Please Roleplay in PK.

[John]

Want to use "get"?  Have a hand free.  Better rp or rs first.

I don't think this playerbase is quite ready for that.

[Lazloth]

People adjust.  The d.elf populace was up in arms while something was fairly recently 'balanced', no?

[Pungee]

What was balanced on d-elves now?

[X-D]

Moves

[Gilvar]

They received a double bonus in the effect that they had endurance benefit (major moves) as WELL as better handling of harsh terrains (less move loss). It was unintended to my knowledge of them to receive both, so they lost the major moves and kept their benefit of better handling of rough terrains.

[Pungee]

Heh. I just looked at it and the funny thing is... That happened like...A month before I finally made a D-elf. So I guess I never noticed the change.

[Lazloth]

Derailers!

[X-D]

Grin, well, I suppose it was rather unrealistic to have an elf with 321mv and reduced mv cost, but it was damm fun.

[Pungee]

Derailers!

Yes, yes I am.  

[Morrolan]

I don't think this playerbase is quite ready for that.

I know I'm not, but I am excited to try.

I'm more worried about the pragmatic coding issues...like -every- freakin' item having to be marked as holdable with one or two hands by size/weight/etc.  That sounds like a lot of work and playtesting.

Plus...how do we craft items without workspace now, and if we have one, how do we prevent theives from taking things from that space (see HELP SKILL_SLIGHT_OF_HAND), and further, how do we report them as thieves with any effectiveness?

Morrolan

[Lazloth]

I'm more worried about the pragmatic coding issues...like -every- freakin' item having to be marked as holdable with one or two hands by size/weight/etc.  That sounds like a lot of work and playtesting.

Plus...how do we craft items without workspace now, and if we have one, how do we prevent theives from taking things from that space (see HELP SKILL_SLIGHT_OF_HAND), and further, how do we report them as thieves with any effectiveness?

I don't think anyone (outside of Gilvar maybe) is advocating eliminating generic inventory.  The idea is that if your hands are full [at least when in combat], you cannot get something.

[X-D]

For playability, it would need to be while in combat only.
Also making it a lot simpler to code.

[Lazloth]

Wouldn't have to be, but makes best sense.

[Morrolan]

I don't think anyone (outside of Gilvar maybe) is advocating eliminating generic inventory.  The idea is that if your hands are full [at least when in combat], you cannot get something.

Looking back, I see what you mean.  I like that idea as well.  It would balance out those <get weapon> moves that come out faster than I could recover from the <disarm> delay.  Still, sheath and draw might need delays as well...

:oops:

This had gone far beyound the scope of RP in PK.  There is another thread in CODE DISCUSSION we can take this up in, I suppose.  See ya over there.  
Morrolan

[Gesht]

- - I apparently wasn't clear when I said "Quite frankly, I don't think anyone has any business demanding a PK be role played in the slightest."

- - This was because I assumed people would have read the original post in this thread. The original post called for interaction from a killer with his/her victim. I was saying the killer doesn't have to role play with the victim outside of trying to kill them. The entire rest of the post I made addressing pkilling was based around this idea, so any misinterpretation was the result of skimming. It's not a huge leap to realise what I meant by looking at the context of the entire rest of the pre-disarm post.

- - Second, in regards to what others have said, you're not supposed to assume that just because the code lets you do something that it is okay to do it. Yes, the disarm code is fairly ambiguous. People often take this ambiguity to mean they can assume whatever justifies what they do next. A maxed out thief, for example, could spamsteal from the same person 16 times in a row and not get caught. Since the code never tells you how you steal, we should all assume as the rest of the people claiming code ambiguity makes it okay to disarm and get. Being able to do it because the code lets you is a perfectly logical reason that you can do that, rather than being like mean old Gesht who's an embarassment to the staff and a sign the game is doomed.

- - The point is, the code is sometimes ambiguous, and the helpfiles are sometimes vague. However, physics are not. You knock the weapon from someone's hand. You have to be swinging in their direction to do this, which means the weapon is virtually always going to land further from you than them. The force of your attack will always be heading towards them, and as such the weapon will fall at an angle that is towards them (whether at their feet or to the side).

- - It is possible (in theory) to disarm someone by swinging towards yourself. Possible. Since you have no chance to impale yourself, slice your arm while grabbing the hilt from someone, or simply being wounded, it is not safe to assume that is happening. This is why I brought up the point about the code not having the potential to have you wounded by the disarmed weapon. You can choose not to understand this a second time if you want. It will have no impact on what I do.

- - In closing, disarming and getting a weapon is bad. Being a fast typist or using macros doesn't mean code abuse isn't code abuse. I don't care if you don't like me for preventing what we don't have a better coded solution to prevent. My job is to enforce good role playing, not achieve popularity.

[jhunter]

Gesht, what about disarming, sheathing a weapon, emoting your actions and picking up the weapon?
That seems fairly reasonable to me?

[Gesht]

- - Depends on how much time passed. Really, reviewing any situation is on a case-by-case basis. Someone could line up a macro that is triggered to do what you suggested the second a disarm success message was transmitted.

[jhunter]

Someone -could- do the same thing except in the reverse, when they are disarmed...

[Gesht]

- - Again, I said it would be a case-by-case basis. There are almost always some exceptions when the factors in a situation are human beings. Human beings sometimes pull something unforeseen. None-the-less, I am trying to think of an easy way to prevent this via code, without nerfing DISARM.

[jhunter]

I like the idea that someone had earlier, not being able to pick up things during combat without a free hand.
I think...that this should be in combination with a delay after a successful disarm (for both of the combatants) before any commands may be entered by either.

My reasoning for this is...the person disarmed shouldn't just immediately be able to reach down and snatch it back up because someone is still swinging weapons on them...should take a moment of dodging around to get into position to retrieve it without getting killed when you do.

The one attacking is too busy hammering away a them to get change to do anything else, (sheath a weapon...get in position to get the other).

Just some ideas. *shrugs*

[John]

- - It is possible (in theory) to disarm someone by swinging towards yourself. Possible. Since you have no chance to impale yourself, slice your arm while grabbing the hilt from someone, or simply being wounded, it is not safe to assume that is happening.

I was going to ask if people will wish up saying the weapon sliced them if they're going to emote the weapon being disarmed and falling towards them. But then I figured "how the heck could you disarm a weapon so it goes towards yourself" so I didn't say anything cause I couldn't (and can't, I'm just taking your word on it) imagine how it's possible.

It looks to me like some people have taken Gesht's post as he is only going to target disarmers who "get weapon." I interpretted Gesht's post as anyone who "gets weapon" when someone is disarmed unless he feels they do it in a realistic manner

[X-D]

Hhhmm, My posts were only having to do with your comments on disarm Gesht, the rest I had agreed with, I found it and still find it disturbing that a member of staff (specialy one that I consider to be a huge asset to the game so far) Can have these views on the matter. -Aside- from the code -allowing- something, even in your second post:

The point is, the code is sometimes ambiguous, and the helpfiles are sometimes vague. However, physics are not. You knock the weapon from someone's hand. You have to be swinging in their direction to do this, which means the weapon is virtually always going to land further from you than them. The force of your attack will always be heading towards them, and as such the weapon will fall at an angle that is towards them (whether at their feet or to the side

For lack of any more polite way to say it, the above is patently wrong, and your arguement goes both ways, just because the code does -not- say it went towards you in any manner does -not- mean it does not.
One needs to be familier with the actual mechanics of melee combat with swords/clubs/axes/flail/staff/polearms etc to understand this in a truly comprehensive form, a familiarity that 99% of people Do Not Have.

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. Add to it that melee combat is not static, it is not two people standing in place hacking at each other with swords, you move back and forth, circle, sidestep and cover a rather large area in a short aount of time, a weapon that may be 5' feet from you could be 10' 1 second later or 2'.

You have to be swinging in their direction to do this, which means the weapon is virtually always going to land further from you than them. The force of your attack will always be heading towards them, and as such the weapon will fall at an angle that is towards them

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.

As for nerfing disarm, please do.

But even without doing so, adding a bit of code making it harder and more dangerous for somebody with both hands full to pick up a weapon during combat should be pretty darn easy, matter of fact, you want to do something to stop people from doing it, add a stumble fall/fumble weapon script for when somebody with both hands full tries to pick up a weapon in combat, realistic, easy to do, does not nerf the actual disarm skill.

[crymerci]

Sorry, I'm coming into the discussion late.  Excuse me if anything I say has been covered already.

For a desert hunter, what is better prey? The scrab or beetle that you might get a hundred sid out of, and a nasty wound if your not lucky? Or is the desert hunter better served slaughtering the hapless wannabe hunter who rushes out throwing himself in harms way, who will likey have a nice stash of coins on him, as well as easily pawnable equipment. If you leave the safety of the city, you are meat. You are prey, for both the big nasties of the wild, and the PC hunters. On zalanthas, the most kindness from a stranger you should hope for is a quick death. So dont bitch when the big nasty warrior who can kill you, does kill you.

The world is savage.

I agree with most of this, except why would anyone think an inexperienced hunter had a huge pile of sids?  ICly their lack of know-how and experience would rather suggest that they are poor and barely surviving from kill to kill.  It is only because you know OOCly that they are new characters, and probably have leftover newbie 'sid, that they look so appealing.

[crymerci]

- - Quite frankly, I don't think anyone has any business demanding a PK be role played in the slightest. The time you spend describing anything is the time your prospective victim could be screwing you over. If this were the real world, all of your actions would be perceived at the exact same time that they happenned. This isn't; the code requires you take time to describe something which would actually occur simultaneously with the action you are comitting.
{snip}
- - So in summary, my feeling is you should consider getting role play out of your killer the same way you should treat an IRS audit going your way. It is a wonderful change from what you expect or deserve.

I still want to state one thing. Just because there is a chance that someone might abuse something, or twink out. Doesn't mean you should do the same, doesn't make it right if you do. Period. Just because there is a chance someone might do something doesn't mean you should be thinking OOCily, well I'm going to fuck everyone else because there is a chance they might do the same.

Thinking so is bullshit. Doing something bad before they do it to you in NO way makes it right. And I'll have to say, even if all the staff agrees with Gesht, I'M TERRIBLY SORRY that we have staff that think this way.

Much as it pains me to say so, I agree with Creeper.

[crymerci]

- - I apparently wasn't clear when I said "Quite frankly, I don't think anyone has any business demanding a PK be role played in the slightest."

- - This was because I assumed people would have read the original post in this thread. The original post called for interaction from a killer with his/her victim. I was saying the killer doesn't have to role play with the victim outside of trying to kill them. The entire rest of the post I made addressing pkilling was based around this idea, so any misinterpretation was the result of skimming. It's not a huge leap to realise what I meant by looking at the context of the entire rest of the pre-disarm post.

I still disagree with you.  I think that PK deserves to be roleplayed out, and YES even emoted, just like any other major event that happens in game.  I'm not of the opinion that lack of twinkage equals roleplay.  I just see this as the type of thing where roleplay will continue devolving until all we use are canned socials and coded commands.  I'd rather see a crackdown on victims who don't roleplay, rather than saying to the killers "well, the victims don't roleplay, so you're off the hook".