>Someone rips a juicy...

[flurry]

A dull creak is heard like someone settling into a chair.

The problem with this particular one is that if you aren't actually hidden, it's going to look really strange.

[Bestatte]

I'm gonna go out on a limb here (surprise surprise!).

There are valid arguements both for and against the use of hidden emotes. There are also valid arguements supporting a change to the existing code to allow for a new and different method of emoting while hidden.

It seems the primary objection to the existing hidden emoting, is that it allows for twinkage. I agree. It does allow for twinkage. But so does ANY emote. So does the combat system. So does clan recruitment. So does the ability to use AIM, ICQ, MSMessenger, and the IRC chat room while mudding.

If the staff spent their energy changing code and enforcing rules to prevent twinkage, Armageddon would be a lousy place to play. I think the responsibilty to play according to the spirit of the game falls on the players, not the code. Twinking should be a rare occurrence, easily noted and checked by staff. From what I've experience so far, it is, and they do.

I will say, though, that I like the idea of changing code so that only people who see "someone" can also see what "someone" is emoting.

1) It's logical.
2) It severely limits the possibility for confusion.
3) It can actually add to the RP atmosphere rather than detract from it (ex. "Hey did you see that?" "What?" "That rotten petoch fruit flying across the room and smacking Rangy in the face." "Nah I guess I wasn't looking. What's that all about anyway?" etc. etc. )
4) It can add even further to the RP atmosphere (ex. "OMG WTF did you see that!" think Hehe he'll never know I'm just making this shit up "What?" "That guy, in the corner! He just slipped spice into the Oash Aide's hand as she was walking out!")

So if anything, I support the suggestion for change. I still maintain that atmospheric hidden emotes are fun to watch (I've never had the guts to try it in front of anyone so I can't make the claim from the "giving" end), and done *responsibly* add a lot of oomph to the RP environment.

[Supreme Allah]

At the same time, Bestatte, you must realize how much such a change would affect (effect?) interaction for hidden characters. I'm really tired of posting here, but just as an example, that entire petoch fruit incident could not have happened if this change was in place.

And I do not support any such change that would eliminate a character's ability to interact simply because they are hidden, but I'd welcome an emote command that allows only those who can see the said "someones" snooping about.

[/quote][/i]

[Rindan]

But what if your victim can see you?  But just hasn't bothered to use the look command?

I'd rather err on the side of the victim, personally.  Which is again why [broken_record]I think that emotes made by hidden PCs should only be visible to PCs who could conceivably see them.[/broken_record]

I sneak into a noble's chamber.  The noble is able to see me but instead of doing a look, decides he'll start to emote going through a chest.  He's going through the chest to get a weapon, but I don't know that.  Meanwhile he's also using psi_contact to try and call his guards.

Now, if I emoted sneaking up from behind him he could react accordingly.  But if I don't, because I'm passing out OOC info, as you say, and just type `backstab noble` I've inadvertantly bypassed the fact that he was well aware that I was there and was planning to mount a defense.

And in dealing with a situation where I'm about to kill another PC through those means, I would like to do everything in my power to make sure the scene is handled properly.

The instances where you shouldn't know the information far out way the instances where you should.  I would rather error on the side of knowing less because the code can generally fill in a lot of clues, especially in the instances that you described.  

For instance, take the point where you sneak into a noble's bedroom.  If I were that noble, I would be really really annoyed if you emoted lining up on my back while hidden.  You might as well go 'OOC Oh yeah, I am going to kill you now, just ahh, hold still.  Only going to hurt for a few seconds.'  That isn't to say the scene has to be lifeless.  If I were said assassin, I would get an emote ready and throw it off just before the backstab lands.  True, the noble misses the line up, but he is also treated with well played surprise.  For instance, what you described would be a perfect time to "emote The floor boards behind ~noble creaks and there is a soft whoosh noise as @ brings ~dagger down towards %noble back."  The scene is certainly not dead, and as a player I would appreciate that far more then having to watch someone all but OOC to me that they are about to make an attempt on me.

Look at the options with failing a sneak attempt into a noble's chambers.  If you don't fail, then the scene plays out as it should and the noble doesn't see a thing until it is too late.  If you do fail, then the noble gets a pretty obvious message 'so and so sneaks from the west'.  While it is not as pretty as what your hand crafted emote is, it should be pretty clear to the noble that someone just tried to creep in and probably has less then honorable intentions.  Either way, the noble players knows what he needs to know and nothing else.  If you emote, then true, if you failed in your sneak the noble has better information.  However, if you didn't fail, then you now have dumped information onto someone that very well might have preferred not to of had it.

In most instances involving people being hidden, the code does more then its share to convey what is happening.  Granted, it is not as flashy as a player, but it also doesn't spew OOC information either.  Take for instance pick pocketing.  If a person fails a pick pocket, then code makes it pretty clear what happens.  If you are hidden, there is an ldesc command that can be used to make it clear what you are doing.  If someone notices 'A <sdesc> stands in the shadows with his knife out" it should be pretty clear that the person is A) hostile and B) trying to hide but failing at it.  I can't think of many instances where the code gives too little information, but I can think of thousands where emoting while hidden gives far too much.

I also agree that error should be given to the victim, but when it comes to hidden emoting, to error on the side of the victim is to refrain from indulging yourself with hidden emotes.  Hidden emoting might look cool to you, but it is a maddening spot you put your victim in.  As a victim, I would greatly prefer to know less then to OOCly know more.  Few things are more damning to role play in my opinion then being fed OOC information.  There is a reason why the sharing of IC information is banned on this board and why this MUD goes to such great lengths to control how much information is spread OOCly.  OOC information hurts role play, pure and simple.  The sharing of OOC information should be avoided, and hidden emotes are absolutely no exception in my mind.

[Bestatte]

Well apparently whoever set up the hide skill for this game disagrees with you Rindan (and whoever else thinks hidden emoting is bad).

The better you are at hiding, the higher your chance of being able to emote while hidden without knocking you out of hiding. That's not a bug, someone had to code that into the skill on purpose.

Repeating again, ad nauseum, forever and ever: It is the responsibility of the players to roleplay in as realistic manner as possible, given the limitations and functions of the code, the atmosphere in which the character is positioned, and the genre of the game.

It is not the responsibility of the staff to spend all their time worrying about the few who -might- twink, and adjusting the game to limit everyone else just because a few players would abuse the code.

[Rindan]

Well apparently whoever set up the hide skill for this game disagrees with you Rindan (and whoever else thinks hidden emoting is bad).

Yeah?  And one the Highlords disagrees with you and thinks hidden emoting is destructive to RP.  What is your point?  Trying to steamroll an argument with 'well this is how it was built' is pointless.  The game was built with intent of having elves able to ride kanks and mantis sitting in the Gaj.  It intent later changed.

Further, the set up for the hide skill does not disagree.  It is set up so that you can do hidden emote.  That is not a bad thing.  There are perfectly good times to use hidden emotes, but those are times when you can expect people to react to them.  For instance, if a magiker decides he wants to make noise, the hidden emote code will fully support him in whatever sort of imagery he wants to display.   It will support people who want to respond to someone making foot prints in the sand, rustling bushes, or whatever you want to imagine.  If an assassin wants the floor boards to creak as he sneaks up and give someone the chance to respond, more power to him.  The issue is when people give away information they don't want people to react to.  I see nothing to suggest that the ability to hidden emote was designed specifically to pass on OOC information, and even if it was, I still wouldn't agree with it.  I don't care what the intent of the code was when it was originally put in 10 (or however many) years ago.

[Bestatte]

This is the only part of your post I'm going to quote, because in my opinion it's the only relevant part of your post:

The issue is when people give away information they don't want people to react to.

The issue is with the players. Not with the code. There is nothing wrong with the code remaining exactly the way it is. I just haven't seen enough instances of players using the code in an inappropriate manner to warrant changing it. All the rest of your post actually supports my own opinion, in that there ARE times when hidden emoting is worthwhile for both the hider and the observer. And there are ALSO times when it is not worthwhile and detracts from the RP rather than adding to it.

For the 97th time - the responsibility to differentiate between the two and act appropriately lies with the player. Not the code or the game itself.

[Rindan]

For the 97th time - the responsibility to differentiate between the two and act appropriately lies with the player. Not the code or the game itself.

I completely agree.  When did I say otherwise?  I have not been arguing for a code change and have not even suggested a need for a coded change on this entire thread.  I have been arguing for behavior (player) change.  I completely agree that there is a time and place for hidden emoting.  What that time and place is is what is being discussed.  The responsibility does lie with the players, and I have been arguing that people use it more responsibly with consideration given to the victim.

[Supreme Allah]

Yeah? And one the Highlords disagrees with you and thinks hidden emoting is destructive to RP.

Actually Rindan, Xygax went out of his way to state that these were his views as a player, not as staff. Check out the "p.s." at the end of one of his posts back there.

It is the responsibility of the players to roleplay in as realistic manner as possible, given the limitations and functions of the code, the atmosphere in which the character is positioned, and the genre of the game.

Bestatte is dead-on here, by the way. But, moving on and trying to be somewhat brief, but failing...

Hidden emoting when you don't want people to respond is like OOCly telling them your plans in my opinion.

"Someone brushes past your cloak."

Hey, because this guy emoted brushing past a cloak, touching a shoulder, or simply moving past, they're broadcasting to the whole room that they've just picked your pocket, right? Wrong. You as a player can be as presumptuous as you want when you see a someone emote, but don't think the rest of the playerbase is doing the same, Rindan.

Being a big fan of the 'rinth as I am, I've done emotes similar to this dozens of times over, Rindan. Just little touches or skirts past one might feel in a crowd. It's nothing I haven't done while not hidden, either.

Know how many pockets my characters have picked, grand total? I bet you can guess at this point, but I'll tell you anyway - dead zero. Know how many times I've even tried? The same. I'm not OOCing you anything at all, Rindan. Stop jumping to conclusions.

No one's said here that you should not at all react to hidden emotes - or, if they have and I missed it, I disagree.

What I am saying: react to what the code gives you and nothing more. That is all that is being asked of the player, and again it isn't that demanding. It isn't anything more than every player faces day to day on Armageddon, and certainly isn't the travesty you make it out to be. Plain and simple, I think your issue here is just in that your mind is wandering.

[Xygax]

Alright.  Following this discussion has pretty much caused me to arrive at the following conclusions (and this is the last I'll post on the subject, as some of the debate I'm starting to see is, unfortunately, decaying into frustration and ad hominem attacks):

1) Hidden emoting is occasionally (though I still argue, rarely) appropriate.  I was gently reminded of a time where -I- used a "hidden emote" to sneak up on someone and give them a surprise hug before they'd seen me.  My intent then had been to have them see "someone slips their arms around you", and then be revealed, and so they were then given the opportunity to appropriately react to my presence.  I'm satisfied that this is an appropriate usage (if I didn't think it were, I suppose I wouldn't have done it), and that there are other situations that might also be appropriate usages.

2) Hidden emoting before/after a coded interaction with a player is almost never appropriate.  As Rindan suggests, it inevitably forces OOC knowledge on your target.

Supreme Allah has made the following interesting statements:

I'm not trying to come off as "holier than thou", but for an immortal to advocate the blatant abuse of OOC knowledge really offends me.

I interpret this as a concession that offering a hidden emote in stealing/backstabbing situation IS, in fact, forcing OOC knowledge on your victim, but you then accuse Rindan of jumping to conclusions thusly:

I'm not OOCing you anything at all, Rindan. Stop jumping to conclusions.

I'm inclined to agree more with your first statement, which is that in reacting to a hidden emote, we are reacting to OOC knowledge.  Because I agree with that statement, I'll beg you to stop sharing OOC knowledge with me during the course of your play.  If you do, I will get up and leave the room.

Supreme Allah continues to contradict himself with the following pair of statements:

If we let solely the code express everything we do, then why do people emote while sparring, or crafting, or anything else? Why should theft have to be any different?

What I am saying: react to what the code gives you and nothing more.

So, which is it, Allah?  Rely on the code, or react to the emote?  Here's a statement you made that I think answers the question:

As it stands, Xygax, "someone" emotes are directly supported by the code.

Oh, excellent.  So what you're saying is, because the CODE actually allows me to see your "someone brushes your cloak" emote, I should react to what the code gives me (even if the code is giving me OOC knowledge??).  Thus, anytime someone "hidden-emotes" around me, I should assume that the code intends for me to see their activity, and assume that it is significant enough for me to react to (the code doesn't show me insignificant things, usually...  and in places where it DOES -- say I see a VNPC brush past me in the Bazaar thanks to some neat "atmosphere" work someone (I think, Dyrinis?) did there, to cause that -- I should react then, as well).

Moving on:

You were meant to see and react to it, but you were meant to do so in-character, not as a player in defiance of the code.

I was meant to react in-character to OOC knowledge?  You conceed above that a "hidden emote" in these situations (stealing and backstab, since those are the ones for which coded results are offered, they're the ones I'm most interested in -- I'll get to spying -- which is just as bad or worse -- shortly), is equivalent to saying "ooc I'm hidden, and I might be about to rob you or plant a knife in your back, or you might ALREADY be missing an item!!", and yet you suggest that I should respond ICly?

Interestingly (though this is somewhat of a side-issue), the example others seem to be citing so often as another appropriate use of hidden-emoting ALSO bothers me:

Someone throws a rotten petoch fruit from the back of the room, striking soandso in the face.

Mainly this bothers me because you've assumed you're that good a throw, and that soandso is that poor at dodging fruit, but it also seems a little broken since surely -someone- would notice you in the act of hurling a fruit.  This is why engaging in combat breaks "hide." (and yes, hurling fruit at someone is a form of assault).


To summarize, Armageddon is a DIKU MUD, with coded results for actions that harm/benefit the players around you.  Remaining in a room hidden, is likely a harmful action, since the ability to spy on a target can equate to an enormous amount of power over that target.  By engaging in an emote while hidden, you are forcing what you, yourself, admit is OOC information upon your target, and then expecting them to react as though they DON'T have that information.  You're giving a player information that they ARE potentially BEING HARMED CURRENTLY, and expecting them to sit there and endure it.  You aren't, in fact, adding atmosphere; by your own admission, you are injecting OOC knowledge into what should be an IC situation handled entirely by the code (again, to use your own words).  It's only mildly interesting to this debate that you have never engaged in picking a pocket, since there are many ways to harm an individual on Zalanthas, without ever raising a blade or slitting a purse, and spying on them is most definitely one of them.  Offering your viewer the OOC knowledge that they are being spied upon can ONLY cloud the RP you claim you desire.

-- X

ps- Again, let me assure you that I am posting on this thread as a player, not as staff.

[Supreme Allah]

First off, this'll be my last post regarding this topic anywhere. I'm genuinely bored of it, and I can only see it continuing to go in circles.

I interpret this as a concession that offering a hidden emote in stealing/backstabbing situation IS, in fact, forcing OOC knowledge on your victim, but you then accuse Rindan of jumping to conclusions...

I'm inclined to agree more with your first statement, which is that in reacting to a hidden emote, we are reacting to OOC knowledge. Because I agree with that statement, I'll beg you to stop sharing OOC knowledge with me during the course of your play. If you do, I will get up and leave the room.

Xygax, I'm not entirely sure whether or not you're feigning ignorance here, but I'll clarify myself, regardless.

As a player, it is your responsibility to react in-character only to what the code gives you - not, in fact, to what you may know or suspect out-of-character. When I said "OOC knowledge" in the first quote you gave, I perhaps misspoke or was not clear enough - that someone has brushed past your cloak, both ICly and OOCly, is only knowledge of precisely what the coded emote in question read. Everything else is suspicion. Another character's actions may, yes, cause your character suspicion. But this, quite simply, is entirely appropriate.

I apologize for this single-word misinterpretation - especially because that single word (fragile a tactic as it may be) appears to be the entire basis of your attempts to refute my arguments in this last post. But I digress...

If "someone brushes past your cloak", interpret that and only that as what has happened. Does that mean you must ignore a presence you may very well have felt? No, by all means (and as I have suggested several times, though apparently it has gone ignored), GO AHEAD AND REACT. But react based on the code - again I say, not what you may suspect OOCly. My coded emote has informed you that someone your character could not identify has brushed past their cloak. That's it. No more, no less. It's really quite simple.

If the situation were different and "someone" brushed past another character's cloak, may indeed give you cause to react - if you feel it does, then by all means, do so. But remember what precisely you're reacting to. Your character, should he have noticed - which is reasonable, but remember that no character is omniscient of everything happening around him - is reacting to someone or something they could not identify touching or otherwise moving past someone else (something quite common I might add), NOT to the fact that YOU think that there is a pickpocket in the room.

Yes, it may come to mind that the aforementioned someone may have stolen from you, but that conclusion you have justly or unjustly drawn is an OUT OF CHARACTER one, and it should not have any effect on your IN-CHARACTER actions. Does your character leap to his feet and scramble out of the room, checking for all of his possessions at every touch he receives? Is he paranoid, as another player describes, and thinks every graze of his clothing is highly, highly suspect? Then by all means, do this. But if not I believe it is completely irresponsible to make an exception and break character (regardless of whether or not you choose to make IC excuses to do so) because of your own OOC suspicions or discomfort with perfectly IC actions.

I hope that is clear enough, because I am done repeating myself in this thread.

The fruit thing

In general, when such things are so harmless as a fruit grazing my character in the jaw, I will not object, but at the same time, yes, power-emoting is bad, and I certainly avoid it in my own actions. To some degree I agree with you in this point, but at the same time, roleplay is not the black-and-white medium you make it out to be. Not every poor, fruit-lobbing soul that throws a fruit should have to watch their character carved up by insta-kill soldiers a split-second after.

(Edited because I suck at forum code, and some unclear wording on my part)

[Xygax]

If my natural, out-of-character suspicion is that you're robbing me, why should my in-character suspicion be any different?

-X

[Barzalene]

I'm backtracking several pages. If I were hidden in a private room, where my aim was to jump out and kill, or to spy, I assume I picked my hiding place very carefully. I would stay still, and try not to cough or breathe too much. In other words I would not emote.

If I were an thiefy type in a crowded bar, I would not crouch under a table. I would hang out in the shadowy corners of the bar and try to be unobtrusive. In this case I might emote.

Perhaps this is not "right." Still, I feel that various situations require a varied number of responses.

[Forest Junkie]

If my natural, out-of-character suspicion is that you're robbing me, why should my in-character suspicion be any different?

-X

Eh...I may be wrong, but are we not supposed to keep the OOC knowledge seperate from IC knowledge? By saying this, I mean, just because -you- know OOC I'm going to jack your shit, doesn't mean IC you know a damned thing, unless you play every single one of your pc's as smart as you the player are. Does that make sense?

[Delirium]

I don't think that's what Xygax meant.

If it's blatantly obvious ICly that "someone" is going to steal from you thanks to an emote, are you supposed to not react to it because they're "hidden"? If someone's hand brushes along your belt, are you supposed to say "oh, well, they were hidden, I better not react to that"?

Anyway, this whole argument is beyond a dead horse, it's a mutilated, rotted horse.

I didn't bother to read this whole thread, but EvilRoeSlade's posts jumped out at me as the ones I agreed with.

[Xygax]

Eh...I may be wrong, but are we not supposed to keep the OOC knowledge seperate from IC knowledge? By saying this, I mean, just because -you- know OOC I'm going to jack your shit, doesn't mean IC you know a damned thing, unless you play every single one of your pc's as smart as you the player are. Does that make sense?

And now we're back to my original point, which was that by "hidden emoting" you are -intentionally- providing me with OOC info.  Worse still, you're -expecting- me to act on it ICly.

[Rindan]

Supreme Allah, you make a big deal about how people should ignore emotes like someone brushing up against them.  Why bother emoting that in the first place?  It is a trivial piece of information ICly, but a big piece of information OOCly.  Why even put someone in the position where they need to ignore OOC knowledge?

If you are hidden emoting things that people should be ignoring, you are passing on OOC information, pure and simple.  I can't possibly see how anyone could argue otherwise.  It doesn't matter if people should or should not react to it.  Forget how the victim reacts for a second and just consider what you are doing.  Regardless if the victim ignores it or responds, you are giving them OOC information.  This MUD is built around the concept that extra OOC information should always be kept at a minimum.

Whatever is added atmospherically from said OOC information is lost many times over in disconnecting the player from their character.  I like being where my character is and I don't want extra OOC information thrown at him.  Yeah, I can ignore it, but I will be annoyed the entire time I am ignoring it that someone is forcing OOC information onto my screen.

Before hidden emoting, I would ask yourself one thing.  Is whatever atmospheric information you are about to give to everyone in the room worth also passing along all the other OOC information you are going to also be passing along?  Realize that everyone in the room might have been happily RPing along like no one hidden was there in complete sync with their character, and now suddenly they have this OOC information that tells them someone hidden is around.

Honestly, I think that if you believe no one should react to your emote unless they are ultra-paranoid, that is a pretty blazingly clear indication that you are spilling more OOC information then whatever that emote is worth and should reconsider.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

And, not to really attempt to lengthen this thread, but, for the sake of argument, don't you think your PC might be more paranoid than you the player? After all, you, the player, are just visiting this world, while your PC has lived in this cold world for every day of his life.

[creeper386]

The problem is... In emotes like brushing past someone, or any sort of touch, hearing or smell.

They aren't giving you information ICly or OOCily. HEY I'm stealing from you, or hey I'm a thief. Or hey I'm an evil magicker!!! They are conveying the simple action of what they are conveying. You OOCily assume that it's a thief or magicker because codewise noone else is invisible and then react ICly on it.

Yes, emotes like 'Someone crosses their arms over their chest.' Could very well not be needed, but if you see, "Someone bumps into you." You shouldn't ICly act like you just got ran into by a thief. You should react ICly like someone bumped into you. Even though you know most likely you OOCly you just got robbed. Just because something is BLATANTLY obvious OOCly doesn't mean your going to see the same thing ICly.

Any place where people are congregating in large numbers and drinking it would probably be common to be bumped into. Now you say, well then if it's common you shouldn't emote it. Well if it's not emoted it probably doesn't be seen, or payed attention to. It's one of the reasons small minorities in Zalanthas become seemingly the norm, as they aren't seen.

Wow... I wasn't expecting to write even close to this much and it's probably repeating the same thing over and over that was said many times in other posts... But anyways... You got to look at things through your characters eyes. Not through the screen.

[Forest Junkie]

Thank you Creeper. Basically sums up my entire opinion on the matter.

[Rindan]

Creeper,  you are missing my question.  I understand how people should react.  The issue is WHY bother giving that information in the first place.  What purpose does it serve?  Why is 'emote bumps into ~person' worth the OOC information it also gives?  Do you really think that sort of atmospheric emote that people are expected to not respond to is worth all the of OOC information that can't help but also be implied?

To sum it up real simply because no one is answering the question:  I understand how peopel should react.  The question is why bother giving that informatin in the first place?  Is that mundan piece of IC information that the victim (not to mention everyone else in the room) is unlikely to react to ICly worth all of the OOC information that is also passed along?

[Forest Junkie]

Creeper,  you are missing my question.  I understand how people should react.  The issue is WHY bother giving that information in the first place.  What purpose does it serve?  Why is 'emote bumps into ~person' worth the OOC information it also gives?  Do you really think that sort of atmospheric emote that people are expected to not respond to is worth all the of OOC information that can't help but also be implied?

Yes damnit. Yes yes YES! It's fucking worth it!

[sacac]

Well.. in the bazaar you have Vnpc that nail you in the ribs or 'bump' into your back.. So why can't a PC do that while in a crowded room where it is filled with VnPC and Pcs.. I say it is ok.. but if your pc has no IC way of seeing or feeling it, then you as a PLAYER shouldn't make them.

[Rindan]

Well.. in the bazaar you have Vnpc that nail you in the ribs or 'bump' into your back.. So why can't a PC do that while in a crowded room where it is filled with VnPC and Pcs.. I say it is ok.. but if your pc has no IC way of seeing or feeling it, then you as a PLAYER shouldn't make them.

When in an NPC does it, it is atmosphere without the OOC information.  When a player does it, there is an additional heap of OOC information.  So again, no one has answered the question.  Why is it worth it?  Why is all that OOC information you inevitably spill to the victim and everyone else in the room worth that small atmospheric emote which no one who is not ultra paranoid is supposed to respond to?  Why bother dumping all of that OOC information onto someone's lap for what seems to be absolutely no purpose?

[Carnage]

Creeper, you are missing my question. I understand how people should react. The issue is WHY bother giving that information in the first place. What purpose does it serve? Why is 'emote bumps into ~person' worth the OOC information it also gives? Do you really think that sort of atmospheric emote that people are expected to not respond to is worth all the of OOC information that can't help but also be implied?

Why emote anything then? Why even emote that you're about to attack someone? All it does is give OOC information after all.