Forgotten Kingdoms Forums

This isn't a suggestion that requires code change.

I was just thinking of how so many things just have a short description, and it doesn't do them justice. Some of them have longs, too, of course - but the problem with this is I can't see them looking at the person.

So my question here is this - Do we find something like this to be allowable, and appropriate? :

Blah blah blah normal desc here, blah she has hair and eyes and even a nose blahblah blah.

Currently: The diamond ring she wears is placed on her left hands ring finger. Her cloak is pushed off her shoulders so her bodice can be fully seen. The bodice is laced on it's sides tightly with golden ribbons. Her sleek skirt is completely sheer, ruby hearts cover it entirely until mid thigh where they begin to fade out until there is no more just below her knees and only the sheer material. The skirt is fitted from her knees up, but flares out below her knees. Her belt of bells dangles over her skirt, when she moves the sound of them can be heard

So on, so forth.. We have things like a slinky black dress. But that doesn't tell anything. When I picture it I picture it strapless, and long and fitted. But other people may picture it differently.

Making sense? Too easily abused? Etc?

Danica

I agree to a degree here. A couple more descriptive words on some items would be nice, since we aren't supposed to add items into our own description achieving the look we actually envision for our characters can be difficult if the equipment is vague.

Some people already have enormous descriptions for their characters, and when in a fast moving room (such as the event last night) just looking at someone can really put you behind. I know I was playing catch-up half the night because of all the unfamiliar people with long descriptions, and I was trying to read as many as possible so I could interact accordingly. If item descriptions get too long they could make the scrolling of the Look command even longer.

I like the idea very much. I would personally love to add in something about how my character looks at the moment. But...I agree that it will make the descriptions too long. It is hard going through full room and actually reading all of the descriptions in a room as is. I really like the idea, I just can't see it being added to our already long descriptions.

I guess I take care of those sort of problems by adding it to my smotes if they are that important to me.

If the gown has longer sleeves than I would normally see on a person, I indicate that the sleeves fall down over my hands. I give the hint that if I figet, and leave wrinkles in the sleeves, as Mariela is want to do.... I say,I figet with the sleeves, twisting them.

I mean, it would be nice to be able to make things that are so common in the game a bit more specialized to a character. You know, tell the tailor you want that crimson gown with pink bows. But... then you are getting into the realms of renames and the like, and I dunno. I guess I don't care enough to stare at someone's clothing, much less their already long description.


THough, I suppose if it was marked in the description, it wouldn't be big deal, especially if it was uniform.


Like.....

Long raven tresses always seems to be falling into her eyes as she speaks.
The tresses travel the way along her back to her midback and no further,
as they are obviously freshly trimmed to that length.
The eyes are dark, the rich amber coloring often getting
hidden by the soft tresses of her hair.
She stands roughly 5'6 in height, a soft tone to her slender build.
Her skin is always fresh, brillant with her vibrant energy.

Attire Notes: She is wearing a white and blue stripped gown with a marblized pattern to it's surface. The white and blue stripped sleeves are tattered and torn at the edges from use, and many wrinkles are present in the sleeves. Her boots show mud splatters, and there is a dirt smear across her left cheek.

It wouldn't be deal breaking to give an update on a character's look in the description. I mean, I am not eluding to anything in specific. There are dirt and rips in the gown cause it's one of her favorites and she wears it often, ect.

But the thing I worry about is that people are ALREADY long winded in their descriptions. And then we add a clothing and attire and hairstyle section that you can change at will if you would like? Eeeeps. I wouldn't mind it.. but I do think that means that the upper section that stays static, like hair color and eye color, ect needs to be shorter!

Perhaps EXAMINE could provide equipment details, while LOOK would not?

Instead of making descriptions longer and including specific item descriptions in them, I would rather make it possible to examine objects worn (not carried) by other people.

It would make sense that, if you are wearing a vest and I see it when I "look" at you, then I should be able to "examine vest (your name)", just like you can for shopkeepers.

We could allow the peer or examine function to work for all classes in response to what they wear. ie. examine cloak oghma

I would really like that, because some items come from specific places, how am I supposed to know that those gloves come from westgate, or those boots from waterdeep unless they say it in the title. I would LOVE to be able to examine items on PC's

This might also help with that pesky "Show" Command that people have wanted. So that you can hold the item and the person could examine the object so that you dont have to show it, they can just examine it. And if they want further detail, ie appraise, then you hand it over.

This just makes soooo much sense in my brain. . .but then, my brain is a strange place

Would that extension to the "examine" command solve the problem presented in the first post, Mele?

I think what Mele is really getting at is that she wants to be able to sort of customize her equipment within reason. Specifics like how a jacket or cloak is worn, condition of armor and minor things like tailoring details on clothing could be customized in the description to reflect day-to-day changes and details that can't be or aren't noted in even the extended descriptions of the items.

Edit: I think the ability to examine items on other people would be great. A lot of items have extended descriptions that really detail what an item looks like and most of the time no one sees that except the person who owns the item. I love the idea, I just don't think it really does what Mele wants to do.

Yeah I think better descriptions on items would be cool but it has to be done by the builders... Just my point of view. If you buy a vest, you bought the vest the builder built.

Here is a out of the ballpark question for Dalvyn and co.

What are the differences between our smaug based, don't know if I spelled that correctly..., and a c++ based mudd. I played a mudd once or twice that was c++ I am pretty sure and one thing it had going for it was the way it was able to use and work with items and practically everything.

The mudd gave underlined words in a different color that worked like internet links... you could actually scroll over things and click on them to get descriptions and interact with things. Like you see a bench, you click on the bench and you are sitting on the bench. It went so far as to show up in room descriptions as joe is sitting on the bench.

So my crazy questions continue, what are the differences between our code base and a c++ code base. Why do we favor this one, I am not opposed to what we got, just checking.

Examining the longs would be awesome, though not -exactly- what I was getting at. Not because it doesn't rock, just because a LOT of items don't HAVE longs. :)

But definately, examining for the longs is excellent.

Ooh I just thought of something, a second tier of optional description that can be opened or closed for viewing with the config option, you can add to it clothing placement and style of wear. Players could choose to use it and view it as another paragraph after the regular description.

I agree with your idea, Oghma. I think it has a great deal of value and would probably be easy for our poor Coders to code, test, and implement.