Description Changes

Started by The Dude, April 18, 2005, 06:16:18 PM

I'll try to be brief.

Why not have a character's description changes be handled in-game by the player themselves through a system not unlike the character application process?

You type in a command, and it brings up your standard messageboard kind of deal, you type it up and "post" it or whatever, then once it is reviewed by an immortal the changes are applied. Sdescs could be handled similarly. Maybe even keywords.

Any other limitations, such as how different it could be or how often you could change it could be applied either by the reviewing immortals or possibly even by a "timer".

Not sure how difficult this would be to implement, but it would be tremendously convenient compared to the current way description changes are handled.
ust takin'er easy fer all'em sinners out there...

Because you could change your entire description and sdesc and you suddenly have a nearly infallible disguise.

What I and some others have recommended, though, is have a short section , 4 lines or so,  after the main description that can be changed to reflect temporary changes in appearance, such as being dirty, injured, or getting a new hairstyle.

Quote from: "Marauder Moe"Because you could change your entire description and sdesc and you suddenly have a nearly infallible disguise.
What the OP was suggesting was a way to submit changes to your desc for REVIEW by an immortal, in-game. I would think such a process would include a field where you give reasons for the change, e.g. aging, disfigurement, and so on, and I doubt any desc change would be accepted if it completely altered your appearance for no good reason.

-Cindrak
quote="www.baobobcomic.com"]Naturally, the worst happened. Soon we saw not only a PC, but one of those weird PCs who uses words I don't know in their sdesc. The podgy, dappled dickens-whelp.[/quote]

Indeed, I didn't read that closeley.  Well anyway, I find that writing an e-mail is much easier than using the game's cumbersome text editor.

I think this would be a bad idea.
Why?  Because the imms are often busy enough with new character applications, it would seriously suck for them to have to field 'why hasn't my new desc been approved!' whines from the -existing- playerbase as well.  Some players would pretty much want to change their mdesc and sdescs to represent silly aspects like, period bloating, growing a beard (in 5 unique main desc changes), or a blood-stain on their chin which would be gone again within a couple days regardless.  Just seems like it is alot of unnecessary burden placed on the present staff.  I'd rather see the imms able to review new apps quicker to get an eager newbie into the game than to waste the same time reviewing and approving a mdesc change for a player that just has a burning hard-on to have a 5-o'clock shadow on his chin...which nobody might ever nontice when looking at him anyways.
<EDIT> was assuming original author was in favor of 'endless freedom' on behalf of players to make their own changes - if the 2 changes per lifetime rule was still kept, then it wouldn't be such a bad idea </EDIT>

Then again...I'm not on staff, so hey they might think its a stellar idea :)

Quote<EDIT>was assuming original author was in favor of 'endless freedom' on behalf of players to make their own changes...
QuoteIndeed, I didn't read that closeley.

I often fail to understand why people bother replying to a post they didn't read in the first place.
ust takin'er easy fer all'em sinners out there...

I haven't had any problems with getting a description change.  The immortals have been very helpful, as long as your polite and go through the roleplay involved to change your appearance.

If you ask for this all the time, expect the imms to be annoyed.  If you do this just for fun, expect them to be annoyed.  If you do it for a good reason, to further some plot, or show the aging of a character who's been around a long time, your probably doing the description change for a good reason and you'll get the help you need.

My response to issues here might have led to a useless flame-fest so, edited it out.

Instead - my apologies to the original poster.  My edit in the prior response was intended to reflect the flexibility in my position assuming the present limitations to the description change policy (believe it is 2 per character), an aspect I didn't feel was asserted clearly one way or another in the original post.  The edit, wasn't reflecting a 'lack of reading' the original thoughts it was simply meant as a clarifying addition.

But, whatever...to each their own.

- Prae