Release Note discussion!

[Lizzie]

For subdued, if I'm awake, you're going to have to try really hard to get me to drink something I don't want. Even if you hold me down, I can spit it out or breath through my nose to prevent swallowing.

Those options don't really apply for unconscious or paralyzed, and if I'm asleep, I just want it to wake them up immediately after they pour. You still get the effects of whatever they pour, but at least you can immediately go for a cure, or attack them back.

I don't remember if a subdued person is codedly able to talk/say/tell or emote. If they are, then my concern about the consent on that is not a concern. The concern I had (and still have) is that the "victim" is codedly incapable of protesting, asking for death, thanking someone, or even emoting about squirming - if they're paralyzed while you're pouring something down their throat.

I can even think of an instance in which someone is critically injured and immobile - and their player is just really idling while waiting for the thirst code to finally kill them off (maybe they don't know about quit-die or maybe they're communicating with staff via wish about the situation before their character dies). Saving their life might be unwanted to the *player*.

There are personal reasons why I would prefer to consent to them killing my character over making me sit there unable to respond while their character poisons mine. It's the "unable to respond" part I object to, when you are doing something to my character. It isn't even that you're doing it against my will - it's that you don't have any way of knowing what my will is, if you don't ask for consent because my character is incapable, codedly, of responding or reacting in any way at all. I might as well just go linkdead, which you'd probably consider lame. But that's how you'd be treating my character if you were to do that to them under that very narrow and specific circumstance.

[surveyvon]

Relevant release notes.

September 12th, 2016

(Nessalin)
-When an arrow becomes lit, by whatever means, any poison on it is removed.
-Vials can now be used to administer cures and poisons to victims using either the use or pour commands.  This will preclude wishes asking to shove a tablet into the mouth of someone who is sleeping/paralyzed/subdued.
  -The victim is unconscious (small chance they will choke and spit it up)
  -The victim is paralyzed (small chance they will choke and spit it up)
  -The victim is subdued (chance to resist)
-Usage:


> use vial warrior
> pour vial warrior
> pour vial in warrior
> pour vial on warrior
> pour vial into warrior
> pour vial onto warrior

« Last Edit: September 19, 2016, 10:59:04 AM by nessalin »

[Grapes]

I would hate to find someone bleeding out and get in trouble for bandaging them, or giving them a drink of water., because I didn't ask for consent beforehand. A lot of things happen to our characters against the will of the players involved. While I do see the point of breathing through one's nose, said nose could be pinched, spitting out, mouth could be covered.

[sleepyhead]

Looks like it already works kind of like I was suggesting. I wonder if being paralyzed but conscious negates your resist roll, though? It should.

[Hauwke]

I don't remember if a subdued person is codedly able to talk/say/tell or emote. If they are, then my concern about the consent on that is not a concern. The concern I had (and still have) is that the "victim" is codedly incapable of protesting, asking for death, thanking someone, or even emoting about squirming - if they're paralyzed while you're pouring something down their throat.

You can emote and say while subdued, yes. If you are paralyzed you cant though.

I would hate to find someone bleeding out and get in trouble for bandaging them, or giving them a drink of water., because I didn't ask for consent beforehand. A lot of things happen to our characters against the will of the players involved. While I do see the point of breathing through one's nose, said nose could be pinched, spitting out, mouth could be covered.

They could always just store after that, and say their character died, I really dont see an issue with it.

[Dar]

I personally do not like the idea of forcing poison down someone's throat mainly because it makes killing too easy. That's my opinion. Not about consent of graphic violence at all. But just a matter of how easy it is for 2 people to subdue and pour liquid in, to instantly KO someone out.  Granted it's possible to do it by simply stabbing a person with a poisoned dagger. But liquid brewed poison and poison that sticks to blades are two entirely different things in terms of difficulty to procure.

What?

Heramide poison that sticks on a blade is rare, difficult, and dangerous to provide. It's price ranges from favor to 5000+ depending on how desperate a PC is for it.
Heramide poison that can be brewed into a vial is possible to be created by a 0 day ranger.

Being subdued by one and attacked by another puts you into a severe disadvantage, but most definitely does not mean certain death. You can survive it, if you're lucky, or skilled enough.
Being subdued by one and having a vial poured into you knocks you out completely, which 'does' mean certain death. Regardless of your character's .... anything really.
A 0 hour warrior elf (I'm not talking about HGs. HGs at least require karma) has a strong 'chance' to subdue a 100 day character, provided he's lacking a certain guild/subguild.
2 0 hour characters can potentially incapacitate and kill a 100 day character due to the vial pouring not having a resistance mechanic, merely by that 100 day character failing 'one' single challenge roll.

Is this really something you find plausible and acceptable?  I'm not talking about realistic, since arguments 'for' and 'against' it have already been mentioned and discussed. I am merely talking about plausibility of it as a coded mechanic.

[surveyvon]

Heramide poison that can be brewed into a vial is possible to be created by a 0 day ranger.

I don't think this is true anymore, following the removal of the brew command in favor of the crafting system.

[Molten Heart]

.

[Dar]

It's still nowhere close to as dangerous as procuring a non-brewed heramide.

Heramide is very powerful. Therefore it's understandable to make the process of procuring it to be very dangerous.

Making a brewed heramide very difficult doesnt make so much sense, because then it's non-lethal application becomes too rare and you lose functionality.

It's easier, more balanced, less abuse prone, and would actually make sense to allow a resistance check on a conscious person. Deactivated by some type on nosave.
If one thinks they have someone in their power so much that they wouldnt be able to resist drinking the liquid. Then that someone should have enough power over their victim to knock them out and pour it into their gullet then. Wake them up afterwards if necessary. If it is a benevolent action, it's just a simple matter of telling the person to "Sit still and drink this" and having the person nosave the defence.

[Akariel]

Re Consent:

Consent is not required to hack motherfuckers up with bone swords, murder someone, or various other forms of coded combat. Consent is required for sexual scenes, bodily mutilation, and graphic torture. The poison code does not fall into any of those categories on its own, nor does using the code in place to poison someone. Of course, if there is abuse of the system we will be watching and listening and will strike faster than a spider-monkey.

Help Consent - http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Consent

There are few restrictions on roleplay in Armageddon. If you choose to roleplay adult situations, that is fine. However, before instigating such an act with another player, you need to OOC to make sure that the role play is consented to, in each scene it happens. You must do this as you can't be sure that you are alone in every situation, and as such consent must be addressed every time. If someone is instigating roleplay that makes you uncomfortable, please OOC that they should stop. If they continue despite being told to stop, please wish up. This rule is not meant to be abused in order to allow characters to escape the consequences. Perhaps a good analogy is the movie ratings system: some people may wish to see the details acted out in a way which would deserve an R rating while another, younger player might prefer that the details be communicated in an OOC fashion and left offstage.

Rape/Sexual Torture plotlines are not to be played out in the game. See 'help rape' for further elaboration on this subject and a definition of what is considered rape in Armageddon.

In the case of mutilation, an action that would cause a character to lose their ability to function in some way, the victim may request that they be killed by the procedure. It is then the instigator's responsibility to attempt to kill the victim, or take some other appropriate course of action. The victim should not request other punishments, bargain, or otherwise discuss the situation out of character beyond this provision.

If you act out a graphic sequence without first obtaining the other player's consent, and the player then complains within a reasonable amount of time (so that the runlogs can be checked and the complaint verified), you will be banned. If you enact a rape plotline or an act of rape, you will be banned. In either case, you will be banned for thirty (30) days for the first offense, permanently for the second offense. If the Producers deem an act that is a first offense especially egregious, you will be permanently banned. Please use common sense and have respect for other people's sensibilities.

Notes:
You must be 18 years of age or older to ask for or give consent for sexual roleplay.

[surveyvon]

It's still nowhere close to as dangerous as procuring a non-brewed heramide.

Heramide is very powerful. Therefore it's understandable to make the process of procuring it to be very dangerous.

Making a brewed heramide very difficult doesnt make so much sense, because then it's non-lethal application becomes too rare and you lose functionality.

It's easier, more balanced, less abuse prone, and would actually make sense to allow a resistance check on a conscious person. Deactivated by some type on nosave.
If one thinks they have someone in their power so much that they wouldnt be able to resist drinking the liquid. Then that someone should have enough power over their victim to knock them out and pour it into their gullet then. Wake them up afterwards if necessary. If it is a benevolent action, it's just a simple matter of telling the person to "Sit still and drink this" and having the person nosave the defence.

There is a resist check.

[Dar]

... oh. There is? I'm sorry. I assumed that pouring liquid inside subdued people did not have any checks. Then nevermiiiind.

[Vox]

Re Consent:

Consent is not required to hack motherfuckers up with bone swords, murder someone, or various other forms of coded combat. Consent is required for sexual scenes, bodily mutilation, and graphic torture. The poison code does not fall into any of those categories on its own, nor does using the code in place to poison someone. Of course, if there is abuse of the system we will be watching and listening and will strike faster than a spider-monkey.

+1 Thank you.

I personally do not like the idea of forcing poison down someone's throat mainly because it makes killing too easy. That's my opinion. Not about consent of graphic violence at all. But just a matter of how easy it is for 2 people to subdue and pour liquid in, to instantly KO someone out.  Granted it's possible to do it by simply stabbing a person with a poisoned dagger. But liquid brewed poison and poison that sticks to blades are two entirely different things in terms of difficulty to procure.

What?

Heramide poison that sticks on a blade is rare, difficult, and dangerous to provide. It's price ranges from favor to 5000+ depending on how desperate a PC is for it.
Heramide poison that can be brewed into a vial is possible to be created by a 0 day ranger.

Being subdued by one and attacked by another puts you into a severe disadvantage, but most definitely does not mean certain death. You can survive it, if you're lucky, or skilled enough.
Being subdued by one and having a vial poured into you knocks you out completely, which 'does' mean certain death. Regardless of your character's .... anything really.
A 0 hour warrior elf (I'm not talking about HGs. HGs at least require karma) has a strong 'chance' to subdue a 100 day character, provided he's lacking a certain guild/subguild.
2 0 hour characters can potentially incapacitate and kill a 100 day character due to the vial pouring not having a resistance mechanic, merely by that 100 day character failing 'one' single challenge roll.

Is this really something you find plausible and acceptable?  I'm not talking about realistic, since arguments 'for' and 'against' it have already been mentioned and discussed. I am merely talking about plausibility of it as a coded mechanic.

I'm not sure I follow the concern here regarding 0 hour characters randomly subduing people and forcing heramide down people's throats. If such a thing occurs, it's fairly easy for Staff to investigate whether this was a 'Troll' killing of abusive newbies and for the victim of this abuse to get rezz'ed.

However, I would suggest adding a nosave 'remedy' option that people can turn off and on to indicate gladly accepting the remedy versus fighting against it, in the same way they do subdue, combat and crime. That way perhaps an addition skill check can be done taking 'def' into account, thereby avoiding Dar's fear that his 100 day warrior could so easily be taken out by some 0 day trolls.

Ultimately though I think the concern of abuse here is wildly anxious and unwarranted, because as Akariel mentioned abuse of all kinds will be monitored by the spider-monkeys in the sky.

I think this is a cool addition with lots of RP potential, and with perhaps a few tweaks to skill checks can be extremely realistic.

[Hauwke]

There are a few food items that do it as well when you eat them.

[Armaddict]

Ultimately though I think the concern of abuse here is wildly anxious and unwarranted, because as Akariel mentioned abuse of all kinds will be monitored by the spider-monkeys in the sky.

Ultimately, code equates to the laws of physics of the game.  What is possible and impossible.  If we want something to behave in a certain way, code it that way.  Abuse is not, 'Oh, that was twinky.'  It's the manipulation of code to gain results that the code is not intended for.

Hence, when we say 'They will be watching for abuse', my general concern is that abuse is being used very loosely and negatively.  Make the code account for the behavior you want.  Not to facilitate another front of 'You fuckin' twink. Negative review.'

That being said...it seems that this entire concern would be solved via further work with poison crafting.  Deadly poisons through brew need to be similarly risky, so that if this happens to you from two 0 day warriors, they just pulled off something special.  I do like the idea of it having a delay that notifies you, so that if you -weren't- fighting off the subdue before...you are now.

[Riev]

The pour vial code has been in place for 2 years, and it hasn't generated this kind of discussion the entire time. SUCCESSFULLY subduing someone, and having your buddy pour a vial down their throat, isn't easy. Subdue, in itself, is a tough skill, and you can always escape. Even beyond the escape, you can resist and cough up the contents of the vial and make them waste it.

Personally, I'm all for a lack of 300 kzul berries in someone's skull-chest, and more opportunity for "lesser people" to try and poison others. Since the new brew code came in, I've wanted to do a subdue/kidnap scenario, but it just isn't a fun plotline after about 20 minutes.

I'm with Armaddict here, though, in that if there is potential for abuse, code it differently. If its working as intended, and some people learn the code, its limitations, and apply that knowledge? Sucks, man, but that's no different from the rest of the game. If you have 2 0-day warriors subduing and forcing poison onto people, nothing was stopping them from subduing and attacking you. But now you have more chances to flee, a chance to avoid the damage entirely, and even IF poisoned, there are a number of branching opportunities there, as well.

[Vox]

Hence, when we say 'They will be watching for abuse', my general concern is that abuse is being used very loosely and negatively.  Make the code account for the behavior you want.  Not to facilitate another front of 'You fuckin' twink. Negative review.'

This is fair, I agree.

The pour vial code has been in place for 2 years, and it hasn't generated this kind of discussion the entire time. SUCCESSFULLY subduing someone, and having your buddy pour a vial down their throat, isn't easy. Subdue, in itself, is a tough skill, and you can always escape. Even beyond the escape, you can resist and cough up the contents of the vial and make them waste it.

Personally, I'm all for a lack of 300 kzul berries in someone's skull-chest, and more opportunity for "lesser people" to try and poison others. Since the new brew code came in, I've wanted to do a subdue/kidnap scenario, but it just isn't a fun plotline after about 20 minutes.

I'm with Armaddict here, though, in that if there is potential for abuse, code it differently. If its working as intended, and some people learn the code, its limitations, and apply that knowledge? Sucks, man, but that's no different from the rest of the game. If you have 2 0-day warriors subduing and forcing poison onto people, nothing was stopping them from subduing and attacking you. But now you have more chances to flee, a chance to avoid the damage entirely, and even IF poisoned, there are a number of branching opportunities there, as well.

I agree with this completely, which is why I think a tweak of what actually constitutes a skill-resist check for this and the ability to nosave would solve the concerns.

[Akariel]

Let me rephrase:
There are checks in place to stop people from doing things that we have already considered outside the realm of IC possibility. If someone finds a way around this through playing the code, it would be considered abuse.

This includes things like, for a hypothetical example, you know that you are supposed to have a lag after bashing someone. You find out one day that if you bash someone, but put a period at the end of the command, it doesn't have any lag. You rationalize that since it's possible, obviously it was intended and you're in the right. You proceed to use this to gain an advantage in the game without reporting it to staff. (Please note, this is completely made up and not a real situation.)

That would be an abuse of the code. Using the code effectively and within the confines of how it's laid out is not abuse of the code. Twinking the code is not an abuse of the code (but may factor into Rule #1).

[Namino]

Hack
(Melee Combat)
This skill causes your character to attempt to strike an opponent's shield or armor, damaging or even destroying it, rather than attacking the opponent themselves.

Shields, when present, are always struck before armor.

And in the tunnels of the gith, there was a great weeping and gnashing of teeth.

[Grapes]

Did I just read the release notes wrong, or is this a wet dream come true?

ETA:

Nope, attacking someone's shield and-or armor instead of their horror-plated crotch-piece is now a thing. Wow.

[X-D]

Attacking shield I understand...attacking armor...Makes no sense at all. Like really, none. Like you suddenly have a magick attack that damages only or mostly the armor while transferring nothing or next to nothing to what is below it, in DIRECT contact. I mean really, just make armor degrade faster when hit in normal attacks (against that too, but at least it makes sense).

As to attacking shield, Fine...but directly attacking the shield should DRASTICALLY raise the odds of weapon destruction as well. I mean, it is not like we are talking about two drastically different materials here, like steel verses leather...most the time they are the same materials, often the shield is actually harder. The idea of attacking that bahamet shell shield with that wooden/bone sword and doing more damage to the shield then the shield does to the sword is silly. Also, the style of weapon should matter as well, Piercing/stabbing and slashing should do the lowest armor and shield damage with a VERY GREAT risk of weapon loss, while Chopping and blunt should do the most (in that order) With the lowest chance to be destroyed. Is that the case now?

[BrainySmurf]

Attacking shield I understand...attacking armor...Makes no sense at all. Like really, none. Like you suddenly have a magick attack that damages only or mostly the armor while transferring nothing or next to nothing to what is below it, in DIRECT contact. I mean really, just make armor degrade faster when hit in normal attacks (against that too, but at least it makes sense).

As to attacking shield, Fine...but directly attacking the shield should DRASTICALLY raise the odds of weapon destruction as well. I mean, it is not like we are talking about two drastically different materials here, like steel verses leather...most the time they are the same materials, often the shield is actually harder. The idea of attacking that bahamet shell shield with that wooden/bone sword and doing more damage to the shield then the shield does to the sword is silly. Also, the style of weapon should matter as well, Piercing/stabbing and slashing should do the lowest armor and shield damage with a VERY GREAT risk of weapon loss, while Chopping and blunt should do the most (in that order) With the lowest chance to be destroyed. Is that the case now?

The only way to hack is with chopping.

And sometimes you have to make sacrifices of realism in the name of playability.

We have disarm for weapons. There has to be some counter to shields, too, which cannot be disarmed.

[cshoov]

Attacking shield I understand...attacking armor...Makes no sense at all. Like really, none. Like you suddenly have a magick attack that damages only or mostly the armor while transferring nothing or next to nothing to what is below it, in DIRECT contact. I mean really, just make armor degrade faster when hit in normal attacks (against that too, but at least it makes sense).

As to attacking shield, Fine...but directly attacking the shield should DRASTICALLY raise the odds of weapon destruction as well. I mean, it is not like we are talking about two drastically different materials here, like steel verses leather...most the time they are the same materials, often the shield is actually harder. The idea of attacking that bahamet shell shield with that wooden/bone sword and doing more damage to the shield then the shield does to the sword is silly. Also, the style of weapon should matter as well, Piercing/stabbing and slashing should do the lowest armor and shield damage with a VERY GREAT risk of weapon loss, while Chopping and blunt should do the most (in that order) With the lowest chance to be destroyed. Is that the case now?

The only way to hack is with chopping.

And sometimes you have to make sacrifices of realism in the name of playability.

We have disarm for weapons. There has to be some counter to shields, too, which cannot be disarmed.

I'm not really following your logic there. The trade-off with shields is that you are better defended, but you attack (approximately) half as often, right? How does it follow from the fact that we can disarm weapons to needed to damage shields?

I actually think it's a cool idea; I'm just trying to understand your train of thought.


Tangentially related: How do people roleplay the implementation of skills/commands like that? Does every fighter around the Known suddenly have this idea for a new technique?

[Vox]

I love the idea of people being able to 'hack' at a shield with axes until it detonates(with a risk of breaking their own weapons in the process too). That's super cool.

I'm not sure I follow the logic of targeting armor though.. I mean, I'd love to just target someone's head and neck with every shot during combat, but that's more or less relegated to how high my offense and weapon proficiency are right? I'm guessing that the success check takes those things into consideration along with parry/defense? In which case, also super cool.

I hope everyone is bracing themselves for the gith to use these same techniques against all our fancy shields and armor too

[X-D]

The in game help file says nothing about weapon type first off, So, if chopping only, that is good. As to a counter for shield...Huh? Why? Historically there was no realistic counter for a shield till the gun. Why does it need to be different in arm, I don't get it.

Also, Shields already go from perfect to crap way to fast in normal combat. I don't know, I think it makes little sense to have the skill/command.

Also, what are the drawbacks to the user of said command? What are the odds the axe gets stuck in the shield? (very realistic) That the user misses completely and thrown way off balance (realistic) That the user is simply easier to hit since his target is a shield and not what is behind it?

Is there a defense against it? Every other offensive melee skill has a defense.

And like others, I really do not follow the playability over realism logic, in fact I find it quite the other way around, harming both.


Wee, all the more reason to spam disarm/bash. Bleh.