Questions about coding/game-mechanics

[Anonymous]

When someone asks a question about support from the game code or game mechanics, they are often told that what they are asking is too IC.  Or they are told that game mechanics don't matter.

This post will show why such a response is unethical, why such a response is natural and instictive despite this, and why players have a legitamate right to know these sorts of things.

Firstly, the reason why it's unethical to tell someone that their question is too IC or that game mechanics are unimportant, is because this is a vary chastising sort of response.  People are inquisitive by nature, and want to have knowledge about the world around them, even game worlds.  Trying to make someone feel bad about their natural urge to learn is like trying to make someone feel bad for the natural urge to masturbate.

Much as most of us would feel somewhat uncomfortable with our teenaged sons and daughters learning sex, we have a similar squeemishness about noobs learning about game mechanics.  We don't want them to grow up.  Knowledge is power.  With a healthy knowledge of game mechanics, noobs can get into all sorts of trouble, and we don't want that for them.  So we tell them that game mechanics is bad, don't worry about game mechanics, game mechanics is dirty.  Just be good little girls and boys, and leave the game mechanics to us grown ups.  We'll take care of everthing for you.

So it's quite understandable that an experienced player WON'T want to share mechanics knowledge with a beginner.  Here is why we should:  We, as more experienced players, have a right to know what the noobs are thinking.  We want them to bring their questions to us.  If one noob is asking too many poignant questions, better for us to learn that this fellow is interested in twinking.  Better to find a problem like this early, so it can be corrected.

Should a noob be a party to everything?  No.  For example, most Noobs will have no legitamate need to know:

--the exact balances of every Kurac bank account
--the number of hit points Tektolnes has
--the number of arrows needed to kill a raptor

But reasonable questions deserve a straightforward answer.  Players have a right to know this kind of stuff, because this is...after all, a game.  It's not role-playing therapy.  It's not role-playing sex.  It's not role-playing training.  It's a role playing game.  The players have a right to learn the rules.  And if they're asking too many questions, someone needs to sit down with them and help them get into character more.

[Mr.Camel]

I personally think the closer the game's mechanics is to a black box, the more the playerbase would be immersed into the world. I believe I would enjoy the game less if I read its code. Seriously, I enjoy it more when I forget the mechanics, or try to as best as I can.

Note: I'm not saying good roleplaying anywhere in my little post, as that can be done regardless of knowing or not how the game works. I talked about enjoyment.

[wizturbo]

I agree with Camel.

The mystery of the game's various classes is destroyed when you get into mechanics.  I WISH I could forget everything I know about certain things, so the mystery and fun would still be there.  But I can't.  I think keeping information from noobs about certain topics is for their own enjoyment purposes, even if they hate mysteries, tough luck!  :-)

[Marauder Moe]

I think we should continue as we have been and keep undocumented game information off these boards.  I would begin addressing your peruasivly-structured post point by point... but its late and I'm tired.

I find your anonymity detracts from your perceived conviction, however.

[Xamminy]

This is a roleplaying game, not a hack 'n' slash mud.  Do what your character would do.  If a question asked on the GDB is giving too much information to the playerbase, we will say so by saying it is 'too IC' because you should find certain things out yourself, as giving away the secrets and the neat things really ruins it for some people that would actally prefer to put forth the work, and would feel cheated if they did but someone else was just handed the answer.

As far as mechanics go, again, this is a roleplaying game, not a hack 'n' slash.  Play your character the way your character would act, and you'll get better at what your character does, and maybe learn things somewhat similar through the process of branching.  Knowing certain things about mechanics changes how you will act with your character.   It really does.  We'd rather you play your character as you want envision your character as a person...and not encourage people to do things based off of code.

[wizturbo]

There are -some- things which are just quirks in the code that is irrational and dumb.  But I dont' think just spreading that information openly on the boards is the solution.  I think that the elder players should suggest ways of fixing these irregularities so they are logical.  For instance (this is completely made up) if you needed to practice riding to branch weaponcrafting, someone who realized this should email the mud requesting that weaponsmithing be crafted from something else.


Beyond the illogical stuff, i think secrets are good.

[Avril]

It's a strange interpretation, that old players are keeping secrets from new ones just to preserve their "elite" status, while at the same time ensuring the new players don't step out of line. From what I've seen, it might also be quite true. Still, there are plenty of reasons to withhold information from new players, just as there are plenty of reasons to hand it out. Few of these reasons ever have to do with role-playing itself, although some try to strap the concept of role-playing next to their own arguments to give them a false sense of legitimacy.

Knowing most of the mechanics (not the numbers and equations, but the general principles) helps you role-play accurately. It removes the suprise and frustration of finding things out on your own. It lets you enjoy the apparent randomness of the game, and those unique moments when the code kills you off for no reason. It helps newbies stay out of trouble, and gives them no defenses against veteran twinks. Just about every argument here has a counter-point, except for this: it helps you role-play accurately.

You might argue that knowing the code helps you exploit it. That's certainly true - I've recently learned of a twink who slipped right into an estate and took off with all the kanks because the guard at the gates doesn't scan, the VNPCs inside don't alarm him and the gates themselves aren't codedly locked. There's still no coded retribution from the clan in question, even though many of its members saw the thief, and many would have realistically reacted. If IC actions truly bring about IC consequences, why haven't the virtual leaders of the estate done something immediately about the theft of all their coded kanks? No reason, but until the gates get their proper code, the same thing might happen over and over again. And once they do get their code, the first fellow to open them from the outside will notice a pair of kanks slip out, along with a rider that's been waiting for real-life hours in the courtyard. It's still unrealistic, but nothing happens ICly to correct it.

From now on, the players of that clan will justifiably prefer to use the city stables rather than the ones their clan provides for free, and keep their tickets inside their closed backpacks at all times. For some reason, a public stable is far safer than a private one, but the characters themselves won't want to look into that reason. They'll know that public stables offer more protection, and they will realistically approach these stables. If the players behind them have a good heart, they will advise newbie members to do the same, even though it's not realistic for the non-coded gameworld. It's even less realistic to let your kanks get stolen and put faith in useless defenses, after all.

I find your anonymity detracts from your perceived conviction, however.

Much like the people who put any stock in it, conviction is worthless. Disregarding any beliefs because you feel they lack conviction will only cripple you intellectually, as it will provide you with a convenient excuse not to think seriously about things. Your judgement will become no more than a simple reflex, arbitrarily deciding that something is true or not. It's often what prompts the reaction of "find out IC".

Play your character the way your character would act, and you'll get better at what your character does

In most cases, that's simply not true.

As for playing out my character the way he would act, my character would sleep his wounds off once he found out that's all it takes to get healthy again. Good thing I know better. If he were in a company of soldiers, all of whom had been clawed up and bitten by a mekillot, and he was the only one who role-played injury after sleeping it off, everyone else would perceive him as a weakling or a coward - and justifiably so, because he was completely healed after the fight.

This is a roleplaying game, not a hack 'n' slash mud. Do what your character would do.

One time, someone subdued my willing character to bring her back into the city. That someone ended up butchered at the gates, simply because the criminal code did something that the guards, as characters, wouldn't have done. This is one of many examples where you shouldn't do what your character would do, because you would receive an unrealistic response from the gameworld. It's also an example of "IC" information that needs being reminded of. I still don't know whether that character might have survided if I turned nosave on. I probably won't be able to find out IC (unless I decide to sacrifice a character for it) but that's what some players on the board will typically suggest.

Not knowing that a failed hide doesn't show an echo, either to the hider or those around him, can cause the hider to look like he's standing around like an idiot. The same thing happens when you put on your shiny new steel helmet and head out on your warhorse, then discover that you're hitting poorly. Is it your inflexible position on your warhorse? Is it the inconvenience your helm? Perhaps the bulk of that new longsword he just gained? Or is he simply carrying too much? The character would have some idea about it (particularly if his helmet's visor is to blame), but since no echos are provided, the player remains uncertain. All he feels is that the character's blows are askew. The horrible weight of his backpack might turn out to be the problem, but the player won't discover this until he tosses it away - after dozens of small battles in which the character could easily have noticed its effects.

The game doesn't act realistically in many ways. When you're using a piece of code without fully knowing what it does, you often won't be able to role-play it through with any accuracy. Sometimes, the knowledge you need comes so quickly and so easily that you forget how valuable it is. Bits of the crafting code make good examples - you have no idea that raw materials are usually destroyed on a crafting failure, when this might logically occour only when you made a catastrophic error. However, after a few tries and wasted newbie coins, it becomes obvious. If the crafting code simply removed the raw materials from your inventory and later gave you the product (or lack of) without an echo, confusion (and some "find out IC" comments) would arise. The crafting code would be severely flawed in this case, much like some parts of Armageddon are today, because it failed to provide the player with an understanding of what his character knew.

When I know that my horse, my helm, my sword, my encumberance, the fortitude spell cast on me and the fact that I logged in on Dzeda, taken together, explain why I kept losing to a vestric, I'm able to decide which of these things my character noticed and which of these he didn't. If he found that the horse wasn't doing a good job squashing the vestric down, he might reserve some time to train it. If he found that his sword swung too low and almost chopped the horse's tail, he might decide to switch weapons or train some more. If he found nothing wrong with his technique, he might just decide that he had a bad day.

[Reverend Jeff]

Wow.  It must be Wednesday if it's time for this discussion again.  Heh.

I dunno.  You know, I've read both sides of this and I do really see good points from each.  On one hand, there's an awful lot of stuff that I really think a "find out IC" response is crappy for.  Stuff like, "Hey... if I spend hours practicing lock picking on a lock that is beyond my skill level, would I eventually learn how to do it?"  Or maybe "Hey... if I try to smuggle spice into Allanak, will I be instantly killed?"  Or even "Hey... my character has lived in this city all his life.  Would I recognize that noble house's symbol?"

Eh.  And the only reason I feel this way about the whole "find out IC" thing is because, realistically, if I created a character whose goal was to smuggle spice into Allanak and, say, he got instantly killed, all of that valuable information I found out in character would be lost.  Because, sure enough, every time I created a new character that, say, had an urge to smuggle spice, realistically, they wouldn't know how to do it properly based off my previous characters' experiences, and the thought of playing an endless loop of three hour characters who get caught kinda sucks.

Now, on the other end of the spectrum, I totally see where the "find out IC" phrase is really correct.  I wouldn't want information about shadowy conspiricies or strange organizations leaking out.  Code specifics like the exact tonnage that a kank can carry or whether certain types of spice affect certain attributes or, eh, even whether I slur my speech when my character gets drunk... all of those are prime examples of things I'd prefer to find out in game.

But, yes, this is the only time I'll chime into this age-old debate and, frankly, the way things are now isn't horrible.  Could things be better?  Maybe.  But the policy we have now suits me just fine.  On one hand, it benefits long-time players (and this is reflected, in-game, by those rare few who you run into that have a intricate knowledge of how things work... as only a rare few should).  It does mean that new players are disadvantaged when they show up.  On the other hand, it also cuts down on the amount of exploits that could happen.

So, for now, I'll support the status quo.  I understand the frustration it can cause and I wish things could be better, but... eh... wish in one hand...

[Agent_137]

As for playing out my character the way he would act, my character would sleep his wounds off once he found out that's all it takes to get healthy again. Good thing I know better. If he were in a company of soldiers, all of whom had been clawed up and bitten by a mekillot, and he was the only one who role-played injury after sleeping it off, everyone else would perceive him as a weakling or a coward - and justifiably so, because he was completely healed after the fight.

Ok, first of all, I don't know what kind of soldiers you are talking about, but with the soldiers my characters have been with, they would see you RPing a major wound, and they'd go "Oh shit, he's right. We've probably got major wounds!"

And then they'd go, "OH! MY BLEEDING NECK."

Maybe it was just my quality company. But I think RPing some lasting wound after getting FUCKED UP is good, regardless of HP.

-----------------
Next subject:


Here's my rule for too IC or not too IC:


If a commoner in either city would know and understand the fact, piece of code, or whatever, it isn't too IC.

If he wouldn't, then it is.


A commoner would know that you are subdued by the guards if they catch you bringing spice in the gates.

A commoner would also understand that if he didn't submit immediately (nosave on) he would be beaten down and likely die.

A commoner might or might not know how effective a certain mount is in combat. He'll probably know that one is better than another, but no details.

A commoner would know the majority of the different house symbols.

I don't really feel I need to go on, but I urge you to think about the question posed in this manner, and then return the response based upon it.

[UnderSeven]

Okay, someone tell me when the last time you slept off wounds in real life was.

Here is a simple equation for what makes sense for your char to do.  Does it have real significance?  There are some things the game does that makes it more playable vs realism, like the fact that you can sleep off wounds fairly quickly rather than spend months recovering.  That's nice, the code does it for our benifit as players, but to say your char would sleep off wounds, that's not looking at the game beyond the code and mechanics and I feel that attitude can detract from rp.

In armageddon many things can affect say the way you swing, but I disagree that you should get a big fat pointer to what is doing it.  Here is a for instance.  Lets say you are trying to weld two electrical components together.  And when you finish you find that the device doesn't work right.  Do you know for certain what caused it? NO.  You can guess that maybe you accidentally welded the wrong things together, or maybe the tools didn't fit the job, or maybe you were doing the wrong thing entirely.  The same can be applied to combat,  The visor of your helm might be doing it, or the elbow piece that is heavily constrictive.  Does arm give you a pointer such as numbers or stats? Thank god no.  But they do give you descriptions to items that often will give strong indicators as to how the item may or may not affect you.  

I would agree there are instances where people should know game mechanics, but, let me give you further examples of things people should not need to know:

Numbers. . EVER.  
Exact comparison for what's better than something else (many factors go into quality and quality is ultimately subjective anyway)
A straight foward explination for combat or combat equipment.  Many factors apply, including the combination of different skills being applied.

These things are NOT self evident, you wouldn't be able to instantly know for sure in a real instance what was what either and no one sleeps off their wounds as if you'll wake up without a scratch.

[Larrath]

The only thing I have to say is that I don't think characters should be unable to figure out why they can't do physical things properly.

If you tried to climb, believe me that you'd KNOW if it's because you are wearing bad gloves, or boots, or too much weight, or that the wall is just too smooth.  Same with combat - if your shoulder plates are holding your arms back, you'd KNOW that.


UnderSeven's electricity example is more of a black box one, and I think it applies more to things such as the Magick code than it does to mundane actions.

Numbers should not be revealed, generally, no.  Knowing too much of how the game works can be annoying, yes.  So what?
Some things should be learned inside the game, and some things should be learned outside the game.


Dwarves are hairless.  Referring to Tektolnes as 'the defiler in the tower' in the Temple of the Dragon is a bad idea.  Fighting an armed opponent without a weapon may be bad for your health.  Krath is the name of the Sun.  Sitting down while holding on to a ledge will make you plummet.

NONE of these things are secrets.  Think about this in a serious IC point of view.  Would you be able to fight the knife-wielding Joe Mugger as easily with your bare hands as you would with a steel katana?
Not to mention sitting down when climbing...this is an action the character would have to consciously do!  They let go of the ledge, and fall as a result.


In summary, I agree that *some* mechanics can be good for the new players to learn only after a month or so of playing and not right away, but there also has to be a limit.  I do not agree that every half-word not written in the Docs is forbidden IC information, and I don't think this is a good approach.

[jhunter]

No, but when it's a question about something code-wise that is quite obviously to use the OOC information to influence their IC decisions the information should be obtained ICly.

Alot of newbies are too quick to ask OOCly about something they can find out IC instead of putting forth the effort to do so. Shit, figuring alot of that shit out IC is alot of the fun.

[Cavus]

All of us has different style of playing, and different opinions. Let me share mine.

If a newbie wants to know something that could be too IC in your opinion, I would PM this person, and tell it may hurt your enjoyment, but if you want it anyway, ok here it is....

Of course, any plot information...I mean IC actions should not be shared, but you should tell him that desert is bad and there are raiders (icly or oocly). House symbols? Sure, they have to know because they are citizens of that city maybe for 25 ic years.

Anyway, let's say he wants to know penalties of slashing weapons, you should *suggest* that it may hurt your enjoyment, but he wants it anway. Is it my problem? No. He may enjoy more if he understands more things. Or, it may bore him after a while, then it's his problem and he give damage to himself. On the other hand, you may help our playerbase by not using rude (according to most newbies) answers.

In any case, GDB is not right way to ask any level of ic information, use PM, helpers, and make some friends and learn their GDB names :-)

The bottom line is:
This is their choice, and you will most probably be more helpfull than simply telling FIND OUT IC.

Of course, this is my opinion and I'm not telling it should be in this way, but any PM is welcomed. I always help newbies icly, and it does not bother me to spend some RL hours.

EDIT:

Alot of newbies are too quick to ask OOCly about something they can find out IC instead of putting forth the effort to do so.

That's right, but we should find better sentence than "Find out ic". You should explain also why.

[Sanvean]

Firstly, the reason why it's unethical to tell someone that their question is too IC or that game mechanics are unimportant, is because this is a vary chastising sort of response. People are inquisitive by nature, and want to have knowledge about the world around them, even game worlds. Trying to make someone feel bad about their natural urge to learn is like trying to make someone feel bad for the natural urge to masturbate.

I'm not sure "unethical" is the word you want there.  But in any case, I disagree.  There's a difference between saying "I'm sorry, but you should find that answer out IC" and saying "You are a twink!  You shouldn't be asking that!", and you seem to be lumping all forms of that answer into the second category.  Comparing an unwillingness to answer to prudishness about sex, while well-designed rhetorically, is just plain a false comparison.

Sometimes things -are- too IC, and being honest about that more of a courtesy than assuming someone is so thin-skinned they'll be crushed by that answer.

The rule of thumb I use, and which I have suggested other people use, is whether or not the answer can be found in the readily avaialble documentation.  If it can, it's not too IC.  Obviously there's edge cases there and there may well be things that should be documented and aren't.  We find that out when people ask.

Assuming that everyone supplying that answer is trying to get an advantage over new players by hiding the secret lore of Armageddon is a misreading of the situation.  Many of the people supplying that answer are helpers, who are working actively to get new players involved in and hooked into the game.  They're motivated by a desire to preserve the game as well as other players' enjoyment.

You can't lump game mechanics questions all into one big bucket.  Sometimes they're very valid and involve things that affect one's ability to play the game: how to talk at tables, how to draw an arrow from a quiver, how to buy things in a shop, how to use nosave, etc.  Other times, as other posters have posted, there are questions that are, in fact, matters that should be explored IC or answered by common sense, such as "Is arrow A better than arrow B?" or "Will I lose more stamina travelling in the forest than on the road?"

One of the things the game depends on is the allure of the unknown.  There is a lot of stuff out there to discover, and discovering it in-game is a lot more fun than reading about it.  I'm fine with seeing people err on the side of caution than in the opposite direction, because I feel the other way results in a lot more enjoyment being lost.

Your basic premise seems to be that reasonable questions are not getting answered.  Can you point to places on this board where that's occurring?  Because it doesn't seem to me to be the case, or if so, I'd suspect it's a pretty small number.  Perhaps definitions of reasonable questions differ in this situation.[/quote]

[Larrath]

I agree, but there are plenty of other OOC things that are much more interesting to discover than "Tektolnes doesn't like being called a defiler" that newbies have to worry about.

And the general common information, like dwarves being bald and Krath being the sun?  These are things *everyone* would know, and I don't think every single newbie likes to play the stranger who seemed to have lost his mind somehow.

Code things, such as sitting down when standing on the middle of a cliff you're climbing...how can you discover that ICly?  On a pure character level, you simply let go of the cliff and fell.  Is a second PC going to go "Whatever you do, Amos, don't look down and don't sit!"?  It makes no sense whatsoever.


I am not saying that all should be revealed, and I am not saying that discovering by oneself is not fun...but again, I think that people immediately hopping forward and going "IC info IC info" is bad.
People should at least try to limit themselves to doing this when it's appropriate.

[Seeker]

The help files do a marvelous job in making commonly known information available to all players, and the vast majority of questions can be answered with a search command of those files or of this website.

For questions that seem valid, but are obviously not covered by the help files, or previously raised threads on the GDB, there are many legitimate avenues for receiving answers.  

The Helpers are well suited to to this, and are often begging for these types of questions.  A polite email to the MUD account, or an individual IMM who has jurisdiction over the particular area in question, is also frequently suggested as a way to get information that is not commonly distributed but might be appropriate to your particular character or situation.  I have even seem some very good role-play in game, some connected with a polite "wish up" to animate a knowledgable NPC in the field the particular question pertains to, to have such answers appropriated revealed IC.

The GDB's policy, however, is "no IC-sensitive information."  There are ways to find answers for any particular character's justified questions without exposing the entire player base to facts that some have repeatedly stated they just want to be able to find out for themselves.

If none of these sources will provide you with an answer, then it is probably safe to say that it is a secret.

I agree that "find out IC," is not a terribly helpful answer.  "The GDB is not the proper place to have this question answered.  You might find out through creative play in the game, through the use of the Helpers, or perhaps a polite email to the staff," might be better.

Seeker
(just offering suggestions that have been offered before)

[ashyom]

Like it or not, we do not advocate spreading information on GDB.  This policy is written in several places, one of which on GDB's Posting Guidelines, "Do NOT post information that is IC-sensitive. While debates over definitions of this term have raged in the past on the discussion boards, one fact has emerged: some people really prefer to experience things in the game, rather than inadvertently have the experience spoiled for them from reading this board. Therefore, when asking yourself whether or not what you're posting is too IC-sensitive, err on the side of caution."

Our helpfiles are written in a way that encourages people to read between the lines, and to RP in game to find out exactly how it works, whether through trial and error, talking to people, or thinking about it.  Most of it is pretty much common sense, and can be deduced from hints provided.  That's why many people on GDB will say, "Find out IC" or just provide links to the helpfiles/docs.  However, I will cede that not all of our documents and helpfiles are clear; if there are any that you feel needs fleshing out, feel free to idea it or email it to the mud.  

Incidentally, if someone wants to write a document of things that should be common knowledge, feel free to take a stab.  I think that'd be a worthy contribution.

Addenum:  Someone posted elsewhere about the crimcode - I want to note that we're very aware of the problems with that, but revamping that is a huge project that is on a very long list of to-do.  Sanvean has said this a few times in the past.  
Hope these insights helps a little.
Ashyom

[Halaster]

Okay, someone tell me when the last time you slept off wounds in real life was.

When was the last time you were stabbed several times by a longsword?  When was the last time you were near death, bleeding heavily from numerous deep gashes?

In the game you don't have to sleep off every wound, you only have to sleep off the really bad ones.  And to me, that's somewhat realistic.  If you get a nasty cut on your arm and need stiches - no, you don't have to sleep that off.  But if you're nearly killed by someone sticking a sword into your gut several times, odds are high that you'll be sleeping a LOT as you recover.  Also consider that realism has to be balanced with playability.

[Kill4Free]

*gets stabbed through heart*
*goes to sleep for the night*
*wakes up all better*

[jmordetsky]

Okay, someone tell me when the last time you slept off wounds in real life was.

When was the last time you were stabbed several times by a longsword?  When was the last time you were near death, bleeding heavily from numerous deep gashes?

In the game you don't have to sleep off every wound, you only have to sleep off the really bad ones.  And to me, that's somewhat realistic.  If you get a nasty cut on your arm and need stiches - no, you don't have to sleep that off.  But if you're nearly killed by someone sticking a sword into your gut several times, odds are high that you'll be sleeping a LOT as you recover.  Also consider that realism has to be balanced with playability.

I think playablity is great. My issue is why people are often complained to when they react to code in it's playable sake.

For example, I hunt, I get hurt, I sleep, I'm better, I hunt again. This often criticized as unrealistic. But it's playable right? So why not? Do I need to tavern sit for an IC month after I get beat down by a tembo even though the code healed me?

And if not, why is it so IC to tell a player the sleeping heals major wounds that resting does not? Wouldn't that be common sense?

Isn't understanding the UI and effects of the code really just an analogy to a rudimentry understanding your body and physical world around you?

If I have a tame rhino, and a tame horse...the tame rhino is going to be  better at charging...it's just intuitive. Whats wrong with asking if the code supports it?

(note...I read no ones post but halasters because I'm lazy. PLease feel free to ignore me)

[Agent_137]

IC, just sleeping for a night won't heal a broken leg, or a huge fucking gash.

IG, it will.


IC, you rp whatever else you are doing to fix that wound, splinting it yourself, going to a healer, or finding a real or virtual physician.


So if you get knocked down to very very low hitpoints, please don't sleep it off with nary emote. I mean, uhg. Roleplaying wounds is FUN. I've always enjoyed it, even roleplaying it alone when I have to animate the physician with my own emotes.

But if you don't look at it that way, if you see sleeping to heal your massive HP loss as just a down time between hunting more or getting back to mudsexing more, maybe you're taking this game in the wrong light.

And I'm not fingering you in particular, jmordetsky. I'm speaking in general, here.

[Kill4Free]

Personally, if I get brutally injured, I do sleep it off (while thinking and emoting on my way to my sleep-place) But then after I recover enough so it will recharge on its own, I go to a tavern, and rp it, wear a bandage over my wound, drink lots and lots of alcohol, and talk to people.
As an almost dead person might be a bit too much of a tempting target to someone who has little to lose (new char for instance).

[Kill4Free]

But basically, you have to work with the code, there are many disparaties between the game and reality, and you just have to accept them.  RP what you can, and work with what you cant

[Sanvean]

Is there actually a post on this board where someone asked how to heal their wounds and was told to find out IC, or is that a total straw man?

[Agent_137]

Not recently, but I didn't run a search.

This thread is rooted in the "find out IC" answers to the war mount thread.


SEE! POST WHORES DO COME IN HANDY SOMETIMES.
(talking about me)