Add 'armed' to sdescs

[MeTekillot]

Remove it from 'assess' (or just keep it?) and add it to someone's sdesc when they're wielding a weapon.

[X-D]

Nah, leave it to the player not code to decide if they are armed.

[MatisseOrOtherwise]

nah

[Cind]

I like it.

I like it less for people who are wielding very small items such as daggers and brass knuckles.

Perhaps if someone with a pair of brass knuckles or one dagger were armed, it would not show up.

If you had two daggers, yes. I think people would probably notice.

That and because people will have one dagger drawn for a variety of reasons that are not all aggressive, and if this made it into the game the mechanic would invariably be treated as aggressive.

[chrisdcoulombe]

What about if you are holding a cane or a walking stick?

[MeTekillot]

Don't make walking sticks weapons?

[MeTekillot]

Make walking sticks flippable from a normal item into a bludgeoning weapon so people can hold them without being 'armed'. Don't see why it's necessary for them to be weapons though. Forks and kitchen knives aren't stabbing and slashing weapons in most cases.

[Dar]

I can see this if the items wielded are let's say, 5+ stones. Then sure. But anything less, shouldnt be so clearly identified.

Wielding a 'fork' would make you armed in this case.

[mansa]

Doesn't "assess" already show this?

[Delirium]

It does. Let's leave 'armed' to assess - we've already seen how quirky edge cases can show up with the 'naked' modifier. Heck, I'd rather 'naked' shows up in assess rather than in the sdesc at this point.

[BadSkeelz]

Heck, I'd rather 'naked' shows up in assess rather than in the sdesc at this point.

plez

[Hauwke]

Are they really edge cases? The only ones I can think of are slaves, and thats because they are only wearing loincloths, I consider that to be essentially naked.

[Cind]

The three escorts for the morning devotions Templar are flaunting what they've got.

[chrisdcoulombe]

What if instead of armed, it said what is in your hands, unless maybe you were good at concealing (slight of hand?) 
The dark, dark-eyed man is wielding a saber
The dark, dark eyed man is holding a bottle

[cshoov]

What if instead of armed, it said what is in your hands, unless maybe you were good at concealing (slight of hand?) 
The dark, dark-eyed man is wielding a saber
The dark, dark eyed man is holding a bottle

How would that jive with their ldescs? E.g. what if I wanna say

Code Select Expand

change ldesc is bangin' ur mom

[MatisseOrOtherwise]

sdescs and ldescs are clunky as fuck as is, we don't need to add more shit

[Delirium]

Are they really edge cases?

All those naked shopkeeps, soldiers and various NPCs? Yeah.

Granted they're gradually being fixed but "naked" to me indicates nudity not "oh they're actually wearing a knee length tunic".  It's jarring in the sdesc. I'm also old and cranky. Get off my dune.

[seidhr]

Code Select Expand

>cast 'mon un drov dreth chran'
Ok.
You focus your will as a naked shadowy figure is brought to this plane.
A naked shadowy figure falls in behind you.


[sleepyhead]

I mean that's hilarious but is it ok to post the specific words and effects of magick spells here now? Even removed spells? Has the symbol command led to a softening of the rules in that regard? Honest questions.