Skill Idea:Distract

[Folker]

Greetings.

Being inspired by another skill idea thread, I figured I'll post one of my own. This skill would in itself be available to all, but only bards and pickpockets would be proeffecient at it.

Skill Distract

This skill allows the option of forcing every character in your closeby surrounding to immediately set their watch skill on you. The skills holds two success rolls. One depending on whether or not it becomes obvious that you're 'clearly' trying to distract others or not, and the second is whether or not they shift their watch on you. Aswell as make everyone failing the resistance roll become more vulnerable to sleight of hand, backstab, sap, subdue, plant, aswell as weakening one's affinity in guarding.

Syntax

distract target/all (emote)

Example:

distract all (slips suddenly on the floor, tossing a few barrels of ale through the air and nearly toppling over the table)

failed skill echo(distracter)/succesfull resistance echo(distracted)

Clearly trying to distractly someone, clown slips suddenly on the floor, tossing a few barrels of ale through the air and nearly toppling over the table.
With an exertion of will, you keep your attention where it was.

successful skill echo(distracter)/failed resistance echo(distracted)

PoorFellow slips suddenly on the floor, tossing a few barrels of ale through the air and nearly toppling over the table.
(no echo of you watching the wrong person)

Note, the two rolls are independant. So a distracter could fail his, but still force you to watch him. Only difference is that you'll be able to roleplay out glimpsing that the performance was indeed a performance aimed to distract you, and begin to suspect foul play, aswell as just simply realize that your attention is not on the person it should be on. Note, distracting 'everyone' is easier then distracting a specific target.

If you succumb to distract, your watch will shift, untill you change it again, you will also become more vulnerable to various skills that rely on your oblivion, aswell as giving penalty to other skills that require your constant awareness.

[Ghost]

Don't like it.  Can be roleplayed.  If you want to distract people, act like you are a sneaky guy, and they will start watching you.

[UnderSeven]

Adding onto what ghost said, this also would be power playing other people, forcing them into actions which their char may or may not actually do.  Perhaps you use the distraction thing while they're attempting to rp speaking over the way with their dying mate.  Very possibly nothing, including halaster ICLY vising in a room and murdering people could distract them.

[Folker]

Well, yes it can be roleplayed out. But the problem is, will people react to the roleplay with an emote, but keep their 'coded' attention elsewhere, say on the 'known' thieves?

As for forcing attention, well that's why it's distraction. It is all about forcing their attention on you, and attention can dwindle without your conscience awareness of it. You could be doing something really important and vital, but in reality, a simple wave of red cloth in your peripheral vision can distract you. Not because it's important, but because it will distract you whether or not you're like it, or even aware of it.

Think of magicians in rl. They do something flashy to the side to distract your attention (even those who know of this trick, and are focusing on the magicians hands entirely), and then perform their thing somewhere you're not focused on. And most importantly, they're not doing it by looking like they're about to kill you or steal from you. Those two arent the 'only' things that should theoretically make your attention shift. Infact, those two are the most unprofessional ones out there

Being distracted is not something you're often conscious on, while without the skill, the characters who are being distracted 'have' to shift their attention consciously and out of free will. And that sometimes coems out different between a 'coded' watch, and an emoted one.

[Ghost]

Well, yes it can be roleplayed out. But the problem is, will people react to the roleplay with an emote, but keep their 'coded' attention elsewhere, say on the 'known' thieves?

Actually, if they are not codedly watching you, then it means you were not successful in acting suspicious.  I still say this is to be roleplayed out.

[jhunter]

I think there -should- be some coded way to distract someone with the adddition of the watch skill making it harder on thieves. Not saying that it shouldn't be rp'ed but there should be something coded to aid with the rp of that.
I can see some people watching anyone they suspect of being shady with the code but not turning their "coded" attention to whatever is distracting them via rp.

[Folker]

That's exactly what I'm saying. As i mentioned in some thread earlier. How many of us stopped watching a shady person to start watching a character of the opposite sex, just because your character likes watching her?

[UnderSeven]

But Jhunter, isn't that example a prime point?  If they're not watching the 'distraction' but instead watching the shady person then clearly the distracting person isn't being distracting enough and the shady person isn't being unshady enough.

In fact.  If that is happening, all you'd need to do is switch roles, tell shady person okay, you do your thing I'll play distraction and thief, knowing they'll just watch you.

Personally, I think it's a matter of rp.

EDIT:  Does anyone know if watch takes into account the number of people into the room when determining passive effects?

If a fight were going on in a room, or there was a huge crowd, I would HOPE the passive effects would be much more tame then if you were in a desert room where you could assume it was just you and whomever else is there.

[Ghost]

RPwise it is too easy to do something like that.  Why not do it that way?  Anybody with a dark hooded cloak, hood up and standing in a place, emoting walking around the people and hiding, being visible and hiding again will already get the attention on themselves anyway.

EDIT:  By the way, there is a coded way to drop someone's watch from you.  An NPC made it on my PC.  So it is there.

[Folker]

But Jhunter, isn't that example a prime point?  If they're not watching the 'distraction' but instead watching the shady person then clearly the distracting person isn't being distracting enough and the shady person isn't being unshady enough.

Or the players behind the characters, view the watch skill as an anti-theft guard and not an attention focus, and leave displaying their attention to emotes only. The way it works now, you apperently watch only 'those' who you are wary of, not those whom you're actually watching. In a way it actually curtails roleplaying, for thieves will be limited only to appearing threatening in order to distract, and not anything else that is only a 'bit' more subtle.

For example, who do pickpockets work on shows and concerts so well supposedly? Or in Armageddon's version ... the arenas and bards. Because everyone's attention are focused on the show, nobody's watching those near them. But how will it work in Armageddon? We'll have rows of benches with pc and vnpc people watching the arena, aaaand keeping a glance on whoever's shady, or whoever you heard to be shady even if they're acting absolutely casual, or even ... just a single random schmoe that appears just a 'slight' bit more shady or poorer then everybody else.

[grog]

I don't know if it's already in there or not, but I think watch should have a harder time in crowded rooms, because of all the distractions.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Personally, I like the concept of the skill, if not the implementation.

[Maybe42or54]

I dig it.

As long as it doesn't increase everyone's watch skill.

[jcarter]

There are two reasons I use the watch skill:

1)I want to know exactly what someone is doing, because half the time they're a shady character.
2)I want someone to know that they have my attention.

I don't constantly change watch for every little thing that catches my character's attention. I might be watching someone, but then look at someone walking in for 3-5 seconds before returning to watching. The idea that it could be 'roleplayed out' is dependant on how often people use the watch skill. Realistically, I should watch sneaky, then watch soandso for 3-5 seconds, then watch sneaky again. It's a hassle, and I don't think anyone actually does this.

I like the idea, and I support it going in. Think about it like this:

You walk into a bar with your girlfriend. You're looking at her and talking to her, when you suddenly hear the smash of a glass bottle and some loud yelling. You look over to see what's going on and watch a couple guys proceed to get into a fight before returning your attention to your girlfriend.

'Distract' isn't necessarily FORCING someone to keep watching. It simply shifts their attention. If it doesn't echo, then that person still has to notice their attention has changed. If it does echo, then I would be in favor of the cooldown code going in effect and keeping watch busy for 3-5 seconds. Just enough time for someone to execute a successful steal or backstab.

I don't constantly change watch for every little thing that catches my character's attention. I might be watching someone, but then look at someone walking in for 3-5 seconds before returning to watching. The idea that it could be 'roleplayed out' is dependant on how often people use the watch skill. Realistically, I should watch sneaky, then watch soandso for 3-5 seconds, then watch sneaky again. It's a hassle, and I don't think anyone actually does this.

[slipshod]

What if instead of forcing a person to focus their attention on someone else, distract simply makes them "stop watching anything in particular"?

I think a distraction is more breaking someone's concentration and not necessarily refocusing it.  Think about getting distracted IRL.  If you're focusing on something and there is a distracting noise or movement or commotion nearby, you don't necessarily start watching it, although it can get your concentration to waver.

This way a person without a partner could get people to stop watching also.  If he were to throw a ceramic vase at a wall, the loud crash and shatter would make people flinch, but it wouldn't mean they need to look at it.  In fact, in some cases a person's natural reaction might be to look away from something shocking or fantasic... not look right at it.

This wouldn't be as powerful a way to affect someone else's character by making them look at something, but it would serve the purpose of getting their attention on something else to momentarily break.

[UnderSeven]

Or the players behind the characters, view the watch skill as an anti-theft guard and not an attention focus, and leave displaying their attention to emotes only. The way it works now, you apperently watch only 'those' who you are wary of, not those whom you're actually watching. In a way it actually curtails roleplaying, for thieves will be limited only to appearing threatening in order to distract, and not anything else that is only a 'bit' more subtle.

I think this is more a question about the passive watch personally.  Because watch I think is meant to be used, not required.  As in, I shouldn't be required to watch (or be considered a bad rper) if I fail to because pc x is doing this or that, is why I disagree with the skill suggestion.

I agree there might be a problem here, but if there is a problem, I'd rather see more balance tweaks put in place then new skills made.

Adding a new skill to fix a problem of a previous new skill is going to only make the problem bigger and harder to balance in my opinnion.  If balance is the problem, and the problem is originating with watch, we should be looking at watch before suggesting new skills to fix it.

[jhunter]

But Jhunter, isn't that example a prime point? If they're not watching the 'distraction' but instead watching the shady person then clearly the distracting person isn't being distracting enough and the shady person isn't being unshady enough.

The point is that whether someone is distracted or not is entirely in the player's hands. Some people play to "win" and wouldn't allow themselves to be distracted by -anything-, just to keep tabs on that one potential thief.

This is why I think there should be a coded way to attempt to distract someone and help increase your chance of the steal being successful.

[Ghost]

The point is that whether someone is distracted or not is entirely in the player's hands. Some people play to "win" and wouldn't allow themselves to be distracted by -anything-, just to keep tabs on that one potential thief.

Again, the shady PC can break off someone's watch.  An NPC did it to me.  So a PC will be able to do it as well.  And being distracting is way too easy than letting the code to handle it for you.  As I said, just having your dark hooded cloak with hood up and standing around, wandering around PCs is enough to draw attention.  This is just something very simple that came up to my mind.  I am sure someone who actually tries to draw attention will soon come up with many more way to draw attention.

What I would not want to see in this game is, someone coming in, typing distract and then I am getting "You start watching the distracting guy" for no reason at all.  I want to see how it is done, I want to actually get distracted and I want to see the performance there.  Not the code telling me what I am doing.

And why don't we actually have a skill diplomacy?  We can as well have such skill, by which if we are successful, everybody in the vicinity has to act friendly to you?
Again, it can be roleplayed, and I would not like to see it hardcoded.

[jhunter]

Again, the shady PC can break off someone's watch. An NPC did it to me.

How do you -know- this is something that a pc can do? NPC's manage to do lots of stuff pcs could never do.

[Ghost]

Well I did get a message he broke off my watch.  So I thought there is a way  to codedly do that.

[Maybe42or54]

Since this would be a skill branched off another skill, the twink-ness would be very limited, IMHO.

[Morgenes]

There are ways for you to loose sight of someone you're watching already in game.

[Aldiel]

I know this is the line no poster of an idea likes to hear, but I think this skill could be very easily abused.  In part it is a interesting idea, but what would stop someone from just distracting before every single attack?  As some of the other players have mentioned, you can RP this out, and it should work just fine.  Just work in pairs and have one guy look shady and the other one come up and slip a hand into that person's pocket.

[FiveDisgruntledMonkeysWit]

I like this idea. A 'distraction' should be something like a belly dancer, or a staged brawl, or a prat fall. The idea that you should 'distract' people by having some one pretend to be shady around them is utterly ridiculous, from an IC standpoint. Yes, OOCly, you're getting "watch" off of you and on to your accomplice, but ICly, you're letting everyone in the tavern around know there are shady-types around. You'd do everything in your power to make it harder for the sneaks, because you're aware that there is sneaking going on.
If you walked into a tavern and found a bunch of shady-looking fucks flipping their knives and dipping their hands into peoples' pockets, you'd probably keep a pretty damn tight grip on your wallet or purse.
Realistically, something like an exotic dancer or a sexy character bending over should be a better distraction than somebody pretending to be sneaky. But since people only use "watch" as a safeguard against sneaks, a skill like this is neccessary, I think.

[bloodfromstone]

The monkeys above me raise a good point. The problem with relying on simply roleplaying it out is that most people (I'm guilty of it. I try not to be.) don't use 'watch' when their characters are watching something. Yeah, I could set myself on fire and run into a tavern screaming and everyone would look up. I would bet none of them would 'watch' me, though, because they're a) too busy reacting, b) not thinking about it, or c) not wanting to leave themselves vunerable. I do think c is in the minority, but it's all the same in the end, as far as pulling off the pinch.