The Reverse-Threaten: Evade!

[Windstorm]

evade raider
You prepare to evade the figure in a dusty, dust-colored dust-looking dustcloak.

emote tries to roleplay a scene with the figure in a dusty, dust-colored dust-looking dustcloak, grebbing with excruciating, insufferable detail and flowery emoting.

The figure in a dusty, dust-colored dust-looking dustcloak attacks you.
You're prepared, and attempt to evade the figure in a dusty, dust-colored dust-looking dustcloak!
You flee, heading west!

ALSO:
In the vein of giving agility and/or smaller-sized PCs an advantage over megastrengthbros, evade could factor agility into who "succeeds". Elves are suddenly slippery like they are meant to be, while Half-giants have an exploitable weakness.

[BadSkeelz]

Isn't this just >Flee self?

[Windstorm]

It's an instant reaction to being attacked.

A potentially threatening PC gets to approach without being immediately spamwalked away from. It allows for a potential of interaction despite threatening circumstances.

That's how I see it anyway.

[Dracul]

auto flee self.

Please add this! This will open up the engagement of descriptive scenes just as much as threaten does with the "I'm going to flee but...I'm emoting until you kick in the code"

[Brokkr]

If you want a better chance to avoid the consequences of being threatened, then learn threaten.

[creeper386]

If you want a better chance to avoid the consequences of being threatened, then learn threaten.

In what I've seen of people talking about this, this isn't about avoiding being threatened. This is a mechanic to allow someone to hopefully RP some, without immediately fleeing or spam walking away, when they see someone else.

Threaten, really doesn't apply in this sense though. Because the auto-flee kicks in if the ""threatener"" attacks. They are already attacking so threaten I don't think applies any more.

[LindseyBalboa]

please don't add auto flee.

remove flee for a bit after a failed flee? sure. but don't add wimpy 100.

[Windstorm]

Well the alternative is just the status quo: spamwalk away from raiders and they can't do anything and generally don't get to interact.

I just don't think that's ideal. This is an alternative.

[Gunnerblaster]

So, as neat an idea as it is, I don't see any feasible way to train this, in-game. Same as, to me, the only way to increase your skill of Threaten is via actually attacking and trying to kill people.

And, while not codedly exactly to work in the way you describe, there is the flee command which, if you're being attacked, has no lag. Additionally, the >nosave combat option I believe makes you fight defensively, focusing more on evasion and defense - And it has no noticeable echo.

[Dar]

Additionally, the >nosave combat option I believe makes you fight defensively, focusing more on evasion and defense - And it has no noticeable echo.

I don't think nosave combat improves your defence.  Though it should.  It merely prevents you from attacking back.

[Brokkr]

If you want a better chance to avoid the consequences of being threatened, then learn threaten.

In what I've seen of people talking about this, this isn't about avoiding being threatened. This is a mechanic to allow someone to hopefully RP some, without immediately fleeing or spam walking away, when they see someone else.

Threaten, really doesn't apply in this sense though. Because the auto-flee kicks in if the ""threatener"" attacks. They are already attacking so threaten I don't think applies any more.

Ok, so straight up nope on an auto flee.  If a threatener attacks, that has nothing to do with threaten.  Threaten only activates if you do something, like type a movement command.  Threaten has a chance not to activate when you do something.  Increase this chance by knowing how to threaten.

[Windstorm]

I feel like my idea's maybe being misinterpreted.

It's not a counter to threaten, it's giving a potential raider victim a chance to interact with the raider instead of just walking away instantaneously before they can even be threatened.

The way things are, people will (and do) probably just walk away instantaneously and no roleplay's really had out of it.

Just like there's a prepared attack if someone tries to leave, this is a prepared retreat if someone tries to attack. In the meanwhile, there's a potential for interaction.

The alternative, how things currently stand, is just typing "w" and that being the end of the encounter.

[Kaathe]

This isn't complex it's just threaten flee. Doesn't and shouldn't be a new command.

https://armageddon.org/help/view/threaten

Presumably there's already some checks for threaten vs threaten.

And it already supports these actions: bluff (aka do nothing), bash, subdue, kill

So you would just add "flee" to the list. Then in all the same cases as threaten currently activates, it would issue a flee self instead of bluff, bash, subdue or kill

as to WHY this is useful, it's useful the same reason threaten is: it lets you ready your action so you are not at a disadvantage while writing a emote or having a conversation. Really everyone should be able to threaten instead of it being just combat classes. Sure they would stay the best, but it's a valuable RP tool and still skill based. Let's give it to everyone.

I think this all is good idea, but it's well outside my purview so my opinion is worth as much as any player here.

[creeper386]

If you want a better chance to avoid the consequences of being threatened, then learn threaten.

In what I've seen of people talking about this, this isn't about avoiding being threatened. This is a mechanic to allow someone to hopefully RP some, without immediately fleeing or spam walking away, when they see someone else.

Threaten, really doesn't apply in this sense though. Because the auto-flee kicks in if the ""threatener"" attacks. They are already attacking so threaten I don't think applies any more.

Ok, so straight up nope on an auto flee.  If a threatener attacks, that has nothing to do with threaten.  Threaten only activates if you do something, like type a movement command.  Threaten has a chance not to activate when you do something.  Increase this chance by knowing how to threaten.

We are talking about a command that could help INCREASE interaction. The point is you can go ahead and have a chance of interacting with a player, instead of just going, "Oh no, another player. I better spam walk away from them." Which definitely happens now, and plenty.

[racurtne]

This isn't complex it's just threaten flee. Doesn't and shouldn't be a new command.

https://armageddon.org/help/view/threaten

Presumably there's already some checks for threaten vs threaten.

And it already supports these actions: bluff (aka do nothing), bash, subdue, kill

So you would just add "flee" to the list. Then in all the same cases as threaten currently activates, it would issue a flee self instead of bluff, bash, subdue or kill

as to WHY this is useful, it's useful the same reason threaten is: it lets you ready your action so you are not at a disadvantage while writing a emote or having a conversation. Really everyone should be able to threaten instead of it being just combat classes. Sure they would stay the best, but it's a valuable RP tool and still skill based. Let's give it to everyone.

I think this all is good idea, but it's well outside my purview so my opinion is worth as much as any player here.

Promoting interaction while still giving people a coded chance at getting away.

[LindseyBalboa]

They have a chance to get away. It's built into threaten. If your options when it comes to running into people are "spam smash flee" and "auto escape wimpy 0" there are lots of characters that will protect you for money or favors.

[creeper386]

They have a chance to get away. It's built into threaten. If your options when it comes to running into people are "spam smash flee" and "auto escape wimpy 0" there are lots of characters that will protect you for money or favors.

That's IFFFFF threaten gets used, this really has nothing to do with threaten. Other then as a way to describe the concept.

Lets say raider walks into a room and just goes, "kill grebber" because you gave them time by typing an emote, and you die.

Next time, you see someone in the sands and you choose to spam walk away instead.

With this idea, you could queue your flee, for if they decide to attack. So lets say, they come in and they threaten you, you can threaten to flee. Then until on side decides to try and leave, or the other side decides to attack, there is a chance to interact before introducing coded actions.

So threaten has a way to queue an attack if they do something. This concept would be to queue up a flee, if someone decides to do something. Whoever decides to do something first, triggers the others queued action.

[LindseyBalboa]

They have a chance to get away. It's built into threaten. If your options when it comes to running into people are "spam smash flee" and "auto escape wimpy 0" there are lots of characters that will protect you for money or favors.

That's IFFFFF threaten gets used, this really has nothing to do with threaten. Other then as a way to describe the concept.

Lets say raider walks into a room and just goes, "kill grebber" because you gave them time by typing an emote, and you die.

Next time, you see someone in the sands and you choose to spam walk away instead.

With this idea, you could queue your flee, for if they decide to attack. So lets say, they come in and they threaten you, you can threaten to flee. Then until on side decides to try and leave, or the other side decides to attack, there is a chance to interact before introducing coded actions.

So threaten has a way to queue an attack if they do something. This concept would be to queue up a flee, if someone decides to do something. Whoever decides to do something first, triggers the others queued action.

I get the concept, and I even understand why this is attractive. I just think that in a collaborative roleplaying game, there should not be things that make it easier to avoid interaction.

Someone whose first instinct is to run away from PCs they meet in the wilds could benefit greatly from hired PC guards, which then not only puts them on the same playing field (because guard is a command that automatically provides defense) but includes other PCs in the roleplay.

What I would really like to see is something usable in the wilderness only, which codely represents how large the rooms are if someone is trying to keep distance. This would give the same basic end, but be more like:

Amos shows up from the west, Soma shows up from the east. Amos hits the distance command and emotes about coming in and spying someone far off. Soma can do what they want, now, but if they want to perform any aggressive, touching, or short-range action, they have to make a check to get closer to Amos. If Amos succeeds the check, Soma does not close any distance and has a delay in which they can only emote etc. Amos cannot attack back except using ranged combat without dropping out of the distance stance, which also has a delay.

This way there is never any roleplay or interaction lost, but there's a reasonable expectation of safety in wilderness rooms if you can manage to keep your distance from someone in the huge-ass rooms. No possibility of Amos Kurac walking in from the west and Doofus the d-elf stalker/slipknife sneaking in hidden from the east and backstabbing Amos immediately, etc.

[creeper386]

That concept gives the same option of as this suggested one.

But also doesn't have the same use. Both would be great.

What you suggest doesn't offer any more chance for allowing interaction then the queuing up a flee.

Both would be for allowing interaction to happen.

But the evade option ... Say would allow someone to do trade. Because there isn't some arbitrary distance involved.


I'm not sure why combat characters get an option to force interaction before code. But someone potentially fleeing isn't given the same support. It's either flee, or just hope that someone else wants to RP.

[LindseyBalboa]

Flee leaves the room.

An idea using distance would keep both PCs in the same room.

It's not supposed to offer more avoidance of interaction, it's supposed to offer less avoidance of interaction.

Because both PCs would be in the same room the entire time able to talk and emote, safe from each other unless one runs up on the other, or they start shooting bows or casting magic.

Threaten is an action that is in response to another character's action. It can fail, because the threatener is too slow.

Auto flee... what? Would you run away from the room randomly because you're jumpy and think someone reaching for a drink on the bar is actually pulling a knife? Because that's the inverse option of failure, and although hilarious, I don't think it would work well. Really asking because I don't think it has a viable fail.

You can flee in response to being attacked now as-is, by typing flee. There just is not a way to flee before being attacked, because that's just leaving the scene by typing a direction.

[creeper386]

Sorry. For avoiding conflict not intereaction.


The evade option allows part parties to stay in the same room without initializing combat or fleeing.

That's the point.

It's saying, hey, i'm ready to run. Just like threaten says, hey I'm ready to attack.

In the mean time. Flee doesn't happen. They can interact. Talk do whatever. Until someone decides to walk away ( threaten kicks in) or attack ( evade kicks in ).

It allows interaction before engaging code.


You suggestion works great, but also limits the type of interactions that can happen. They'd probably work best together. Allowing people that want to stay away from people outside, to stay away from people outside and allowing people that want to interact, do so, without the penalty of the other person getting a hand up because they typed, "kill grebber" before the grebber typed flee.

[LindseyBalboa]

You're always ready to flee though. You can flee before combat at any point.

You're asking for code that makes you try to anticipate an attack, and then avoid it somehow, and then also turn and disengage and then run off away from someone.

Threaten ONLY indicates they're going to try something and then takes one reaction, based on character skill, which is avoidable. It is one action.

You threaten someone, they move, you try to bash them at a lower success rate than if you'd just bashed them. You have given up combat utility, skill level, and a chance at winning, in exchange for the opportunity to RP. That's how serious you are about RP, you've weakened yourself and given someone else an advantage over your character's life.

Auto flee gives up nothing in exchange for making several actions at once and indicates that you're okay with roleplay only if you have an advantage over the other player and less risk.

[creeper386]

You don't just do one action. Barring bluff and subdue I'm pretty bash and kill all initiate combat.

This evade should probably also be a skill check, based off your .... Flee skill. To avoid the incoming combat. So just like, if you try and walk away, if someone threatens you, they have a chance to do something, if someone tries to do something, you have a chance to run away. To me it already incidates, I'm trying to keep my distance. I'm being weary of the situation


Right now, the combat characters hold ALL the cards, which leaves folks into avoiding interaction.

The flee allows you to say, "hey i'm ready to run is something goes wrong." Just as much as threaten says, "Hey, I'm ready to attack if you do something I don't like."

This would be GREATLY more preferable over, I see an elf, "e;e;e;s;s;e;e;n;n;enter wagon".

[creeper386]

The same conversation has been had from before I starting playing Arm.

Raiders kill on sight, and they do it because people auto flee and spam walk away from.

Other people say they auto flee and spam walk away from them because they kill on sight.


Giving tools to solely two one of these groups to force interaction doesn't help anything. Especially when that interaction is to engage code. I don't care if it's a bash, or a subdue or kill. Then you've given more power to the raider, to have control over the confrontation, and make the people that want to auto flee and spam walk away feeling even more vulnerable and out of control.

That inherently doesn't fix the problem. It makes it worse.

[Riev]

Anecdote:

New PC. Rinthi Warrior. Got hired to guard someone out on the sands. Took it seriously.
Raider clan PC comes by. Guardee spam-flees immediately. I get attacked. Knocked out in the sands.
Did not die. Just got raided. My PC later becomes a Guild Boss that interrupts weddings and paints lewd pictures of templars AND GETS AWAY WITH IT.

Hire more people to guard you in the sands.


On topic? Raiders now HAVE threaten to let people know they should expect a scene. Do some people still run;e;e;kill man ? Of course they do. You will never get away from that, and NPCs will do the same.
I'm almost on board with the idea, but I don't think it wil fix the issue.