The power emote

[Janna]

Based of a partial discussion in this thread http://www.zalanthas.org/gdb/index.php/topic,28215.225.html and various other gripes I've seen on other threads here and there, I'm curious to see how split the PB is on 'Power emotes'.

Example:

A sergeant of the Militia/Sun legions hears a criminal is in a tavern and proceeds to said tavern with two or three underlings. Upon arrival, the Sergeant 'power emotes' blocking off one exit while underling 1 and 2 block whatever other exits there are. The criminal, who spots trouble, pops up and proceeds to 'power emote' running at Sergeant brick-wall to break through and into safety.

Who's in the wrong?

Example two:

If you didn't use the power emote in the same scene, and just walked in and typed 'guard n' along with underling one typing 'guard w' and number three typing 'guard s' and the criminal pops up and types 'run' and 'n'. Who's wrong?

My personal take on example one, is if a criminal was silly enough to be caught red-handed in a tavern where Militia/Sun legions patrol after being silly enough to have done something that attracted enough attention that the Militia/Sun legions would recognize you for right off, or have been tipped off about what you've done, then tough. You've been caught and need to own up to the IC actions and consequences bit. (This varies, of course, such as if there were five criminals in the tavern and three militia, the chances are two criminals could knock that militia sergeant or whichever aside and book with the rest) Common sense.

In example two, I want to cry, because not only do we see the exact same problem but we also lose the emotes and are lowered to the hack and slash who can type what the fastest mentality.

Now, my post isn't meant to beat on criminal types, as I've played my share. The exact same holds true if three assassins or some such corner a militia officer in some back alleyway for an assassination. That soldier went were they shouldn't have or didn't take proper care in where they were going, got caught, and need to take that blade in the back or ass kicking for slipping up.

Thoughts?

[Rindan]

In the case you describe, I honestly think that the proper answer is for the three militiamen to use the guard command to guard the doorway.  You have to use your judgment.  An elf that sees three militiamen in the doorway is entirely justified in thinking that he might be fast enough to slip by without them getting a grip.  A beefy warrior type might rightfully believe that he can batter his way past.  There is also the added problem that you are asking the criminal to trust you.  If three guys stand in the door, then I assume none of them are going to suddenly try and toss a subdue command because they are by the door.  There is also the concern that the code is going to manhandled the criminal in question.  If the criminal is intent on struggling and decides that he is going to wait until one of them moves from the door to try and subdue him, he is going to get ganked by the entire city.  Once  he gets his merry crime flag, the entire city automagikally is going to be after him.  Criminals who are not blessed with high hides and sneaks tend to be jumpy because of this very reason.  The decks are radically stacked against them.

In such ugly situations, I suggest using the code first and RP second.  As the militiamen, use the guard command, and then RP what  you are doing.  Many people will go along with it.  Those who think they are justified in thinking that they can still break through should go ahead and give it a try.  Just be considerate in the fact that if you are emoting standing by a doorway, you shouldn't be throwing out coded subdues.

This isn't universal.  There are times when I think people ignore emoting in favor of letting the code let them do what they want.  I recall many years back when a sergeant of mine passed out.  The second she passed out, three of us were up on our feet, weapons drawn, and declared that any person who came close was going to get cut in half (and we had the authority to do it).  Despite this, some elf thought that it would be an awesome idea to steal her Anakore gloves anyways because everyone knows that sleeping people always fail their pick pocket checks.  So, we have three armed people with the intent to murder telling anyone who comes close that they are dead, and this thief decides that not only does he get by all three of us despite our threats to kill anyone coming close, but he removes her bladed gloves without slicing off his own fingers.  It 'twas lame.

The code is there to arbitrate when there is no clear solution.  When there is a clear solution, or the two people consent as to what happened, then emoting works great.  When there is some question as to what the outcome is going to be, the code is a good judge when a staff member isn't sitting over your shoulder calling the shots.

[Salt Merchant]

Definitely, use the guard command and then emote after it.

If the code lets the running elf slip by too often, I believe the correct approach would be to lobby to have the code modified to reduce the probability of this.

In Rindan's counterexample, I believe the correct approach would be to modify the code to make the pickpocket attempt have to pass checks for whoever is guarding the unconscious person.

[Raesanos]

What I encounter is this kind of scenario:

Dwarf power-emotes grabbing an elf.
Elf emotes slipping away.
Dwarf emails in to complain that the elf could never have gotten away.
Elf emails in to complain that the dwarf shouldn't have power-emoted.

Ultimately, the code is there to make these decisions, because with the limited information that the game provides there is no way to authoritatively say what could and could not have happened.  Since this is a MUD rather than a MUSH or some other type of game, the code determines what actually happens.

If the code is coming to bad conclusions, the code should be adjusted.  Feel free to let us know about cases where you think the code is insufficient.  We try to make it as realistic as possible.

If someone thinks the code is insufficient and wants to decide that they can't do something that the code lets them do, thats fine.  But if a someone decides they can do something the code doesn't let them do, that causes problems.

In the case of the elf escaping the 3 guards, if the elf wanted to decide they could never get past them, thats fine.  But the code says they could somehow slip by.  Its not hard to imagine a way for this to be possible.  A running dive between two people?  Pushing past them?  There are a lot of possibilities, so if the code says something is possible, a little imagination generally yields a plausible cause.  If you still think the code should be tweaked, again, the right thing to do is to let the staff know about it.

[Cerelum]

In the case of the elf escaping the 3 guards, if the elf wanted to decide they could never get past them, thats fine.  But the code says they could somehow slip by.  Its not hard to imagine a way for this to be possible.  A running dive between two people?  Pushing past them?  There are a lot of possibilities, so if the code says something is possible, a little imagination generally yields a plausible cause.  If you still think the code should be tweaked, again, the right thing to do is to let the staff know about it.

Right, Elves are supposed to be more dexterious then humans and definately moreso then Dwarves... Who's to say the elf didn't jump onto a table, kick ale into the dwarf's eyes then sprint past as he's complaining about wasting good ale?

The code is the "Gamemaster" so to speak, not the players, and I've been screwed and benefitted on this from each side, it sucks when it's against you, it's awesome when it's with you.

The things that I think Rae here is getting as is gay bugs like this..

half-giant subdues you
You are dragged away, then so and so hits you and knocks you into unconsciousness, whole time the half giant is subduing you.
minutes go by, you finally awaken from being knocked out.
You are now being carried through the town, you want to make a few last minute writhes or attempts to flee with your 140some stamina you regained from your nap
you type flee
you get, "You're too relaxed to do that!"

And then Jarod cusses as the computer and demands to know if the half-giant is giving him some type of deep tissue massage that doesn't allow him to attempt to flee. GAY!

shit like that should be fixed...hint,hint.

[brytta.leofa]

Using the code correctly is a critical part of roleplaying on Armageddon, IMO.

[X-D]

Sometimes You have  to consider the situation as well. Like if I'm playing a half-giant and I emote walking over and pinning your elf against the bar, is it a power emote? Maybe, but I also know that the HG is MASSIVE, and will not fail the subdue if he tries.

Sadly, people ignore it, so, normaly have to just use code...meh.

[Cerelum]

Sometimes You have  to consider the situation as well. Like if I'm playing a half-giant and I emote walking over and pinning your elf against the bar, is it a power emote? Maybe, but I also know that the HG is MASSIVE, and will not fail the subdue if he tries.

Sadly, people ignore it, so, normaly have to just use code...meh.

Exceptional agility, very good strength human evaded a half-giants subdues like 20 times in a row.  So no.. You're half-giant isn't a massive subdueing machine.

[Adiadochokinesis]

Code > Emotes in these cases.

[spawnloser]

Exceptional agility, very good strength human evaded a half-giants subdues like 20 times in a row.  So no.. You're half-giant isn't a massive subdueing machine.

You'd think so, but when I played a HG with the skill, I never failed a subdue attempt against anything... and I tried against just about everything I came across.  Don't assume anything, one way or the other.  The code resolves all disputes.

[Raesanos]

Don't assume anything, one way or the other.

Very good advice!

Even if you are 100% sure half giants could always subdue elves, or whatever it is, there could be exceptional circumstances.  Maybe they have an agility spell that gives them superhuman agility?  Anything is possible.  If you let the staff know about things that seem wrong rather than getting pissed off at the other person, things work out much better.

[Ghost]

To the original poster:  Militia should have used the guard command in my opinion.  There is an option of emoting to chop someone's head off, and actually doing it.  There is no guarantee that you will be able to accomplish it, there is no guarantee your victim will definitely escape.  So let the code decide who is buff and who is buffer if it is a question of that kind.

Rindan's example:  I would have emailed the elf in question.  By the way, I thought the guard command would also be effective even if the victim is sleeping and a would be thief was attempting something?  Is it not so?

[Rindan]

Rindan's example:  I would have emailed the elf in question.  By the way, I thought the guard command would also be effective even if the victim is sleeping and a would be thief was attempting something?  Is it not so?

This was back before the guard command would defend against pick pockets and I did indeed pass on my thoughts via the staff.  That said, even if the guard command does prevent pick pockets, people do need to take context into account.  The reason why someone can try and run past three militiamen emoting that they are guarding a door is because the guard command was made for exactly that purpose.

There is a place for emoting out actions, even when there is rough code analogy.  The code does a very poor job determining when one side or the other has an extreme advantage.  Three armed men with the power of law on their side declaring that they will chop anyone down who comes close is enough of an advantage where anyone who isn't magikally invisible should realize that a pick pocket attempt will fail, irregardless of whether or not the code allows it.  If you are hidden in a room, and a person walks in and starts methodically searching the room, you should reveal yourself even though they don't have scan and never in a million years will find you according to the code.

While the code is there to arbitrate most of the time, and does a good job most of the time, don't assume that just because the code lets you do something that it is right.  There is no hard and fast rules.  In general, default to letting code decide things, but use your own judgment as to when it is appropiate to let code decide, and when it is time to 'do the right thing' and let reason decide.

[Ghost]

I agree the situation you posted is not "code lets me do it" kind.  It is not in the same regard as the OP's original question.  I just wondered if the guard code is working against opportunists trying to steal from unconcious.

[JustAnotherGuy]

There is a place for emoting out actions, even when there is rough code analogy.  The code does a very poor job determining when one side or the other has an extreme advantage.  Three armed men with the power of law on their side declaring that they will chop anyone down who comes close is enough of an advantage where anyone who isn't magikally invisible should realize that a pick pocket attempt will fail, irregardless of whether or not the code allows it.  If you are hidden in a room, and a person walks in and starts methodically searching the room, you should reveal yourself even though they don't have scan and never in a million years will find you according to the code.

Actually, if you wanted to use an example like this...  Someone that is doing a methodical search, that person is taking there time.  Someone that is hiding, would easily see that this person is searching and could move around the room still hiding to keep away from the person that is searching.  That is why there is code for these things, so that someone that has sharp eyes, can use the scan ability.  Where as the person that has the hide command, knows how to hide and get away from people that are looking for them.  Just walking in and saying you are searching for someone, doesn't mean you'll find them.  A bar full of people is an extremely hard place to find someone, as they could be slipping amongst people to get away from the searcher.  Or say there is a shadow filled room, said person that is hiding could easily slip from shadow to shadow while the searcher is looking around.  The scan command does work sometimes when you don't have the ability, are you good at searching though?  No...  that's why you don't have the skill.

Even in a situation like that, code is there for a reason.

[Rindan]

Actually, if you wanted to use an example like this...  Someone that is doing a methodical search, that person is taking there time.  Someone that is hiding, would easily see that this person is searching and could move around the room still hiding to keep away from the person that is searching.  That is why there is code for these things, so that someone that has sharp eyes, can use the scan ability.  Where as the person that has the hide command, knows how to hide and get away from people that are looking for them.  Just walking in and saying you are searching for someone, doesn't mean you'll find them.  A bar full of people is an extremely hard place to find someone, as they could be slipping amongst people to get away from the searcher.  Or say there is a shadow filled room, said person that is hiding could easily slip from shadow to shadow while the searcher is looking around.  The scan command does work sometimes when you don't have the ability, are you good at searching though?  No...  that's why you don't have the skill.

Even in a situation like that, code is there for a reason.

In a shadowy tavern?  Sure.  I will happily give the benefit of the doubt that a determined warrior Byner without the scan skill should stand little chance of finding someone who is good at hiding.    The problem is that unless a room is tagged as no-hide, you are going to stand roughly the same chance of spotting someone in a tavern mobbed with a hundred people and with poor lighting, as you are going to find someone hiding in your 10 by 10 apartment.  Even if the rooms have modifiers, unless you consider yourself to be the most uber elite assassin of them all, you should know when you are beat.  The code will let someone with a decent hide skill stay perfectly invisible no matter what happens against a person with no scan skill.  The code is not a catch all.  It doesn't take everything into consideration.  It looks at a small handful of variables, rolls some dice, and ignores everything else.  You, as a reasonable human, should be able to spot when the code is going to fail in properly resolving the situation by acting accordingly.

Most of the time code works well enough to arbitrate, but as a responsible player you should act when it fails.  I doubt you will get in much trouble for sticking entirely to code unless you commit some grievous violation.  That said, you don't garner much trust from other people (not to mention you make for a dull story teller) when you live and die by the code. 

Let me sum this up better:

[lurkus ignoramus]

If the code is coming to bad conclusions, the code should be adjusted.  Feel free to let us know about cases where you think the code is insufficient.  We try to make it as realistic as possible.

What is it about the code in the "hide" and "scan" skills that makes them follow a different set of rules?

Why wouldn't a player trust the code's decisions, when that is what it is there for?

[staggerlee]

I'm inclined to agree with Rindan.  Code is all well and good, but you also need to take the environment into account. Use your head.

Code wise, I can draw a flaming steel broadsword in the market place and say to myself "all the other players are in Tuluk, nobody can find out."   But that's ignoring the huge crowd of virtual npcs, and just bad play all around.

Code wise, I can hide in one room apartment, while someone else is having a conversation with me.  Never mind that it's probably impossible.  Again, just bad play.

I can "emote: spits at the blue robed npc templar" and probably get away with it too. Again, bad play.

Code is all well and good, but we also need to take the virtual world and other people's rp into account. The world is not just the sum of what the code allows you to do.  We can't rely on the staff to step in and animate a virtual crowd, npc, or change the code every time we're retarded.  We need to police ourselves and be better players so that they don't have to do that. 

[Rindan]

What is it about the code in the "hide" and "scan" skills that makes them follow a different set of rules?

Why wouldn't a player trust the code's decisions, when that is what it is there for?

Mostly because scan is something that is only semi-active.  Scan doesn't know the difference between, "I am being aware while I walk down the street" and "I am searching this room from top to bottom and doing nothing else".  We have a class system that kicks you in the nuts for trying to use a skill you don't have.  You can be sitting in a relatively empty room without a no-hide flag, hide, and then start whispering into the ear of a person trying to find you.  If they don't have the scan skill, they are SOL. 

I don't mean to pick on scan or hide.  There are other instances where the code bombs.  All interactions with NPCs tend to come out poorly if you use the code only.  If you want to be a real ass hole, there are lots of combat abuses, choo-choo training of NPCs, and all sorts of ugly things you can technically do.  Give me a desert elf and I will lead a host of horrors to Allanak's gate and murder everyone trying to leave them until a staff member shows up to grind my face into dust.  I can emote standing by the doorway, and proceed to pick pocket everyone in the room.  Someone can emote standing off from me, and I can still reach across the street to backstab them... and speaking of backstab, there is no end to the abusive things you can do with that skill until a staff member comes down to crush your head.  You can loot a clan store room clean in front of guards.  You can have a bar fight that lasts for three days.

Code comes in slowly over time.  For many, many, many years we didn't have the watch command and you could do all sorts of stupid "stealthy" things while a guy emoted watching you.  As I said earlier, the guard command didn't always guard against pick pockets.  When code fills in the loop holes, great.  The staff has done a great job filling in a lot of loop holes, especially over the last couple of years.  Until a loop hole is covered though, you need to use a little common sense.  If you want to hide against my character without the scan skill in his apartment and then taunt him knowing that he has no way of catching you short of staff intervention, great.  You might or might not get spanked by the staff.  That said, I will certainly think you are an asshole and endeavor to not play with you. 

The code lets you do all sorts of dumb things, and you can't possibly close every loop hole or get the code to account for every single factor that might make the normal dice rolls crap.  I am just saying use a little common sense.

[lurkus ignoramus]

Code wise, I can draw a flaming steel broadsword in the market place and say to myself "all the other players are in Tuluk, nobody can find out."   But that's ignoring the huge crowd of virtual npcs, and just bad play all around.

Code wise, I can hide in one room apartment, while someone else is having a conversation with me.  Never mind that it's probably impossible.  Again, just bad play.

I can "emote: spits at the blue robed npc templar" and probably get away with it too. Again, bad play.

Are three straw men better than one?

Is being able to say something and then hide immediately inappropriate code?

Is this something that could be addressed with the code?

Have you tried doing as Raesanos suggested, and bugged or otherwise commented on this perceived flaw?

What does ignoring NPCs and VNPCs (the main issue with the two other straw men) have to do with power emoting (or bad code)?

Does "methodically searching" for "professional" hiders when you do not have the coded skills to back it up constitute power emoting?

[staggerlee]

Are three straw men better than one?

That wasn't a straw man.  I wasn't responding to anyone's argument, and certainly wasn't setting up a strawman counter to do so.  I was citing examples where the game world could fail to be represented by the code.

Is being able to say something and then hide immediately inappropriate code?

Depending on the circumstances, it could be extremely poor rp.  If I was standing face to face, talking to someone in a small empty room and they vanished I'd have some serious questions.  In a crowded bar, or a dark alley, or with an appropriate leading emote it might feel a lot less jarring, and a lot more realistic.

Is this something that could be addressed with the code?

Possibly.  I'd imagine that having modifiers to hide checks in all rooms would help, and at some points the watch command could be used.  A less extreme hide/scan system that didn't just roll checks against each other?  So yes, it could be addressed by code. In theory.

Have you tried doing as Raesanos suggested, and bugged or otherwise commented on this perceived flaw?

I think I just did comment on it.  Those were theoretical examples, so bugging them would be sort of obnoxious.

What does ignoring NPCs and VNPCs (the main issue with the two other straw men) have to do with power emoting (or bad code)?

Does "methodically searching" for "professional" hiders when you do not have the coded skills to back it up constitute power emoting?

It has everything to do with it.  My point is that the code is not the here all and the end all, we also need to rp and take the virtual world into account.   
I know it's sexy to toss the word strawman around, because everyone knows somebody who's taken a philosophy of logic 101 course, but those weren't strawman arguments. 

[lurkus ignoramus]

Why does the edit button never seem to load the edit page for me?

I don't mean to pick on scan or hide.  There are other instances where the code bombs.  All interactions with NPCs tend to come out poorly if you use the code only.

Why can't these bugs be reported and fixed?

Why would a discussion about power emoting, that is emotes vs. coded commands have anything to do with NPC interactions?

Why does everyone enjoy knocking around silly straw men?

The code lets you do all sorts of dumb things, and you can't possibly close every loop hole or get the code to account for every single factor that might make the normal dice rolls crap.

Why can't this be fixed?  What makes loopholes not closeable?

[lurkus ignoramus]

My point is that the code is not the here all and the end all, we also need to rp and take the virtual world into
account.

What does your point have to do with power emoting?

Didn't the staff just remind us that when emotes and code clash, the code > emotes?

Isn't that why we have it?

If it is representing things wrong, shouldn't it be fixed?

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Simple fix. Tags for rooms that indicate either penalties to hiding or additions to scan. Make the flags scalable from 0 to 100.

[Troicha]

The spirit of the staff's intervention was not simply that code trumps emotes, but that simulations of reality trump simulations of unreality, and specifically as regards emotes, in areas which the code handles well, that the code trumps said emotes. However, the code should not be trusted in areas where the code is recognized faulty.

Discussion as to what those areas are is still open.

[Stroker]

Depending on the circumstances, it could be extremely poor rp.  If I was standing face to face, talking to someone in a small empty room and they vanished I'd have some serious questions.  In a crowded bar, or a dark alley, or with an appropriate leading emote it might feel a lot less jarring, and a lot more realistic.

What about Houdini? He can make a bahamet disappear in a crowded amphitheater - misdirection. Then again, maybe Houdini used magick.

[staggerlee]

The spirit of the staff's intervention was not simply that code trumps emotes, but that simulations of reality trump simulations of unreality, and specifically as regards emotes, in areas which the code handles well, that the code trumps said emotes. However, the code should not be trusted in areas where the code is recognized faulty.

Discussion as to what those areas are is still open.

Well said.

Simple fix. Tags for rooms that indicate either penalties to hiding or additions to scan. Make the flags scalable from 0 to 100.

I've always supported that idea.  I think that the main difficulty would be that it requires the staff to add a tag giving modifiers to every single room in the game. 
But yes, I really like it.

[Raesanos]

Hmm, I'm going to try to make a summary of the situation.

If there is something that the code handles, use the code.
If you think the code can be improved to be more realistic, let us know, but continue to use it.
If there is a bug, let us know.  We'll let you know what should be done until its fixed if appropriate.
If there is something the code doesn't handle, roleplay it.  If you and another player disagree on what should happen and there is no coded way to resolve it, ask for staff intervention.
If you found something the code lets you do but you don't think you should be able to do, don't do it.  Let us know so we can either let you know if it is / is not ok, and fix the code if needed.

And one last one, which I consider very important:

If someone else is doing something you don't think they should be able to do, give them the benefit of the doubt.  If it still concerns you, let the staff know and we'll investigate.  Don't assume someone is a bad player for this since you don't know the whole situation.  Don't complain about them on the GDB, because this benefits no one.

[lurkus ignoramus]

Ultimately, the code is there to make these decisions, because with the limited information that the game provides there is no way to authoritatively say what could and could not have happened.  Since this is a MUD rather than a MUSH or some other type of game, the code determines what actually happens.

If the code is coming to bad conclusions, the code should be adjusted.  Feel free to let us know about cases where you think the code is insufficient.  We try to make it as realistic as possible.

There are a lot of possibilities, so if the code says something is possible, a little imagination generally yields a plausible cause.  If you still think the code should be tweaked, again, the right thing to do is to let the staff know about it.

Anything is possible.  If you let the staff know about things that seem wrong rather than getting pissed off at the other person, things work out much better.

What in the above quotes implies what is stated in the one below?

The spirit of the staff's intervention was not simply that code trumps emotes, but that simulations of reality trump simulations of unreality, and specifically as regards emotes, in areas which the code handles well, that the code trumps said emotes. However, the code should not be trusted in areas where the code is recognized faulty.

Discussion as to what those areas are is still open.

[Troicha]

Look harder, I'm sure you'll find it.

[lurkus ignoramus]

...specifically as regards emotes, in areas which the code handles well, that the code trumps said emotes. However, the code should not be trusted in areas where the code is recognized faulty.

Where did Raesanos ever qualify a statement about code trumping emotes with a qualifier like "in areas which the code handles well"?

In the coded hiding vs. emoted scanning example, which player gets to decide which areas the code handles well?

Doesn't the following quote refute the stated inference that faulty code should not be trusted?

If there is something that the code handles, use the code.
If you think the code can be improved to be more realistic, let us know, but continue to use it.

Am I the only person who thinks emoting searching for someone who is codedly hidden and expecting them to show themselves is power emoting?

There are a lot of possibilities, so if the code says something is possible, a little imagination generally yields a plausible cause.  If you still think the code should be tweaked, again, the right thing to do is to let the staff know about it.

And one last one, which I consider very important:

If someone else is doing something you don't think they should be able to do, give them the benefit of the doubt.  If it still concerns you, let the staff know and we'll investigate.  Don't assume someone is a bad player for this since you don't know the whole situation.

Do we agree that coded hiding takes precedence over emoted searching yet?

Isn't emoting successfully searching for a codedly hidden person power emoting itself?

If there is something that the code handles, use the code.

[Salt Merchant]

The spirit of the staff's intervention was not simply that code trumps emotes, but that simulations of reality trump simulations of unreality, and specifically as regards emotes, in areas which the code handles well, that the code trumps said emotes. However, the code should not be trusted in areas where the code is recognized faulty.

Discussion as to what those areas are is still open.

My interpretation of this is that "simulations of reality trump poor simulations of reality".

In other words, there are areas where the code is definitely king.

However, there's an admission that while the code generally does fairly well, there are places it could be improved on. Some players have opinions on this and try to get around it with emotes. So players are advised to not freak out when this happens, instead ask the staff about it or suggest improvements to the code.

[staggerlee]

Lurkus, correct me if I'm wrong but I think you're asking for heavy dominance of code over rp here.   And your quotes from the staff do support that.  That's what code is here for, to resolve conflict so that we can negotiate scenes without fighting over who can and can't do what.

But while we're quoting Raesanos  here...

If you found something the code lets you do but you don't think you should be able to do, don't do it.  Let us know so we can either let you know if it is / is not ok, and fix the code if needed.

I think that my freshly rolled assassin typing "hide" without so much as an emote when in a locked, empty room with a templar looking me in the eye, would qualify.
There are times that you shouldn't do something just because the code allows it.

In the cited example, I wouldn't bother to email the staff to ask, I'd just refrain from using hide.

If someone else is doing something you don't think they should be able to do, give them the benefit of the doubt.  If it still concerns you, let the staff know and we'll investigate.  Don't assume someone is a bad player for this since you don't know the whole situation.  Don't complain about them on the GDB, because this benefits no one.

Now... as the templar's player I wouldn't type OOC: WTF DUDE

I'd go through the rp of being totally shocked that this guy did this, and trying to figure out why and how.   I'd then politely contact the staff and advise them of the situation, so that if they were concerned they could make sure that it was appropriate behavior.



At the end of the day, I think that what Raesanos is suggesting is that we be mature and reasonable about how we handle things.

[Salt Merchant]

I think that my freshly rolled assassin typing "hide" without so much as an emote when in a locked, empty room with a templar looking me in the eye, would qualify.
There are times that you shouldn't do something just because the code allows it.

Here I would suggest that each room should have a hiding difficulty factor. A well-lit, empty room would take a magician to hide in. A dimly lit, crowded, smoky pub might allow even the unskilled a chance to hide.

I'd also suggest that the scan command not be instantaneous, but instead take time. The longer the scanning character continues to poke about, the more chance he has of spying something hidden, up to the limit of his skill.

[lurkus ignoramus]

I think that my freshly rolled assassin typing "hide" without so much as an emote when in a locked, empty room with a templar looking me in the eye, would qualify.
There are times that you shouldn't do something just because the code allows it.

Would a freshly rolled assassin's hide skill really function in this scenario?

Don't the Templarate have abilities that would negate the hide skill, if said newbie assassin were to somehow successfully hide?

Shouldn't a Templar looking a character in the eye use the 'watch' skill, making hiding, and this scenario, even more improbable?

Do I smell another scarecrow?

If a character can actually successfully hide when a Templar has them locked in a room and is watching them, aren't there plausible, but difficult to play out so that all parties involved have the entire scene, possibilities that could account for this?

Isn't that why we have this code in place?

If the code is faulty, weren't we told to report it but continue using it as is?

Lurkus, correct me if I'm wrong but I think you're asking for heavy dominance of code over rp here.

Why don't you call me Ignoramus?

What makes you think that?

Isn't the idea behind hard coded abilities that the code enforces and arbitrates role play between players and the environment?

Why would one (code or RP) have dominance over the other?

Isn't the using the code still role playing?

How does this relate to power emoting?

However, there's an admission that while the code generally does fairly well, there are places it could be improved on. Some players have opinions on this and try to get around it with emotes. So players are advised to not freak out when this happens, instead ask the staff about it or suggest improvements to the code.

Doesn't the quote below inform us that we shouldn't be trying to get around existing code with emotes?

If you think the code can be improved to be more realistic, let us know, but continue to use it.

Isn't using emotes to "try to get around" code power emoting?

If there is something that the code handles, use the code.

Is repetition -really- key?

[lurkus ignoramus]

Can someone please fix my inability to edit my posts?

In the cited example, I wouldn't bother to email the staff to ask, I'd just refrain from using hide.

By not reporting loopholes, bugs, or unrealistic behavior in the code aren't you doing the game a disservice?

Don't the staff members need to know about the way code is perceived and functions in game to know how to improve it?

Wont the same issues keep cropping up if they are not addressed?

[Stroker]

Use your best judgment when dealing with these situations.

[Ghost]

lurkus can you put your thoughts into paraghraphs and explain in a rather plain sirihish rather than asking questions?

are you saying "use your common sense" is not enough for you?

have you heard about the weather code?

[lurkus ignoramus]

What is common sense?

Which players' 'common sense' rationalization takes precedence?

What is the point of code if not to arbitrate these exact issues?

Isn't it power emoting if you emote something in contradiction to the code?

What does weather code have to do with power emoting?

If there is something that the code handles, use the code.

Is that common sense?

[Troicha]

Have you read Aristophanes' Clouds?

Are you capable of constructive questioning rather than polemic division?

What sort of answer are you looking for when you ask questions about the differences in what is being said?

Can you clearly illustrate a true difference in position?

Is it possible that points of view converge towards the same goal despite being phrased differently?

What do you think the goal of the code is?

What do you think the goal of emoting is?

Do either of these aspire to be or aid 'roleplaying'?

What is 'roleplaying'?

[lurkus ignoramus]

What does any of that have to do with the topic at hand?

[Troicha]

What does any of that not have to do with the discussion at hand?

[Jherlen]

Constructively:

There are scenarios that necessarily need to transcend the code. Lets say you have a character with the hide skill who gets cornered in a completely bare apartment. Anybody who isn't completely blind should be able to find your character in there, whether they have the scan skill or not. Unfortunately, the code isn't smart enough to determine how realistic it should be to hide somewhere. Whether you typed hide before someone 'watch'ed you, or even before anyone else entered, should not matter. If you are in that room, you should be able to be seen by anybody else in that room with eyes who is capable of 'look'ing around. They'd hardly need to 'scan'. (It'd be cool if we could implement the Salt Merchant's idea and set a hide difficulty for each and every room. Even cooler if the code could dynamically determine difficulty based on factors like furniture in the room, occupancy, light shading, how easy it is to cling to the ceiling, and whatever else. But the code isn't at that point, so let's not expect it to be.)

Another example: A character can get injured down to 1 hp, taking grievous wounds to several different body parts, from a nasty ferocious beast, like a mekillot. They can then get to safety, go to sleep, and be back at full health within ~20 minutes of realtime... which would be about two game hours. In other words, your character can have a near-death experience in the morning and go sparring or drinking with buddies, perfectly healthy, by midday. Should we trust the code (the current code, as it is now) to reflect somebody's "true" state of health in situations like these?

--------------------

And now to keep in the "spirit" of the thread:

Wouldn't it be nice if we could have a discussion about this with Lurkus that didn't result in endless questions?

Isn't it easier to talk with somebody if they will explain their point of view politely and concisely, in paragraph form?

Why do I suspect Lurkus Ignoramus is Psionic Fungus in disguise?

What is the meaning of life?

[Troicha]

I'm done now; my illustrative purpose is finished. I apologize if I disrupted any actual effort being put into the discussion on this thread.

[Ghost]

EDITED: nothing to see here, move along

[lurkus ignoramus]

Can you clearly illustrate a true difference in position?

However, the code should not be trusted in areas where the code is recognized faulty.

If you think the code can be improved to be more realistic, let us know, but continue to use it.

If you are hidden in a room, and a person walks in and starts methodically searching the room, you should reveal yourself even though they don't have scan and never in a million years will find you according to the code.

Someone that is doing a methodical search, that person is taking there time.  Someone that is hiding, would easily see that this person is searching and could move around the room still hiding to keep away from the person that is searching.  That is why there is code for these things, so that someone that has sharp eyes, can use the scan ability.  Where as the person that has the hide command, knows how to hide and get away from people that are looking for them.  Just walking in and saying you are searching for someone, doesn't mean you'll find them.

Even if the rooms have modifiers, unless you consider yourself to be the most uber elite assassin of them all, you should know when you are beat.  The code will let someone with a decent hide skill stay perfectly invisible no matter what happens against a person with no scan skill.  The code is not a catch all.  It doesn't take everything into consideration.  It looks at a small handful of variables, rolls some dice, and ignores everything else.  You, as a reasonable human, should be able to spot when the code is going to fail in properly resolving the situation by acting accordingly.

If there is something that the code handles, use the code.
If you think the code can be improved to be more realistic, let us know, but continue to use it.
If there is a bug, let us know.  We'll let you know what should be done until its fixed if appropriate.

And one last one, which I consider very important:

If someone else is doing something you don't think they should be able to do, give them the benefit of the doubt.  If it still concerns you, let the staff know and we'll investigate.  Don't assume someone is a bad player for this since you don't know the whole situation.

Lets say you have a character with the hide skill who gets cornered in a completely bare apartment. Anybody who isn't completely blind should be able to find your character in there, whether they have the scan skill or not. Unfortunately, the code isn't smart enough to determine how realistic it should be to hide somewhere.

Do "completely bare apartments" exist?

Are there virtual objects, rafters, curtains, windows, or any other possibility you aren't thinking of?

Weren't we told to give people the benefit of the doubt when the code supports them?

In other words, your character can have a near-death experience in the morning and go sparring or drinking with buddies, perfectly healthy, by midday. Should we trust the code (the current code, as it is now) to reflect somebody's "true" state of health in situations like these?

The staff says yes, and what is the alternative, do we treat them like they're half-dead for an IC month, even though they are sparring and running around as usual?

What is their "true" state of health and how is it determined if not through the code?



Do we agree that coded abilities have more weight than emotes when determining a scene?

Is attempting to "get around" code, such as emoting searching for a codedly hidden person and expecting to them to reveal themselves, power emoting?

Can we attempt to stay on topic, please?

[jstorrie]

Can we get some more questions up in this thread, please?

[Ghost]

Do "completely bare apartments" exist?

Are there virtual objects, rafters, curtains, windows, or any other possibility you aren't thinking of?

Can you think of -one- apartment where someone who is ready to trash the entire place from top to bottom can not find a person?

How about an apartment in zalanthas?

Can we get some more questions up in this thread, please?

Should I start answering any question from this point on?

[lurkus ignoramus]

Don't most Zalanthan apartments have built in furniture?

Don't Zalanthan's with a decent hide skill have super-human stealth abilities when compared to real life?

Why isn't the staff's word good enough on this issue?

[Troicha]

So no, you can't. Pity that. I'll attempt to be clear, then.

The code should be trusted when it yields a realistic result. The code should not be trusted when it yields an unrealistic result. In the event of the code yielding an unrealistic result, the staff should be informed.

The questions I see as worthwhile pursuing are these:

What constitutes a realistic result? Can we give a clear, useful definition of that without relying on examples, since examples are often flawed or potentially flawed in ways difficult to see?

Who decides what constitutes a realistic result?

Who decides if a result is realistic as defined above?

What is proper form for dealing, in the moment, with code which yields an unrealistic result?

There are possibly others. I will attempt these below.

##

A realistic result is one which, taking into account all situational variables, most closely models how things would turn out in 'real life,' while also considering and allowing for playability (or ease of resolution, if you prefer that term, meaning roughly: maintaining the ease and fluidity of interface with the game world by the players) and certain environmental constructs of the game world for which we as players give suspension of disbelief, e.g., magick.

While the staff have the authority to make changes to the MUD, the entire playerbase is continually involved in deciding what constitutes a realistic result. This is the case because we all live in the 'real life' upon which realistic results are supposedly based, and we all play the MUD. When the exact parameters are set out, I doubt very much that there is widespread disagreement in any example as to what constitutes a realistic results, the above posts notwithstanding. I can give a few such examples if desired.

Ultimately, the staff decides (in the sense of having  authority of enforcement, rather than forming an opinion) whether or not a result is realistic, and they do this by giving us roleplay guides, of which the code is one. The object proper of this MUD (if such a term can be used in this sense) is roleplay, or the fostering of roleplay. Other guidelines, which function through different mechanisms, are documentation, the concept of the game world, and specific concepts such as 'vNPCs'. Opinions on how these function and how much influence these have is where the majority of disagreements form.

I don't know the answer to this question; perhaps we can get an answer from the staff regarding it. Assume when answering this question that the code has actually failed in the aims set forth above.

##

Why is anything I just said relevant?

The "power emoting vs. code" argument is a subset of the structure defined above. It closely follows questions two, three, and four, though not so far stated as such, and deals with question one purely in the realm of specifics.

[Stroker]

Do "completely bare apartments" exist?

Yes.

Are there virtual objects, rafters, curtains, windows, or any other possibility you aren't thinking of?

Rely on room descriptions for this....

Weren't we told to give people the benefit of the doubt when the code supports them?

Yes.

The staff says yes, and what is the alternative, do we treat them like they're half-dead for an IC month, even though they are sparring and running around as usual?

The staff doesn't say yes - they say that it is up to the injured person to role-play his/her injuries as they see fit. Again, why was this person near-death? Was s/he hit by a bahamet in the chest/torso/leg/arm? Or were they near death due to poison.... or some other fleeting element. In the end, if a person rapidly rebounds from the former, you, as a spectator, have no control over their character/role-play. If you're asking how would I role-play the former scene, I can tell you. I would role-play that scene as my character suffering a serious wound, which would heal over a period of days/weeks, during which he will not be running around battling more bahamets.

Do we agree that coded abilities have more weight than emotes when determining a scene?

Emotes set and describe the scene; code determines the outcome.

Is attempting to "get around" code, such as emoting searching for a codedly hidden person and expecting to them to reveal themselves, power emoting?

You can emote searching for them, but ultimately it is up to the hidden person to reveal themselves. If some dude runs in and starts searching the premises for me, will I reveal myself? Probably not, but it would depend on the situation, and I would use my best judgment to decide.

[Ghost]

Don't Zalanthan's with a decent hide skill have super-human stealth abilities when compared to real life?

Are you joking or are you just saying it?

[Rindan]

If I, as a militiaman warrior with no scan, was to charge into an apartment after a criminal who is hiding in there, and I start emoting that I am trashing the room to find them, I would think a hell of a lot more highly of that person if they reveal themselves, than if they decide that they are super assassins who can't possibly be seen no matter what I do.  Conversely, I personally would reveal myself if in the criminals shoes. 

I know that the scan does a lousy job simulating a determined effort to find someone in a relatively confined space, and would role play accordingly, regardless of what the code says.  The same goes for all things where the code either does a poor job simulating the situation or the code doesn't exist.  I'll stop my wagon if someone drops a few logs in the way.  I won't pick pocket someone who tells me that if I get within swinging distance I am going to have my head removed and emote accordingly.  If I emote that I am guarding a doorway, I won't try and insta-subdue someone in the room.  I won't hide while I am talking to someone unless it is a damned crowded room, and even then, I will emote ducking into the crowd instead of just vanishing.

Clearly, the staff is the final word in what exactly is and is not right.  Further, I bet they will likely error on the side of letting you get away with things because the code lets you, rather than smacking you down because they are nice folks.  That said, the people who can play beyond the code are the people who I will try and play with.  Thieves who taunt you while hidden because you don't have the scan skill and will not in a million years find them are the people that I will avoid playing with.  When I do have to deal with them, I will likely deal with them in the most brutish coded way I can.  On the other hand, people who are trust worthy (and I tend to give everyone some benefit of the doubt until prove otherwise) are the people where I will delay coded action in favor of playing out a scene. 

Armageddon is not a life simulator.  The code takes a couple of numbers, rolls some dice, ignores everything else, and spits out a black and white response.  No, the staff can't fix everything.  This is a game where my character can eviscerate you with a smooth stroke of his knife, but can't cut a damned piece of fruit without dropping one on the ground every single time (which he apparently won't eat dirty), much less cook with half the skill of a college male.  Code is nice and it is great when it is there for you.  I play Armageddon and not a MUSH because I like code.  That said, I play Armageddon and not some other RP MUD because I like being around people who realize where the usefulness of code begins and ends.

Personally, I think that if every time you run into a scene you ignore emoting and do what the code lets you do, you are going to miss out.  People are going to respond in kind, and scenes that could be tense and interesting are going to boil down into spamming subdue and kill until one party is out of action.  This is unlikely to help you to "win" Armageddon, and in all likelihood result in people being uninterested in dragging you into scenes and plots.  If that is what you are after, why on earth are you play Armageddon?

[lurkus ignoramus]

Isn't it all really circumstantial?

Didn't you think that scene in Leon where he is spider-manning the ceiling and pops those SWAT nerds in the head was rad?

Isn't it true that if someone is successfully hidden from you, you cannot see their long description, or any silent emoting they may be engaging in?

Does emoting or coded ability win in the end?

Should we accept and work around loopholes, flaws, and unrealistic code or should we do as the programmer in charge of redesigning skills suggested and give the staff feedback so they can improve and update the code to be more realistic?

Why not make it possible for rooms to give bonuses or detriments to stealth and/or observation skills?

Why not make it so that it takes longer to go from running to sneaking/hiding, and even more time to hide after having been in combat?

Why not use some type of approach/advance code, so that you really can't subdue someone across the room while simultaneously guarding the door?

[X-D]

Does lurkus ignoramus =delerak?

brother maybe?

[RogueGunslinger]

Anyone who had any hope of a discussion with this thread, lost all hope with the repeated spammy ass questions. Can we stop trying to mock each other and just have a god-damned discussion?

Edit: Disregard this post. I just realized Lurkus is doing this all over the boards.

[Maybe42or54]

Isn't it all really circumstantial?

Does emoting or coded ability win in the end?

Should we accept and work around loopholes, flaws, and unrealistic code or should we do as the programmer in charge of redesigning skills suggested and give the staff feedback so they can improve and update the code to be more realistic?

Why not make it possible for rooms to give bonuses or detriments to stealth and/or observation skills?

Why not make it so that it takes longer to go from running to sneaking/hiding, and even more time to hide after having been in combat?

Well. To your first question. Yes.

2. Emoting or Coded ability tie. What wins is the story. If the story says you climbed out through the chimney in the room, well. Damn good choice. If you emoted jumping behind the couch, then they "looked behind the couch" you should want to have a good, active story and reveal yourself. If you hid in the closet, and they look in the closet, you should reveal yourself. It all makes sense. You can just "power emote" finding a loose board and climbing underneath. Unless of course there is actually a loose board in the description, or you actively spent time trying to loosen a board.

3.They could.

4. No, because you don't have to sneak to hide. I could be running away from a mul and jump into a barrel to hide.

[Doppelganger]

Code is sillier than average Armer, but I trust it more, because it's unbiased. I would rather give subdue skill to any class to use than allow said average Armer to decide was he able to catch me or not. Not that I defend abuse of code, I just think that the only solution to avoid it is improvement to code. Make different levels of hide-ability for different rooms and there will be no ground for in-game OOC discussions.

It's nice to have someone around who is able to play the scene just and fair by emotes only, but I've seen enough otherwise responsible and still respected players who chicken out in life-and-death situations and rely on code when it suits them. Whenever code allows something to happen, I take it as a given. The question how did it happen is an excercise for my imagination rather than prompt for me to ruin the scene further with OOC thoughts and complaints.

4. No, because you don't have to sneak to hide. I could be running away from a mul and jump into a barrel to hide.

Don't you think that jumping is lauder than cautiously crawling in? And I'd think about the echo when you breath heavily after the long and exciting run.

[Maybe42or54]

4. No, because you don't have to sneak to hide. I could be running away from a mul and jump into a barrel to hide.

Don't you think that jumping is lauder than cautiously crawling in? And I'd think about the echo when you breath heavily after the long and exciting run.

Yes, it may be. However, if a mul is berserking, I'd rather just not be in sight. Maybe he'll forget about me. Maybe there is enough noise from screaming citizens, my breathing may by the last thing on my mind when the mul is chasing me. I may have gotten far enough away from him, since I'm an elf, that I have time to take a few deep breaths before he is clsoe enough to me. Or, I may just choke myself so that he doesn't find me and kill me.

There are a million little modifiers to each scene.

If I was running from a militiaman that was trying to kill me, and I ran into a bare room, then I would definately try to hide somewhere. Codely.

If that militiaman just comes in and emotes, "The Man looks around." I am not going to come out of my hiding space in the latrine to that. If he was actively looking around and actually looked in the spot that I was hiding, I'd give myself up. I wouldn't do it if he was just being pissed off OOC because I hid in a bare room, where I dug a hole in the previous day to hide.

[Doppelganger]

There are a million little modifiers to each scene.

Absolutely. And there are million different opinions on how each scene should be played. I don't call to play by code alone, I just find it useful to use coded affect as final judgement. If it happened, it happened, let's move on.

It's just my point of view, that more often than not OOC discussion about scene brings more shit to the game than questionable abuse itself.

[Raesanos]

There is no reason to argue about what is realistic in specific examples.

Two people can use their common sense and come to different conclusions, because the game gives you incomplete information about the situation and two people might make different assumptions or extrapolations from what they know, in both cases reasonably, and still come to different conclusions.

This is fine.  Its not like one of them is right and one of them is wrong.  You're all smart people and I don't think anybody is arguing based on a truly bad assumption.

So, accept that other people can come to other conclusions than you, respect their decision and use the guidelines I wrote out for dealing with when different opinions come into conflict.

[Tomeglow]

Well, I personally think it's a bit unreal to come in and guard the exits, emoting or code, because first you're going to need to search the bar. What most people fail to remember is, the Gaj is extremely full of vNPCs, and upon entering, you should scan the area and step between people, all while knowing OOC he's there. The thief should return the favor by trying to blend into the heavily-populated room. I think the guard command should only be used once he's been found, then I find it acceptable to guard the exits and maybe drag him outside to accomplish what's needed.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I find it perfectly acceptable to halt traffic while you look for him. Whether you find him or not, it is always best to lock down the scene. It happens IRL.

[Troicha]

And here I was hoping Rae had finally killed this troublesome topic.

Sigh.

[Salt Merchant]

And here I was hoping Rae had finally killed this troublesome topic.

Sigh.

And you want it dead, why?

[Ghost]

It is pretty much beaten to death

Let it not suffer anymore.  Make it quick.