Trust.

[Northlander]

It's a wonderful thing, isn't it? The thing is, I don't trust you.

Pickpockets, thieves, or magickers with active spells, hate it when you get a 'look' in on them, fearing that you'll remember the information and point them out instantly from a crowd when next you see eachother.

People playing hidden magickers or spies are bloody careful about letting you OOCly know their class, fearing it'll change your PCs' actions.

People don't e-mail imms with what they do, for fear of imms using the information against them.

People are mightily annoyed by a near linkdead PC, thinking he might play it out as if his 'listen' catched every bit of PC communication in the tavern when he comes back and checks the log.


This isn't about IC trust, it's about OOC trust. We don't trust eachother, and that's a big problem.


One way to solve this would be to change the game. Make look more rare, make it give less info, make it less effective against hidden people. We could make listen, when used to listen in on table discussions, need to target a specific table.
This might help a few things, might make things a bit more realistic and less abusable, but it's nowhere near fixing the problem.

Are we afraid of losing characters, losing plots or just getting annoyed out of a conviction of our own RP being superior and more important than everyone else's? Is the problem fixable?

I feel trust is at the heart of many of our most heated discussions and arguments.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I agree. I have experienced both sides of the coin here, both trust and non-trust. I have, likely, also been the culprit of such behaviour as might affect trust. Players make mistakes, and all that, but I feel that most of the players here do not abuse the game.

I play as such.

[Anonymous]

I don't think it's just a matter of whether or not I trust you, or Venomz, or John, or anyone for that matter, to not abuse the game.  It's also a matter of realizing that there are amazingly varied views about how this game should be played and what is realistic.

To me in a city of 500k people it's damn hard to know who is who.  Yet I've been told by well-played PCs to go 'find that woman with the green hair.' or something similar.  There's nothing wrong with that, but it represents a huge difference in how we each view the game world.  That's something you have to consider before your hidden sorc emotes brushing ash off of their shoes.  5 out of 10 players might think 'He's a sorc, but my PC wouldn't know and would think it was just dust or campfire ash' while the other 5 might think 'He's a sorc, and my PC is smart, so he'll figure that out!'

[sarahjc]

I was once on the recieving end of a very twinkish incident involving looking at a Character. I won't go into the detail, but I make an effort myself to ignore the person lurking in the shadows IC'ly and not look at them, unless they are begging to be noticed. And at that, I will remember very basic details, the cloak they have on or their stooped posture.

I do choose to be careful in a Tavern with what I say, as someone may just be listening. But thats all the time, regardless of who is in the room..Cause you never know..someone could be lurking and listening..And I don't trust you..

But I think that is perfectly IC.


Just my opinion

Sarah

[Quirk]

This quandary is at the very heart of Armageddon. You forgot perhaps the largest and most obvious trust issue: karma. The existence of karma implies that the staff at least believe that not everyone can be trusted equally. Through watching people, they get some idea of how much a person is to be trusted through seeing their different characters. Players don't have the luxury of knowing how trustworthy the player of another character that they're interacting with is.

The thing is that we all see evidences that certain other players are not to be trusted. An unseen "someone" emotes slipping through the crowd in a bustling tavern, and suddenly three or four characters are on their feet and scanning the room. We emote pouring spice into our pipe, or dealing ourselves cards off a deck, and when we look in the inventory the pipe or spice or deck of cards is gone from between our fingers. If we're playing a thief, fail a steal and our target gets an echo that "someone" tried to steal from them, we know the nearest PC is usually held to blame, especially if they're shabbily dressed or elven (quite a bonus if your thief is hidden, but I digress). I've seen and heard of more ludicrous abuses than these carried out by established PCs holding some degree of rank in Noble Houses or the militia. Even if 3 out of 4 players were absolutely, utterly trustworthy, the risk of losing your character because the fourth somehow RPed having omniscient senses is one few care to take. People do lose characters and plots through other players abusing code. Sometimes the abuse is egregriously obvious - such as two wimpy merchants subduing and killing an armed and ready master warrior - sometimes it's less direct but potentially every bit as damaging, as in the example already given of those with perfect memories for the tiny facial blemishes on a hooded figure skulking in the shadowy corner of a room that no-one else even saw. Sometimes we're tempted to do things like these ourselves, when it seems our characters are in danger and through the mechanism of the code we've been given the ability to keep them safe.

As a result of this, I tend to be in favour of changes to the code designed to prevent unrealistic role-play. Making look show far less of hidden hooded figures or those obscured by magick would be highly beneficial - as it is, it's ludicrously easy for any twink with scan to destroy the reputation of a would-be thief or pickpocket in one fell swoop. Giving listen a bit of direction wouldn't be a bad thing. Bringing subdue on an armed bladesman into line with unarmed attacks on the same opponent would seem eminently wise to me. Such changes remove temptation from those who should know better, and reduce the power wielded by those willing to forego realistic RP for their character's gain.

Colour me cynical, but I don't believe there will ever be a true solution to the trust issue, not until the only people playing the game are the ones with eight karma and all the imms are perfect infallible cyborgs. The only answer I see is to reduce the potential for abuse where possible, and educate the playerbase so that the problem gradually diminishes among those who've been playing a while.

Quirk

[Angela Christine]

It doesn't take many bad apples to spoil the trust, it may not take any -bad- apples at all.

Suppose you go to your squalid apartment one day and the door is unlocked, or even open.  "Huh, I was sure I locked that."  Sure enough, everything valuable that could be easily carried off is gone.  ICly it is an important event for the character, but OOCly it isn't a big deal.  The next day the door is unlocked again, and now even the stuff that isn't very valuable or easy to sell is gone.  The character gets suspicious, does someone have a key?  Is it one of the neighbours?  Did the landlord have something to do with it?  Why didn't anyone see anything?  Then, the third day, the apartment is open again, and this time they took the damned furnature.  At this point it gets hard to RP through, it gets hard to picture a "realistic" response.  Are you being targeted specificially?  Is it worthwhile to even pay rent for a room with a lock when even nearly worthless items get stolen?  Is there a giant furnature emporium in the 'rinth?  I suppose it could be a half-giant whose pockets are big enough that the furnature isn't obvious.  It might not even be the same thief, it could just be coincidence that the place was hit by 3 (or more) thieves in three days.  But OOCly it starts to look really suspicious.  Like it is might be someone twinking their pick skill to hell and back, or someone who found a copy of the key and just happened to guess which of the thousands of doors in the city that it belonged to.  It seems really dodgy to keep going back again and again to the same apartment.

I'm not here to complain about theives, that was just an example where things look bad.  When someone walks in and attacks without saying a word, that looks bad too.  If you go to the trouble to emote holding a knife on someone  or having your men surround them, and they respond by simply  walking away because they know the code won't stop them, well, I don't know about you but it makes me feel stupid.  

After these things happen a few times, it seems natural to stop giving other players the benefit of the doubt.  It is possible there is some reasonable good-RP explanation for each instance, but there is no way to know.

Likewise, if bad things happen to you that seem like imm interference, then you start to worry that the staff will use it against you if you tell them your plans.  You might even be nervous about ICly *thinking* your plans, because if they know you plan to visit the broken rim mountains they may decide to make the trip more interesting by having a polar bear waiting for you.  :shock:  Ok, not a polar bear, but something.    Bad things happen more often on RPTs announced and planned well in advance than on spur of the moment events.  Sure, it does make the RPTs more interesting, but sometimes you just want to do something the easy way.

I honestly think most players and staff are trustworthy most of the time, and that dedicated twinks are rare because this game doesn't cater to them.  But we are also all prone to the occasional bad day or brain fart.  Super-twinks are rare but newbies are common, and some newbies don't realize what things are considered realistic and good roleplay here.  I'm sure most of us have done things as newbies that we are embarassed to think about now. :oops:  Even if 9 out of 10 players are trustworthy, that tenth player can really mess things up for everyone.

I don't know what the answer is.

AC

[X-D]

Over all, I'm basicly in agreement with Quirk, except on this point.

Quirk wrote:

as it is, it's ludicrously easy for any twink with scan to destroy the reputation of a would-be thief or pickpocket in one fell swoop.

So, people who use scan are twinks, or just if they look at the hidden person?

In either case, thats silly, specialy if you are thinking city hide, in which case there is basicly two types of hiding in the city, #1 remaining un-noticed, this is in a populated place, easily done IRL, but, if somebody does notice then that person actually sticks out as attempting to remain un-noticed, Hell, when I notice people like that IRL I stare at them (oh if only there was a watch command in game) #2 is in an area basicly empty of people, in this case you actually need to conceal yourself, under bed, behind couch, in closet, behind drapes, you get the picture, This is another case where the person with scan notices say the end of your dark hooded cloak sticking out from under the bed.


But, I do wish people would not suddenly stand up and spam scans when a hidden person emotes, That is most annoying, Remember, If your scan did not pick him up before the emote, then Your char never saw/sensed whatever was emoted, unless it was directed at them and the emoting hidden player is simply trying to play things out and add flavor to the game.

[Petra]

As a result of this, I tend to be in favour of changes to the code designed to prevent unrealistic role-play. Making look show far less of hidden hooded figures or those obscured by magick would be highly beneficial - as it is, it's ludicrously easy for any twink with scan to destroy the reputation of a would-be thief or pickpocket in one fell swoop.

Yeah.  I'd swear that being invisible is completely pointless since everyone and their brother is out there scanning.  What I don't like about scan vs. invisibility/hide is that it's very very black and white.  You have the skill.  Your skill is higher than your opponent.  You see them.  End of story.  What about seeing something but you can't quite pinpoint who/what it is you see?  Since they are, after all, invisible via arcane means, or veiled through the foliage as they cower in a tree.  Even with a maxed scan how are you able to see them fully?

In any event, I liked your post, Quirk.  I don't think there's much to be done about the issue, myself (the whole topic, that is, not just scan and such).  We all have a differing view of what's realistic RP and what isn't, and in a lot of instances, there really is no right answer.

[Synthesis]

Just as a note:

I think the issue with people scanning as soon as someone does a hidden emote is less based on their newly aroused suspicions than on a disconnect between what they imagine their character doing, and what the code says their character is doing.

That is, their casually observant PC may have scanned beforehand, and they assume that the scan is still active. Maybe they've been chatting it up for awhile, emoting looking around or whatnot, thinking that the scan is still going strong.  But when the 'someone' emote pops out, it reminds them that "Hey, I probably need to scan again," so they scan.  Then bust out with some justifying emote that probably doesn't make any sense.  Usually I'll just stand, scan, and sit back down without emoting anything, if scanning is what my character was doing in the first place. (Why can't you just scan while remaining seated?)

[Quirk]

Over all, I'm basicly in agreement with Quirk, except on this point.

Quirk wrote:

as it is, it's ludicrously easy for any twink with scan to destroy the reputation of a would-be thief or pickpocket in one fell swoop.

So, people who use scan are twinks, or just if they look at the hidden person?

Neither - only if they scan, look at the hidden person and *then* can remember every detail right down to colour of eyes and rings on fingers, or indeed suddenly spring into scanning action after an emote tips them off someone's there. My point was not that having or using scan made you a twink, but that scan was a skill very easy to use irresponsibly.

Quirk

[Quirk]

That is, their casually observant PC may have scanned beforehand, and they assume that the scan is still active. Maybe they've been chatting it up for awhile, emoting looking around or whatnot, thinking that the scan is still going strong.

I think we may need a thread on what exactly scanning constitutes from an RP point of view. I don't think that someone sitting talking with their buddies should have scan working - scan to me argues a level of vigilance that is incompatible with the normal social protocols of conversation such as meeting someone's eye while you're talking to them. Sure, a couple of guards on a tower exchanging a few words, or a muttered conversation between a couple of militia keeping a weather eye on the tavern seems consistent enough to me, but sitting at a table griping about the unreasonable demands made of you by Lord Fancypant's new squeeze over a drink places you in a position where you're not actually examining the crowd.

It's also possible that your scan is still active, and they're hidden too well for you to find them. In any case, it seems more courteous to the person who added that "someone" emote into the mix to RP that your attention had lapsed and not to bother scanning again, even if you're a militia solider staring across the crowd, than taking advantage of the reminder to get your scan up again.

There seems to be a case for secret emotes visible only to those who can actually see the character, but that's an old discussion and one that's been had many times, so I'll pass on it for the present.

Quirk

[Ayashah]

I try to keep it realistic with my scan ability. If my pc sees someone hidden, I try to add a look *shadow* as her gaze shifts over various individuals in the tavern. When I do that, I am TRYING to point out that my pc's glance didnt linger therefore no one has a reason to have noticed my pc staring in a certain direction. I have been witness to seeing a whole tavern jumping up, draw swords to protect their nobles, scan and start closing packs, etc. I even had someone approach me IC later and say "Soo, you are good seeing into the shadows. Are you happy with your current job?"

If I have reason to really note the person, I usually only pick out noticable things. I dont do a "He wore....blah blah blah and had a mole by his right eye." Where I would be remembering everything about him down to the stone in his boot.

Bringing up stones, I have used that thought in tracking people. Something about the tred of their boot, cuts in the soles, stones sticking in them allowed me to pick out their prints in the dust to follow them. That being said, my pc tracked someone that had just taken their kank and though OOCLY I was pretty sure this elf I saw come out of the stables did it, IC my pc noted him as a suspect but then proceeded to check around the stables. I never did accuse him and I didnt copy down his description to pull a look at later to remember him. Why? Because if I cant remember it on my own without writing it down, then my pc wouldnt have remembered him an IC month later. Granted, I could have claimed that since he stole it outside of a shop in the middle of the day infront of npcs/vpcs that were there, that they TOLD me what he looked like. I am sure anyone can think up an excuse as to why their actions or reactions were perfectly IC and reasonable.

I guess its really about making sure the others, and imms, know what you are doing. Make sure all around you know when you glance at a hidden person that no one would have noticed your gaze lingering. When talking at a table use the emote system to add in 'keeping her tone low to the point of not carrying past the table', instead of just tracking, emote that you are looking over the tracks and finding a certain track with a distinguishing feature.

[X-D]

Neither - only if they scan, look at the hidden person and *then* can remember every detail right down to colour of eyes and rings on fingers, or indeed suddenly spring into scanning action after an emote tips them off someone's there. My point was not that having or using scan made you a twink, but that scan was a skill very easy to use irresponsibly.

I have to disagree with you on the first point, -IF- My char notices somebody attempting to remain unnoticed *strange shadow, Then actually looks at them, he is going to remember many things about the person, maybe everything, think of the act of looking in this case and a stare and there is simply no reason why you should not be able to see everything. What is far worse is when somebody is in a tavern and stands up and hides with a single emote, while 3 pc's are actively watching him, and have emoted as much, Personaly I found hide and sneak abused far more then scan and even by high karma players, Hell, I've been quilty of it from time to time.

Then people talk about invis, Again, why not be able to see everything?
A long long time ago I was talking to an overlord at the time, Jhal maybe, not sure, and asked about invis, Explanation given, the person has not become transparent, instead the air around him bends the light around him, but it is not 100%  It is just air after all. Wonder if that is still the way it is looked at by the staff, Anyway, point being, Again, with scan, your char is activly looking for things that are obscure, you notice it, then you stare intently at it (look at it).

The only way I see of using scan irresponsibly is by reacting to a hidden emote,

That is, their casually observant PC may have scanned beforehand, and they assume that the scan is still active. Maybe they've been chatting it up for awhile, emoting looking around or whatnot, thinking that the scan is still going strong. But when the 'someone' emote pops out, it reminds them that "Hey, I probably need to scan again," so they scan. Then bust out with some justifying emote that probably doesn't make any sense. Usually I'll just stand, scan, and sit back down without emoting anything, if scanning is what my character was doing in the first place. (Why can't you just scan while remaining seated?)

And I completly disagree with that line of thinking, Using the emote from the hidden person that your char did not see to remember oocly Oh, I need to scan again then have your char do it is wrong, and how do you, as the player know your scan is not working, the other person may have better hide skill. Bah, Besides, NOT reacting is often far more fun, this thread is about trust, well, if the hidden person has emoted he is already showing a certain amount of trust, maybe you should do the same.

[Bestatte]

Hi. I see dead people. All the time. No, wait. wrong topic. Okay..I see shadows and blurry forms. Yeah that's it.

Now, about them shadows:

When my PC is looking for specific things that are -known- to hide in shadows, I will allow my PC to not only see them RP-wise, but look at them RP-wise and code-wise.

When my PC is not looking for specific things that are -known- to hide in shadows, I will not allow my PC to notice them RP-wise, even if I can see the *strange shadow* right there on my monitor in all its blazing shadowy glory.

On blurry forms:

I won't get into mechanics because it's sekrit stuff, okay? Okay. Now then. If my character sees "a blurry form," she's not seeing something that isn't there. She's seeing a form. A form that's blurry. A form that's blurry, and visible. Maybe the blurry form doesn't know that their blurriness is visible to some people, maybe so, but it doesn't matter. My character can see them. It is an unusual enough thing for her to see that she would certainly notice it, and would probably investigate (depending on where she is at the time). Maybe she'd be so fearful of what she'd find that she intentionally ignores it and runs along to "somewhere else" [tm]. Maybe she's in good safe company and feels it worth the risk to take a gander. Maybe something inbetween.

But if I see a blurry form, she will see it. And that's because people just plain don't see blurry forms all that often, unless they're drunk. And since she rarely gets drunk, she's gonna notice that blurry form.

The moral of the story: Shadows are everywhere. Unless you have a specific reason to be looking at one, chances are you don't notice that it looks any different from any other shadow and won't be inspired to investigate.

Blurry forms are not everywhere. If you see it, you should RP your character's notice of it however is fitting for your character to react.

This is not my "rule" that I impose on anyone else. I want to make that very clear, so anyone who wants to accuse me of taking over after the RP god died, bite me. This is how I RP my own characters' experiences, and how I would *like* (notice this funny word "like" - it's subjective, implying opinion) to see other people RPing theirs.

[Quirk]

I have to disagree with you on the first point, -IF- My char notices somebody attempting to remain unnoticed *strange shadow, Then actually looks at them, he is going to remember many things about the person, maybe everything, think of the act of looking in this case and a stare and there is simply no reason why you should not be able to see everything.

Of course there is. Depending on how the "hide" is being performed, the person may either be mostly obscured by foliage or behind a curtain, or by strangers in the crowd. Likely they may be keeping to the shadows, especially in the street at night. You cannot hide in plain sight, or everyone would be able to see you. That you would even be able to tell the most elementary things about a face half-hidden by the shadow of a hood glimpsed across a tavern when its possessor is endeavouring to escape such notice stretches belief. Not every person in hiding is crouching by your belt waiting to cut your purse. This is perhaps one of the most telling arguments that "look" on hidden persons needs to be changed - it's evident you've gone so far as to think about looking at people trying to hide and whether you'd remember the result, but you've failed to take into account that they are in fact mostly concealed and hence that your idea of their features will be sketchy at best. You're an experienced player - think what it's like for a newbie.

Invisibility goes rather further. If this person is actually impossible to see except by those trained to notice tiny discrepancies in the shadows, and the light bent round them turns them into a blur even when you can see them, how on Zalanthas are you to pick out their features? Even distinguishing from the vague outline that they are wearing a cloak or brandishing a weapon should be tricky, never mind what manner of cloak or weapon, and managing to see the pimple on their left cheek is a wide stretch beyond that.

Such features as your character can pick out he or she will want to remember clearly, that's beyond doubt. However, you have to consider how what opportunities for concealment the room offers, whether it is possible that you're just seeing the hem of a cloak at the bottom of a curtain or whether you're seeing a vague pale face in the shadows at the other side of the alley, and RP accordingly. I'm sure you'll agree that it's not really up to you to decide where in the room the other person is hiding, so you really ought to cut them as much slack as possible rather than assuming they're breathing down your neck and that you can just turn and scrutinise them closely.

Quirk

[Delirium]

Mechanics I would like to see to help solve this "trust" issue:

Have hoods available that obscure your character's features. Replace the main description with a simple message that 'The figure in a purple bunny-embroiderd cloak's features are shadowed and obscure'.

Now before you all freak out at me about criminals rampaging about unchecked (though I wouldn't mind seeing it a bit easier to be a criminal), I will offer a counterbalance:

A new command, 'study'. Anyone can do it, it's relatively easy and gets a bonus if your character's scan skill is high.  If you study a hooded figure, there is a good chance you will be able to discern their features. Idealy, it'd have a delay beforehand of a few seconds to reflect the time necessary to get a good look at the sneaky bastard.

Naturally, if said hooden figure is hidden, and you notice them and start trying to study them, they'll know that they're busted, and can react however said character would.

That would also help in the cases of 'OMG someone just walked into a wilderness square and tried to raid me, let me just bang off a 'look' and then fleeself, then run back to safety and post their description, word for word, all over the board!' Life would be made a bit easier for raiders and thugs and all sorts of lowlifes, character types of which I would like to see MORE of, not less. :)

[X-D]

Well, first, My chars almost never use complete sdesc or main desc when describing somebody who is not hiding. Second, (quirk) If you are in a tavern and decide to hide, You did not suddenly sneak behind the bar and duck down, You are simply working at being backround and un-noticed but still in plain view. And even in the forest, it's kinda like the game hide and seek, *strange shadow= hey, something odd about the bush, look=peering into bush TAG your out. And you damm well can hide in plain sight, often it is the easiest method of hiding, I'm damm good at it. There is a big difference between being seen and being noticed, On the way to work today I saw a couple hundred people, yet I -noticed- only one of them, the rest are gone from mind and may as well have never been seen to begin with. One of the great things about Arm is that the person who did the stealth code knew something about  hiding and sneaking in a populated area and in a wilderness area, these REALLY are 2 seperate skills IRL.

Rp wise, You know when I've looked at you, If you take off with suitable emote's quickly then my char will only know basic things about you, if you stay, well, that becomes more then basic very quickly.

[Quirk]

Well, this comes down to exactly what I said about the differing potential for concealment in different places, and the need for cutting the other player some slack. In a tavern or a street in broad daylight, the odds are the "hidden" person is indeed blending in with the crowd. Nonetheless, they could be crouching in that shadowy nook under the stairs listening to a noble, or they could be that slightly darker patch on the wall in the corner where the torch blew out five minutes ago. You don't know which of these possibilities they're RPing (oh, my kingdom for an semote!) and it's best not to assume that it's the one that lets you see and remember their little eyebrow ring. Indeed, if they're that darker patch on the wall in the corner where the torch blew out, even treating them as suspicious probably isn't great RP.

If you come across that same shadow in your house, or in the woods, they are most likely hidden behind something, and seeing them fully wouldn't make a lot of sense. Of course, you could walk over to their hiding place, peering behind your bed to see who that foot belongs to, but if you do that you ought to emote it out to give them time to react to your approach. You don't have magickal zooming X-ray vision - unless you're actually a magicker . In many cases, all you'll know for certain is the colour of their cloak and what assess -v would tell you about their general shape and size.

Any information gained by looking at a shadow or blur will be incomplete, since your character cannot see the target clearly.

This seems a pretty clear guideline for RP to me. It would be nice to see a little more help from the code, perhaps, but the guideline's there.

Quirk

[Rindan]

If I see something hidden and I am curious, I look at it.  I remember what it looks like the same way I would remember anything.  If anythimg, I am probably likely to take more notice.  If you want people to treat you like you are hidding in some way which they might not get a good look at you, then use the change ldesc command.  If there is no indication otherwise, then I see nothing wrong with assuming you have a perfectly good view.

[Blackmoon]

Take the '*' a strange shadow '*' out..(the ** from the text).
I think I tend to notice the ** part more than whats between, due to the fact that it is so easy to see on a screen with only words, numbers, and spaces. If your actively looking for 'a strange shadow', you'll more likely see it then if you just type LOOK to see an update on the various PCs/NPSs in the room, and may perhaps skip over the 'strange shadow' message.

A side-note, have glance be a vague look and keep look as what people are suggesting become study. With the echo that you recieve that is. By looking at someone, you single them out, with a glance..your only 'glancing'.

-Also-, this issue with trust. You can't truely be roleplaying if your thinking OOCly with your character...well...perhaps you can alittle. If your thinking as your character would be thinking, then your RPing him (which may be hard for the old and experienced players who probably know much more than what the character may know, but why else would they have karma if the staff not trust that they RP well?). If your not, then you should perhaps try a character concept that will allow you to think as your character. I've read several documents and posts about people trying new character concepts and personalities, adding in faults and traits that are different, but in my opinion, if you can't think as your character (if you make your character concept to foreign to your personality) then you shouldn't be playing him for RP experiences.

...perhaps this is a bit rough around the edges.

[Lazloth]

Take the '*' a strange shadow '*' out..(the ** from the text).
I think I tend to notice the ** part more than whats between, due to the fact that it is so easy to see on a screen with only words, numbers, and spaces.

C'mon, anyone with a twenty-cent client and the ability to type #highlight will lock on this string, asterisks or not.

[Blackmoon]

Lazloth wrote:

Blackmoon wrote:
Take the '*' a strange shadow '*' out..(the ** from the text).
I think I tend to notice the ** part more than whats between, due to the fact that it is so easy to see on a screen with only words, numbers, and spaces.

C'mon, anyone with a twenty-cent client and the ability to type #highlight will lock on this string, asterisks or not.

For thoughs who do not use fancy colors to know practically everything in a room that is not what you would normally see..(a bit exagerated I might admit)..it would make a difference. Not everyone likes to have color on all text which is not seen in normal room looks..and its using OOC knowledge as well. Though, I'll have to admit, it'll be a great way take advantage of the OOC technology we have today. I'm saying its -wrong- to use color, I myself use a bit of color to make the environment feel like whats it should be felt as, as well as know things that my character would most likely know without thinking of it all the time, such as direction.

[My 2 sids]

Focus people, think about the bigger picture here.  The idea of trust is a major issue, one that goes above and beyond a few small examples.  For all the complaining and making fun of MUSHes and free form and the like where nothing is coded... we forget that in games like that the players have trust in each other for realistic responses.  We talk about hack and slash MUDs as being poor role play yet here we are talking about having to hide behind our own code.  If characters are forced to hide behind the code of the game, how are we different than any other hack and slash game out there?  Because role play, at it's core, is about responding to actions in a realistic manor.  And that takes trust.  

At the heart of any game it is the Imms who set the mood.  They are the ones responsible for the rules of the given society and (in Arm's case) for passing out Karma and characters (both normal and any special applications for powerful characters).  To be perfectly honest, in my small experience I've seen too many posts and stories of players not being able to trust the Imms.  Like it or not, fair or not, correct or not... this sets the mood for the entire game.  The Imms have to show they are willing to be as hard on each other and have as high expectations of each other to win the trust of the players.

As for the players I'll agree with some of posts before this, it doesn't take many bad apples to spoil the whole bunch.  But, I don't see many people trying to ruin the game for everyone else.  What I do see are people who are willing to go to such extremes to defend their own characters that everyone seems to be loosing the bigger picture of what is going on in the entire game.  Let's say there is poorly role-played thief in the crowded tavern... alright, that's one twink.  The problem is when people realize there is a twink thief and handling it OOCly (twinks, those that are abusing OOC power/knowledge, people who aren't role-playing correctly are outside the game and therefore need to be handled OOCly) we have ten people jumping up to scan the area!  We've gone from one bad apple to loosing the game to accommodate poor role-players!  

Everyone still with me?  Because here come my thoughts.  More than code, more than karma, more than banning and punishing, more than cracking down on all forms of OOC talk, we need players who are committed to the game itself.   There will always be a few bad apples who continue to have this idea they must somehow win at all costs... this concept is what lies at the heart of all cheating of all games.  But what we need is to establish the love of the game as a bigger picture.  If more and more people focus on the bigger picture of the game (instead of this individual focus), we all will have to work together.  Working together, having a unified cause, that will build teamwork, that will build the trust
we all are looking for.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Amen.

[SykotikGith]

Sykotik Gith tosses two 'sids to My 2 Sids.

Well said!

[Quirk]

Unfortunately, it's never going to be that easy.

MUSHes aren't all perfect havens of trustworthy RPers either, you know. They face the same issues we have, and often solve them in different ways - it's often not really possible to kill a character if the player behind the character doesn't consent to it, for example. Because the things that happen to your character have to be things you consent to, the risks of being spotted while hiding or found out in some wicked plot are much lower and with less serious consequences players are going to be less worked up over abuse issues. Additionally, much OOC communication is frequently present between those RPing a scene in a MUSH to detail how they want the scene to go, and this communication allows word of "untrustworthy" RPers to be passed along rather more straightforwardly than on Arm, where each character begins afresh without the shackles of the last's actions attached to it - from the view of other players, anyway.

People will disagree on what constitutes realistic RP, anyway. I am quite convinced that Rindan is wrong in the way he treats spotting someone in hiding, because I feel that someone trying to conceal themselves will necessarily afford you less chance to study their features than someone who is not attempting to conceal themselves. This is, however, merely my opinion, and just as I'm entitled to my opinion he's entitled to his. Being at odds on this issue does not turn either of us into "twinks". However, there is a spectrum of disagreement here on all aspects of RP, and there will always be someone to claim that their elf riding a kank is just fine given special circumstances, or argue that they can justify using "hide" to disappear from in front of someone they're talking to because their character is really really good at slipping into crowds. There will thus always be conflict between those who believe good RP lies one way and those who believe it lies another. Coded restrictions cut through this like a knife; if the code doesn't allow a particular RP interpretation as valid, for the vast majority of players it will not be valid. Imm guidelines serve almost as strongly as code for many players, but people can and do overlook them more easily. The body of popular player opinion holds a lesser sway still, and there will be more people who disagree with it than who disagree with the way the code works or the imm guidelines.

By all means everyone should RP in the manner that they would like to be RPed with. Sometimes this seems impractical, when facing someone who whether from a different interpretation or lack of thought given to the situation falls back on the code, and RP will need to be adjusted to, say, the problem that the captured hostage that you had emoted as having a knife held to their throat somehow squirmed free of their captor before you could move the knife and is now high-tailing it down the street. That ought not to change your default response to others, but it may force you to adapt to particular characters who play by different rules.

That still won't reduce the value of discussions over what the code should or shouldn't allow. The code is RP law. What it permits may still in some cases be considered poor RP by the imms or the playerbase, but it denies much worse RP. The newbie warrior may emote beating up the grizzled veteran, but the code will correct him. The newbie thief may emote passing unseen through the tavern, but the code will dictate whether that is in effect the case. For this reason, the code will be at the heart of many discussions of issues of trust, for it can transform what most consider poor RP or an imm guideline into law that cannot be overstepped without the consent of other players.

People will never see eye to eye on issues of trust across the board. Sometimes they will get upset that another's interpretation of what is realistic differs so radically from their own. Even in cases when some kind of consensus is obtained, new additions to the mud may take some time to realise it and incorporate it into their RP. Sometimes the code is the only thing that everyone will agree on.

Quirk

[__Torax__]

Why gripe about hide? Well, atleast I dont because most of my PC's that have the skills dont live long enough to be seen by some twink that wants to discover a character and start with the enormously redundant RP. But the one thing I will cry about is sneak. I've said it over and over and frankly, I see almost every PC do it.

When I see someone fail a sneak, I dont instantly look at them suspicious or start eyeing them and talking about them. Sneak to me is merely walking slowly. I mean any good assassin/stealth type isnt going to make it blantant like Austin Powers in Goldmember or something. I mean you can be the most moronic person in the world and be able to sneak fairly decent. But I've seen it over and over that when I fail a sneak people will instantly look at you and tell you to stop.

Example:

1) I watched a former militia PC read the riot act to some elf that fail a sneak check on the roads. Magically he saw this elf out of all the others that are stalking around along with the kanks, wagons and such that are also around.

2) I was sneaking with a former PC that was stopped in the middle of a large city by a templar that was speaking with his guardsman. He was read the riot act and harrased from that point on.

I mean, please correct me if I'm wrong but I dont think a templar or even Muk Utep could spot a mere commoner in the middle of the road with about a hundred more commoners around sneaking. Only thing I can think of that would get anyone's attention would be if this -SNEAKING- person was jumping up and down screaming, "Yaa baby! Yaa"

Just my thoughts.

[Angela Christine]

I think that sneaking isn't just walking slowly, and is potentially noticable as something unusual.  Now I don't know exactly what a sneaking person is doing that is unusual, they could be walking on tip toe, going out of their way to stay in the shadows or crouching down so they aren't taller than the rest of the crowd, it probably depends on the situation.

Evidence?  When you fail a sneak it says you move stealthily.  If it was just supposed to be walking slowly, then the echo would say you were walking slowly, or simply give the same echo as a walking person.  I assume this is deliberate, and not just an oversight that they haven't noticed in the last 10+ years.  

The result is that a person who is attempting sneak and failing will sometimes attract more attention than if they hadn't tryed to sneak at all.  Given that reality, I would suggest not sneaking in lawful public areas unless you really need to.  Save your sneaking for back alleys and slums, your skill won't improve quite as quickly, but you won't give away your sneakiness to every Tom, Dick and Amos that walks by either.

AC

[gfair]

1) I watched a former militia PC read the riot act to some elf that fail a sneak check on the roads. Magically he saw this elf out of all the others that are stalking around along with the kanks, wagons and such that are also around.

I mean, please correct me if I'm wrong but I dont think a templar or even Muk Utep could spot a mere commoner in the middle of the road with about a hundred more commoners around sneaking. Only thing I can think of that would get anyone's attention would be if this -SNEAKING- person was jumping up and down screaming, "Yaa baby! Yaa"

With regards to point 1 - you don't need magic to observe someone trying to sneak down the road, if they're sneaking down a road and failing then the assumption is that they aren't sneaking well, and can be seen.  

The problem with this is that neither player knows the playing style of the other.  The soldier may either -always- see the sneak because she/he doesn't know how to play in moderation, or the player just decided that the one elf was the one he did, for legitimate reasons, notice.  How can the sneaking PC be able to accurately tell which type of player the soldier PC is?  You can't without an OOC discussion, which is expressly forbidden, so you simply have to play the scenario out, and hope that people learn from these threads.

There needs to be some general convention on this, because I see a lot of people sneaking and failing, and you can't always have it your way, Mr. Sneak.  Failed sneakers can and will be seen.


As for the second point about people spotting a sneak on the roads - again, sometimes they can be seen, sometimes they can't.  You can't fail sneaking down the road too much (not just blend into a crowd) before the people around you will notice.  Are you taking into account, among those hundreds of people, that dozens of  them will notice someone who is failing at sneaking, and those people give off tell-tale signs of their own, like stopping abrutply, looking down, stepping out of the way, and other behaviour?

So the rule of thumb should be not to sneak down Main Road, Tuluk or Nak, unless you are darn confident in your ability to be able to hide in a large crowd and go unnoticed.  And when you are caught don't make OOC excuses and be reasonable about it, play the situation out, and never assume that you couldn't be seen, because sneaking down populated roads is far more likely to get you noticed by large numbers of people than sneaking down a quiet road under light of Jihae.

[Rindan]

If people are not allowed to notice a failed sneak, why bother having it the fail message in?  That is like saying that people should ignore the tickle in thier pocket when a thief fails.  That is the point of the message.  The code is telling you clear as day that you just caught someone doing something.  It means you DID pick that one guy out of the crowd because he was acting funny.  It means you DID realize that that tugging on your pocket wasn't just a person pushing past.  That isn't to say they can decide to ignore it and decide their PC didn't notice it, but there is absolutely nothing wrong deciding that you did notice it.

This goes back to the issue of trust.  This game is a MUD.  Code is arbitrates many disputes.  This is one example of a dispute that the code deals with.  Only the code is going to be able to fairly decide if you were spotted doing something bad or not.  People still have plenty of room to play around the code, but if the code says you caught somoene, that is a green light to know that your character had the capability to do it.

If I see someone hiding in the tavern with my scan, I will not feel any guilt if I look and remember that person who was acting off.  If I feel a tug on my pockets I will not think twice before shouting thief.  If I see someone sneak by, I will react like I just saw someone very suspicious try and sneak by.  There might be times when I decide not to do this for one reason or another, but I feel absolutely no obligation to make sure I let a few get away as if some how that is superior RP.  The code is there for a reason, and in this case the code is not conflicting with RP.  It is simply settling a dispute as the most fair and impartial party involved.

[Anonymous]

Especially when your a thief.. and you wear one cloak to steal from people and antoher to be seen by people.. Then after you change cloaks the militia spots you, you robbed the Flinka (Names changed to protect the semi-innocent) an hour ago in your hooded brownish, sandcloth cloak. so We are gonna kill you. Even though they didn't see your face or this green and purple hooded cloak. But your guilty..

I've lost more characters that way.

[Rindan]

Especially when your a thief.. and you wear one cloak to steal from people and antoher to be seen by people.. Then after you change cloaks the militia spots you, you robbed the Flinka (Names changed to protect the semi-innocent) an hour ago in your hooded brownish, sandcloth cloak. so We are gonna kill you. Even though they didn't see your face or this green and purple hooded cloak. But your guilty..

I've lost more characters that way.

Obviously they did see your face.  A cloak doesn't prevent people from spotting you or looking at your face.  Further, just because someone has the same colored cloak as a criminal doesn't make them a criminal too.  Switching cloaks is a good tactic, but don't expect it to work 100% of the time.  It can throw of militia if they are running around looking for a guy in a brown robe and you have a purple robed.  However, just like in real life, changing your clothes is not protection that they will not glance your way and reconize your face despite the change in clothing.