Ranger sanctuary

[Thanos]

I've always thought that a ranger should be able to pass through hostile territories relatively unscathed. Espeacially an experienced ranger. Although I know a good ranger can make it through most situations, I propose they should be given a hard coded buffer to make it happen and minimize the bad luck problem.

A ranger would be able to pass within one room of aggro mobs and not have them charge. To minimize abuse potential I would say that combat should disable this ability for some time based on the pc's hunt skill.

An idea, no less, no more.
Thanos

[Marauder Moe]

I've never played a ranger, but isnt that what ranger hide/sneak is supposed to do?

[Dakkon Black]

From what I hear your ranger has to be intensely l337 to sneek or hide past anything. And even then I'm not sure you can becuase most of these aggro critters have damn good noses. I should hope that a ranger could do it though so if you can't. Maybe that will be tweaked some day.

[Rindan]

From what I hear your ranger has to be intensely l337 to sneek or hide past anything. And even then I'm not sure you can becuase most of these aggro critters have damn good noses. I should hope that a ranger could do it though so if you can't. Maybe that will be tweaked some day.

My understanding of the problem isn't that there are not rangers good enough to do this, but that the way the code works the NPCs are always 'looking'.  In other words, the NPCs are always spaming 'l;l e;l s;l w;l n'  So, you can sneak in such a way they don't see the room entrance, but they are spamming look so much that they see you well before you can hide.  I am pretty sure that unless things have changed, you can not sneak past agro critters or things that autoflee.

[Teleri]

In other words, the NPCs are always spaming 'l;l e;l s;l w;l n'

Would it then be possible, code-wise, to change the time intervals at which certain npcs look around for danger or food?  I think a few extra seconds or so would be beneficial to the ranger characters who are better at sneaking and hiding, and would make it possible for them to do as they should be able to in the first place.  Some creatures could be more attentive to their surroundings, perhaps even relating to weather conditions or the time in-game, as they would naturally be more skittish/aggressive.

I don't know anything about the coding on any npc for anything, so I'm not sure if it's even possible to change the times at which some of them look around.  However, if this could be done, I believe that it would give some hunters a better chance of sneaking up on and killing animals.  But, I believe it should still be hard to do this, and if the animals could be more random in their searches, that would cut down on possible exploitation of any pattern.

[Bestatte]

Teleri I love the idea of more randomness in how various npcs utilize their skills! I know there are guards in shops who have the scan skill..and it seems like you're in the shop, they start scanning, and actively scan every 20 seconds. It's annoying as hell. I mean, if you're good at scanning, you don't need to renew it that often. It's on, just type LOOK and if something's there, you'll see it. Or not, if the hider is better at hiding than your scan is..

(no it's not ic info, it's in the help files so shush everyone).

But there are also critters that autoflee..it's like they just happen to be facing YOUR direction in a 3-mile area every freaking time you show up.

I'd like to see them flee - but maybe once in awhile, they're looking in the OTHER direction and don't see you right away. Have that random chance of actually being able to engage them in combat without having to chase them into exhaustion or have a bow/knife-thrower with you. Just once in awhile, for a treat. So you can think to yourself, YEAH! instead of spending the entire game day chasing it down, only to have it turn pitch black by the time it starts to get tired and then you have to go home for the night.

[John]

some critters have auto-flee randomised

[mansa]

It works.   Give it time.  You won't be able to 'sneak' around past beasts with less than 1 day playing time on your ranger.  At 5 days, perhaps.  10, Most definitely.

Give it time.  Have patience.  Eat a donut.

[X-D]

Heh, or even 16 days on a d-elf ranger with camo gear who could sneak past any pc he came across, but damm if them auto-flee's and agro's did not see him every single time.

Hide works fine, forget sneak if your dealing with agro or auto-flee in the wild.

[JollyGreenGiant]

Personally, I'd like to see it so that if you successfully hide, a successful sneak move won't break the hide automatically, but would automatically generate a hide roll in the new room.  If successful, you never become visible.  If you fail, you become visible.  Similarly, if you fail your sneak, you become visible.

[Kalden]

That's a damn good idea, JollyGreenGiant. I know that thieves have the same problems sneaking past guards in the cities, and that would actually overcome all those problems.

Some people describe 'hide' as active and moving. If so, then why can't you actively 'hide and sneak' to another room without breaking cover?

Your idea is the only way that I can see this problem being solved, and allowing the rangers sneak and hide skill to be actually useful against NPCs. As it is, it's all fine and good for sneaking around PCs, but it doesn't help when you're a ranger trying to get through territory without the monsters noticing you.

[flashz00]

Yes you can sneak and hide from npc beasts..Hell I've done it..I've hidden from a beast once soon as it entered the square with me..Never did it see me. And I've even snuck into the square with some of the auto flee creatures..You can't expect to be able to do it right off the bat..You must practice and give it time.

[Rindan]

Try sneaking past a gith ambush for me some time.  I don't care if your sneak is at 100%, it will get you.  Sneak is slightly screwy in that you are visble when you sneak, it just doesn't display your entrance message.  That means that things that are not looking for an entrance message will see you.  So, if you sneak past a square with some aggressive soldiers in it, they will attack because you will be visible.

I personally like the idea of being able to move while hidden if you have sneak on.  I don't see it as being unbalanced.  Just make it do both a sneak and a hide check to see if you pull it off.

[Northlander]

Yes, if they charge into the 'room', you can hide and avoid them seeing you. If you go in a direction after that, they'll follow thanks to their look-spam, but you might be able to hide before they attack.

And yes, some autoflee beasts are possible to sneak up on. Also, the autoflee script fails at times. For the majority of auto-flee beasts, however, this is not possible.

I'd love a hide roll being given to you if you succeed a sneak, and that the roll is immediate so that, if successful, you're never visible.

Northlander, who's had one of those sixty-day-rangers.

[UnderSeven]

It's been a long time since I've played a ranger, but I'm not entirly sure this is accurate.  The way I remeber it being is that if you did a successful hide AND a successful sneak, you would not be unhidden in the next room.  Granted it took a while to get there, but I'm pretty sure that's how the code works and if I'm correct than it definatly needs no tweaking.  Things to consider though:

Argro npcs are stupid.  REALLY stupid so a ranger who knows their salt really doesn't have a lot to worry about.  When I last played a ranger, they got to the point where they completely owned the wilderness.  I somehow doubt if this has changed, but if you spend all your time fleeing gith and killing skeet, than yeah, don't expect to get that good at it.

Second keep in mind that just because you sneak and hide everywhere, doesn't mean you get any better at it.  For instance, if I were to stand in a room, all by myself (in real life) and practice my loot persuation skills, just sort of talking to myself, I'd probably be just as bad next time I tried to do it.  So you guys might not be as good at this as you think.

Anyway, I don't think we need a staffer to come tell us one way or the other how the code works for the game, but these rangers have been around forever and so have their skills, they've worked in the past and nothing seems to of recently been done to break them.  I don't personally see any problem.

[Twilight]

I'd like hide and sneak to work the same, whether you are following someone or not.  As it is, there is a big difference.  I'd rather you always got the chance to hide on a successful sneak.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I concur. As it is, sneak and hide both are broken. Outo-flee animals should not flee automatically. Sneaking and hiding, for rangers, dictates an ability to mask one's presence, period. That includes smell, sight, and feel and passage, for beasts, and sight and passage for humans.

[Lazloth]

I believe sneak and hide to be both fine, and find this line of griping ridiculous.  If it's outdoors mobs you have a problem with, maybe suggest a fix there; imho, this would be overly powerful for the skulker.

[jhunter]

I think that a good ranger should be able to sneak past aggros and sneak up on autoflees as well. I know you can hide from them, but I've never seen -anyone-, this includes someone who was an over 60 day ranger, be able to sneak past aggros.
IMHO, a good ranger, and -only- a good ranger should be able to do these things.
A good ranger should be able to do that, IC, doing those things would be the -main- reason for a ranger to work at moving quietly and keeping themselves hidden, hiding from -pcs- in the wilds would be secondary to most, yet, it is the one that's easier to do.

[Theebie]

Hi,

a codewise point of view (and its just a guess here) would be that
entering a room triggers an event. that means, if you enter a room,
a method (function) will be triggered in all objects (==aggro critters)
in nearby rooms which makes them charge.

that could be easily changed, but i guess its a feature that whenever
you enter a room everything charges you...

---theebie---

[Xygax]

Hi,

a codewise point of view (and its just a guess here) would be that
entering a room triggers an event. that means, if you enter a room,
a method (function) will be triggered in all objects (==aggro critters)
in nearby rooms which makes them charge.

that could be easily changed, but i guess its a feature that whenever
you enter a room everything charges you...

---theebie---

No, not really.  What's happening is that just after you've entered the room (and your hide, if any, removed), the creatures around you are "pulsing".  During their pulses, they scan nearby rooms for meaty pinatas like yourself.  When one is found, they charge.  I've liked some of the afore-mentioned ideas of allowing someone to hide-sneak thusly:

Code Select Expand


//pseudocode
cmd_move()
{
.
.
.
 char_to_room(new_room)
 if (hiding && sneaking && skilltest(hide) && skilltest(sneak))
     hide(ch);
.
.
.
}


thus leaving you hidden, if you sneak successfully -and- manage to hide successfully in the new room (given terrain restrictions, etc).  Perhaps with a significantly longer movement delay for those moving while hidden and sneaking (without looking at the code, I think there is already an additonal delay imposed for just sneaking).  What I don't like about it is the idea that you could basically "spam" these skills (hide and sneak) by leaving them on all the time, but that's fixable too.  This is probably the same fix/calculation I would do for people shadowing others, incidentally.  I'll see what the other staff think.

And, of course, I'll never tell you what I -actually- end up coding.  

[JollyGreenGiant]

I've liked some of the afore-mentioned ideas of allowing someone to hide-sneak thusly:

Code Select Expand


//pseudocode
cmd_move()
{
.
.
.
 char_to_room(new_room)
 if (hiding && sneaking && skilltest(hide) && skilltest(sneak))
     hide(ch);
.
.
.
}


thus leaving you hidden, if you sneak successfully -and- manage to hide successfully in the new room (given terrain restrictions, etc).

Xygax is my hero.  I even like the idea of changing shadow to work that way too, it makes sense.

[Carnage]

I don't support the idea 100%. I'd personally like to see it wear off after two or three rooms and you have to reapply the hide. As Xygax said, people could just leave it on all the time.

[Quirk]

I think this is great, just what the doctor ordered, and furthermore that Xygax rocks in many ways, all different.

Quirk

[Theebie]

I think it'd be a great way that way, since a possibility for people/rangers to actually be able to hide+sneak-move would be a nice thing.

there are probably some nice ways to restrict 'power-sneakers'
since people who always sneak DO get better in it (at least as much
better as people who just sometimes sneak) i think just removing
some of the skill-gains wouldnt be the best way.
some other way i could think of could be something like 'sneak-crim-flagged'
if you sneak and hide too often and get seen doing so by the guards,
they charge you 20 sids for 'behaving like a criminal' or something.
(and no, i wouldnt want them to charge, bash, hack'n'slay and then shout
Suffer the Highlords Fury, criminal!!!)
of course that'd only happen if a guard would actually see the FAILED
sneak/hide, since if you do sneak 'n hide all the time and do it successfully
noone will see you (you will do it good, it will be good, and you will raise skill,  actually you already got skill, since otherwise it wouldnt be good, but hey, you 'd get even MORE skill)

sneaking for a long time could cost additinal movepoints (it could be exhausting to always be carefull)

---theebie---

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

As I said before, I support the implemention of sneak/hide being constant until you fail one of the checks. That said, to eliminate those who twink-sneak, apply movement penalties to sneak, in city of in the desert. I think that if you made it cost perhaps 5 movepoints in city and 8 in the wilderness, that would solve any problem you might have. I do not say this should apply in full to shadow, but I would suggest a lesser amount of movepoint penalty even to this.

[X-D]

Sneak already costs more MV in the wilderness 7DV....Though, I do think it should cost some in the city, not alot, 1 or 2 is good.

[Gar]

Once upon a time I had a 20+ day ranger.  He really never used sneak at all BUT... he could survive in the wilderness and escape almost anything.  The key to my survival was more related to things other than sneak though.  

For one, he could quit out anywhere.  This meant to me that I didn't have to go in the direction of civilization to escape.  Also, at night I could just camp out.  And if the weather got really bad I'd wait it out by camping.

Another thing, although more minor, was the ability to find food etc.  This would help you survive to a certain extent.

My greatest asset was my mount.  Being an expert rider, I could escape anything.  The big problem with a warrior (or someone not as adept at riding) is that once attacked you have to get off the mount and fight or run.  Maybe you can flee on the mount, but not with any certainty.  A ranger can mount and flee very quickly, even while in combat.  Try that with a non-expert rider.

So, I guess I didn't see myself as the being able to survive in the wilderness by sneaking around and such as much as using some of the other skills.

[Xygax]

For one, he could quit out anywhere.

Just for the record, this is considered an unacceptable technique (ie. twinkish) for escaping a conflict.

-- X

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

X-D, I meant it should cost even more to sneak and hide at the same time, which was the possible twink-point that was brought up.

[JollyGreenGiant]

X-D, I meant it should cost even more to sneak and hide at the same time, which was the possible twink-point that was brought up.

I don't think it'd be as bad as you might think.  Consider: skills go up on failed checks.  The check for sneaking wouldn't change, so it wouldn't be "twinked" any more or less than it is.  On your very first failure, your hide breaks.  Until you hide again, you're no longer checking against the hide skill, just sneak.  And as long as you're succeeding, you're not improving your skill.  If the "sneak" check fails, you're still out of hiding, but it's an improvement to your sneak skill, not your hide skill.  If your hide skill fails, it's an improvement to hide, not sneak.

So, like I said, I don't think it'd be a big deal at all.

[Xygax]

X-D, I meant it should cost even more to sneak and hide at the same time, which was the possible twink-point that was brought up.

I don't think it'd be as bad as you might think.  Consider: skills go up on failed checks.  The check for sneaking wouldn't change, so it wouldn't be "twinked" any more or less than it is.  On your very first failure, your hide breaks.  Until you hide again, you're no longer checking against the hide skill, just sneak.  And as long as you're succeeding, you're not improving your skill.  If the "sneak" check fails, you're still out of hiding, but it's an improvement to your sneak skill, not your hide skill.  If your hide skill fails, it's an improvement to hide, not sneak.

So, like I said, I don't think it'd be a big deal at all.

This seems like a big deal to me, since, either way, the character who's doing the sneak-hiding, is potentially gaining something.  Either they succeed and continue to remain concealed for no cost, or they get a shot at gaining in their sneak and/or hide skill(s).

-- x

[Delirium]

Isn't there a time-limit between how quickly someone can learn anyway?

Besides, they'd either twink >sneak >hide >e >hide >e, or they'd just >sneak >hide >e >e >e >e ... both are equally abuseable, IMHO.

[X-D]

Just for the record, this is considered an unacceptable technique (ie. twinkish) for escaping a conflict.

-- X

Heh, I take that to mean with pc's myself, I am perfectly willing to quit out to avoid the Armagedden T1000 tracking mobs, And if anything, the T stands for UBER Twink mob. Any plans on limiting that script a little BTW?

[JollyGreenGiant]

Hmm.  Well, first, it's really only the hide skill that stands to gain anything, right?  After all, sneaking is sneaking, whether you're hidden or not.  You wouldn't be changing how often it gets checked.

Hide would be a different case.  As long as you remain hidden, you're checking the skill.  This is no different, from a skill-check standpoint, than someone who alternately sneaks and then hides, sneaks and then hides - until you lose your hide.  Let's assume you don't know it, and look at three cases: alternating hide and sneak, having hide/sneak work together, and hiding once, then sneaking around (with no additional hides).  In each case, we'll look at 4 moves, and assume that half the time, a given skill fails.

Case 1:
4 sneak skill checks, 4 hide skill checks, regardless of the success or failure of any of them.  2 fail, 2 succeed for each, on average.

Case 2:
4 sneak checks.  2 fail, 2 succeed, on average.  Possible hide results - 1 failure, no other checks, .5 chance;  1 success, 1 failure, no other checks, .25 chance;  2 success, 1 failure, no other checks .125 chance;  3 success, 1 failure, .0625 chance;  4 success, 0 failure, .0625 chance.  Weighted total - .9375 failures, 1.625 successes on average.

Case 3:
4 sneak checks.  2 fail, 2 succeed, on average.  1 hide check, average failure - .5.

Obviously, sneak isn't affected at all.  Hide, well.  In either scenario, spamming hide every square will always yield a much higher number of failures.  Case 2 and 3 are really what we're looking at, then.  At low skill levels, they'll be very similar, as your chances of initial failure are higher.  The difference will increase for a while, then begin to decrease, but only at very high skill levels.  The greater the number of moves, also, the more of an advantage Case 2 has over Case 3, but Case 2 is limited to a maximum of a single failure, regardless.

Another thing to note, for those of you worried about the "twinking" of this skills, is that even if you had a 90% success rate, and the skill were solely dependent on hide, you'd still have only a 66% chance of moving 4 times and staying hidden every time.  Not the best odds in the world.  Factor in sneak, say, also at 90%, and you're at 43% chance of getting there still hidden - that's less than half the time.

Now that I've sat around and done the math, I think this would make shadowing virtually useless, if it were applied to that skill.  The change sounds neat, but overall, but I think the implementation would need to take the statistics into consideration.

[Lazloth]

X-D, I meant it should cost even more to sneak and hide at the same time, which was the possible twink-point that was brought up.

And now you'll have an ooc means to determine if you're succeeding the hide/sneak combo, eh?

I still think this is an unnecessary addition; rangers will not be the only ones affected.  It's not an earthshattering change to me, though -- moreover, how hard of a stretch is it to successful sneaking impacting not breaking hide as well, on regular functions?  I mean, what's the difference?

[Xygax]

Just for the record, this is considered an unacceptable technique (ie. twinkish) for escaping a conflict.

-- X

Heh, I take that to mean with pc's myself, I am perfectly willing to quit out to avoid the Armagedden T1000 tracking mobs, And if anything, the T stands for UBER Twink mob. Any plans on limiting that script a little BTW?

No, it's pretty much twinkish in every situation.  If you don't want to be tracked by the T1000s, don't hit them.

-- X

[X-D]

That would be a lot easier if they were not agro now wouldn't it? And it -is- an unrealistic behavior script, not much sillier then watching a raptor hunt 60+ times in a row in the same room, and they do not stop unless killed, had at least 2 so far go through other mobs to get to my char, which was a good thing cause when it made it, it was near death and out of moves, silly.

[Kalden]

That said, to eliminate those who twink-sneak, apply movement penalties to sneak, in city of in the desert. I think that if you made it cost perhaps 5 movepoints in city and 8 in the wilderness, that would solve any problem you might have.

The movement drain in the wilderness is already significant enough. I don't think "twinking" sneak is that big of a deal. If you live in the 'rinth, everyone sneaks, and they're not twinking, just cautious. Doesn't make any sense to me that you'd implement  a movement drain when moving slowly doesn't take any more endurance than walking.

However, now that I think of it, twinking the sneak/hide combo could be a possibility. It might be good to implement just a five or six room lasting, then, just so people are able to sneak past aggro mobs and guards. People would essentially be 'going invisible' by this.

Make it something toggleable, and when it's toggled on, as far you know, make the sneak delay significantly longer to account for the fact that you're sneaking into a hiding place as you enter?

I still think this is an unnecessary addition; rangers will not be the only ones affected. It's not an earthshattering change to me, though -- moreover, how hard of a stretch is it to successful sneaking impacting not breaking hide as well, on regular functions?

I'm not sure what you mean on that last bit... obviously, everyone who sneaks will be affected, and the change would be quite major. Rangers could sneak past gith, which would affect me, and thieves could sneak past guards, which is major for all of them.

I don't understand why you see this as unnecessary. The sneak skill has been and is completely useless against NPCs, because they spam look. Twinkishly spam look, you might say. It's useful against PC guards but useless against NPC guards - isn't there something wrong with that?

[Rindan]

Another alternative would be to differentiate between sneak and a sneak/hide.  A normal old sneak is what you get when you are moving quickly but not exactly unseen.  I would call that 'blending in' in the city, and moving at a fairly quick clip in the wilderness.  You are trying to make time as well as sneak around.  You shadow with this method.

The other type of sneaking is when you are very careful.  You are not just trying to blend in, you are making a very conscious effort to avoid everyone's eyes.  This would be sneak/hide.  This would take a long time.  Imagine if a sneak/hide had the same delay that sneaking then hiding in the room would have, hell make it longer.  So, sneak/hide would be worthless for shadowing someone or for more 'casual' avoidance like in the 'rinth.  This would mean that you are trying your damndest to avoid being seen by anything.  This is what an assassin is using while he is sneaking through the nobles quarters to a noble's bedroom.  He isn't just blending in or what not, he isn't trying to just be quiet.  He is trying to make his way from piece of cover to piece of cover and taking his time to do it.  In the wilderness, it would be the same sort of deal.  One wouldn't be trying to just avoid attracting attention, you are crawling on your belly from rock to rock and covering your tracks.  

So sure, it is checking both skills, but you are making extremely little actual distance for the time you spend.  If you tried to sneak from the Sanctuary to the Tembo's tooth, you had better have some free time on your hands.  If it has no practical traveling application, t hen if people are twinking it, it will be pretty clear.  It would be like someone spamming hunt.  It is one thing to sneak through the entire city, as one could justify that as trying to avoid eyes, but if you sneak/hide through the city, then it is clear you are going above and beyond for some reason.  I think twinking this would be as obvious as someone twinking hunt by spamming it at the ground a dozen times.

[X-D]

Actually, I like that Rindan, but in that case, why not just make it a seperate skill, branched, wilderness and city styles of course, and if possible link the branching to both sneak and hide.

This would at least solve peoples worries about being able to twink both skills at once.

[Kalden]

Actually, I like that Rindan, but in that case, why not just make it a seperate skill, branched, wilderness and city styles of course, and if possible link the branching to both sneak and hide.

Because it isn't a new skill... just someboy sneaking into a hiding spot. No reason to code a new skill that just combines the use of old skills.

[X-D]

First, It would probly be simpler to put in a new skill, second, a new skill would take care of many worries about twinking, making stealthy types too powerful to start, plus one need not worry about the already working skills getting broken in the process.

Plus, I think the shadow ability is perfect where it sits right now.


And I'm really only for the sneak/hide combo because after thinking on the subject, implementing it would likly be FAR easier then trying to fix the uber twink spam looking of npc's.


PLUS, and this is something you might think about, such an ability -should- only be in the realm of a very skilled stealthy type, hence, a branched skill, and in the case of rangers, he would have to be VERY advanced, which makes sense since he is moving and remaining not only unseen and unheard, but unsmelled.

Because it isn't a new skill... just someboy sneaking into a hiding spot. No reason to code a new skill that just combines the use of old skills.

And if your thinking is the case, Then there is no reason to code at all, You can already do what you typed with current code.

[JollyGreenGiant]

I think X-D is right.  The addition of a new skill solves the whole question of "twinking", prevents the old skills from getting broken, and is probably just all around easier to implement.

Skill: creep
Syntax: creep
Effects: Changes your movement style to "creeping", makes an immediate skill check.  If successful, you're hidden in the room you're in, failure means you're not.  Thereafter, moving in a direction checks the creep skill.  Success means you're hidden in the new room, and no movement echo was displayed to your old room or the new one.  Failure means you're visible, and both rooms echo a message.

Downsides: Movement delay, stamina cost.  If there's a stamina cost (for the outdoor version, if it's higher than sneak) then maybe the movement delay doesn't have to be too awful, maybe a bit more than sneak.

[Thanos]

Problem I see with the above commentary is the lack of being able to move mounted through an area without attracting the attention of agressives. Without that ability, travel, unless over extremely short distances will continue as it currently.

Thanos

[Lazloth]

Not quite.  It will shift to favor d.elves and city skulks.

[Stroker]

I don't think quiting for a ranger to avoid conflict, such as a bunch of npcs chasing, them is very bad. First reason is because you really can't quit for a while after fighting. Second, I do believe it has been mentioned that your char survives virtually in the world after quiting (correct me here if I am wrong). Therefore, your char could have just hid in the bushes, waited out the mob's pursuit and departure, and then left. Sounds very reasonable.

[spawnloser]

Problem I see with the above commentary is the lack of being able to move mounted through an area without attracting the attention of agressives. Without that ability, travel, unless over extremely short distances will continue as it currently.

Thanos

And I'm fine with this.  If your mount can't sneak, well, you're SOL as far as mounted movement goes.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I'm not completely certian, but I think that mounted folk can sneak. If this is so, then I see no reason that one could not sneak up on prey while mounted. I would, of course, not implement this until one was perhaps at 95 to 98% of peak riding and sneaking skill, and of course, I would only allow rangers to do so. City sneak would not allow this.

[Gar]

For one, he could quit out anywhere.

Just for the record, this is considered an unacceptable technique (ie. twinkish) for escaping a conflict.

-- X

Of course it is if you're using quit to escape something.  Xygax, no offense but you're trying to read into my post something that was not intended.  Allow me to clarify:  Let's say you find yourself cutoff or chased by something in the wilderness.  If you're a non-ranger you need to think very seriously about heading back towards the city.  This gives you a very limited escape path.  If not you could get stuck out there and eventually killed.  A ranger has other options.  He can head in any direction.  It's easy for him to hole up somewhere, rest, camp and quit out when he's good and ready.

*bump*

I'm curious as to whether the imms have had a chance to code the ability to sneak while remaining hidden yet? It sounded like it was under consideration back in December...

[spawnloser]

You mean remaining hidden while sneaking, Xerin?  You can sneak while hidden already...but moving breaks hide.  That's the problem.  The suggestion was to remain hidden with a succesful sneak.

Yes, I'm talking about the ability to remain hidden while sneaking. Is it still under consideration?

[jmordetsky]

So your saying right now,  if I am hidden, then sneak east and then enter no commands, and someone moves into the room with me, I'm in a totally visible state?

Yes, unless the imms have made the change. It sounded like Xygax was seriously considering it back in December.

[Cenghiz]

Did anyone use the sneak skill in any other H&S MUDs? No? Probably not. Because it simply does nothing. PK is not allowed in most of those MUDs, and AFAIK in Diku and Envy base sneak is useless against NPCs.
Here in Arm I don't remember any of my chars succesfully using sneak against aggro or auto-flee mobs. No pickpockets, no assassins, no rangers. Ehrm.. I guess once the rats in 'rinth weren't spamming looking. Long ago I had a pickpocket who was subduing rats easily to play jokes, to let them go onto other city-people. But no other mobs.
The change may be twinked for sure. We're clever. We'll find a way to twink. But; everything is twinkable in Arm. Anything about code's twinkable. No escape. There's not even one command which can't be twinked I may think of.
change ldesc: You've ever seen people in dormitories who are "sitting here."? Some are not. Try telling something to them. I'm already against stealing in dormitories except thieves but, typing "sleep;change ldesc is sitting here."?? But we can't remove change ldesc, because I may sleep snoring, I may lie dazed, I may be in fetal position or my body may be stretched.
forage: I need to explain?
craft: I need to explain?
talk (mob talk): I accidentally twinked with my current char. I was joking to an elf which had the talk command implemented from time to time, but in nearly 9 days of playing time, those jokes and the talk response in Allundean (which you RP'ed that only something you don't understand) may teach you allundean basics, at least the skill's seen. I guess I could be fluent in any language except Cavilish in only one day, knowing which mob talks in which language. You're an elf? Go talk to every stranger in town, to ones even who wouldn't talk to you, go to a shop at night/before down and try to sell something while it's closed 500 times. Bingo!
guard: Another player told me as a fantasy but it's possible. Two PC's sparring, guard the exit. They can't flee, so they can't stop. Kill the wounded one.
backstab, steal, plant, palm, sneak: You'll be accused anyway, you twink or not. But they're real easy to twink.
value, analyze: Heh piece of cake...
ride: mount, charge to your friend. Do it 1000 times.. Real good exercise.
climb: There are places where failing doesn't cost you hp and stun.
haggle: Again very easy to twink.
......

Eh I'm tired.. You see, nearly everything's twinkable. So please let it be tweaked, then I'll play the ranger with more joy.

[Angela Christine]

guard: Another player told me as a fantasy but it's possible. Two PC's sparring, guard the exit. They can't flee, so they can't stop. Kill the wounded one.

That would only work on stupid/panicked people.  You can't stop fighting, but you can start fighting someone else instead.  Both sparers attack the one guarding the exit, draw their real the weapons, and share the loot.

And you CAN flee past a guard, it depends on their guard skill and your flee skill.  You must be running or sneaking to get past a guard, fleeing is running.

Sorry to ruin that fantasy for you.  :wink:


AC

[Agent_137]

*jots down notes from Cenghiz's post*


:twisted:

[Ghost]

I dont know if you tried but, I have sneaked past an aggro critter.

Andon my way back, I was attacked.  So I think I failed to sneak in the second try.  So it might mean that it is implemented.

[Cenghiz]

Waitstate... Thanks God aggros have a wait state when they enter your room. Once a scrab has waited for a very long time, about 20-30 secs before deciding to attack me. IC I wasn't aware of it, so it was boring waiting, having the first emote of the surprise battle typed, waiting to hit enter. I guess for some random time they wait before they attack.

[Vettrock]

I think rather than have your character remain hidden while sneaking, instead what should happen is to make sneaking have the same effect on NPCs as it currently does on PCs.  Right now if I sneak into a room and hide most PC aren't going to notice me.  If I sneak two room past someone they aren't going to notice me.

I would propose makking sneak such that when you sneak, you are hidden for say like 5 seconds hen you arrive in the next room.  As long as you keep moving, and you continue to pass your sneak roll, you remain hidden.  (this would be unrelated to your hide skill)  Now when you get to where you want to stop, your going to have to hide.  I think this would address both the problem with sneak being ineffective against NPCs, and prevent the hide and sneak twink effect, since your not dependant on the hide skill, and therefore not improving it.

Now I suppose if someone wanted to be hidden and wanted to depend on the sneak skill instead they could just move back and forth between two rooms, but 1) your going to fail eventually so its not going to be that effective, and 2) Your going to run out of movement pts eventually, and 3)  Your going to have to stop to "do" anything so what is the point?

[SpyGuy]

Good idea, but apparently NPCs spam look or some such.  Not sure if it would work by the code.  The sneak vs. NPCs thing is a big matter though, it prevents some realistic hunting tactics and also just makes wilderness survival (for the trained hunter) that much harder.

I think the coders know all this, its just somewhere on the drawing board.

[jhunter]

I've watched people do it in game.

[Vettrock]

What I am saying is for 5 seconds (or maybe less) after you arrive in a room, you have the same effect as if you are hidden, ie are not detectable without scan.  Wether the NPC spams look or not it wouldn't make a difference if it was coded this way.