Contacting

[Rogerthat]

Edited to take out what I previously said:
Uh, no way to delete anything so don't mind me, sigh. sorry.

[X-D]

The problem is not so much staff side Nyr.

More player side, but it is a problem player side because staff does not have a good set of rules on the matter.

Which leaves the players up in the air and in contention.


For instance.

I once shadowed a PC about for a while, I looked at the PC several times and tried to pick a keyword out of the mdesc, and was unable because the player of said PC used obscure words in his sdesc and those words were not even a synonym of any on the mdesc, instead the mdesc describes one of the obscure words in the sdesc. Lame IMO, but while still nicely out of sight I contact said PC. Who then OOCs a complaint on sdesc fishing with the way. Also lame IMO.

Now, I think that the mdesc sdesc were staff side failings. But more importantly, since there is nothing clear on the matter from staff rulings, people, get to decide one way or another themselves..

Then, one staffer says it is fine, another says well, it is not really fine but not really bad, then another says that is what it is meant for and another says it depends on the situation. Then the players check the docs and find there is NO ruling on the matter in print at all.

And if they are players like me, if it is not in the main docs I only consider it that staffers opinion not a rule, and unless that staffer is an overlord...well, I will pretty much ignore the opinion.

And the GDB is not posted docs...hell, many players don't even read it, I did not for several years.

Understand what I am getting at here?

[Dar]

My personal opinion is that I dislike sdesc sniffing via psi. Barrier is easily "easily" breached in many many cases. So whenever I play identity conscious people (a le RF and criminals), if a person psi sniffs me, the chances of my character not killing him decrease instantly. If they mask the psi sniff with a bit of a mention via the way. I'm just fine with it, my character assumes that the person contacted mine to relay the sentence. But when it's an obvious psi sniff, the respect for their life just ... plummets. Any possible arrangements that "could've" been achieved dont, any kind of trust that could've been built, does not.

So yeah, maybe it's legal to do it, maybe it's not. But it's a decision each person has to make.

[Nyr]

I can see how that would be confusing. I see what you mean.

I don't see an easy solution.

[X-D]

Well, we are both in the same boat on that point then.

Though I really think that once barrier is maxed it should be VERY hard for a non-psi PC to break it.

As it sits max contact breaks max barrier 50% of the time, and every player knows it. So you know that 2-4 tries will get you past the barrier. If maxed contact only broke maxed barrier 10% of the time you could not do so all casual like, IE, spamming to get the sdescs of the 5 hooded PCs in the room.

OR make it so that breaking a barrier with contact cost a LOT more stun.

Then put in a rule on char gen that your sdesc needs to match your mdesc with at least 50% of the words and no synonyms.

That would lower the need to psi sniff sdescs.

[Nahara]

...parts of your post are inaccurate, X-D.

[Lizzie]

Easy way to address (not a solution - nothing is foolproof but anything is better than the status quo):

Better enforce the docs, and add to them. I did a search of the help files and the regular docs, and couldn't find -any- indication that the sdesc had to even be remotely related to the mdesc. That should be changed. It should be an actual rule, that the sdesc, MUST reflect the mdesc. And, the mdesc, MUST contain within it a description of the sdesc (if not the exact words, which I personally feel could be optional as long as the descriptions are clearly written)

However, I -did- find this:

http://www.armageddon.org/intro/intro.html#sdesc

And right at the very beginning of this section, isolated from the rest of this section:

Creating a Short Description:
Keep in mind is that your short description should contain the most significant features of your character's appearance.

This is -often- completely disregarded by players, and by extension, the staff. Since the players cannot enter the game with those sdescs, unless the staff has approved them. And clearly, the staff is disregarding the "should" and assuming it means "doesn't have to." The "should" should be changed to a "must" and be enforced across the board for newly generated PCs. Obviously with tdesc, there might be new features on a character that have replaced the original as being significant. However people should -start- with whatever is most significant, in their sdesc. There should be no exceptions. The tall dark man should NOT be allowed to show up out of the hall of kings with a missing arm, or an extra leg, or womanly curves, or green skin. Conversely, the womanly-curved man MUST have those curves described as somehow feminine, in his mdesc. And the green-skinned elf MUST present in his mdesc some description of green skin (whether green, or emerald, or reminiscent of the leaves on a citron tree in full spring splendour or whatever else).

This causes a HUGE amount of contention, and way-sniffing. If the sdesc and the mdesc correlate to each other, AND the sdesc complies with the docs, AND the staff enforces both, then you will reduce the amount of griping from both sides of this issue: the people who are being way-sniffed won't get way-sniffed as often, and the people don't the sniffing won't have to sniff as often.

[Rogerthat]

Lets see this in ARM 2, or if that is not coming out anytime soon, arm 1.. Please?

Also should have some type of fix in arm one IMO.
Just saying. 

[AmandaGreathouse]

A bunch of stuff I couldn't agree with more.

Sounds like a good way to help the situation, and one I'd be all for. To use an example, I know a lot of people like to use thesaurus-requiring words for their sdescs, but with multiple keyword contact, it's really unnecessary. Good rule of thumb for an sdesc, I think: How you would be described in 5 words or less.

Examples of hilarious keywords that make you think 'How would I ever, EVER use this to describe this person as an obvious trait of what they physically look like?': blousy, zaftig, poised, japuar-breasted, sheened, august, atramentous, badious, razor, willowy (like a willow? That's as zalanthan as a cupid's bow mouth), urbane, and more.

Do you really think that those sound like word choices that would at ALL be used? I mean, if we're treating SDESC as though it's a completely IC thing rather than an OOC way of targetting your pc for coded interaction, shouldn't we be using sdescs that make IC sense?

[X-D]

Really Nahara, which parts?

How weak barrier is compared to contact?

If so, your right, it is actually much easier then I stated, but 50% was a good number.

[Synthesis]

Once you have barrier at (master), it is pretty hard for a non-psi to break it.

I have contact at (master), and I've sat directly across from people trying to break their barrier and was unable to do it after 10+ attempts.

I'd speculate that your wisdom stat gives a significant bonus to psionics, so that if you're a dwarf with poor wisdom, you might be (master) at barrier but still suck at it, because the elf with very good wisdom who has contact at (master) will have a significant stat-based bonus that will overcome it.

I think that's fair, personally (if it's even the case).

[X-D]

You can flip a coin 10 times and have all heads.

[Nahara]

The part that every player knows it. 

[Synthesis]

You can flip a coin 10 times and have all heads.

I really don't need a lecture on probability and inference.

The anecdote is a rhetorical device intended to convey a main idea concisely, when full presentation of the available data would be unwieldy or impossible (or against the rules, in this case).

[Armaddict]

Wisdom has a very LARGE part to do with psionics if they've remained the same, but I won't go into detail about just as to how.

[X-D]

Oh, like you never do it.

And sure it does, hell it has been posted before.

But even all thinks being relatively equal, barrier is still too easy to break.

And the last tweak to it only made it easier.

[Majikal]

barrier is still too easy to break.

This is my only beef with contact, fixing this would solve sdesc sniffing and many other issues.

[Armaddict]

It's not easy to break if one practices it with the tenacity that they do contact.  Which is pretty much a must for anyone who -doesn't want people in their head-.

[Majikal]

It's not easy to break if one practices it with the tenacity that they do contact.  Which is pretty much a must for anyone who -doesn't want people in their head-.

You're wrong. Sorry.

[Old Kank]

I'm not trying to troll or anything, but why do people need to fish for sdescs?  If it's a targeting issue, the 'key' command will solve your problems in most cases.

My character doesn't like having people in his head, but his stun points are so low that keeping up a barrier puts him at an extreme risk of passing out.  Why do I have to risk the IC consequences of my character passing out to prevent your character from contacting mine to obtain an OOC short-hand reference for my character?

[Synthesis]

Maintaining a barrier is a negligible nuisance for anyone who's good at it.

And no, they aren't easy to break...when you're good at it.

(Unless Majikal and X-D are referring to a specific circumstance that causes it to go down...in which case if you're -really- good, you can even put it back up afterward.)

[Majikal]

Maintaining a barrier is a negligible nuisance for anyone who's good at it.

True.

And no, they aren't easy to break...when you're good at it.

False.

[Cutthroat]

I suggest those that believe barrier is easy to break consider whether their PC's barrier was at master level when they had bad experiences with barrier and throw out their experiences with barrier before we could see rough skill levels, because gauging barrier's ability is pretty difficult otherwise. We could go for days saying "barrier is easy to break", "barrier is hard to break", "no, it's easy!" etc. but we should accept that there are a variety of factors that affect barrier's ability to be broken, and that we should look at barrier at its best.

I think all players' barrier experiences are invalid unless they were very recent (after the skill level addition).

[Geryon]

I'm not trying to troll or anything, but why do people need to fish for sdescs?  If it's a targeting issue, the 'key' command will solve your problems in most cases.

This is what I find myself continuously thinking as I read through this thread.

[Rogerthat]

I want that SDESC so i can see if I know that person, cause i remember better by SDESC not MDESC. Thats why for me anyways.