Clean Da Poisons

[RogueGunslinger]

It's still never going to be as complicated as you're making it out to be. Even it it's as simply as scraping the blade along the stem the chances of cutting yourself are pretty damn slim. The fact is there are tons of different poisons and each should be emoted in their own way. And none of them should be so complicated or dangerous to perform that gloves would completely inhibit you.

[Lizzie]

It's not complicated at all. That was my point. Holding a small piece of plant, or a very deadly, dangerous, delicate gland, while wearing plate armor should be nearly impossible to do. You don't need a lot of dexterity, but you need some. This isn't a pair of snow-gloves we're talking about - and if you've ever tried to pick up a single flower from a bunch of flowers while wearing a pair of snow gloves, you'd know how DIFFICULT this is to do..this is picking up a single flower while wearing a pair of snow gloves made out of elk-hide, that have had pieces of a box-turtle's shell sewn into the 1/8"-thick hide gloves.

If there is ANY flexibility at all, it's just barely enough to grab an axe-handle or sword hilt. Gloves that are intended to be used for armor, are not intended to be flexible enough to pick up and do delicate work.

In addition, it's pretty twinky to me, that you'd say it's perfectly suitable for poisoning things -but you probably take your gloves OFF every time you skin a critter. Y'know, so you don't get blood on them. It's okay to risk getting poison on your gloves though, because codedly, it doesn't happen. Sorry. I don't buy it.

If you want to protect your hands from the risk of poison by wearing thick plate armor gloves, that's fine. I'm just saying, that it should be more difficult to succeed in actually poisoning something, while wearing those thick plate armor gloves, because you have *dramatically* reduced your dexterity, and dexterity is required for applying lethal poisons to razor-sharp blades.

[MeTekillot]

excuse me, this thread is about cleaning poison. you have literally reversed the topic.

[Twilight]

Because, you know, having poison smeared all over the gloves you never take off (except when skinning something) is a great idea.  Got this done, lets go get lunch!

As far as RL, let me just hold this slimy, slippery tree frog, that I can't actually touch with my bare hands, because then I would die, and slide this sharp surface over its skin, careful not to kill it.  Yep, easy smeasy.  Maybe I will use gloves, so I can hold it, and then go eat lunch...

BTW, I vote for a Zalanthan frog (or equivalent animal, silt frog?) forageable item that is a poison.

But on topic, wiping your blade clean...isn't really going to work with all poisons.  Especially those applied to porous materials.  You really do need to thoroughly clean it and for that, you pretty much need a liquid.  Though it would be funny (and cool) if you could poison a blade by pouring water that was poisonous on it.

[Harmless]

For the same reason Zalanthans can take a few beetle pinches or a bahamet bite or two and sleep it off, they just tend to poison themselves when playing with herbs and sharp things. They must secretly want to shiver and suffer, and I don't argue.

[bcw81]

In addition, it's pretty twinky to me, that you'd say it's perfectly suitable for poisoning things -but you probably take your gloves OFF every time you skin a critter. Y'know, so you don't get blood on them. It's okay to risk getting poison on your gloves though, because codedly, it doesn't happen. Sorry. I don't buy it.

Hey Lizzie, how many creatures have you ever gutted in your life?

Being a hunter and all, I can tell you for a fact that it's a damn sight harder to skin a critter with gloves on. There are quite a few bits where you need the finer dexterity to peel flesh from skin, or pick out stray shot (in this case, bits of broken arrowhead, whatever.) So yes, every time I skin something in game, I peel my gloves off. Not because I don't want to get them bloody, but because that's how I would do it in the real world.

Just like working with poisons. What people are trying to say is that wearing thick, padded gloves should negate the risk of being poisoned on the spot by some spotty code. Changed or not, you're always going to see people not taking certain things into account when they're using any coded action. There are plenty of gloves: Work gloves, fancy gloves, combat gloves. Not every single one is chitin plated. Not every single one should be worn outside of its intended use. Sure. Some people are always going to wear workgloves everywhere because taking them off requires a lot of typing for little gain. But the truth of the matter is gloves -should- protect from 'slipping and cutting yourself' like a dunce.

[Lizzie]

In addition, it's pretty twinky to me, that you'd say it's perfectly suitable for poisoning things -but you probably take your gloves OFF every time you skin a critter. Y'know, so you don't get blood on them. It's okay to risk getting poison on your gloves though, because codedly, it doesn't happen. Sorry. I don't buy it.

Hey Lizzie, how many creatures have you ever gutted in your life?

Being a hunter and all, I can tell you for a fact that it's a damn sight harder to skin a critter with gloves on. There are quite a few bits where you need the finer dexterity to peel flesh from skin, or pick out stray shot (in this case, bits of broken arrowhead, whatever.) So yes, every time I skin something in game, I peel my gloves off. Not because I don't want to get them bloody, but because that's how I would do it in the real world.

Just like working with poisons. What people are trying to say is that wearing thick, padded gloves should negate the risk of being poisoned on the spot by some spotty code. Changed or not, you're always going to see people not taking certain things into account when they're using any coded action. There are plenty of gloves: Work gloves, fancy gloves, combat gloves. Not every single one is chitin plated. Not every single one should be worn outside of its intended use. Sure. Some people are always going to wear workgloves everywhere because taking them off requires a lot of typing for little gain. But the truth of the matter is gloves -should- protect from 'slipping and cutting yourself' like a dunce.

I agree. Gloves should protect from cutting yourself. They should NOT protect against failure to poison an item, and should make it more difficult to do so. Failure doesn't always mean cutting yourself don't forget. You could just ruin the poison, and not poison the item, and have to try again. This is currently coded. I just think the code should extend to wearing gloves that are intended to be used as armor (as opposed to gloves that are intended to be used for fashion, which don't usually impede dexterity).

[HavokBlue]

If the gloves are made of a material pliable enough to let you close your fist around a sword hilt, regardless of whether they are armored or not, they will impede your dexterity a lot less than you seem to imagine. If the glove is armor plated, I'm going to be reasonable and assume the plates are where you would reasonably expect them to be, on the back of the hand, and possibly on the fingers with gaps on the joints.

Gloves generally cause problems not by impeding dexterity, but with friction issues. For example, trying to grip an object, and the friction between your hand and the glove is significantly less than than the glove and the object you are trying to grip, causing your hand to slide and slip under impact or pressure.

[bcw81]

In addition, it's pretty twinky to me, that you'd say it's perfectly suitable for poisoning things -but you probably take your gloves OFF every time you skin a critter. Y'know, so you don't get blood on them. It's okay to risk getting poison on your gloves though, because codedly, it doesn't happen. Sorry. I don't buy it.

Hey Lizzie, how many creatures have you ever gutted in your life?

Being a hunter and all, I can tell you for a fact that it's a damn sight harder to skin a critter with gloves on. There are quite a few bits where you need the finer dexterity to peel flesh from skin, or pick out stray shot (in this case, bits of broken arrowhead, whatever.) So yes, every time I skin something in game, I peel my gloves off. Not because I don't want to get them bloody, but because that's how I would do it in the real world.

Just like working with poisons. What people are trying to say is that wearing thick, padded gloves should negate the risk of being poisoned on the spot by some spotty code. Changed or not, you're always going to see people not taking certain things into account when they're using any coded action. There are plenty of gloves: Work gloves, fancy gloves, combat gloves. Not every single one is chitin plated. Not every single one should be worn outside of its intended use. Sure. Some people are always going to wear workgloves everywhere because taking them off requires a lot of typing for little gain. But the truth of the matter is gloves -should- protect from 'slipping and cutting yourself' like a dunce.

I agree. Gloves should protect from cutting yourself. They should NOT protect against failure to poison an item, and should make it more difficult to do so. Failure doesn't always mean cutting yourself don't forget. You could just ruin the poison, and not poison the item, and have to try again. This is currently coded. I just think the code should extend to wearing gloves that are intended to be used as armor (as opposed to gloves that are intended to be used for fashion, which don't usually impede dexterity).

There are currently two fail messages when poisoning. One involves slipping and cutting yourself, the other involves slipping and nearly cutting yourself. I would be all the more glad if these messages were made a -lot- more vague, but as it is, it's silly to be failing when you're wearing thick gloves. Gith poison their weapons not through delicate work, but by stabbing poo a few times to get all that tasty fecal matter up on their weapons. You don't need to be dexterous to poison anything, you just need to make sure a poisonous substance sticks.

[Dalmeth]

Are you people really taking the text seriously?

"You slip and cut yourself!"

"You slip and nearly cut yourself!"

These are the two lines in question, and they are plain analogues for critical fail and fail, respectively.  They are strictly meant to communicate two distinct results to the player.  You could just as easily have this :

"You feel ill and stop coating your weapon with poison."

"You coat your weapon poison, but it flakes off upon drying."

These would mean the exact same thing in the game, but the player would find twice as much ground to critique these statements because they are much more informative.

Thus you find the primary reason why poison system will not change : you are all whiny little babies.


Poisons are dangerous.  Extreme attention to detail is required if the poisoner is not to taint themselves with their own work.  The specific text the game uses to communicate this to me is as important as the rain drop that struck your head back when you were eight years old.  Which is to say it is not important at all.

[RogueGunslinger]

Well how could we ever argue with "You're all whiny babies" It's just so compelling.

[TheWanderer]

M-Mom... is that you?

[Harmless]

Dalmeth, the question of this thread is twofold. The code seems to have a high chance of poisoning the user and there are no coded means to prevent that, which is a valid question and proposed new feature, and that the in-game messages are simplistic. What you're telling us is that the exact message is irrelevant to the outcome, but we already knew that. It isn't whining to discuss the realism and mechanics of the game. By the way, we all knew you can emote around the current system, so you're not informing us of anything with your example that we didn't already know and do.

In short, your comment is not constructive. Please try to do better so that we can enjoy a relaxed, mature discussion. 

Trippy neckahs stay spiced.

[QuillDipper]

My two cents, I was always under the impression that you just took your gloves off when you did something that required them off anyways. I mean, it doesn't outright say it but its not like you're juggling all the items in 'inv' when you enter combat either, right?

[RogueGunslinger]

My two cents, I was always under the impression that you just took your gloves off when you did something that required them off anyways. I mean, it doesn't outright say it but its not like you're juggling all the items in 'inv' when you enter combat either, right?

This is simpyl a matter of roleplay. If you don't emote or roleplay it out, the code trumps. If you do, then yeah, everyone should be going along with your emotes, bloodied gloves be damned.

But then I'd ask, why not just take off the gloves if you're going to emote it through.

[Lizzie]

My two cents, I was always under the impression that you just took your gloves off when you did something that required them off anyways. I mean, it doesn't outright say it but its not like you're juggling all the items in 'inv' when you enter combat either, right?

This is simpyl a matter of roleplay. If you don't emote or roleplay it out, the code trumps. If you do, then yeah, everyone should be going along with your emotes, bloodied gloves be damned.

But then I'd ask, why not just take off the gloves if you're going to emote it through.

It's not only a matter of roleplay, because there -are- coded effects to wearing vs. not wearing gloves.

If you wear gloves, you -will- get them bloodied when you skin critters. That is an actual coded effect.

If you wear armor-based gloves, you -will- enjoy a coded benefit to your defenses.

If you wear any gloves, you -will- obscure any rings or tattoos you have underneath them.

It's sort of like if you are standing, and change your ldesc to say you're reclining. The code will still treat you as if you're standing, because you are. Or using emotes to include things your character is saying. Even though there might be people who don't understand your character's language, you are forcing them to understand you, thus bypassing the code. It's not considered appropriate to circumvent the code like that.

The gloves thing - is a suggestion that gloves should work to make it more difficult to slip and cut yourself when you try poisoning things. It makes sense, to me.  My addition was to also make it harder to succeed, when wearing thick gloves that are intended to be worn as armor. So no you wouldn't slip and cut yourself, but you would also not poison that dart with that particular berry. You'd drop the berry, or smush it, or it'd leak out onto the glove and not onto the blade, or whatever you want to RP that it's doing - but it would ruin the berry and you'd have to try again. Success would be lower than if you weren't wearing any gloves at all, but wouldn't be impossible.

[RogueGunslinger]

Your idea all makes sense to me, Lizzie. I can see it being harder to poison with SOME poisons with gloves. I can also see gloves doing a good job of protecting from cuts.

I can also imagine a very easy was to not poison yourself, or cut yourself without the use of any gloves at all.

But the fact of the matter is not all poisons can be applied the same, not all would risk poisoning yourself, and let's be honest here, the failure is more an artifact of DIKU code, like fumbling and dropping your own weapon, than any sense of realism.

[Yummri]

The key to most games is the balance between real and game. This game tried to air more towards realistic in a fantasy setting and in all honesty it does it to an extremely good degree. But in some cases like.. poisoning yourself. There needs to be some danger or some skill involved or you might as well just let everyone do it.

Could those messages be better, yes they could. But what if you are a novice at poisoning. You fail and rather than cut yourself you touch your now poisoned gloves to your mouth wondering what you did wrong...oops new guy/girl mistake and poisoned. Its the risk you take to get a codded advantage and why you pay someone to do it for you.

Because if you took things to seriously there would be no magic, no animals and you might as well log onto twitter and listen to people posting about going to the bathroom and what they ate for lunch while scratching their backsides and shaking hands(using the same hand) with the girl/guy they like.

To me adding an extra layer of risk when cleaning the knife properly with a special rag is an extra layer of fun whilst replacing a waste of something as valuable as water in a desert world(unrealistic) with a reasonably realistic one. Not to mention holding a poison cleaning rag would allow you to clean cups and stuff out of poison. Once they were empty of course.

Its not whining to ask for a little more risk, especially when I didn't have much of a problem with them. But perhaps a little more ic would be nice.