The Infamous, Do-it-Yourself PSI Emote!

[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?