We really need an additional description that appears when a figure wrapped in a cloak, hooded and with a facewrap on is looked at.
And another for the completely masked.
Sure, most of us know better and will try to ignore the hidden portions of the full description, but it still can be a bit of an OOC spoiler.
Or is it just twinkish to look at people wearing these things at all?
Yes.
I often feel the same. And then I don't...and then I do. But honestly...I think it would make the game better overall if it were as the OP says.
If you mean facewraps hiding a persons main description as well as thier short description. I would be for that.
People can say...
"Well that might be abused. What if there are other features about the PC that would make them recognizable?"
Well it has been being abused for years the way it is now. Changing it would only alter the fashion of the abuse. Better to try and change it, than leave it the way it is knowing it gets abused how it is now. *Shrugs*
The way it works now...Someone wearing a deep hooded cloak, a facewrap, and full body coverings raids you...nine out of ten times you will still have the victim running into taverns shouting....
"A man with green eyes, a scar on his chin in the shape of a donkey, and a dragon tattoo on his chest with maroon eyes and blood dripping from its teeth raided me. He also had a bite mark on his penis and he was missing two toes on his left foot! 1000 sid bounty to the man that kills him!"
The way it works now, if you LOOK at a raider codedly, they really are kind of forced to kill you codedly. Better to kill you, than hope you wont abuse the fact you could read thier main description.
I would much rather be ABLE to leave people pc's alive.
Would it?
I'm honestly not so sure.
Do we really need to give raiders/thieves/informants/whatever impenetrable shields of anonymity?
I think it might be better to err on the side of downplaying the practicality of raiding rather than making it too easy.
Quote from: Marauder Moe on June 24, 2008, 03:25:41 PM
impenetrable shields of anonymity?
As long as there's "contact figure" there's no such thing.
Quote from: Marauder Moe on June 24, 2008, 03:25:41 PM
Would it?
I think so.
I'm honestly not so sure.
Do we really need to give raiders/thieves/informants/whatever impenetrable shields of anonymity?
If someone wearing a full body cloak/duster, a hood, and a facewrap walked up to me IRL, I very likely wouldnt know them, even if it was my own brother. Unless I specifically looked for thier eyes which would be familiar to me already.
I think it might be better to err on the side of downplaying the practicality of raiding rather than making it too easy.
It wouldnt make raiding any easier. Pulling off the job would still be just as hard. It would however prevent people from RP'ing they have extremely detailed information regarding someone who they have only seen thier eyes, if that.
I know you have seen movies where those desert raiders, all decked out in facewraps and cloaks come in to attack the wagons, they all look like the exact same guy. Imagine adding a full hood to that wardrobe. When you went back to tell on your raider all you would be able to tell them IRL would be..."He had dark eyes, and wore desert gear."
Quote from: Fathi on June 24, 2008, 03:27:26 PM
Quote from: Marauder Moe on June 24, 2008, 03:25:41 PM
impenetrable shields of anonymity?
As long as there's "contact figure" there's no such thing.
Yeah, which Sanvean has pointed out is a very poor way of RP'ing you know what someone looks like.
Quote from: Desertman on June 24, 2008, 03:28:23 PM
Quote from: Fathi on June 24, 2008, 03:27:26 PM
Quote from: Marauder Moe on June 24, 2008, 03:25:41 PM
impenetrable shields of anonymity?
As long as there's "contact figure" there's no such thing.
Yeah, which Sanvean has pointed out is a very poor way of RP'ing you know what someone looks like.
Tell me you haven't seen someone describe the onyx-skinned, surly man who raided them to a templar because the contacted them as thus...
"He had dark skin...like onyx. And was sort of surly. Looked human."
Or give details they had NO way of seeing, because it's included in their mdesc. Yeah...he has a tattoo of a dragon on his neck...which was covered with a sandcloth wrap, beneath a greatcloak with a hood up and a sandcloth facewrap hanging down over the already sandcloth wrapped neck.
Or should all raiders only have in the mdesc their eyes and eyebrows and bridge of their nose?
If you haven't...I want to give you a hug. Your innocence...makes my heart grow two sizes to big.
It's nearly impossible to play a raider with any sort of success. How many successful raider companies do you recall. I can think of two. One of which...weren't 'necessarily' raiders, just territorial.
I certainly hope this happens in at
least ARM 2.
Quote from: Marauder Moe on June 24, 2008, 03:25:41 PM
Do we really need to give raiders/thieves/informants/whatever impenetrable shields of anonymity?
I think it might be better to err on the side of downplaying the practicality of raiding rather than making it too easy.
There's an easy non-psionic way around the anonymity: subdue the raider and rip off his facewrap. :D
Has anybody really been complaining about excessive, unrealistic raiding?
Quote from: brytta.leofa on June 24, 2008, 04:22:29 PM
Quote from: Marauder Moe on June 24, 2008, 03:25:41 PM
Do we really need to give raiders/thieves/informants/whatever impenetrable shields of anonymity?
I think it might be better to err on the side of downplaying the practicality of raiding rather than making it too easy.
There's an easy non-psionic way around the anonymity: subdue the raider and rip off his facewrap. :D
Has anybody really been complaining about excessive, unrealistic raiding?
Exactly.
Quote from: brytta.leofa on June 24, 2008, 04:22:29 PMHas anybody really been complaining about excessive, unrealistic raiding?
Not lately, but that may have been the reason the staff removed description-concealing facewraps in the first place.
Quote from: brytta.leofa on June 24, 2008, 04:22:29 PM
Quote from: Marauder Moe on June 24, 2008, 03:25:41 PM
Do we really need to give raiders/thieves/informants/whatever impenetrable shields of anonymity?
I think it might be better to err on the side of downplaying the practicality of raiding rather than making it too easy.
There's an easy non-psionic way around the anonymity: subdue the raider and rip off his facewrap. :D
Has anybody really been complaining about excessive, unrealistic raiding?
Probably not. But then again, that's probably why you hear very little about raiding. And with the way things are...it makes it easier to do so, and leave them alive so you can do it to them again. Or to RP out a scene without having to kill them because they will look at you while you are RPing.
I personally think it's become more the opposite, the raiders are the ones crying out because of excessive, unrealistic law and order.
Quote from: Marauder Moe on June 24, 2008, 04:24:24 PM
Quote from: brytta.leofa on June 24, 2008, 04:22:29 PMHas anybody really been complaining about excessive, unrealistic raiding?
Not lately, but that may have been the reason the staff removed description-concealing facewraps in the first place.
I never recall facewraps hiding someones mdesc...I am probably wrong. If so, I am sad it was taken out, lets put it back in.
Facewraps as a whole didn't. But there used to be commonly available facewear that did, and no, they were not all masks. I always thought that was ok - I always have wanted them back in.
Why not let facewrap/mask + hood up = lost main long description, but leave clothing visible as per normal. That way, you can always describe those pesky raiders by the all-over desert camouflage, or fancy silk gloves, or whatever clothing they're wearing.
I am also saddened by psi-contact-fishing...every time it happens, I lose a little faith in other people's RP. Then again, I do the same when people go, "OMG, you've got a dragon on your face (when wearing a facewrap/mask)/a naked woman on your chest (when wearing any form of covering upper body clothing/armour)/ugly scar on your ass (...assuming you're not butt-naked, thats always an interesting one to work out how they knew - I prefer the response of "...so -you're- the one that has been peeping through my window while I was dressing!")
Quote from: Kyviantre on July 01, 2008, 09:19:02 AM
I am also saddened by psi-contact-fishing...every time it happens, I lose a little faith in other people's RP.
This is one of the many reasons why the skill barrier exists. Tired of people entering your mindz, then barrier is the skill for you.
If I am not mistaken, being able to use the way to discern the identity of a masked person is one of the 'features' of contact as stated by the imms on multiple occasions unless this policy has changed. And to counter this feature of the contact skill everyone has access to the barrier skill.
I'm making the assumption that people are purposefully fishing and managing to break that barrier. Not arguing that it isn't a useful thing, just saying that it doesn't always work :'(
Quote from: Kyviantre on July 01, 2008, 09:34:17 AM
I'm making the assumption that people are purposefully fishing and managing to break that barrier. Not arguing that it isn't a useful thing, just saying that it doesn't always work :'(
That's because it is a skill. You have to work at it and get better.
That I'm not disputing! I'm just saying that (and lets keep this -very- simple)...Way-fishing = bad, nasty, ick! (in my opinion).
Here's how I look at it when people get your sdesc from "Contact Figure".... Just tell that person to piss off. That they found the wrong mind. If they tell you that they tried to contact that figure that jumped off their wagon with five pieces of gold, tell them you're in Red Storm sifting spice. And also remind that person how much of an idiot they are because there are at least six thousand people with their hoods up.
Also, are raiders and thieves something we really don't want to see abused? In all my time I've played, I can't say I've ever been pickpocketed, or raided. With thieves and raiders running willy-nilly about the streets and sands, that would just make the game that much harsher and grittier, wouldn't it? It's too safe outside the gates.
I think that neither way is perfect but I believe that the worse abuse is the way it currently works. The right stuff should be able to hide the character's main description. Sure, some people argue that there are things they might be able to recognize some features, but between the two options I think the way it currently works is the worst option of the two. I'm totally willing to forgive not being able to pick out a few minor details that I -might- be able to recognize in order for those who want to remain anonymous to do so. I think that would add to rp instead of a good portion of such rp being ruined completely by people abusing the fact that they can see a masked and hooded person's entire main description.
To my knowledge, noone has ever lost their pc unfairly due to not being able to pick out some minor recognizable detail. I'm 100% certain that would-be raiders have lost their pcs due to people abusing the fact that their main description can be seen unhindered even while taking precautions to cover yourself and hide your identity.
This is something that IMO, has needed to be fixed for a long time now and most definitely should be fixed in the new game.
Maybe add a stare command that has a long delay that will allow people to pick out some of the main description of concealed people, also make it echo to others and able to be interrupted when spotted.
Quote from: jhunter on July 01, 2008, 01:04:24 PM
I think that neither way is perfect but I believe that the worse abuse is the way it currently works. The right stuff should be able to hide the character's main description. Sure, some people argue that there are things they might be able to recognize but between the two options I think the way it currently works is the worst option of the two. I'm totally willing to forgive not being able to pick out a few minor details that I -might- be able to recognize in order for those who want to remain anonymous to do so. I think that would add to rp instead of a good portion of such rp being ruined completely by people abusing the fact that they can see a masked and hooded person's entire main description.
To my knowledge, noone has ever lost their pc unfairly due to not being able to pick out some minor recognizable detail. I'm 100% certain that would-be raiders have lost their pcs due to people abusing the fact that their main description can be seen unhindered even while taking precautions to cover yourself and hide your identity.
This is something that IMO, has needed to be fixed for a long time now and most definitely should be fixed in the new game.
Maybe add a stare command that has a long delay that will allow people to pick out some of the main description of concealed people, also make it echo to others and able to be interrupted when spotted.
Seconded. This had bugged me about the game since i started playing.
I've had one raider/thief one time. They took minimal things, and then ran off. I loved them, the RP they did, and it gave me happiness inside. To you unknown raider, you did good, and you're welcome to come hold me up again for water any time :)
(and I'll try telling them to bugger off, that it isn't me, next time around...still makes me sad that people do it :( )
Guys.
Find out IC.
.
Quote from: Greve on July 01, 2008, 01:50:40 PM
I'm pretty sure it's an established fact that on this mud, the majority of the playerbase will rid themselves of such burdens as logic and laws of physics in any situation where there is some sort of risk to their character.
This is quite the statement. Would you please elaborate? To whom is this an an established fact? Do you mean that the vast majority of our players believe this fact to be established beyond doubt? Do you mean that in the MUDding community at large, this opinion is held as well-established fact by outsiders evaluating this game and its users?
Pardon the derail. I don't even intend to contest the truth of the above statement. I just want to know to what group of people Greve's statement is an established fact.
Seeker
Quote from: Tisiphone on July 01, 2008, 01:12:08 PM
Guys.
Find out IC.
Yes ... lets find out IC about the code surrounding concealing facewraps and hoods ...
???
emote gives ~tisiphone ... a boot to the head.
Quote from: musashi on July 01, 2008, 05:27:27 PM
Some stuff
Do me the favour of assuming I have a reason to post what I do. Thanks.
While at the time mask items were removed, it was getting a little excessive, it's always been my opinion that removal of mask items was even more excessive. Even if a considerable sized group gets their hands on it...usually...that...makes...sense.
What currently exists...does...not...make...sense.
While I know that some mask items still exist for some purposes, they are currently more rare and more valuable than metal. For no reason whatsoever.
Because masks look cool as shit.
I think they should be rare, because, well, everyone would be wearing one if they weren't.
Here is my idea for the hood/mask situations for arm.2: Let the desc be uncovered by the other characters watch skill. Items could be given different degrees of masking and bonuses. Hoods would give a very small chance of covering up the desc, so that occasionally it would be covered but mostly uncovered as it is now in Arm. Facewraps would give a better chance, but still not super good. Masks would give the best chance, of course.
Quote from: Bogre on July 01, 2008, 06:19:09 PM
Because masks look cool as shit.
I think they should be rare, because, well, everyone would be wearing one if they weren't.
Here is my idea for the hood/mask situations for arm.2: Let the desc be uncovered by the other characters watch skill. Items could be given different degrees of masking and bonuses. Hoods would give a very small chance of covering up the desc, so that occasionally it would be covered but mostly uncovered as it is now in Arm. Facewraps would give a better chance, but still not super good. Masks would give the best chance, of course.
I think that's a cool idea, moving in the right direction, but would facewraps really not be "super good" at concealing what someone looks like? I mean ...
(http://crypto.nsa.org/f-21/img_7173.jpg)
No matter how much I look him over, I probably still wouldn't be able to pick him out in an unmasked lineup. And unless 'x-ray vision' branches from 'watch', I can't imagine how 'watch' could be used to uncover that man's facial description.
Quote from: Qzzrbl on July 01, 2008, 06:32:47 PM
No matter how much I look him over, I probably still wouldn't be able to pick him out in an unmasked lineup.
On the other hand what the game doesn't take into account for us is all the little things that help us recognize people, consciously or unconsciously. Things like odor, posture, body type, voice, how they walk, little twitches and quirks, really any number of things. To some extent people can rp those things, but if you're going to argue on the basis of realism that masks should absolutely cover identity those need to be pointed out. What if their main desc describes their entire body and they run around wearing a mask and a loincloth, I can no longer tell that they're fat, black, dreadlocked and smell like flowers because they have a face mask on?
Realism isn't a particularly valid argument for having masks that absolutely disguise identity. It actually doesn't make any particular sense at all for masks to hide an entire main desc and sdesc.
Now, if we want to talk about playability and what kind of game play we're looking for in Armageddon, that's something else entirely.
To clarify my above post:
I don't feel that discussions of 'realism' benefit the game. I think that what needs to be discussed is:
-How much should face masks conceal the identity of the wearer in Armageddon?
-What are the advantages of that to the game?
-What are the disadvantages?
-Will it suit the environment and atmosphere of the game world?
-Will I feel differently as raider? city based assassin? guard? victim?
-What are the limitations of the code?
I'd like to see a fairly dynamic system myself that allowed masks to mostly cover a person's identity, it would be really nice if viewers could still notice important traits that wouldn't be covered by the mask however. Maybe with multiple pieces of gear you could achieve a more complete costume. Perhaps a skill like peek or scan would help pick up certain subtler characteristics.
To some extent we trust each other to roleplay over the inadequacies of the code, but if this thread were moved to the reborn forum (and it likely should be) we could begin to consider how the code could be changed to resolve its current limitations.
On the other hand I'm pretty sure this has been gone over repeatedly before both in the context of the old and new MUD.
Well, I feel like the game already has coded ways to represent scars, tattoos and other identifying marks that aren't on the character's face ... also the assess command takes care of how tall the person is without needing to see their desc.
I would prefer it if a masked/facewraped person's mdesc were not included ... simply because, while the things above are identifyable, but still a bit vauge (so the raider might have the chance of getting away with it), a mdesc is completely unique ... so once a PC sees it, they will be able to identify that person with 100% accuracy from that moment forward, and I think that's icky.
Mind ... I'm not sure about hoods. I've seen lots of people wear hoods up ... it doesn't conceal their face at all, if anything it just conceals their hair, I dunno ... I think the shadowy hooded figure is a little silly.
Again, to go with pictures ...
(http://www.revivalclothing.com/ProductImages/hood_BlackWoolSimple_nodag.jpg)
I could recognize that guy again if I saw him.
Just one more pic ... the only hood I've ever seen that masked the way a person looked was this one:
(http://www.sillyjokes.co.uk/images/dress-up/masks/horror/black-hood.jpg)
Hah... sorry... that last picture made me laugh.
Brandon
I personally don't see any reason someone would be against it except to allow twinkery to get unrealistic (99.9% OOC) revenge on raiders or to keep raider's numbers down. I personally wish that that it was more often done without having your raider pc fucked in the ass dry for bullshit reasons. It only takes one cheesy fucktard to get your raider pc killed, even when you've taken all the realistic precautions possible. I -hate- having to kill my victims due to code limitations in order to give my raider pc even a snowball's chance in Zalanthas. I -hate- having my pc killed by raiders when I try to play along because they don't have much other choice in order to prevent twinkery against their pc, but I understand why it is done and I don't blame them one bit. I blame the code and the people who fight to keep that avenue of twinkery against them open.
Quote from: jhunter on July 01, 2008, 07:30:50 PM
I personally don't see any reason someone would be against it except to allow twinkery to get unrealistic (99.9% OOC) revenge on raiders or to keep raider's numbers down. I personally wish that that it was more often done without having your raider pc fucked in the ass dry for bullshit reasons. It only takes one cheesy fucktard to get your raider pc killed, even when you've taken all the realistic precautions possible. I -hate- having to kill my victims due to code limitations in order to give my raider pc even a snowball's chance in Zalanthas. I -hate- having my pc killed by raiders when I try to play along because they don't have much other choice in order to prevent twinkery against their pc, but I understand why it is done and I don't blame them one bit. I blame the code and the people who fight to keep that avenue of twinkery against them open.
I had a person "train" a carru to me as a raider, before. Mind you, this was spamming flee/flee/mount/n/n/n/n/get carru/flee/s/s/s/s/s/s. Now, I first learned the term "train" when I played Everquest when I was like... 12. This level of mature roleplaying about summed up the experience.
I think we need something in the middle between facewraps concealing everything in the mdesc and facewraps concealing nothing. Maybe a separate description is the way to go, but my only concern there is in adding another step to the application and approval process.
Quote from: Is Friday on July 01, 2008, 07:48:30 PM
Quote from: jhunter on July 01, 2008, 07:30:50 PM
I personally don't see any reason someone would be against it except to allow twinkery to get unrealistic (99.9% OOC) revenge on raiders or to keep raider's numbers down. I personally wish that that it was more often done without having your raider pc fucked in the ass dry for bullshit reasons. It only takes one cheesy fucktard to get your raider pc killed, even when you've taken all the realistic precautions possible. I -hate- having to kill my victims due to code limitations in order to give my raider pc even a snowball's chance in Zalanthas. I -hate- having my pc killed by raiders when I try to play along because they don't have much other choice in order to prevent twinkery against their pc, but I understand why it is done and I don't blame them one bit. I blame the code and the people who fight to keep that avenue of twinkery against them open.
I had a person "train" a carru to me as a raider, before. Mind you, this was spamming flee/flee/mount/n/n/n/n/get carru/flee/s/s/s/s/s/s. Now, I first learned the term "train" when I played Everquest when I was like... 12. This level of mature roleplaying about summed up the experience.
??? I guess I'm not sure what relevance this has exactly.
Quote from: jhunter on July 01, 2008, 07:30:50 PM
I personally wish that that it was more often done without having your raider pc fucked in the ass dry for bullshit reasons. It only takes one cheesy fucktard to get your raider pc killed, even when you've taken all the realistic precautions possible.
AMEN!!!
Quote from: jhunter on July 02, 2008, 01:19:19 PM
Quote from: Is Friday on July 01, 2008, 07:48:30 PM
Quote from: jhunter on July 01, 2008, 07:30:50 PM
I personally don't see any reason someone would be against it except to allow twinkery to get unrealistic (99.9% OOC) revenge on raiders or to keep raider's numbers down. I personally wish that that it was more often done without having your raider pc fucked in the ass dry for bullshit reasons. It only takes one cheesy fucktard to get your raider pc killed, even when you've taken all the realistic precautions possible. I -hate- having to kill my victims due to code limitations in order to give my raider pc even a snowball's chance in Zalanthas. I -hate- having my pc killed by raiders when I try to play along because they don't have much other choice in order to prevent twinkery against their pc, but I understand why it is done and I don't blame them one bit. I blame the code and the people who fight to keep that avenue of twinkery against them open.
I had a person "train" a carru to me as a raider, before. Mind you, this was spamming flee/flee/mount/n/n/n/n/get carru/flee/s/s/s/s/s/s. Now, I first learned the term "train" when I played Everquest when I was like... 12. This level of mature roleplaying about summed up the experience.
??? I guess I'm not sure what relevance this has exactly.
It's hidden.
Quote from: Armaddict on July 01, 2008, 05:46:40 PMWhile I know that some mask items still exist for some purposes, they are currently more rare and more valuable than metal. For no reason whatsoever.
I'm not even sure if those exist anymore. ::)
Edit: Or, rather, that that feature does.
Quote from: Mood on July 02, 2008, 10:41:18 PM
Quote from: Armaddict on July 01, 2008, 05:46:40 PMWhile I know that some mask items still exist for some purposes, they are currently more rare and more valuable than metal. For no reason whatsoever.
I'm not even sure if those exist anymore. ::)
Edit: Or, rather, that that feature does.
See my post on the subject above.
Quote from: Tisiphone on July 02, 2008, 10:45:39 PM
Quote from: Mood on July 02, 2008, 10:41:18 PM
Quote from: Armaddict on July 01, 2008, 05:46:40 PMWhile I know that some mask items still exist for some purposes, they are currently more rare and more valuable than metal. For no reason whatsoever.
I'm not even sure if those exist anymore. ::)
Edit: Or, rather, that that feature does.
See my post on the subject above.
I could be mistaken, but I really have trouble seeing a change in OOC staff policy on mask items as IC-sensitive info.
Quote from: Mood on July 02, 2008, 10:51:11 PM
I could be mistaken, but I really have trouble seeing a change in OOC staff policy on mask items as IC-sensitive info.
Thank you.
Quote from: Marauder Moe on June 24, 2008, 03:25:41 PM
Do we really need to give raiders/thieves/informants/whatever impenetrable shields of anonymity?
Really? Impenetrable? Who says you can't memorize what they're WEARING, as opposed to what they look like?
If they happen to be a smart raider and change their gear when raiding, then try their accent, gender, things that can be more difficult to change, especially the latter. :o
Quote from: musashi on July 02, 2008, 10:57:35 PM
Quote from: Mood on July 02, 2008, 10:51:11 PM
I could be mistaken, but I really have trouble seeing a change in OOC staff policy on mask items as IC-sensitive info.
Thank you.
You pretty much would be, though. Or, at least, the extent and ramifications of that change are.
Why the repeated hints if it's too IC to discuss? I never understood why people need to call attention to the fact that they know something that can't be discussed. No offense; it just seems a little odd to me.
Quote from: flurry on July 02, 2008, 11:34:40 PM
Why the repeated hints if it's too IC to discuss? I never understood why people need to call attention to the fact that they know something that can't be discussed. No offense; it just seems a little odd to me.
This is what I was thinking. I figure the whole Find out IC thing here just led people to conclusions they wouldn't have without it... especially since you kept beating the dog after it died.
Brandon
Quote from: Lakota on July 02, 2008, 11:06:45 PM
Really? Impenetrable? Who says you can't memorize what they're WEARING, as opposed to what they look like?
The less death-to-raiders of us use that to describe them anyway! Much more fun claiming they had a purple-spotted facewrap, and accidentally getting the wrong person arrested because the raiders sold on their well-known attire, and then having to explain to the somewhat irritated person in charge that while they might be wearing the right clothes, they're the wrong gender/race/size/accent/twenty-other-things-that-separate-people!