specific hemote targets

[tortall]

I have to disagree with the OP.

Excluding/including who sees your hemotes is unrealistic. What if somebody else who was not intended to see you giving Amos a wet willy, actually in fact notices it by accident?

Er, that's the whole point of hemote. As it stands NOW, however, not even Amos will notice you sticking your wet infer into his ear.


We're just asking that there be a way to target someone you WANT to see what you're doing, and have everyone else only MAYBE notice it.


I -can- see how EXCLUDING people MIGHT be twinkish.

But frankly, there's tons of stuff that's twinkish in this game. Tdesc could be used as twinkish, but it's actually a VERY useful, NEWLY ADDED, RP tool. Within the last year.

[Xeran Van Houten]

This thread just made me remember a couple days ago I wanted to a possessive hidden emote and didn't know how, so it took me a few minutes to reword to a hemote, which could have gotten me a second hemote/phemote... Which is the syntax I didn't know about:

phemote!

[Gimfalisette]

Though I still think if I want to poke AT someone under the table, I should be able to make them notice, and have few/none others notice. When you're doing an action TO someone, they're about 95% likely to notice.

I actually assumed that when you used ~/!/#/%/^/ect in a hemote, the person you were targeting saw it. Or, I did until they never responded. :-D

Well, I said before...I think this is solved by training the PCs you play with, over time, to watch you  I have often had PC relationships where over time we just started watching each other whenever we were together, because we knew something subtle and interesting was going to happen.

And I think it's really OK that if your burly buddy Malik is watching someone at the bar (because he's hot for them or he suspects they're a threat), then he doesn't notice you bumping him under the table. He's paying more attention to other stuff than he is to you; it's IC. I recommend slapping him full on the face, shrieking at him to pay more attention, and storming out. Then pout until he watches you!

Alternately, kill him and acquire a more attentive buddy.

[Manhattan]

Oops. I might've been mistaken.

I hate these circular logics. Like 'nosave'. Always takes me a while to understand that 'nosave arrest' means you want to be arrested, or 'nosave climb' means you want to fall. Maybe I'm just dumb.

[brytta.leofa]

It would appear to me that the decision on whether or not a character notices a particular hemote is determined by the code.

I'd even go as far as saying that this would be power emoting, as proposed.

I certainly see room for abuse, but the code can't tell the difference between:
   > hemote elbows ~amos in the ribs.
and
   > hemote sticks out ^me tongue at ~amos as !amos turns away.
Yet Unwatchful Amos should probably have a much higher chance of noticing the first example than the second.

I think the abuse potential is much, much higher for the "hemote to one person, normal emote to everyone else" idea, and basically oppose it for that reason.

[tortall]

I'll settle for being able to target one-two people who will DEFINITELY see a hemote, rather than neither likely seeing it.


That's really all -I- want.

[Chettaman]

I definately still like this idea.
But I'm definately going to watch a lot more people.