Problem entering house :(

[Kylie Jaxxon]

This is so frustrating.  I've been fooling around with this issue for three days now and can't solve it...have never come across this before :(  I've also messaged the creator but have not heard back yet.  Not sure I will so I thought perhaps someone might have an idea of what is wrong.

When I rez my house and not do anything else, it is fine...I have no problems.  But when I "edit linked" something (I want to remove the plants out of the flower  boxes,) it won't let me out or in through my doors.  The doors still open and close properly, but it's like an invisible barrier that won't let me pass :(

It is not mesh.  I'm not unlinking or linking anything, other than the plants. I am not anywhere near my boundary line.

Any ideas?

 

[Trinity Yazimoto]

Yes this happens and this is normal.

once you edit and change smth in your house the phantom door is not anymore phantom

to fix this :

unlink the frame around the doors  and  settle them as phantom again. :smileyhappy: And you'll be able to go accross them again

[Kylie Jaxxon]

Yay!!!  Trinity...thank you so much  

[Trinity Yazimoto]

you are welcome lol.. 

it happened to me to sometimes ago and ive read in the forum it was normal :smileywink:

[Phil Deakins]

---

Trinity Yazimoto wrote:

Yes this happens and this is normal.

once you edit and change smth in your house the phantom door is not anymore phantom

to fix this :

unlink the frame around the doors  and  settle them as phantom again. :smileyhappy: And you'll be able to go accross them again

---

I didn't understand that at all and I almost posted to query it. It hadn't occured to me that the frame is a single hollowed out prim. Now that it's occured to me, it makes sense.

I didn't know that a phantom prim can be linked to non-phantom prims (I've never needed to do it) so I've learned something

[Trinity Yazimoto]

well, when this happened to my shop building i figured out to fix by myself... but then.. sometimes later ive read the explanation in the forum... but sorry, i cant remember the reason why its happening...it had prob something to see whith the linking between phantom and non phantom objects.. or with the scripts in the door.. i cant rem... but well, i just remember the way to fix this lol... isnt this the more important  ?:smileywink:

I guess some builders will come here and give the the explanation about why doors act like this after editing the buildings...

[Phil Deakins]

Your explanation was enough to know that it wasn't the door, or scripts in the door, that was the problem. In fact it's nothing to do with the door. The problem is the surround, which is a single prim - a flat box - that is phantom and mostly transparent. Making it non-phantom means that it can't be walked through, and that was the problem. When I've created door surrounds, I never thought of that single-prim method.

I've just done a little test with 2 prims and I don't know how it is possible to have them linked together and have one phantom and the other not phantom.

ETA: I made a mistake. I've always used a single prim for door surrounds, but hollow and not phantom. My brain isn't working very well at the moment. I see no reason to have a phantom door surround prim, and I'm not at all sure of why that remedy works.

More ETA : I suppose the phantom prim metrhod is better than what I've always used because it allows the surround top to be the same thickness as the sides. Using a hollow prim on a surround where the door much taller than it is wide, means that the top is much thicker than the sides, and that's not very good.

 

[Porky Gorky]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

More ETA

: I suppose the phantom prim metrhod is better than what I've always used because it allows the surround top to be the same thickness as the sides. Using a hollow prim on a surround where the door much taller than it is wide, means that the top is much thicker than the sides, and that's not very good.

 

---

Bingo.

Of course sculpties and mesh have eliminated the use of this technique from allot of builder's repertoires as we can easily make door frames with an equal thickness on all sides now.

[Phil Deakins]

It's just as well I never made buildings to sell

[Qie Niangao]

Yeah, this is a little confusing.

Maybe the door surround is a sculpty, in which case it would have to be phantom to allow passage. Back before Mesh, there was a hideous kludge that allowed child prims of any sort to become phantom without the entire linkset going phantom. You could kind of emulate it in the editor (without a script) by setting the prim to be flexible, but the editor only allows boxes and cylinders to be set phantom.

Now, post-Mesh there's a much cleaner way to get the same results: set the to-be-phantom child prim to be of physics type None -- but the problem is that it will cause the whole linkset to use Mesh accounting for Land Impact, and if the linkset includes a sculpty, torus, or etc. still set to physics type Prim, the Land Impact is apt to skyrocket. So instead you need to take the whole mess to a sandbox where there are thousands of spare prims and fiddle some more. Sometimes you can get by with just setting everything Convex Hull except the stuff that needs to be phantom, but often you'll get a lower Land Impact by segregating stuff into two linksets, one with Mesh-aware physics types (Convex Hull and None), and one still using Prim accounting.

One other thing that would create a "problem entering house" would be if the door were surrounded by a hollow prim that somehow went from physics type Prim (or None) to instead be Convex Hull -- but I don't know of this happening spontaneously just by removing other child prims from the linkset.

[Phil Deakins]

Thank you for all that, Qie. It's appreciated.

Am I right in thinking that, once the OP's door surround has changed to non-phantom (the actual problem), and then it is unlinked and set to phantom (the solution), s/he can't link it back to the house again because it will become non-phantom - the same as the house?

[Porky Gorky]

---

Qie Niangao wrote:

Sometimes you can get by with just setting everything Convex Hull except the stuff that needs to be phantom, but often you'll get a lower Land Impact by segregating stuff into two linksets, one with Mesh-aware physics types (Convex Hull and None), and one still using Prim accounting.

---

From a LI saving perspective I would actually go for 3 linksets, the 2 you mentioned then a 3rd one for any convex hull/none type prims that have scripts in them as scripts can sometimes add to the weight under the new system and push up the LI, so I like to keep them grouped and as isolated as possible. 

[Qie Niangao]

---

Am I right in thinking that, once the OP's door surround has changed to non-phantom (the actual problem), and then it is unlinked and set to phantom (the solution), s/he can't link it back to the house again because it will become non-phantom - the same as the house?

---

Yeah, as far as I know, that's correct. The only way around it is to set the surround's physics type to None before relinking -- but then there's that risk of the Land Impact going supercritical.

[Qie Niangao]

---

From a LI saving perspective I would actually go for 3 linksets, the 2 you mentioned then a 3rd one for any convex hull/none type prims that have scripts in them as scripts can sometimes add to the weight under the new system and push up the LI, so I like to keep them grouped and as isolated as possible. 

---

Yeah; back when Mesh accounting first came out, this was way worse than it is now. I fussed pretty loudly about that, and about the brain-damaged rationale that there was somehow a virtue to keeping "dynamic content" separate from static. Now, however, I think only the scripted component itself get a penalty (it used to apply to each item in the linkset if any of them contained a script). Recently, the script penalty has seemed reasonable each time I've encountered it, but maybe I've just been lucky.

(Incidentally, I'm very much in favor of minimizing script count, and a penalty for each prim that actually contains a script is one way to encourage good scripting hygiene.)

[Knutz Scorpio]

A little quirk I just discovered about mesh is that if a mesh is less then .5 m in any direction it and everything that it is linked to gets quietly switched to physics type convex hull, and what I mean by quietly switched is that the server kindly does it for you without notify your viewer.  Had a fun time trying to figure out why I couldn't walk through a mesh doorway (which was .3 m thick) and why the mesh stairs I had linked it too was suddenly barred to me, even though my viewer said their physic's type was prim the server had switched them to convex hull.  After several minutes of head thumping, VR and RL, I searched the mesh forum and found the above explanation.  Just something related to this topic I thought you'd like to know.

 

[Porky Gorky]

---

Qie Niangao wrote:

Yeah; back when Mesh accounting first came out, this was way worse than it is now. I fussed pretty loudly about that, and about the brain-damaged rationale that there was somehow a virtue to keeping "dynamic content" separate from static. Now, however, I think only the scripted component itself get a penalty (it used to apply to each item in the linkset if

any

of them contained a script). Recently, the script penalty has seemed reasonable each time I've encountered it, but maybe I've just been lucky.

---

I agree the LI cost of scripts is definitely more acceptable now. One concern that I do have is that the LI cost of scripts could be subject to change through future development by the lab and we could see an LI increase or decrease on existing  content due to the changing script cost. This is a bit of a headache from a merchants point of view with product boxes and sales material etc. Prolly just being paranoid :matte-motes-big-grin: