Allow rigid items to affect relative encumbrance

[CodeBandit]

Summary

Summary: Bugfixes "Allow rigid items to affect relative encumbrance"

Purpose of change

Rigid pockets disregarded relative encumbrance. This is incorrect since a full and heavy container is more encumbering than an empty container, but this is not how it works in game right now.

For an actual example, brought to me by @meladath , a full golf bag, because its primary pocket is rigid, will always have a torso encumbrance of 2. That's essentially an insignificant amount of encumbrance for 45L of storage.

Describe the solution

Remove the check that ignores relative encumbrance if pocket is rigid.

Testing

Spawn a golf bag and fill up the rigid pocket. See that its encumbrance now increases.
Run unit tests, nothing failed.

[meladath]

But muh OP golf bag :'(
Anyone know if this code was originally intended or added in error?

[kevingranade]

This is wrong, the reason it ignores rigid containers is that encumbrance from rigid pockets should be incorporated into the base encumbrance of the item. The encumbrance being calculated by this is not a product of weight and volume, it is just based on volume. Weight-based encumbrance is handled entirely separately.