Poll Closed: Default for cloaks being open or closed

[Rhyden]

So all cloaks are "closeable" containers now?

I think this may be the case. My character has a cloak with pockets that didn't used to be "closeable". Now I can't access my cloak's pockets when it's closed. Therefore, I assume all cloaks' pockets can be closed up now.

Poor thieves.

[Tlaloc]

One thing that I would've liked to see, is some 'other' benefits and penalties to having the cloak opened and closed. Because right now, the way I understand it, people will use their cloaks in exactly 'opposite' way then people would in real life.

A ranger in a longcloak leaves the city gates and unlutches his cloak open. Because .... he might need to draw in a hurry, and the chance of meeting thieves in the middle of the wild are slim.  Ofcourse, the wind, the sand, the dirt will have an easier time getting inside his garments, but ... oh well. That's not coded in.

A ranger in a longcloak enters the city. The first thing he does is tightens his cloak as shut as possible. Why? Because the delay to drawing isnt all that relevent, the crim code is in effect, and the city's full of thieves to nick his nifty weapons.

While irl, it would be exactly the opposite. Mainly because the cloak's 'main' function is cover from weather/sun/dust, not thieves.

I actually kind of see this as an RP thing. If it were me, I'm not sure I would auto-open my cloak upon leaving the city. Rather, I would open it prior to an engagement (that I knew was coming). I see a a ranger in a longcloak tightening his cloak about him as he heads out in to the sands on a scouting mission. Upon seeing a gith on the horizon - or entering dangerous territory - he unlatches his cloak to allow for better movement during combat. Maybe my PC gets jumped, and maybe I suffer a draw-penalty from it. To me it's worth it just for the scene where an undertaker is gravely putting the finishing touches on a crappy wooden coffin while two guys square off in a duel at High Sun, throwing their longcloaks open, fingers twitching by their sheathed weapons, a bead of sweat trailing down their cheeks as a tumbleweed rolls past...

So, to sum up: I say do what's IC, and not what's coded. If it's IC for your ranger to be more worried about grit and dirt and sunburn, then close up that cloak. If it's IC for your ranger to open up his cloak to show off his fancy new nipple rings, or get at his sword faster, then open up the cloak. This is an RP tool. Use it!

[Reiloth]

One thing that I would've liked to see, is some 'other' benefits and penalties to having the cloak opened and closed. Because right now, the way I understand it, people will use their cloaks in exactly 'opposite' way then people would in real life.

A ranger in a longcloak leaves the city gates and unlutches his cloak open. Because .... he might need to draw in a hurry, and the chance of meeting thieves in the middle of the wild are slim.  Ofcourse, the wind, the sand, the dirt will have an easier time getting inside his garments, but ... oh well. That's not coded in.

A ranger in a longcloak enters the city. The first thing he does is tightens his cloak as shut as possible. Why? Because the delay to drawing isnt all that relevent, the crim code is in effect, and the city's full of thieves to nick his nifty weapons.

While irl, it would be exactly the opposite. Mainly because the cloak's 'main' function is cover from weather/sun/dust, not thieves.

I actually kind of see this as an RP thing. If it were me, I'm not sure I would auto-open my cloak upon leaving the city. Rather, I would open it prior to an engagement (that I knew was coming). I see a a ranger in a longcloak tightening his cloak about him as he heads out in to the sands on a scouting mission. Upon seeing a gith on the horizon - or entering dangerous territory - he unlatches his cloak to allow for better movement during combat. Maybe my PC gets jumped, and maybe I suffer a draw-penalty from it. To me it's worth it just for the scene where an undertaker is gravely putting the finishing touches on a crappy wooden coffin while two guys square off in a duel at High Sun, throwing their longcloaks open, fingers twitching by their sheathed weapons, a bead of sweat trailing down their cheeks as a tumbleweed rolls past...

So, to sum up: I say do what's IC, and not what's coded. If it's IC for your ranger to be more worried about grit and dirt and sunburn, then close up that cloak. If it's IC for your ranger to open up his cloak to show off his fancy new nipple rings, or get at his sword faster, then open up the cloak. This is an RP tool. Use it!

This is what I was trying to say.

Also, why aren't you staff anymore? I hope you re-applied.

[Jarek]

Note that Tlaloc's suggestion here is how Arm 2's wear locations will work.  Staff can describe what an item covers and what it doesn't, covering over items that are below it.

Will that apply to armor values or just look coverage, or both?

[Tisiphone]

I actually kind of see this as an RP thing. If it were me, I'm not sure I would auto-open my cloak upon leaving the city. Rather, I would open it prior to an engagement (that I knew was coming). I see a a ranger in a longcloak tightening his cloak about him as he heads out in to the sands on a scouting mission. Upon seeing a gith on the horizon - or entering dangerous territory - he unlatches his cloak to allow for better movement during combat. Maybe my PC gets jumped, and maybe I suffer a draw-penalty from it. To me it's worth it just for the scene where an undertaker is gravely putting the finishing touches on a crappy wooden coffin while two guys square off in a duel at High Sun, throwing their longcloaks open, fingers twitching by their sheathed weapons, a bead of sweat trailing down their cheeks as a tumbleweed rolls past...

So, to sum up: I say do what's IC, and not what's coded. If it's IC for your ranger to be more worried about grit and dirt and sunburn, then close up that cloak. If it's IC for your ranger to open up his cloak to show off his fancy new nipple rings, or get at his sword faster, then open up the cloak. This is an RP tool. Use it!

I agree that this is the way it should be, but right now the code penalizes that behaviour, rather than rewarding it, which will lead to people doing the opposite.

[Morgenes]

Note that Tlaloc's suggestion here is how Arm 2's wear locations will work.  Staff can describe what an item covers and what it doesn't, covering over items that are below it.

Will that apply to armor values or just look coverage, or both?

both

[brytta.leofa]

Honestly, who was y'all's Byn sarge?

If your weapons aren't drawn when you leave the gates, you're already too late.  Mr. Mekillot doesn't stop for chit-chat.

[a strange shadow]

2) cloak pockets remain permanently open, and unaffected by open/close.

why? many coats/dusters/cloaks have pockets on the outside, and it makes little IC sense to 'open' your cloak to access an outside pocket.

This directly conflicts with previous cloaks that could open/close their pockets.  It's actually a boon to you all as you are now all getting the 'closable' container idea on all cloaks.  Really, if you think about it, I don't think you really want me to do this, if you still think you do, start a poll and have the playerbase show me that it is what you want.

Actually, I do really want this: one, this makes PCs even more impregnable for pickpockets; two, it makes little sense to be forced to open your cloak to access a pocket on the outside; three, the cloaks which could be closed were very few in number compared to those which couldn't. I'll start a poll, though, once I get off work & have time to elaborate.

[Morgenes]

2) cloak pockets remain permanently open, and unaffected by open/close.

why? many coats/dusters/cloaks have pockets on the outside, and it makes little IC sense to 'open' your cloak to access an outside pocket.

This directly conflicts with previous cloaks that could open/close their pockets.  It's actually a boon to you all as you are now all getting the 'closable' container idea on all cloaks.  Really, if you think about it, I don't think you really want me to do this, if you still think you do, start a poll and have the playerbase show me that it is what you want.

Actually, I do really want this: one, this makes PCs even more impregnable for pickpockets; two, it makes little sense to be forced to open your cloak to access a pocket on the outside; three, the cloaks which could be closed were very few in number compared to those which couldn't. I'll start a poll, though, once I get off work & have time to elaborate.

I will note that since this was requested I did go back and refactor things so that there is only one 'closed' flag (there were two, one for the pocket and one for the cloak).  I won't easily be able to rectify this, and so it needs to be all or nothing at least in the short term.  Either closing your cloak protects the contents, or it doesn't.

[Thunkkin]

If your weapons aren't drawn when you leave the gates, you're already too late.

Sir, yessir!

Have to sheathe them in order to get out your skinning knife or mess with your bow ... sounds like a pretty reasonable time to open that cloak to allow freedom of movement.  All done shooting/skinning?  Get out your blades and tighten up the cloak and trudge/ride on.

[ScionReaver]

Will the inventory-view sdesc of the cloak change to reflect that it's open or closed?  Like...

PLEASE!

Either that or

<worn on body>    nipples

[Lizzie]

Previously: All things worn on body covered up stuff. It didn't matter if they had pockets, and it didn't matter if they were openable/closeable.

Now: Only things that can close, that are worn on body cover up stuff. Not all things worn on body are openable/closeable.

Should things that are worn on body (capes, abas, caftans), that do NOT have pockets, and are NOT openable/closeable, be typoed or bugged to have the ability to open/close them added to them? Cause - I really REALLY don't want people seeing my ratty old waterskin and mismatched belt on my waist, just because my cape goes perfectly with the rest of my outfit.

[Only He Stands There]

They're that way for a reason.

I can definitely see your belt and waterskin when you wear a cape. Aba, too - they've got two openings instead of one, and you'd look damn-near comical trying to keep them shut.

Caftans, now, those should probably be bugged, as the vast majority of caftans (at least IRL) are more robelike in appearance than anything, and most don't even have front openings.

Otherwise - if you're wanting to wear a cape because it fits so perfectly with the rest of your outfit, then obviously your WHOLE outfit needs to fit - including your belt and your ratty waterskin - because you're not Dracula, and your cape is not made of malleable, impermeable shadow that blocks sight of everything to your knees.

[Synthesis]

In other news:  who actually wastes a belt slot with a waterskin? 

[Lizzie]

Funny, you never used to be able to see my waterskin, so what's different now? Oh - right. He made CLOAKS change. So it's possible he did "mon un imm openable cloak" and forgot about ALL those other outer garments that have -always- covered shirts and belts, but simply lack that "cloak" keyword.

That is why I'm asking Morgenes if these items, which have always covered up belts and shirts and anything hanging off the belts in the past, need to be bugged. To put them back where they used to be, regarding "what these items cover." They have always covered what they covered. Now they don't. It can be problematic, for a myriad of reasons, the ugly waterskin syndrome being merely the most convenient when I was typing it out.

Synthesis: I do. I didn't know it wasn't a common thing to do. Especially since um..they -can- be worn on the belt, and you -can- buy belts that hold a dozen knives, so who cares about one single slot? If these capes, which are actually parts of other outfits, and not intended to be worn *under* cloaks...are no longer going to be able to cover the upper torso (even though they're worn on the body..hello?)...

then I'm gonna start writing up matching waterskins to go with every last outfit in the known world. Because, brown tandu looks LOUSY with purple silk.

[Only He Stands There]

That's what this change was ABOUT - cloaks being able to open and close and realistically show what they should show.

Cloaks should cover you up. Abas and capes should not. That's how it WAS, because the code was an inefficient blanket on anything worn "about."

That was changed - and purposefully, unless I'm mistaken - to fix these problems.


Closed cloak:


Open cloak:


Cape:


Cloaks cover you up. That's one of their main purposes: keep you warm, keep you anonymous. Capes are not meant for anonymity or covering you up - they're meant for keeping you warm and faaaashionable.


[Edit]
I misspoke on the abas earlier, however - they were an invention of Herbert's Dune, and I was thinking of tabards. My mistake. However, if they had wanted every single item worn about to be able to be closeable, I'm sure it would have been a LOT easier to code the change to affect everything en masse as the prior code had. The fact that not everything is closeable feels purposeful.
[/Edit]

[Morgenes]

For now you have to have it be marked as a cloak to cover things.  Per the discussion before, anything that was worn about was covering things (even capes, bandoleers and others that should not have). 

If you have something that should cover but isn't, bug it, we will make it so it open/closes for now.  I did not get to the part about having items that always cover but aren't openable/closeable, nor do I know when I will.

[Tlaloc]

[Edit]
I misspoke on the abas earlier, however - they were an invention of Herbert's Dune, and I was thinking of tabards. My mistake. However, if they had wanted every single item worn about to be able to be closeable, I'm sure it would have been a LOT easier to code the change to affect everything en masse as the prior code had. The fact that not everything is closeable feels purposeful.
[/Edit]

The aba (or abaya) is traditional wear of the Bedouins. Here's a pretty good link showing some pictures of them: http://www.raqs.co.nz/me/clothing_cloak.html

That site in general might be a good resource for kadians and other fashionistas.

[Only He Stands There]

I was thinking the aba and abaya/abaaya were two separate things, with the former being Herbert's creation. Interesting. Thanks.

[Jingo]

Huh. I always assumed that abas were just big baggy hoodies.

[spicemustflow]

Are some cloaks not able to be closed, or I'm doing something wrong?

Sorry if this came up already, I haven't read the whole thread.

[SMuz]

Hmm.. I don't really like how the aba works now. I mean for Bynners, it seems ok enough to have a breastplate on top of the aba. But when I see a blouse and skirt on top of the aba... well, that's just bad fashion

Maybe the body and legs equipment should be under the aba, but the belt and anything on it on top?

[spicemustflow]

Why the dark, hooded cloak can't be closed, but filthy dark, hooded one can? I wanted to bug it, but then I'm sure someone would do that a long time ago if it were a bug.

[Morgenes]

Why the dark, hooded cloak can't be closed, but filthy dark, hooded one can? I wanted to bug it, but then I'm sure someone would do that a long time ago if it were a bug.

These objects should mostly be fixed, wish up if you find a cloak that should be closable but isn't and we'll fix it.

[spawnloser]

How are we supposed to know which ones should and which ones shouldn't?