RE: No more baby items post in Staff Announcements

[crymerci]

I think there are more advantages to not having a baby-object than there are in having one.  Sarahjc pointed out one: the ease in desc-changes--after all, the first years of life have the most development and changes in them.  Your Arm baby will be an entirely different thing at birth than it is 3 RL weeks later.

Another advantage is handoffs between parents and other caretakers.  If you have the baby-object, you have to actually wait to see another caretaker in order to hand it over (or leave it seemingly unattended in a home), whereas with a virtual baby, you can settle a schedule, a signal, or use a brief ooc contact to settle who has the baby when.  Then, even if your partner had the baby the last time they logged out, you can have it when you log in.

I think it also challenges your creativity to come up with different ways to describe the same thing.  The sleeping, chubby-cheeked infant, the squalling blue-eyed baby, the fuzzy-haired, one-toothed babe...these could all be the same baby without any stretching whatsoever.

I'm not anti-baby-object.  I've seen them used well, and I've seen them used poorly.  No doubt the object-less babies will be played equally unevenly.  But the salient point here, I think, is that your baby-object won't be a baby for much longer than a couple of RL months.  It's really asking something to have an object made that gets that short a usage, especially since, as Sanvean pointed out, the original object-making isn't the only imm-help you'll need.  There's crashes and junkings and all sorts of other fun ways to mess with a baby-object.

As a side-note, it's not easy to play realistically with a baby.  When I did it, I had to do all sorts of research because I don't have kids so I'm pretty clueless when it comes to what they're like as newborns as opposed to year-olds.  I had to find out all sorts of things like when they start to smile, sleep through the night, reach for things, crawl, talk, etc. etc.  And because of the way Arm time works it was a constant process: the baby that was starting to teethe one day might have four teeth a RL week later.  And don't even get me started on the math and trying to figure out just how old the baby is, anyway.  Then you have to look up low-tech alternatives for things like diapers and baby food.  

It's a big undertaking, and looking back on the babies I've seen played in the game just sort of emphasizes my dislike of all the times I saw a baby held (or brandished, heh) and then completely ignored while the player went on with their RP.  Babies don't let you ignore them.  They are smelly, loud, and inconvenient.  They do and should hugely change your character's life.  So, although as I said, I'm not anti-baby-object, I think this change is good, because it will (hopefully!) cause people to be a little more thoughtful about how their characters interact with babies, instead of just getting the uber-eq of a cute baby-object (the imm's work, not theirs) and then neglect to put in any serious thought or work of their own.

[Rindan]

I don't see how the lack of a baby object is going to make for less realistic RP of a child.  I think that there is just less of a chance for abuse.  If you want to steal a child,  you still can, you just need to be realistic about it.  There is probably no subtle way to steal a child unless a person sets the child down.  So long as it is an object in the inventory and thus in the parents hands, no subtly is going to remove it.  Now instead of pick pocketing babies, you probably need to emote the parent into giving it up.  Instead of typing get baby, you need to emote snatching it.

So long as there is a baby object, if someone steals it you can't say they didn't take it, as they clearly have the baby.  If someone types 'emote pick pockets YOUR BABY!!!1!!"  you can just type OOC Go to hell.

[Flaming Ocotillo]

I'm sure you can count on your fingers the number of truly political plots that have evolved around a baby's kidnapping.

Every other baby theft seems to be the same typical behavior for the same old reasons:

Someone wants to hurt or kill a PC in some way, but they can't find a way to do it. Too many NPC guards, the crim-code system, their PC isn't skilled enough with poison, they don't have the money to hire someone capable, they don't want to make more enemies if word gets around, etc. So what is the exciting alternative they come up with? Using a mediocre steal skill to steal a baby object, because the low amount of risk (if any) versus the massive reward of having such a valued treasure is so, so worth it. Don't have the steal skill? Just wait for a PC to leave the baby somewhere while he/she isn't logged in, and make a strike against inanimate, brainless NPC guards.. RPing that no one saw your magicker or thief steal the baby from the crib. But what if the PC and his/her baby ALWAYS log out together? That's when you can start to OOCly complain that "she's never without the baby, day and night, it's unrealistic!"... and meanwhile you think to yourself, "Yes.. I just need one shot at the baby when no one's on-line! Or at least someone with low combat skills in a non-crim room."

Come on. You've either seen it all before, or you've thought it yourself. The baby theft is almost always a cheap shot at someone using the imperfect code against someone. The people who are truly interested in seeing a baby-kidnapping for some credible reason, done the right way, aren't the ones who have anything to fear from the lack of baby objects. You already -know- that things will be arranged accordingly to fit the situation. The rest of you will eventually cope with being "unrealistically" forced into role-playing a kidnapping with the help of the staff.

[Lazloth]

Using a mediocre steal skill to steal a baby object, because the low amount of risk (if any) versus the massive reward of having such a valued treasure is so, so worth it.

I'm off this thread since further discussion is undoubtedly moot, but would add that the fix, if this is what it combats, is inane.  How difficult would it be to add one !STEAL item flag and an if-check within the steal function?  "I don't like the taste of oranges .. I won't ever eat again!"

Don't have the steal skill? Just wait for a PC to leave the baby somewhere while he/she isn't logged in, and make a strike against inanimate, brainless NPC guards.. RPing that no one saw your magicker or thief steal the baby from the crib.

And this is different from how the carbon-copy PC Zalanthan thieves act how?

The baby theft is almost always a cheap shot at someone using the imperfect code against someone. The people who are truly interested in seeing a baby-kidnapping for some credible reason, done the right way, aren't the ones who have anything to fear from the lack of baby objects. You already -know- that things will be arranged accordingly to fit the situation. The rest of you will eventually cope with being "unrealistically" forced into role-playing a kidnapping with the help of the staff.

Not everyone can bend the ear of the staff at whim.  Not all babies are political creatures that will ellicit some sort of immediate, roaring attention.  I'm guttertrash that can't see past the following week and feel like ransoming that pretty commoner's kid for seventy-five 'sid .. the girl that nurses it in the Barrel .. so I catch her with a quick stunning blow to the head, and lift the rodent in the ensuing street confusion, only to later dangle it.

*shrug*  I've never had a kid on Zalanthas, don't intend to, don't care for them, but don't see what the big deal is.

[aeshyw]

Probably not the best idea to open up another can of worms around this subject, but its made me think about something I've considered a few times before.  What if there was a 'carry person' skill?  By this, I do not mean subdue, but a skill where if PC 1 passes a strength and size check and is allowed to by PC 2, they gently lift a person and carry them around?

Its just a thought.  Babies could be NPCs and require the players who request them to jump through all neccesary hoops to create NPCs rather then just asking for a cute object to be loaded up, and the 'steal baby from mom's arms' idea gets a lot harder to do, initiating combat.

The only real huge problem I see with this are the coded limitations on size and weight for NPCs/PCs.  I personal raised a couple of NPC brats from baby objects up to adulthood and it used to give me a snicker to note they were coded taller then me at age 4.  That and a requirement to update them about once every 3 IC years as kids grows a bit ponderous but really is neccesary.

I will say that looking back on it now, having the objects made playing my character harder, and I think that's a good thing.  They were involved in some political RP and because the other characters around them took them seriously, the objects themselves became the center of more then one plotline, a couple of them brutal and cruel in true Armageddon style.

[John]

Also. Aeshyw stuffed up one time with a baby object which got me more involved in stuff which made playing that char a lot more fun It would be impossible for that to happen now since the baby objects are going to become extremely rare, but it's probably a good thing considering it was an OOC mistake

[Angela Christine]

I think it would be helpful for future breeders if some of the examples for how to manipulate virtual children were added to the pregnancy doc.  This thread will eventually die (we can hope) but the breeding will go on and on, so a "how to" section in the docs would be good.

How to express a virtual baby.
 - emotes
 - drops

How to age the baby realistically.

How to organize a schedual of activities so that you know where the baby should be and who it should be with when you are not logged in, or when you are doing something that is not baby-friendly.

I assume most large organizations would have some kind of virtual creche or nursery for taking care of small children for busy employees.  Not only would it keep a valuable employee from needing to take time off if little Amos gets the sniffles, it would also give the House a chance to impart their values into the children, making them better potential employees for the future.  If you tell the little blighters tales about how great House Moneybags is, they are more likely to want to sign up with Moneybags when they are old enough to be useful.  It wouldn't even be that expensive to set up, because you could have pregnant, nursing, or elderly slaves doing most of the baby-related dirty work.  Don't get me wrong, I think most employers would be pretty breeder friendly and not object to you taking your kid with you on duty, but some work would be too dangerous or delicate to have babes around.  You don't go scrab hunting with a baby strapped to your back ... unless it is bait.  :twisted:

AC

[spawnloser]

Lord Moneybags probably doesn't want the rugrat screaming in his ear during a nice dinner either.