Please Roleplay in PK.

[Raesanos]

This is my personal opinion on all this.

> Emoting is optional.

> Role-playing is not optional.  Read help roleplay for its definition.

> Emoting is an excellent tool to help you role-play.

> Abuse is not allowed.

> If something is not abuse and is allowed by the code, it is allowed.

The reason this specific situation is tough is because you cannot tell if someone is role-playing well or not from a brief encounter.  Quality of role-play is how well someone is playing their role.  Did they attack you for OOC fun?  Did they attack you because they're a bandit or assassin?  The bad news is, you really have no idea, since you only know one tiny slice of the story.  It is unfair to judge somebody's quality of role-play based when you know only a piece of the story.  Maybe they are a an extremely well fleshed-out character, and attacking you was completely in character.  In fact, I think one would be best off assuming that this is the case.

You can say a death is better if someone emotes a lot while killing you.  Its true.  Unfortunetely, some people are using think instead.  Some people are nervous and can't think up emotes well under pressure.  Some people are typing kill first, since its completely reasonable to, and hoping to emote later if they get the chanse.  Some people fell of of their chairs.  Some people went braindead and can't come up with anything to contribute at that moment.  Some people do not enjoy emoting about the details of combat and are letting the code do it, or are keeping their buffer open for other commands.  We all love emotes!  We encourage emotes.  But, failure to emote is not a sin in and of itself.

If you see someone who is abusive, aka picking up items with their hands full or spamming commands, you should email mud and we'll investigate.  Keep in mind it could be a typo or mistake.  If somebody isn't doing anything wrong, they aren't doing anything wrong.  If we (staff) find out that somebody is being abusive, we deal with it.



Also, please keep in mind that when staff members post, it is generally to state their opinions.  Any staff member post that is meant to clarify official policy will say so specifically.  Sometimes staff members have differences in opinion as well.  For example, I don't agree with Gesht about the physics of the disarm skill being unambiguous.  My personal belief on that is that the situation is ambiguous, and if you are not being abusive (like when picking things up with a hand you do not have) then it is fine.  You are not performing a blasphemy by disagreeing with one of us in a matter of opinion, so rest at ease.

I know that when a staff member posts it does seem to carry some kind of special weight, but always remember that opinions are opinions, and this is a discussion board, and we, too, are here to discuss.

[John]

I know that when a staff member posts it does seem to carry some kind of special weight, but always remember that opinions are opinions, and this is a discussion board, and we, too, are here to discuss.

The reason some of us see that extra weight and are scared to discuss something with staff is because we aren't use to the staff posting on the GDB except to rule on things and put the final word in. But lately the staff have been debating with us, which I think is a good thing. But also takes some time to get use too

[X-D]

For myself, I know that unless stated as official, and normaly by a Highlord or an Overlord, staff comments are generaly held as opinion of that person or view on something, but the post was not written that way, as a matter of fact it was FAR from it, at least on that point.

On a side note, disarming someone and picking up their weapon is code abuse. If I saw someone do it, I would immediately fine them karma, followed by emailing an OL to request the player lose the DISARM command. Whether or not you recovered karma would be up to that OL. I would do this no matter how "logical" your emotes were

At no time did the statement even hint at being opinion, and even worse, stated no warning would be given that this person would be karmicly bitch slapped hard and a skill command removed if at all possible, Then combined with the "I would do this no matter how "logical" your emotes were" section means that we are NOT allowed to rp what happens if it is at odds with coded message or the code does not give a message, which goes against 99% of the RP and emotes in the game for the last 12 years.

As I said, even IF it was opinion, I found it a very disturbing thing for a staff member to say or do, doing something like that to a player and in that manner could easily turn an otherwise good player into a Delerak.

[Quirk]

Merely as a matter of note, an not uncommon tactic in the heyday of the rapier was to trap the opponent's somewhat dull blade with either a specially designed dagger or with a gauntleted hand, with the aim of either immobilising them long enough to deliver a thrust or forcing them to release their weapon to prevent being so attacked. Another technique designed more specifically for disarming was for the disarmer at close quarters to drop the dagger, if they had one in their off hand, and reach forward to wrest their opponent's rapier away by the hilt. Both of those techniques could result not merely in the weapon being disarmed, but coming into the disarmer's hand; both carried significant risk of failure. With the rapier itself as opposed to lighter modern sport weaponry such as the epee, the default grip taken tended to be too strong for the weapon to be easily knocked out of an opponent's hand by a strike, and I would suspect that the majority of weapons prior to it would also have grips that tended to resist such impacts, particularly with slashing or chopping weapons.

The current ease of use of the disarm skill does seem oddly out of sorts with actual melee combat however, particularly as a number of the historical means of disarming people required having a hand free to wrest the weapon from the opponent's grip and would be impractical with either shield and sword or two weapons.

Quirk

[Callisto]

As I said, even IF it was opinion, I found it a very disturbing thing for a staff member to say or do, doing something like that to a player and in that manner could easily turn an otherwise good player into a Delerak.

Agreed.

[moab]

Delerak is now an adjective?
Very cool.  

[Gesht]

- - It seems no one reads these days. Yes, I said that, no matter how "logical" the emotes that came between the disarming and the getting of the weapon, I'd still act in the same manner. However, in the very next sentence I clarified that time and position were the only things of importance to me. I repeated this point in later posts, going so far as to point out those "logical" emotes could be part of a prewritten macro. Twelve seconds worth of action could be emoted in less than one second, giving someone an OOC edge over another player not using triggers. Why should logical emotes be more important than the actual passage of time?

- - Considering that I've emphasized time being important, not only in my original post, but in following posts, the only reason to keep quoting me out of context is because you don't like my message. I don't believe using technology so that you have superhuman action or reaction speed is good role playing. Of course, I doubt this will be acknowledged, and someone will requote what I said about emotes. After all, what's wrong with performing forty seconds of actions in one second, thanks to the magic of macros?

- - The post I orginally replied to refered to someone typing "disarm;get" weapon. Again, this is where context comes into play. Most people who disarm someone and get their weapon would probably never hear a negative word from me. People who spam commands like that, or use macros, would.



- - In regards to what was said about disarmed weapons...

Fact is, if, you were to disarm somebody, the odds are pretty even on the weapon landing anywhere, even to the point of being near 100% random as to direction and distance, as a matter of distinct fact, the weapon is slightly -More- likley to land closer to the disarmer then the disarmee, and this does have to do with physics of inertia, swing and more.

- - You provided absolutely no evidence to support any of these points. Stating them as if they were facts doesn't make them facts.

This is wrong, unless the person is standing there holding his sword still for you to knock it away, But no, he is swinging it at -you-, so, -physics states that said weapon would head off on a tangent angle acording to force applied to change the direction and inertia, meaning the weapon would more likly end up behind and to the side of the -disarmer- not the disarmee. making it closer to the disarmer.

- - Yes, they are swinging at you. The weapon has inertia from their swing, heading in your direction. Then you swing at them to disarm them. Now inertia is heading in their direction. If you disarmed an opponent with a stern glance, yes, what you said would be correct. However, since disarming involves physical interaction, what you described is entirely wrong.



- - In summary (which wouldn't be necessary if people read my writing instead of picking phrases they disagree with out of context), I said there are only two things that matter to me after you disarm someone. They are the TIME between you disarming someone and picking up the weapons, and POSITION your enemy is in. The vast majority of people don't spam commands or use command-and-emote macros, and therefore they would not have a problem with this.

[jhunter]

- In summary (which wouldn't be necessary if people read my writing instead of picking phrases they disagree with out of context), I said there are only two things that matter to me after you disarm someone. They are the TIME between you disarming someone and picking up the weapons, and POSITION your enemy is in. The vast majority of people don't spam commands or use command-and-emote macros, and therefore they would not have a problem with this.

Answer me this: How are you supposed to tell what postion they are in if they're not emoting?

If not, I would think the assumed position would be one of being off-balance and surprised since their weapon was just knocked out of their hand.

Also, do you intend to punish those that just type "get weapon" immediately after their weapon is knocked out of their hands?

I would think that this time and position thing goes both ways, not just against the disarmer.

[Lazloth]

Yes, they are swinging at you. The weapon has inertia from their swing, heading in your direction. Then you swing at them to disarm them. Now inertia is heading in their direction. If you disarmed an opponent with a stern glance, yes, what you said would be correct. However, since disarming involves physical interaction, what you described is entirely wrong.

Eh?  Disarming is all about technique.  Hard to believe I'm alone in thinking it's not weapon-meeting-weapon in direct blunt force.
http://www.kalideleon.com/techniques.html : end-point looks pretty random.

[jhunter]

That's exactly the way I see it.

Could be disarmed any number of different ways, not just trying to overpower them and actually strike it from their hand.

Most likely if your good enough, your either going to keep ahold of their weapon if you get it away (and have an open hand to do so) Or your going to attempt to have it land as far away from them as possible.

But, it could go anywhere.

[Mr.Camel]

I think the disarm code already puts someone's weapon away from their reach if you'r good enough.

[jhunter]

It does, and the disarmers as well.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Disarming, eh?

From what I understand of disarming, IRL, I beleive that it involves a great many different techniques (though generally, Jet Li techniques might leave you wishing for less flare and more relativity). You can't say just how a weapon is disarmed. You can't say just where the weapon lands. You can't SEE any of this. You dig?

You have to roleplay it. If you haven't been using emotes, and your opponent has not been using emotes, then you just have to guess. And in ANY case, disarm;get sword is just super, super, super ga...uhm...twinkish.

[jhunter]

Sorry I disagree, if the disarmer sheathes a weapon first and emotes properly I think there should be no problem with it.
I'd have no problem personally with this if I was on the receiving end of it and it was done that way.
I would have a problem and do, if they didn't and do have a problem with even the one disarmed hammering out "get sword" the moment the disarm message comes on the screen.

IMHO, both are equally twinkish.

[X-D]

- - Yes, they are swinging at you. The weapon has inertia from their swing, heading in your direction. Then you swing at them to disarm them. Now inertia is heading in their direction. If you disarmed an opponent with a stern glance, yes, what you said would be correct. However, since disarming involves physical interaction, what you described is entirely wrong.

Not much for physics are ya.

Go play a game of pool, pay attention, get back to me later.

Oh Hell, I can't just leave it, as much as I should...Sigh.

Alright, assume a simple impact style disarm (yes, I know there are other types, but they tend to put the weapon in even odder places) Now, as somebody pointed out on another thread, your arm is a lever and has a pivot point. Now, that means that you must swing your weapon in an arc, or a partial circle, picture it, stay with me now. Each person swings in this circle, if the weapons meet with the same force in the -exact- same direction then they will stop dead, if one person loses hold it drops, in this case it would be slightly closer to the person that was disarmed, but this is unlikly to happen. Now, What is more likly to happen is a deflected disarm, this will cause a transfer of energy and a change of direction, but that change of direction is going to be a combination of the directions of both swings, Or in other words, it will continue off in a straight line decided by the arc it was traveling and the impact it was given, normaly this would put it behind and to one side of the disarmer, it is VERY rare and unlikly for the weapon to make a 180 degree change of direction and go anywhere but down, It is likly for it to make a 30-90 degree change in direction, Draw it out on a sheet of paper and you will figure it out. It really is simple, maybe 7th grade science and math.

As far as the inertia heading 180 degrees the other way, only if you applied a lot more force then they did, unlikly unless you a dwarf/mul or HG...And the easy in which weak races can disarm strong races pretty much points at it not being a strength matter IG.

Now, with actual practical experiance I can tell you that most methods of disarming do a VERY good job of making sure that weapon is not closer to the disarmed the the disarmer, not that it matters, if the weapon is 10 feet off to one side of the disarmed and 9 feet off from the disarmer, I'd just consider that equal and out of reach of both.

- - You provided absolutely no evidence to support any of these points. Stating them as if they were facts doesn't make them facts.

And neither did you. When you stated that it will NOT fall closer to the disarmer etc etc. I have to call you the pot there bub.
As far as providing evidence, grab yourself a sword and bring it with you to the APM, My evidence is from 16 years of Hands On experience that continues today, I'll even be nice and bring a sabre, one of the easiest swords to disarm And I'll bet large sums of money that you can't disarm me and that when I disarm you I will be able to call where your sword goes.

- In summary (which wouldn't be necessary if people read my writing instead of picking phrases they disagree with out of context), I said there are only two things that matter to me after you disarm someone. They are the TIME between you disarming someone and picking up the weapons, and POSITION your enemy is in. The vast majority of people don't spam commands or use command-and-emote macros, and therefore they would not have a problem with this.

Gonna have ta call ya the pot again, Since it is pretty easy to tell that you did not read my first response to your first post except by maybe scanning over certain lines.
My first one was mostly taking issue with the statements that were NOT voiced as opinion but instead what YOu held to be fact and without anything to back it up. In later posts I attempted to clarify to no avail that what really bothered me on your first post, So, I'm going to quote a small section out of context to help out here.

If I saw someone do it, I would immediately fine them karma, followed by emailing an OL to request the player lose the DISARM command

Now, this to me is simply wrong, You said nothing about any warning, as a matter of fact, stating you would "immediately" Fine them karma and petition for disarm to be removed from them means that you either are NOT going to warn them or you consider that the warning, and with no regard for the player at all. Now, maybe I'm wrong, but that IS the way it comes across to me and probobly others as well. And seems to be a less then professional attitude to me. I did not care about the part where you stated exceptions and did not add them into the quote the first time around because I had no issue with that part.

[jhunter]

Quote:
If I saw someone do it, I would immediately fine them karma, followed by emailing an OL to request the player lose the DISARM command


Now, this to me is simply wrong, You said nothing about any warning, as a matter of fact, stating you would "immediately" Fine them karma and petition for disarm to be removed from them means that you either are NOT going to warn them or you consider that the warning, and with no regard for the player at all. Now, maybe I'm wrong, but that IS the way it comes across to me and probobly others as well. And seems to be a less then professional attitude to me. I did not care about the part where you stated exceptions and did not add them into the quote the first time around because I had no issue with that part.

That is exactly how I felt about it too, X-D.

I had not really thought much on the subject before this came up, and now that I had, I thought:

"Wow, I might've actually done that, not even thinking about it being considered code abuse. If Gesht had been watching and I had done it, I'd have lost karma and my disarm skill without any warning about it? WTF???!!!"