IC and OOC communication

[nauta]

Hi,

I'm tossing out a concern and a proposed solution that I suspect would be minimal in code mutilation.  I'd be curious what others think, since I'm making a lot of assumptions based on little experience; but it's on a topic that has bothered me for a while - since I started really.

The Concern.  As far as I can tell (NB: an assumption) the preferred mode of communication for Arm is PC-to-PC, with even rumor boards (both inside the clan and outside) being restricted to broad and general rumors that would affect the entire clan (e.g. both north and south divisions of Salarr, or all of Allanak).  If this assumption is correct (and it seems to be de facto the case even if it isn't a stated rule), then I think I might formulate the concern as follows: this is super frustrating, especially for offpeakers and occasional players!  It:

a) prevents a lot of trivial plots from moving forward (sometimes even non-trivial ones), where playtimes don't overlap - in a lot of cases it is unrealistic that the two PCs involved wouldn't, via the virtual world, be able to communicate what happened when the other wasn't playing.

b) creates cliques where PCs that are outside those cliques (be they independent or in other cliques) just have no way of involving themselves in those plots

c) pushes people towards OOC forms of communication; I've seen a lot: OOC here's my gdb handle, you know, just to coordinate on further actions; which of course is a slippery slope into the bad form of OOC communication - I'd prefer the game to be setup so that people weren't pushed towards OOC, even if the mudsex was -that- good.

d) creates the image to a newer player that nothing is really going on

e) limits the extent to which we can celebrate our little victories or defeats (a crime PC can brag about their crimes or a non-crime PC can brag about bagging the criminal or a hunter can brag about bagging a dozen lurkers)

f) it might give people something to talk about at the bar - sometimes your PC shouldn't be the one gossiping the information, but it's nice to get it out there.

g) creates these huge gaps in reality with offpeakers and occasional players who might not have been around to learn from a PC (or might never learn from a PC) that something happened right there where they work each day.

h) just, in general, I find it pretty unrealistic and jarring to not know some of the things that it seems to me I would know, from hanging out in the environment.

Some Solutions.  

1) Encourage the use of rumor boards for trivial things.  Obviously, the big thing is to get a better way of entering stuff into the extant message boards and for people to use those message boards more regularly.

2) Add more message boards.  But another thing would be to add more message boards: one for Red's, one for the Gaj, one at the body pile (to catch the gossip of those bodies that pile up there), one in front of the jail (to catch the gossip about those jailed), one in each apartment, one in each clan estate (north and south); one at each gate (catch the latest gossip from travellers and hunters), etc. These could go alongside the current city-wide or clan-wide ones.

Now, I suspect that the reason for the current rule (if it is one) is to prevent a plethora of little things like "missed connections: you: tall silent breed hunter; me: buxom roundear gemmed; you dropped a dead rat on the road and I thought it was cute", so monitoring the boards might be a hit on Staff time... but it also might at least make this player enjoy the game a lot more (and I suspect others, but I could be wrong).  I guess I'd like us to lean on the side of too much than too little (or none at all).

What do you think?

[Delirium]

I'm all for increased ability to facilitate in-game methods of communication between players whose playtimes don't always sync.

It doesn't have to be limited to an increased number of message boards.. though that's a great first step that doesn't require much if any code.

[Harmless]

I like your ideas and suggestions and I agree with all of your concerns.

Here's some thoughts:

1.) Be able to pay/bribe/feed an NPC to hold onto a message for you for someone that will activate with a keyword. If this could be triggered with the 'discuss' command, and set with another existing command like 'pay' or something, that'd be fucking awesome.

>Discuss barkeep rumors

The grizzled barkeep says, in sirihish:
  "There ain't been much going on lately, stranger. Unless you know someone specific who's left ya a message, I can't help. You could PAY me to hold onto something for someone, or we could DISCUSS somethin' or someone ya know about already. Now ya getting a drink or not!?"

>discuss barkeep fudgepacker

The grizzled barkeep says, in sirihish:
   "So you know 'bout Fudgepacker. A'right..."

The grizzled barkeep whispers to you, leaning over the bar, in sirihish:
   "Fudgepacker says that you should leave yer deliveries in the fourth building ya see when walking from Hathor's from now on, and tha' he'll be gone on other business for the next three or four weeks."

The grizzled barkeep nods and goes back to his business.

2.) Leaving a message is possible even without literacy, using the arrange command and save rooms, especially save rooms that are unlikely to be violated. Using chalk for scribbles is obvious, but arranging items can be done in so many ways it's possible to establish a code for what certain signals mean in advance and send very complex messages. The difficulty here is that a novel message on a topic previously undiscussed is difficult.

3.) Of course, making as many PC contacts as possible, and asking someone with overlapping playtimes to function as a messenger is great, and is usually what people have to do. Of course, this has difficulties.

[CodeMaster]

I like your ideas and suggestions and I agree with all of your concerns.

Here's some thoughts:

1.) Be able to pay/bribe/feed an NPC to hold onto a message for you for someone that will activate with a keyword. If this could be triggered with the 'discuss' command, and set with another existing command like 'pay' or something, that'd be fucking awesome.

>Discuss barkeep rumors

The grizzled barkeep says, in sirihish:
  "There ain't been much going on lately, stranger. Unless you know someone specific who's left ya a message, I can't help. You could PAY me to hold onto something for someone, or we could DISCUSS somethin' or someone ya know about already. Now ya getting a drink or not!?"

>discuss barkeep fudgepacker

The grizzled barkeep says, in sirihish:
   "So you know 'bout Fudgepacker. A'right..."

The grizzled barkeep whispers to you, leaning over the bar, in sirihish:
   "Fudgepacker says that you should leave yer deliveries in the fourth building ya see when walking from Hathor's from now on, and tha' he'll be gone on other business for the next three or four weeks."

The grizzled barkeep nods and goes back to his business.

2.) Leaving a message is possible even without literacy, using the arrange command and save rooms, especially save rooms that are unlikely to be violated. Using chalk for scribbles is obvious, but arranging items can be done in so many ways it's possible to establish a code for what certain signals mean in advance and send very complex messages. The difficulty here is that a novel message on a topic previously undiscussed is difficult.

3.) Of course, making as many PC contacts as possible, and asking someone with overlapping playtimes to function as a messenger is great, and is usually what people have to do. Of course, this has difficulties.

Great thoughts.

Re: 1) I love the idea of leaving messages with NPCs.  An alternative would be to have a mysterious NPC you could contact and he would take and leave messages in a similar fashion.  Or it could be a scripted-out PC whose player just left online, but that would be so botlike as to break the rules of the game .  A similar idea would just be to let players leave "ethereal packages" in the Way that works a bit like traditional mudmail.  Any of these would be awesome.

Re: 2) A related example would be to use the open/close status of chests to signify what you want your hunter to get more of that week.  If the 'chitin' chest is open, your offpeak hunter dude should go get more chitin because a big order is coming up, etc.

I'll also add:  you could also use the "bury" code to leave items in a specific location in the desert; each item buried could encode a different message.  It would vanish between reboots, but maybe that wouldn't be so bad.

[Talia]

It doesn't have to be limited to an increased number of message boards.. though that's a great first step that doesn't require much if any code.

Just a technical note: Actually this is really very difficult to do with our current code. Message boards are hard-coded objects that are not easily replicable. At this point it takes an actual coder to change anything about them, or add new ones.

[Marauder Moe]

I dunno, it's tricky. 

I'm not sure I buy the assumption that a plot forwarded primarily by message boards/NPCs is actually better than a dead/stalled plot.  This is a live roleplaying game, after all, not a forum RPG.

That said, I wouldn't mind it if staff wanted to experiment with messaging NPCs and/or adding/splitting a few more message boards.

[CodeMaster]

I'm not sure I buy the assumption that a plot forwarded primarily by message boards/NPCs is actually better than a dead/stalled plot.  This is a live roleplaying game, after all, not a forum RPG.

I can see your point, but some clans already have private discussion forums.  I realize what's being proposed isn't the exact same thing, but there are reasons why those forums exist -- one of which is probably to better facilitate plots among clannies with disparate playtimes.

I'm just guessing, but I think the posts on forum RPGs also include tangible actions, like stabbing some guy and killing his character, and not just memos being relayed back and forth.

[Narf]

I'm heartily in favor of putting a "corpse pile only" rumor board up.

[creeper386]

I think expanding out the way to potentially store or even sometimes store offline messages would be a great thing. If you "connecting" with someone was dependant on skill, not dependant on being offline/dead/etc .... I think that'd be a great option there. Completely IC and in my opinion much more realistic version of the way in game terms to me. It takes a lot of the OOC aspect out of the way completely.

[nauta]

It doesn't have to be limited to an increased number of message boards.. though that's a great first step that doesn't require much if any code.

Just a technical note: Actually this is really very difficult to do with our current code. Message boards are hard-coded objects that are not easily replicable. At this point it takes an actual coder to change anything about them, or add new ones.

That's too bad.  I noticed there's this really dormant board that boasts Senate messages circa 2004 down by the southeast end of Allanak, and the Salarr board IIRC hasn't been used for a long time too (everyone preferring to do things on the gdb, which, I think, has the bad consequence that spies no longer can spy so neatly).  Anyway, I wonder if these boards could just be 'moved' to the body pile or something.  Just a thought.

[rodic]

contact amos
You are unable to reach their mind
contact amos
The mind you are trying to reach is currently unavailable, if you'd like to leave your name, location, and a brief message for 'Amos' please do so after the psionic beep. Thank you.


psi "Err Amos, Sarge is dead, you're the new Sarge."

[creeper386]

Or,
>contact amos
You can't reach that person right now. (Fail message)

>contact amos
You've contacted the dusky-skinned man. (Online, offline, dead, whatever)

psi Sarge is dead.


Amos gets the message when he logs in. I'd prefer it with some sort of time stamp. Even if it's something, within the last week, etc ...

Because I swear to god people contact my characters to see if they are online, and then cease ... because depending on my position, it happens all the time, which I feel is an OOC reason to use an IC command, and poor play.(Yes there are times when this is a legitimate reason, I've being scanned by a psion or something. Whatever, but not to the degree that it happens at times.)

It from all the angles i see it at, makes psi a much more IC construct and removes the ooc things about it.

Don't know how hard it would be to code, but I really think this sort of thing should be something looked at seriously.

[CodeMaster]

I started hack/slash MUDding back before instant messaging (e.g., ICQ) was really popular. The mudmail system was absolutely necessary to keep in touch with the people I was meeting, and in some cases I remember it would be weeks before our login times matched and we were able to share a live "hello".  Without mudmail, I probably wouldn't have forged the connections I did with all those people - some of which I'm even in touch with today.

That's a pretty idyllic anecdote, but I think it holds some water.  Our MUD takes the IC/OOC barrier more seriously than most MUSHes, which is to its massive credit.  But it also subdivides the playerbase along the arbitrary lines of "playtimes".  And it's an undeniable fact that, as the global audience for MUDs ages into careers and families, these lines become bolder, and the regions between them become smaller and more numerous.

If there were some small means of communicating with people when they weren't logged into their character, I think friendships (and rivalries) within our limited playerbase would have a better chance of taking shape.

All that is to say that... offline IC messages would be awesome, full stop.  If it were done in an artful and sort of seamless way that resolved some of the IC/OOC discrepancies you currently get when using the Way, I believe it would be one of those changes that players would wonder how they did without.

Because I swear to god people contact my characters to see if they are online, and then cease ... because depending on my position, it happens all the time, which I feel is an OOC reason to use an IC command, and poor play.(Yes there are times when this is a legitimate reason, I've being scanned by a psion or something. Whatever, but not to the degree that it happens at times.)

"Let us not attribute to malice and cruelty what may be referred to less criminal motives. Do we not often afflict others undesignedly, and, from mere carelessness, neglect to relieve distress?" (Jane West).

In other words, I don't have any stats in front of me, but based on my own play I think it's far more likely that someone is mistakenly latching onto one of your keywords.

[creeper386]

That might be true ... But when I could play for weeks and don't actually start getting those psis until situations change for my character such as joining a guild or something like that ... Again as I stated I'm sure there are legit reasons such as reaching the wrong person and such. But I've seen it happen with a variety of different characters, and almost always ramps up more when a character of mines been in the spotlight, and unlikely all of it has IC reasons so much as people seeing if I'm logged in.

I personally do go ahead and try and way people when I'm in a clan and such to try and reach out to others. Or even when I'm not in a clan and try to stay in contact with those I know, but I also usually have IC reasons for reaching them, and ICly communicate once I do. So ....

Anyways, it's not just a one of situation. I've had I think over 30 characters and played quite a bit back in the day. It's an issue with how the psi system works honestly, which is why I'd like to see changes to it.

[Lizzie]

creeper it really is probably just mistaken keywords. Happens to me often. I try to have "non-generic" keywords for my character to distinguish me from every other Talia. I also have long-lived characters. So it's inevitable that at some point during my character's life, someone -else- will roll up a character with a keyword that is the same as one of mine. THAT character has his/her own group of friends and enemies, some of whom try to find them when they're not logged in. And so they get my character by mistake. Happens for as long as both of our characters are alive. I've actually run into some of those "same-keyword" characters and notice that if they die and people find out about the death, those mistaken contact attempts eventually stop entirely.

In your case it's probably that they're trying to contact some long-lived character, and you rolled up your character after they'd already established a "way network" of friends/foes, and you both share a keyword that people use to get in touch with the other person. They're getting you by mistake and have nothing to say to you so they just break off.

Considering how common it is for me, I have to imagine it's fairly common for most people at one point or another.

[Beethoven]

It could also be that they decided to contact you, then changed their mind once they actually managed to reach your mind. I do this all the time, sadly.

[creeper386]

Okay, again, if I've acquiesced to the fact that it can happen,  for a variety of reasons. I have more to say but lets stay on topic.

Are you trying to deny the fact that people use psi to find out if someone is ONLINE?! Because if you are, lets discuss that. Considering many people have admitted to using it for that sole purpose on this forums. An purely OOC construct forced into the IG world ... I'm going to assume your arguments are invalid, but lets see what you have to say about that. Instead of nitpicking something that we obviously have different opinions about and honestly has NO barring on the discussion at hand.

[Lizzie]

Okay, again, if I've acquiesced to the fact that it can happen,  for a variety of reasons. I have more to say but lets stay on topic.

Are you trying to deny the fact that people use psi to find out if someone is ONLINE?! Because if you are, lets discuss that. Considering many people have admitted to using it for that sole purpose on this forums. An purely OOC construct forced into the IG world ... I'm going to assume your arguments are invalid, but lets see what you have to say about that. Instead of nitpicking something that we obviously have different opinions about and honestly has NO barring on the discussion at hand.

No, none of us are denying that people use it to find out if someone is online. We're suggesting that it isn't the -only- reason why someone might find your mind and break contact without saying anything. Are you suggesting that the -only- time someone finds your mind, doesn't say anything, and breaks off, is when someone is trying to find out if you are online? Are you suggesting that you and your character are that important that anyone would care that much, every single time you experience this phenomenon? How do you know that's why it's happening? We're suggesting - that you have no idea WHY someone finds your mind, says nothing, and breaks contact. And we're suggesting that there could be several possible reasons why, and that your implication that it is EXCLUSIVELY because someone is trying to find out if you're online, is not necessarily true (and unlikely to be the ONLY time it ever happens).

[creeper386]

No, none of us are denying that people use it to find out if someone is online. We're suggesting that it isn't the -only- reason why someone might find your mind and break contact without saying anything. Are you suggesting that the -only- time someone finds your mind, doesn't say anything, and breaks off, is when someone is trying to find out if you are online? Are you suggesting that you and your character are that important that anyone would care that much, every single time you experience this phenomenon? How do you know that's why it's happening? We're suggesting - that you have no idea WHY someone finds your mind, says nothing, and breaks contact. And we're suggesting that there could be several possible reasons why, and that your implication that it is EXCLUSIVELY because someone is trying to find out if you're online, is not necessarily true (and unlikely to be the ONLY time it ever happens).

(Yes there are times when this is a legitimate reason, I've being scanned by a psion or something. Whatever, but not to the degree that it happens at times.)

Oh god your right. That's exactly what I was suggestion .... I'm so glad you pointed out the error of my ways. Or perhaps in the future try reading peoples posts before being an ....

[Lizzie]

Again - you are offering only two possibilities:

1) It's happening for legitimate IC reasons
2) Someone is trying to find out whether or not you're online.

Again - those are only two possibilities, and there are several more, in fact, several more that are MORE likely than EITHER of the two you imply are the only two possibilities. The one I suggested was that it's just a keyword of someone else who's in the game. That is not an IC reason. It is an OOC reason and a limitation of the code. But this OOC reason has nothing to do with logchecking. I even told you flat out that it happens more often once one of the two similarly-keyworded people is in the spotlight.  MAYBE - just possibly - your assumption that people are log-checking you, isn't really what's going on at all, since it is *common* to mistake keywords of prominent people who are -not- logged in - with the exact same keyword of someone who IS logged in. And maybe the other person who you share a keyword with is equally in the spotlight. Maybe they just are in a different spotlight.

Like, the rotund, silver-tressed woman, and the green-eyed silver-tressed man. Lady Lizzie Tenneshi, and Creeper the Guild boss.  Half the "mistakes" I see from people who are using emotes and talks, make the mistake of targeting the sdesc words and insisting on not using the names they already know. It's not a stretch to assume that those same people who make this *common* mistake are psing silver or silver-tressed instead of Lizzie, and getting you because I"m not logged in.

This is MORE likely to occur than someone log-checking you. The likelihood that you are -often- log-checked, is low. The likelihood that you are -often- keyworded in error, is high.

Perhaps re-read the entirety of your post as I did, before criticizing me for responding to the entirety of your post. If you didn't mean what you wrote, then you might consider being more careful about how you write in the future.

[creeper386]

Here's my point. Your post is completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand. This isn't a post I started complaining about log checking. This is me making a suggestion in a post about IC and OOC communication. My suggestion is something that I feel helps with the OP ... While also resolving an OOC use of an IC item.

Actually I also consider keyword 'mistakes' IC. Why? Because the psi requires you focusing on the person, if you are only focusing on their hair color, your certainly less likely to get the right person, as you aren't focusing that hard. It's not really a limitation of the code so much as someone not using the tool how it should be made. Yes there are other reasons aside from log checking. No your posts here aren't actually on topic nor are they actually helpful. I tried explaining what I'm talking about, it's obvious you disagree, instead of leaving it at that and keeping polite you decide to post and continue posting about how "wrong" I am. Leave it alone already.

[valeria]

Creeper, tone it down a notch, please.  It's possible to disagree with someone without entering flaming territory.  Thanks!

[Lizzie]

Or,
>contact amos
You can't reach that person right now. (Fail message)

>contact amos
You've contacted the dusky-skinned man. (Online, offline, dead, whatever)

psi Sarge is dead.


Amos gets the message when he logs in. I'd prefer it with some sort of time stamp. Even if it's something, within the last week, etc ...

Because I swear to god people contact my characters to see if they are online, and then cease ... because depending on my position, it happens all the time, which I feel is an OOC reason to use an IC command, and poor play.(Yes there are times when this is a legitimate reason, I've being scanned by a psion or something. Whatever, but not to the degree that it happens at times.)

It from all the angles i see it at, makes psi a much more IC construct and removes the ooc things about it.

Don't know how hard it would be to code, but I really think this sort of thing should be something looked at seriously.

Well then here's me addressing your suggestion:

In order to do that - the game would have to retain the sdesc and name of every single character in the game, even after they've died. So when you 'contact amos' and you're looking for YOUR friend Amos - how would the game know which Amos to find? The only time the game knows, is when Amos is logged in and alive. And then, the game targets the most recent Amos to exist in the game. If one Amos the human was in the game an hour ago, and Amos the NPC has been in the game since the last game reset, and a new Amos pops up in Tuluk out of the hall of kings, your attempt to find "amos" via the way will return the one who just showed up out of chargen. If you want your human pal, you'd need to contact 2.amos

or contact amos.sdesckeyword.sdesckeyword2.etc.

Imagine now, trying to contact amos - but the game now includes every single instance of the name amos for the past year, including 10 who have been dead for months. How do you know which one you did -not- find, when you fail to find them? Of course if you see their sdesc when you send them a psi, you'll know it's the wrong one. How many stun points will you need to go through, to find the right one? Especially if the one you want has their barrier up and is in the game, but you simply can't find their mind at the moment.

Sounds like a huge nightmare to solve a problem that isn't really a problem.

[IntuitiveApathy]

Or,
>contact amos
You can't reach that person right now. (Fail message)

>contact amos
You've contacted the dusky-skinned man. (Online, offline, dead, whatever)

psi Sarge is dead.


Amos gets the message when he logs in. I'd prefer it with some sort of time stamp. Even if it's something, within the last week, etc ...

Because I swear to god people contact my characters to see if they are online, and then cease ... because depending on my position, it happens all the time, which I feel is an OOC reason to use an IC command, and poor play.(Yes there are times when this is a legitimate reason, I've being scanned by a psion or something. Whatever, but not to the degree that it happens at times.)

It from all the angles i see it at, makes psi a much more IC construct and removes the ooc things about it.

Don't know how hard it would be to code, but I really think this sort of thing should be something looked at seriously.

Well then here's me addressing your suggestion:

In order to do that - the game would have to retain the sdesc and name of every single character in the game, even after they've died. So when you 'contact amos' and you're looking for YOUR friend Amos - how would the game know which Amos to find? The only time the game knows, is when Amos is logged in and alive. And then, the game targets the most recent Amos to exist in the game. If one Amos the human was in the game an hour ago, and Amos the NPC has been in the game since the last game reset, and a new Amos pops up in Tuluk out of the hall of kings, your attempt to find "amos" via the way will return the one who just showed up out of chargen. If you want your human pal, you'd need to contact 2.amos

or contact amos.sdesckeyword.sdesckeyword2.etc.

Imagine now, trying to contact amos - but the game now includes every single instance of the name amos for the past year, including 10 who have been dead for months. How do you know which one you did -not- find, when you fail to find them? Of course if you see their sdesc when you send them a psi, you'll know it's the wrong one. How many stun points will you need to go through, to find the right one? Especially if the one you want has their barrier up and is in the game, but you simply can't find their mind at the moment.

Sounds like a huge nightmare to solve a problem that isn't really a problem.

I'm not sure how difficult it would be to code, but why wouldn't the contact check only characters/descriptions that are currently alive in the database?  That would return magnitudes less results presumably and make it less of a huge nightmare.