Armed Prompt

[Twilight]

For the prompt value %A I would propose an additional couple of statuses.

unarmed:  Nothing in your hands
armed:  at least one weapon in one of your hands
shield:  a shield in one of your hands, nothing in the other hands
held:  some non-weapon, non-shield is in one of your hands.  Could be a light, tool, etc.

Precendence I think would work like:

armed
held
shield
unarmed

[jmordetsky]

+1

[Spoon]

Also add:

frying pan

[Kalai]

Would it be too IC to say what I've done with frying pans?

Eh, probably.

[kuhfelsen]

Sounds nifty.

[Saellyn]

We don't need to know the mudsexxorz you have with frying pans...

[kuhfelsen]

We don't need to know the mudsexxorz you have with frying pans...

... But we want to.

[Taven]

+1

[James de Monet]

If you're going to go that way anyway, it would be kind of nice to have "full" or "both" possibly as well, so you can remember at a glance if you're just holding a skinning knife, or if you actually have a weapon in both hands (of course, this wouldn't save you from forgetting you were holding, say, a glasshacker.  ).

[musashi]

As a small addition, I'd like some indication if the weapon held was magick as well. If you're being raided, and the raider says not to look at them ... you could assess them and see that they were arm'd sure, but I think you would remember the difference between a bone bladed sword, and a suspensed rainbow of sunshine and fairy tales.

[AmandaGreathouse]

As a small addition, I'd like some indication if the weapon held was magick as well. If you're being raided, and the raider says not to look at them ... you could assess them and see that they were arm'd sure, but I think you would remember the difference between a bone bladed sword, and a suspensed rainbow of sunshine and fairy tales.

You would. With a look.

[musashi]

And somehow without a look you can still tell if they're armed? Just not with what? That makes no sense.
Perhaps rather than having all these little toggles about being armed, unarmed, shield, held, whatever ... I think it would solve everything in one swoop if when you assess someone you see:

Code Select Expand

So and so is armed -with- a bone bladed bastard sword and a chitin kite shield.

[AmandaGreathouse]

I really don't see how it's unreasonable to need to LOOK at someone or something to tell what it looks like and what's going on with it/them and/or what they look like.

Sorry. I will never, ever be convinced otherwise, and if someone's playing a role which (like a raider) is heavily dependent on other pcs, then they really need to grow the balls to let them look at them. Just because you can see the look echo in game and you can't in real life doesn't mean they need to behead you right away, first off. And second off, your HOOD is not enough to keep people from seeing:

1. general skin color
2. eye color
3. hair color (via eyebrows, or in the case of someone with long enough hair, yes something you need a look to determine, if it's poking out the edge of your hood)
4. grotesque facial deformities
5. grotesque bodily deformities (ie horribly burnt hands without gloves, etc)
6. what you ARE wearing
7. your general race (for people who stand at 5'2 ig, humans, half-elves, and elves can all be in the 'very tall' bracket)
and so forth...

So no, I don't think it's unreasonable that that particular thing isn't in there. But now I've derailed your assess -v derail on the prompt thread.

So, back to prompt: I think it would be simpler perhaps, and much appreciated on my part at least, for you to simply break it into two things. Like %p and %s (I'm pretty sure those are already taken, but bear with me). You would just have one for what's in your primary hand and what's in your secondary hand, except display the items sdesc like it displays the sdesc of your mount when you have what you're riding in your prompt. When it's nothing, much like the other, have it just say 'nothing'.

[musashi]

Sorry. I will never, ever be convinced otherwise

Then intelligent or meaningful discussion is over.

[jmordetsky]

Code Select Expand

So and so is armed -with- a bone bladed bastard sword and a chitin kite shield.

I think this has merit. We do it now if you are carrying a large item (bag, backpack, corpse) because this is something that would be noticed. If you entered a room armed, I would say that this is definitely something that should be noticed without additional scrutiny (aka look) and as such I agree with the suggestion, however, it probably warrants its own thread.

[musashi]

I just figure if we're talking about having it show up in your prompt, why not also have it show up in assess, or like you say, in a tag that follows along after your sdesc when you're in a room.

Either of those options would be good I think.

Side note: That was also where I was coming from when I mentioned the thing about magick. Since the game also adds a -- he is covered in tenticles that are glowing and singing cheers! to you when you cast blatantly overt magick on yoursef, I don't see how a flaming screaming rabid tregil equipped in your primary hand is any less conspicious.

[jmordetsky]

I just figure if we're talking about having it show up in your prompt, why not also have it show up in assess, or like you say, in a tag that follows along after your sdesc when you're in a room.

Either of those options would be good I think.

Side note: That was also where I was coming from when I mentioned the thing about magick. Since the game also adds a -- he is covered in tenticles that are glowing and singing cheers! to you when you cast blatantly overt magick on yoursef, I don't see how a flaming screaming rabid tregil equipped in your primary hand is any less conspicious.

Agreed, I think the fact that you anything carried in your hands that isn't very small (coins etc) and anything you are actively wielding should in theory show up.

[shadeoux]

For the prompt value %A I would propose an additional couple of statuses.

unarmed:  Nothing in your hands
armed:  at least one weapon in one of your hands
shield:  a shield in one of your hands, nothing in the other hands
held:  some non-weapon, non-shield is in one of your hands.  Could be a light, tool, etc.

Precendence I think would work like:

armed
held
shield
unarmed

Why not take it a step further and have it display WHAT your wielding, or what is putting you in armed status and if unarmed keep it saying unarmed.

if your dual wielding, have it say dual wielding if it's a shield and weapon, have it say the weapon, if it's JUST a shield have it say shield.
just my 2cents.

plink plink