Subjective sdescs

[X-D]

I made this because I don't think it belongs in the roleplaying forum.

I would like if the char creation section of the game more clearly described and ruled against subjective words in a sdesc.

And for players to try an not use them as well.

What is subjective you ask?

Well, Let me state, this does not apply to a special app where you were able to go outside the norm.

Otherwise, ANY word that describes actual height or weight is subjective. Aside from things like, normal, average etc, because, Unless you have a spec app your PC is inside the norm for the race chosen. You really are not a Tall human, you are on the tall side of the average is all. Of course since most people take max height, that is not exactly true either.

Half-giants, You are not Titanic, Massive, Gargantuan towering etc...to other half-giants you are in fact, average, to other races, Hey, we already know you are all of the above because of these two words which are in your sdesc HALF-GIANT. Same applies to elves, Yes, you are thin, we know that, your an elf, but you are average for an elf.
Etc Etc

Now, describing body "Style" Thats fine, Dumpy, rangy, sinewy etc.

And really, I start this thread because staff does not really want me to file a complaint on subjective PC/NPC. As that would be several dozen a week, sometimes a day.

Besides, picking things that actually set your PC apart will help out on some of these other arguements having to do with sdescs.

[Marauder Moe]

I usually assume that sdesc terms are relative to race.  A gigantic half giant being larger than the average half giant, etc.

[HavokBlue]

I usually assume that sdesc terms are relative to race.  A gigantic half giant being larger than the average half giant, etc.

[Nyr]

I do the same.

I only really take issue with it if it is not true (they aren't tall for their race, they aren't old for their race, they show beauty subjectively, etc).

[Talia]

What Nyr said, and the others. Whenever I see true subjectivity in an sdesc or desc, I change it or reject it. We're pretty rigorous about it, and we see a LOT of it.

[Feco]

Its pretty normal to use things like size in terms of what it is being described.  I'm a lot taller and heavier than a cat, but I can still call one  'that big, fatass cat.'

I've never run into anything truly subjectice like 'the gorgeous man.'  That would be bad.

[Cutthroat]

A truly subjective sdesc or desc imposes an opinion upon those that read it. Putting "tall" into even a dwarf sdesc is fine if the player is picking the maximum height for a dwarf. Putting "tall" into an elf sdesc and picking the minimum height wouldn't work though.

[X-D]

I only really take issue with it if it is not true (they aren't tall for their race, they aren't old for their race, they show beauty subjectively, etc).

See now, that's the thing, unless they are spec app, they are NOT tall for the race. They are in fact inside the average range not outside it. I'm 6' 200lbs, I am not tall or heavy for a human, Andre the giant was, Manute Bol was. But they are outside the norm.

To restate, I have no problem with somebody having the towering human, IF that human is outside the norm and really is past 78 inches tall. But if they are inside the 10 inch allowable range in chargen...

I mean hell, I'm 12 inches taller then my wife, So, yes, I'm taller, but the words Lofty, Towering etc still do not apply.

And I never even brought up how it looks when somebody outside the race is looking at them. Play the HG and look at the towering gargantuan man, he pulls his hood up and suddenly it is the tiny and thin hooded figure.

Then, as is stated in another thread. How exactly does the HG describe that guy if all he saw was the sdesc? Because to him, even with the hood down, that guy is no bigger then any of the other tiny beings.

And again, the max height for a dwarf in chargen is not the max dwarf height, it is the max average which is what is allowed without spec app.

And taking tall as a sdesc word on a min height elf, Well, why not, he is tall compared to humans and dwarves, Or a majority of the population. He might not be tall for an elf, but he is tall. It does impose an opinion inside the race and outside.

Also, my OP was and is still more suggestion then otherwise, it is less then creative IMO to go Hey, it is a HG, so he is big...checks the interweb, Oooh, Gargantuan! 

Yes, We know, HG are huge massive beings, it says so in the docs, how about giving me something to work with?

One of my fav HG descs ever was the bushy-haired red-skinned half-giant. Another great one, The billowing black haired elf. That gave me something to work with, We know elves are tall and skinny, you don't have to tell us that after a stint on thesaurus.com.

[Nyr]

I'm not sure where to start on this one, but I think the first thing to do is "dispellus preconceived-notionus."

Height ranges are the height ranges. The extremes are short and tall. Someone special apping shorter or taller is also short or tall for the race--just in an even more pronounced fashion.

Same with weight.

As for your hypothetical HG, it sounds like a fun situation in which to be involved.

[Ami]

I usually assume that sdesc terms are relative to race.  A gigantic half giant being larger than the average half giant, etc.

[Marauder Moe]

Grammatically speaking, adjectives are in the frame of reference of the noun they modify rather than any sort of absolute scale.

I don't expect "a tall glass" to be taller than a man, nor even "a towering glass".  Why then would an adjective used to describe a dwarf be subject to different rules?

[Feco]

The descriptors for 'figure in blank cloak' are subjective because 'figures' dont have an assumed average height like 'man,' 'woman', 'elf' etc. do.

[X-D]

Dispellus all you want, So, your saying that ALL zalanthus races are so uniform that the average height is a 1 inch range?

Or that people any amount shorter then you IRL are Minute, Tiny, Small, and people any amount taller then you count as Lofty, Towering, etc?


Oh, and if that is the case, maybe put it in the docs, I've gotten quite different answers from OLs in the past.

And Moe, that is even more subjective, A tall glass could in fact be the name of the glass type not the actual size first of all, second, what you call a tall glass and what I call a tall glass would be totally different, even if we are the same height.

AND, EVEN if you go with the inside race argument. It still remains subjective. If Somebody says Moe is 6 foot tall and says he is a tall guy, and 6' is the max, if another 6 footer looks at him, is he still tall? According to code he is in fact...Not. Hood up, no tall, assess, nope, not there either.

EDIT
I wish to clarify again, this thread, at least for me is more in the range of a suggestion, to help out in making interesting sdescs where we have something to work with, or as Nyr said, be creative or rearrange wording IG when describing people to others in voice or the way.

With maybe a little peeve on HGs, because I'm never going to describe a HG in game as titanic, Gargantuan, Hulking, Massive or any of the other commonly used HG sdesc words. I mean really, at that rate all HGs have the same sdesc and should be named Amos.

[Feco]

He isnt tall as a figure with a hood, because the observer has no frame of reference.  He is a tall man, however.  Just because the taller fellow can say the other is short in reference to himself, does not make him a short man.

The desc is 'the tall man,' not 'the man taller than you, who codedly isnt.'

[Sephiroto]

X-D, your arguments are making subjectively little sense.  Ha ha, joking, right.

Tall, short, thick, gargantuan, etc. are adjectives to describe a certain size of a PC or NPC's race.  They're not subjective because they describe nouns with with a difinitively assigned range of values.

Since races have those height and weight ranges, those closer to either extreme can be called tall/short, thick/thin, or any of the other descriptive terms.  That is because they're being compared by their size and shape in relation to the median values for other creatures of that race.

Your semantical debate about the "tall glass" is pretty moot as well.  There are no races called "tall humans" or "short dwarves."  All races, with the exception of half-giants and half-elves, are simply that: humans, dwarves, elves, etc..  Since there are objects called "tall glasses" then your independent statment about them makes sense, but doesn't apply to racial description.

[Marauder Moe]

If I'm tall and I look at someone else who is the the same height, we don't stop being tall... we're both tall.

[Lizzie]

My only real issue with the subjective descs is when they're innacurate. Like..the tall elf, who is codedly shorter than average, but the player figured since elves are tall, it'd be okay to use tall as a keyword in his sdesc. He's not a tall elf. He's tall, for a humanoid, but as elves go, he's short.

Or the towering human, who is an inch taller than smack-dab in the middle. Okay so she's a little taller than average. But she's not towering. She's not really even tall, for a human.

If it's the same race, and the coded height doesn't coincide with the described height, then it's just flat out incorrect and should be fixed, and the imm should've asked the player "do you want your coded height adjusted, OR do you want to pick a different keyword for your description?" and rejected the app until the player made a decision.

Weight is harder to determine, because someone could be very skinny, but weigh more than average because they picked max height, and only "just below" average weight. Proportionately, they'd end up pretty skinny. Or they might say they're fat, but weigh less than average. But that's just because they're really short, and have skin-and-bone arms and legs, with all their bulk in rolls of fat on their back and belly.

Thing is though, the information should all coincide. The mdesc, sdesc, and coded stats should provide a "fair" interpretation of what the person looks like. If part of it is clear enough, but not perfect, then okay - it's off a bit, who cares. But when one part is in total opposition to the other part, then it becomes a roleplay problem.

[X-D]

The tall glass was a joke on my part, a bad one but still. What IS a tall glass. If I pull 6 out of my cupboard between 3 and 9 inches tall, which is the tall one? And what if my neighbor has six more all between 8 inches and 16 and he brings them over?

Totally subjective.

Now, Joe is taller then me, by an inch, Yes, between the two of us that does in fact make him the tall man. But If we are the same height and the only two in the room, does that still make him the tall man? Sure, we might both be taller then the norm in a larger group, but at that point and place we are not tall or short. All of these and others are in fact subjective, they might be subjective inside a race but subjective none the less.

Now if Amos is the black haired scarred man, These are not subjective, Black remains black and scars are scars.

The one-eyed sinewy man is not subjective, he has in fact 1 eye, assuming the person looking at him can count, and even if he cannot count the number of eyes remains the same. Sinewy describes a build type that might be a tiny bit subjective but over all anybody no matter the size or build will agree on the type.

And to go on with Lizzie, At what point, even inside the race do they become tall? If I'm 6' and everybody else is taller then me, then I am in fact the short guy. Now, Joe is 6'1, I am shorter then him, so he is not the short guy, so he can pick the tall guy, Meanwhile Mike is 6'2", he is also not the short guy, so he also picks the tall guy. Etc Etc on to 6'10" Amy Who, because everybody is shorter then her picks the tall woman. Now, even if you go, well hey, 6'5 is the middle, so nobody under that can pick the tall guy as a sdesc, Does that mean that 6'5"+ all get to pick the tall guy as Sdesc, and if so, does that make them equal? From an RP standpoint it all seems rather silly to me.

[Marauder Moe]

"Tall" isn't defined by just the people in the room at the moment, though. YOU'RE BOTH STILL TALL.

[X-D]

"Tall" isn't defined by just the people in the room at the moment, though. YOU'RE BOTH STILL TALL.

As compared to what? And if so, are we still if somebody taller arrives?

What if your looking at us from 50 feet away and the only point of reference you have is the tree next to us which is half our height? But you get to within 3 feet and find out the tree is 12 inches tall, are we still tall?

Tall, short, fat, thin etc are comparative terms IE, subjective.

[Lizzie]

"Tall" isn't defined by just the people in the room at the moment, though. YOU'RE BOTH STILL TALL.

And when those tall people go to a picnic sponsored by the National Gigantism Foundation...

those tall people will be considered short by everyone else there. Not just average, but short. They're only tall, in comparison to certain other people. Fact of the matter, is in some cultures, they'd be considered incredibly tall, not merely "tall." If they're in Japan, they'd stand out in their tallness. At that picnic, they'd stand out for their shortness, not their tallness.

Tall is completely and totally relative to whatever/whoever is doing the measuring. As such, "tall" and "short" are pretty meaningless keywords for sdescs because the value of their height is completely dependent on the people who observe them.

[Feco]

Your scenario would make sense if those two men were the only in existence, or if they knew of no other men.  In the latter case I just mentioned, the objective description would be 'tall men.'  Whatever they decided in the room would be subjective to their situation.

[Marauder Moe]

Ugh. I'm leaving this thread.

[X-D]

Your scenario would make sense if those two men were the only in existence, or if they knew of no other men.  In the latter case I just mentioned, the objective description would be 'tall men.'  Whatever they decided in the room would be subjective to their situation.

Objective? How can  comparing be objective?  Without a point of ref then they can be neither tall nor short. Something can only be tall relative to something else. But if that something else can be different heights then it becomes subjective.

"Tall" isn't defined by just the people in the room at the moment, though. YOU'RE BOTH STILL TALL.

Tall is completely and totally relative to whatever/whoever is doing the measuring. As such, "tall" and "short" are pretty meaningless keywords for sdescs because the value of their height is completely dependent on the people who observe them.

Bye Moe!

[Feco]

Yes.

I can look at a tree and say that it's tall.  However, it may be a short tree.

Again, it's 'the tall man', not 'taller man than you.'  Different things.