Pour molten copper into axe mold Use axe to chop trees and make firewood and get a charcoal pit going Use pickaxe to harvest more copper Use hammer to crush ore bits Use charcoal to smelt the rest of the copper, fuel your pitkilns, make the rest of your molds (anvil mold anyone??) and get a proper smithing setup All without touching a single knife. And it can be done with bronze, too, allowing a player to skip right to iron, even, without touching a single knife. How is this a "simple" change? It isn't. It's game-breaking. I think instead of allowing tool-less harvesting of grass, a better solution would be to allow the player to pick moss off trees and rocks and use that as a replacement for grass when making a firestarter. Moss is historically documented as tinder and has genuine fire starting properties. It would, of course, be hard to find and even harder to obtain due to its delicate nature, making it a genuine last resort for survival rather than a convenient shortcut. It's an alternative for players who can't find flint to make a knife or who are looking for an additional challenge all without overtly affecting the progression chain for everyone else who plays the game. As a bonus, moss could have additional uses that make it worth seeking out at any stage of the game. Its well-documented historical antiseptic properties make it a natural candidate for wound dressing or the creation of poultices. It could also serve as an insulation material to be sewn into clothing for extra cold resistance. Moss would genuinely add something new to the game, giving it more depth instead of removing the basic need to rub two rocks together to make a knife.

the presence of ripe fruit wasn't enough?

I have to push back on this because realistically there is an inherent problem with using them to chisel handholds on a surface you're trying to climb. You need to already be on a stable surface before you can effectively use said tools. Realistically nobody is hanging off the side of a cliff, gripping the footholds with their toes while chiseling out more, at least not without some sort of climbing gear. That's a really good way to end up a pre-tenderized bear snack at the foot of the cliff. Some sort of scaffolding would allow this, but honestly I only see it being useful for shorter runs without.

It's an open forum. Anyone can respond. I would ask what is the purpose of being able to make a firepit without tools, but first I need to know a few other things: What is your exact definition of "tools". The game classifies a lot of items as tools, including firestarters. If no tools are required, what should be required then? Obviously resources, but what about a skill level in harvesting the resources? I've seen some comments suggesting that you should be allowed to freely gather grass with your bare hands. Have you tried ripping up grass with your hands? It's not easy. Who should be allowed to do this? All players from the start of the game or only those who've progressed enough to know how to build a fire in the first place the normal way? What stops this from making the existing requirements for building fires pointless? This also raises a question about how the game onboards new players. The game's tutorials guide you to making your very first knife and stone tools. Are you suggesting that this should be irrelevant? I largely agree with this. The knife is useful for so many things, cutting hides, harvesting animals, looting rotbeasts etc. It can even serve as a weapon in a pinch. A good quality steel knife is a godsend because it's long durability! You've already responded to this quote from LadyWYT here: I'm not sure we're using the same definition for "railroading" here. Can you define railroading for me, please? The point I'm trying to make is that nobody is FORCING you to carry a knife with you at all times. Nobody is forcing you to carry only one. The choice is yours to make at all times. Your player agency is intact. What you're bumping into and why you're making this suggestion isn't because the players are being railroaded into specific choices, it's game mechanics. Mechanics are coherent, deliberate design choices that define how players are allowed to interact with the game world to achieve the desired outcomes. The tool requirement isn't restricting your agency, it's defining the terms of how you are allowed to play the game. Furthermore, suggesting that fires be allowed to be made without tools is a bit of a contradiction to what the game is all about. Vintage Story is a game that markets itself as an "uncompromising wilderness survival" game. Difficulty building a fire because you need a knife to cut grass isn't an arbitrary restriction, it's a deliberate choice. Asking to remove this isn't asking for more agency, it's asking the game to stop requiring you to adhere to its rules. You need thing, you use tool to get it. Same for chopping wood, or smithing another knife on the anvil or grinding grains into flour. Yes it is a simple change to allow grass to be harvested without a knife. But a simple change in the wrong direction is still the wrong change to make. One final thought: Players who actually want the option to remain toolless already have that option. There are several things you can obtain throughout game play without ever crafting a single tool. You can forage for food, you can run around collecting rusty gears and eventually trade them to get your first lantern. But without that knife, a lot of the game's systems will simply be locked to you.

No, I really didn't. I copied and pasted it and explained the disagreement of which it had full context. AI is notorious for mistakes. Don't trust them even if they agree with you. They are not experts. In the future I would refrain from using AI in your responses. All of mine came from Googling the topic of projectiles in motion and my own basic knowledge of forces in motion. But to get back on track, I think perhaps where the disagreement is coming from is that I'm using simple models that would be reflected in a video game where you're asking the game to perform a full ballistics simulation model on every projectile. That is simply not feasible because you would have to account for variations in spear head weight, size, and even shape as some spears will do more damage than others. One one hand I can sort of understand your arguments, but the instant you perform a full thrust with the spear instead of the "poke" that we do in game, you're lodging your spear deep into a target that's going to be very, very angry about it. You're also equating a thrust with a continuous push which is closer to charging your target with the spear and is clearly not what happens in game. A quick summary of thrusting a spear shows that the force of the spear would travel about as far as the user could push it. The mass imparting the force would be equivalent to the mass of the spear and whatever limbs were carrying it. The force itself would be equivalent to the force needed to move the spear that distance at that speed. The velocity is much much lower in this case, and thus imparts a lower impacting force on the target than the sheer force of a thrown projectile. At that point, the limiting factor would be the user's grip and whether the target was able to retaliate. These factors will severely limit the user's ability to impart the "continuous force" you seem to think should be happening here. Sorry but even if you are correct on a technicality, the way you're trying to apply the concepts is incompatible with how the game actually works, which is poking with a one-handed thrust vs hurling the spear. I've seen enough videos of people standing too close to the Olympic javelin toss to allow the thought that a thrusted spear could deal more damage.

I copied and pasted our entire conversation for context with a brief explanation: "The OP of this thread and I are disagreeing on this subject. My claim is that a thrown spear will have a higher Kinetic Energy (KE) than a thrusted spear. He deflected with a knife comparison, I challenged him on this as throwing knives aren't part of the game we're discussing and tried to refocus the discussion back on spears. This is his final comment to me:" And then posted your last comment. So like... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Okay.... here's what it said verbatim: It is: thrust = lower peak velocity, longer controlled force application throw = higher peak velocity, shorter uncontrolled impact Those are different interaction models, not competing energy systems. In short, it sounds like the OP has a basic grasp of the fundamental concepts, but is missing the mark on how to correctly apply them. It then expressed an interest in ending the thread here: Then I asked if I could just copy and paste the response and it said: Well I copied and pasted it verbatim. lol. but hey you told me to ask it and I did.

I thought we were talking about spears... Anyway, you’re also mixing up sustained force with impact energy. A thrust lets you keep pushing, but a thrown weapon delivers its energy in a single impact, and that impact scales strongly with velocity. I know this because I did pay attention in physics class. Here are the formulas for kinetic energy (KE), momentum (p), and force (F). KE = 1/2 * m * v^2 p = m * v F = m * a Impact energy scales with velocity squared (v^2), so higher speed = much harder hit than a slower hit with more mass behind it. In gameplay terms, that distinction matters. A thrown spear is a one-use, high-risk action where you lose the weapon, so it should hit harder on impact. A thrust is repeatable, controlled, and reliable, so it makes sense for it to have lower per-hit damage but higher consistency. For rough comparison: A ~4 kg spear thrust at ~10 m/s is ~200 J of energy. If the spear is thrusted much slower (because 10m/s is a generous speed!) then the number goes even lower. KE = 1/2 * 4 * 10^2 = 200 J A thrown spear in realistic human ranges (~25–35 m/s) is: KE = 1/2 * 4 * 30^2 ≈ 1800 J That’s an order of magnitude higher energy on impact, even before considering penetration dynamics. If they hit the same, or thrusting is stronger than throwing, then, there's no point in throwing spears or even using them. Just use a falx for melee since it hits way harder and a bow/arrow for projectiles since those are more accurate and can fire much faster.

That's really the most interesting way I've seen someone say, "This is better suited as a mod". This "no tools" challenge... is that NO tools at all, or just no crafting of tools (like you can still loot the cracked tool vessels)? If it's no tools AT ALL then this this doesn’t meaningfully improve the experience it’s targeting, and it risks undermining progression elsewhere. It will also only appeal to a minimal handful of players and will either go ignored or unused by the rest of the players. Either way without tools, you can't harvest dead animals so you don't really need a firepit except to cook porridge and fish. You won't be chopping wood so no pies or other baked goods. You will be stuck in the pre-stone age with no weapons, no armor, and no way to really defend yourself or survive except for praying that you can find food and the next wolf/bear won't send you back to spawn... And even then the only fuel you'll be able to use is either more sticks or peat which are readily available but hard to obtain in barren areas. I don't see any value in this suggestion.

Javelins aren't a thing in the game. There’s no reason to invent a separate “weaker thrown spear” tier just to justify a balance point. You're solving a problem that doesn’t exist. But in short, yes, spears should do more damage when thrown. They have higher kinetic energy than thrusting with a spear. Physics says that faster objects hit harder than slower objects. If you don't believe me, pay better attention in class.

The Blackguards favor shortswords because they were typically deployed as enforcers using a sword-and-shield style. A longsword, as you pointed out, is generally a two-handed weapon, so it doesn’t really fit as their preferred choice once you consider how they operate in the game’s lore. You were also right to pick up on the pseudo-European tone. In that kind of setting, anything described as "black" was often viewed through a superstitious lens, associated with something less noble or upright. That contrast becomes clearer when you put them alongside knights. Knights are often depicted with longswords, weapons that demand space, control, and a certain deliberate presence in combat. They are less about crowd control and enforcement and more about formal battle, duels, or standing as visible symbols of authority. The longsword, in that sense, complements the image: it is measured, disciplined, and, in the cultural imagination, tied to honor. Blackguards sit on the other end of that spectrum. Their shortswords suit close quarters, cramped indoor spaces (perhaps those of survivor hideouts?), quick engagements, and the reality of keeping order rather than embodying it. Where a knight’s weapon reinforces the idea of nobility and righteousness, the Blackguard’s gear reflects function over ceremony. The difference isn’t just mechanical, it reinforces how each group is perceived. Knights are meant to be seen and admired, even idealized. Blackguards are meant to be effective, and if they’re feared or mistrusted in the process, that almost seems to be part of their role. Shortswords also require less material and less work to make than longswords. Given the circumstances that birthed the need for the Blackguards, it's quickly understood why that was their weapon -- not by choice, but necessity. I'm sure there were some who believed them to be noble and upright denizens of the dying land as indicated by some conversation you can have with a certain NPC in the game after you've advanced the story to a certain point, but that view was not held by the majority who feared and even sometimes hated the Blackguards.

in order: dunno, dunno, and... ... never!

I can agree with most of these, but you still need a knife to get the dry grass to use as tinder so you still need knapping to make a fire. Go make an axe and chop wood.

I voted for the new logo but only because I like the clarified shading and because I think it's important for a game's logo to be consistent with the art style of the game itself. You wouldn't expect a game like CyberPunk to have a watercolor logo or something like Apex Legends to have balloon art. Usually the game's logo is taking from something visually striking from the game itself that is easily recognizable and people can point to it and say "Yes, that's Vintage Story." What the old logo does right: Simplicity in design. The original logo understands restraint. The tree, the floating island, the clock. That’s the identity. It doesn’t try to over-explain itself, and it doesn’t need to. The larger shapes do the heavy lifting, while the finer details are implied rather than forced. It leaves mystery and allows the player to discover that there is more than what is apparent from the surface. Separation of the text from the logo. The tree is the logo. The text is the brand. They are treated as separate elements, which gives both room to breathe. Nothing is fighting for attention, and the viewer can process the image cleanly. Thematic consistency. Everything points back to the tree. The greens and browns are cohesive, and the gears are understated. They exist just enough to create curiosity without pulling focus. The logo knows what it’s about and doesn’t drift from it. Even the colors of the text match the colors of the logo, giving them a visually jarring look that draws attention to them in just the right way that leaves the viewer slightly unsettled. Not so much that they look away, but just enough that they look at it and think "Something isn't quite right here", which lends more to the game than you might realize. What the new logo does right: Deeper contrast. The new design introduces stronger light and shadow. The added contrast in the canopy and the darker underside of the island give the image actual depth instead of letting it sit flat. It reads faster and more clearly because of it and draws the eye to the image as a whole. More defined shading. Lighting feels intentional instead of evenly spread. The tree is broken into readable forms, highlights and shadowed masses, which gives it structure and makes the whole piece feel more grounded in realism which is a whole thematic element of the game itself. A stronger, fuller tree. This is where the new design carries the most weight. The added branches and the expanded canopy give the tree presence. It feels older, healthier, and more established. The silhouette is bigger, clearer, and more recognizable. The tree is the anchor of the whole design. Improved silhouette clarity. The overall shape of the tree and island reads much more cleanly. You can recognize it at a glance without needing to rely on internal detail, which is exactly what a strong logo should do. You could lose half the details of the logo with the clockwork, steampunk machinery and condense it down to just what is in the first image without losing ANY details in what the image represents. Better depth in the base. The underside of the island and the gears have more separation and shadow, which helps sell the idea that this is a layered object rather than a flat cutout. The visual depth is more pleasing to the eye. What could work better: Not a complete redesign, but a visual clarification of original logo. Same identity, same tone, same intent. What a proper logo needs to do is: Keep the visual clarity of the old logo Add the depth and contrast of the new logo Keep the updated tree so it actually carries visual weight Keep the simplicity so it feels intentional instead of overloaded As it stands, the new logo appears, visually, more playful than grounded, which makes it feel closer to something aimed at a younger audience. That’s a noticeable shift from the creator’s description of Vintage Story as being like The Other Block Game, "but for adults."

this one is quite simple: you have food recipes and non-food recipes. In order for a non-food recipe to be cooked, it must be done so in a dirty cookpot or else it will foul the cookpot and make it unusable. It's just part of how the game determines if you're cooking food or something else. correct, because the intended path to leather is finding limestone or chalk. Borax can be used as a substitute, but the reason it's gated behind bronze is because of how it's used as a flux between the two halves of an iron anvil to forge weld them together. I have opinions about this, too, but I believe the difference between the lime water and quicklime is that the quicklime is used for mortar preparation and the ground limestone is just to differentiate between the two. I do not understand why one is required over the other and honestly I might see if I can create a mod that fixes this if one does not already exist. Not sure if this is the best solution, but I get where you're coming from. The major problem I have with this is what to do with the lead-lined still once you're done... Usually sturdy leather is kind of a one-time end-game process.

I have also noticed this. The problem I see is that some people want or expect the current behavior in the game so I guess you have to weigh and balance retraining yourself to use the game's current controls and click actions or asking everyone else to retrain themselves to use your desired controls and click actions.

Step 1: kill deer for antlers Step 2: use antlers to dig for stone Step 3: use stone to craft spears/axes Step 4: use spears to hunt for deer repeat as needed until you realize it's a catch 22 and will never be resolved without a lucky break Without axes, you have no firewood so you are limited to whatever raw ingredients you can find on the ground. Perfect, I guess for the vegan player, but a LOT of stuff is locked by killing your first animal including larger inventory and warm clothing for the winter. no offense to the person you're replying to, but from what I'm reading this idea is better suited for a mod to increase the early game difficulty or for players who want a more traditional vegan survival route. If it were part of the base game, I would probably create a mod to revert it.