The Infamous, Do-it-Yourself PSI Emote!

[Galdun]

Everybody, and I mean everybody - from your lowliest, egg suckin', spice shuckin', web toed grebber to your fancy-feathered, hoity toity Chosen Lord - knows what I'm talkin' about.  When certain folks feel the need to convey an emtion or the state of their mental presence, they find ways to separate the description from the actual message.  For those of you who aren't quite followin' me yet, heres an example.

The skinny waif sends you a telepathic message:
"**Their voice echoing angrily in your head** Where's my small'n'a half for the other night, Amos?  You better pay me up front next time or I'm gonna cut the damn thing off!"

The point is, that we don't have a sort of way based, Psi emote in place and yet people sort of handle it on their own.  Now this is of course totally cool and I haven't got any problem with it, but the fact that there isn't a coded PSI emote leads me to believe the player base is divided on this issue.

So what in Krath's name do you all think?  Are these little D.I.Y. Psi emotes ok?  Are they stupid?  Should people use them?  If so, should we bug the staff to code them? Would it be hard to code them?

Lets talk it up.

[Ghost]

I picture psionic communication as a transmission of images as well as a transmission of words.  And the mind's images can be colored with emotions.  I find it okay, so long it just represents the state of emotion of the other person, without forcing me to anything.  So:

psi *Colors of anger accompanying his thoughts* I hate you...

is okay.


But:

psi *His anger frightening you* I hate you...

is not.

[Dakkon Black]

I say that way emotes are A-OK.

It shouldn't ever be an actual emote, but I do like the way it's done if its a feeling.

so.

The waif sends you a telepathic message:
"*as she sits on a chair in her room* Thanks for the chair

Is bad, and should never happen.

The waif sends you a telepathic message:
"*with a flicker of hapiness* Thanks for the chair

Seems fine to me.

[Ardan]

I think they're ok once they're not overdone. I don't think words that convey strong emotion should be used as this is entering territory where normal people do not want to be. I always keep my psi emotes to be very slight things that would appear more like a faint or brief sensation. Saying something like, "I could sense he was as ferociously angry, mad as a Gaj Lord Templar!" is something that could drop both of you in a lot of unwanted trouble.

[Eternal]

Hmm... I'm almost unilaterally opposed to anyone but psionicists psi'ing anything beyond a message.  If I begin to feel what you're feeling, I think you're getting too close.  If I get 'You feel queasy' every time you contact me, then I'm going straight to the templars about your obvious Brainworm ways.  If I see a great dragon towering over me, or some other nonsense, you'd better be a templar yourself (and I'll assume you're some sort of strange mindbendy one!) or be really good friends with one who's willing to protect you from another.

I don't like it.

[bloodfromstone]

Personally, I've always liked it when it's done for emotions. I've seen people do images, and I don't like that so much, but I definitely think some way to add some feeling into psi's is good.

[Sanvean]

This is currently being discussed at the staff level.

Right now, it is fine to interject feelings and emotions, as long as they are your feelings and emotions.

example:

psi *with a wash of shame* I slept with your mother last night.

but psiing

psi *image of your mom doing her "O" face*

would be unjustified since (presumably) you don't know their mom.  If you do, go for it.

I would not expect people to give accurate visions of some place or to supply information they don't have in person.  You can convey your own emotion, but you cannot infuence the recipent's.

As I said, being discussed, and subject to change if we hash out something else.

[Eternal]

You know what would be nifty?

If the feel command gave you some sort of 'feel desc' which would be communicated with your psis!  This would get the feelings through without the need for emote or careful wording.

You feel nervous.

You send to the balding, one-eyed templar:
"With a nervous feeling:  Blah, blah, bladdy blah, Lord Templar."

Just a thought.

[jhunter]

I've been using them for quite some time now and I like them being used so long as it is only displaying your pc's feelings or an image they are picturing and sending via the way. The Way IMO, is more than just sending actual text to someone else's mind. It's a mixture of thoughts, feelings, and images to get the message across.

[Uberskaapie]

I do this on occaision, though very rarely, and I personally think that including personal emotions in the psi-emote gets a little too close to psionicist status. When I do use them, I use them to convey the way my thoughts are travelling. For instance:

If I live in Tuluk, but have gone to allanak for whatever reason, when I communicate with my friends back home I might say:

the skinny dude psi's:
 "*his thoughts distant* Hey, long time no see"

or if I'm in the middle of something:
the skinny dude psi's:
 "*his thoughts divided* Now's not the best time"

basically, conveying the psionic reception, rather than non-verbal communication.




if that makes sense at all...

[InsertCleverNameHere]

I like it. I do it quite often, when my character's feeling any emotion I feel ought to bleed through into a psi. While mining for obsidian/clay/glass, your craggy old dude finds a hidden gold deposit and has to tell somebody. "psi *with a joy bordering on the orgasmic* You will never believe what I just found."

Okay so.. I've never used that. But now that I've thought of it I might just... But *a burst of happiness* *irritation ebbing through the thought* *trickle of sly humor* *warm mental laughter*... All similar to things I've used, or seen other people use. And I'm totally okay with it. It's like talking to someone on the phone, in my head. Sure, you can't see them to see what emotions are on their face, but a voice (or mental voice) can inflict a lot of feeling by tone, volume, etc.

[MorganChaos]

I do emotes in it a lot. Very occasionally, if I'm waying someone who's right there in the room with me, I'll put something in describing that I say this to them at the same time as I'm smoking or drinking or winking at someone or whatever. Otherwise I do things like *thoughts racing confusingly* or *thoughts a litte fuzzy* or *seeming extremely content.* I'll also do simple images, but if I can't fit the image into one send then it's more complicated than I want to send through psi.

[spawnloser]

Eeek!  MorganChaos, please don't put actions in your psi's!  Emote or Hemote or Semote any actions, please.  If you're winking at someone or smoking, great...those should be things that people can see.  Just prep stuff up so that the two commands go through one right after the other, and then the person you're psi'ing too will see the psi come through at the same time as whatever you're emoting and it'll all be good.  Don't deny those others in the room the chance to interact with your emote by putting it only in the psi please.

[Vesperas]

When someone first struct me with the *does something*, I kind of stopped and stared for a moment, because it was just sort of jarring to see amongst all of the other coded wonders.

Now that I'm used to it, I'm perfectly okay with it.  I think, though, the way you 'emote' in a PSI is determined on how you imagine it.  

For me, I'm marching with all those people who view the Way as a series of sensations and brief (but unrecallable) images/sounds that ultimately convey an intuitive message.

People should NOT be able to broadcast recognizeable images that the reciever can clearly remember.  I believe that's in the realm of mindbenders, and if my character ICly suddenly discovers that she know exactly what your PC is phsically doing or seeing, she's either going to turn your PC in for being a worm or become EXTREMELY paranoid of herself.

When I say something is unrecallable... well, think of receiving a Way message like having a dream. In the short time that you are actually receiving it, you are experiencing flashes of vivid imagery and sound, but once the message has stopped (like waking up from the dream), the images fade, but the concept and sensation still remain.


Mmm, I had more to say on the subject, but my keyboard is making it a nuisance to type and spell correctly.

[joyofdiscord]

Someone once used a psi-emote to flash someone's complete sdesc (as an "image") at me, for a person he was trying to describe.  That's just not right, that's worse than the sdesc abuse we're already accustomed to.  Please don't do this.

[Synthesis]

Considering Sanvean just said "if you know his mom, go for it" with respect to sending an image over the Way, I'd say your opinion as to what is acceptable over the Way is a little off, joyofdiscord.

Further, I find it interesting that you're so certain, considering the fairly sparse documentation about the subject.  If they're discussing such things at the staff level, I find it a little unreasonable for anyone to be forming adamant opinions about it.

So...you might not like it, but so far, at least one staff member has expressed tacit approval.

[Nameless Face]

Someone once used a psi-emote to flash someone's complete sdesc (as an "image") at me, for a person he was trying to describe.  That's just not right, that's worse than the sdesc abuse we're already accustomed to.  Please don't do this.

Who says this is forbidden?  It seems that the transmission of images is not currently ruled out by staff.


(edit: see above... was slower on the draw)

[MorganChaos]

Eeek!  MorganChaos, please don't put actions in your psi's!  Emote or Hemote or Semote any actions, please.  If you're winking at someone or smoking, great...those should be things that people can see.  Just prep stuff up so that the two commands go through one right after the other, and then the person you're psi'ing too will see the psi come through at the same time as whatever you're emoting and it'll all be good.  Don't deny those others in the room the chance to interact with your emote by putting it only in the psi please.

It's not only in the psi. Example:

Code Select Expand

emote drags deeply off his spice, eyes half-shutting contently, and blows a smoke ring at ~man

psi *as he blows a smoke ring* He's the next target.

Other people still can react to me blowing smoke rings at them, and the person I'm talking to can react properly to my emote in combination with what I said. I only do this when I'm sitting next to a person who's paying attention to me, or should be.

[joyofdiscord]

So... you guys honestly think this is acceptable:

The guy ways you, "He's tall, bla bla bla, dragon tattoo, bla bla bla:

You way them, "I'm not sure I know who you're talking about"

The guy ways you, "*an image of the altitudinous, cadmium-eyed man appearing in front of you* well, maybe you'll figure it out"

I mean, honestly?  No fooling?  That doesn't sound like an abuse to you?

If that's so, why should we EVER bother describing people?  As long as we've seen them once, we can apparently psionically project a hologram of them using their EXACT sdesc and all but eliminate any chance of mistaken identity.

Personally, I think it's pretty obvious that the example Sanvean gave is worlds different than what I'm describing.  I'm talking about characters bestowing psionic Obi Wan Kenobi style hologram powers on themselves to avoid the complications of identifying people.

[Ktavialt]

So... you guys honestly think this is acceptable:

The guy ways you, "He's tall, bla bla bla, dragon tattoo, bla bla bla:

You way them, "I'm not sure I know who you're talking about"

The guy ways you, "*an image of the altitudinous, cadmium-eyed man appearing in front of you* well, maybe you'll figure it out"

I mean, honestly?  No fooling?  That doesn't sound like an abuse to you?

Actually, in that particular example, I see the perfect reason why that is
acceptable.  Altitudinous?  Cadmium?  Ugh.  Really picking on one of my
pet peeves there, especially when the person beneath the hood doesn't
have either altitudinous or cadmium inside the mdesc, and are trying to
get away from having anybody target them.

- Ktavialt

[joyofdiscord]

Uuuhhh, that's a random sdesc given for purposes of example.  The sdesc itself doesn't matter, and we are NOT talking about sdesc-mdesc incongruity here, so I'm personally baffled as to how that cognitive leap was made.

Describing people is difficult.  When I was a teacher, I tried to refer to one of the 6-8 students in my class to another teacher with the same class and found it frustratingly difficult.  This is out of a pool of 6 to 8 people.  Without very specific identifying features to latch onto, it's no easy thing to describe a person.  Everyone focuses on some features more than others.  Few people truly have features so striking that most people notice that first.

Here on Arm, it's a necessary evil that everybody has the same "most identifiable features" to every person that they pass: their sdesc.  People that describe people honestly in-game often still have a hard time doing it, because describing people is hard.  People that kind of tiptoe around the two sdesc adjectives, maybe with a scar/tattoo or other mdesc feature throw in, (by far the most common type of player, in my experience, and a group I'm too often guilty of belonging to, due to necessity and a bad memory) have an easier time of it.  Those who are possessed of holographic imagery that uses the entire sdesc letter-for-letter as if their psi-emote were some kind of legitimate code echo have no chance of failing.

[MorganChaos]

Uuuhhh, that's a random sdesc given for purposes of example.  The sdesc itself doesn't matter, and we are NOT talking about sdesc-mdesc incongruity here, so I'm personally baffled as to how that cognitive leap was made.

The point there was that sdesc is ridiculous to begin with, and there's a lot of them like it. I would not object to that. If it were "the blue-eyed, dark-haired man" or whatever, you can just say "He's got blue eye, and kinda dark shaggy hair." But someone who says "altitudinous, cadmium-eyed man" (or something similar, with crazy words) is being an idiot and trying not to get targeted, so they shouldn't be surprised when someone ways their sdesc. If it were "tall, (i don't know what color cadmium is)-eyed man," then no, you shouldn't way that sdesc, you should just describe.

I understand it was just random, but in that particular instance, yeah, I'd think it cool. But with what you're talking about, sdesc-mdesc incongruity IS a big issue, when people have sdescs that have little-nothing to do with their mdesc and wear hoods all the time. I personally think I'd rather the person way an sdesc, because it's a much more vague image, than the mdesc or a list of features in the mdesc. For playability's sake and realism's sake.

[Nao]

On a side note, altitudinous is prety ridiculous for people... That's a word used in geography, seriously. Another instance where someone showed they could use a thesaurus but didn't bother checking a bit further.

[Ktavialt]

Uuuhhh, that's a random sdesc given for purposes of example.  The sdesc itself doesn't matter, and we are NOT talking about sdesc-mdesc incongruity here, so I'm personally baffled as to how that cognitive leap was made.

Are you and Agent137 related? Seriously?

Anyways, I figure that if every player can telepathically send messages
through the Way like Dr. Xavier from the X-Men, it isn't that hard to
believe that you can send images with the mind like Obi Wan Kenobi (though
thats kind of a bad example, since he did it with a device, not the mind.)

Playability trumps normality in each, I say.

- Ktavialt

[Marauder Moe]

I'm with you, joyofdiscord.

If psi was meant to convey images (or emotions, for that matter), I think it should be recoded to accept command emotes as such.  Or at least that staff needs to explicitly say in documentation that emotions and/or images are OK for the Way.  Sanvean said they're talking about this now, so we just have to wait I suppose.

The telepathy as pure thought argument isn't foolproof.  It's possible that the parts of the humanoid brain that enable the Way are tied directly and only into the speech centers of the brain and have nothing to do with the visual cortex.  So, the sender concentrates on words, those words go into the Way section of the brain, get transmitted through the Way and into the Way center of the recipient, and then are translated into his native language by his speech centers.  As a corralary, that would make a mindbender someone who's Way center of the brain is enlarged and has connections to other parts of the brain, thus allowing greater control and capability.

[joyofdiscord]

On a side note, altitudinous is prety ridiculous for people... That's a word used in geography, seriously. Another instance where someone showed they could use a thesaurus but didn't bother checking a bit further.

Okay everybody, I apologize.  Sometimes, since we can't use the real sdesc that was used in "the incident", being IC, we use made-up sdescs, and it's pretty common on this board to use ones that are kind of ridiculous and most-obviously not real.  It could have been "the snozzberry-haired bogeyman", and the point would not change.

Playability trumps normality in each, I say.

I don't think sdesc abuse is a playability issue, personally.  One very large part of what we "play" on Armageddon involves describing people.  Players inventing abilities like this out of nowhere renders this entire part of the game redundant.  People being too-easily identifiable is already destroying playability for chars like raiders.  With this sort of technique being acceptable, character identification is almost absolutely guaranteed.  Why is your playability more important than the guy's playability who's trying to blend into the crowd (something that's pretty easy in real life, where about 90% of people qualify as "hard to describe" as opposed to the 5% or so on Arm, who may or may not be abusing descriptions)?

Furthermore, if someone is hiding behind a hood all the time with deceptively-written descriptions (a kind of abuse I honestly haven't seen in years), then you don't have their sdesc to spread around anyway, and people aren't going to be able to identify them by that sdesc, so how is that relevant again?  Everyone will have to fish mdesc features, and probably follow up with "he wears a hood morning, noon, and night" and the guy will probably go down.

Desc consistency is also an OOC issue, so it really should not affect your character's IC decision of whether or not to use the holodeck.  Why is it all right to use this IC ability against an OOCly abusive char and not a normal char?  If it's an actual IC ability that your character can do, why doesn't he just do it every single time? On the other hand, if you're really dealing with someone with an abusive set of descs, shouldn't you mention it to the staff rather than using (what is, in my opinion) a counter-abuse?  If I'm dealing with some evil cheating magicker (the lithium-eyed coppertop Elkran) who I just happen to know uses a casting trigger, should I set up a "draw poisoned knife" trigger to level the playing field?

[Melody]

When I say something is unrecallable... well, think of receiving a Way message like having a dream. In the short time that you are actually receiving it, you are experiencing flashes of vivid imagery and sound, but once the message has stopped (like waking up from the dream), the images fade, but the concept and sensation still remain.

Dreams don't fade for everyone. Some of us have the ability to dream in colours and retain clear memories of some pictures easily. On the other hand, I don't see why pictures can't be transferred through the Way (after all fantasy and magic shouldn't be explained using modern science). Following someone else's logic, even if the communication is done with feelings and words, the brain is capable of constructing an image based upon them instinctively. (with equal chances of getting it completely wrong) Although I don't employ it personally, I don't mind it when others use it.

[WarriorPoet]

I've always liked the idea that instead of talking through telepathy like talking on a telephone, the Way was more a jumble of thoughts. Images, colors, emotions and 'speech' all combining to paint a larger picture of the psionic message.

-WP

[Dakkon Black]

I've always liked the idea that instead of talking through telepathy like talking on a telephone, the Way was more a jumble of thoughts. Images, colors, emotions and 'speech' all combining to paint a larger picture of the psionic message.

Correct. If anything, people who simply speak words and sentences perfectly are the ones abusing it. Or benders

[WarriorPoet]

I wouldn't say abuse. I just assume that my character deciphered their psionic jumble into a proper thought.

-WP

[spawnloser]

duplicate post

[spawnloser]

Images?  Under normal circumstances, HELL NO.  I will not explain myself further so as not to reveal things I shouldn't, but I am violently opposed to anyone sending images via the Way.  I will make a player complaint every time someone does this.

Emotion or even sensation to some extent, and describing how the thoughts are coming through?  Okay.

Code Select Expand

> psi *thoughts weak and with a sensation of pain while anger permeates them* Oh, really now?This I can accept.

Code Select Expand

> psi *an image of the fugly, lanktastic man accompanying his thoughts* Get this feck and tear his head off!This I will not.

Of course, since the Way bypasses language barriers, it is not language in and of itself.  It would have to be something that comes from deeper in the brain than the speech centers.  However, doing more than raw communication with it?  Do you really believe that you could accurately describe someone that you'd seen ten minutes ago for a minute total?  Psychology has proven that you will more than likely NOT be able to do so.  Sending accurate sdescs is the equivalent of doing that...only with exact and photographic accuracy.  This is abuse in my mind, no less than just telling someone, "Hey, keep an eye out for that lanky, blond-tussled young man."

[jhunter]

Images?  Under normal circumstances, HELL NO.  I will not explain myself further so as not to reveal things I shouldn't, but I am violently opposed to anyone sending images via the Way.  I will make a player complaint every time someone does this.

Emotion or even sensation to some extent, and describing how the thoughts are coming through?  Okay.

Code Select Expand

> psi *thoughts weak and with a sensation of pain while anger permeates them* Oh, really now?This I can accept.

Code Select Expand

> psi *an image of the fugly, lanktastic man accompanying his thoughts* Get this feck and tear his head off!This I will not.

Of course, since the Way bypasses language barriers, it is not language in and of itself.  It would have to be something that comes from deeper in the brain than the speech centers.  However, doing more than raw communication with it?  Do you really believe that you could accurately describe someone that you'd seen ten minutes ago for a minute total?  Psychology has proven that you will more than likely NOT be able to do so.  Sending accurate sdescs is the equivalent of doing that...only with exact and photographic accuracy.  This is abuse in my mind, no less than just telling someone, "Hey, keep an eye out for that lanky, blond-tussled young man."

Sure, but that's the same as giving someone's desc to others to make sure they go after the right person. I see absolutely nothing at all with:

psi *an image of a skinny human with long brown hair* Some stranger here...don't recognize the guy.

So long as "a skinny human with long brown hair" is not someone's exact sdesc. I think pure imagery with a sense of feeling is as raw as mental communication gets.

[Majikal]

I love feelings and minor sensations through the way, and imagery as long as it doesn't go to far. I don't even mind details such as seeing through someones eyes.. or getting a glimpse of a location, I dislike the use of short descriptions completely though.

-Romantic feelings and sensations via the way (a gentle caress on your mind or something similar)
-Interpretation of the surrounding weather (sand stinging the skin or the feeling of a strong wind)
-Flashes of color to represent emotion (red for anger or similar appropriate colors that are used to describe feeling)
-an echo of surrounding voices in loud places or sounds of the wild (such as tavern commotion if it's busy or the sound of ritikki chirruping)
-Representation of the strength of the connection if I was going unconscious or sick or something similar. (the psychic link fading or flickering or whatever)

I've used all of these at least once throughout my time on arm and thought they all brought alot of good things to the way conversation.
I discussed this with an ooc friend and he gave me an example of something he did, I found this to be awesome imagery and very neat. Some might find it to be a bit to graphic, but as long as it's not spouting out assasin bobs short description I don't find anything wrong with even imagery like this.

the dude sends you a telepathic message: *A vision of laying low in the grass, looking across a verdant valley at a small pack of deadly wild gwoshi*

[Majikal]

Duplified post

[Ardan]

I don't even mind details such as seeing through someones eyes.. or getting a glimpse of a location, I dislike the use of short descriptions completely though.

...

the dude sends you a telepathic message: *A vision of laying low in the grass, looking across a verdant valley at a small pack of deadly wild gwoshi*

I think those really are straying solidly into mindbender territory personally though hopefully we'll get some Imm guidelines soon as to precisely what is and isn't acceptable.

[spawnloser]

the dude sends you a telepathic message: *A vision of laying low in the grass, looking across a verdant valley at a small pack of deadly wild gwoshi*

This should only be possible by psionicists.  Like I said, I'll make a player complaint every time unless the staff actually makes an official announcement saying that this is okay.

[jhunter]

So why are you announcing it? It sounds like you are threatening others who don't see eye to eye with you on this matter and are trying to bully people into doing it your way without the staff having made some prior decision on the matter as to what is acceptable. Seems to me that instead of whining to the staff repeatedly just because -you- disagree with it you should sit back and wait for an answer. Whining repeatedly to them is only going to annoy staff members and piss off those interacting with you should they get wind of someone complaining. (When there hasn't been anything announced officially one way or another on this particular subject.)

Some people believe it is going too far into the realm of psionicists. Unless your are -forcing- someone to think something instead of sending a mental image, I completely disagree. But I will sit and wait for a staff decision one way or another as I can see how it could be a huge grey area for some people who only see The Way as a simple text message that gets around language barriers.

[Melody]

the dude sends you a telepathic message: *A vision of laying low in the grass, looking across a verdant valley at a small pack of deadly wild gwoshi*

This should only be possible by psionicists.  Like I said, I'll make a player complaint every time unless the staff actually makes an official announcement saying that this is okay.

I don't really follow the logic implied here, maybe it's because I'm still so new to the game and its peculiar way of thinking. If people communicate in words without images.... how does, say, a desert elf who doesn't speak sirihish manage to talk with a city merchant who only speaks the sirihish?

Most people, if not everyone, are perfectly capable of holding an image in their minds. I'm not going to go into an in depth explanation of dreams, pictures, and nerve endings. But since Way is simply a transfer, then why not flashes of pictures too? After all, no one said it has to be 100% accurate. Brain interpretate things differently.

It may seem rude to most, but any complaints directed at me for using pictures simply gets ignored. (not that I actually use it) Until an immortal announce somewhere that images are the evil realm of the mindbenders. Or even better, someone comes up with an argument that makes sense to a newbie. ^_^

[spawnloser]

I'm not trying to bully anyone.  I'm just explaining how much I feel that it is abuse...enough to warrant a player complaint every time in order to bring it to staff attention.

Also, don't characterize player complaints as whining simply because you don't agree with the person making the complaint.  Considering that noone making a complaint will be told much other than that their request has been resolved, if I got that message and saw another (even by the same person) send an image through the way, I would make another complaint...UNTIL THE STAFF SAYS IT'S OKAY TO DO SO, as I said earlier.

Still, as I said in my earlier post...I won't explain myself further as I do not want to ruin the mystery for others by revealing things that shouldn't be revealed.  In fact, I'm done arguing with you, as to do so any longer would require me to reveal things to you so that you could understand where I'm coming from.

Seriously, if someone says, "Look, dude, I can't tell you why, but that is code abuse.  If you want to do it, get the staff to say it's okay," why argue with him?  Go ask the staff if it's okay...you've more to lose by doing something bad than by not doing something good, yes?

[jhunter]

I'm just saying that it's whining because:

1) We know they are aware of this and they have commented somewhat on it in this thread.

2) We also know, that so far they have not announced a staff standpoint on this specific subject. We have not been told one way or another about it yet.

Knowing this, if you choose to continue sending complaints every time someone does it until they make an announcement or policy regarding it what are you doing exactly? What purpose does it serve other than to knowingly and intentionally be obnoxious or attempt to bully others who do it (when it has not been said to be wrong by the staff -yet-) into stopping for fear of one player whining about it?

[spawnloser]

Actually, you're wrong...they said they are discussing the general concept of the so-called psi-emote and whether such is (or will be) allowed at all.  They never said they were discussing sending images specifically.

You're also taking what I said too literally.  Reread what I said in my last post.  Whenever something is resolved through the request tool (this includes player complaints), the person making the request is told it is resolved.  If the staff is undecided on something, they will not resolve those particular requests/complaints.  When resolved, either the person will be told to cut it out, or I will be told that the staff position is that it is okay for the person to send images through the Way.

I'm not going to make repeated complaints about one person while previous complaints about that one person for the same thing are yet unresolved.

[Raesanos]

This has been added to help contact.

Some people choose to portray images or their own feelings over a psionic link and this is left to the discretion of the player.  However, forcing emotions, sensations, or thoughts onto the receiver is not acceptable.

[Marauder Moe]

This has been added to help contact.

Some people choose to portray images or their own feelings over a psionic link and this is left to the discretion of the player.  However, forcing emotions, sensations, or thoughts onto the receiver is not acceptable.

What about portraying an image of someone (ie sdesc)?  Any discussion of that?

[Raesanos]

This has been added to help contact.

Some people choose to portray images or their own feelings over a psionic link and this is left to the discretion of the player.  However, forcing emotions, sensations, or thoughts onto the receiver is not acceptable.

What about portraying an image of someone (ie sdesc)?  Any discussion of that?

The helpfile deliberately does not go through all the various specific cases. It says that its up to the discretion of the player except in the exception given.

[LauraMars]

Guess no more player complaints about sending images!  Deep breaths spawnlower, everyone relax.  There's plenty more to bitch about DISCUSS.

So how about that psi emote?

[jhunter]

Sweet. I would've hated to see a strict ruling making them bland and unimaginative. I think it leaves more room for creativity without going too far that way. It's exactly how I have always played it.

[Marauder Moe]

This has been added to help contact.

Some people choose to portray images or their own feelings over a psionic link and this is left to the discretion of the player.  However, forcing emotions, sensations, or thoughts onto the receiver is not acceptable.

What about portraying an image of someone (ie sdesc)?  Any discussion of that?

The helpfile deliberately does not go through all the various specific cases. It says that its up to the discretion of the player except in the exception given.

I'm forced to conclude, then, that you're saying Waying a precise image of someone is acceptable.

>psi *an image of the tall, muscular man*  This is your target.  Two large if I have his head by the end of the month.

[spawnloser]

Yes, I'm with Moe.  Whether my chracter can do it or not relies on two things...whether I think my character can do it, AND whether the staff says it is okay.  By not saying, "Yes, it is okay," or, "No, it is not okay," we are left with a vague notion where it sounds almost like...we the players get to decide policy...and on an individual, changing basis even.  I don't like that.  I just want a simple yes or no response to: "Is it okay to send images through the way?"

[Raesanos]

I'm forced to conclude, then, that you're saying Waying a precise image of someone is acceptable.

Since you'd like me to be explicit about this specific example I will do so.  The unqualified use of the term "images" is intended to mean any images, even of people, even as sdescs.  So yes, your example is allowed.

Though the addition to the helpfile is brief, it does comprehensively state our stance which was thoroughly discussed beforehand.

[Raesanos]

Yes, I'm with Moe.  Whether my chracter can do it or not relies on two things...whether I think my character can do it, AND whether the staff says it is okay.  By not saying, "Yes, it is okay," or, "No, it is not okay," we are left with a vague notion where it sounds almost like...we the players get to decide policy...and on an individual, changing basis even.  I don't like that.  I just want a simple yes or no response to: "Is it okay to send images through the way?"

I thought this was clear, but due to the confusion I'll reword it.

For future reference, the way this works is that if someone says "its up to your discretion" they mean that they allow it.  Its different than just saying "I allow it" because it leaves room for individuals to make decisions on the grey areas.  For the helpfile, I'll leave it implicit that if you are in a situation where you think using an image over the Way is not OK, even though its technically allowed, you'll do what you feel is appropriate.

Some players choose to portray images or their own feelings over
a psionic link and this is allowed.  However, forcing emotions,
sensations, or thoughts onto the receiver is not acceptable.

[Marauder Moe]

How can I decide something to be "not OK" when the staff says it's allowed, though?  If I decide that Waying a person's sdesc is "not OK" by me, how do I respond when someone Ways me an sdesc, or says "Yo dude, just Way me what he looks like and I'll pop a knife in his back"?  Putting something in the docs or helpfiles is saying "this is how the world is".  You can't then say that players can disagree.  It doesn't make sense.

Now, you could say something like "With a certain proffeciency in the Way, many ordinary people are able to transmit images, though some may be capable of this.  A character's ability to do this is left up to the player's discretion." meaning that any character has the potential to do it, but you don't have to roleplay having the ability.

Still, not that I'd quit the game over it or anything, but I think allowing images over the Way opens up a big can of worms with possible unintended side effects.  For instance, Waying sdescs makes it ICly trivial to identify someone you've never met.  Then there's Waying images of places, maps, symbols, writing, and probably things I haven't even thought about yet.  It makes the Way, in effect, far superior than verbal communication when it comes to transfering specific information.

[jhunter]

How can I decide something to be "not OK" when the staff says it's allowed, though?  If I decide that Waying a person's sdesc is "not OK" by me, how do I respond when someone Ways me an sdesc, or says "Yo dude, just Way me what he looks like and I'll pop a knife in his back"?  Putting something in the docs or helpfiles is saying "this is how the world is".  You can't then say that players can disagree.  It doesn't make sense.

Now, you could say something like "With a certain proffeciency in the Way, many ordinary people are able to transmit images, though some may be capable of this.  A character's ability to do this is left up to the player's discretion." meaning that any character has the potential to do it, but you don't have to roleplay having the ability.

Still, not that I'd quit the game over it or anything, but I think allowing images over the Way opens up a big can of worms with possible unintended side effects.  For instance, Waying sdescs makes it ICly trivial to identify someone you've never met.  Then there's Waying images of places, maps, symbols, writing, and probably things I haven't even thought about yet.  It makes the Way, in effect, far superior than verbal communication when it comes to transfering specific information.

There is a slight difference between waying images and waying sdescs. I personally feel that waying an exact sdesc is as cheesy as using an exact sdesc to describe someone verbally in the game. I do not however feel that there is anything wrong with sending an image describing the pc -without- using the exact sdesc.

I'd also like to point out, afaik it has always been allowed. It is now documented for the naysayers. Also, there has been something representing images being sent over the way (by mundanes) codewise for quite some time now. I cannot go into detail but I'm sure many people are aware of it.

[Raesanos]

How can I decide something to be "not OK" when the staff says it's allowed, though?  If I decide that Waying a person's sdesc is "not OK" by me, how do I respond when someone Ways me an sdesc, or says "Yo dude, just Way me what he looks like and I'll pop a knife in his back"?  Putting something in the docs or helpfiles is saying "this is how the world is".  You can't then say that players can disagree.  It doesn't make sense.

You can say: "My character is not good with the way.  I'm using my discretion and won't have them able to send images over the Way, even though I'm allowed to."

You can't say: "This other character is sending images over the way, and I don't approve" because its up to THEIR discretion what they do, not yours.

[Marauder Moe]

I certainly agree that verbally speaking an sdesc is very poor form.  However, if this interpretation of the Way stands, I'd have to say that Waying an sdesc would have to be appropriate.  An sdesc represents a complete image of someone.  Since you can't really contain an unambiguous, complete image of someone in a single sentance, doing so verbally is bad.  However, with telepathic imagry, with level up detail at the player's discretion, you could convey a complete image.

[jhunter]

I certainly agree that verbally speaking an sdesc is very poor form.  However, if this interpretation of the Way stands, I'd have to say that Waying an sdesc would have to be appropriate.  An sdesc represents a complete image of someone.  Since you can't really contain an unambiguous, complete image of someone in a single sentance, doing so verbally is bad.  However, with telepathic imagry, with level up detail at the player's discretion, you could convey a complete image.

For the fun of it, I think my preference would be to way a watered down version of the pc's main desc and leave out the sdesc. That way, it leaves something to interpretation and doesn't make it as simple as: "find the matching sdesc".

That's just the way I'd do it. *shrug*

[Marauder Moe]

How can I decide something to be "not OK" when the staff says it's allowed, though?  If I decide that Waying a person's sdesc is "not OK" by me, how do I respond when someone Ways me an sdesc, or says "Yo dude, just Way me what he looks like and I'll pop a knife in his back"?  Putting something in the docs or helpfiles is saying "this is how the world is".  You can't then say that players can disagree.  It doesn't make sense.

You can say: "My character is not good with the way.  I'm using my discretion and won't have them able to send images over the Way, even though I'm allowed to."

You can't say: "This other character is sending images over the way, and I don't approve" because its up to THEIR discretion what they do, not yours.

So then it is, as I said, not a matter of being not OK by my standards of roleplaying but rather within being the capabilities of my character.  Fair enough, though I suppose I would have worded it "Some players choose to have their characters be able to portray images or their own feelings over a psionic link and this is allowed".  Let players know that it's an optional IC ability, like musical talent, rather than a matter of OOC roleplaying style or standards.

I still think it's a bad idea, though.  *shrug*

[Marauder Moe]

For the fun of it, I think my preference would be to way a watered down version of the pc's main desc and leave out the sdesc. That way, it leaves something to interpretation and doesn't make it as simple as: "find the matching sdesc".

That's just the way I'd do it. *shrug*

What I suppose I mean is that "find the matching sdesc" is about the same as "find the guy in this telepathic photograph", or at least it would be when some characters are able to send telepathic photographs.

[jhunter]

For the fun of it, I think my preference would be to way a watered down version of the pc's main desc and leave out the sdesc. That way, it leaves something to interpretation and doesn't make it as simple as: "find the matching sdesc".

That's just the way I'd do it. *shrug*

What I suppose I mean is that "find the matching sdesc" is about the same as "find the guy in this telepathic photograph", or at least it would be when some characters are able to send telepathic photographs.

Yeah, the difference is though that seeing them from a distance and knowing for certain it is them if you've never seen them before is kinda lame. It seems more realistic if you were to give the main desc or a variation on it. That way, they would have to get close enough first to make sure it's the right person.

[Marauder Moe]

For the fun of it, I think my preference would be to way a watered down version of the pc's main desc and leave out the sdesc. That way, it leaves something to interpretation and doesn't make it as simple as: "find the matching sdesc".

That's just the way I'd do it. *shrug*

What I suppose I mean is that "find the matching sdesc" is about the same as "find the guy in this telepathic photograph", or at least it would be when some characters are able to send telepathic photographs.

Yeah, the difference is though that seeing them from a distance and knowing for certain it is them if you've never seen them before is kinda lame. It seems more realistic if you were to give the main desc or a variation on it. That way, they would have to get close enough first to make sure it's the right person.

Well, that's a slightly different, thought quite valid, issue.  Wouldn't matter that significantly if that fellow a league off is your buddy Amos or your assassination target Joram.  If an assassin identified his target at a distance I'd say the poor play was on him for not verifying the target up close, rather than on his boss Waying him an sdesc, as a Highlord just said that Waying an sdesc is allowed.   :?

[joyofdiscord]

If an assassin identified his target at a distance I'd say the poor play was on him for not verifying the target up close, rather than on his boss Waying him an sdesc, as a Highlord just said that Waying an sdesc is allowed.

Well, if he had the target's exact image beamed directly into his mind , doesn't it stand to reason that he would be able to identify him even from a distance?  Most players already hate to have their characters fail a mission, so why would they bother with extra examination when I can virtually guarantee staff will not reprimand them or consider it bad play for failing to look a little closer?  

I mean, this is a mud where experienced, respected players can already say "Hey, there's this elf we're after, he's lanky, with wild hair." to a half-giant militiaman who then proceeds to insta-subdue the lanky, wild-haired elf as soon as he steps into the room.  Yes, I witnessed this exact situation go down, with a different sdesc (Before anyone starts making assumptions: an sdesc which was completely in-line with the elf's mdesc, but most certainly not representing features that are ICly sufficient to pick any one elf out of a crowd).  I wished up immediately, and I think I made a complaint, too, but I never received any response or indication whether it was acceptable behavior or not.  These days, I start to fear that it is, that we are just using longer sentences and an advanced emote system to disguise the fact that we mostly behave just like players on PK Muds, where there is never any mistaken identity, and the fastest typer usually wins.

I'm beginning to wish I never brought up the aforementioned incident with waying sdescs, because now people have it in their heads, some have decided it's good play, and the staff has left it up to their discretion, which means every lazy PC with a grudge against some character or another will have an obscenely easy time creating problems for that char.    

Luckily I'm not currently in a role that involves hunting down people identified by others.  If and when I am again, if I end up having to contend with "*an image of the foo-eyed man appearing before you*" on anything even approaching a regular basis, that char is getting retired.  For me, that kind of play just isn't worth my time.

I could be making too big a deal of this, though.  It's possible that day-to-day play will remain about the same as before, with each player favoring the styles they always have.  But given that borderline sdesc abuse is already, if not THE single most popular method of identification in game (even on the upper half of the karma ladder), at least[/i] a close runner-up, I find it hard to imagine players not taking advantage of this ability which would greatly simplify the process.

So, I guess I'll just take this opportunity to voice my very strong reservations about this policy for anyone who might deign to consider them, while remaining fully aware that I don't make the rules around here.

[mansa]

i like this.  it allows us to consider what real mind-to-mind conversations is all about.

[joyofdiscord]

You know, mansa, I agree. I should be more positive because I really love 99% of the implications of this, especially chances to do/receive things like this example given earlier in the thread:

the dude sends you a telepathic message: *A vision of laying low in the grass, looking across a verdant valley at a small pack of deadly wild gwoshi*

I think that's just unspeakably cool, and I would hate to have that possibility limited or removed.  I just find one potential use of this to be so lush with abuse potential that I can't help but say something.

[Marauder Moe]

Well, I'm not against it just for abuse reasons.  I think the societal, setting, and playability implications for Way-imaging are much greater than people realize.  As it was, the Way's only advantages over speech were distance and privacy.  Face to face, people prefer talking.  You get the advantage of conveying meaning through gestures, facial expression, and inflection.  

Now, however, I think the staff have opened the door to having the Way, for some who choose to roleplay such profeciency, to be far superior.  Facial expressions and inflection aren't needed when you can just let your exact feeling travel over the way.  Gestures aren't needed if you can just send an image to explain your point.  The only remaining downsides to the Way is that you can only talk to one person at a time and that once you get past the newbie stages at least, it gives you a minor headache.

With the Way being so much clearer than talking, why would two people sitting together and conversing use speech?  Why would an aide deliver a verbal report to his lord?  Why would anyone even bother trying to verbally describe someone?

Don't throw that "you can choose not to be able to do these things" argument at me again, either.  These abilities are significant, and those who choose to RP lacking them may eventually find their characters at a severe disadvantage compared to those who do.  As above, why would Amos's mate stay with him as opposed to someone who's good at having intimate Way-sex?  Why would Lord Fancypants hire an aide who can't send his thoughts clearly?  Why would Guilder Joram get promoted to boss  if he can't describe a contract target to his men?

Then, as I said before, there's other things.  Places, maps, symbols, writing...  One could theoretically learn to read and write without ever sketching a singly letter.  I'm sure there is even more, but I think I've said enough this post.

EDIT: In summary, this will change the world of Zalanthas.

-Marauder Moe, thinking he should play his Way deaf/mute idea as his next character

[Angela Christine]

Why talk?  Because you suffer from the way.  For some kinds of information way imagery may be more effecient, but for others it isn't.  An image isn't a movie and the length limit on each psi enforces that.

"I met with our informant, Rinthi Mcguiness, and gave him 300 sid.  He claims that Lady Borsail has been having secret meetings with an elven thief known only as "Silty".  The word is that she is going to have him steal some book from the Sath library, but first she has to teach him how to recognise the specific book so he doesn't lift the wrong one -- not how to read, but damned close!   However, other sources say that the whole book thing is just a cover story, to hide the fact that she is having a sexual liaison with the elf!  I honestly don't know which would be more scandalous.  Anyway, that's why I had to pay our guy so much, he's going to feel out some of his other contacts, and see if he can find out the truth -- and get some proof.  If we had that kind of dirt on her, she'd have to see things our way, eh?  But after this job we may have to get rid of Rinthi Mcguiness, he knows too much."

Sending that message over the Way wouldn't add much concrete information.  To do it as pictures might be harder than doing it as words, since forming images of a Lady teaching an elf to read would be more complex than just saying it.  The Way could convey some of your emotional content, like when you think about the scandal you might feel outraged or gleeful.

Some information could be conveyed most efficiently as images, but other information would be better as words.   That is why they have kids do written work in school, and not just draw pictures.  Having the ability to do both is nifty.

[Naiona]

As above, why would Amos's mate stay with him as opposed to someone who's good at having intimate Way-sex?  

Just a note, the new guidelines aren't changing anything - they are simply clarifying policy that already existed.  It is still completely possible for someone who uses the way in intricate ways to be accused of mindbending and any consequences that might imply.  Projecting a simple image is one thing, appearing to be someone who is better with their thoughts then their spoken words is entirely another. If you seem to others to be a 'master' of the Way, you may have some 'splaining to do, Lucy. In other words - we aren't telling you how to roleplay - but we also aren't going to interfere with the consequences of that roleplay.  We are simply saying that you aren't OOCly breaking any rules.

Also, in regards to the quote above - emoting actions over the Way was not included as 'okay' in the guidelines listed.  Again, do what you want at your own discretion/peril.

[Marauder Moe]

Sending that message over the Way wouldn't add much concrete information. To do it as pictures might be harder than doing it as words, since forming images of a Lady teaching an elf to read would be more complex than just saying it.

Except you can just say it over the Way too.  It gives you the option to convey the meaning as easily as possible, through feeling, word, or image, or all three at once.
>psi *a feeling of disgust and an image of a well-dressed woman holding a book open to an elf* Can you believe a noble would do such a thing?

Just a note, the new guidelines aren't changing anything - they are simply clarifying policy that already existed. It is still completely possible for someone who uses the way in intricate ways to be accused of mindbending and any consequences that might imply. Projecting a simple image is one thing, appearing to be someone who is better with their thoughts then their spoken words is entirely another. If you seem to others to be a 'master' of the Way, you may have some 'splaining to do, Lucy.

So we're supposed to accuse people who send too many images over the Way of being mindbenders?  The consequences of such an accusation can be pretty serious: namely death.  Shouldn't the help files, something meant to help new players, warn about that?  Make it clear that Way-imaging may not be socially acceptable?

In other words - we aren't telling you how to roleplay - but we also aren't going to interfere with the consequences of that roleplay. We are simply saying that you aren't OOCly breaking any rules.

No, you don't need to tell us how to roleplay (though you do, ie elves riding kanks), but you should tell us how the world is.  Conflicting views of the reality of Zalanthas can't really be resolved.

You've said what is OOCly acceptable in terms of the Way.  I think, then, you need to say what is ICly acceptable in terms of the Way.  What does the average Zalanthan mother tell her children about mindbenders?  Are accusations of such commonplace?  How does the templarate/militia/local authority deal with these accusations?  Do people generally hold back their own psionic potential out of social fear?

[Nusku]

Actually, there are a lot of things that we don't spell out in the documentation. For example, we don't tell people that walking around the cities wielding weapons is threatening behavior. If you didn't already realize that, someone is likely to point it out to you in game. We don't tell people that if they make a human and give it a pointy-ear mutation, that they'll be treated like a half-breed. We don't tell people not to emote wisps of smoke curling from any wood surfaces that they touch, or warn them that if they do, they're likely to be treated like a magicker.

Speaking for myself, I'm not interested in slapping safety labels on everything in the game. It ruins some of the mystery and paranoia. There are plenty of things that could kill you, socially or physically, in the game that we don't document. This is perhaps especially true of the Way. We've left a LOT of things about the Way nebulous on purpose to the playerbase. This isn't a mistake or oversight, it is a conscious design decision.

So when Naiona says that you can react to things in a certain way, what she is specifically not saying is that ICly, this is how you should see it. All she really said is that a certain range of responses is legitimate. It is entirely up to you to pick one that fits your situation, character, and environment.

[Raesanos]

So we're supposed to accuse people who send too many images over the Way of being mindbenders?

Naiona definitely did not say you're "supposed to accuse people who send too many images over the Way of being mindbenders."  She said this might happen.  You are coming to conclusions that are a bit far from what was actually said.

[Marauder Moe]

Sorry.  I still disagree.

This will cause change.  In the past, general player belief seemed to be that Waying images wasn't quite proper.  In my years playing, I think I've only had two pictures sent to me.

Now, though, you've said that it's completely (OOCly) acceptable.  Because of that, people are going to start Waying pictures to eachother casually.  That's a change.  That's different.  Where before it was rare, now it will be common.  If change is not your intent, you need to define a counterbalance to dissuade people from being so casual about it.  Social unacceptability, difficulty, or whatever.  

Giving a range of acceptable responses without weighing them isn't good enough, in my opinion.  People will tend to pick the value of that range that's easiest or best.  Accusing your best friend of mindbendery because he sent you an image of a nice painting he's looking at is neither.  If people choose not to accuse, then (gradually at least) Way imagry will become commonplace and the game world could change in ways detailed in my previous posts.

[Nusku]

Sorry.  I still disagree.

Sorry. You're still wrong.

You're operating on mistaken assumptions with insufficient data. There's no other way to say it.

In the past, general player belief seemed to be that Waying images wasn't quite proper.

Player consensus on undocumented topics has a frequent habit of being incorrect, based on mistaken assumptions with insufficient data. These bad assumptions have an equally bad habit of getting communicated by various OOC means by people speaking with great authority on subjects about which they know nothing. That has a way of contributing to and furthering such problems. You should never be relying on "player belief." Questions such as whether or not Waying images is appropriate should be directed to the immortals, not your fellow players.

[spawnloser]

Nusku, not to be contrary, but how can he be wrong about his own opinion?  How can you know that he's wrong about his own opinion?  How can you know that he's wrong about the trend he fears may happen?

Without giving us some guidance on what level of sending imagery the common populace would accept without accusing, or what would be a normal level of proficiency at doing so, while suggesting that there is a point at which someone could be accused of mindbending, how are we supposed to make a call on when to accuse people ourselves?

Okay, my character's level of proficiency is up to me.  But I don't get to choose when I'm accused of mindbending or not...and I may have thought that something was completely acceptable, then have someone played by someone else that thought it was too much basically get my character in all sorts of trouble.

[Sanvean]

Now, though, you've said that it's completely (OOCly) acceptable. Because of that, people are going to start Waying pictures to eachother casually. That's a change. That's different. Where before it was rare, now it will be common. If change is not your intent, you need to define a counterbalance to dissuade people from being so casual about it. Social unacceptability, difficulty, or whatever.

The question came up on the staff board because some staff were advocating censuring players for psi emotes and images.  This is not something I feel devoting a lot of staff time to policing is worthwhile, and there is a long tradition over the 15 years I have played of people conveying images and emotions over the Way.  This is an area where players and staff need to use common sense.  If you are psi-ing to someone that they feel an overwhelming sense of doom and want to fleee, that is over the top, and I would think it justified for them to accuse you of mindbending, or for a passing Lirathuan to smack you around on suspicion of the same.

Unfortunately, yes, discussing things helps standardize the way people do things.  It also prevents things like people getting censured for one thing by a staff member and then its opposite by another.  To my way of thinking, the latter outwieghs the former.

Giving a range of acceptable responses without weighing them isn't good enough, in my opinion. People will tend to pick the value of that range that's easiest or best.

Use common sense.  People engage in different flavors of roleplay.  that is one of the strengths of the game.  Some use words, some add a touch of emotion, some speak only in colors or images.  There is no single way that is right, just as in RL, people have different ways of thinking.

[Marauder Moe]

Sorry.  I still disagree.

Sorry. You're still wrong.

I hope it's just the lack of inflection inherent in text-only communication, but that seemed a little harsh.  If I've come across as rude or uncivil, please let me know and I'll try and adjust.  It's certainly not my intent to speak so.  I just like a good debate (though I'm quite honest about my beliefs on this issue).

You're operating on mistaken assumptions with insufficient data. There's no other way to say it.

That's what I've been saying.  I don't think you've given enough data, and I believe that the more natural conclusions resulting from this ambiguity could be harmful.  If you want me to assume differently, give me more data.

Player consensus on undocumented topics has a frequent habit of being incorrect, based on mistaken assumptions with insufficient data. These bad assumptions have an equally bad habit of getting communicated by various OOC means by people speaking with great authority on subjects about which they know nothing. That has a way of contributing to and furthering such problems. You should never be relying on "player belief."

Player belief is similar to player behavior, though.  Estimated from my observations: 99% of the time, PCs Way other PCs.  99.99% of those messages (PC to PC or otherwise) didn't contain pictures.  How do you seriously expect me, or anyone else, to know what's ICly appropriate with the Way?  We can't see how the vNPCs do it.  Are you giving some players access to staff-only docs and letting them spread it to the rest of the PCs by example?  Are you setting examples yourselves when you animate NPCs?  What, besides player belief and player behavior, could I possibly rely on to make a judgement about what's appropriate with the Way?

Questions such as whether or not Waying images is appropriate should be directed to the immortals, not your fellow players.

I asked today and didn't feel I got very good answers.  Maybe I'm asking the wrong questions?

I understand that I have two issues with this topic.  Firstly, I think that allowing people to send images over the Way is a bad idea.  I think I stated that clearly enough, though, so I can now only accept the staff ruling on it.

Second, given that the Way-imagry policy will stand, how then is it supposed to be roleplayed?  As I said, in the past it usually wasn't roleplayed at all.  There aren't any docs that give good advice about it either.

[Marauder Moe]

Sanvean,

I understand and appreciate the staff's motives.  I'm certainly not saying that you do start rigidly censuring players.

I would think that adding command emotes to psi would be better than taking a completely hands-off approach would be a better compromise, though.  Something like ">psi (with a sense of dread) Help me!"  You then need only make it clear in helps and docs that the command emotes are for emotions only or emotions and maybe vague images and the rest of the message should be speech, just like the say, tell, talk, etc.

As it was, people apparantly had to make up their own syntax for seperating telepathic speech from emotions/images.  I tended to believe that you shouldn't really be doing that, just as you shouldn't be doing it in say's.  Heck, the helpfile says "psi <message>" rather than "psi <*emotion or image* message>".  I never saw the harm in doing so with simple emotions, though, so I did it as well.  I feel images, however, are a vastly different matter (ala the psi sdesc issue).

Common sense just doesn't work for me.  How are we supposed to have common sense about fantasy telepathy?

[Raesanos]

Common sense just doesn't work for me.  How are we supposed to have common sense about fantasy telepathy?

Common sense is defined as sound judgment not based on specialized knowledge[1].  It implies that even without a "specialized knowledge" of how fantasy telepathy works you can still come up with good judgements about it.

It looks like you feel that this "specialized knowledge" is required to make any decisions regarding fantasy telepathy--that common sense is not sufficient.  We disagree.  It looks like this is the fundamental disagreement here, but I think discussing the value of common sense would be fruitless, heh.

[1] thefreedictionary.com

[Marauder Moe]

Hmm, dictionary fencing?  Well then, if I may riposte, if "common sense" is judgement not based off specific knowledge, then it must be based off of general knowledge - knowledge that is available to anyone*.  What knowledge about the nature of Zalanthan telepathy is available to (implied: the Arm playerbase) anyone?  The docs?  The past behaviors of the playerbase?  Scifi/fantasy books, movies, and TV shows?

I did make a common sense judgement and was then told differently.


*also courtesy of thefreedictionary.com

[Raesanos]

I'm starting to feel like we're going in circles, but yes, you can use common sense to make decisions about psionics even though general knowledge doesn't include details about it.

[Marauder Moe]

We're going in circles because my questions aren't being answered.  

I ask what knowledge is available to anyone.  You answer yes.  Questions starting with "what" aren't supposed to be answered with "yes".

I ask how I'm supposed to know if I should accuse someone of mindbending, or how I should know if an action is likely to get me accused of mindbending.  I'm told "common sense".

I ask if you've carefully considered the game-world implications of imaging over the Way.  I'm not sure I got any answer on that one.


Anyway, my workday is over.  It's been a pleasure debating.  It's not often you staff will openly engage in such.  I look forward to round 2, if there is one.

[Raesanos]

I personally think I've said all that I have to say on the subject.  I'm sorry you don't feel all your questions were answered but I'm glad that you enjoyed getting some direct feedback.  I will, in closing, answer the question about if this has all been carefully considered by staff before being made policy.  The answer is most assuredly yes.

[Marauder Moe]

And 3... 2... 1...

It's not a feeling, Raesanos, you simply didn't answer my last question.  It's your perogative to not answer, of course, but I don't see what's so unreasonable about it.

I searched through the documents and helpfiles and have found exactly three that relate to psionic communication: 'help psionics', 'help contact' and 'help mindbender'.  Not a single one give any hint of how common certain profeciencies with normal psionics are.  Not one addresses how common (false or otherwise) accusations of mindbending are in the world.

I ask again: what general knowledge, available to all players, with which we can make "common sense" decisions about psionic communication, is there?

[Marauder Moe]

So that's it?  Nothing?

Too secret to talk about, or so obvious that one must be a raving idiot to miss it?

Presumeably, the immortals all know what mindbenders can do; exact knowledge where their powers begin and normal psionics end.  Isn't it at least a little bit possible that immortal common sense differs at least slightly from player common sense?  Also, if common sense is supposed to be at such a basic level of understanding, such a discrepency might even be hard to be aware of.

I'm not going to be partaking in any of this Way-imagry.  I have absolutely no idea at what point I should be afraid that my character is doing too much and may be in danger of being accused of psionicism.  With the lack of public guidance, that point is likely to even be different for each player.

On top of that, I don't feel comfortable playing my character accusing another either.  If it gets to that point, it's very possible that the conflict is simply a result of differing OOC sensabilities about Way usage (resulting, of course, from the lack of documentation or guidance about it).


I'm disappointed.  I suppose I'll just have to get over it, though, and hope I never get caught in such a situation.

[mansa]

Moe:

You -CAN- do this:

psi (with a feeling of pain so intense that can be felt through this psionic connection) I'm Dying!  Oh krath please!

You -CAN- do this:

psi (An image of the Tall, Muscular Man) This is your Target

-

Remember, there is latent psionic abilities in people.  Anything goes.  When someone accues you of being a psionicists, you can always accuse them of reading your mind.

You can say that you and your mate have such a closeness that you two feel the same things at the same times when connected psionically.

You can transmit whatever you want to.  The line of 'psionic common sense' is when you force the receiving player to do things, be that thinks, feelings, or actions.

[Marauder Moe]

Yes, I know I can do those things.  The OOC line is drawn at forcing things on people in Way messages.  From what the staff seems to have said, however, the IC line where your average Amos is likely to run looking for a templar screaming "Mindbender!" is not the same line.  (If I'm mistaken and it is, though, someone please say so!)

[mansa]

Well, here's the thing Moe.  The IC line is whatever you can get away with.

If your character is influencial, they can spread lies about anybody doing anything.  The only person who knows where the mindbender situation is relies on you and the person you're contacting.

If you send someone an image of your father dying and a gortok eating him, and that person goes to the templars and says you're a mindbender - it is exact same thing as if you send someone these lines ' my father died from a gortok '.

You're talking about IC consenquences for using a coded way of displaying information.  The thing is that characters do not all act the same and believe the same.  The IC line is -whatever- your character wants it to be, and -whatever- your character decides to push it as far as they want to push it.  It also depends on the social levels that your character lives in.  If he's a 'rinther telling a templar that a noble is a psionicists, then the templar isn't going to believe the 'rinther, no matter what.

[Eternal]

If he's a 'rinther telling a templar that a noble is a psionicists, then the templar isn't going to believe the 'rinther, no matter what.

I would, that'd be killer leverage.  "Why yes, Lord Amos, I do have it from a good source that you are... psionically inclined."

And now, on topic:
The Staff has stated that sending images is okay, even in the examples given above (the exact sdesc or a general emotional feeling.  I take that to mean that you shouldn't go screaming 'Mindbender!' unless their communication goes beyond those types of things.  If they make you think, feel, or do something, they're a mindbender.  Everything else seems to be fair usage.

I would assume that everyone can tell the difference between a Wayed vision and a normal one, and that even a half-giant would be unlikely to be fooled into believing it is not mental... as that puts too much power into the hands of the psi'er.  I'm not embracing the usage of images, myself, but it has now been stated that it's okay to do so.

Lord Templar Hard Nose sends:
"(The image of a winged serpent winding around a blue goblet)  I wouldn't drink that, if I were you."

[Doppelganger]

Well, here's the thing Moe.  The IC line is whatever you can get away with.

Assuming I got him right, Moe is not talking about IC consequences alone. He is asking what is physical norm is and what exception is, and you too are narrowing his question to what he can get away from Templar with.

Example. Everyone can fart in tavern, it's a norm. Yet chosen someone can fart and, with enough of of hard-coded or immortal support, everyone in tavern will burst in flames. So, knowing or suspecting that Zalanthans fart the same people on Earth do, with a help of Earthen common sense we draw a line between being a norm and being a powerful Krathi. The fact that miracle survivor of tavern disaster must rely upon his discretion when considering to report described incident to Templar has nothing to do with that line.

Basically, Moe asks, with regard to mindbending: what kinds of mental abilities are considered a norm, what would be considered poweremote? What mundane character is physically capable of doing and what he isn't? And you keep on telling him that everyone has latent ability to fart, so everyone can emote burning tavern all they want.

[joyofdiscord]

The Staff has stated that sending images is okay, even in the examples given above (the exact sdesc or a general emotional feeling.  I take that to mean that you shouldn't go screaming 'Mindbender!' unless their communication goes beyond those types of things.  If they make you think, feel, or do something, they're a mindbender.  Everything else seems to be fair usage.

Not exactly: they've said it's all right from an OOC perspective.  Forcing feelings and whatnot would seem to be beyond the OOC line of acceptability.

If you seem to others to be a 'master' of the Way, you may have some 'splaining to do, Lucy. In other words - we aren't telling you how to roleplay - but we also aren't going to interfere with the consequences of that roleplay. We are simply saying that you aren't OOCly breaking any rules.

There is a big difference being made here between OOCly OK and ICly OK, and now that I understand that, I see that the policy isn't as problematic as I'd initially thought.

[manonfire]

Within the boundaries of common sense, do what you want. Good luck, have fun.

/thread

[Eternal]

Not exactly: they've said it's all right from an OOC perspective.  Forcing feelings and whatnot would seem to be beyond the OOC line of acceptability.

Umm... right...

If they make you think, feel, or do something, they're a mindbender.

If they make you feel something, they're a mindbender.  If they send you their general emotional feelings, it's okay.

[Marauder Moe]

Within the boundaries of common sense, do what you want. Good luck, have fun.

/thread

If you would bother to read what was posted, you'd know that there's almost nothing to go from as far as "common sense" is concerned.  Feel free to prove me wrong by citing some knowledge resources, though.

[Vesperas]

Maaan, this topic sure has gotten hot since I last looked at it.

I do hope I won't be overstepping my boundries with this next statement, but I think someone needs to say it, even if its a lowly newish player.

Folks, players and immortals alike... this started out as an unheated dicussion, but within in the span of six pages, all I've seen is unyielding disagreement and "dictionary-fencing."  We're not talking about brain surgery here, so there's absolutely no need to nit-pick over language that you see every single day of your life.  It's also sort of unnessessary to (perhaps inadvertantly) try to antagonize other posters (including imms), because I kind of don't want to see this topic locked.  It's one of those wonderful "hey, look, this is unclear" threads, and I like it.

It's apparent that there will -not- be any concrete documentation published concerning the differences between the common man's telepathy and the intricate powers of a psionic mastermind.  This is one of those areas where we are just going to have to be mindful of one another and make judgements about what your character would be able to do.  I'll have my way (which I described on the first page), and you'll have yours.

Here are some things that -I- plan to keep in mind in the future for all my waying:


1.)  Don't abuse sdescs.

If you choose to flash imagery of people to others, be mindful of the players you are with.  Sending someone the image of 'the blue-eyed, brown-haired man' is about the same as describing them as such by word.  OOCly, it's just a poor cop-out, and if you have seen this person well enough to send a telepathic carbon-copy of them, you ought to be able to make the image more complete than that.

2.)  Just because someone Ways different than you...

It's obvious we're all going to have a different idea about the Way now (as before).  Well, if someone Way's different than you, just respect it.  If they Way you what you would consider top seekrit info by sending you a detailed image of an object, place, or person, you the player can choose how you interpret it.  I myself will probably choose to treat it like in my "unrecallable dream" example -- recieve the images, but not be able to keep a firm grasp on them.  You know how your character's brain works.

Now, of course, there may be some instances where you may feel that sending player feedback may be prudent.  Just use your best judgement, and don't get all uber-pissy if you happen to be the person who recieved such player feedback.

3.) Keep in mind there is a difference between the common man and a psionic.

The common man can recieve and, probably with some strained effort, transmit images that they know.  The psionic is much, much more dangerous -- he can actually see what you see without you knowing!  Or can he?  Maybe he can interfere with your psionic connection with other people... and ALTER the images you send to one another?  What if that person you are psionically connected with isn't who you think it is at all?  

You can use your own character's level of personal paranoia to decide just what is "too far" in a Way message.  



DISCLAIMER:  Just because I use the word 'you', it does not mean I am trying to pose as some sort of authority.  These are rules I plan to use; you can use them, or you can ignore them and ridicule them and print them out and eat them.  They are inconclusive, do not factor in all possible scenarios, and do not take into account the mental accuity of every single person who plays Armageddon -- in short, they are just suggestive ideas.

[joyofdiscord]

Eternal, what I am trying to point out is that there is a zone here that is acceptable OOC but which may (or may not) cause you problems IC.  Forcing feelings is beyond the OOC line completely, in the same way that emoting flames from your eyes when not possessed of the necessary magic powers to do so is.

And now, on topic:
The Staff has stated that sending images is okay, even in the examples given above (the exact sdesc or a general emotional feeling. I take that to mean that you shouldn't go screaming 'Mindbender!' unless their communication goes beyond those types of things. If they make you think, feel, or do something, they're a mindbender. Everything else seems to be fair usage.

My point is that some images, for example, might be so spectacular as to cause IC consequences, up to and including screaming mindbender, which are not a transgression of the OOC prohibition:

*accompanied by a crystal clear vision of a tranquil oasis lined with cyprani trees with the mounting roar of an approaching sandstorm on the horizon, the trees beginning to sway in the rising winds*

There are lot of ways to ICly respond to that.  One is to allow your character to perceive it and not worry about it (although I think it should seem a bit out of the ordinary at the very least).  Another is like Vesperas says, to not even allow your character to fully process it.  Another is to start getting very worried about mindworms, maybe one interfering with you or him/her or both, or thinking the sender is a mindworm.  None of these examples is an example of bad play on the part of the receiver, nor is the original action of the sender.  It's just very in character Zalanthan interaction.

[manonfire]

...you'd know that there's almost nothing to go from as far as "common sense" is concerned. Feel free to prove me wrong by citing some knowledge resources, though.

I'm starting to feel like we're going in circles, but yes, you can use common sense to make decisions about psionics even though general knowledge doesn't include details about it.

That's pure opinion, Moe. You don't speak for me. Once the staff posted their views on the matter, the rest of the thread turned into a verbal circle-jerk.

[Marauder Moe]

Opinion?  So there's plenty of docs or whatnot about how far people can go with Way-imagry without having too worry about being called a mindbender, and I don't see it because it's my opinion that it doesn't exist?

I'm not being difficult just for fun.  This new addendum to the help files has created a significant (in my opinion :roll:) grey spot in my knowledge of the world of Zalanthas.  I'm asking what I'm supposed to fill it with, and people keep insisting on answering "common sense", but refusing to define what that is in a satisfactory (in my opinion :roll:) way.

If you don't like the way this thread has gone, stop reading.  I'm not done trying to figure things out and get answers from it, though.

[jhunter]

The issue is, from my take on it Moe, that you want someone to fill in all the grey area for you. What I believe they are trying to say, is that is up to you to decide within the boundaries they have recently placed into the documentation. The reactions to what you choose to allow your pc to do, within those limitations, are up to the others you are interacting with to decide.
There is no right or wrong -within- those boundaries, it is up to you to decide what is proper for your pc and it is up to others that pc is interacting with to decide what is a proper reaction for them. This may or may not result in some sort of consequences, much like any other choice you've made rp-wise for your pc.
It's sort of a similar idea to there being some boundaries in place as to what you should expect from acting a certain way toward a templar or noble. There is alot of grey area in the middle which may or may not result in consequences (in varying degrees) for your pc, dependant upon both your choices for your pc and the choices of the nobles or templars that said pc is interacting with.

Example: The documentation doesn't specifically say that farting in the presence of an Allanaki noble is improper.

Situation A: Your pc is the type to do this and does so, resulting in no reaction from a nearby Allanaki noble.

Situation B: Your pc is the type to do this and does so, resulting in the noble's senses becoming offended and the noble asking a soldier to escort you to the dungeons where shortly afterward a templar at the request of the noble has your pc banished from the city.

Now, let's take this and relate it more directly to the documentation of The Way.

Example: The documentation regarding contact states that the use of images or emotions is acceptable roleplay but forcing feelings etc on another is not.

Situation A: Your pc uses images in their use of the way because you have decided that they are decently skilled enough at it to do so. The person they contact doesn't feel there is anything wrong with it and nothing out of the ordinary happens.
Situation B: Your pc uses images in their use of the way because you have decided that they are decently skilled enough at it to do so. The person they contact is paranoid and hasn't encountered much of this and decides that you must be a mindbender and reports you to the authorities.
In which case: 1) The authorities listen and do something to you about it. (dependant upon the authority figure involved and their personality/knowledge of such.
or 2) The authorities do not listen to them, for whatever reason the characters have.

Or any one of many many other possibilites.

What you seem to be asking for is an answer that will give you 100% knowledge in the consequences of your decisions regarding your choices within the grey area. What fun is there in that?

I don't know if that helps any but I figured I'd try.

[James de Monet]

Perhaps an appropriate comparison would be to the documentation on riding.  The docs don't (to my knowledge) give anywhere the Zalanthan norms for skill in riding.  They mention combat vs. non-combat, yes, but they don't refer to specific mounted skills.  Can your character ride bareback?  Sidesaddle?  Standing?  Do they have enough skill to smoke while riding?  Drink?  Take a nap?  The documentation does not specify, though you have the power to emote (or even codedly perform some of) these actions.  Does that mean you can?  OOCly, yes.  ICly?  If you suddenly decided that your character could ride standing while juggling balls of fire and playing the flute, you could emote that.  Might people think you were a magicker?  Yes, they very well might, and you might face IC consequences for it.  The docs didn't say you couldn't.  It's left up to your common sense.  Now, before you say that people have much more common sense regarding horses than they do telepathy, I want to ask, do they?  Really?  How many people in the Arm community have enough experience with horses to know precisely how difficult these activities would be?  Or, is the case not much more likely that the experiences people have with horses more prevalently derived from second hand or third hand experience?  Even movies, perhaps?  There's telepathy in movies.  Common sense regarding telepathy and common sense regarding riding could easily be equal for many players.

    Now, granted, this topic does not have, perhaps, as much potential impact on the game world.  I certainly don't want to see everyone riding around emoting about how they are stringing bows and combing their hair in a mirror while they are riding, but it's not likely to seriously disrupt the atmosphere.  But the point is, I don't see anyone petitioning the staff for more documentation about riding so that they know what their characters are capable of, so they know what won't get them in trouble, or so they know how to react to other riders.  If you feel yourself capable of making this distinction, my suggestion would be to take that same skillset, that same sensibility, and apply it to the Way.  The staff is trusting you.  Don't make them wrong.  And most importantly, have fun with it.

[Marauder Moe]

The problem with both of those examples is that common sense (or my common sense) clearly applies.

I know from real-life common sense that farting is unpleasant for those around me.  I know from the game documentation that nobles have a lot of power and are often corrupt in their application of it.  It's not a very big leap to deduce that farting arount a noble is a bad thing.

As for the second one, I'm pretty sure the docs DO state somewhere that you shouldn't emote magickal effects unless you're a magicker.  I suppose that was just an exaggerated example of emoting extreme skill at riding, though.  Anyway, I'm quite comfortable saying that people have more common sense regarding horses than they do telepathy.  I don't have to have experience riding a horse to know they exist.  I've seen enough instances of people riding horses to know within a reasonable bounds what types of concurrent activities are possible.

For the telepathy in movies, well, 95% of the time it seems to be verbal-only.  In addition, only about 10% of the time is it, or a certain proffeciency with it, illegal.  As I've stated before, my common sense regarding the Way has already been invalidated.


My feeling on this whole thing is that it's essentially as though the staff said "It's OOCly ok for elves to ride kanks, but there may be IC consequences if you do so" and with no other documents detailing the elven aversion for mounts.  Now sure, I might be able to figure out that elven pride might make an elf reluctant to ride, but how can I be reasonably confident that most other players will as well?  If all my elven friends mount up to go hunting, how do I justify time after time going on foot or staying behind?  Eventually, either OOCly or ICly, I'd probably get tired and just join with the crowd and then all elves are riding kanks.

[Doppelganger]

As was pointed out not all aspects of the game world are fully covered in documentation, some things you learn to accept with experience. My very personal common sense dictates to me that until recently sending images directly to someone mind was reserved to some rare and dangerous freaks. In no way my past characters could have thought that sending images could be trained via sending messages, same way as my common sense prevents me from thinking that you can train your strength to the point where you can pick up and carry mekilot on your shoulders or grow your skin tough enough to be invulnerable to normal weapons or to train yourself in fireballing by uttering nonsense and snapping your fingers.

In fact I can think of at least two instances, where harmless image popping in one's mind was treated as ultimate sign of mindbending.
Scene 1. Tavern, some idlers at the table, a pair flirting at the bar and I am lazily checking their pockets. Suddenly someone adds a detail to my vision of tavern, nothing as bizarre as fire breathing dragon or two Templars kanking on the table, just an ordinary image of the simple object that wasn't there before, which disappeared with the blink of the eye. Was there a doubt; was there discussion if we all have seen the same thing? No, the sole fact that foreign image has appeared in our minds instantly forced everyone to backpedal and flee in terror, then to rally around nearest Templar for the city-wide mindbender hunt.

Scene 2. Someone, tired of my lies, tells me, "Behold, I'll show you something". And she sure does. It was not image itself that forced me to give up and to speak truth; it was her ability to stuff that alien image into my mind. And she did her demonstration on purpose; we both knew that no normal man can do that, no matter how hard they spam 'contact' and 'psi'.

Were we right or wrong in our reactions and expectations? Now, I don't know, I just show the way my 'common sense' about mental abilities been working before the change. Now I am told to change my common sense and to stretch my imagination. Fine, I say, to what limit do I have to do it? I am thankful for insights like 'we don't know', 'we don't care' and 'figure something on your own', but they don't sound satisfactory to me. I am ready to play by any rules, so long as they are set.