RTW Derail: -armed tag on people with weapons

[Synthesis]

This sort of thing could get utterly spammy during an HRPT.

[FantasyWriter]

I would like it (if it had a brief toggle).  My reason being it is illegal to have a drawn weapon in most centers if civilization, and therefore should be highly standout-ish.

[Potaje]

perhaps it is given that the character is not skilled enough to not make a noise of some sort when drawing even a steak knife.
One could surmise that bone, stone or wood makes a subtle sound when being drawn, bumps the buckle on a belt, plate of bone or shell on the armor, or perhaps even ones own gloves. Could be that your leathers on your armor needed oiling and had not been tended so that when your drawing your weapon your movement is enough to draw attention or even offer the familiar sound that most other pcs become customer  to hearing. Light Catches along some shinny part of the blade or glints off the polished hilt. A vnps is watching you and gasps as the blade is drawn, bringing others attention upon you. One can always rationalize if one choses to.

[Dan]

I don't like the idea. It's always served me well enough to just look at anyone I thought might be armed. If I didn't look, then my PC just didn't notice the impending attack.

My characters are -not- all seeing, all knowing. Sometimes you miss things.

Finally, when it comes to moving around with 20 people through the desert, all armed, less spam is a good thing.

[Armaddict]

I don't like the idea. It's always served me well enough to just look at anyone I thought might be armed. If I didn't look, then my PC just didn't notice the impending attack.

My characters are -not- all seeing, all knowing. Sometimes you miss things.

Finally, when it comes to moving around with 20 people through the desert, all armed, less spam is a good thing.

+1

[Blackisback]

I think, if anything, it should be a representation of your character. If you're an assassin trying to sneakily wield that longknife (assuming the longknife isn't -too- large/gawdy) then it shouldn't show. If you are a run of the mill warrior who is waltzing about with their shortsword or a battleaxe without any attempt at subterfuge, then it should be made clear that you are armed.

As for talks about being "not all seeing", there are instances of this already in place. Seeing people walk in and out of buildings, people emoting, people crafting, etc. To say we are not "all seeing" when all evidence points to the contrary is pretty ridiculous. We may not acknowledge these emotes, but we can surely see them. Why emotes/walking/crafting and not "-He is armed", which is something any casual observer would note?

[X-D]

I don't like the idea. It's always served me well enough to just look at anyone I thought might be armed. If I didn't look, then my PC just didn't notice the impending attack.

My characters are -not- all seeing, all knowing. Sometimes you miss things.

Finally, when it comes to moving around with 20 people through the desert, all armed, less spam is a good thing.

[FantasyWriter]

Finally, when it comes to moving around with 20 people through the desert, all armed, less spam is a good thing.

>brief armed

[AmandaGreathouse]

I don't like the idea. It's always served me well enough to just look at anyone I thought might be armed. If I didn't look, then my PC just didn't notice the impending attack.

My characters are -not- all seeing, all knowing. Sometimes you miss things.

Finally, when it comes to moving around with 20 people through the desert, all armed, less spam is a good thing.

+1

[bcw81]

All right, then why not compromise? It would be nice if you got an echo

>He is armed with ____

When someone simply draws a sword or axe or hammer or whatnot. But when someone stealthily pulls something out of their boots/wrists/gloves/etc the echo can not be seen without specifically looking at the person?

I know nothing of MUDcode, so that might not even be possible/easy though.

Personally, I doubt someone could conceal anything larger than a shortsword if they're holding it with in one or two hands. Something like a two-handed sword in a city would defiantly be noticeable though, just like someone holding a gun in our world.

[AmandaGreathouse]

...

Don't you already GET an echo when people draw and wield weapons?

I've seen this, every time, without fail.

Complete with slip/palm for your stealthy thing (that part is, I admit, a guess. Dunno if it's been done in front of me, if it has, I haven't seen it.)

[brytta.leofa]

Don't you already GET an echo when people draw and wield weapons?

You totally do, unless they're using a sneaky command or special equipment.

[bcw81]

Not what I was talking about. I was saying when they draw it regularly without the sneakiness then they get the tag under their SDESC "-Is armed" so if someone new walks in they'll see:

The ____, _____ Curved Sexy Female is here.
-She is carrying a large, afro-ridden bag
-She is armed with an extremely large Key

[X-D]

Nah.

Somebody having a giant bag show is one thing, but if you want to see if they are armed, there are two commands for that.

Next thing you know people will want to know if somebody is naked without looking, soon we walk into a room and get 7 pages of eq spam from 2 PCs. No thanks.

[Blackisback]

Nah.

Somebody having a giant bag show is one thing, but if you want to see if they are armed, there are two commands for that.

Next thing you know people will want to know if somebody is naked without looking, soon we walk into a room and get 7 pages of eq spam from 2 PCs. No thanks.

Why do people keep dodging me when I ask this? Why accept someone holding a bag (someone being completely non-threatening and less noticeable than someone wielding a weapon) but you so vehemently refuse to have an -armed tag? How can you justify one without the other?

[Majikal]

You shouldn't have to 'peek' in their shiz to see if they got a bag half their size on their back. That's why it's different. You can look/assess to see if someone is wielding a weapon.

[AmandaGreathouse]

You shouldn't have to 'peek' in their shiz to see if they got a bag half their size on their back. That's why it's different. You can look/assess to see if someone is wielding a weapon.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Not to mention, I don't see how LOOKing to SEE something makes little sense?

Sorry, but it's a text-based game. If you can't be assed into reading even an eq list, then I can't fathom why you'd want to play something without graphics.

[Blackisback]

Sorry, but it's a text-based game. If you can't be assed into reading even an eq list, then I can't fathom why you'd want to play something without graphics.

Cut the snark, it has nothing to do with reading, it has everything to do with common sense.

Edit:

And once again, no justification for -He is holding a large bag.

[Majikal]

And once again, no justification for -He is holding a large bag.

If they're carrying a couch.. you, as a player, should know it. Be it RP purposes or combat or what. How is that not justification for seeing heavier items?

Assess -v amos
he is excellent
he is sweepy
he is ARMED

Too lazy to type maybe?

[Lizzie]

assess and assess -v return an echo if people are particularly perceptive.

By typing "look" without arguement (as in, look at the room, not at anything specific), you can see if someone is carrying a couch, but you can't see that someone is standing there wielding a massive bone broadsword. You can't even tell he's armed at all. You can't even tell that he's totally and completely buck-naked, except for his massive bone broadsword, and his massive broad boner.

I believe you should be able to see this just by virtue of your being in the room and typing "look."

I WANT 2 C UR BONR

[Blackisback]

And once again, no justification for -He is holding a large bag.

If they're carrying a couch.. you, as a player, should know it. Be it RP purposes or combat or what. How is that not justification for seeing heavier items?

Assess -v amos
he is excellent
he is sweepy
he is ARMED

Too lazy to type maybe?

So why would someone living in a dangerous desert world not immediately notice those who are armed and those who aren't? Too stupid to make that distinction?

[Majikal]

Look covers it all, assess covers it, heavy item code covers the rest. I've never even briefly wanted an 'armed' tag, mebbe I'm speculz


Protip: Everyone is armed.

I actually tend to be more scared of people that aren't holding weapons in scary places in the word. At least if they're holding a spear I only gotta worry about getting poked!

[Synthesis]

Look covers it all, assess covers it, heavy item code covers the rest. I've never even briefly wanted an 'armed' tag, mebbe I'm speculz


Protip: Everyone is armed.

I actually tend to be more scared of people that aren't holding weapons in scary places in the word. At least if they're holding a spear I only gotta worry about getting poked!

Yeah, the last thing you want is a dwarf coming at you barehanded.

[Qzzrbl]

Fuck's sake, is there seriously a discussion about this?

Use assess -v, goddamn. :/

[Nahara]

The seeing the heavy item, is because being in inventory, there is no way to tell someone is carrying a couch around without a class-specific skill. Which is not as it should be. So something heavy enough in inventory shows up at a glance at the room, because that is the best solution currently implemented.

To see more than the vaguest impression of someone you need to at least glance at them. assess -v will give you whether they are armed and some other general traits. look will tell you if those are skin-colored tights or they're naked from the waist down. But there are ways to see these things without it cluttering up the room.

Personally I dislike look echoes, maybe a peek that didn't check into someone's inventory would be nice for a less-echoey look, with different fail message. But to, y'know, tell if they're armed, naked, masked, all that.