Community Standards Discussion

[Leech]

Recently others and I were involved in a scene that is a poignant example of what an agreed upon and enforced list of community standards (coupled with code changes, maybe) should mediate.

Hooded, my character walked into River Square during a burning. Before I made an emote, other people were already emoting their approach - and some already using the 'move' code. I chose therefore to use my first emote leaving, and asked via osay if anybody was going to attempt to stop him. I gave no more than a minute for somebody to respond, and when nobody did, I left the room, changed my pace to run, and made my escape using the travel code.

If anybody else has anything to add to what happened sans personal feelings, please share - I was speedily reading emotes and might have missed something. To my knowledge the above is a brief description of what went down.

How do people feel scenes like the one described should be resolved? What should have been different?

[Dice]

1) We should not ever react to a character's entry, or consider them there for RP purposes, until they have posed in. This makes sense in so many ways: you don't know the state in which somebody is entering a room to respond to them, for example. This also ensures that in tense situations like this, you would have gotten a say.

2) I've said this before and I'll say it again: move/approach NOT KOSHER in tense scenes, only for "undisputed" scenes. As a secondary issue, only one 'coded' action per emote. Don't emote running across the square to stop someone, use move to get there and type guard all in one emote turn.

3) We need an official mechanic for "can I leave the room before you catch me" that doesn't depend on "can you somehow code-attack me before my 30-sec walking out the room thread completes." Like guard, but one that doesn't assume you're already there - one that assumes you're running to try and catch them.

[Voxumo]

Alright after reading this i would like to Clarify something.

Evocation and Invocation are two beasts of their own. But to continue this i would like to state that a mage can not evoke during combat (Code-wise), But they can invoke during combat. Now if you catch a mage evoke a spell I agree that there should be a thing that allows for anyone in the room to pose before you invoke the spell you just evoked. However i do not agree that each ritual or invocation thread should be emoted. Being a mage is already bloody difficult enough as it is especially considering how many people are out to kill your character.

Although in a combat situation a mage can only invoke one spell since they only can have one spell 'at the ready' so I am not sure what you all are talking about spells during combat. However i know some spells can have a huge effect on combat. For example blacksight and Void of fire. I have learned that on my mages it is smart to have blacksight always casted and to have void of fire at the ready. At that point if you find yourself surrounded by people wanting to arrest/kill you you can cast void of fire and flee while they are unable to see. I call that good planning and should not be penalized.. However i am biased to the whole mage side since i have played so many mages.

So just wanted to clarify that. However on the Approach/move thing I must agree that it is a bit buggy and that it should be limited to steps and lunges. However this also brings up something in my mind. I don't know how many times i have used the map command and seen everyone on the same spot in a map. This really surprises me and i also find it annoying since not everyone would be in the same location of a room and that can affect combat in a lot of ways. For example i know i have forgotten to move to a more realistic location for my character.

Example: If my action says i am at the bar and the bar is on the other side of the room and then person comes in planning to attack my character. Now If it is already established that my character is at the bar should i be allowed to move my character to where he or she would logically be in the room or not?

So yeah just adding my tiny two sense in here.

EDIT: Also regarding the whole cloaked thing. I am sorry if you walk into a huge area cloaked you should be prepared for the onslaught. However i am notorious for asking on a osay if a person realizes they are cloaked or if they have their weapon drawn and you would be surprised how many people are like 'oh, crap no i did not realize' at which point i allow them to undo said thing and rp from there. Then again i am understanding.

[Applesauce]

I don't know how many times i have used the map command and seen everyone on the same spot in a map. This really surprises me and i also find it annoying since not everyone would be in the same location of a room and that can affect combat in a lot of ways. For example i know i have forgotten to move to a more realistic location for my character.

Example: If my action says i am at the bar and the bar is on the other side of the room and then person comes in planning to attack my character. Now If it is already established that my character is at the bar should i be allowed to move my character to where he or she would logically be in the room or not?

Agreed on the map thing. I try to make a habit of moving as/before I set my action, so that I don't have to think about it later, but generally people do tend to pile up near whatever entrance they came through.

I think during casual RP maybe it doesn't matter as much (though it also affects casual commands like whisper, mutter, tcant, etc.) but maybe as part of "entering tense mode" people should first move to wherever they've established being via action or previous emotes.

Just like people shouldn't move/guard immediately when someone emotes that they're going to try to run away next turn, I've seen someone flee a room when people technically WERE in the way, but happened to be piled up on map because it wasn't an issue until the person fled.

[Leech]

Being a mage is already bloody difficult enough as it is especially considering how many people are out to kill your character.

I've talked about this before on OOC, at length, but now I feel like I have a special little insight, because again, I'm playing a character who everyone wants to kill. The funny part is: I'm not even a mage.

So, let's restate this for what it is; playing an antagonist is hard. At least as a mage you have access to those auto flees. People have talked about making playing a villain easier with XP bonuses, etc. To that I say pish posh. Being the villain is fun, and it's appropriately challenging.

Now, on subject: invoking threads have been called unfair by several players. They work outside of turn-based combat when they could just as easily work within. They penalize slow typers, something you yourself have advocated against. Roleplaying your spells gives you a lot more control of style, and even adds to RP, rather than going through an odd sequence of pre-determined actions.

The number of turns per spell is where the balance comes in. And really, it could be one. Just as long as it works within combat and gives somebody the chance to attempt to stop you before you start a long sequence of dancing/finger wiggling that lasts all of two seconds and gives incredible, devastating results.

~~~~

@Apple: This is part of why I want a 'tense' command, or an extension of the 'turns' command, so before somebody makes a move that can be considered aggro (we'd need to define that term) everyone can get into the positions on the map they'd actually be in.

[Applesauce]

@Apple: This is part of why I want a 'tense' command, or an extension of the 'turns' command, so before somebody makes a move that can be considered aggro (we'd need to define that term) everyone can get into the positions on the map they'd actually be in.

I don't think we need new code, the turns helpfile already says "players may request turn-taking for any reason." We just need to agree on what to do when it's fired. Maybe the turns helpfile should mention moving to the right map spot BEFORE your first action. Example:

Joe arrives in a room with a dozen other people who happen to be on the same map spot, but have actions all over the place. He realizes he's covered in blood and gore and emotes turning right back around.

Someone else in the room immediately hits "turns". So this should mean a few things:

- Everyone who already had an action set or had been emoting about being near some part of the room should go get near the right spot before their next emote.

- Joe should not attempt to code leave until everyone has their turn. Maybe not "everyone" but currently turns doesn't autochoose an order.

- If someone is near Joe after fixing map but before their first emote, then they are close enough to pair a guard or expose action with their emote. Help turns supports pairing a code action with your emote, so long as they're the same thing.

- If someone is FAR AWAY (define far away), then they can use their turn to approach, but NOT to apprehend or expose Joe, or guard the direction he's fleeing because he's actually fleeing AWAY from them, not through them. As above, help turns says that you cannot pair two different actions with one turn's emote.

[Kinaed]

I'm going to post some polls to see if we can get a consensus view on some of these items.

[Leech]

- Joe should not attempt to code leave until everyone has their turn. Maybe not "everyone" but currently turns doesn't autochoose an order.

@Apple: So technically Joe gets penalized two turns? Basically how I've seen it previously is that you emote what you're doing and then use code to back it up - and this consists of your turn. If I'm moving in my emote, I should be moving via code. If I want to attack in my emote, I attack (obviously a bit easier since code enforces emote attacks).

By this logic Joe would take one turn emoting, and then another doing his code action - wherein all other cases people would be emoting and taking their coded actions at the same time (guarding, approaching, exposing, attacking). It's a bit of a double standard, one I'm not entirely sure on myself yet. Should scenes like this dissolve into a chase/flee type deal? Would Joe get a temporary 'drop' on a room, a sort of 'entering' bonus? Certainly Joe isn't going into the room without having looked first (unless played otherwise) so Joe is aware of everyone's positioning, but Joe can't by code be aware of this because code doesn't allow Joe to look at another room's map set up - only actions, which are at best misleading.

Edit: For reference, I'm sure many of you are familiar with D&D's initiative rolls. Do you think a system like that would be beneficial for a MUD?

[Kinaed]

And then I forgot about posting polls and even what polls I was gonna post...

[Applesauce]

- Joe should not attempt to code leave until everyone has their turn. Maybe not "everyone" but currently turns doesn't autochoose an order.

@Apple: So technically Joe gets penalized two turns? Basically how I've seen it previously is that you emote what you're doing and then use code to back it up - and this consists of your turn. If I'm moving in my emote, I should be moving via code. If I want to attack in my emote, I attack (obviously a bit easier since code enforces emote attacks).

No, his first emote was already paired with the action of ENTERING. If you emote your arrival and in that same emote you're turning around to leave, it seems like you're doing two actions and should wait for someone to react.

If he emoted entering, and then other people emoted, and THEN he emoted leaving, then yeah he can definitely go ahead and code leave. This is not the above example, sorry for any confusion.