Forgotten Kingdoms Forums

Ta haroughty

I didn't read the entire thread yet. That said, I have some ideas/suggestions. Again

1. have a command that will let you see keywords of an object, maybe even make it so you can modify the keywords you want, like a nickname system on LP muds.

2. Make a command that allows you to see the actions/verbs/whatever it's called here, ways you can interact with the item. Some things have this, others do not from what I can tell, and that makes it extremely difficult to tell whether what you're holding is a prop item or something that actually does something.

Suggestions, re pickable things from trees:

1. Don't have any fruit or vegetable or anything edible on them during the winter, and especially in the tundra and far northern reaches.

2. Have different trees farther south, some tropical ones, for instance.
(There may already be those, just brainstorming)

1. have a command that will let you see keywords of an object, maybe even make it so you can modify the keywords you want, like a nickname system on LP muds.

I can see a few too many problems with this. I could restring the keywords on my sword to 'puppy kitten flower' so if I get disarmed, no one else could pick up my sword. It also gives way for trolling in shops, if an item is bought and it's keywords are randomized and you can't even target the item to rewrite them. Keywords are set in stone for a reason, they are attached to the base description of the item and using any part of the items short description allows you to pick it up. If you want an easier time getting specific items from your packs and the like, set an alias that's shorthand like 'gflow' for get 'flowery warhammer' pack

2. Make a command that allows you to see the actions/verbs/whatever it's called here, ways you can interact with the item. Some things have this, others do not from what I can tell, and that makes it extremely difficult to tell whether what you're holding is a prop item or something that actually does something.

Half the point is that you don't always know if an item does something or not, it adds an air of mystery to the object in your hand. There's also a few quests that make you guess the keyword of an item to use it, so being able to see those keywords really destroys the point of those quests. Let the unknown remain unknown till you discover it!

Hello

1. have a command that will let you see keywords of an object, maybe even make it so you can modify the keywords you want, like a nickname system on LP muds.

Since all objects are made by a builder, the builder choses the keywords and afterwards they are set. Taking into account the sheer mass of objects on the mud, thinking out a system for this would probably be a nightmare considering that FK sees a constant input of new objects due to new areas, roleplays, etc.etc. The set keywords are required by the gamecode, too, to properly function.

And why would one always want to know immediately what an object does? Some take some finding out and many will have their keyword emphasized in their description Also, the command "Command" does display most if not all commands usable by Player Characters.

2. Have different trees farther south, some tropical ones, for instance.
(There may already be those, just brainstorming)

You will find different kinds of trees in different areas of the game, there are some that are rather heavy with trees and bushes bearing fruits and vegetables that will yield a certain amount of fruit/vegetable until they run out. Just takes some travelling around to learn of the locations.

Cheers.

Well, I think the way this is achieved elsewhere is by giving players the same tools / commands that a builder / admin would use to see what type of object it is, and what manipulators it has.

This has gone aways from my initial intent though so I'll leave it up to Tiyari to clarify / post more if he / she should wish to. For my part I just felt that having keywords that weren't in the desc was counterproductive to play.

It would be extremely poor to show unseen keywords to players, as sometimes they include what an object does, and sometimes random things in renames. (I tag all my renames with why they were given to a player, be it a reward or glory being spent. Sometimes I tag them with the exact roleplay name.)

The nickname system would go like this:

feather-hilted steel longsword
nickname s1 or whatever. Yes, aliases could work for this.

The keywords set by the builder/creator would still be there: feather, sword, long, longsword, etc

I would often combine aliases and nicknames on other games. Something like:

bp {take armours from backpack}
Meanwhile the backpack would be nicknamed bp

I have to disagree strongly about hidden keywords. I know I'm in the minority on this, but here's why it matters to me.
I don't think of things sometimes. The creator/builder/coder may have had one idea, meanwhile I may be going in the opposite direction. I like exploring areas and descriptions, while I hate trying to figure out if something is a prop item, and in fact, find it a huge disappointment when it is.

Example with perfume bottles. Here are a few different syntaxes:

spray bottle on me/name

pour bottle on name

use bottle/perfume/scentname me/name

spritz me with perfume

I don't want "hand-holding' as it were, but because I go blank when trying to think outside the box when it comes to logic-type things (like this one), it's frustrating. Beyond frustrating sometimes.

I don't see what's wrong with having a line when you examine something like:

It looks like you can rub, apply, pour, spray the perfume bottle at yourself or others.

Saying that it's pour is rather strong, in my opinion. It may be for you, but not for others. Just like I can't and won't say that my struggle is the only thing builders should think about when building. We each have strengths and weaknesses, different ways we prefer things done.

I'm sorry for pulling away fromt he point of the original discussion. Likely I misread again and misunderstood where you were trying to go with it.

Tiyari, who is female, et al

It looks like a huge hard code undertaking to me. I keep a list of alias' in the game like Mele pointed above to keep track of things, one thing I like about the mud is that you have the ability to take it anywhere with you, with over 100 alias slots built into account and char I usually store commands there.

Tiyari:
On nicknames, yes, that is exactly what aliases currently do. Your alias does not need to address a nickname; If your alias is bp to 'get armour backpack', your backpack does not need to be 'nicknamed' bp to function.

Example:

alias bp get [item] backpack
New alias for 'character' successfully bp.
bp
You get [item] from a leather backpack.

To the perfume example, Apply is a basic command, much like look or say. You can roleplay 'spritzing' it at someone with smotes, but that example, and ensuing beyond frustration, is more to do with what programs a builder may or may not have placed on an item(Whether they're coded to 'do' something when you type 'spritz'), than an actual complaint about the unseen keyword on the item(Which would be 'perfume' in your examples, a keyword all perfumes I've come across have).


I hope this isn't coming across as rude, but this is likely one of the least frustrating things I've ever encountered.　As others have said, you can assign 'nicknames' through your client's, or the in-game alias system with relative ease. The 'prop' items you mentioned are unabashedly that; props, to facilitate roleplay through the use of roleplay commands, and accomplish this well without coding programs onto each of them. Though obviously, if you wanted to build your own area with code-supported perfume bottles, that's generally the best way to remedy these sorts of issues.

After reading that, I think something worth considering is to have suggestive text in the description for mundaine items if the builder so chooses to code an actual function on it. But keep powers of quest items and such hidden as usual and make the figuring out of its powers part of the quest as they are now.

Shouldn't that satisfy both camps here? Or am I missing the main point?
Mostly I'd be satisfied with stuff like this being a soft rule of building going forward than anything particularly retroactive, but those are my own preferences on the matter.

I can see both sides of the argument, I think it is something to be kept in mind while building.