Forgotten Kingdoms Forums

I'd like to suggest that areas covered by equipment don't show up as "heavily wounded" when you glance at someone. That way, we could only know what we could see- Unless someone roleplayed being wounded. It's kind of disappointing to see someone go, "Jeez bro your arm is like extremely wounded" only to look at yourself and see that you're wearing sleeves, chainmail over those sleeves, two bracers, and elbow-length gloves. Just a thought.

Hey, I agree with you to a certain extent. I always -try- to look at what people are wearing before I comment on something like that (I do admittedly slip sometimes though, but I try!). Especially if it is just bruising. But even the thickest, most covering armor can cover wounds to a certain extent. I don't care who you are or what you are wearing, if your arm or anything else is mangled, even if people cannot -see- the damage, and if you aren't walking around rping like that part is about to fall off, people would still be able to tell that something is seriously wrong. Maybe it would be enough to make more of an effort to do some things to make people more aware of this. Perhaps add a little something to the wounds helpfile, and even just seeing this will put it in people's minds and make them more conscious of it.

Aveline wrote:Perhaps add a little something to the wounds helpfile, and even just seeing this will put it in people's minds and make them more conscious of it.

I was about to go and do this, but I don't think we really have a wounds helpfile. Did I just not find it?

In any case, a little more prodding indicated that the current code doesn't seem to push in this direction - for example, the GLANCE command will show you everything that's bruised, no matter what someone is wearing, without listing the equipment that might be covering it. If we were to change to account for what can and can't be seen, what would the desired output of GLANCE become, or would it no longer show injuries?

I believe the current status is largely in place to allow allies to see how their friends are doing in combat, or while adventuring. Good RPers will make a mangled leg obvious by their smotes, of course, but they wouldn't have time for that in the heat of combat.

In short, I guess I'm asking if hiding this information for covered parts of the body (the vast majority, in most cases) would have a downside we should consider.

I really like the suggestion. But for the reasons Raona mentioned like going out adventuring...I'd like to be able to see how badly my group members are injured even if I couldn't see it ICly. I think we'll just have to make more of an effort to show people that they won't always be able to see such. Someone sees something you think they wouldn't be able to, just take it in stride and rp it off like you were moving strangely for some other reason. Perhaps send a POLITE otell of why you shrugged their observation off...but POLITE.

"Heavily wounded" would mean there was blood and such. I cannot see a problem with people noticing this even within the heaviest of armors, personally.

Raona wrote:

Aveline wrote:Perhaps add a little something to the wounds helpfile, and even just seeing this will put it in people's minds and make them more conscious of it.

I was about to go and do this, but I don't think we really have a wounds helpfile. Did I just not find it?

In any case, a little more prodding indicated that the current code doesn't seem to push in this direction - for example, the GLANCE command will show you everything that's bruised, no matter what someone is wearing, without listing the equipment that might be covering it. If we were to change to account for what can and can't be seen, what would the desired output of GLANCE become, or would it no longer show injuries?

I believe the current status is largely in place to allow allies to see how their friends are doing in combat, or while adventuring. Good RPers will make a mangled leg obvious by their smotes, of course, but they wouldn't have time for that in the heat of combat.

In short, I guess I'm asking if hiding this information for covered parts of the body (the vast majority, in most cases) would have a downside we should consider.

Well, wouldn't it be possible to have it that someone actively in your party can glance and see the things as they are currently? After all, that person has actually been fighting with you, seen the blows land, and can judge how wounded you are likely to be.

Alternatively, maybe when looking or glancing at someone an 'aid' check could be made, allowing you to use your wisdom to ascertain how wounded someone is based on how they walk, the way they favor an arm, etc.

All that having been said, I think I've voiced my opinions in the past on how I consider it to be generally poor RP to look at someone when you're in the middle of a conversation with someone else, and then comment on the looked at person's state of health, when it's 'niggling injuries' that they're really suffering. I once had someone tell me that I looked like I was about to die, even though I was at 100% health. <.< Another time I had someone look at me, and before they said one word to me, they cast a healing spell on me. Suffice to say, I handled it ICly and gave said person quite the tongue lashing about touching people you don't know without their permission. In fact, generally speaking, I try to always handle the aforementioned situations in an IC fashion. When I walk into a room and someone instantly looks at me, I retort with a , "What are you looking at?" and an angry sneer. or "Can I help you?" something to that effect. It's just a major pet peeve.

Frankly, I think that -glance- should only show what gear they're wearing, not even their full description. Look should give the full gambit, and maybe 'assess' or something could be used to judge wounds.

Just my 2 cents.

Even though your armour is still in perfect condition after fighting codewise ICly it's going to have some dings and bangs and be pretty messy and what have you, this along with other things would allow most people to put two and two together and ask "Hey are you alright?"

Briek wrote:Even though your armour is still in perfect condition after fighting codewise ICly it's going to have some dings and bangs and be pretty messy and what have you, this along with other things would allow most people to put two and two together and ask "Hey are you alright?"

Except for the fact that left untreated those wounds can last for days and days and days ICly.. in that time you could easilly have patched and cleaned up your armor.

I have a small suggestion of my own...

Title your posts so that folk know what they refer to...

This is an interesting debate, but the non-specific subject line is annoying the Hell out of me

I am personally with Melee, I think if you are heavily wounded you are obviously going to bleeding and it will be seeping out of your armor, or your armor will be damaged even though "code wise" its not. Like your leather will be obviously soaked in blood from within.

Not to mention the smell of blood or discoloration from wounds. I've always followed the credo that just because the code lets you ignore something does not mean you should. That being said its possible to dismiss wounds icly but it certainly does not mean those around you will.

Gwain wrote:Not to mention the smell of blood or discoloration from wounds. I've always followed the credo that just because the code lets you ignore something does not mean you should. That being said its possible to dismiss wounds icly but it certainly does not mean those around you will.

Once again, realistically, the wounds have been washed, treated, cleaned and maybe even bandaged before people go hanging out in Market Square.. and the wounds could be several days old. It's unrealistic (and thus un-IC to me) to assume that the wounds are still fresh and open. If the person is at 100% health, at any rate. I use the condition descriptor as much as the rest. I think used in tandem the two should give you an idea of how to RP, not just one or the other.

Leveran wrote:

Gwain wrote:Not to mention the smell of blood or discoloration from wounds. I've always followed the credo that just because the code lets you ignore something does not mean you should. That being said its possible to dismiss wounds icly but it certainly does not mean those around you will.

Once again, realistically, the wounds have been washed, treated, cleaned and maybe even bandaged before people go hanging out in Market Square.. and the wounds could be several days old. It's unrealistic (and thus un-IC to me) to assume that the wounds are still fresh and open. If the person is at 100% health, at any rate. I use the condition descriptor as much as the rest. I think used in tandem the two should give you an idea of how to RP, not just one or the other.

Sometimes yes, and sometimes no. Many many people come to the square straight from a fight. And even if they had cleaned up..and say their head was bruised.. I take that to mean the face too. And not all helmets cover all of the face, or around the eyes atleast. You'd be able to see that someone had been used like a living punching bag. They could be very clean bruises, but you'd still see them in some cases. I don't find this as an either/or situation. I think you need to try to be mindful of the person you are looking at and judge each case on whether or not you'd be able to tell. And if someone doesn't do that, just take it in stride and go with it. But really all you can do is try to do that yourself and be a good examples to others, and maybe people will catch on.

Leveran wrote:If the person is at 100% health, at any rate. I use the condition descriptor as much as the rest.

I really yearn for the day when people actually read all of my posts.

In spirit, I agree with Skeas. I think that's a perfect world scenario where you trust all players to roleplay their PC's appropriately. Without the full trust of all players I feel it's important to be able to see this...without a code backup different player's will decide different definitions of what the injury is. That's a problem. With this system the code backs up the standard. So while it may be odd for a some dude to say "wow, your arm has a nice bruise on it" for when you're barely hurt - it's perfectly reasonable to say "wtf happened?!" when your arm is code mangled and hanging limply like a noodle from his shoulder.

----

On topic but different direction. I'd personally be for nondescript damage overall. I dislike the location based damage greatly, and moving to a nondescript entirely HP based system would be moving in line with DND. Unfortunately this is likely a major overall for not only armor class but also for combat as a system. But if it's at all realistic to accomplish, I think it'd be a good move.

Leveran wrote:

Leveran wrote:If the person is at 100% health, at any rate. I use the condition descriptor as much as the rest.

I really yearn for the day when people actually read all of my posts.

Yes...I agree. That is why I said -sometimes-.

Horace wrote: On topic but different direction. I'd personally be for nondescript damage overall. I dislike the location based damage greatly, and moving to a nondescript entirely HP based system would be moving in line with DND. Unfortunately this is likely a major overall for not only armor class but also for combat as a system. But if it's at all realistic to accomplish, I think it'd be a good move.

I would agree with this on the condition that you still saw specific damage locations when you looked at yourself, but others only saw a general summary of damage when they looked or glanced at you. It might be prudent to have this hardcoded with the option to turn on/off full damage viewing for your player depending on preference. I still need to see specific damage for myself to judge if I need to do emergency healing.

Two points.

First, combat wounds are very often not obvious. This is why combat casualty care involves running your hands over most of the casualty's (your wounded buddy's) body; people would miss many wounds (particularly piercing damage!) otherwise.

Second, I believe that this change is not something that demands a lot of attention in the here-and-now. While this change might be a good idea (for reasons both Skeas and Horace brought up), there are more fundemental, functional issues to be resolved right now.

Kelemvor wrote:I have a small suggestion of my own...

Title your posts so that folk know what they refer to...

This is an interesting debate, but the non-specific subject line is annoying the Hell out of me

You're a forum mod, aintcha? Chaaaange it. Make it specific! You won't hurt my feelings, sir! If there's something you don't like from me, you have my full consent to bring down the peoples' elbow.

Horace wrote:In spirit, I agree with Skeas. I think that's a perfect world scenario where you trust all players to roleplay their PC's appropriately.

But not the scenario we're living. Nobody is perfect and it's unfair to expect them to be. That's why I made the suggestion that code be changed, instead of suggesting that people take other peoples' armor into consideration along with the other 325907230592709530923 things that must be considered in every RP. We can only juggle so much, right?

I didn't figure it would be implemented. To be perfectly honest, I was always 100% certain it wouldn't be. I'm just trying to be part of the community, I guess. Offering something back, maybe. It coulda been an idea that the entire MUD echoed was amazing, clamored for, and probably still wouldn't have been implemented. We just don't have the manpower, sadly.