Feel.

[Cale_Knight]

First let me say that I love the feel command, and I really want to use it more. But I hate, hate, hate the way it works with think

Could we please make feel free-form when combined with the think command. I really feel like it's too restrictive as it is now. I want to be able to do something like this:

Code Select Expand



Cale Knight circles the ugly gith slowly, parrying blow after blow.

With a sense of dread, you think:
    "He's better than me."

The ugly gith slashes you very hard on the head.

Your vision wavering hazily, you think:
    "Oh... sweet Krath."

Instead, every input for feel gets tagged after "feeling." I just think it's way too restrictive, and would love to see more room to use it.

[bloodfromstone]

Agreed. Half the time I try to use it, I end up ditching the idea because it has taken me too long to form the sentence with the proper structure for the format and I don't want to keep others waiting.

[spawnloser]

Code Select Expand

> feel scared
You feel scared.

> think That fecking mek is gonna eat me alive.
You think:
 "That fecking mek is gonna eat me alive."
Works fine for me.

[Delirium]

Code Select Expand

Cale Knight circles the ugly gith slowly, parrying blow after blow.

With a sense of dread, you think:
    "He's better than me."

The ugly gith slashes you very hard on the head.

Your vision wavering hazily, you think:
    "Oh... sweet Krath."


This is doable.

Code Select Expand

Delirium circles the ugly gith slowly, parrying blow after blow.

>think (a sense of dread) He's better than me.
Feeling a sense of dread, you think:
    "He's better than me."

The ugly gith slashes you very hard on your head.

>think (your vision waver hazily) Oh.. sweet Krath.
Feeling your vision waver hazily, you think:
    "Oh.... sweet Krath."

[Rindan]

I tend to agree with Cale Knight that a more open ended syntext would be nicer.  Yes, you can normally peg something into the "you feel..." way of saying it, but for style reasons it is not preferable.

The only good reason I can think of to not do this is because the current system forces you to only "feel" things.  Under Cale Knight's proposed way of doing it, you could do something like:

As you reach into the ugly elf's pocket, you think,
"Shit, I hope this guy doesn't notice my hand in there."

Basically, it allows hidden emoting in a limited way.  I don't really think this would be a bad thing, but the staff might disagree.  Of course, using the feel command you could do this 'hidden emote' too, it is just a little kludgier.

Feeling nervous as you reaches into the ugly elf's pock, you think,
"Shit, I hope this guy doesn't notice my hand in there."

[Supreme Allah]

Though I use feel on its own once in awhile, the context of the think emote throws me enough that when I'm in the middle of a dialogue or something fast-paced, I don't want to bother adding to what my character's thinking.

It also tends to be redundant, because what my character's feeling is typically consistent with what they're thinking anyway.

[path]

I second Cale_Knight's motion. Awesome, awesome idea. Much more fluid and natural.

[Nusku]

There's a reason for the present syntax. The feel command is for emotions. Your vision wavering hazily is not an emotion.

[jmordetsky]

There's a reason for the present syntax. The feel command is for emotions. Your vision wavering hazily is not an emotion.

Still, it limits the players ability to tell a story. You really can't emote that your vision is wavering, and this works fine:

>think (your vision waver hazily) Oh.. sweet Krath.
Feeling your vision waver hazily, you think:
    "Oh.... sweet Krath."


Why not allow the syntax to be more open? For example:

>think (hand creeping to his belt) Alright....If I don't act now...

Feeling hand creeping to his belt, you think:
"Alright....If I don't act now..."

>palm knife

The feeling thing is cool, but it can be put there by the user. Another example of where a hard coded "Feeling" doesn't work:

>think (with a sudden pang of impending doom) Oh no.

Lots of thing can be expressed through thinks that allow a rich story telling experience that don't really need to be prefixed with "feeling". I don't see why we shouldn't extend Think to mimic Say.

[Yokunama]

Why not allow the syntax to be more open? For example:

>think (hand creeping to his belt) Alright....If I don't act now...

Feeling hand creeping to his belt, you think:
"Alright....If I don't act now..."

>palm knife

You could just do the following.

Code Select Expand

>:places his hand at his waist

The Super-buff-dude places his hands at his waist.

>think (unsure about the situation) Alright.... If I don't act now.

Feeling unsure about the situation, you think:
"Alright....If I don't act now..."

>palm knife

[Folker]

Not to nitpick, but that actually wont work, Yokunama. Nyah nyah nyah nyah.

[Yokunama]

Not to nitpick, but that actually wont work, Yokunama. Nyah nyah nyah nyah.

Eh? Thanks, I fixed it.  

[jmordetsky]

Not to nitpick, but that actually wont work, Yokunama. Nyah nyah nyah nyah.

Eh? Thanks, I fixed it.  

I hear you. It's not a big deal, but it's just one of those stylistic things.

[Delirium]

There's a reason for the present syntax. The feel command is for emotions. Your vision wavering hazily is not an emotion.

I respectfully disagree.. and I would hate to see creative use of the feel/think command be discouraged.

I've been playing around with it since its inception.. and frankly.. I've found it to be extraordinarily useful for incorporating my character's inward motivations.  I would be disappointed if use of the feel command wasn't a little flexible.

There are physical feelings and there are emotional feelings..

So why NOT emote physical feelings (wavery vision, nausea, etc), as well as emotional feelings?

[Yokunama]

I really like the feel command the way that it is. It doesn't need to have flashy two or three lines of text.

[Delirium]

To explain what I mean:

Code Select Expand

>feel choked up, and unable to speak
You feel choked up, and unable to speak.

>think (a wave of regret) Poor ol' Jimbob.
Feeling a wave of regret, you think:
    "Poor ol' Jimbob."

>em curls ^me hand into a fist.
The grungy mercenary curls his hand into a fist.

>feel the comforting bulk of a thick ring encircling his forefinger
You feel the comforting bulk of a thick ring encircling his forefinger.

think Well, I've still got his ring.
You think:
    "Well, I've still got his ring."

>feel the threat of tears pass
You feel the threat of tears pass.

>say (waving a hand carelessly) Eh, everybody's got to kick the sandbucket sometime.
Waving a hand carelessly, the grungy mercenary says, in southern-accented sirihish:
    "Eh, everybody's got to kick the sandbucket sometime."

[Nusku]

Apologies, Delirium, you're right in that feel can be used to describe anything that you would feel, be it physical or emotional. It is not for hidden emoting, as Rindan points out.

[Tamarin]

In other words, Delirium, you have to make whatever you submit as the argument of the feel command into a noun.

feel rage (rage is a noun)

feel your hormones raging (your hormones raging is a noun phrase)

feel a raging pulse in your pants (pulse is the noun, and rage describes it)

feel your hand slipping into a black, silken pouch (your hand slipping is a noun clause..I believe)

Etc.

[Cale_Knight]

I agree that pretty much anything can be changed around to fit with the current system. 100% agreement here.

But my complaint with it is two-fold.

For one, it's just a matter of redundance. I don't like using a command that forces me to repeat myself stylistically again and again.

Second, it just feels unnatural. I keep wanting to use the feel command the same way I'd use parenthetical emotes with talk or say. Instead, I'm forced to artificially twist what's intended to what will fit the template.

I'll type something like this:

think (as the templar's gaze turns to him) Oh shit!

Then I'll go to hit return, pause, and then curse as I realize that won't work. Then I have to decide how I want to weave and wander my way towards what I really want to say by catering to the current system. Then nine times in ten I say "screw it" because the scene has already moved on.

I understand the rationale behind the way it is, but I disagree with it anyway. It's just as easy use a hidden emote with "feeling nervous as he slips up behind jimbob" as it is to use a hidden emote that goes "as he nervously slips up behind jimbob."

[Lazloth]

Apologies, Delirium, you're right in that feel can be used to describe anything that you would feel, be it physical or emotional. It is not for hidden emoting, as Rindan points out.

> feel the weight of your weapon on your shoulder is "okay" then?  When I read the helpfile initially, I remember it pointing to <emotion> specifically.

[Morfeus]

I agree with Cale_Knight. If nothing else, for me as a non-native speaker is sometime hard to express what I mean even without being forced to use the form which would fit after "Feeling..."

[bloodfromstone]

Then nine times in ten I say "screw it" because the scene has already moved on.

Exactly what happens to me. I'll live, and learn to use it if it stays the same, but it sure would be nice.

[Agent_137]

I agree with Cale_Knight. If nothing else, for me as a non-native speaker is sometime hard to express what I mean even without being forced to use the form which would fit after "Feeling..."

Then fuck it up. No one will complain, I promise. You know what you meant, and any immortals can probably figure it out.

[spawnloser]

Think of it this way, guys...

Feel and emote are the same format command.

Say and talk are the same format command.

Tell and whisper are the same format command, very similar to say and talk format.

Now...if you all can use emote, why not feel?

[Naiona]

Feel is in place exclusively for emotions.  If you are hoping for a hidden emote command, you would probably have more success advocating fora hidden emote command rather then insisting on using feel for other then what it is intended.

There are multiple reasons in game that the feel command is coded the way it is, and it functions perfectly for what it is intended.  What you are looking for is something altogether different.

[jmordetsky]

Feel is in place exclusively for emotions.  If you are hoping for a hidden emote command, you would probably have more success advocating fora hidden emote command rather then insisting on using feel for other then what it is intended.

There are multiple reasons in game that the feel command is coded the way it is, and it functions perfectly for what it is intended.  What you are looking for is something altogether different.

I'm for leaving feel as is. But I think we could remove "feeling" from think.

Why not kill two birds with one stone and allow slight gestures to be expressed via think?

For example is:

think (eyes flickering nervoulsy to entrance of the tavern) Oh boy....

Really so wrong? I think it would work pretty nicely. I mean you could easily sub in:

think (nervous, his eyes flickering to entrance of the tavern)  Oh boy...

By why place the limit on it? I love the command as is, and use it all the time, and like I said this isn't really that big a deal, but from a purely stylistic point of view, I would love if we weren't tied to the "feeling" prefix for thinks.

[HaiWolfe]

Because it gives other PCs no chance to catch those small gestures of yours. You could just as easily play it out as:

>pem eyes flicker to the entrance of the tavern.

>think (nervous) Oh boy...

[amoeba]

Because it gives other PCs no chance to catch those small gestures of yours.

My thoughts exactlly.

[bloodfromstone]

Feel and emote are the same format command.

This is false, though. Emote does not put any limitations or imposed phrases into the sentence, save your own sdesc, which you can move around. If emote placed the word 'Moving' at the beginning of every emote, then they would be the safe format.

That aside, I can understand why the Imms would be hestitant to let it be set up to be used essentially as a hidden emote feature. I'll survive either way.

[Morfeus]

But as was mentioned above, the fact you have to start with "Feeling..." doesn't really stop you from using this 'hidden emotes'.

[rishenko]

Feel is in place exclusively for emotions.  If you are hoping for a hidden emote command, you would probably have more success advocating fora hidden emote command rather then insisting on using feel for other then what it is intended.

There are multiple reasons in game that the feel command is coded the way it is, and it functions perfectly for what it is intended.  What you are looking for is something altogether different.

*falls upon his knees* Then I beg of you, please give us a hidden emote command.  I love using hidden emotes (currently, in my foolishness, using the 'feel' command) to further describe the mental and physical effects that are taking place with my characters. Examples follow:

You feel your ribs cracking under the weight of the kank that has fallen upon you.

You feel your blood boiling, the searing pain flowing through your veins as the poison takes hold.

Yellow dots dance across your vision as you stagger back from the blow of the half-giant's club.

A sense of dread permeates your body as the templar glares at you, causing your heart to skip several beats.

Your wounds from the blades of the gith burn as you ride your kank hard across the desert.

Perhaps a thread should be started to avoid hijacking this thread?

[Cale_Knight]

Perhaps a thread should be started to avoid hijacking this thread?

Hijack away. A hidden emote command would be just as useful to me as changing the feel command.

[Moofassa]

Chanting in english, Moofassa says:' Hemote, hemote, hemote, hemote!'

I would love hidden emotes.

[Lazloth]

Chanting in english, Moofassa says:' Hemote, hemote, hemote, hemote!'

Didn't X-D lose the poll?  semote, semote semote

[Nusku]

Apologies, Delirium, you're right in that feel can be used to describe anything that you would feel, be it physical or emotional. It is not for hidden emoting, as Rindan points out.

> feel the weight of your weapon on your shoulder is "okay" then?  When I read the helpfile initially, I remember it pointing to <emotion> specifically.

It's somewhat open to interpretation and motive. Your example seems fine. What probably wouldn't be fine is:

> feel the weight on your shoulders ease off as you drop your weapon

I'd break that example up into two things instead of just one. One of those is a feeling, one is a physical action. One is a legitimate target for feel, one is an emote. Does that help?

[Cale Knight]

It's somewhat open to interpretation and motive. Your example seems fine. What probably wouldn't be fine is:

> feel the weight on your shoulders ease off as you drop your weapon

I'd break that example up into two things instead of just one. One of those is a feeling, one is a physical action. One is a legitimate target for feel, one is an emote. Does that help?

So long as the action of lowering the weapon is also played out in an actual emote, what's the harm?

[Lazloth]

One of those is a feeling, one is a physical action. One is a legitimate target for feel, one is an emote. Does that help?

It makes sense, but it's not consistent with what I see --

Reference:

Feel is in place exclusively for emotions.

Feel    (Communication)
This command is used to express what your character is feeling. Use this as a role playing tool for the emotions your character would like to experience.

Syntax:

feel <emotion>
Examples:

> feel annoyed
> feel joyful

Was simply looking for clarification, as there's semantic variance between feeling hot or feeling the sand in his/her boots and feeling angry.  To counter what I remember spawnloser posting, a syntactical difference exists between feel and emote (namely in how to the pronoun refernence can float) and if we start to blur the line between silent/hidden emote and non- in how we portray "feelings," we run the risk of infering the staff position on semote/hemote which I don't believe was ever ratified.

[Tiernan]

A few, personal comments:

1.  Embedded feel was introduced in the hope of giving everyone a shortcut instead of mandating the use of both the feel and think commands separately.  It is not intended to be abused to perform hidden-emoting.  If its usage is terminally unclear between how feel and think work, I have no qualms about removing it entirely from think and let things stand with using both commands separately.  The reason the word "Feeling" is hard-coded into the command is because when the command is used properly, it makes grammatical sense.  I'd rather keep the shortcut, myself.

2.  Hidden emotes.  I don't care for them at all.  If you're performing a physical action, there's no reason why someone else cannot observe it.  We have skills in place for the surreptitious handling of objects and stealth so that the conditions and consequences of the action are identified and constrained.  There would be no such constraints or control for hidden emotes, which is why I remain a firm opponent to the concept.  Think and feel are the only two commands that come to my mind where they're considered IC and are not physical actions.  Perhaps that's why the shortcut is confusing/difficult to understand, because we are all used to the cool syntactical approaches for emotes and now we have to override them for think.  This offers up another good reason to remove feel from think: inconsistency.

3.  Emotions vs Physical 'feelings'.  Personally, I prefer emotions.  There's a fine line between an emote and a physical feeling so I'm willing to cut a little slack on things that seem to be borderline.  E.g. "think (overwhelmingly exhausted) That was a long ride." seems reasonable while "think (the coarseness of the sand as it sifts through your fingers) How did I end up here?" does not.  You'll note that emote parsing isn't performed on what's specified in an embedded think, further separating it from emote.

4.  Thoughts on "feel" overall.  It's new, which means we don't really have a lot of other examples to refer to and say "It'd be a lot like...".  The policy on it is still being fleshed out as we observe what comes of it and form our opinions on whether or not it would be considered "acceptable".  "Think" was less ambiguous as it can be viewed as an internal dialog.  Feelings and emotions are not so clear-cut.  Philosophers have long debated emotions / "moods" and entire schools of thought have been developed from any effort to scientifically quantify emotions.  It's an unanswered debate that philosophers will continue into the very distant future.  What this means is that expecting a cut & dried, black & white policy is probably going to end up as another "highly subjective" one and be another example of how things go.  If you stray too close to the fringes, the staff will most likely do what we usually do in similar circumstances, and try to steer you back towards the commonly accepted usage.