Imagery in the Way

[Kismetic]

n/t

[Schrodingers Cat]

It depends.

[Kalai]

I'm sure to some extent it depends on how the mind works ... see, everything I've heard rumored about halflings and the Way.

[Synthesis]

1.  You can transmit crude, low-resolution images of miscellaneous stuff.  However, it's at such a poor quality that it's virtually useless.

2.  You can receive someone's sdesc (image) if:
a.  You've seen them before, and you searched for their psionic aura by using your memory of their appearance (i.e. contact via sdesc keywords)
b.  Someone has provided you a very detailed description of them (contact via sdesc keywords).
c.  That person has previously sent you their image by communicating via psi (contact via sdesc keywords).

3.  Every time you use 'psi,' you transmit your image (sdesc) to whoever you're in contact with.

4.  Exceptions at every level for mindbenders.

Grey area:  Would you immediately recognize someone's psionic aura if you were searching for a name that you don't know that person by?  E.g. you know Talia as Talia, the lithe, black-haired woman...but she also has an alter ego:  Catwoman.  If you searched via the Way for Catwoman, and found a link...would you immediately recognize it as also being Talia, the lithe, black-haired woman?  I tend to lean toward the 'no' side.

[Maso]

It depends on how far you are from the nearest cell tower. Unless you're on t-mobile, in which case definitely no images.

[Schrodingers Cat]

Grey area:  Would you immediately recognize someone's psionic aura if you were searching for a name that you don't know that person by?  E.g. you know Talia as Talia, the lithe, black-haired woman...but she also has an alter ego:  Catwoman.  If you searched via the Way for Catwoman, and found a link...would you immediately recognize it as also being Talia, the lithe, black-haired woman?  I tend to lean toward the 'no' side.

Would this not be a keyword issue as it applied to the way, not an issue with the way specifically?

[Kismetic]

Uhh, dudes, I have no idea why I put this in Code Discussion.  Facepalm, time to go get a life.

[Cind]

Every time I think of or way an image I get the feeling that somewhere, I've jarred somebody's immersion. Should I be feeling that way? I'd be doing it a lot more if I didn't.

[Synthesis]

Grey area:  Would you immediately recognize someone's psionic aura if you were searching for a name that you don't know that person by?  E.g. you know Talia as Talia, the lithe, black-haired woman...but she also has an alter ego:  Catwoman.  If you searched via the Way for Catwoman, and found a link...would you immediately recognize it as also being Talia, the lithe, black-haired woman?  I tend to lean toward the 'no' side.

Would this not be a keyword issue as it applied to the way, not an issue with the way specifically?

No, it's an issue with the Way.  Specifically, just because you know one aspect of a person, does that give you the ability to detect all of their potential alter egos?  How you answer that will shape how you'd like the code to work, of course.

[Schrodingers Cat]

Grey area:  Would you immediately recognize someone's psionic aura if you were searching for a name that you don't know that person by?  E.g. you know Talia as Talia, the lithe, black-haired woman...but she also has an alter ego:  Catwoman.  If you searched via the Way for Catwoman, and found a link...would you immediately recognize it as also being Talia, the lithe, black-haired woman?  I tend to lean toward the 'no' side.

Would this not be a keyword issue as it applied to the way, not an issue with the way specifically?

No, it's an issue with the Way.  Specifically, just because you know one aspect of a person, does that give you the ability to detect all of their potential alter egos?  How you answer that will shape how you'd like the code to work, of course.

I see it as a separate issue pertaining to keywords and the Catwoman example is that of how this keyword issue applies to The Way.  An example without "The Way" component might be: In a room full of people dressed like ninjas (all identical), one is able to single out and target the "Catwoman" and attack her, or give her a hug or whatever.  The Catwoman is easily singled out among a group of people that would otherwise be indistinguishable by a name alone. While we still don't know what she may or may not look like, or even know her sdesc, we do know that the Catwoman is there and can be attacked, looked at, etc.  The target is still identifiable as the Catwoman (or even Talia if someone tries using that keyword) by a simple keyword.  I think that's the same issue but when The Way is involved the room suddenly becomes the whole world AND when contacted their Sdesc is revealed allowing unique keywords (like names) to easily be associated with descriptions.  It's a combination of the two specific issues.

Ideally, people shouldn't be able to use the same keywords (like nicknames, aliases, etc) for individuals that others know them as because they wouldn't recognize or associate those individuals with those names.  That seems to be what the "Catwoman" example is about.  I think the best solution would be to make keywords "personal", as Morg is suggesting in his post in the thread here.

Also, sdesc covering items like cloaks and masks should also obscure keywords like names to some degree also but that a topic for another thread that's already been made.

[Synthesis]

Grey area:  Would you immediately recognize someone's psionic aura if you were searching for a name that you don't know that person by?  E.g. you know Talia as Talia, the lithe, black-haired woman...but she also has an alter ego:  Catwoman.  If you searched via the Way for Catwoman, and found a link...would you immediately recognize it as also being Talia, the lithe, black-haired woman?  I tend to lean toward the 'no' side.

Would this not be a keyword issue as it applied to the way, not an issue with the way specifically?

No, it's an issue with the Way.  Specifically, just because you know one aspect of a person, does that give you the ability to detect all of their potential alter egos?  How you answer that will shape how you'd like the code to work, of course.

I see it as a separate issue pertaining to keywords and the Catwoman example is that of how this keyword issue applies to The Way.  An example without "The Way" component might be: In a room full of people dressed like ninjas (all identical), one is able to single out and target the "Catwoman" and attack her, or give her a hug or whatever.  The Catwoman is easily singled out among a group of people that would otherwise be indistinguishable by a name alone. While we still don't know what she may or may not look like, or even know her sdesc but we do know that the Catwoman is there and can be attacked, looked at, etc.  The target is still identifiable as the Catwoman (or even Talia if someone tries using that keyword) by a simple keyword.  I think that's the same issue but when The Way is involved the room suddenly becomes the whole world AND when contacted their Sdesc is revealed allowing unique keywords (like names) to easily be associated with descriptions.  It's a combination of the two specific issues.

Ideally, people shouldn't be able to use the same keywords (like nicknames, aliases, etc) for individuals that others know them as because they wouldn't recognize or associate those individuals with those names.  That seems to be what the "Catwoman" example is about.  I think the best solution would be to make keywords "personal", as Morg is suggesting in his post in the thread here.

Also, sdesc covering items like cloaks and masks should also obscure keywords like names to some degree also but that a topic for another thread that's already been made.

My point is that if you believe that by knowing Talia, you would also know it was her if you were contacting Catwoman, then the coding will have to be different than if you believe that shouldn't be the case.

Let's break this down Barney style:

You are a bounty hunter.  Your mate is Talia.  One day, Lord Templar hardnose gives you a mission:  find and eliminate Catwoman.  You pull a > contact catwoman.  To your surprise, you contact Talia.

The question is:  should the code allow that scenario, or prevent it?  Your answer to that will be shaped by how much you envision the Way allows someone to perceive about their target's psionic aura.  Ergo, it is both a code issue and an issue of IC physics.

[AmandaGreathouse]

First one.

The helpfile really says it all with regards to how I picture it working.

All intelligent creatures on Zalanthas are able to use psionics (often
called the Way or the Way of the Mind) to some degree. Psionic powers
enable people to communicate across vast distances and barricade their
minds against intrusion. Non-psionic races are long since deceased on
Zalanthas, not having been able to compete with those who possessed
the ability.

It is convention to send emotions or images enclosed in sentinal
characters like *.  It is alright to do this so long as you are not
imposing any emotions on the contacted character.

Right in the first and last paragraph.

The real question, to me, is why this is such an issue other than keywords that art not a part of the sdesc.

I like the idea Morgenese had about people being able to add keywords to you, though I think it would be awesome to be able to add your own nicknames to yourself that someone would be able to contact equal to your sdesc the way that they can now. That's just me, though.

[Marauder Moe]

That bit was added after the last time this debate came up.

I still disagree with that policy/interpretation/whatever.  However, since that discussion, there hasn't been quite the doom and gloom as I'd feared while caught up in the heat of the debate.

Not that we shouldn't necessarily have it again, though.  Staff change, so do policies.  Sometimes old ideas finally get implemented.

If so or if not, though, the game does go on just fine.

[ShaLeah]

I don't see an issue with being able to project imagery or feelings. In a way just the fact that you can search for, find and connect with anyone through mental connection would indicate a higher ability, no?

Anything to make the world more alive.


Too much and you're in Bender category which I would not hesitate to turn your ass into a Templar for.

[Schrodingers Cat]

Grey area:  Would you immediately recognize someone's psionic aura if you were searching for a name that you don't know that person by?  E.g. you know Talia as Talia, the lithe, black-haired woman...but she also has an alter ego:  Catwoman.  If you searched via the Way for Catwoman, and found a link...would you immediately recognize it as also being Talia, the lithe, black-haired woman?  I tend to lean toward the 'no' side.

Would this not be a keyword issue as it applied to the way, not an issue with the way specifically?

No, it's an issue with the Way.  Specifically, just because you know one aspect of a person, does that give you the ability to detect all of their potential alter egos?  How you answer that will shape how you'd like the code to work, of course.

I see it as a separate issue pertaining to keywords and the Catwoman example is that of how this keyword issue applies to The Way.  An example without "The Way" component might be: In a room full of people dressed like ninjas (all identical), one is able to single out and target the "Catwoman" and attack her, or give her a hug or whatever.  The Catwoman is easily singled out among a group of people that would otherwise be indistinguishable by a name alone. While we still don't know what she may or may not look like, or even know her sdesc but we do know that the Catwoman is there and can be attacked, looked at, etc.  The target is still identifiable as the Catwoman (or even Talia if someone tries using that keyword) by a simple keyword.  I think that's the same issue but when The Way is involved the room suddenly becomes the whole world AND when contacted their Sdesc is revealed allowing unique keywords (like names) to easily be associated with descriptions.  It's a combination of the two specific issues.

Ideally, people shouldn't be able to use the same keywords (like nicknames, aliases, etc) for individuals that others know them as because they wouldn't recognize or associate those individuals with those names.  That seems to be what the "Catwoman" example is about.  I think the best solution would be to make keywords "personal", as Morg is suggesting in his post in the thread here.

Also, sdesc covering items like cloaks and masks should also obscure keywords like names to some degree also but that a topic for another thread that's already been made.

My point is that if you believe that by knowing Talia, you would also know it was her if you were contacting Catwoman, then the coding will have to be different than if you believe that shouldn't be the case.

Let's break this down Barney style:

You are a bounty hunter.  Your mate is Talia.  One day, Lord Templar hardnose gives you a mission:  find and eliminate Catwoman.  You pull a > contact catwoman.  To your surprise, you contact Talia.

The question is:  should the code allow that scenario, or prevent it?  Your answer to that will be shaped by how much you envision the Way allows someone to perceive about their target's psionic aura.  Ergo, it is both a code issue and an issue of IC physics.

No, the code shouldn't allow me to contact someone with a name that I can't associate them with.  I, the bounty hunter, the mate of Talia (the Catwoman), shouldn't be able to use "catwoman" as a keyword to interact with Talia at all.  This of course should change if The Catwoman were to say... kidnap me and take me to her lair and then reveal to me that it was really Talia (or maybe I just look at her). At this point, Ideally I'd should be able to interact with/target her with the catwoman keyword, including contacting her over the way and seeing her sdesc/psionic aura/etc.

I agree with you but I think it's broader issue.  I shouldn't be able to contact someone with only a name (and no face or any kind of physical traits) to target them with.

[Synthesis]

Grey area:  Would you immediately recognize someone's psionic aura if you were searching for a name that you don't know that person by?  E.g. you know Talia as Talia, the lithe, black-haired woman...but she also has an alter ego:  Catwoman.  If you searched via the Way for Catwoman, and found a link...would you immediately recognize it as also being Talia, the lithe, black-haired woman?  I tend to lean toward the 'no' side.

Would this not be a keyword issue as it applied to the way, not an issue with the way specifically?

No, it's an issue with the Way.  Specifically, just because you know one aspect of a person, does that give you the ability to detect all of their potential alter egos?  How you answer that will shape how you'd like the code to work, of course.

I see it as a separate issue pertaining to keywords and the Catwoman example is that of how this keyword issue applies to The Way.  An example without "The Way" component might be: In a room full of people dressed like ninjas (all identical), one is able to single out and target the "Catwoman" and attack her, or give her a hug or whatever.  The Catwoman is easily singled out among a group of people that would otherwise be indistinguishable by a name alone. While we still don't know what she may or may not look like, or even know her sdesc but we do know that the Catwoman is there and can be attacked, looked at, etc.  The target is still identifiable as the Catwoman (or even Talia if someone tries using that keyword) by a simple keyword.  I think that's the same issue but when The Way is involved the room suddenly becomes the whole world AND when contacted their Sdesc is revealed allowing unique keywords (like names) to easily be associated with descriptions.  It's a combination of the two specific issues.

Ideally, people shouldn't be able to use the same keywords (like nicknames, aliases, etc) for individuals that others know them as because they wouldn't recognize or associate those individuals with those names.  That seems to be what the "Catwoman" example is about.  I think the best solution would be to make keywords "personal", as Morg is suggesting in his post in the thread here.

Also, sdesc covering items like cloaks and masks should also obscure keywords like names to some degree also but that a topic for another thread that's already been made.

My point is that if you believe that by knowing Talia, you would also know it was her if you were contacting Catwoman, then the coding will have to be different than if you believe that shouldn't be the case.

Let's break this down Barney style:

You are a bounty hunter.  Your mate is Talia.  One day, Lord Templar hardnose gives you a mission:  find and eliminate Catwoman.  You pull a > contact catwoman.  To your surprise, you contact Talia.

The question is:  should the code allow that scenario, or prevent it?  Your answer to that will be shaped by how much you envision the Way allows someone to perceive about their target's psionic aura.  Ergo, it is both a code issue and an issue of IC physics.

No, the code shouldn't allow me to contact someone with a name that I can't associate them with.  I, the bounty hunter, the mate of Talia (the Catwoman), shouldn't be able to use "catwoman" as a keyword to interact with Talia at all.  This of course should change if The Catwoman were to say... kidnap me and take me to her lair and then reveal to me that it was really Talia (or maybe I just look at her). At this point, Ideally I'd should be able to interact with/target her with the catwoman keyword, including contacting her over the way and seeing her sdesc/psionic aura/etc.

I agree with you but I think it's broader issue.  I shouldn't be able to contact someone with only a name (and no face or any kind of physical traits) to target them with.

I agree with you, but that's just like, our opinions, man. Other people would say that as soon as you established a psychic connection by searching the psionic aether for 'catwoman,' you would immediately know it was Talia, because that sort of information -is- transmitted.

Either way works perfectly well in terms of constructing IC physics, because extant descriptions of psionic physics are vague enough to accommodate any number of possible interpretations.  The question is whether one of them is better in terms of gameplay.

Everyone can toss in their 2 cents, but at the end of the day, we're really only worried about convincing the staff to change it.

[James de Monet]

I think it would be awesome to be able to add your own nicknames to yourself that someone would be able to contact equal to your sdesc the way that they can now. That's just me, though.

Does addkeyword no longer work? Or am I misunderstanding your intent?

[Marauder Moe]

I think it would be awesome to be able to add your own nicknames to yourself that someone would be able to contact equal to your sdesc the way that they can now. That's just me, though.

Does addkeyword no longer work? Or am I misunderstanding your intent?

It would be like addkeyword that you do on other players, and that only function for your use.

[AmandaGreathouse]

I think it would be awesome to be able to add your own nicknames to yourself that someone would be able to contact equal to your sdesc the way that they can now. That's just me, though.

Does addkeyword no longer work? Or am I misunderstanding your intent?

It would be like addkeyword that you do on other players, and that only function for your use.

What I mean to say is, since you would no longer have that in Morgenes' proposal, keep the addkeyword to self ability. Right? Then you get the byn/templar/silky-merchant whatever that has the name they trade under or work under still available for others to contact them by, keeping playability up for those type roles (which also tend to be higher profile roles), and other than that, I like Morg's proposal of the introduction/face-to-face thing for the no true names.

I assumed that with the idea stated, that addkeywording your self would, indeed, be defunct.

[Morgenes]

Under my proposed changes, addkeyword would likely be repurposed to allow adding a keyword for someone else, but I might also shut down addkeyword and add another command altogether to cut down on confusion.

[AmandaGreathouse]

Ah, interesting. Would it then be possible for staff to manually add the name as a keyword to sponsored roles?

Would that be a bearable compromise to everyone?

Because, really, to me, the biggest issue with your idea is the ability to facilitate contact/recruiting with sponsored roles. Other than that: I'm all for it.

I like the idea of making it a new command though, it would help to keep people in the habit of trying to addkeywords to themselves when they use a nickname to not to it on accident when/if the changes go in.

Other than that, I really like what I heard from you about your idea/ideas for the change, morg. *thumbs up*

[Bluefae]

It is convention to send emotions or images enclosed in sentinal
characters like *.  It is alright to do this so long as you are not
imposing any emotions on the contacted character.

     Sheesh, I -remember- this debate, too.  How did I miss the "images" piece?  I recall emotions being given the green light by the Imms, but not the later.  Thanks for posting this, AGH.

[Lizzie]

I agree with you but I think it's broader issue.  I shouldn't be able to contact someone with only a name (and no face or any kind of physical traits) to target them with.

Problems with this line of thinking:

If I can't contact the -wrong- Amos, then I can very easily find out if the Amos I'm looking for is online/alive, because I will always get a failure message, UNLESS the one I want to find, is contactable. Contacting amos should give me a risk of contacting the wrong Amos, *because* I'm looking for a name, and not a name + appropriate sdesc keywords. That's whether I know them or not.

[Schrodingers Cat]

I agree with you but I think it's broader issue.  I shouldn't be able to contact someone with only a name (and no face or any kind of physical traits) to target them with.

Problems with this line of thinking:

If I can't contact the -wrong- Amos, then I can very easily find out if the Amos I'm looking for is online/alive, because I will always get a failure message, UNLESS the one I want to find, is contactable. Contacting amos should give me a risk of contacting the wrong Amos, *because* I'm looking for a name, and not a name + appropriate sdesc keywords. That's whether I know them or not.

Consider that I'm talking about a situation where some sort of system like the one proposed here would be in effect.

[Lizzie]

I agree with you but I think it's broader issue.  I shouldn't be able to contact someone with only a name (and no face or any kind of physical traits) to target them with.

Problems with this line of thinking:

If I can't contact the -wrong- Amos, then I can very easily find out if the Amos I'm looking for is online/alive, because I will always get a failure message, UNLESS the one I want to find, is contactable. Contacting amos should give me a risk of contacting the wrong Amos, *because* I'm looking for a name, and not a name + appropriate sdesc keywords. That's whether I know them or not.

Consider that I'm talking about a situation where some sort of system like the one proposed here would be in effect.

I don't like that idea either, because there are already WAY too many instances of "characters with vague sdescs but very interesting, unique, and detailed mdescs."

In other words, there are people like..

the tall, muscular man

who has that famous green hair and one arm.

When someone says "Find Amos, he has green hair and one arm" you're most likely to look for "green haired one armed Amos" and NOT "tall muscular Amos."

Or worse - you actually SEE him in the bar, with his hood up, and you LOOK at him and see his main desc...and someone says the next day that yeah his name is Amos..

and you try to find "amos green haired one armed" and can't. Because Amos's player didn't bother putting the most blatant, obvious, in your face, unique, interesting feature in his sdesc, and instead, chose a nondescript sdesc, and the staff had no problem with it.

When really, all you should have had to do was find amos, and psied him to ask if he was the one with green hair and one arm.
But you can't even do THAT...

No, I don't think that's a good idea at all. I'd much rather see Morgenes' previous idea, of both sender and recipient being able to see the other person's sdesc upon a successful contact attempt.

[Scarecrow]

If magickers could send imagery to eachother they'd be eating babies in their heads.

[Kol]

No images. Ever. At all. That's what mindbenders are for.