Gorka wrote: If you read your sentence again it can actually be taken to mean different things. You could be clarifying what a bard can do - sing luck gods, or specifically highlighting a specific bard if there were more than one - the bard who is singing luck gods (because you then mention people which is plural).
The sentence means one and only thing in this context, and I'll do my best to clarify it beyond reasonable doubt.
I never thought studying English in the university and English grammer 5 times over the course of my life would've come ultimately useful, but today is the day.
Sentence:
"how about excluding the bard, who is singing the luck gods, from the people counter"
What we already know: if there is anyone in the area, it doesn't repop. Hence the name, people counter.
People is used to differentiate between players and mobs, not to denote plurality (people vs a player), because it doesn't repop with 1 player as well.
Note: it also doesn't repop with familiars, so we can rename it to Player Presence Detector.
I'll spare us both the use exact grammar terms and will attempt to describe the syntax as simply as possible.
The complex sentence consists of two parts:
1. how about excluding the bard from the people counter
2. who is singing the luck gods.
1. is the main part, 2. is the subordinate clause, which are separated by a comma, because we need commas to separate subordinate clause from the independent parts of the sentence.
1. how about excluding the bard from the people counter
It can be rephrased to how about you exclude the bard.
Gorka wrote:but the emphasis of the sentence is placed on "excluding the bard."
Well caught: this is indeed the main part of the sentence. Hats off to Gorka!
2. who is singing the luck gods
This is a descriptive dependent clause, because it describes the object in part 1: a bard, which one? the one, who is singing luck gods. It can't exist without the object it describes, because it describes one and only thing, the bard. Therefore, the bard can not be excepted from being considered to be singing luck gods.
Gorka wrote:Using comma's doesn't mean things are happening at the same time, it only implies relationship between the statements.
comma itself does not denote a time, but the tense a verb is used in does.
"is singing" is in a Present Continuous Tense, which denotes what is happening at the very moment. In the sentence, the moment is that of the repop: the bard is singing, when the area repops - after that he can stop, for what we care (he/she usually does, no point singing luck gods immediately after repop).
Therefore, the suggestion means one, and only thing: to exclude the bard, who is singing luck gods, from the player presence detector.
So far I've used just the English grammar to arrive at the one and only meaning of the sentence. But let's dig deeper to dispel your doubts.
Gorka wrote:You could be clarifying what a bard can do - sing luck gods
No, because this is a prime skill - only bards can sing luck gods. I wouldn't even need to mention luck gods, if I wanted to mention a bard prime.
If I wanted to say "a bard, who can sing luck gods" as opposed to a bard, who can't, then I'd have said "a bard, who has luck gods learned".
Gorka wrote:If you read your sentence again it can actually be taken to mean different things. You could be ... specifically highlighting a specific bard if there were more than one - the bard who is singing luck gods
If we place the sentence in the context - which is that right now no players present allow the area to repop - then we see that the bard is opposed to other players, not other bards in the area.
it is not:
- two bard are present, one is singing, one is not
- two bards are present, both are singing
- two bards are present, none are singing.
It is a singing bard vs all the other players for the sake of the context and the suggestion.
The sentence does answer, whether the area repops in the following conditions:
- two bards are present, one is singing, one is not
No, because one is not singing
- two bards are present, both are singing
Yes, because both are singing
- one or more bards are present, none are singing
No, because they aren't singing.
And lastly, if you use the Occam's razor, and use only the information given in the suggestion without assuming anything out of place, then you'll still arrive at the only possible conclusion - which I assume you did.
Therefore, I believe the suggestion should only be understood in one and only way possible: to introduce the code, which would allow the area with a bard, who is singing the luck gods song at the time of the repop, to repop.
Now, about the quest areas.
As far as I remember, the quest areas are made norepop for the same reason as other areas: it makes it easy for others to proceed. In one case, a mob blocks the passage, afair.
I don't see why a bard would need to reset a quest area to slow down his quest progress.
Of course, it is possible he might want to pop several sets of quest items, but there's the thing: quests can only be completed once. Twice, if you rebirth. I'd say it's a bit farfetched that a bard would get to quest area and sing luck gods just to get quest items for his rebirth.
Even if we assume that a bard would be persistent to do such a thing, this can be easily circumvented by setting quest area repop timer to 20 days or never. It'd save Teker's time to add area specific flags for quest areas. If quest areas have a separate quest-area tag, then it could be updated to never let quest areas repop.