military wear

[FantasyWriter]

I like the idea of uniorm items change sdesc...
I don't like coded benifits coming from uniforms.

How often IRL do you see guards letting people pass a gate without checking their ID just because they are in uniform?

[Kol]

I like the idea of uniorm items change sdesc...
I don't like coded benifits coming from uniforms.

How often IRL do you see guards letting people pass a gate without checking their ID just because they are in uniform?

I wholehartedly agree with FW, when I was in the British navy, just having a uniform didnt get you on base, if you lost your I'D card, that was it, you were -politely- escorted to a nice -comfortable- cell, untill your identity could be confirmed by a supirior who personally knew you, and if you were then cleared, you were given a proper strip down for loosing you ID......


So yhea, in short, I'm against.

[jcarter]

I personally think this would be stupid.

It's already too easy to dupe NPCs in the game.

It's currently restricted to using two or three abilities during a very narrow time frame, the technique of which could easily be seen as twinkish at best, if not outright code abuse. Other than that, compounds are for the most part impenetrable.

Any PC with a half-grain of awareness would see right through you merely donning some clan gear and walking around their compound.  Thus, coding this would merely add yet another mechanism to dupe those poor response-limited NPCs.

Yeah, it's pretty obvious if the dude you see every day with a 'Rinthi accent in the Gaj is strolling around the Tor compound in full uniform. Outside of that, if people are playing their parts correctly, there shouldn't be any immediate damning evidence just because a person your PC has never seen be is walking around the Xyz compound in the proper Xyz uniform besides the hints they drop.

Not only that, but the way compounds are coded in the game is built upon the assumption that it is difficult to get inside in the first place.  There are a number of things that would get totally unbalanced if this assumption was no longer relevant.

Good. As said originally, player guards now have an actual purpose and are a needed service. Spies can be a real threat. People can be reached out and touched instead of hiding behind NPCs. There is an actual, tangible value placed on uniforms.

I like the idea of uniorm items change sdesc...
I don't like coded benifits coming from uniforms.

How often IRL do you see guards letting people pass a gate without checking their ID just because they are in uniform?

There is nothing even close to resembling photo IDs in game, largely making this completely irrelevant.

[BlackMagic0]

Lets not derail.

This thread was started for the 'solider' bit added to a description, so let us discuss that. The change to code for clan such into just having to wear the EQ is for another discussion.

I want the soldier tag..  So lets keep discussing that!!

[Archbaron]

I want the soldier tag..  So lets keep discussing that!!

[Gunnerblaster]

Yeah, no coded effects. Just put in 'soldier' in the description.

Putting something on and taking it off shouldn't affect code beyond the desc change.

It's not like just because someone throws on a Templar's robe, they get l33t skillz.

[Qzzrbl]

Yeah, no coded effects. Just put in 'soldier' in the description.

Putting something on and taking it off shouldn't affect code beyond the desc change.

It's not like just because someone throws on a Templar's robe, they get l33t skillz.

But would you be questioning a man wearing a Templar's robe as to how he got it?

I wouldn't.

[FantasyWriter]

Yeah, no coded effects. Just put in 'soldier' in the description.

Putting something on and taking it off shouldn't affect code beyond the desc change.

It's not like just because someone throws on a Templar's robe, they get l33t skillz.

But would you be questioning a man wearing a Templar's robe as to how he got it?

I wouldn't.

First of all, it would take much more than a Jihaen robe to make me believe someone is really a templar.

[Kronibas]

I wholehartedly agree with FW, when I was in the British navy, just having a uniform didnt get you on base, if you lost your I'D card, that was it, you were -politely- escorted to a nice -comfortable- cell, untill your identity could be confirmed by a supirior who personally knew you, and if you were then cleared, you were given a proper strip down for loosing you ID......

So yhea, in short, I'm against.

When I was in the United States Marine Corps, I showed up at Millington Naval Support Station in Memphis one day without an ID, but I was in my digi cammies and had all my gear and crap in the back of my car.

The asshole Master at Arms (US navy's version of a cop/guard/general douchebag) just wouldn't let me take my car through because I didn't have an ID, and it sorta sucked having to hump my MOLLE gear about a mile and a half into garrison and my assigned barracks for the weekend because of that, but they still let me in.

That's just an opposing anecdote to show that sometimes a uniform and a specific "look" will grant access to certain places, even in the ultra-paranoid post-911 world in which we live.

I'm uncertain whether or not this would be applicable to Zalanthas... but the idea of gear have coded benefits is interesting and might deserve attention, once the possibilities of abuse have been weighed against the pros.

[Dan]

Yeah, no coded effects. Just put in 'soldier' in the description.

Putting something on and taking it off shouldn't affect code beyond the desc change.

It's not like just because someone throws on a Templar's robe, they get l33t skillz.

But would you be questioning a man wearing a Templar's robe as to how he got it?

I wouldn't.

First of all, it would take much more than a Jihaen robe to make me believe someone is really a templar.

Yeah, like a steel-bladed staff or something.   

[Qzzrbl]

Yeah, no coded effects. Just put in 'soldier' in the description.

Putting something on and taking it off shouldn't affect code beyond the desc change.

It's not like just because someone throws on a Templar's robe, they get l33t skillz.

But would you be questioning a man wearing a Templar's robe as to how he got it?

I wouldn't.

First of all, it would take much more than a Jihaen robe to make me believe someone is really a templar.

You've been playing up north too long.

I don't know how it goes up there, but you sure as fuck wouldn't question a southern templar.

On another note.... There's really nothing other than an aba and patch that signifies a Bynner, and with so many NPC and VNPC sergeants and lieutenants and whatnot, it would be pretty easy to sneak in with just an aba and patch.

[Mechafish]

I'm against the idea.

[Jdr]

Just to be different right? In that case, I ALSO am against it. Hah!

[X-D]

Soldiers should show up as soldiers.

Or else they should lose the coded percs they get for being a soldier.

Byn...no, as nifty as it would be to wear the aba and have it tack "mercenary" on, Byn has no coded percs.

Soldiers do. Just as templars do.

Every single NPC soldier IG shows it in Sdesc. PCs should be no different.

I'd actually go so far as to say that a PC soldier clanned AOD/Legion/Kurac whatever must be in the uniform (Dustcloak/Tabard) In order for the coded percs to even work.

IE, wearing the militia duskcloak would tack soldier on but you would get no other coded perc, and if you are clanned militia but are not wearing the militia cloak then you are not immune to crime code and other percs.

[SMuz]

I agree with what X-D says He did say that Byn gets the "mercenary" sdesc right?

[Qzzrbl]

One would think that access to the Byn compound would be considered a coded "perc", no?

[Rooster]

I agree with what X-D says He did say that Byn gets the "mercenary" sdesc right?

No he said they don't. I'm firmly opposed to it. You can't tell if someone's a 'mercenary' because they're wearing a Byn cloak. I would only want this implemented for soldiers.

[Qzzrbl]

I agree with what X-D says He did say that Byn gets the "mercenary" sdesc right?

No he said they don't. I'm firmly opposed to it. You can't tell if someone's a 'mercenary' because they're wearing a Byn cloak. I would only want this implemented for soldiers.

Dear sir, the T'zai Byn is a group of mercenaries.

So wearing a cloak that signifies that one is a part of the T'zai Byn would make one look like a mercenary. Because that's what Bynners are. Mercenaries. 

[Yam]

But there are plenty of non-T'zai Byn mercenaries. Hell, there are plenty of non-T'zai Byn people in brown, shit-covered cloaks.

[Qzzrbl]

But there are plenty of non-T'zai Byn mercenaries. Hell, there are plenty of non-T'zai Byn people in brown, shit-covered cloaks.

Ah, but do they wear Byn patches as well?

More to the Byn uniform than just the cloak. 

[Cutthroat]

Would it be better if "Bynner" were used rather than "mercenary"?

[Taven]

I agree with what X-D says He did say that Byn gets the "mercenary" sdesc right?

No he said they don't. I'm firmly opposed to it. You can't tell if someone's a 'mercenary' because they're wearing a Byn cloak. I would only want this implemented for soldiers.

Dear sir, the T'zai Byn is a group of mercenaries.

So wearing a cloak that signifies that one is a part of the T'zai Byn would make one look like a mercenary. Because that's what Bynners are. Mercenaries. 

I think the point is that Bynners can't arrest people, or incriminate them, or anything like that. I think that if you're trying to sneak into a compound, it shouldn't be because you can codedly, I think that will lead to incredible twinkery. I think that emailing the imms and/or wishing up would get a real reaction, and avoid all that. I also think that every single clan getting what they are tacked on to the end is silly, and would be very excessive. I can see the arguement for soldiers getting that in their sdesc, however, with the right gear.

I'm not sure I like soldier coded powers being connected to what they're currently wearing, but it does make some sense.

[Yam]

But there are plenty of non-T'zai Byn mercenaries. Hell, there are plenty of non-T'zai Byn people in brown, shit-covered cloaks.

Ah, but do they wear Byn patches as well?

More to the Byn uniform than just the cloak. 

I doubt the patch is big or bright or not covered in blood, dust, and shit enough to be identified from any appreciable distance.

[Rooster]

Dear sir, the T'zai Byn is a group of mercenaries.

Yeah no shit. Pardon the pun.

So wearing a cloak that signifies that one is a part of the T'zai Byn would make one look like a mercenary. Because that's what Bynners are. Mercenaries. 

True, but 'mercenary' is a much more loose term than 'soldier'. Anyone can be a mercenary in Zalanthas, you don't need a brown military aba or a unit patch. Not anyone can be a soldier. Besides, there are elves, half-elves, and dwarves in the Byn too. What would you suggest? The brown-eyed dwarf = the brown-eyed mercenary? No thanks. Add Bynner as their descriptor word? Even worse - I would find it extremely jarring.

Soldiers - Okay, cool
Mercenaries - Thanks, but no thanks

[Qzzrbl]

So a brown eyed dwarf becoming "the brown eyed soldier" is any better than "the brown eyed mercenary"?

I hardly see how a black military dustcloak is any more distinguishable from other cloaks than a brown aba, especially when dirty.