say limit

[jmordetsky]

Could we increase the ammount you can say?

I'm always trying to express thoughts that get truncated.

[fearwig]

Yeah... I'd press for an extension of ldesc, as well, if it's practical. Not a huge one, but maybe double or just half again. It's pretty difficult, at the moment, especially since you have to enter someone's ldesc in if you wish to say you're speaking with them (since it doesn't support ~indicators).

[Rhyden]

I say no to ldesc increases. My screen gets flooded as it is with ultra-long ldescs with clothing worn in every body location.  :wink:

And no to say increases as well. If you have lots to say, use '...' at the end to show that you've more to say. As well, limiting say commands allows there to be more emotes during speech, which is useful for expressing corporal emotions. If the say command is increased the say-emotes would be decreased.

[fearwig]

I think people can determine for themselves where emotes are appropriate in a conversation. Books flow sometimes with long blocks of dialogue, because it's appropriate. If an emote is superfluous (such as the third "waving his hands idly" in a row), it's not adding to the mood at all.

And I haven't seen an excessively long ldesc myself. Not ever. There's simply no room for it by code. When someone's wearing a hood, facemask, and whatnot, it gets a little bit longer, but frankly not much.

If I am standing in a room talking to "the burly, purple-haired twit", there's about enough room in my ldesc to say "The monkey-faced pirate is here, talking to the burly, purple-haired twit". But I actually think that would push it over--someone can do the character count if they'd like. Ldescs are a great tool that are generally overlooked because people have to constantly reword them into shorter strings, especially with the lack of ~indicators. A doubling of ldesc strength would be a great benefit to the game, even though you've been so thoroughly inventive as to come up with a pretty minor drawback to that suggestion.

Really, if you don't want to read it, you don't have to, guys! But you should. Sometimes it takes a moment to see what someone's doing, and sometimes it's important. Most people don't even use them enough as it is, so it's hardly a huge affair.

But who am I to argue with naysayers? God knows I never go out on a limb to do that.

[Rhyden]

Oops, my mistake. Ignore what I said about ldescs in my previous thread. I thought you were speaking about a character's long description, where their sdesc is described in more detail.  :oops:

But, my decision still says the same with ldescs that reflect a small act of what a character is doing. A ldesc doesn't have to describe everything your character is doing, just a few words explaining what the hardcode can't (is standing here, resting, sitting, sleeping, etc.)

ex: change ldesc sits here by the side of the road, his leg bleeding.

(this ldesc will be too long, so here's how it can be shortened significantly)

1. change ldesc sits here by the road, bleeding.
2. change ldesc sits here bleeding.
3. change ldesc is here bleeding.
4. change ldesc is bleeding.

-Your ldesc doesn't have to be elaborate. It won't matter whether your ldesc is like #1 or #4, its still basically the same thing and adds the same atmosphere.

-If your ldesc is too long, shorten it or don't have one at all, its that simple.

[fearwig]

With all ah, politeness--we're *aware* of what you do. My point is that there's no reason for that at all. Allowing for a longer ldesc promotes better descriptions of ongoing events, something that emotes fail to do. Ldescs are a fantastic tool, and I guess I like them more than most people. But saying that you're bleeding isn't really much of a description, is it? It's not the kind of thing I want to read, anyhow. I like the richness that so much of Arm's code allows for players to describe about their actions and situations. I'd rather see exactly how someone was bleeding, from where, and if it seemed relevant, where they were standing or lying--wouldn't you?

We're not asking how to cope with the code as it is, we're suggesting how it might be improved.

[Rhyden]

It could be, but increasing the length of ldescs in general is something that would be listed on the bottom of the priority list. As well, I see no difference.

And, as for the, erm, *politeness*, there -are- other players on this board who aren't as experienced as you are, fearwig, who may need a little help understanding what a ldesc is and how it can be manipulated.

I think the ldesc 'is bleeding' would be more accurate if your character was bleeding than nothing at all. Of course its bold and poorly worded but its very accurate and adds information, atmosphere and a visual aid.

[fearwig]

My point is that I'd like for there to be room for more, Rhyden, that's all. Emotes are great for explaining your position and situation, but an ldesc is better yet--it can be seen by everyone, regardless of when it's placed.

[Rhyden]

And I see no reason to lengthen it, fearwig.

I forget which immortal it was, but during an earlier thread, they stated that they -could- increase the limit a few more words...but then eventually everybody would want it just a few more. After that, just a few more words wouldn't hurt and before you know it, ldescs are taking up three strings of code.

I say keep it where it is and count your blessings.

[fearwig]

Here's where I unsheathe my "whatever" face. I think it'd be nice, considering the difference between ldesc length and emote length. It would certainly add a richness to a lot of experiences, and keep a lot of us from having to reword our ldescs 5 times to get them down to six or seven short words.

As it is, should we reduce emotes to however many limited characters as well, on the basis of the argument that you can always shorten your emotes? No! Rich, descriptive emotes are wonderful, and add loads to the game. Ldescs serve a similar, but distinct purpose, and I would love to be able to use them to the same degree. That's all there is for me to say about it.

As for the "everybody would just want it a few more" argument, that's an unrealistic statement. Is anyone saying emotes should be allowed to be longer? I've never heard it. They're plenty long, for what they do. Says sometimes need to be a little more extensive. As it is, ldescs are about a fourth as long as says are permitted to be (cautious estimate).

And you know? What if they were? Would it hurt anything? I think a healthy buffer should be figured in to these strings. Anything that doesn't take up more than two lines or a line and a half on a normal mud display should be fine for an ldesc. Don't want to read it? Don't have to, bub.

[Dakkon Black]

As a player on another RPI mud I can say that long ldesc's are fantastic. Sure, we can cut our ldesc down and keep them short. We can also emote with socials from now on.

The gritty unshaven man lays on the side of the road, a pool of ale surrounding the spilled tankard by his head.

How does that not make the game better?

[Forest Junkie]

How does that not make the game better?

Can make the screen cumbersome in crowded streets or pubs.

I say find a length and stick with it. No shortening or lengthening.

[Marauder Moe]

Uh... isn't this thread supposed to be about the cap on say's?  Why did the first reply derail it to ldescs?

Anyway, I don't think a say-length increase is neccesary or even a good idea.  In real conversations you don't usually get to express yourself with a whole 'paragraph' at a time.  Even if you do, having a limit on say's allows/forces opportunities to add emotive arguments to your speech.  Its a shame that the English language isn't very supportive when it comes to describing gestures.

[fearwig]

Uh... isn't this thread supposed to be about the cap on say's?  Why did the first reply derail it to ldescs?

B..Because it's the same issue? Damnit! Okay, I take full responsibility. I think they're related topics, though.

[fearwig]

How does that not make the game better?

Can make the screen cumbersome in crowded streets or pubs.

I say find a length and stick with it. No shortening or lengthening.

Ahh, but most people don't tend to use ldescs, and if you're right, and a few words are -usually- enough, most people would probably stick to short ldescs. Most people stick to short emotes, after all, despite the fact that there's lots of room for them.

I think Dakkon Black had it right. I liked his ldesc way better than a truncated version.

To be fair, the arguments for leaving the "say" limit where it is are probably a lot better. But, if no one minds the derailment, I'll leave that issue where it is and say ldescs could use to be longer. Maybe I'll start a fresh thread, complete with a poll.

[moab]

Says need to be longer too - espeically since we can add our emotes in with 'em.

I think they were extended in the past once, weren't they?

[sarahjc]

I would like longer ldescs, however not says. Here's why:

I always find that I have to try and type my ldesc ten times before I get it right, because its too damn long, and do to that fact, I tend to get frustrated and not use it as much as I could. An example:

Last night I wanted to change my ldesc to:

Stands at the side of a small wooden table, her hands clasped behind her back.

And THAT didn't fit. By the time I had something that did fit, the other party that I wanted to see that ldesc had already entered and the moment was lost. It was very annoying. IMHO the Ldesc on PC's needs to be longer in order for it to be useful, that's not to say that isn't now. But I think you would find that more people would use it creatively if it were allowed to be a couple lines long.



Now as for says. I think there needs to be a limit and the one we have now seems fine. Just break up what you are saying. There are two things that I think you need to consider here.

One is the time it takes to write out a say. Some people are super fast typers and can rip out a conversation in 2.2 seconds. Others take longer. And the longer you take to write something, the more frustrated speedy fingers on the other end of the computer screen is getting. Keeping says short, keeps the conversation flowing at a good pace.  

Second you can simply just break up what it is you need to say into a couple says. The ... is a great way to do that, it lets the other player know you are not finished.

[Maybe42or54]

Last night I wanted to change my ldesc to:

Stands at the side of a small wooden table, her hands clasped behind her back.

Stands, hands clasped behind, beside a table.

[moab]

I think the last lacks as much flavor as the former.

[sarahjc]

Yeah, the alterative just looks like bad english to me, I 'd rather just pass on the description.

[JollyGreenGiant]

I dig the limit to the say command.  It prevents people from blurting paragraphs worth of information all at one whack, when theoretically someone might have a chance to interrupt, as per a real conversation.  Plus, I tend to blurt paragraphs of information all at one whack, and the say limit puts me in more of a "conversational" mode.