Meat and Predators

[Bestatte]

So, knowing that running lowers your stamina, if your stamina drops to a certain number you have to rest - that's wrong, because it's just code?

Or how about knowing that you have to HOLD a rope in ordered for it to have any benefit to you?

What about USE SOAP? I mean - you can already "clean collar blood" - you shouldn't need to be informed that the proper CODED syntax for soap is "USE."

Sorry - I just have to disagree. There's realism, and there's playability. REALISTICALLY - dropping meat to lure a creature closer so you can kill it, or dropping meat to distract it so it won't kill you - REALISTICALLY - this would work. Realistically - you should -totally- try it if you think your character would.

This all boils down to the same ole stuff about what's IC and what isn't, and which IC things are appropriate to discuss and which things aren't.

If something -should- work, according to realistic roleplay, but there exists no code to support it, then players -should- be informed if they ask about it so they don't wish up complaining when it doesn't work, or worse - post on the GDB ranting about how no one told them, and that it SHOULD work because it's realistic.

Pantoufle posted the same general idea - much less wordy of course. But yeah I agree on this particular issue. It's not giving info about how a secret command works. It is acknowledging the fact that a certain code does NOT exist in the game. And I don't think this is a problem.

[Agent_137]

So, you're a hunter. You have some meat on you. You are running from a beast that wants to eat you. You now have the question:

Do I drop the meat, or keep it?

As a character, unless you know, IC, that the beast won't stop to eat the meat, or that the meat isn't weighing you down when you run, wouldn't it make perfect sense to drop it? In just the -off- chance? I mean, I leave this to your character to decide.

But, as a player, you heard on the gdb that dropping the meat won't work at all. So now you are split from your character. He doesn't know. You do. Thus arises the potential for twinking, and a small conflict for those who don't twink. Sure, the average RPer is going to ignore his OOC knowledge and do as his char would, but wouldn't it have been nicer if he -didn't- know, and held out a bit of hope? Seems more enjoyable to me. Could just be me.


Now, as far as the other examples listed, they are all on the other end of the spectrum. Harmless code that you -need- to know to play. Stuff that a living breathing character in the world would -know-. Anyone, everyone, every VNPC in Zalanthas knows that when you run, you get tired, and when you get tired, you have to stop, and eventually sleep, because you are WORN OUT.

Every VNPC, NPC, and PC on zalanthas knows that to clean a collar with soap you have to scrub it. No one would hold the soap, look at the collar, smash them together, and go home. So you should know the code is USE soap.

etc. etc.

Not every person on zalanthas is gonna know if that tembo will stop to eat the meat or not. Hell, nobody on this board really knows if an earth beast would stop to eat the meat. Even Cenghiz was like, "i've studied a lot, but I don't really -know-."  So, it's safe to assume that not everyone on zalanthas knows, either. Therefore, it should be left to finding out ic.

BAM. How about that? I said it. Find out IC.

[sjanimal]

Gilvar,

You seem to think that I have overstepped my bounds here, and for that I would like to apologize and accept censure.  

I will try to refrain from entering discussions on the code until I have had time to reflect on what is appropriate and what is not.

I don't consider this matter to be finished, however, and should like to talk to you sometime about it, when we are both not busy.

-sjanimal

[Gilvar]

Pantoufle posted the same general idea - much less wordy of course. But yeah I agree on this particular issue. It's not giving info about how a secret command works. It is acknowledging the fact that a certain code does NOT exist in the game. And I don't think this is a problem.

I think it is a problem, because of what I said. Someone just saying "THIS DOES NOT EXIST" causes characters to not even do it because it will not produce a coded reaction. Not everyone, but a good chunk of the populace. Similarly with the soap example, soap used to not clean. Soap used to not exist (in a hard-coded way). It was added specifically for this and made clear that it had a coded benefit. Crafting-Tools, my example, are different and more in line with that I think this hunting thing is (something that should be left ambiguous and mysterious to prevent abuse and encourage characters to act as realistically as possible. I.e. using tools is realistic and should be done, regardless of a coded benefit, but if a player was told definitively eitherway, alot would likely forego their use in an effort to save money, OOC-thinking, but done nonetheless.)

Going back to soap, before it was added people still emoted, worked with, and tended to their clothing and equipment to clean and maintain it, alot didnt because they felt there was no point. Like in the Byn a guy actually OOCed about not having any armor repair skills on a maintenance day and how he was going to go AFK to get something to eat since he couldn't do anything to his damaged equipment anyways.

And that is pretty much the basis of my opinion on this issue. Saying: Yes/No this does/n't have a coded benefit/detriment/effect affects people's gameply and should be avoided where possible. And in alot of cases, creative people willing to work with themselves or the staff can often work around non-existant code if its realistic, but this of course relies on players willing to try things. (Granted this isn't an ideal option for a life or death situation, but you hopefully get the idea.)

Lastly, im not even saying this is wrong or illegal, as obviously the post is still here, just that I think, (as in, in my opinion) that discussing the definitiveness of generally obscure and non-everyday code (or the lack thereof) is bad and can set precedents/conceptions about code discussion that could also be more potentially harmful then just a discussion about meat and predators. Also sometimes useful ideas come from the vague discussion of code (i.e. in the code-discussion forum) and ways to improve/add different features. But again, saying Yes that creates a coded affect, or No that doesn't create a coded affect,  is bad.

[spawnloser]

Gilvar, the problem here is that people's characters and fun is on the line.  We are playing a game because we enjoy it...and if the raptor doens't even pause at the meat, it is possible that the person being chased could get eaten by it pretty quickly.  Sure, they could possibly get a rezz as a code issue is what caused the death...but then they have to send an email, wait for a response, probably send another email, wait for a response, wait for rez...and now they can finally play the game again.  If something is going to affect my game play so badly, I think it is more than a 'code quirk' or 'feature' of the game...it should almost be classified as a bug.  Unless someone was willing to pause to wish up and the staff agreed that one of them would automatically make the hunting NPC stop for the meat if appropriate without pause, I'd be fine with this...but I don't expect the IMMs to make that promise, as there are plenty of other important things they need to be doing.  Personally, I'd rather drop the meat and run...spam getting my ass out of there because I don't feel like losing a character to some silly code quirk doesn't sound so terribly awful to me.

[Anarchy]

Given the escape abilities of most "desert" animals, in the RL (lizards and their tales comes to mind), i would be inclined to think tossing a bit of meat while your running down a sand dune, bleeding, sweating and screaming out for help, - would -not- deflect a Tembo's attention from catching you, then consuming you. All the meal would do is be tosses up into the air, then land with a thud on the sand. It does nothing to draw the animal's attention, while you, on the other hand are running, screaming, bleeding and sweating.

[Kill4Free]

You forget though that in most cases in game, you can get far ahead of the tembo, or raptor, and then they follow your tracks.  If they saw a big piece of juicy free meat, Id say that would distract them from the goal.

[Angela Christine]

My observations, as someone who has died in the wilderness many, many times:

*Some creatures will eat a body, some will not.

*Some creatures will stop and pick up things dropped on the ground, some will not.  They don't stop for very long, but it might be long enough.

*Some creatures appear to be coded to be more likely to go looking for food only when they are hungry, but  are still happy to attack anyone that walks near them whether they are hungry or not.

*There are ways to get a tracking creature off your tail, some obvious, some not.

Those are possibilities which I honestly believe to be true based on my own experiences.  Obviously I'm not going to say which ones apply to which NPCs, but these are things that at least a few NPCs will do.  There is hope.


You can experiment for yourself.  You can try to convince a weathered old hunter to take you on as an apprentice and teach you all he knows.  You can join an organization that conducts extensive wilderness survival training and missions in the wilderness.  You can become an imm, mage or psionicist and watch what other people do, without them knowing.  Each approach has it's own problems: experimenting for yourself will probably lead to many deaths, weathered old hunters may not want an apprentice, organizations may only send very experienced people or large groups into the wilderness so they may not actually use or know ways for a lone wimp to escape a raptor (or other tracker) because they always simply kill them outright, and getting into a position to watch other PCs without being noticed takes a long time.  But there is hope.


Angela Christine