Find out IC - what does this term actually mean?

[RogueGunslinger]

Once again, Mushashi, I think you are the only one arguing your point. Upon doing a search for "Find out IC" I have found very few instances (none really) where someone simply said "Find out IC" And that was the end of the discussion. More often than not(almost every time, really) There was information given as to why you should find out IC. Either by someone else, or by the person giving out the "Find out IC"

It's not like every single question asked has someone telling you you should find out the answer in the game.



To actually argue your point, because this is what I think you're looking for here. No. I think if anyone it's a newbie who should get a "Find out IC." Why you ask? Because it's a simple fact that here at Armageddon, we hold very dearly our secrets. It should be known to them very early in the game, that certain things just aren't talked about on the boards(like how you aren't supposed to tell people on your clan board that you died, for example). We do this to preserve the mystical, awe-inspiring parts of the game that makes us love it so damn much. We don't want to spoil all the fun for them. Period. And if they think that we're a bit stuck up in our answers, well, that's too bad. There are quite a few different means to go about asking a question that might be IC Sensitive. And they are all clearly outlined in this thread.

If someones going to get that bent out of shape over three little words, they need to grow the fuck up and realize: THIS IS THE INTERNET.

[Rhyden]

Everyone's perspective of what 'Find out IC' means will vary. I'll use this apparently pesky term every once in a while, but only if totally necessary. Newer players have a million questions and where else to bring them than the GDB? That's fine! They -should- be asking questions! Know why? Cause it means they're incredibly interested and curious about the game world. However, there's a lot of players on this GDB. Some are newer, some are older, some are in between. So if any question is asked, you're going to get a lot of different answers, arguments or just general nonsense. Unfortunately, some questions are better left vague if not completely unanswered. The term 'Find out IC' is used frequently when newer players have a question that crosses the OOC question border, into the IC question area. 'Finding out IC' isn't meant to be an elitist snappy remark to scold newer players. It means what it says. I suppose one could also say 'the answer to your question would be better discovered in character', but we're pretty lazy so 'Find out IC' is easier to type.

Don't take it in a bad way, musashi, I tell newer players to 'Find out IC' as often as they ask me terribly IC questions. It's all in the learning process, and more often than not, I find new players distinguish the difference between "good" questions and "bad" questions eventually with a few helpful coded answers, a few vague ones, a few helpful hints and a few well-placed 'Find out IC's'

[musashi]

Everyone's perspective of what 'Find out IC' means will vary. I'll use this apparently pesky term every once in a while, but only if totally necessary. Newer players have a million questions and where else to bring them than the GDB? That's fine! They -should- be asking questions! Know why? Cause it means they're incredibly interested and curious about the game world. However, there's a lot of players on this GDB. Some are newer, some are older, some are in between. So if any question is asked, you're going to get a lot of different answers, arguments or just general nonsense. Unfortunately, some questions are better left vague if not completely unanswered. The term 'Find out IC' is used frequently when newer players have a question that crosses the OOC question border, into the IC question area. 'Finding out IC' isn't meant to be an elitist snappy remark to scold newer players. It means what it says. I suppose one could also say 'the answer to your question would be better discovered in character', but we're pretty lazy so 'Find out IC' is easier to type.

Don't take it in a bad way, musashi, I tell newer players to 'Find out IC' as often as they ask me terribly IC questions. It's all in the learning process, and more often than not, I find new players distinguish the difference between "good" questions and "bad" questions eventually with a few helpful coded answers, a few vague ones, a few helpful hints and a few well-placed 'Find out IC's'

Psst ... you're nicer than RGS ... or maybe I should reword that to: I tend to think the emotional content of your written text is more positive than RGS's.

Likely because of the smilies. 

[RogueGunslinger]

 

[musashi]

 

[psionic fungus]

I agree with Musashi... 

At least half the time I see the "response" "Find out IC", it is entirely inappropriate...

The other half it just comes off as being pompous.   

[RogueGunslinger]

I agree that half the time it comes off pompous. And maybe the other half is inappropriate, but not entirely so. I just don't see the reasoning behind people thinking it's something that terrible to hear, and turn it into a big deal. It's other players saying it. People. People whom you are completely allowed to agree, or disagree with. So it gets thrown around a lot... Who gives a fuck. Move on, find your answers elsewhere. It's not like we're treating out newbies like complete and utter garbage here. Ain't that right Musashi?

[Lizzie]

This is something that really stuck out for me: LOD wrote:

"Which weapons are better than others?" is an obvious IC subjective question.

It is SO not an obvious IC subjective question. It -is- an IC subjective question, but that is ONLY "obvious" to people who already know the answer. And people who already know the answer, won't ask the question.

In most games, the stats of weapons are numeric, OOC by nature, and often listed in order of damage on gamer websites or fansites. The stats are knowable before the player ever starts playing the game. In many games, people wanting to roll up a dwarf, do so because everyone knows dwarves and blunt weapons make the most powerful warrior type. Dwarves wouldn't be very good with longswords or other one-handed edged weapons, but they can't be beat when they're using a club. In Armageddon, what is "obvious" is not at all what is "obvious" in the majority of the rest of the gaming world.

I think a lot of the problem stems from exactly this: that veterans are so used to knowing the answers to things already (by being veterans) that they forget these are *not* obviously IC subjective questions, and the attitude toward people asking them is reflected in their "obvious" eye-roll answers.

When you make a blanket statement that something is "obvious," please remember who is trying to make the observation. If it's a new player to the game, or even a veteran who is playing a certain skillset for the first time, it is not necessarily obvious at all. It's only obvious to YOU.

[Rhyden]

I agree with Musashi... 

At least half the time I see the "response" "Find out IC", it is entirely inappropriate...

The other half it just comes off as being pompous.   

I'd love to see some threads to back this.

Every time I see a 'Find out IC', it seems appropriate.

Maybe it's just that weird internet perspective thing.

[Rhyden]

This is something that really stuck out for me: LOD wrote:

"Which weapons are better than others?" is an obvious IC subjective question.

It is SO not an obvious IC subjective question. It -is- an IC subjective question, but that is ONLY "obvious" to people who already know the answer. And people who already know the answer, won't ask the question.

I think you misunderstood. LoD wasn't saying what weapons are better than others is obvious. He was saying this question is obviously a 'Find out IC' question. Which weapons are better than others? That's for the player to find out. In fact, I don't even think anyone really knows this answer but staff.

[LoD]

This is something that really stuck out for me: LOD wrote:

"Which weapons are better than others?" is an obvious IC subjective question.

It is SO not an obvious IC subjective question. It -is- an IC subjective question, but that is ONLY "obvious" to people who already know the answer. And people who already know the answer, won't ask the question.

I think you misunderstood. LoD wasn't saying what weapons are better than others is obvious. He was saying this question is obviously a 'Find out IC' question. Which weapons are better than others? That's for the player to find out. In fact, I don't even think anyone really knows this answer but staff.

I took Lizzie's comment to mean that part of the issue with the "Find out IC" response from players is that they assume the new player asking the question knows enough about the nature of the game to understand what is and isn't an obvious question they should pursue IC.  And, while I was only claiming it was obvious to myself, as an answer to Musashi's question about examples where certain questions could be answered with a "Find out IC", I think it's a fine point to make.

Veteran players may see a given question and, having played for 10 years, feel that the person asking should magically understand that the nature of their question is one that should be pursued IC.  This was probably something they learned many years ago themselves, but have since come to count as common knowledge -- or as an "obvious" question -- when in fact it is anything but that to the new player.  This assumption -- that the player recognizes the obvious nature of their question, but asks anyways -- is what Lizzie feels contributes to the abrupt or unhelpful response from those veteran players.

If I were to guess, I would probably say that we have about 10% of the people purposefully throwing out snarky and condescending "Find out IC" responses, 10% of the people assuming that's what people are thinking when they write that response, and a big middle ground of people that simply read the message for what it says, and not what it implies.

Do some people misinterpret the message of "Find out IC"?  Of course.  Is it the rampant and soul stealing devil of a response that some people seem to make it out to be?  Probably not.

However, we could probably all benefit from being a little more considerate and taking a bit more time if we choose to respond to a newbie's question, both with regards to their feelings and to keeping the answer within appropriate IC/OOC boundaries of the game.

-LoD

[psionic fungus]

I'd love to see some threads to back this.

Every time I see a 'Find out IC', it seems appropriate.

First... Have you done a search for "find out ic" in the forum?  The results seem to be a lot of people complaining about the phrase... I bet there is a reason for it!  Let's investigate!

I am curious, about those strap on the forearms bucklers.

Do these count as "Shield-Use" or do they just count as "Extra Armor"? Does the code see it as a "Shield"?

If it is simply, seen as "Armor" by the code.. Would it be fine to RP using it as you would a real buckler, then at times??

This would be simple enough to check IC.

Obviously this isn't something you have to check IC, as ICly it obviously works as both... This is an OOC code/syntax issue that cannot really be answered ICly.

I do have some questions, though, about what are recognized bugs, and what are problems caused solely by my own screw-ups or lack of proper syntax.  Input within guidelines?

1.  Are all items IG that describe themselves as vials useable as "vials" in the brewing code?
2.  Are all items created by a successful brew and that have the same item description actually identical?  Even if made with totally different ingredients?
3.  It doesn't appear that long-term successful brewing increases the range of items that a PC can brew.  Is this a bug?  A feature?
4.  If you have the right recipe, it seems impossible to fail in the attempt.  Is this a bug?  A feature?

I can't see any way anyone can answer your questions without revealing IC information, other than to say...

"Find out IC."

Questions 1, 3, and 4 are entirely concerned with code and bug issues.  These cannot be addressed -In Character-!  There is no way to address the fact that you cannot, under ANY circumstances, fuck up trying to make a pill out of two leaves!  You can certainly discover these things in game... But code flaws and known bugs can hardly be considered IC Information.  Even question 2 is only nominally IC.  I think it is a flaw of the code that so many herbs share properties, and -ICLY- it would not be so!

How can one tell if the armor will affect Hiding and Sneaking?
What defines Heavy armor...or are those skills affected by all armors.
If not, Which pieces can one wear without failing on those skills?

find out IC.

Again, this is a syntax/code issue, not an in character one.  A character would easily be able to tell if they are making a lot of noise or unable to move freely... A player does not have such an easy time.

The honest answer is that there is no foolproof way to determine if armor will effect hiding or sneaking.  You just have to be logical about it: keep armor light and flexible if you want to sneak in it.  There is little reason to simply say "find out IC" as the underlying question would probably be more properly phrased as: "How can I find out how armor effects sneaking and hiding while IC?"... A much more difficult question to answer.


So, there you go... Three examples.   There are many, many more.  It's usually the same scenario, someone asks about a code/syntax issue and gets told to "Find out IC", which is a functionally impossible task.

Next time you're thinking about saying "Find out IC." just remember how it can come across...  A little bit of elaboration, and some advice on how to do so would probably make a new player feel a lot more welcome.

Yeah.   

[X-D]

For the record, I liked it better when there was no stars.

As to find out IC....It is a good response and people who posted here saying to be patient because even if a bunch of people post to find out IC, if it is indeed not too IC then somebody will post the answer or how to get to the answer IG.

And that is one thing you definitly need to play this game...Patience.

[Tisiphone]

A further issue is where to put the 'obvious' divider as to what is IC and what is not. Hiding and sneaking are a good example, as PF kindly highlighted in his post. (No sarcasm there, I'm being serious.)

On the side of it being a code issue: some of the commands that break hide or penalize sneak don't appear to make sense at first glance. A good example of this is eq, which I mention only because a simple search of the semi-recent board activity will reveal that information. After all, eq simply checks your current equipment, rather than involving anything attention-getting. Further, a character should know, just like a person does, when he's trying to be sneaky, and even be relatively sure of his own success.

On the side of it being an IG issue: many of those commands that at first glance don't appear to make good sense breaking hide do, if you look at them differently. For example, take eq again: interpret it as quickly patting yourself down, moving around to check yourself over, and generally making a bit of noise as you move stuff around. In this view, it makes sense that it breaks hide.

Some commands are completely obvious, some are rather silly; e.g. kill man or stand (when standing).

I tend to err on the side of Find Out IC on the boards, because in many, many cases, while 'tis easy to assume that the code is buggy, we can't KNOW that (though in others we can; if you teleport into the Silt Sea when getting off of your argosy, something has probably gone wrong). So here, I try to find ways that the way the world is coded makes sense, like eq being patting yourself down rather than checking yourself out. Others might argue that, since there is no echo to the room, it shouldn't be interpreted as something that obvious; the simple truth is, they're right, there is no echo to the room, so we can't know unless an imm comes down and tells us.

At the same time, IG I rigourously use the bug command for things that don't appear to make sense. After all, if I'm wrong, the imms will ignore me.

[Rhyden]

PF, two of those 'Find out IC's in your example were written by staff.

Pretty much speaks for itself.

[Rahnevyn]

A recent code change means the 'eq' command no longer breaks hide.

[psionic fungus]

PF, two of those 'Find out IC's in your example were written by staff.

Pretty much speaks for itself.

Unlike some, I don't believe the staff are infallible.

The staff was wrong.

[Tisiphone]

Nothing to see here, I was being rantish, and that hardly ever solves anything.

[Maybe42or54]

The problem I see with Find out IC, is that is a lazy answer to me. Neither helpful nor encouraging. It does not point me in the wrong direction, and I am still frustrated at trying to find out IC before I asked.


Whenever I see find out IC, I scroll down to the next post. It never adds anything to the conversation.

When I see "find out IC, and here are some links that'll point you in the right direction." I check out those links, and I normally always find out something new. Those are constructive.

[musashi]

I agree that half the time it comes off pompous. And maybe the other half is inappropriate, but not entirely so. I just don't see the reasoning behind people thinking it's something that terrible to hear, and turn it into a big deal. It's other players saying it. People. People whom you are completely allowed to agree, or disagree with. So it gets thrown around a lot... Who gives a fuck. Move on, find your answers elsewhere. It's not like we're treating out newbies like complete and utter garbage here. Ain't that right Musashi?

Sorry to bail out on your RGS, I had to get a few hours sleep before I started hitting the GDB again  I think you're right that by and large newbies here who ask for help are not treated like complete and utter garbage. They generally get the help they need from someone down the course of the thread. I think (or hope) everyone agrees with that. This is a cool game, with cool people playing it.

But IMO, also happen to agree with this:

The problem I see with Find out IC, is that is a lazy answer to me. Neither helpful nor encouraging. It does not point me in the wrong direction, and I am still frustrated at trying to find out IC before I asked.


Whenever I see find out IC, I scroll down to the next post. It never adds anything to the conversation.

When I see "find out IC, and here are some links that'll point you in the right direction." I check out those links, and I normally always find out something new. Those are constructive.

I just don't find a "find out IC" with nothing else to go along with it, helpful in any sense. So my little opinion (for what it's worth) remains that, rather than make a thread explaining how when we say "Find out IC" we mean that in a good fuzzy way ... why not just elaborate a little more to make sure the person reading your reply knows you mean it in a good fuzzy way.

I'm not argueing with anybody. Tisiphone, LoD, Rhyden, Incognito, they all have very good explanations for how just saying "find out IC" does not have to mean "I am being a jerk to you". But since a newbie next month will probably not read this thread to get those awesome explanations before they post a newbie type question that might slightly cross the IC/OOC barrier ... I think odds are, like countless newbies in the threads gone by (do a search for "find out IC" and see for yourself), they'll ask a question ... get that as an answer, and feel like someone was trying to be mean to them. And we're right back where we started before this thread was born.

It just seems to me that it might be a bit more productive in the long run to avoid sayings that will likely come off as seeming rude, unless you're actually trying to be rude, rather than make a thread about how you mean those saying in a good way. That's all.  But I'm sure I've said that enough by now ... so I'll let it die.

Post note: I am /only/ talking about when "find out IC" are in affect the only words in a person's reply. If someone replied to my question the way LoD, or Rhyden did ... even though the end answer is still "find out IC", the wording is easier to percieve as "nice", smilies were used ... and little hints about where to /start/ looking IC were given, making it a very helpful response.

And lastly (I promise!  ):

If I were to guess, I would probably say that we have about 10% of the people purposefully throwing out snarky and condescending "Find out IC" responses, 10% of the people assuming that's what people are thinking when they write that response, and a big middle ground of people that simply read the message for what it says, and not what it implies.

I hope this does not sound snarky, because I REALLY don't want it to, but after reading that bit on the research into miscommunication in emails and text mediums vice speaking to people, I think the percent of folks who assume people are trying to be mean when they read that comment is a bit higher than 10%. Have a look at this pie chart!



Accordingly to these silly little men who spent a lot of time gathering statistics on it, about 89% of people reading a text message believe they are reading the intent of the message correctly. Only 56% are actually doing that. So that leaves about 33% who think they're reading it right, but aren't. 3 times higher than your estimated 10%.

Again, I don't mean to sound like I'm trying to be a smart-ass, I'm just offering up a different opinion, and trying to show you with some kind of citeable source, the reason I came to that opinion.

Thanks! 

[Tisiphone]

This thread is effectively complete. I think everyone agrees with everyone else, but is possibly stressing different points.

[Mood]

This thread is effectively complete. I think everyone agrees with everyone else, but is possibly stressing different points.

Welcome to the internet.

[Shimrod]

I think a lot of frustration stems from this simple scenario:

Players who have been here a decade and know the ins and outs of the game's syntax and branching each have at their fingertips (in-game) supreme knowledge of every guild's abilities, every creature in the world, and every geographic nook and cranny. So even a verging-on-retardation half-giant warrior knows more about magic than my water priest, or more about crafting than my merchant. This game has tried so hard to eliminate stats to avoid twinkage (admirable goal), that the result is opacity that makes everything but fighting so completely mystifying that all you CAN do is twink because you don't know how to do anything else!

"Find out ICly" is used so often, it seems more like hazing the rookies than actual advice. "My knowledge was forged through dark years of travail and sorrow. You will not gain my eternal sekrits until you undergo your own vision-quest." Okay, fine.

[touringCompl3t3]

I like the original post. 

[Barzalene]

Chiming in late. Find out IC usually means very simply, not I'm a dick and I don't want to help you, it either means It will be more fun to find out in game, or it would be cheating to find out out of game.