Illusions and afflines

Ssaliss

So we've all heard the gripes about afflines killing illusions and whatnot. So how'bout solving that?

My idea:

Illusions come in two flavors; either freeform illusions or combat illusions.

Combat illusions would have the following syntax: WEAVE ILLUSION <performer> <ability> <target>. So you could, for instance, WEAVE ILLUSION ME NIGHTKISS ALBAN, and everyone would see me nightkiss Alban. This would automatically attach appropriate afflines.

Freeform illusions would have the following syntax: WEAVE ILLUSION FREE <stuff>. This'd just display the stuff to everyone in the room. Perfect for RP/rituals/whatnot. Possible additions would be to have this kind of illusions bypass illusion detection but at the same time make them a separate colour on CONFIG COLOR as well as making it perfectly clear that using freeform illusions for combat illusions is extremely frowned upon.

As a perk, this would allow the creation of special artifacts that'd only allow the freeform illusions to be used for RP purposes, which would likely be a fair bit cheaper than other illusion wands.

Thoughts? Comments? Illusions aren't exactly my forte, so I might've missed something in here.

Alban

Well, some free illusions would be needed for combat, like things that aren't afflictions or aren't targetable, like a focus mind illusion.

Ssaliss

For those, you'd do WEAVE ILLUSION ME FOCUS MIND.

Nihta

I am a wand user, and there is a fairly high chance that someone will see through my illusion (50%, I think). Having a targeted illusion further aggravates this, as instead of tricking some people, and not tricking other people, it would just have a 50% chance of working on one person. If it became targetted, I would like to see it moved to its own balance (slower than the eq balance, maybe 3s or 4s), or the % chance of it working go up significantly, or some combination of both.

Also in response to the previous thread declaration that illusions are OOC, I do not consider illusions OOC in any way. I think this argument is made because they trick systems into doing things. I prefer to view them as complete illusions, rather than just visual illusions, so if I illusion that you get covered in ectoplasm, then you actually see, feel, smell, taste, ect that you have just been covered in ectoplasm, and you act accordingly. If you see through the illusion, or think about the possibility of it being an illusion, then you can ignore your strongly honed combat instincts and fight as if it didn't just happen.

The only real difference between a system (reflexes) and a person's decision making capability is that one is "dumber" but faster. In real life, if someone makes a motion as if they are going to throw something in my face, I flinch, even though I know in my mind that they are likely not going to throw it at me. My reflexes do not equate to my decision making ability.

Ssaliss

You could always solve the "targeted vs. untargeted" illusion problem by adding an "all" target. If you target all, then everyone will appear to be the singular target of the action.

Iosai

This would be prohibitively difficult to code (read: it will not happen). Sorry.

Ssaliss

Aww

Nihta

Iosai said:

This would be prohibitively difficult to code (read: it will not happen). Sorry.

Target all or having its own balance?

Ssaliss

I'm assuming she meant the entire basis of my idea. I suspected it might be, but no guts no glory and whatnot.

Kio

It's also important to remember that many skills have two lines, limiting the use of illusions for them. Ectoplasm is an example. There's a line for someone using the skill, then a line saying you've been hit by it.

This is why you only ever see ectoplasm illusions programmed and not spammed in combat.

Nihta

By the way:

Message #20 sent by Oneiroi (received: 2013/05/29 15:36:25)

   Greetings. In answer to Issue #1363, it is permissable is use afflines in an illusion. Thank you!

Ssaliss

Hmm. Perhaps it would be possible to add afflines as a syntax in illusions? For instance, adding #affline stupidity in an illusion would, if the viewer has afflines configured on, show a newline and the stupidity affline?

EDIT: Example:

WEAVE ILLUSION Ssaliss recites an awful pun at you.#affline stupidity

would show:

Ssaliss recites an awful pun at you.
You are afflicted by stupidity.

Nihta

Ssaliss said:

Hmm. Perhaps it would be possible to add afflines as a syntax in illusions? For instance, adding #affline stupidity in an illusion would, if the viewer has afflines configured on, show a newline and the stupidity affline?

EDIT: Example:

WEAVE ILLUSION Ssaliss recites an awful pun at you.#affline stupidity

would show:

Ssaliss recites an awful pun at you.
You are afflicted by stupidity.

I think something like this was envoyed at some point, but cannot find it.

Ioni

Nihta said:

I think something like this was envoyed at some point, but cannot find it.

Maybe the Aeromancers' Report 1115? It's only a draft but it is the same idea.

Shedrin

The combat utility of illusions has gone down significantly since the game was released. Gmcp, afflines and systems generally getting better are the main causes.

Some of the better remaining illusions are not actually an affliction line, so removing free-form illusions from combat reduces that utility.

Largely, I think it's ok for Illusions to be reduced in usefulness. They were quite fun to use, but they're also very complex and put a lot of burden on a system coder.

Any buffs to the combat utility of Illusions can come from buffing Phantasms and Glamours. This might be less exciting, but it'll be more balanceable. 

Malayn

Nihta said:

By the way:

Message #20 sent by Oneiroi (received: 2013/05/29 15:36:25)

   Greetings. In answer to Issue #1363, it is permissable is use afflines in an illusion. Thank you!

I have lost all respect for the administrations decision making in regard to illusions/emotes/dramaturgy.

Why is "5856h, 6270m, 7590e, 10p, 21900en, 26400w elrxd<>- " bad but "You are afflicted with stupidity."  okay?

Just make illusions for fun if we cannot be concise and rationale about what is okay. If this was important allow a WEAVE AFFLICTION <aff> <message> to fake it where needed. I dislike illusions myself as they only make it harder for people to get into combat and further make systems a monumental endeavour. There is a reason Lusternia has so few systems available now, our combat is just getting retarded at this point.

Nihta

Malarious said:

 There is a reason Lusternia has so few systems available now, our combat is just getting retarded at this point.

Well, I think there are a lot of systems, just few are publicly available/for sale.

Moi

I was not aware that prompt illusions were disallowed. I mean, I never used them, but that's because they're useless, not because I thought they weren't allowed.

Enyalida

Back in the day, prompt illusions were decently useful. Not as many systems were as fully dependent on or integrated with GMCP.

Alban

Malarious said:

Nihta said:

By the way:

Message #20 sent by Oneiroi (received: 2013/05/29 15:36:25)

   Greetings. In answer to Issue #1363, it is permissable is use afflines in an illusion. Thank you!

I have lost all respect for the administrations decision making in regard to illusions/emotes/dramaturgy.

Why is "5856h, 6270m, 7590e, 10p, 21900en, 26400w elrxd<>- " bad but "You are afflicted with stupidity."  okay?

Just make illusions for fun if we cannot be concise and rationale about what is okay. If this was important allow a WEAVE AFFLICTION <aff> <message> to fake it where needed. I dislike illusions myself as they only make it harder for people to get into combat and further make systems a monumental endeavour. There is a reason Lusternia has so few systems available now, our combat is just getting retarded at this point.

I'm not convinced prompt illusions are "bad." No more so than the Wounds illusion, you're just altering how someone perceives their health/mana/ego or some other state.

Malayn

Nowadays a prompt doesnt matter because systems pull GMCP for that anyway.

And yes showing things like numbers would be OOC, because you dont express "I am healthy" as I am at 7621 health. Prompts broke the illusions rule because there is no realistic way to weave being about to die, while having no mental stamina, and no ego, with all balances gone. Server messages should not be illusionable, but they went the other way on affmessages.  What bugs me more is I expect people intend to weave JUST that message without a line before it.  That is weave illusion You are afflicted with ectoplasm.   Without an ecto line before hand, and just spamming that. 

Again I would just remove illusions as a combat tool, no guild with them actually needs them.  If something is changed by not having them improve on that skill not illusions.  We could be the first (?) IRE to get rid of illusions when they are generally considered lack luster.


Dramaturgy should still have a qualifier line so you can tell its not an illusion with extra affs.

Lerad

My opinion on illusions is that they should be gone.

That said, on this topic of prompt versus afflines, I think it's perfectly fine and reasonable that prompts are entirely disallowed and afflines are not. Instead of categorizing these two as "system messages" or not, and using that to determine whether or not they should be allowed as illusions, it's wiser to look at the design and purpose of illusions themselves.

Illusions are supposed to give a marginal and specific advantage to the user: the ability to trick a target's system in a limited capacity. It is designed to complement the vast array of afflictions and the complex and complicated manner they are cured in IRE games. In other words, the main use of illusions in combat has always been to trick systems into eating the wrong cures, prioritizing the wrong affs and generally slowing down the target's curing in order for the user to exploit the subsequently exposed vulnerability and gain aff-rate traction against the target.

On the other hand, illusions are not actually supposed to trick systems into shutting down entirely, ("You have been slain." lines) or entirely OOC stuff (prompts). These are informal understandings most combatants have. Cases where illusioning afflictions on a target causes his system to go into a curing loop and crash the system are unfortunate accidents, and a side-effect to what the illusions were designed for (on the admin side) or created to do (on the user side).

Afflines would appear to fall into the OOC stuff area, and should, on first analysis, be banned from illusion use. However, it is important to note that afflines were not created to cripple illusions, but to simplify and facillitate system building and newbies entering combat. The creation of afflines wasn't a sudden change in the admin stance about OOC lines not being able to be illusioned. They were not created with illusioning as a factor at all. Unfortunately, this good deed results in a hit to affliction line illusioning, which is perfectly "legal", and is, in fact, the designed purpose of illusioning. By extension, it should be a reasonable exception to the no-OOC lines rule for illusioning.

As a result, I find it perfectly reasonable to allow affline illusioning while continuing to restrict prompt illusioning. Of course, there's no official helpfile that even disallows this at the moment, and it's entirely possible that this informal position of the admin may change in the future. Similarly, this informal position may be kept and continued to be enforced, and if anyone uses it and gets shrubbed or punished due to that, I'm fine with it.

Zvoltz

Our stance on illusions is formal, not informal. We do not allow OOC illusions (or OOC anything else), whether they be prompts or about how excited you are that your team is going to the Super Bowl.

You can think of afflines as your body being able to recognize when you have been afflicted rather than a system message. As Lerad said, afflines were never meant to cripple illusions and banning them from illusions really neuters illusions in a way that we don't want right now.

If you have questions or aren't sure what is or is not legal to illusion, you may always ISSUE ME for clarification.

Kio

I don't think anyone should ever get shrubbed or punished do to an informal position.  Serious consequences should be reserved only for serious crimes, crimes which should be known to be 100% against the rules.

That said, I don't think the admin have any informal positions.  I'll take the legality of illusioning a prompt with a grain of salt until an ISSUE ME is produced with the official position, much like Nihta has done with illusioning afflines.

Sorry, heh.  I just find the idea that someone could be shrubbed over an informal anything absolutely terrifying.

Note: if an official admin position has been produced on illusioning prompts, disregard that but.  However, the rest still stands just as a side-note and possible derail, for which I apologize.

Malayn

Zvoltz said:

Our stance on illusions is formal, not informal. We do not allow OOC illusions (or OOC anything else), whether they be prompts or about how excited you are that your team is going to the Super Bowl.

You can think of afflines as your body being able to recognize when you have been afflicted rather than a system message. As Lerad said, afflines were never meant to cripple illusions and banning them from illusions really neuters illusions in a way that we don't want right now.

If you have questions or aren't sure what is or is not legal to illusion, you may always ISSUE ME for clarification.

@Zvoltz:  Yes but the reply from Oneiroi was toward a single line illusion. Meaning it will ONLY say
You are afflicted with ectoplasm.

not

Shuyin blows snot on you.
You are afflicted with ectoplasm.

The former seems OOC because you have no cause, it just suddenly looks like the system tells you you have an affliction, or using your logic, that your body suddenly realizes it has an affliction with no root cause.  The latter has a clear reason for the affliction and is acceptable.   If the admin could agree to this fact I would find it an acceptable point for illusions.  I assume it is unlikely they will take a stand of "no affline without a cause" though.

Nihta

I think for an affline alone, its: you suddenly feel as if you are covered in ectoplasm, and react accordingly. For the illusion line, you see Shuyin blow snot at you and you feel the ectoplasm covering you.

I really don't understand the argument that illusions are OOC just because they affect systems. I don't even view systems as OOC, they are your IC characters combat instincts which happen faster than the speed of thought.

Illusions only make coding systems harder if you want to ignore them when they happen to you, you will be at a disadvantage from curing illusions, but no more than curing something in a different, worse way than someone else.

I think you can say that you don't like illusions, but you can't say they are OOC any more than you can say what you do in character is OOC (because there is a player behind the character acting things out).

Enyalida

Not the first to remove illusions. Imperian had a sneaky class (that all the other standard-style IREs have some version of: Syssins) that had a Subterfuge skill that focused largely on using illusions. Their combat involved basically spamming poisons and illusions until they tricked your system into a loop, then they ganked you. They realized this was a terrible way to balance combat and replaced the skillset (And the illusions) with an entirely separate mechanic and rebalanced.

The only class that can really use illusions is the psionic mage. The only class that can be said to 'need' illusions is the TP mage, arguably. Buffs have been coming down the pipeline for TPs to make them less reliant on illusions, more of the same can be put through and illusions as a means of combat can go. 

Akyaevin

Runists can also use illusions, I believe. They just have other problems 1v1 (and illusions are rarely used in groups outside of specific combos).

Neos

Enyalida said:

Not the first to remove illusions. ImperianAetolia had a sneaky class (that all the other standard-style IREs have some version of: Syssins) that had a Subterfuge skill that focused largely on using illusions. Their combat involved basically spamming poisons and illusions until they tricked your system into a loop, then they ganked you. They realized this was a terrible way to balance combat and replaced the skillset (And the illusions) with an entirely separate mechanic and rebalanced.

The only class that can really use illusions is the psionic mage. The only class that can be said to 'need' illusions is the TP mage, arguably. Buffs have been coming down the pipeline for TPs to make them less reliant on illusions, more of the same can be put through and illusions as a means of combat can go. 

Enyalida

Have they removed illusions from the aetolia version too?  The imperian version is the 'assassins' class, and they removed subterfuge and got spatium, which focuses on the wormholes aspect of the previous skill.

Neos

Enyalida said:

Have they removed illusions from the aetolia version too?  The imperian version is the 'assassins' class, and they removed subterfuge and got spatium, which focuses on the wormholes aspect of the previous skill.

Aetolia Syssin still have illusions, but they cannot be used in combat(as far as I know).