@tragedyjones said in The State of the Chronicles of Darkness:
@Thenomain said in The State of the Chronicles of Darkness:
@tragedyjones
Changeling? Ever?2019
Gotcha, thanks.
@tragedyjones said in The State of the Chronicles of Darkness:
@Thenomain said in The State of the Chronicles of Darkness:
@tragedyjones
Changeling? Ever?2019
Gotcha, thanks.
Eh, you could enable the player account and allow people to add and drop characters from there, which doesn't sound difficult to me; you already know if a roster character is used by if it's associated with a player account or has an "in use" flag or something like that.
I take account administration for granted as part of my bread and butter for game coding, something that I've already solved with a straightforward system. Again, a matter of implementation more than anything else.
Do remember, you and @Sunny both, that I started down this road with a comment that requesting email as a way to track people was silly and demanding it to make things easier was illogical. This is not what you're doing, so by that same logic my entry into this is moot.
I'm willing to talk more about it, because I find design decisions to be fascinating. I do! And it leaves my head working on a way to make things easier still, especially for the (trust me, more than two) people who just want to log in and get going, while keeping the design goal of "keep it clean", which is laudable.
edit, brief thought: Have you considered a note that the email is outgoing only and is never stored or saved? The number of people I know who don't know about things like 10 Minute Mail is pretty surprising, but I think we still have a long way to go to educate the general public on good online security.
That would make sense. I'm not going to make a technical comment about it. I know of one simple workaround for that using Evennia, but I also know what it's like for someone to come in, look at your code, and say, "Why didn't you do this differently from the start?" Sometimes the answer is, "Because I didn't, and if you keep on going about it I'm going to take this code and shove it somewhere that you'd regret."
Make fun of neckbeards if you'd like, but they are some of the most chill people on the planet. Not all of us coders are Big Bang Theory tropes. (n.b., I am not a neckbeard. I'm a skinny neurotic beta nerd, thank you.)
@Seamus said in Alternate Forms and Stat Stacking?:
- &RP`0`attr`001 db=Appearance
- &rp`0`attr`001`rank db=3
- &rp`1`attr`002 db=Appearance
- &rp`1`attr`002`rank db=2
Let me make the suggestion again based on this.
&form: 001 002
To display a specific attribute:
&display.attribute.one-line:
\\ %0: sheet dbref
\\ %1: attribute number
cat(
get( %0/rp`%1`attr`001 ):,
ladd( iter( get( %0/form ), get( %0/rp`%1`attr`%i0`rank )))
)
That should do it. Pardon typos as I'm doing this in the board editing window.
Hope that helps.
@Kanye-Qwest said in Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning:
@Thenomain You didn't shit on the game, you said that anyone who thought there was a valid reason for email requirement to play refuses to see/use logic.
You're confused about what's going on here. I wasn't trolling, I was legitimately offended by what you said. For the first time!
It looks exactly like most things you've said shitting on me, so while I'm bitter about that (quite a lot, incidentally), I do genuinely apologize for offending you in that way. I do speak in hyperbole, but I honestly never want to lump an entire group into being stupid.
That is absolutely no reason to call someone a shit-lord outside of the Hog Pit. There's a reason that it's there, and I don't have to be administration here to call you out on it. That was a fucked-up thing that you did.
I was calling you out for calling two of the best people I know incapable of logic.
Maybe if you said so; I mean, we all make mistakes. And calling me a swan? Yeah, sometimes you pull your pants down just to pee on everything you find offensive yourself. I dunno, but I think I'm far more willing to accept the mistakes of others than you are.
You have edited it since then, and I'm guessing that's not what you meant to get across, so that's fine. It's all good.
You must have rage-blinders on because I specifically said that's not what I meant. I don't think it's all good, but I'm the one you blindly attacked, twice, over a misunderstanding. I'll be calm in about ten minutes, myself.
NOTE: With this version of the boards, I can no longer scroll down to "quote" another post, so I'm going to be apologizing to @Apos here in a minute.
@Apos said in Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning:
Because the alternate implementations are worse, more cumbersome, and unnecessary when the few people that have issues with it we could just manually make exceptions for?
Fair, but your cohort was making snide comments about these people. I took some minor offense to that. I am going to assume from Kanye's blind rage that "snide" was not his intention and leave it at that.
More difficult? Well, like I said, Mush-likes can create characters from the login screen. I had no idea that this was difficult for Evennia. It honestly shocks me. To me, having something that reads emails and creates a character that way sounds far more technically complex. This shocks me enough that I'm going to look into it, because using email to trigger an automated system that I at least feel could be built-in sounds, well, silly. Implementation differences, I suppose? But still, a bit of the head-scratcher.
Thanks for the clarification, tho. And yeah, sorry if I offended.
I edited what I said because at second reading it wasn't what I meant. I didn't mean to shit on the game, and I certainly didn't think that I did. I absolutely question "give us your email because it doesn't matter" and what I see as the poor logic in saying it's "not a big deal". Put up with it? Sure. Attacking someone's reasoning for saying it's not a big deal? No. And I'm not even talking to you here.
You know, no matter how many times I try to bury the hatchet with you, Kanye, you appear to want to take everything I say in its worst context. Go you, I suppose, and I know you're going to read this and just come up with reasons why you're right, but I left the Hog Pit for a reason. I'm tired of this. I'm done with it. Shitting on someone you think shit on you then blaming them for editing themselves to look better is going to be all on you. Your game is okay, you have decent ideas as staff, but you are not such a good person that I'm going to take two posts in a row shit-talking me.
Please stop trolling me. I'm tired of it, and I've stopped trolling you back. Take the high road please. Thanks.
@Apu said in Dead Celebrity Thread:
I think the idea was to have the second season take place before Serenity, so Wash could come back.
Sometimes you have to look at the time passed and the age of the actors and not do something based on that.
@Tehom said in Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning:
@WTFE said in Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning:
@Meg said in Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning:
They have an easy application
They want an email for application. That's an instant "nope!" here. On two grounds:
- I don't know them from a hole in the ground. I'm not going to hand them my email.
- If(f) they think this somehow "secures" things they're too stupid to staff.
I don't know (or care) if #2 is true or not. #1 is sufficient grounds for turning and walking away.
I am honestly confused how anyone could ever imagine that an email would be anything more than a convenience for automating the application process so that a GM doesn't have to be on hand.
Because there have been several times in the past where people have taken those email addresses and abused the trust of the people who've asked for them. We here, esp. us dinos like WTFE and myself, have been over this and we can't come up with a considerately valid reason why having the email in the first place has more benefits than risks.
I'd be happy to waive it if someone is unwilling to provide an email, though I'd wonder why they wouldn't just google 'temp email' and save both of us time.
There is something that saves everyone even more time: Not needing s system to validate over email to being with. This is how Mushes (et al.) work.
As a coder, I would then be able to get other things done. If the email address is used for "is a person" except then you're ignoring fake email addresses, then it's helping nobody. It's a hoop that nobody cares about. So why have it?
I don't suspect the answer is much more than habit. It seems like a very Mudlike requirement, though I honestly don't know why.
I don't know if Bob was the first to mention it, but FTB must be a policy. I don't normally talk about them because I don't really believe in "rights" on games, but FTB must be a right of any player.
Your character still has to live with the consequences. The players should talk out the resolution to be fair to everyone. But if someone doesn't want to pose everything out, they have every right to say "no".
@Warma-Sheen said in City of Angels MUX (CofD/nWoD 2E):
@Faceless said in City of Angels MUX (CofD/nWoD 2E):
There are just some aspects that would outright require direct staff involvement, such as being Blown.
If staff has to be directly involved in TS on this game I'd really have to argue against so much micromanagement.
Back in the old days, you were pretty sure staff was watching, dark, with popcorn.
&form: 0 1
Appearance: [ladd( iter( get( player/form ), get( player/appearance_%i0 ))]
This is not a suggestion on where to store, but pseudo code based on I'm on my iPad and this gives you the idea. It should be easy for @Seamus to extrapolate to the form he's using.
Fidel Castro, yeah.
Shine on, you crazy diamond.
Note: I think having a specific TS policy is silly. If you can't explain your TS policy in a simple "how to treat each other as human beings" file, then you're doing it wrong.
Hell, if you need to tell people how to treat each other like human beings then I do think you need a better way to get across what you mean by "adult" and "human being". Probably with a 2x4 to the back of someone's head.
@Thenomain I understood that speech somewhat differently. It wasn't that spreading was the problem, it was spreading without regard to the environment that made humans somewhat unique.
If you think deer care about its impact on the environment, you don't know deer. No, animals don't have any regard to the environment. It's the environment, including other species and sometimes its own, that throws up the problems that creates the rules under which we define positive evolution.
@Thenomain said in RL Anger:
… not even evolution has solved overpopulation.
Sure it has. We just don't particularly want to experience its solution.
Reduced effectiveness in breeding? Yeah, no, that's alright.
Oh, wait, you mean death. We experience this solution all the time, though as higher thinking animals we are kind of shit in dealing with it. We work pretty hard to avoid it thus expanding our ability to breed. This is evolution working as intended.
If you mean disease, this isn't our evolutionary response to overpopulation, this is a consequence of it. Evolution isn't solving nothing...well, our evolution isn't. The disease is certainly taking advantage of it.
All of this means that: Evolution doesn't give one shit about the environment, and neither does any animal or plant life. At best, they're taking advantage of changing situations such as natural enemies being reduced or removed entirely when transplanted to a different ecosystem. Or dying off because of same.
The Matrix's "mankind as virus" speech is utter nonsense.
One of the things that bugged me about The Matrix, or nerd-triggered me, or was such a minor thing that still felt like a splinter I couldn't get at, was the Agent Smith speech about how only Mankind spreads without care of its impact on the environment.
"Spreading" is genetics' motherfucking mandate. Evolution is its tool, and not even evolution has solved overpopulation.
Isn't it strange how much Idiocracy becomes more true year after year.
One of the million things I have on the back burner is "SGP replacement".
My back burner is about the size of a house.
@faraday said in New Start Databases:
@Thenomain Unfortunately there are times when adding spaces causes the parser to actually add spaces, which is often not what you wanted. Example:
set(me, foo: bar)
sets foo to "_bar" instead of "bar" as expected.
This also isn't after a comma. Any Mush-like parser that would add a space between strcat( foo, bar )
would surprise me. (Note: I don't know what would happen in this case if you had the system not compress spaces, but I suspect code still compresses spaces in almost every other code-like situation.)
Also code that Mush parsers don't pass padded spaces to the buffer: Semi-colons, parenthesis.
I well know this is more of a "spaces or tabs for indent" level of discussion, but I can pretty easily defend it as "so much easier to read as to make up for the pain of remembering the exceptions".
Really, doesn't matter what you use to indent as long as you code with legibility in mind.