Blood Spraying All Over You

[moab]

In reference to this post:
http://www.zalanthas.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=230877#230877

Regarding the new "if things spray blood, everyone in the room has a chance of getting bloody effect."

I'm not sure if this is a wise choice because:

For years the pbase and staff have discussed problems related to outdoor room size and rping effectively the idea of space.

Now, I can be nearly, but not quite, a league away and still get sprayed by blood when someone kills something.

I think this will only encourage a continued misunderstanding of how big an outdoor room is.

Other thoughts?

[spawnloser]

That is a very good point, moab.

My suggested alterations, if possible:

I would suggest only those those people directly in combat with the dying person or killing person (including those two people) have a chance.  In fact, dying and killing should have a larger chance.

I would also suggest that each visible item have a chance of getting bloodied individually.  Not a flat chance to spray EVERYTHING worn by someone.

Extending the last idea, I'll focus on visible items.  Only those items that are not covered up should be bloodied.  Those other items, if I can't see them, how does blood get on them?  The exception to this would be the dying person's things.  If s/he's doing the spraying, the blood's coming from inside and nothing should be safe from the blood.

Continue discussion please.

[Hymwen]

If it's possible, it would be neat to have some sort of flag coded so that only people who were fighting the dead PC/NPC will get bloodied. If that can't be done, then the next best thing might be to only spray blood on people with the "You are too excited to leave just yet!" flag (people who have been in combat recently) to at least avoid spraying blood and gore on the silk-clad noblewoman sitting in the other end of the area.

[Grey Area]

This would really only apply to certain outdoor situations, I'd say. Inside, well... When the militia Half Giant chops that 'rinthi elf into three seperate pieces in the Bard and Barrel, everybody in the tavern ought to be catching a bit of the red, red kroovy.

[Pantoufle]

This would really only apply to certain outdoor situations, I'd say. Inside, well... When the militia Half Giant chops that 'rinthi elf into three seperate pieces in the Bard and Barrel, everybody in the tavern ought to be catching a bit of the red, red kroovy.

I don't think anything short of a blender is going to spray so much blood that every single person, from one side of the room to the next, is going to be showered (let alone receive a single droplet, in some cases) of blood.  Especially if you consider the virtual crowds, there's a good chance the population closest to the victim will act as a shield for those further away.

[Ghost]

I am not sure if it is a big issue.  We still have the same lag to start fighting someone in the wilderness as we have it in a very small room.  A spray of blood showering over everyone does not have as lethal consequences as getting attacked by someone even if the room is more than a mile square, so I don't think it has priority for a code change.

What I find the as a slightly bigger issue is, even when you don't do anything to make the creature bleed, you still get bloodied.  Like, you kill something with magick/psionics, and there is a chance you see a spray of blood message and you are bloodied.

[Halaster]

Hmm, or maybe just the people who were actually fighting the person dying/spraying blood.

[Morgenes]

For clarification, the blood spray code that is used here does a random check on each 'top level' item.  So things which are covered will not get sprayed with blood.

*continue discussion on how to determine 'range' of blood fountains*

[slipshod]

Maybe include combatants and people guarding/following combatants... they could define the "sanguine circle" of people in range of the blood-spray.  Anyone else in the "room" not codely attached to someone in the fight (or actually fighting) would be out in spectator range.  



That's Gallagher going to work on a watermelon with the sledge-o-matic.

[Marauder Moe]

While an outdoor room represents a distance of a league or so, I've always thought that all the people in a given outdoor room are all still close together.  That's how the code behaves too.

Consequently, if you want to keep your distance from someone in the desert, don't enter the same room as them.  If you enter the room, that's the same thing as ICly approaching whoever's in there.


So anyway, when the bloodspray code triggers, is it a chance that everyone will get bloody, or does everyone have a chance to get bloody?  I think it should be the latter.  Especially when dealing with large creatures, there's going to be a chance of random directed bloodspurts.  [EDIT] But a 360 degree even spray is a bit silly.


If Lord Silkypants Tor wants to watch his Scorpions take down a Mek, I think he needs to codedly define his distance by being one room away (or in a wagon).  Otherwise, I say he's fair game to be hit by flying spurts and giblets.

[slipshod]

...all the people in a given outdoor room are all still close together. That's how the code behaves too.
Consequently, if you want to keep your distance from someone in the desert, don't enter the same room as them. If you enter the room, that's the same thing as ICly approaching whoever's in there.

I don't really agree with this.  I think certain outdoor rooms could be considered vast enough to have people occupy the same general area without being tightly packed together.  In fact, I think it would open up more possibilities for RP if everyone thought of outdoor rooms differently than indoor rooms.  Enemies could enter the same room and posture and circle around and not necessary have to automatically engage in combat.  The terrain features - rolling dunes, rock outcroppings, groves of trees - represented in the outdoor rooms should provide cover and room for separation between people.  In short, it should be conceivable that someone could be in the same -outdoor- room as a fight, and not get bloody.  The argument is a little less compelling in indoor/city rooms, though I have already seen it made here.  The people in the front row at Gallagher's shows need the tarps and ponchos, but not the back row.

So just to clarify, I suggest that the people fighting, and people following or guarding/guarded by the people fighting are the ones who can get bloodied.

Unless one of the combatants is a half-giant with a mallet and the opponent has a juicy melon shaped head...

[creeper386]

I don't neccessarily agree with the whole, "people that are being guarding or following" combatants idea.

So, we have silk clad merchant who wishes to stay away from the fight. The guards were all guarding him, and he was following his ranger buddy as the ranger buddy is the guy that knows where to go, but when baddy lil' creature comes in, there is probably a chance that the merchant isn't going to be anywhere near the fighting. Does he then have to have them stop guarding him, and he has to start following himself as well?

Eh, I'd say leave it to the combatants, at least in outside rooms, but that's just me.

Although in outside rooms, I do have the opinion that they are various points in the wilderness, where people are nearby with the distances being between the rooms instead of the rooms being neccessarily butting each other, but that to me has been how I've always viewed them. They can still be large areas, but they aren't leagues of areas, but ... That's a derail, so ....

[Delirium]

Am I the only one that actually likes the idea of Jane Salarr or Amos Kadius getting splattered with blood when their guardsmen totally obliterate some hapless creature that tried to attack?

C'mon, how cool is that?

"Damnit, Malik, you got blood all over my clothes again.  Can't you just kill things more... gently?"

[moab]

If she were being guarded by the soldier who caused the bloody flag to get activated, then she would have a chance of also being bloodied.

At least that's the sense I'm getting from this discussion.

[spawnloser]

She wouldn't be guarded by the time the bloodspray happened.  Combat ends guarding, remember?

I don't think the guarded/guarding/followed/following will work well for this.  If it is impossible to just do the people in combat with killer AND bleeder, then just the bleeder would be my preference.

By the way, thanks for the clarification Morgenes on the top level thing.

[Halaster]

Personally, I think it's fine.

I'm currently playing a ranger, and I get most of my gear bloody pretty fast.  So what?  That gives me something to DO when it's dark.. clean cloak blood, clean sword blood, etc.  If that doesn't work, I can get a piece of soap which isn't very expensive and clean them.

As for fancy-pants merchants with a lot of cash?  So what?  They can afford soap or new clothes.

As for realism and distance, there's not a lot to do about it since distance is pretty vague, at times.  We don't have commands and actions that make you close with your opponent, besides walking into their room.  I think the way it is is a decent compromise.

[Tlaloc]

The following is my own opinion, and does not nessecarially represent the views of the rest of the staff:

I'm honestly disheartened by this thread. This was added as a cool, cinematic addition to the game. Is it realistic for fountains of blood to shoot out of someone, coating everyone around when you kill someone? Probably not all the time, but...it's fun. The added gore factor helps hone in the fact that it's a fantasy game.

Sure, we could code it so that the game magickally keeps track of everyone's virtual position in the room in relation to everyone else (or rather, come up with some reasonable simulation therein). Doing this, though, would likely reduce all bows to range 0 (who ever heard of a bow that could shoot three leagues?); force PCs to not be able to 'hit' or 'kill' someone they weren't standing right beside; force PCs to charge across the sands with every kick, bash, or disarm attempt; disallow people from sitting at tables without walking over to them; not shake peoples hand's they weren't standing beside; and about a bajillion other things that players take for granted every day that require "distance" to be taken into account. This could be a very cool addition, but not one I see anyone undertaking, just to keep blood off a few PCs.

This is a game which has legions of undead wandering around, characters who can wilt plants at a glance, giant house-sized angry armadillos, insects larger than a bus, and cops which shoot flaming balls of fire, instead of bullets. This is also a game where death is not only a fact of life, but it's a certainty. I personally feel that suspending your disbelief is perfectly within the realm of possibility, even with a bit of flying gore in the wilds.

I mean, seriously, what's next? "I emoted hiding behind this patch of virtual cactus...there's no way the blood could have gotten me!" This is essentially the same argument as: "I emoted riding away from the battle a hundred yards."

In my opinion, life on Armageddon comes down to this: Sometimes you get the blood. Sometimes, the blood gets you.

[creeper386]

Well, I personally don't think cinamatic blood sprays splashing everyone adds to the game, at all. It doesn't do anything for me in the movies except make it look ridiculous and completely turn me off about it, and the thought of the same thing in Armageddon? I think it's blatantly retarded.

Now, I don't mind seeing more blood on combatants, I also don't might weapons getting bloodied when beheading someone, but I don't think the severed neck is going to be spraying blood in a full half circle let alone in every direction.

Honestly, I'm sure some people may get a kick out of the blood spraying all over the place, but is this something that most of the people on the MUD would prefer to see? Is everyone huge fans of the Kill Bill blood or the gore from some Saw movie?

I only see this addition of spraying blood catering to a small amount of people. More blood ... Yes. Blood spraying in all directions over everyone? No.

[spawnloser]

Oh, I'm not saying that I don't like this addition, Tlaloc, and I don't think anyone is.  This is an open discussion forum, though, where people are simply voicing opinions on how it can still be improved.

[Pantoufle]

I'm honestly disheartened by this thread. This was added as a cool, cinematic addition to the game. Is it realistic for fountains of blood to shoot out of someone, coating everyone around when you kill someone? Probably not all the time, but...it's fun. The added gore factor helps hone in the fact that it's a fantasy game.

I don't think any of the constructive criticism was a direct insult to whomever took the time to implement this code.  So far it all seems very polite and courteous to me, nothing that should invoke disheartedness.

With respect, the code seems a little too Hollywood for my tastes in that it's a major exaggeration of reality (despite that, from what I can tell, it was implemented to be realistic).  The gore factor reminds me of video games like Baldur's Gate, especially using the name gore factor.  The addition of coded blood, itself, is absolutely fantastic, but I think implementing a few variables to make it more realistic will help lend the image of realism in favor of the image of a plotless arcade game.  With that said, I hope this discussion continues and that some of the suggestions are added.

[Intrepid]

I'm honestly disheartened by this thread. This was added as a cool, cinematic addition to the game. Is it realistic for fountains of blood to shoot out of someone, coating everyone around when you kill someone? Probably not all the time, but...it's fun. The added gore factor helps hone in the fact that it's a fantasy game.

I've seen blood splatter everywhere from an actual death and I do like the new blood code in game.

[Paris]

This would really only apply to certain outdoor situations, I'd say. Inside, well... When the militia Half Giant chops that 'rinthi elf into three seperate pieces in the Bard and Barrel, everybody in the tavern ought to be catching a bit of the red, red kroovy.

What about when that elf is actually a well trained fighter, and he beats up the half giant with a few well placed stabs (seen it happen) Why would that elf be able to rip hard enough into the giant to spray me over by the stage when he stabs the giant coming in from the plaza?

Arm is not a cheap Japanese horror movie!

:twisted:

[Grey Area]

Is everyone huge fans of the Kill Bill blood...

Well... Yes, actually! You mean you don't picture armageddon combat like this?

I've only seen the blood spray once since it was added, when a half giant thoroughly smushed something nearby. Everyone got splattered. It was entirely appropriate.

It's not like this happens every time, and when it does it's pretty damn cool.

Why would that elf be able to rip hard enough into the giant to spray me over by the stage when he stabs the giant coming in from the plaza?

Even better - I can gaurantee a half giant has a lot more blood than some scrawny longneck, and probably at higher pressure too!

[bloodfromstone]

It happens in the arena, too, if I'm not mistaken. Not that I mind. I actually love seeing the variety of emotes as blood sprays into the stands.

[moab]

I'm honestly disheartened by this thread. This was added as a cool, cinematic addition to the game. Is it realistic for fountains of blood to shoot out of someone, coating everyone around when you kill someone? Probably not all the time, but...it's fun. The added gore factor helps hone in the fact that it's a fantasy game.

Man, I didn't mean to bring you down!  I'm all for cool changes to the game, but I just wanted to point out it may cause complications in how an outdoor space is understood.

Me? I have no problem walking into a room and emoting something that indicates some degree of position veruses the other players in the room and am comfortable if they do likewise.

However, I am concerned that if I emote something like that and a player than uses the code to justify "daw sword; kill hippy."

We have already seen that in this thread:

While an outdoor room represents a distance of a league or so, I've always thought that all the people in a given outdoor room are all still close together. That's how the code behaves too.

Consequently, if you want to keep your distance from someone in the desert, don't enter the same room as them. If you enter the room, that's the same thing as ICly approaching whoever's in there.

It might be good to gives some clarification on what space an outdoor room represents and when players have very different perceptions of this space, the bloody code adds to the confusion.

Again - it's all good - I'm just pointing out any issue the change has raised.

Finally, I don't want to be my college writing instructor.  She always loved everything our class wrote.  I always wondered - if we're so good, how come none of us are published?  To say that every code change is GREAT!!!11!1! is meaningless if you never hear from someone that a code change is confusing (which this one is, IMO) or even blows.

:-D