Celebrate Look Hemote!

[IAmJacksOpinion]

Code Select Expand


look npc
(You look up at the <npc redacted>.)

>look npc (squinting)
(Squinting, you look up at the <npc redacted>.)


All looks at N/PCs are hemotes.

Looking in a direction never echoed, and probably still doesn't.

[LauraMars]

Looking in a direction or at an item was never even a hemote, it was just invisible, unless you appended a command emote to it.

So >look east is invisible, nobody knows you did it. >look backpack is invisible, nobody knows you did it.

>look east (with a glance over her shoulder) or >look backpack (inspecting it carefully) will send the non-hemotes:

With a glance over her shoulder, the tressy-tressed woman looks east.
Inspecting it carefully, the tressy-tressed woman looks at a bone-studded backpack.

These command-emote appended look actions are still not hemotes.

[Bogre]

Code Select Expand


look npc
(You look up at the <npc redacted>.)

>look npc (squinting)
(Squinting, you look up at the <npc redacted>.)


All looks at N/PCs are hemotes.

Looking in a direction never echoed, and probably still doesn't.

look east (squinting)

would echo

[Asmoth]

As an opposing view to Jingo's "I don't like this" view.

I have had times before where a sneaky character had succeeded in a sneak into my room.  But was foiled by typing Look Asmoth and I caught the echo.

So now I won't have that luxery either.  Seems fair for me to avoid all that spam.

[IAmJacksOpinion]

As far as this change; I'm 100% team Jingo on this one. It is bad.

Considering that the chief complaint against look echoes was that it was spammy, this would've been the ideal way to do it:

I'd be in support of adding a "look brief" that changes looks into hemotes. So it can be toggled by those that don't like the change.

Like the pooping mounts updates. But for looks. Turn it off when you don't care, or on when you do.

As someone who plays a lot of sneakies, there are tons of situations you get into where the looks would realistically be noticed. Anyone who has played an unclanned youngster of any main guild knows what it's like to turn every head and close every container in the room. (Sorry guys, but it's not just us sneakies being meta. You guys can be pretty awful yourselves sometimes.) But there are other situations where you might stumble upon an interesting conversation being had on the city street and stop to listen to two or three people talk. Sure, you can't watch a whole room, but you can easily watch a whole group - and many times that's all your PC is doing when they're skulking about anyhow. They don't really care about the Bynners at the dragon-etched table. They're watching the merchant at table 4.

Unfortunately there's not really a good way to accomplish this unless there was a "stand with <target>" command that let you behave like you were standing around an adhoc table, and then watching one person at the "table" (physical table, or adhoc group) allowed you to behave like you were watching everyone. Sort of like how follow interacts with listening. That's a good idea, but a complete derail... Even then it would be up to the players to use it appropriately...

The irony is that Laura is just about the only person who plays pickpockets.  

Yes, except no. Just.... nooooo.... Honestly, wtf? 

Consequences don't come from npc's unless they're animated,

... You're pretty much saying you'd do shit around NPCs that you wouldn't do around PCs. ICly NPCs should be treated no different than PCs. Hell, even vNPCs need to be considered. ...

I take it then that you treat all NPCs, or even vNPCs, the same as PCs and vice versa? So, when you're sitting in the bar and you feel a tugging at your pocket, you behave exactly the same as when you're walking through the Bazaar and you get that random echo to the same effect? Or when you're in the Gaj and a hooded figure walks in, you treat it the same as some of the seedier room echoes about hooded figures that you see in the same location?  This is actually just a rhetorical question, because the answer is that you don't. You don't, I don't, no one does. I'm not saying that's bad; treating PCs, NPCs, and vNPCs the same isn't black and white, it's a sliding grey scale ranging from "negligible" to "obvious abuse." But to your original assertion; NO, sneaking around NPCs isn't that bad when you consider that failing a single sneak check around a PC can create a social stigma that may take you IG months, or years, to recover from. The latter is far worse and more unrealistic than the former.

Yes, stealth is OP in this game. If there were a petition stating that apartment doors or compound gates should be 100% impossible to shadow someone through, I would sign it. But, much like magick, it's an OP mechanic that is counter-balanced by social stigmas. And like mages, whether or not you like sneakies or play sneakies yourself at all, they're an important part of this game, and this change is problematic to playing that role.

[Norcal]

If I am using wilderness sneak and I try to get past a drov beetle or a carru,  they have -never- let me know that my sneak has failed by looking at me.  They just attack me and try to kill me. I get no warning. They just attack.

So why should city sneak be any different?  It is already over powered and if you are detected in a bar no one is gong to attack you to kill you. You might get crim flagged, but you will not get carrued.

Taverns are crowded, busy and noisy places, even if there are no PCs present. If I was in a pub here and caught someone obviously trying to sneak and do something illegal, I would certainly  not only look, but also say or do something to stop the person. That is a point of RP, that players now need to be accountable for. However, putting up with walls of spam and spaghetti western look sequences just so that sneaky types can maintain superhuman abilities in a tavern, is wrong.  Kudos to staff for the change.

[Asmoth]

 Next character concept, a ranger who joins the aod and uses the crim code to murder everyone who fails a sneak check with guards...

Yes, that is silly, but so I comparing beetles to people.  The npc in the rooms I train stealing on don't look at me either when I fail a steal checks they just run away screaming their heads off.

[RogueGunslinger]

This "problem" was around BEFORE this change. All someone had to do is not look at your character to let them know you see them. Really not getting people who are against it.. However, making it a toggle or no-save would be perfectly fine with me.

[hyzhenhok]

This "problem" was around BEFORE this change. All someone had to do is not look at your character to let them know you see them. Really not getting people who are against it.. However, making it a toggle or no-save would be perfectly fine with me.

This is where the conversation overlaps with the mdesc hiding stuff. Previously, the person had a choice: you could get the mdesc and equipment list of the stealthed character, but only by tipping off the fact that you'd seen them. The stealthed character would know when their identity was likely compromised.

I don't have a whole lot of sympathy for stealth characters who try to live Batman-esque secret double lives, but it probably didn't need to get harder than it already was.

[nauta]

I realize I used 'look' a lot as a 'Hi-I'm-Ready-To-RP-You-Can-Stop-Spam-Walking-Or-Double-Back' trick, a lot.

Problem solved:

Code Select Expand


alias looka em looks alive.


[Delirium]

Wrong thread. Why are there two threads??

[Jingo]

Failed peek attempts should be hemotes.

[IAmJacksOpinion]

Failed peek attempts should be hemotes.

Pretty sure they are. I think you can potentially even notice successful peeks, but not positive.