Lame Contact

[Qetesh]

I think what Qetesh is trying to say is that by looking at it completely IC'ly - that is, your character is trying to find out whether the target character is alive/awake IC'ly - that this is ok (the side benefit is that the target has some IC warning)

All you would find out by just touching a mind without saying anything is if they -might- be around to interact with. But they might be on anyway if you don't reach them. All this does is let you know that they are in fact available to communicate with and lets them know that someone is fishing around for their mind.

But see, the problem with this is that when you fail your contact, the target character could very well be alive and doing virtual things in the game-world (MJ's fear is that you'd be able to know this, OOC'ly 'automatically', with the who command when a player logs on), but there is no actual IC way to find out whether a character is alive with contact, if the player is not online.  

How does your character react to this IC'ly, when there's a contact fail?  He/she has to make up some lame excuse, like 'oh, there must be a problem with the Way'?  In reality, we disregard it OOC'ly, because we know that it's more probably that the character isn't online.  Yes MJ, the character could be dead and that's why you can't contact them, but if they don't show up on the 'who' list, wouldn't you have the same possibility there - that the character is dead?  But I bring you back to the subject matter of the thread: 'contact pinging' is supposedly ok, for some hybrid IC/OOC reasoning.  Thus, the mess, the confusion, the angst between IC/OOC use of contact.

Contact isn't an exact science, it isn't like instant messenger, it's not always effective.  You cannot assume that just because you can't find someone's mind, that they aren't OOC'ly "on line" and your PC would not/should not make any assumptions about where they are or what their status is.  You just can't reach them. All New PC's have a horrible time trying to find someones mind. Do they just think they the person is dead? No.. they think they suck at the way.

So not being able to reach someone is just that.. You just can't reach them.

It would be like saying, "We haven't seen Timmy at the bar in the past few days.. He must be dead."

You might assume that after a few weeks have gone by and still no contact or sight of Timmy. But certainly not after a few failed contacts.

[Cuusardo]

If you are always there Johnny raider could also just sit inside your cave and wait for you to log in. How would you react then? Just walking in? But you were always there right?

That seems pretty twinkish to me as well, seeing as technically he'd be sitting in the cave while Mr. Hermit was still in there, and neither would be reacting to the other.

[Qetesh]

If you are always there Johnny raider could also just sit inside your cave and wait for you to log in. How would you react then? Just walking in? But you were always there right?

That seems pretty twinkish to me as well, seeing as technically he'd be sitting in the cave while Mr. Hermit was still in there, and neither would be reacting to the other.

And what if some random fella walked in there that didn't know you? But that wasn't the point. The point was that there are far too many variables involved with your scenario. I also don't want to banter back and forth on this and get off topic on ownership of quit locations, but that might be another topic to start a thread on.

Using contact is not the same as using locate.  If John has been staking you a while and knows that you hang out in that cave day in and day out, I see it as perfectly fine reasoning that he can touch your mind, know you are around and go to that cave and find you.

He would have never used OOC info nor would he be using any out of game sources. He really has no idea if you are really there, and has no idea when he gets there if you would have logged out or moved on, or hid or what.

In short, he's just "knowing" that at that moment, you are available for interaction and you now know that someone is looking for you.

[Xygax]

I'm going to post my official stance on this, and unless some other OL or HL disagrees, you can take it as staff consensus:

The reason that the contact failure message for offline people was changed was specifically to make the use of contact less OOCly abusable.  You can now no longer tell the difference between a skill failure, a successful barrier, and a logged off player.  Therefore, if you want to use contact simply to "ping" people and find out if they're online, that's fine.  However, if your failure to reach someone is causing you to come to the final conclusion that they're offline, then you might very well be wrong.

There.  Staff consensus.

-- X

[Anonymous]

It's very nice to get a straight answer on one of these topics where there is logic for either viewpoint.  Thanks.

[Marc]

I dunno...

IMHO this opens the door to a lot of problems with a "The code lets me do it!" mentality.  As far as contact pinging not being 100% accurate, I would be HAPPY to disprove this to any immortal IG.  It is flawless.

Which raises the question:  Where do you draw the line between IC/OOC within the boundries of the code or is that where we need the immortals to do it for us?

[Xygax]

Marc: Please e-mail me your evidence.

And I'm not suggesting that anything the code allows you to do should be what you RP.  I'm only making the call on this one thing, contact-pinging.

With respect to OOC/IC boundaries of the code, you often will be forced to make these calls on your own.  Our game is an RP game, so your decisions must always be measured against what your character would reasonably do.  There will probably never be code, for example, to cause you to become exhausted after 2 IC days straight of practicing, say, the pilot skill.  But that doesn't mean you should sit at your computer spamming pilot for almost 6 RL hours, either.

-- X

[joyofdiscord]

I understand the logic here, and I'll definitely continue contacting like mad when my char needs to get in touch with a friend/contact/other person he's not in an overtly hostile relationship with.  Ultimately, this amounts to basically the same thing: telling me when those players are online, except I'm likely to send them a psi, too.

However, as for me personally, I would feel a little strange contacting someone my char is trying to hunt down, then breaking abruptly, standing up and saying "Let's roll."  Of course, my characters haven't typically been involved in a lot of humanoid-hunting, and when they did, it actually never occurred to me to use contact.  Maybe my opinion would change if I played a militia or someone otherwise involved in rounding up foes, and I spent hours tramping around after someone who's not logged on.  That's just my personal choice on how I want to play, though, and I wouldn't claim it should be enforced on all.

[Confused Kank]

This has me a bit confused. I was once in a situation where my pc had contracted out the death of another player to happen at a certain time. To check on whether the target was actually being killed, my pc kept finding that pc's mind with contact. Since my pc could establish a link, the character knew the target wasn't dead yet. My pc repeated this several times over the course of half an hour to 45 minutes or so, and then I got a message from staff asking the reason I was contacting the player without saying anything. I explained my pc's reasoning and I was thanked for clarifying, and told the staff member was just checking that I wasn't using contact in an ooc manner to determine if the player was online.

But from reading this thread and Xygax and other staff member's posts, it seems like even if what I had been doing -was- contact pinging, it would have still been okay?

So to clarify... the official staff position is that using contact to determine the online/offline status of a pc is never bad play, as long as the player recognises it may not be a completely reliable indicator?

[Qetesh]

As Xygax has said, there is a line between what you should be doing and what the code allows. As it stands, the code says that you can attempt to contact someone as many times as you like. Also, in doing that (and being successfull) They will know each time someone is contacting them. They may get annoyed.

I'd also say contact to find out if someone is dead yet is really not going to tell you if they are.

They coud have escaped and quit, or just blocked you.

Yes, you can contact someone and find out that they are playing weither you say something or not. But faliure to reach thier mind, does not mean that they aren't around.

This doesn't even seem like an issue that would be abused often, especially with the new coded response being so vague.

[Still Confused]

I'd also say contact to find out if someone is dead yet is really not going to tell you if they are.

They coud have escaped and quit, or just blocked you.

Contacting someone and establishing a link is definite proof that they're NOT dead (yet), though. This allows you to contact your would-be assassin(s) and yell at them for not doing their jobs.

I'm just puzzled here because messages from staff in-game seemed to indicate that 'contact pinging' was a no-no, which contradicts this thread.

[Yokunama]

How do people feel about contacting a cloaked figure in order to obtain the figure's sdesc?

[Anonymous]

How do people feel about contacting a cloaked figure in order to obtain the figure's sdesc?

I'd never do it, but I will say I think some people have unrealistic expectations about how much of your desc a cloak will hide and not to mention some people would be recognizable to some degree due to visible build and skin tone.  I really wish people wouldn't act like 'raise hood' creates an impenetrable veil of shadows rendering all of their features completely unrecognizable.

But to answer your question I don't think that determining sdescs was the purpose of the contact command so I don't think that's a good use of it.  I'd almost prefer that sdescs weren't sent back and forth.

[Qetesh]

How do people feel about contacting a cloaked figure in order to obtain the figure's sdesc?

Definitely not something you should do. Especially if you don't know who this person is to begin with. You could contact the wrong figure.

[Marc]

How do people feel about contacting a cloaked figure in order to obtain the figure's sdesc?

Definitely not something you should do. Especially if you don't know who this person is to begin with. You could contact the wrong figure.

That's just wierd.  I mean, of course you can contact the wrong figure and then you'd be wrong in assuming it was in fact the same figure.

This is the message I am getting:

You can contact anyone you want as long as you know them (name/desc or some form of information) and gleen any information you can from that contact.

You can't contact someone you don't know.  This includes people you can see, but not clearly (shadows, blurs, figures etc)

Does that seem right?  The logic behind the first is that contact is an IC skill subject to failure like everything else.  Is the logic behind the later that it's ooc abuse?  I'm really confused

I can try and contact JimBob across the known world for the sole purpose of finding out if he is logged on or not before I go steal his wagon, but I can't contact the figure standing in front of me with a knife? (admittedly the example is pretty extreme :-)

[Qetesh]

This is the message I am getting:

You can contact anyone you want as long as you know them (name/desc or some form of information) and gleen any information you can from that contact.

I think the staff policy on this is that you would be gleaning so little it's a non issue.

You can't contact someone you don't know.  This includes people you can see, but not clearly (shadows, blurs, figures etc)

If you don't know what a person looks like, or never met them or don't even know thier name, why would you contact them? How do you even know if it's them you are contacting? Would it be abuse? I think so, but that's my personal opinion, but moreso, it doesn't make sense.

With your example, yes, you could find out that Joe across the world is playing, but.. there is no garuntee that he will be playing when you get to him.  

As I said earlier, you don't know where Joe is or what Joe is doing, and Joe may choose to block you and you will not be able to contact him again or Joe may log out. You just might not know.

As for your guy in the hood example, if you can read his main desc and think you are contacting the right guy, go for it. I  just hope you are right is all, it would suck if you are wrong.

Also why would you just try his mind, he is standing right there. To see if it works? To see if he's awake? If you are using it for the sole purpose of knowing his short desc, than that's sort of twinkish in my book.

[Yokunama]

Yes, I've been noticing a lot of it lately. People would just contact my character because they could not see it's sdesc. After a while, it sorta gets annoying and frustrating seeing people using it to find out your sdesc.

[Marc]

*stuff*

I guess the point I am trying to make is that contacting someone without communication and/or another coded purpose is entirely OOC (imho naturally).  Yes failure happens (beyond a few massive loopholes, get that email X?), but if you're not trying to communicate/eat brainz/etc what are you trying to do?

I will gladly and happily cede that when someone contacts me there are other functions carried out that I don't know or see.

I will gladly and happily cede that sometimes I get contacted because of a keyword mix up, expecially when I share a keyword with one or multiple others.

But there is no way I will ever believe that players do not use contact as an OOC tool to figure out if someone is online.  That seems more abusive than:

If you are using (contact) for the sole purpose of knowing his short desc, than that's sort of twinkish in my book.

Logged in or out is a completely OOC concept (as established in the quit message conversation).  Sdesc are not.  Why is being able to establish login status a-ok even if it isn't 100% accurate, but using the same skills for IC purposes twinkish?

[Yokunama]

If you are using (contact) for the sole purpose of knowing his short desc, than that's sort of twinkish in my book.

Logged in or out is a completely OOC concept (as established in the quit message conversation).  Sdesc are not.  Why is being able to establish login status a-ok even if it isn't 100% accurate, but using the same skills for IC purposes twinkish?

It is twinkish, because the players are manipulating the code to get information that isn't suppose to be available to them. There really isn't no use for the hooded cloaks, veils, and other items that hide your sdesc, if players are using the code to get information that they shouldn't have. People who wear items that hide their sdesc really do not want to be identified by it. Why let them be unveiled with contact?

I'm sure the immortals did not add the coded feature of hiding sdescs just to have it cancled out by another coded feature.

[Marc]

But as stated in the past many many times, just because you're cloaked does not mean no one can recognize you.  If your disguise is meant to be absolute, it will also change your main description.

We as players are expected to pay attention to a characters entire desc, equipment list, the lighting, weather etc when determining what our characters would recognize.  That's why when people describe someone by their sdesc and their sdesc alone it is frowned apon.  A sdesc is supposed to be the most obvious features of a character, but sometimes those features will be hidden.

If 'the green-eyed man' attacks me and I look at him and notice he is wearing sunslits, I can't exactly describe him as the green eyed man.

I'd think the same logic would be for contact.  If I see a figure running away from a crime scene and only hear her yell a curse, I wont know anything.  If down the road I'm with the green-eyed woman and she shouts the same curse at someone else, isn't there a chance I'd recognize it?  Without having the sdesc to compare I'd never know, but if I, the player know, my character has the option of noticing.  Same thing with height, weight, profile, sex.  Many things that would be obvious even when wearing a cloak or a facewrap.

Weak example.  Just trying to illustrate that these policies seem contradicting.

Unless this is a statement that Line of Sight/General location knowledge of the target isn't enough to Contact/Psi then I still don't get it.

Maybe I'm just being a stubborn, closeminded ass.  Someone enlighten me!

[Ghost]

It is twinkish, because the players are manipulating the code to get information that isn't suppose to be available to them

I think hoods do not make it so hard to see who is under the hood.
Hood only covers the face.  And some hoods does not even cover it entirely.  -I- know only one type of cloak with a hood that would completely cover your face.  And once your face is covered, you have the rest of your entire body still out of it.
And add to it, how you walk, move, voice, and you should not take too long to be recognized.

EDIT:  Here are a few posts from earlier threads.  You can check for threads as well.  I just picked up specific posts from two different threads.

http://www.zalanthas.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=128112#128112
http://www.zalanthas.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=122856#122856
http://www.zalanthas.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=122963#122963
http://www.zalanthas.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=123063#123063

[Bestatte]

Hoods don't cover the face. They cover the top and back and sides of the head. If they covered the face, they'd be bags, not hoods.
Facewraps don't cover the eyes. They cover the mouth, in -some- cases the nose, and in -some- cases cover all the way down to the neck.
Sunslits don't cover the eyes. If they did, the person wearing them wouldn't be able to see.

In the dark, these items would make it extremely difficult to see the facial features. In broad daylight, or in a building with light in it, they would not impede the viewer's ability to see. These hoods aren't death-eater robes. They're just cloaks with hoods that jut past the top of the forehead. Ever see a western movie, where the bad guy wears a bandana over his face? You can still see the contours of his cheekbones, his eyes, his eyebrows, the angry scar that twists from his outer right eye to his temple...you can still tell that it's John Wayne, the good guy, even before he says a single word.

If you have seen these people in game before, you would learn to recognize the shape of their face, color of their eyes, features and clothing on their bodies, preference of weapons, the curl of their long hair, etc. etc.

Now, if you have -never- seen them before..you might only be able to say "Uh, definitely an elf. Had to be, he was really tall. And skinny. And had those elfie eyes, y'know, how they angle up at the corners? Wore a bunch of desert clothes. His nose looked like it was..in the wrong place. Or maybe his facewrap was just wrinkled really badly. Oh and green moccasins. Never forget those, I was thinking of getting a pair just like them for my little girl."

But you wouldn't know that he had completely shaven hair, because the top of his head is covered. You wouldn't know that he had a mole on his chin, because his chin is covered. You wouldn't know about the bone loop through his lip. Or the tattoo on the back of his neck. Etc. etc. etc.

But the guy isn't invisible just because he's wearing a hood and a facewrap. He's still identifiable, even if the description you can glean from his appearance identifies him as one of three dozen other elves who've passed by in the last hour.

[Cuusardo]

Speaking from RL experience, a hood can make it very difficult to see the face of the person wearing it.  If the hood is deep enough, you can't really get a look at the person's face unless you're looking at them head on from the front.

I've always imagined facewraps wrapping around the head, leaving a space large enough to show the eyes so that the person wearing it could see out.

[Bestatte]

Right Cuusardo. And when you are using the "look" command, you have that ability to tag an emote to it.

look hooded carefully up and down with a scrutinizing stare.

The hooded figure also has the ability to emote where he is, in relevence to where everyone else is.

>The hooded figure moves immediately to the back wall and faces the corner, keeping his head down.

The RP can (and does) explain why Jimbob knows what HoodedElfie looks like. The RP can (and does) explain why HoodedElfie is making himself intentionally difficult to see past his hood.

The code is intended to allow the looker to get the look. The RP (and description of the clothing) determines how much of that look the looker sees.

[Anonymous]

Just as an aside, in response to the original topic, I'd like to point out that last night alone I contacted the same wrong person 3 times or more because I kept habitually using 'contact <keyword>' instead of 'contact <name>'.  This was probably in the course of 2 hours.