CLOK BBS

Rias wrote:NPC highligthing no longer reflects whether they are friendly or hostile. Be careful!

I imagine this was removed because it was considered OOC information, but I don't think it is and I would like to see the highlighting come back.

I see the highlighting as reflecting someone's demeanor towards the player which is IC information. It is broadcast through body language, facial expressions, tone or any number of other cues that we pick up on throughout our daily lives but are difficult to render in text. I would expect a bandit to carry itself towards Elystole differently than a Shadgard militiaman, but rather than add in more fluff text for what should be instantly recognized, we have color highlighting. Red means that NPC is menacing, frowning, shoulders tensed, bared fangs, whatever else. Green means that NPC is relaxed, smiling, or otherwise agreeable. Yellow means that NPC is like any of the numerous people we pass during the day who are indifferent to our presence. I've used the colors in the past as RP cues for how to conduct myself towards NPCs and how I could expect them to react to me without a GM there to puppet them.

An example of this would be the time when the scarecrows showed up to join the fight in Tarueka. Scarecrows are usually hostile to people but that time they walked in yellow and while we were still wary we didn't automatically attack them. Their demeanor meant they weren't looking to fight with us though that could have changed at any moment. It would have been a nightmare to figure that out in a middle of a fight without NPC highlighting because of how much scrolling there is when dozens of mobs are fighting at once.

That's one reason NPC highlighting is a standard feature of most MUDs. On CLOK we also have a few abilities that automatically target the next hostile mob, and if we don't know which mobs are hostile we might find ourselves in otherwise completely avoidable trouble. The first example that comes to mind is when horses are accidentally set as hostile to someone. Without NPC highlighting we are blind-firing any time we attack.

In short, contrary to what I figure the intended effect of this change was, removing NPC highlighting hinders roleplaying and makes the game harder to play.

I guess I could see the points made here, but in a way, it kind of doesn't make much of a difference to many players. I for one can't see the colors; however, I think it's not really a real issue. If you get attacked by something, it hates you, if it doesn't you wouldn't really know. even if they are glaring and giving tells, it doesn't mean they are hostile, just that something is wrong. that's just me though.

I do a lot of peering into rooms, and the highlighting shows up, it shows up when you're hiding as well, so that doesn't really make sense. maybe only have it show up when you are in the room with said npc and unhidden.

Lavi wrote:I guess I could see the points made here, but in a way, it kind of doesn't make much of a difference to many players. I for one can't see the colors; however, I think it's not really a real issue.

I wasn't aware that CLOK catered solely to blind players now.

When a blind player makes a request that would make playing the game easier for them, you don't see me come down and say, "That's not an important change because I can see," so I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't jump into one of my suggestions and say, "That's not an important change because I'm blind."

If you get attacked by something, it hates you, if it doesn't you wouldn't really know. even if they are glaring and giving tells, it doesn't mean they are hostile, just that something is wrong. that's just me though.

Even if you are attacked by or attack something it still doesn't flag red. That's a real problem for those combat scenarios where we need to be able to tell who is or isn't trying to kill us out of the group of things in front of us, or if we're trying to determine what is going to be automatically targeted when we attack. I have had my horse accidentally attacked a few times because they were flagged hostile to someone and it was the fact that it was highlighted as hostile to that player that told us to get it fixed.

Sneaky wrote:I do a lot of peering into rooms, and the highlighting shows up, it shows up when you're hiding as well, so that doesn't really make sense. maybe only have it show up when you are in the room with said npc and unhidden.

Actually, that's another reason to have the highlighting. A lot of the NPCs that are hostile have descriptions that make it clear they are hostile (crazy infested, snarling wolves, no-good bandits, etc.), but there's no way of looking at those descriptions when you're in the next room - which is when it matters because by time you are in the room with them they are already trying to eat your face so it is too late for "Does that NPC look hostile or not?"

But, really, NPC highlighting wasn't broken, so I'm not sure why it was fixed and I think it would be nice if it was un-fixed.

Yeah, but you're viewing them at a distance. You can't really get a good look at them. Plus most of the npcs that are hostile have well defined ground strings. For example, a sweaty and smelly bandit. Bandit= red flag. An infested bear=red flag, A bear=Redflag, A crazed anything=red flag. The only ones I can see a problem with this are the people in corvus, but if you're in corvus you either belong or you don't, and if you don't know which category you're in then you most likely don't belong there. As far as the highlighting not showing up for blind players it actually did, I used it a lot. Now though, it proves to be a lot funner. The only point I can see here that makes sense is the accidentally attacking the hostile horse, in which case I would be behind making a command to clear your mount's targets.

Sneaky wrote:Yeah, but you're viewing them at a distance. You can't really get a good look at them. Plus most of the npcs that are hostile have well defined ground strings. For example, a sweaty and smelly bandit. Bandit= red flag. An infested bear=red flag, A bear=Redflag, A crazed anything=red flag. The only ones I can see a problem with this are the people in corvus, but if you're in corvus you either belong or you don't, and if you don't know which category you're in then you most likely don't belong there. As far as the highlighting not showing up for blind players it actually did, I used it a lot. Now though, it proves to be a lot funner. The only point I can see here that makes sense is the accidentally attacking the hostile horse, in which case I would be behind making a command to clear your mount's targets.

Alright, I can see your point regarding names, though there are exceptions such as salamanders which seem to go either way and some other wilderness critters. I still like the highlighting for these crazy group fights we get into and for situations like the horse or other pets. What about a situation when there are multiple similar NPCs but only one of them took a swing at me? I keep thinking back to the fight in Tarueka when the scarecrows showed up. Scarecrows are usually hostile and flagged as such, but that time they weren't so when they showed up things were tense and there was a moment where I was wondering which side they were on. I knew something was up. Turned out they were on my side that day and I lit up ESP telling people they were friendlies and it turned into a pretty memorable invasion.

At the very least, I would like to see NPCs that are actively engaged in hostilities with me or my group to flag red. If we really want to preserve that ambiguity about whether or not something is going to attack us by keeping hostile/neutral NPCs yellow, once they attack us or we attack them that ambiguity is gone. At that point flagging them red just makes it easier to make sense of something that should be intuitive but isn't because of the game medium.

The other thing is that if we lose NPC highlighting then I would like some other way to determine what is my faction status. Highlighting was the only way I had of knowing and, you know what? It was a pretty momentous event when Shadgard NPCs suddenly flagged green for me. I've heard there are very few characters who have friendly status with them, and I liked walking around town with all of these green NPCs. Shadgardians are a pretty standoff-ish bunch, so getting in their good graces was an accomplishment, and seeing them made me feel like it was really Elystole's home and those are his friends.

I'd like to keep the green highlighting in any case because I have also walked into situations where someone was fighting a townie, and I knew that NPC was one of my townsfolk because they were green. The issue of whether a NPC is friendly (and I should recognize them because I've seen them around town or we're part of the same organization or whatever) or not doesn't warrant the same ambiguity as hostile or not.

It was changed for efficiency and to reducea big chunk of overhead for something that had negligible benefit.

baerden wrote:It was changed for efficiency and to reducea big chunk of overhead for something that had negligible benefit.

While it's true that the highlighting stuff did require some complex processing and took up a small bit of processing time which added up when it was being ran thousands of times per hour, the increased efficiency that came from removing it was more of an added bonus than the primary reason.

I could compare to other MUDs, saying, "X MUD never had agressive mob indicators.", but when it really comes down to it. The whole "I see red so I am going to instantly try to kill you." and "I peered into this area I've never been to before and these critters I've never seen before are red, so I'm going either avoid it or treat it as a hunting area." things are the primary reason why we removed it.

If you're hiding or peering, they can't see you so you can't judge their attitude toward you because they don't know you're there in the first place. If you're in the open in front of them, you'll know real quick if they're hostile as they'll proceed to act against you. Having that "red" in there just adds a layer of unjustified OOC preparation or paranoia. It also goofs up a number of events where we have an NPC or group of NPCs who aren't supposed to be overtly hostile at a glance, but people see they're "red" and become instantly aggressive or, at the very least, paranoid levels of suspicious. That and the poor NPCs who are part of a "red" faction but are the exception to the norm and may actually want to take the chance to stop and talk. Even when given a different name so they stand out as different, people tend to see the red and instantly go for the kill.

Coanid gives good advice as far as setting your own client-side highlights. If you want to be alerted to all overt infetsed, highlight the word "infested" in red (and maybe add things like "moldy", "mold-covered" and "fungus-covered"). "Crazed" is another good one where you can assume they're going to be trouble, as it insinuates they're walking around roaring or frothing or showing obvious signs of extreme agitation regardless of who is or isn't nearby. "Canim" is another good highlight to add to your "be careful cause they're highly likely to want to eat me" list, judging by the typical nature of canim.

I -have- been considering a compromise in the form of a temporary highlight for creatures that have attacked you recently, but I'm not sold on it.

Yeah, the accidentally attacking mounts thing has been a problem for a long while and extends beyond highlight coloring. If you're auto-attacking a mount that you don't want to, it should be clear at that point that something is amiss regardless of what color it is or isn't highlighted. That fact that the person had attacked it, even accidentally, would have made it "red" even if it wasn't previously.

And yes, I am happy at the processing power we save by not having to do the complex highlight calculations all the time.

Rias wrote:[...] I -have- been considering a compromise in the form of a temporary highlight for creatures that have attacked you recently, but I'm not sold on it. [...]

I like this idea. It would reflect that "Hey, that's the nozzle that hit me!"