Nosave Vs. Incriminate

[mansa]

Nosave vs. Incriminate.  Nosave vs. Soldiers.  Nosave vs. Wanted Flag.

This is needed.  This isn't what I want.  This is what I need.  This is what I value most of anything Armageddon does next.  I value this application greater than any spell, than any new clan, than any new skill.

It's silly to have one command cover -everything- from transmutation, falling off cliffs, blindness, stealth, poison, subdue, and everything that has a 'saving roll'.

I honestly can't play this game anymore without it.

[RunningMountain]

No poll? There's lots we all want to see, but in the end it's up to the coders, this is not a democracy.

-RM

[Marauder Moe]

I do sometimes wonder why the staff hasn't implemented or at least commented on this suggestion.

[Fnord]

I agree this should be a high priority. It can be the cause of some of the most annoying, frustrating, and pointless deaths. Then again maybe the imms like it because it helps recycle the playerbase. I hope that's not the reason why it hasn't been addressed though...

[jhunter]

Definitely.

[Tlaloc]

I do sometimes wonder why the staff hasn't implemented or at least commented on this suggestion.

Short: Cool idea. Maybe it'll happen.

Long:

While I'm not a coder, I will state this:

What the players believe is needed does not nescesarially mean that the Staff feel something is needed. While this might be a great idea to you, things like crashbugs, spell fixes, bugs, bugs, more bugs, further code implimentation and improvements, coding of administrative thingamabobs, and other overhauls to the code tend to take precidence.

I feel that the staff (Coding Staff included) is aware of this idea. Its a great idea. Someone might even be working on it right now. However, all code has to survive the triage that is all the other code issues on the plate at once, survive the Staff's critiscism and ultimately be deemed 'necessary' (regardless of player opinions), be codeable at all, and finally find someone who is willing to put the effort into seeing it done.

In conclusion: its a cool idea. Maybe it'll happen.

[Tamarin]

mansa for president.

[Incognito]

Another way of going around this would be to make the "surrender" command toggle-able.

You could still have NOSAVE off - coz you dont want to miss out on saving throws.

But if you had SURRENDER on - it'd still allow the authorities to subdue/arrest you, without your auto-escaping the subdue attempt and end up getting auto-attacked by NPCs.

Usage for Surrender could be something like:

Surrender (on|of|now|status)
Surrender off - for those who dont care.
Surrender on - for those who think they might be incriminated in the near future  (but at the same time dont want to sacrifice their other saving throws).
Surrender now - for those who wish to beg the militia's mercy - right away.

[Dead Horse]

Please don't beat me any more...

Note: Couldn't stand... Love, Cenghiz.

[Armaddict]

Kind of derailing here, but another sort of request.

When a templar types incriminate <criminal keyword>, could the default -please- not be infinite duration anymore?

[ashyom]

Kind of derailing here, but another sort of request.

When a templar types incriminate <criminal keyword>, could the default -please- not be infinite duration anymore?

A PC templar cannot incriminate for infinite duration.  Only an IMM can.   It's relatively rare though - usually only done with a good reason (ie to further a plot or to prevent a twink from quitting out to avoid a RP scene, then logging in to try wait out the jailtime).

[Ghost]

A PC templar cannot incriminate for infinite duration.  Only an IMM can.   It's relatively rare though - usually only done with a good reason (ie to further a plot or to prevent a twink from quitting out to avoid a RP scene, then logging in to try wait out the jailtime).

Is this a recent change?  Because it was said in a very old thread (I don't know where it is now) repeatedly that a PC templar leaving the time part blank makes an infinite incriminate.

I am confused.

[Permanent kank]

I too would like clarification, because

If no duration is given, the incrimination is "permanent" until such time as someone of authority pardons them.

[ashyom]

A PC templar cannot incriminate for infinite duration.  Only an IMM can.   It's relatively rare though - usually only done with a good reason (ie to further a plot or to prevent a twink from quitting out to avoid a RP scene, then logging in to try wait out the jailtime).

Is this a recent change?  Because it was said in a very old thread (I don't know where it is now) repeatedly that a PC templar leaving the time part blank makes an infinite incriminate.

I am confused.

That's probably a bug then.  I'll look into it, thanks for bringing it to our attention.  PC templars are not supposed to be crimming people for infinite duration.

[Bestatte]

Nope, not a bug. I just checked the helpfile too - looks intentional to me. But if it's something that can be changed, where a templar *must* set a duration, then that would be awesome.

[Maybe42or54]

IF an anon kank was to donate let us say.. five small IRL money/cash/cheque. Would it be deemed a good idea by the Imm populace to "like" the surrender idea?

[mansa]

Another way of going around this would be to make the "surrender" command toggle-able.

There is no surrender command.  There is a surrender help file, which basically points to the nosave command, for those players that come from other MUDs that have that.  It's a helpful syntax helpfile to point you in the right direction.

Code Select Expand

**hp, **s, ***mv>surrender
What?  


What you talk about is an implementation of a NEW command, which is also what I'm talking about.  You've just given it a name and some examples, which I think is fine.  I don't think there needs to be a new command name, just a change to NOSAVE in general.

and the rest of the post...  which is pretty good, but I think is really more hard that the fix needs to be:

But if you had SURRENDER on - it'd still allow the authorities to subdue/arrest you, without your auto-escaping the subdue attempt and end up getting auto-attacked by NPCs.

Usage for Surrender could be something like:

Surrender (on|of|now|status)
Surrender off - for those who dont care.
Surrender on - for those who think they might be incriminated in the near future  (but at the same time dont want to sacrifice their other saving throws).
Surrender now - for those who wish to beg the militia's mercy - right away.

[Graven]

IF an anon kank was to donate let us say.. five small IRL money/cash/cheque. Would it be deemed a good idea by the Imm populace to "like" the surrender idea?

....wtf?

[Armaddict]

IF an anon kank was to donate let us say.. five small IRL money/cash/cheque. Would it be deemed a good idea by the Imm populace to "like" the surrender idea?

Yes, are the imms open to bribes?  I'd definitely like some code put in.  And some steel items.  And maybe some skills no one else has.

What's your price?!

[Malifaxis]

Payment for code reinforcement I'd love to see... it's hard freakin work (I'm sure, not that I can do it myself).

But the moment this place becomes a bribe-o-matic, man, I'm out.  I've seen so many muds get ruined by that.

think Crap!  That guy had another purple-neon swirling glow-potion!  I really must learn what herbs I need for one of them...

Nononononono...

em goes back to happily dabbling at writing a semi screenplay inspired by Seeker.