Shattered Kingdoms

I personally think it's lame to not allow one to use a disguise to throw off their enemies. May as well just remove the whole skill. Part of using a disguise is to confuse your enemies.

I think it's fine, if the person you're disguising similar to is your size, and you know, a person.

An elf scout disguising as 'immense' to hide behind their 'immense gorilla' is [REDACTED], yes. An elf disguising as dark-haired to hide behind a dark-haired human in their group? Allow it.

Trying to say the cabal ability that let's you look exactly like somebody, down to their eq, shouldn't be allowed to be used that way is really dumb.

Seems like newb QQ about a challenge that all players already have the tools to solve. Learn to use the glance command and numerical targeting.

Is every adj that begins 'golden-____(haired/eyed/skinned)' off limits because there's a popular 'golden lion' pet? Based on Cylan's age death with 'grey-bearded', apparently not, but I was personally made to change an adj from golden-skinned once, on a barbarian who never used the pet and had no scout allies.

Hence the problem with 'at one imm's discretion' and the need for rules that aren't dictated entirely by whim and bias.

Drewbag, on further consideration last night, I don't feel as confident in my response. It seems to me if there were any ability specifically intended to cause this kind of obfuscation in the heat of battle, it would be the ability you bring up now. I'm more of a guy who sees many shades of grey, and less black & white, so I tend to be the devil's advocate in many discussions on rules, etc. I'd definitely recommending sending a note to Sadr to clarify this. It's a worthwhile question to ask.

As for public discussion of cabal abilities... whether someone likes it or not, it's been policy for almost 2 decades. I don't foresee that changing, so we should save ourselves the grief of beating our heads against a wall over it.

Cheers

The entire point of said ability is to obfuscate and confuse. Hell that entire faction revolves around it.

Just adding my two cents that if we can't disguise as people in our groups or as those we're fighting, to me that should apply to all ways to disguise your identity to look like someone else. I believe it's considered bad form because it strikes people as an unfair advantage in group combat. Chances are if you have one of a few classes in your group, it's something any group could do, but it doesn't mean its kosher.

The hypothetical secret cabal ability has so many other benefits that I don't think putting it under this same umbrella of rules and/or digression (however it is to be handled) hinders anyone who uses it. It's not like you can't use it in the same situation simply to give your opponent pause as they have to tailor their commands without having to start throwing in numbers (ie: 2.target, etc, I don't even know if that works).

And I've been in a fight with the grey-bearded giant with a grey wolf in the group and died (well, honestly for several reasons but at least in part) because I was shooting at the grey wolf the whole time. I agree that is in moderate poor taste as well, but I don't think it's the point of this discussion.

PS. I have similar logs as well if an imm would like to see them.

I will take it up with Sadr, however, as la.bonita mentioned, the 'ability to confuse' being touted as the basis for this cabal and cabal ability is ridiculous, given the MANY ways that it does just that, outside of targeting.

Using disguise/poly/natural adj+pets/ETC to gain a combative advantage via targeting confusion has been punished in the past. Using the mechanical limitations of a text game has always been punished (I.e. cabal guardian verification), and that is what this is. Using glance or numbered targets does not work in all situations (could very well both be in the same row, and if two things look exactly alike using the X.human format does not help), especially with this secret ability we're discussing

Causing confusion in battle is still accomplished without making targeting nearly impossible. For example, if it is a group battle, who knows who that butler-looking human is; could be a swashie or a sorc, and you won't know immediately.

Simply put, this is a pretty clear example in my mind of using the limitations of the code in an unintended and unsportsmanlike way, one which has been punished before on many occasions.

Thank you for bringing this up again. It seems I looked at it, got to work on something of a response but then lost it in the mix.

It also seems I missed some room for clarification on this in rewriting/reviewing. We hadn't had a discussion on it in a while and it just escaped my sight.

Right now, I hate this kind of rule and lack of clarity. My opinion is that disguising one's self as pets, or naming pets after one's adjective, are the only things that should be against the rules. Disguising as an enemy is fair, I think - I mean, why have something that changes an adjective if you can't use it to change an adjective? I think the pet abuse is the real problem. However, that is a knee-jerk opinion of someone who rather likes PK and ways to excel in it. Let's be real - what classes have disguise? Generally underpowered ones that get deuced on regularly. The advantage should be theirs to use.

I will be contacting the staff about this issue and talking it out, so stay tuned for a more official response.

So, you are proposing that the certain cabal gets punished for making themselves look like the guards of the city that they are about to raid?

The issue, as Dulrik has explained it, is that using these skills in this manner flies in the face of logic by exploiting mechanical limitations of the code:

Say I'm standing in the front row of a group with a bard named Melody in the second row. We go up against a group of enemies. They have used one of the several methods to look like Melody. If we are in pursuit and I target their Melody look-alike, I am going to effectively turn around and attack the person in my own group, which doesn't make any sense. Nobody would ever do that.

While I would agree with the players' sentiment that there is some tactical advantage to using adjectives in this way, I also see why Dulrik feels as he does. Pet abuse with a permanent adjective is a no-brainer to me. When faced with it personally, I have used MY DISCRETION to offer the character the option of either changing his/her adjective or agreeing never to use the matching pet again, risking actual punishment if they do so later. Still, logically, your character wouldn't be likely to hit the wrong mark simply because a grey-haired dude is standing behind a grey wolf.

Nobody would ever do that? It's a pretty popular trope in movies/books/etc, especially if we're talking about <cabal ability>. "Oh my god, which is the real one!? Noooooo, what have I done."

Cleave already has a 'you can't cleave them, they're in your group' thing, so I can't imagine it'd be hard to add a 'don't attack my group auto-toggle'. Definitely don't see how disguising as actual teammates sensibly would be mechanics abuse. Obviously no giant scouts disguising as slender to protect the slender elf. But same size people disguising as each other in their own group? Why not?

Edit : Also back to the perma-adj thing. What happens when the grey-haired guy teams up with other people who have grey wolf pets?