Semote idea

[Marc]

Silent emote.  It has been discussed before, but a silent emote would be GREAT:

Give everyone in the room a chance (Wis based maybe?) to see it, with a very significant bonus for scan.

Have it targetable so you can do the following:

semote (fancypants) nudges ~fancypants then dips a nod towards ~templar.

you would see:

the man nudges lord fancypants then dips a nod towards the scary templar.

Fancy pants would see:

The man nudges you then dips a nod towards the scary templar.

People who successfully scanned or passed the wisdom check would see:

the man nudges lord fancypants then dips a nod towards the scary templar.

Everyone else would see nothing.

If untargetted only the emotee and the successful scanners/wisdomers would see it.

Feedback?

I like the idea of it being targetable too. But unfortunately it gets a little sketchy there. Maybe give bonuses for Sleight of hand, or sneak?

[Marc]

I like the idea of it being targetable too. But unfortunately it gets a little sketchy there. Maybe give bonuses for Sleight of hand, or sneak?

Sure, add some skill checks in there, or even a simple agility check (have that as the target for others to notice.  A very slick sneaky elf would be less likely to be seen then the drunk, staggering dwarf).  But targetting would be so great.  That way you could include others in it.  Sure, its abusable, but so is emote (emote The huge black dragon enters from the north, spewing flame and fire which consumes me, ~elf, ~dwarf, and ~mul) and most people are pretty good about not abusing that.

[EvilRoeSlade]

What is the point?  I'm having trouble figuring out how it adds to the game.

[Anonymous]

What is the point?  I'm having trouble figuring out how it adds to the game.

Three people in a room.  One with a high scan, the other two without.

In sneaks an elf who hides.

The elf's player now gleefully semotes what he is doing, with only the player with a high scan noticing.

Frankly when I've been hidden/invis I've wanted to emote my head off to set the scene.

---
semote Moving along the dimly-lit wall, @ slinks towards ~bed.

semote After a quiet pause me silently lifts ~dagger overhead, moving towards ~man.

backstab man
---

Now, if the PC targetted with the man keyword has a high enough scan, he might turn the tables on the sneaking PC.

---
semote Moving along the dimly-lit wall, @ slinks towards ~bed.

semote After a quiet pause me silently lifts ~dagger overhead, moving towards ~man.

The tall, blonde man rises and stands, whipping out an obsidian longsword.

The tall, blonde man draws an obsidian longsword.
---

I'd love to see it, personally.

[krelin]

I see the point, and I like the idea.    The syntax is a little goofy, but that can be repaired.  

[Eternal]

For me, I feel that it adds enjoyablilty to a scene when hidden people emote, even if (and most likely) my pc doesn't see it, the hidden assassin (Someone) licking his blade before driving it into the ribs of another person in the room is much better than me just seeing "X falls over, dead!"

Lots of people complain that people don't emote enough, with this system, people would emote the same amount, but others would -see- less.  A haughty rebuke to this idea is "well, if everyone can be so trusted, why not make think visible to all"... I hope no one would say that, but there are some out there...  The obvious reason is that everyone can't be trusted, but I'd rather give the players the benefit of the doubt... and if Someone emotes, and everyone jumps up and spams scan, as far as I'm concerned that's code abuse, and I would not be above logging it and emailing it for the imms to deal with.   :twisted: I'm evil like that.

I feel that this would be forcing people to roleplay in a particular vein, instead of them being able to decide what to do with what comes across their screen... i.e. kinda like if you sat at a table, and the chair was coded with its back to the door, so you never got an 'enters from the north' message... it's codable, it's good rp, it hampers creativity and forces the player to do things that might not exactly be ic.

Lord Templar Hard Nose says, in sirihish:
"Welcome to Armageddon!  Where the role-playas play!"

[EvilRoeSlade]

Now that I've figured out what this idea would actually do, I'd say that I like it.

If I were given the choice of how to impliment it, I'd make it so that if you can see the person through scan then you can see their hidden emotes too, no skill check involved.  This would make it so that you wouldn't be taking any extra-coded risk for emoting more, and some Byn Sergeant that doesn't even have the scan skill doesn't get lucky and know that you are present.

In fact, it would probably be even better if your emotes automatically became hidden upon a succesful hide, without having to use a special command.

[Delirium]

The only problem I have with your post is the very last sentance, Evil - IMHO, it would actually hamper RP a little. For example, if you're shadowing someone and you want to make them a little paranoid, or clue them in... A little twig snapping, a little bush rustling (if you're in the North, anyway).  Or if you're invisible, and want to have fun with shadows and objects and voices floating about the clearing.. etc, etc. Then the hidden emote could come in handy for detailing just how you're darting about the clearing, trying to confuse them as to your exact location.

I'm rambling.

I do like the idea for a seperate emote.. and I like Evil's suggestion on implimenting it.

[Anonymous]

I like it, from every angle, played the stealthy types before and would have loved having it, also with the non stealthy, I see no drawback, if a player uses it great, and if not, no worse then current, but Myself, I would.

[X-D]

aarrgghh, darn, posted without logging in, oh well, the above guest is me, sigh

[HaiWolfe]

I like this idea and would probably use it a lot, even though my current character isn't one of those stealthy types.  I've been in a few situations where it's not that I don't want other people in the room to see what I'm doing, but they just wouldn't be able to see my actions at all (e.g. if I've gone behind a curtain or something).

[Eternal]

Exactly, you would use it a lot even though you're not a stealthy type.  Less emotes for all to see, more for the imms, less for the playerbase as a whole.  *sigh*  I'm against the idea, as I stated above, because it's just another example of code forcing players how to play.

I know if I was robbed of seeing 'Someone licks his dagger, carefully sliding into position behind you.' (which is something I would -never- react to) and just got *beep* Mantis... I would feel that I had just joined yet another pkmud, and would quickly leave to find some well-roleplayed scenarios.

I'd much rather see the assassin who has the trust in his fellows to emote, than the one who hides behind the code in -yet another- fashion to ensure that his twinkiness is rationalized.  Making the game better for players is my first priority.

[Marc]

Exactly, you would use it a lot even though you're not a stealthy type.  Less emotes for all to see, more for the imms, less for the playerbase as a whole.  *sigh*  I'm against the idea, as I stated above, because it's just another example of code forcing players how to play.

I know if I was robbed of seeing 'Someone licks his dagger, carefully sliding into position behind you.' (which is something I would -never- react to) and just got *beep* Mantis... I would feel that I had just joined yet another pkmud, and would quickly leave to find some well-roleplayed scenarios.

I'd much rather see the assassin who has the trust in his fellows to emote, than the one who hides behind the code in -yet another- fashion to ensure that his twinkiness is rationalized.  Making the game better for players is my first priority.

Yes, damn that 'think' command.  It just takes away from the game because only the imms can see it  :?

[Eternal]

Hmm, well, that was punditry.  The think command -added- something to the game that was not there before.  Your command will modify an existing command, and thus take away from the emotes that are now being used.

I will see -nothing- before I am killed, and thus be forced to assume that I was twink-killed and move on to a rp-enforced mud, instead of a twink-hiding-behind-the-code one.

[Ender]

That's not what he meant at all Marc.  Eternal's main point is semote is one of those ideas that takes trust out of the players and back into the code.

Instead of wanting to hide our emotes to prevent twinky people from seeing emotes we as responsible players should decide what emotes we see and do not see.

Good playing starts with the player.  If everyone started giving their fellow players more benefit of the doubt I bet RP will dramatically improve.  I bet a lot of the twinkishness I've seen in the game were people fearing that they might be twinked out on first.

An semote sounds interesting sure, but it seems like one of those things that is ultimately unnecessary for the amount of work needed to put it in.  Right now we can silently emote through trust of your fellow player.

[Marc]

Hmm, well, that was punditry.  The think command -added- something to the game that was not there before.  Your command will modify an existing command, and thus take away from the emotes that are now being used.

I will see -nothing- before I am killed, and thus be forced to assume that I was twink-killed and move on to a rp-enforced mud, instead of a twink-hiding-behind-the-code one.

You will see something if you spot the person.

The fact is, you are looking at it from a worst case scenerio standpoint, Eternal.  Right now you can be killed with no emotes just as easily as you can with.  Someone JUST posted an example where no one emoted when they killed them.  Does that mean it was bad rp?  Not necessarily.

Oh, and I don't think it will take anything away from the game.  People will emote things they never would before for fear of everyone seeing.  Is that such a bad thing or should we instead continue to watch what we emotes and/or hope no one abuses knowledge gleaned from one?

[Anonymous]

I'm surprised at your response to this Eternal.  Do we have the same idea of how this skill would work?

Anyone in the room who could see the person or see 'a strange shadow' or whatever, would see the emotes and would be within their rights to act on them if it made sense for them to see.

People who had failed their sneak/hide and used 'semote' would echo to the room as normal.


Imagine if this skill was implemented along with the ability to append text to the kill, backstab, and other offensive skills.

The would-be killer would be able to emote where he was moving without the worry of the victim being overcome with the sudden urge to look under their bed for a pair of shoes.

If the target could see the killer, they would see the emotes.

[Typo]

Just throwing my feces into the cesspool that has become this discussion:

From my point of view, ARM tries to strike a balance between player-led RP and code-enforced RP and it does that pretty well as it is. Every few days, someone has a good idea--this case, it is the smote. The problem arises that will this code upset the balance the imms have instituted?

The answer is resoundingly "Yes!" A good RPer who was playing an assassin would emote sneaking up behind his target, putting his faith in the willingness of the other PC to possibly sacrifice his character for a chance to greatly enchance the enviorn of the MUD. If the other character decides that his character's life is more important than contributing to the MUD, then he either needs to change his style of play or find a new MUD.

I have always felt a problem arises when everyone wants to be the hero in the story, everyone wants to foil the assassination attempt, or catch the theif, or spit in the eye of oppression and tyranny. That kind of gaming is stupid. Many of the players on ARM choose this MUD because they can find enjoyment from being the faceless grunt who gets speared by the elf raider, or the bar wino who does nothing but beg for booze. To me, that is the spirit of the game, that is where this MUD truly shines. I can be a nobody, and just by doing that, I will have enhanced the flavor of the game 100%.

But alas, I have gotten off-topic, forgive me my rant and leave this post with this idea....

Code-based RP will never be superior to Player-led RP.

[Anonymous]

Code-based RP will never be superior to Player-led RP.

There is no such thing as code-based RP.

This is a mud.  I do not play mush's because I like the boundaries the code provides.

The simple fact to me is that a "Someone slinks up behind you" emote leaves a bitter taste in someone's mouth more often than not.

The sort of player I am, I will let the other player kill me rather than risk being lame or being perceived as lame.  What if I *actually was going to be looking under the bed*?

What if I was going to go sit in that chair that the assassin is hiding behind.

If I emote doing that it appears to the lurking evil-doer that I'm cheesy.

This is the perfect example of what the code is good for.

Why should I as the victim be left to decide whether or not I hear something?  Can I also decide whether or not your dagger sinks into my back?

Let the code set the boundaries for our RP, not the whim of players.  Seeing a "Someone does such and such" emote is a catch-22 when you know you are the victim.

What good does seeing a "Someone" emote do for anyone?

If you as the victim can't see the person then so be it, you can't see them and you don't see their emotes, just like the regular victim wouldn't.

I'll happily deliver a 'before the moment of the strike' type emote, but I'd also like to be able to take 5 minutes, if it fits the scene, and emote how I'm preparing to kill you.  Without leaving the other player to feel tempted to not have their PC leave and go get some bread from the kitchen or feel like they CAN'T do what they intended without appearing lame.

Putting in an semote that is visible if you can see the PC leaves the situation cut and dried.  The code is telling YOU you see me or nothing at all.  If your PC leaves to go to the kitchen now I don't know if you 'saw' me and ran out of if you just really wanted some bread.

"Someone" emotes have always been a catch-22 for me.

[Typo]

Sorry, what I meant to say was code-enforced RP, which I believe there is.

I don't play MUSHs either, because ARM has struck that nirvana between the two extremes.

I would suggest that you not be caught up in what you had planned, but move with the flow. There is something fun about playing into the hands of an assassin, for everyone involved. With the Semote, you've just taken one of the important players out of the equation...the victim. Now, I'm just a mob waiting for someone to take my head off. I hate meaningless deaths where I don't get my "Death Scene", it makes me feel cheated.

Normally, I wouldn't prescribe to the belief that everyone is a really good RPer, so let them do what they want and no one say anything, but this is one of the situations that I feel that belief can be applied.

What you have is a hired assassin, who must be a little good at what he does or else he wouldn't get hired.
                                                  +
Someone who has been around long enough to make enemies, and powerful enough not to be killed in the open.
                                                  =
Two people who I would trust to RP the situation.

I'm not saying that every PC should just lay down, if your character would have IC knowledge that someone might be out to get him, then go ahead and foil the attempt. Make the assassin work for his kill.

Semote just takes away too much of the game for me I would be comfortable with. Maybe, instead of laying down code, some people could get together and start writing the Victim's Bible, like some other guys were saying.

[Lazloth]

What about a pickpocket, then?

My little urchin just skulks into a room of mercenaries, and I'd like to not
think Hrm, maybe if I walk over there, I'll find something.. but to actually semote kneeling, @ inches closer to ~twinkletoes.

I know if I lay down a straight emote, a trio will stand & scan while another guards the exit.  

*shrug* again, I think it's a fantastic suggestion.

[Marc]

Like Eternal, you are looking at worst case scenerio's Typo.  I've been around for a very long time, and it is a RARE assassin who emotes before they strike, unless they group their commands together such as:

emote slinks up behind ~victim;backstab victim

If you think every player can be trusted at all times to never let an emote their character wouldn't see effect their rp, then you are right, it isn't needed.  But the fact remains, armag is not that perfect of a place.

Semote could be used before and after backstab, could be used before and after a steal.  Could be used during a game of cards to signal your partner.  It could be used anytime you don't want a gesture or action to be seen by everyone.  If I hold a finger up behind my back to signal my partners in crime away, why should the templar in front of me see it, unless indeed his character is capable of spotting it?

The code dictates what we can and cannot do/see in so many situations, and it works (I don't see too many people complaining about the inbalance to listen and scan because they can't make a choice whether their chars hear/see something).  Why is emote the golden calf that you two (typo and eternal + any silent partners) don't want to see touched with "ugly" code?

[Typo]

In response to:

Why is emote the golden calf that you two (typo and eternal + any silent partners) don't want to see touched with "ugly" code?

I can't speak for anyone else on this matter. To me, the use of emote is what makes ARM an RP MUD. There is numerous documentation everywhere on the importance of emote and the necessity of becoming skilled in its use. When I hear about something like semote, I immediately sound a call to arms. Here's my thought process (Hold on tight, this could get a little crazy):

Emote is code, it works fine. In fact, the emote is nearly perfect and limited only by the user's imagination and integrity.

If Emote is a divine tool , then it is the players who are screwing up.

If players are the ones screwing it up, then is the answer more code?

No. Because then the players will just find a way to screw that up. People will complain some more, and more code added, which will lead to more screwups, more complaints, and more code, until the computer is the one playing the game.

Well then, what is the answer?

Don't fix the code, fix the players. Alter their understanding of the game so that it will enhance the experience for everyone.

(End of posting-induced mental state)

I know my thought process sounds idealist/extremist/anarchistic, but that's how I see it.

I hope that answered the question, I hope some of the other fellas could chime in...and I apologize for my lack of eloquence, but I'm cranking out a lot of writing today, and my synapses are baking like an albino in Death Valley.[/u]

[Lazloth]

To me, the use of emote is what makes ARM an RP MUD.

Do you feel the think command detracts from the roleplay on Arm?  I doubt it.  I don't understand the reluctance to embrace this concept as a "public think" of sorts;  I wouldn't expect this to be used only by sneaky folks.

semote kicks ~friend under the table.
At your table, your silly friend says in sirihish:
  "No, Lady Templar.  He's right.  That's how we found it."