The @desc_cloak can be edited with tooling, which can be as character-specific as the original swap command, but the description of what your character looks like in a given cloak is linked to the cloak.
As I see it, these complaints generally come down to being more about players not liking to "pay" in resources for something they're used to having cheaply as opposed to indicating that it's appropriate for Jane to look the same in an oiled black leather cloak with a mantel than in a clingy green silk cloak that billows in the wind. Cloak descriptions themselves are no more or less flexible than they used to be. Actually, I take that back - they're more flexible as we now provide the use of variables like $e.
@desc_cloak by default
What? You didn't have to use 'swap.' You used to use 'cloak desc' for a description while cloaked.
The issue is that a 300 pound 7' tall man looks exactly the same in a given 'hooded wool cloak' as a 3' tall female child. Which is ridiculous.
I take offense that you would accuse us about being upset about having to spend silver when it's a matter of the change being damaging to RP and weakening to verisimilitude. Your argument is in bad faith and needlessly dismissive.
Before, you would describe how your frame looks while cloaked, while the cloak string itself would provide the description of the cloak.
Now you can only describe the cloak and not your frame, because anyone could take that cloak and wear it and have the same description you set (if you describe a small frame within @desc_cloak and someone large and bulky wears it, this is inappropriate, so you cannot describe frame).
This is objectively less flexible. You can only describe the cloak now, which was already possible with the old system (via both the short desc and extra descs). You cannot describe frame anymore, which was important for RP. With free retool, you could adjust the description to match each wearer. It's a tedious workaround that should have never been necessary, but it's better than the current system.
The issue is that a 300 pound 7' tall man looks exactly the same in a given 'hooded wool cloak' as a 3' tall female child. Which is ridiculous.
I take offense that you would accuse us about being upset about having to spend silver when it's a matter of the change being damaging to RP and weakening to verisimilitude. Your argument is in bad faith and needlessly dismissive.
Before, you would describe how your frame looks while cloaked, while the cloak string itself would provide the description of the cloak.
Now you can only describe the cloak and not your frame, because anyone could take that cloak and wear it and have the same description you set (if you describe a small frame within @desc_cloak and someone large and bulky wears it, this is inappropriate, so you cannot describe frame).
This is objectively less flexible. You can only describe the cloak now, which was already possible with the old system (via both the short desc and extra descs). You cannot describe frame anymore, which was important for RP. With free retool, you could adjust the description to match each wearer. It's a tedious workaround that should have never been necessary, but it's better than the current system.
Rabek gets me.
@desc_cloak can't and shouldn't be character specific, for all the reasons Rabek mentions. Even if I could freely alter this description, it still wouldn't be ideal, nor would I really want to add any details that are specific to my character. Cloaks CAN be lost and stolen. It doesn't make sense to tie information specific to my character to a separate object. In fact, it sounds like bad form.
cloak desc, on the other hand, was tied specifically to the character, rather than the cloak, and that's what we removed completely from the game. It was important to me for RP reasons, and it was as easily adjustable as any other character-based description. AFAIK, 'swap' is still in the game but is irrelevant here. Swap is just a secondary desc that you can switch to at any time when you're NOT cloaked.
It seems to me like we could have kept the cloak desc and simply made it optional, so that part of the description could still be specific to the character if someone wanted, and the rest (@desc_cloak) could describe the cloak itself. They would simply describe two different things.
@desc_cloak can't and shouldn't be character specific, for all the reasons Rabek mentions. Even if I could freely alter this description, it still wouldn't be ideal, nor would I really want to add any details that are specific to my character. Cloaks CAN be lost and stolen. It doesn't make sense to tie information specific to my character to a separate object. In fact, it sounds like bad form.
cloak desc, on the other hand, was tied specifically to the character, rather than the cloak, and that's what we removed completely from the game. It was important to me for RP reasons, and it was as easily adjustable as any other character-based description. AFAIK, 'swap' is still in the game but is irrelevant here. Swap is just a secondary desc that you can switch to at any time when you're NOT cloaked.
It seems to me like we could have kept the cloak desc and simply made it optional, so that part of the description could still be specific to the character if someone wanted, and the rest (@desc_cloak) could describe the cloak itself. They would simply describe two different things.
I want to reiterate all of these points, especially in light of the fact that a custom @desc_cloak is now a requirement. Also, if it's now required, I hope that tailors are warned that their cloaks don't have a custom @desc_cloak before they're able to finalize them and sell them. Which brings me to another point: what about all the cloaks that already exist and do not have a custom @desc_cloak? Do individuals now have to pay out of pocket to have them retro-actively added?Andruid wrote:I understand the rationale, but I'd like to push for the best of both worlds, here.
If @desc_cloak can't be edited freely, I would like the option of having a cloak desc that is specific to my character and not my cloak (which, honestly, I could care less about). I agree with Rabek, and I think there should be more to a cloaked person's description than the color and type of fabric they're wearing.
I'm interested in the way my CHARACTER appears to people when he enters a room, which might include a description about the specific cloak he's wearing (@desc_cloak) but may also have to do with his demeanor, the sound of his voice when he speaks, how he carries himself, and so on. These are details that I was rather fond of including and which gave other players -- at a glance -- some sense as to what my character was all about, without me having to repeat all of that information the moment someone new walked into a room.
I don't understand why a character-specific description was removed completely instead of being made optional. Why can't we have unique character descriptions AND cloak-specific information?
Again, I don't see why the old system had to be removed completely in favor of this cloak-centric business. It's certainly not my fault if people were forgetting to update their cloak descs or were including information that could be used to identify them. That's the player's choice and the player's responsibility -- and I would like that choice back, please.
There are details I want in my hooded desc that have very little to do with the cut or color of fabric. And if I include them in the @desc_cloak, then they're going to be attached to the object, which is completely inappropriate. In fact, anyone who is currently including character-specific details in their @desc_cloak (including height and build) is misusing the system, because character-specific details should NOT transfer with the cloak object itself.
I haven't crafted a cloak since @desc_cloak became required so I'm not sure if we're warned or not before we finalize. It would be nice if we were! Or if there was some big red text in the tailor show <blah blah> for all the cloak recipes that was like IF YOU DON'T MAKE A @DESC_CLOAK, THE CLOAK WILL NOT WORK.
Being a newbie to TI, I wasn't about when this other system was in place where a person could describe the cloak AND what they looked like in the cloak separately. But it honestly sounds like a good idea. I'd love that myself. More options to add little personal touches are great to me!
To be honest, before @desc_cloak became required, I think I sold... one generic cloak on the open market and that sucker has NO @desc_cloak (sorry about it to whoever owns it; I'll happily fix it fo free) because like Andruid and others have mentioned... I didn't know what to put to keep the cloak description generic enough that it could fit any number of people.
And as for Andruid's above point of: "Which brings me to another point: what about all the cloaks that already exist and do not have a custom @desc_cloak? Do individuals now have to pay out of pocket to have them retro-actively added?"
I'd be happy to help people with fixing their cloaks and adding @desc_cloak to them. It would be nice if neither party had to pay to have this fixed. But I'd just like to offer my describing assistance all the same
Being a newbie to TI, I wasn't about when this other system was in place where a person could describe the cloak AND what they looked like in the cloak separately. But it honestly sounds like a good idea. I'd love that myself. More options to add little personal touches are great to me!
To be honest, before @desc_cloak became required, I think I sold... one generic cloak on the open market and that sucker has NO @desc_cloak (sorry about it to whoever owns it; I'll happily fix it fo free) because like Andruid and others have mentioned... I didn't know what to put to keep the cloak description generic enough that it could fit any number of people.
And as for Andruid's above point of: "Which brings me to another point: what about all the cloaks that already exist and do not have a custom @desc_cloak? Do individuals now have to pay out of pocket to have them retro-actively added?"
I'd be happy to help people with fixing their cloaks and adding @desc_cloak to them. It would be nice if neither party had to pay to have this fixed. But I'd just like to offer my describing assistance all the same
Player of that "soulless Vavardi girl" Caterina dul Decapua
If you buy a cloak from an NPC shop that doesn't have an @desc_cloak on it, please Typo and Request Board. Staff will fix it for free.
If you buy a cloak from a PC merchant that doesn't have an @desc_cloak please deal with the issue ICly as an item sold with quality flaws.
If you buy a cloak from a PC merchant that doesn't have an @desc_cloak please deal with the issue ICly as an item sold with quality flaws.
I think the concern is more for the oldies who have been around so long that the PC tailor probably no longer existsKinaed wrote:If you buy a cloak from an NPC shop that doesn't have an @desc_cloak on it, please Typo and Request Board. Staff will fix it for free.
If you buy a cloak from a PC merchant that doesn't have an @desc_cloak please deal with the issue ICly as an item sold with quality flaws.
Newbie question: Is the 1 silver for a merchant to retool a crafted item for ALL crafted items or just items they crafted? It's my understanding it's the latter, but if it's the former, I'll happily fix all janky cloaks fo free to help counterbalance this concern. It'd make IC sense for people to come to me IC complaining of cloaks not properly clasping and shoddy craftsmanship blah blah, anyway.
Player of that "soulless Vavardi girl" Caterina dul Decapua
Oh. I see. Help retool has conflicting information then:
Honestly, I think it should work that way. No reason a skilled tailor shouldn't be able to make adjustments to something made by another tailor, for example.Retool is used to make an object eligible for tooling. This will cost
the item base cost over again, unless you have a high enough rank in a
skill to make that item yourself.
-
- Information
-
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests