|
Guideline Input: Talk modes
Posted: 30 Jun 2003 12:37 AM |
Questions to consider:
What talk modes are restricted?
To which talk modes are Out of Character (ooc) talks restricted?
Acceptable designations for OOC talks?
Consensus emotes? ('*you saw a flash of light and the next thing you see is disoriented as your head rolls on the floor and I start laughing*' is obviously not acceptable - what else?)
What are the consequences for eventual violators, intentional (metagaming type), or unintentional (ignorant of server rules)? |
Aria
So talented, so troubled. |
|
  |
|
|
[No Subject]
Posted: 30 Jun 2003 12:37 AM |
Some guidelines that I mentioned on another forum [url=http://24.62.29.167/vives/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=131&sid=727f71ad1c98fbddda1d1274007e8570]thread[/url].
[quote:12442726b6]Whisper & Talk:
Main mode of communication. In Character at all times.
Party:
Used sparingly for OOC group co-ordination. There will come times that there will be groups of players who will need to confer amongst themselves to co-ordinate some sort of RP event. Things like "Ok when I hold up the chalice, could you ask the congregation to kneel in prayer", "Alright im about to enter, hit the gong..." . This does not extend to mundane tasks such as "Alright, I cleared the zombies, your safe to come in now" - use tells.
DM: Used -only- and sparingly when there is a freakish NWN occurance, such as being trapped etc. Always Out of Character.
Shout: Never used.
Tells: Always out of character. There is no reason IC to be able to talk to someone at any time and place. [/quote:12442726b6] |
|
|
|
|
|
[No Subject]
Posted: 30 Jun 2003 12:37 AM |
I agree with everything Kell said, but tells are indeed OOC...I don't mind them being used, as long as it does not effect IG actions, or else it would be meta-gaming
~Fenarisk |
|
|
|
|
|
[No Subject]
Posted: 30 Jun 2003 12:37 AM |
can we disable party talk? Its not really needed and its distracting to DMs when there are a lrage number of players ingame.
Tells or the ooc lounge should be used for the most part
ooc-
(ooc)
(())
ooc "talk" should be ok for one or two sentences
umm ok |
I do what the voices in my head tell me too. |
|
|
|
|
[No Subject]
Posted: 30 Jun 2003 12:37 AM |
Its my understanding that the channels are something beyond the scope of disablement, just like Tells or any other channel for that matter.
If players are told that DM's can hear whatever they are party chatting, and that the party line is only used for specific roleplaying circumstances and events (of which DM's like myself will be more than interested in) then it:
a) shouldn't get out of hand
b) will allow DM's to keep a tab on the "pulse" of roleplay going on in the world.
So why banish a tool that can be used? We need to embrace what NWN makes available instead of deny it.
Again, I will reiterate that I dont think you should be able to talk or whisper ooc, at all. If you need to go to the toilet or answer the doorbell, simply excuse your character, or make something up that puts your character out of action and go to the player lounge. If you feel compelled that people need to know your OOC situation (which, most often than not, Im sure they dont give a crap that someones at your door) then send them a tell. If people feel they need to approach you about why your out of action, then they can send you a tell, or they can follow you into the lounge.
If you have to have an OOC conversation with someone, then go to the player lounge, which, overall should be an OOC area (forgot to mention).
OOC talks and whispers detract from RP because passers-by are subjected to it unwittingly, as a player I find it annoying that one second someone is roleplaying, and the next complaining about their barking dog! |
|
|
|
|
|
[No Subject]
Posted: 30 Jun 2003 12:37 AM |
My opinion on concensus emotes...
(of which there is a more fundamental matter)
As a roleplaying rule in general - ie, Players, builders, scripters, cast player characters, DM's, everyone. You should never dictate to another player their actions, reactions or feelings (especially negatively) in anyway.
Scripts shouldn't make characters say things like "This place is creepy!" (Midor burial grounds) or "I want to be like Kell Larithian!" (although that example is humorous and in OOC area so its ok). It may make no sense that a character says these things. If a player feels that certain situations warrant a response of this type, they will roleplay it. Theres no need to force the issue.
Only when you can assure that a character will react to a situation in a certain way (growing frightened from a fear spell, muscles spasming from being hit by lightning, vomiting from poison etc etc) should you think to "elaborate" the effects the PC is going through. Sometimes these add spice to the situation, and give it a much more vivid effect.
You shouldnt dictate how a character feels either. A waterfall might be breathtaking to some, superfluous to others. A skeleton might send shivers down a young adventurers spine, or be quite familiar to an evil cleric. You cant expect every character to react or think of things in the same way, and nor should you dictate it. |
|
|
|
|
|
[No Subject]
Posted: 30 Jun 2003 12:37 AM |
We seems to be reaching a consensus here:
All actions in Player's Lounge is OOC.
[color=olive:e959fb4ff9]Whisper[/color:e959fb4ff9]: Always IC.
Talk: Always IC.
Party: Used when DM-quest is on-going (IC), otherwise OOC, with the restriction that it should not confer in-character advantages.
[color=green:e959fb4ff9]Tell[/color:e959fb4ff9]: Used sparingly IC (*little bird perches on your shoulder*), OOC otherwise.
[color=orange:e959fb4ff9]Shout[/color:e959fb4ff9]: [i:e959fb4ff9]Never[/i:e959fb4ff9] used.
All OOC speeches must be preceded/enclosed by [i:e959fb4ff9]
(ooc)/(OOC)
ooc -
(( ))[/i:e959fb4ff9]
--
Now... enforcement side of things? |
Aria
So talented, so troubled. |
|
|
|
|
[No Subject]
Posted: 30 Jun 2003 12:37 AM |
Enforcement ideas:
Friendly reminder -> warning -> xp loss -> penguining into the OOC lounge for a certain time period -> banning.
Some steps could be skipped depending on the severity of the offence. Eg. A medium Meta-gaming offence could result in XP lose immediatly. Shouting of profanities could result in a ban right away. |
~Alosynth
|
|
|
|
|
[No Subject]
Posted: 30 Jun 2003 12:37 AM |
I'd like to elaborate on the Party chat issue... and reiterate how annoying it is to hear that as a DM, and not know whether it is party or talk, and who it is being sent to. As such, I'd like to see players -only- use it when conversing through a transition, or when you are just out of 'talk' range.
A couple examples I see it should be used in...
Grunge: Youz go through hole Gujak Lul Ishii. See if baddies be waitings.
Finfalin: *nods* wait here Beleger, I'll send word when it's clear.
....
Finfalin: (Party) *shouts back through the tunnel* It's all clear Beleger... come through, if you can fit that is. *chuckles*
Grunge: RRHAAAAGGHHH!
or
*Finfalin and Grunge are running from Port to Buckshire, and Finfalin is distancing himself out front*
Grunge: (party) *shouts* Slowz down Gujak Lul Ishii! Meez legz no keepings up! *huff puff*
Just my 2c.
Gwindor |
|
|
|
|
|
[No Subject]
Posted: 30 Jun 2003 12:37 AM |
Personally, I see examples like "Go in and see if there are baddies" as meta-gaming. Its not like monsters "go out now and then to check for goodies", and your using a game mechanic (area transition) to keep your character safe from anything that may be lurking.
When your looking at having scores of players, the type of chatter you (Gwindor) cite as feasible on the party channel will clog the DM chat lines utterly, and thus you contradict your opening statement.
We don't want to hear if someone is lagging behind, be it speed or courage.
If you want to meta-game across area transitions, use tells. If someone is getting away from you, rely on them, in the spirit of partying (which is often the case) that they will wait up for you, your only slowing down to type something as long-winded as that anyway.
Whilst some party talk is unavoidable, I don't think your examples are valid. |
|
|
|
|
|
[No Subject]
Posted: 30 Jun 2003 12:37 AM |
Personally I like the use of party chat for the example of yelling down the cave (area transition) as an example. The reason I feel it's a good example/worthwhile use of Party Chat is that in PnP you can control progressing down the cave, whereas in NWN, due to game mechanics, it's an abrupt transition with no intermediate progression at all. So, Player chat IMO *can* be used to overcome the limitations of the NWN computer-game mechanics.
On the other hand, it can (and most likely will) be used for more OOC and less RP purposes.
Oh, and personally, I don't ever use party chat for OOC reasons (unless i *have* to leave the game because my dog (in RL) died and i need to let everyone know). |
|
|
|
|
|
[No Subject]
Posted: 30 Jun 2003 12:37 AM |
So you feel the need to spam the DM's with this trivial stuff? I've been on and its bad enough trying to keep track with just five players using the party chat... try 40.. 50?
And I don't care about your dog :P |
|
|
|
|
|
[No Subject]
Posted: 30 Jun 2003 12:37 AM |
I agree with Quietus. When I open the front door to my house, I can see the front yard. In NWN, I'd see a white square on the front door until I walked outside - not even close to reality. The game mechanics definitely interferes in area transitions in a number of ways, talk modes is just one of them.
I do care about Q's dog (I even happen to know her name). And most of the players that I do party with, do care about my personal life, (esp. when it interferes with gaming).
Good DMs would also care, just like a good coach. Personal life does affect performance in sports, games, etc. Now granted you don't want to be a constant crying shoulder for everyone, but [b:1823a9a41b]it should be ok for the occasion party message about an infrequent sudden personal issue that immediately affects the game (like "kid choking g2g").[/b:1823a9a41b] (If you aren't a parent, you won't completely understand.)
And good players will try to avoid such messages, but sometimes situations just don't allow time to gracefully convey the information. |
.
Punchinello Longfello
.
Picasso Picante
.
|
|
|
|
|
[No Subject]
Posted: 30 Jun 2003 12:37 AM |
As an added note for DM's that are being overwhelmed with party chat, you can either exclude it completely from your chat window, or move it into the action window if you need to keep an occaisional eye on it.
To do this, right click on the bar of the chat window to pull up the radial menu. Then select exclude party chat. If you want to see party chat in the action window, right click on its bar and bring up the radial menu again, this time select include party chat.
I have found this feature very useful even as a PC on another mod, where, when having a conversation with someone, I would occaisionally get overwhelmed by party chat.
Hope this helps
:) |
~Alosynth
|
|
|
|
|
[No Subject]
Posted: 30 Jun 2003 12:37 AM |
Kell:
No, this is -not- meta gaming... as 1) that tandem had been adventuring like that the whole time, not just in area transitions. The scout would be ahead, and the big lumbering fighter behind. Why should an area transition be different? Why should they -both- lumber ahead blind and be killed?
and 2) Grunge is a blithering idiot. He could call his own kid a 'baddie'... or a dog, or a wolf, or himself. His inteligence is very likely a 6.. and thus, just off the charts.
So you suggest all parties just blindly rage ahead through transitions using only talk, since there should be NO circumstance in a dungeon, forest, city, etc where the party is cut off from communicating, unless somehow part of them are trapped inside some magic bubble. With that having been said... there have been MANY areas where the scout goes in first, and finds evil creatures camping by the transition. Without knowing they're there, or hell, even if some parties know, they would walk in blind and die. YAY. That's the spirit, eh Kell? |
|
|
|
|
|
[No Subject]
Posted: 30 Jun 2003 12:37 AM |
I agree with Gwindor here. I'll use a (sort of) RL example to illustrate.
If you are standing at the entrance to a cave, and you send in a scout to have a look, (Merum likes to scout ahead by the way) it's unrealistic to think that you would not be able to hear the scout shout back "It's all clear in 'ere!" or even, for that case, "AAAUUGH!"
Now, I don't do this at this time, simply because the issue is up in the air, and I don't want to offend anybody, but I certainly think it's well within the bounds of good RP. |
Question Authority! |
|
|
|
|
[No Subject]
Posted: 30 Jun 2003 12:37 AM |
I don't see anyone walking around areas and calling back "Its safe". Everyone does go blindly raging through for safety of numbers.
If you want someone to scout ahead, they should scout ahead and return with the information.
An area transition is not like your opening a door and looking outside unless, thats exactly what your doing (ie, in a building in a city) but in these situations you rarely need to shout back "Its safe".
In the wilderness I don't believe an area transition marks such a fine line between one area to the other, as opposed to some sort of distance crossed in order to get to the other area. Are you going to tell me that it takes 15 minutes (less than an IC day) to travel by foot across the continent?
If I was suggesting parties blindly rage everywhere, I would say it myself, I don't need you to misconstrue what I'm trying to say.
Thanks Alo, I didnt know you could do that with the party chat. That would go far to alleviate the main spam problem as I see it affecting DM's.
And Noggin, its great you and Q are all cuddly and stuff, but I dont think that represents the majority of the players we're trying to plan for.
If your kids choking you'd actually take the time to type out something to tell a bunch of colorful pixels controlled by people around the world? Fix your priorities.
No-one will mind that your character goes idle for a little while. From time to time, lag and internet problems permitting, you will be utterly powerless to stop it. And you won't be able to OOC-chat it. People understand. And unless for some reason, your the center of -all- the attention, probably no-one will notice.
If you let 'some' types of OOC chat through... people will enter and slowly slowly push that boundary back to all types of chat. You won't be able to police every conversation, and the more people do it, the more it will be regarded as permissable to the point where you have people chatting OOC- adlib.
To any serious roleplayer, this spoils what could be a pure environment.
The more OOC you allow into the environment, the more it effects it and makes IC detract. There are plenty of ways and means to communicate OOC, both in NWN and out of it. |
|
|
|
|
|
[No Subject]
Posted: 30 Jun 2003 12:37 AM |
Kell: I very much agree with your sentiment on OOC chat. Let in any, more will slip in eventually.
However, my point with party chat was -not- to allow OOC chat into it. Rather, it was to say that I feel it is ok in some instances. It's when people are talking over different zones as if in casual conversation (which I've seen a number of times) that bothers me, and floods my channel. Yes, thanks Alo, I didn't even think about doing that with the chat windows.
Kell, let me get this straight. You believe that scouts are meta-gaming? You feel that a party should go through an area transition together, and when the trolls come barreling down the mountainside at the ill-equiped party, they should likewise all die together?
I understand the great distances traveled, I also understand that loading times are a bitch. They suck, and they are a reality. Let's be full RL and have no respawn. *shrugs* A little understanding and reason here is asked. If I see (as a DM) a party utilizing the party chat only for instances such as those I've said, that's fine with me. That doesn't clutter, as I feel it is well within RP, and it's not OOC.
Now that we've agreed the transitions represent many miles, if not more, spent traveling to arrive at the next area... are caves the same way? Would the scout not then walk ahead of the group throughout those many miles? and then, would he not be able to alert the rest of the group who was trailing a little ways behind him? without having to retread those many miles back to the group waiting so far back? hmmm... I think yes, they should be able to do that. It makes perfect sense. Again, this is just my opnion, and I've been known to be wrong, or in the minority many many times. |
|
|
|
|
|
[No Subject]
Posted: 30 Jun 2003 12:37 AM |
There are two issues:
Allowing OOC chat in talk and whisper modes of which I'm firmly against (give players an inch and it will become a mile).
And scouts warning their party using party channel of dangers.
Given the example about the party travelling the many miles, with a scout just ahead ready to run back with information - I don't see why everyone who is in the party... who could be waiting on the other side of the transition, or who could be half way across the world, or who could be a DM, needs to hear this. I don't see, after all those many miles, how an adventuring party can avoid a dangerous encounter by just "turning back". Your using NPC perception radii and area transitions to keep your heads connected to your necks. I offered the option of using tells to tell single/multiple party members on the opposite side of the transition to come on in - however, if its so dangerous a situation, wouldn't the scout turn around and head out themselves? And given that they do RP this, they could just speak it to the people waiting on the otherside.
Now if this was a perma-death mod, i'd also use any means possible to avoid getting killed, but the amount of leniency that is being afforded when it comes to death would warrant that players grow a hide and take at least some risk to their precious XP trauling. I dont call crawling around behind a scout who verifies threats before charging in and killing "moderate" or "effortless" creatures "Adventring" at all. If you want to RP a scout, there are very large areas in which to do this - but noone does it. Scouting across area transitions just does not hold water when people dont scout around cave corners or scout into dungeon halls. |
|
|
|
|
|
[No Subject]
Posted: 30 Jun 2003 12:37 AM |
| all I can offer to you is this.. you've never partied with Finfalin in a dungeon, cave, forest, anywhere. He insisted on being first everywhere to scout. Almost came to blows with Ulfjarl for raging ahead and bringing the fury of monsters down upon them. I'm ok with going back through transitions over and over to scout if you are. |
|
|
|
|
|
[No Subject]
Posted: 30 Jun 2003 12:37 AM |
| No I haven't partied with "Finfalin", but I would say those who roleplay scouts are the exception rather than the rule. If players can take the easy option of just broadcasting whether its safe or not to proceed over the party channel, then they wont bother to RP actually going back and warning the party. |
|
|
|
|
|
[No Subject]
Posted: 30 Jun 2003 12:37 AM |
Looks like there has been lots of discussion on what should and shouldn't be allowed on party chat going with man good point brought up, but perhaps we should try and come to a concensus on this point.
A) Should the party channel not be used at all because it spams the DM chat window and doesn't have any RP value.
B) Should it only be used for valid RP situations as per Gwindors examples
C) Or, as per Aria's original summation, used when DM-quest is on-going (IC), otherwise OOC, with the restriction that it should not confer in-character advantages. |
~Alosynth
|
|
|
|