AMIA ARCHIVE • View topic

I just want the name metagaming possibility gone (unintentional or intentional metagaming). I would rather a player AND their character not know who a disguised character is until they find out via mechanics or whatever is decided upon and implemented. The element of surprise is currently non-existent at the moment, and I want that element with whatever gets changed for disguises.

It's all well and good to say you shouldn't get free disguises but you have yet to offer a fair system. Let's take it down the list and go over the skills suggested.

Spot: Spot is an immensely useful skill. Calling it a sacrifice is like saying you're sacrificing carrying capacity to have gear. By and large you could expect to exceed every other disguise-like skill except Hide, while still be useful in DM events and fighting sneaks.
Search: Marginally better since Search is a bit more niche and limited in class access some, but again we're looking at a useful skill (search is good for traps, secret doors, and frequently comes up in new dungeon scripts) against mostly useless skills (again, except Hide)
Listen: Less useful than spot and search, but still gaining popularity because the prevalence of noisy SDs and its usefulness at keeping a room clear of eavesdroppers (if slowly). Some classes only get Listen and not spot. Unless you're arguing that you have bat-like sonar, you're limited to listening to and knowing their voice, however. Some may argue that no matter how good your listening is, all you can tell is that the batman voice you're hearing is fake.

Charisma vs Wisdom: This sounds fair, since while charisma is often a dump stat, so is wis (although wis also controls your will saves). Although you're just as likely to have to sneak by clerics, paladins and other wise-classes as any other, whereas burning points on cha is painful for many classes. Furthermore, you only need to fail against one person before your disguise is ruined, and stat rolls are weighed more to the result of the d20. Don't even bother charisma vs an actual skill check.

Perform: Limited to bards.
Bluff: 99% useless. Period. I will happily expound upon this if people are not convinced.
Hide: Still my personal favourite option - someone mentioned earlier that you're not really hiding, but technically you are trying to obscure yourself. Some sleight of hand (concealing weapons) can also be included under Hide. The real benefit of Hide vs Spot is that most Spotters expect to only need to beat your Hide score "eventually" and they get 5(?) rolls per second in the system. With a disguise, you only need to beat them once.

Did I miss anything? At this point it doesn't matter - people can and will argue until the cows come home, on what is/isn't the appropriate skill. Even Hide, my favourite, is disagreed upon by quite a few. And I can see their reasoning. Here's the real bottom line: There is no practical way to enforce any of this mechanically, with the lone exception of 1000 faces. Sorry, but it's Shifter or bust. Yes, if you want you should be able to get a Disguise nametagger if unintentional metagaming is going to be a problem. But the people who will tell you their skills give them a free pass will still get a free pass, and should you happen to disagree I guess you better be just as headstrong and call the right DM to settle any disputes.

Murex wrote:

I just want the name metagaming possibility gone (unintentional or intentional metagaming). I would rather a player AND their character not know who a disguised character is until they find out via mechanics or whatever is decided upon and implemented. The element of surprise is currently non-existent at the moment, and I want that element with whatever gets changed for disguises.

But the thing is, even if it was somehow implemented, there's still the "account-name" thing that helps you in identifying players, even when someone is just randomly curious of who is playing the character they are RPing with and clicks on the portrait. That is enough to raise "unintentional" flags, and it's like no possibility we can get rid of that.

serbiris wrote:

Here's the real bottom line: There is no practical way to enforce any of this mechanically, with the lone exception of 1000 faces. Sorry, but it's Shifter or bust. Yes, if you want you should be able to get a Disguise nametagger if unintentional metagaming is going to be a problem. But the people who will tell you their skills give them a free pass will still get a free pass, and should you happen to disagree I guess you better be just as headstrong and call the right DM to settle any disputes.

I think you are right, serbiris. There aren't really any good skills to counter disguises, although at this point, I'm leaning more towards Bluff if anything. Hide and Spot are too useful as they are already, and it would be nice to boost the usefulness of commonly unused skills, but that would cause players to rebuild characters to fit the desired idea of what they may have already had in mind for their character.

Hide makes some sense, Spot does as well, but Bluff fits better I think, but a counter to Bluff would most likely win more times than not. Listen should make sense if your character can identify a voice, but there are just too many factors that can go into identifying a disguised character.

Is there any possibility for multiple skills to be used to counter disguises? If so, I would want to dive deeper into that.

Alaria- wrote:

Murex wrote:

I just want the name metagaming possibility gone (unintentional or intentional metagaming). I would rather a player AND their character not know who a disguised character is until they find out via mechanics or whatever is decided upon and implemented. The element of surprise is currently non-existent at the moment, and I want that element with whatever gets changed for disguises.

But the thing is, even if it was somehow implemented, there's still the "account-name" thing that helps you in identifying players, even when someone is just randomly curious of who is playing the character they are RPing with and clicks on the portrait. That is enough to raise "unintentional" flags, and it's like no possibility we can get rid of that.

That only works if the other character is in your party if I recall correctly.

It works on anyone whose portrait you can click on, either on the party bar or on the chat window, Murex.

A skill vs skill system wouldn't be able to cure intentional metagaming, this is true. It would alleviate some inadvertent metagaming, though, and it would set an unambiguous standard for how disguises are handled, both of which are worthy goals.

Yeah, alright. I guess I don't do that as much as others. I don't often follow players that much to know all the characters they play.

Two things- I would consider someone actively trying to learn OOC info intentional metagaming, and most players have more than one character, so even if a playername is found out, it may not provide anything. It seems there is no 100% solution, but I can live with players who want to intentionally metagame, because that seems to be less frequent than unintentional metagaming.

Totally agreed on both points.

Quote:

Hide makes some sense, Spot does as well, but Bluff fits better I think, but a counter to Bluff would most likely win more times than not. Listen should make sense if your character can identify a voice, but there are just too many factors that can go into identifying a disguised character.

Is there any possibility for multiple skills to be used to counter disguises? If so, I would want to dive deeper into that.

It would make me very happy to have disguise be a simple Bluff vs Listen check. I think that bluff is way under-used, and making it a requirement for good disguises would make it more common. Listen is probably one of my favorite skills of all time, and it is vastly neglected... I would like to see it gain attention by making it a counter to disguises. I would also like to see the Listen skill be used in place of "Sense Motive," but I guess that's just me fantasizing. *dream*

I would rather not convolute an already convoluted system by making multiple skills available to counter spies. A simple Bluff vs Listen check makes it a more clear rule, and clear rules make arguments and OOC conflict less common.

Bluff versus Listen only if words are spoken. What about the visual aspect of disguises?

Murex wrote:

Bluff versus Listen only if words are spoken. What about the visual aspect of disguises?

Ah, but if it became accepted that Listen could be used in place of a Sense Motive check, then it would be perfect.

I didn't read this whole thread, so if my comments have been said, feel free to ignore me.

What happens far too often is that people disguise themselves as *is wearing a big robe, a hood, and a mask over their face!*. Well, call it metagaming if you like, but I think that's pretty damn suspicious and my characters (assuming they're the type to care) would call them out.

If only we could all have Am-bushes like Toby, disguises would be great.

Even characters not disguised wear a helm and clothing that covers their entire body.

I believe he is referring to people who try to look so inconspicuous that they end up looking overtly conspicuous. You could point out most of these disguises from a mile away.

Richard_Edmund wrote:

I believe he is referring to people who try to look so inconspicuous that they end up looking overtly conspicuous. You could point out most of these disguises from a mile away.

This.

Yes, that is what I was worrying about earlier in the thread. The zealousy with which people want to disguise themselves and the system proposed to do so seems to create even more reason for suspicion than before. Metagaming or no.

I just got it! The best idea eva!

Add a "Sense Motive" to the dice widget conversation, and make the roll: [2d20+(Spot Mod + Listen Mod)]/2. BAM!

Why is this a good idea? The main problem with finding a disguise out being a skill check is that spies have a LOT more at stake than the person looking for a spy. Having it be a simple skill vs skill check is not as fair as I thought it was at first...

Using that equation for sense motive, a "Sense Motive" vs a "Bluff" check would then require the investigator to have a whole HEAP of skill points, feats, and equipment invested into finding out a spy.

Thoughts?

Not a half bad idea, but we don't want people to be investing a heap into countering something simple. It isn't balanced and is not likely to be until we actually have people investing equally one way or the other or both.

Skill vs skill is perfectly fair. I don't agree at all that spies have more at stake, and even if they did, spying is voluntary. Being spied upon is not. The 100% foolproof way to avoid the risk is just to not choose to go spying; the targets have no such privilege. The choice to try to disguise yourself and weasel your way into other people's knowledge constitutes an acceptance of the associated risks.

Disguise vs detection =/= spying vs counterspying.

I was just using that word because Joe used it. For "spying", read "disguising" if you like; my argument is the same.

The more I think about it, the more I realize I am probably not going to be satisfied until there is a Disguise skill countered by Perception and a Bluff skill countered by Sense Motive, with an equal balance of class skill ranks in the class options available.

Yossarin wrote:

The more I think about it, the more I realize I am probably not going to be satisfied until there is a Disguise skill countered by Perception and a Bluff skill countered by Sense Motive, with an equal balance of class skill ranks in the class options available.

Yes. This. And it does not involve people using a free game mechanic, and vetoing an others ability to defeat said disguise.

Analog Kid wrote:

Yossarin wrote:

The more I think about it, the more I realize I am probably not going to be satisfied until there is a Disguise skill countered by Perception and a Bluff skill countered by Sense Motive, with an equal balance of class skill ranks in the class options available.

Yes. This. And it does not involve people using a free game mechanic, and vetoing an others ability to defeat said disguise.

We could add sense motive as a skill, i could see if my DM friend on another server can possibly send me the coding for it since they do have specialty skills added to that server. Possible??

It's certainly possible, but it's not going to happen. There's way too many other scripting priorities. At the risk of redundancy, the only two viable options are 1.) leave the matter as it stands, which is not having any system at all, and allowing every disguised character and every character seeking to beat a disguise determine their success exclusively by their own RP, or 2.) instituting the server policy that disguises are accomplished by Skill X and defeating them is accomplished by Skill Y, where both X and Y are skills that the game already supports.

If there is a way to hide PC names of their characters all together, it would cut down on the issue. That way you would have to met the PC in game and remember their name (You could write it in your journal to remember characters of importance and things like outfits, personality, posture, appearance, race, etc). Characters of less importance would not be remembered as well to some, much like real life. When you meet someone briefly, and when you have known someone for many years are two different things. You are able to pick up on it quickly; in most cases if someone you have know for years is in a disguise (given they are not a professional actor/actress), there are many things they would probably do that you would know it is them. That being said, a character in a disguise that you have only met briefly would be able to conceal their identities much easier. If this is feasible I do not know, but I will finish trying to explain my thoughts on the subject and how it might work on the server.

All characters on the server would be set to a default which their names do not display above their heads. Their names would only be displayed in the player list for ease of use of the party widget.

An option in the rest menu could be set for the player to choose other PC's to be able to view their name. (This would help for joining a group with other players, as well, when in disguise you could still let certain people know who you are).

And last but not least, add epic reputation into this somehow. Maybe make it so that all PC's are able to see what the characters name is if they have the feat. It would actually emulate a reputation for the PC and I think it would add a sense of accomplishment and a different aspect of RP for the characters that want to be very well known on the server.

I love you, Mirage, and your desperately beautiful dreams that will never be made into a reality. Come, my love, let us live in that world together in our imaginations.

o-Mirage-o wrote:

Stuff

That won't work because there aren't infinite possibilities for facial features, height, weight, body shape, walking animations. I can go into character creation and make a character that looks just like, say, Ulrik, screenshot the clothes he wears, craft some just like it and pretend to be Ulrik and nobody would know the difference in your situation. The game does not support such anonymity well at all.

Sorry Derkistan, I do not see the logic you are trying to portray to me. The issue is about being able to effectively disguise yourself without being meta-gamed. In the situation you described, if someone actually did have the same appearance as Ulrik, and pretended to be him; if you couldn't tell the difference then the disguise would have been successful.

I can see how if everyone on the server made exact clothing/appearances of other PC's to try and pretend to be them it could get confusing. But then again, not everyone plays a character who is constantly pretending to be "everyone" at the same time. Not to mention, the finite possibilities for appearances is the only thing we have going for us in terms of making a disguise even possible.

You would also have to ask yourself "What am I accomplishing by pretending to be -Ulrik- or another PC in disguise"? If you're not doing something IC with it, then it doesn't matter. Your example of "going into character creation to make -so and so-" doesn't hold any valid point. You can already do that if you really wanted to.

Lastly, in my previous post I mentioned that PC's have their own personalities, lingo, gestures; all that good stuff. Even if you were in disguise as Ulrik, you would have to know the things he knows, do the things he does, talk the way he talks, and act the way he acts. It wouldn't be as much a walk in the park as you make it out to be.

Anyways, by the sounds of LetumLuxs post, this is probably not feasible to begin with but thank you for listening.

PS: Reality is a dream, and to die is to awake. So live now, and forget later.

The logic is right there for you to see. I can recognize you by the shape of your nose, eyes, mouth, hairstyle, weight, height, scars, birthmarks, moles, acne, etc...

How many of those can you accurately portray in character select?

Yes, I can already go in and make a lookalike, but the names over their heads compensate for all of the limitations that the game engine has. Just because Human A uses head model 17 looks like Human B who also uses head model 17 does not mean that they actually look identical IC. It's just the game having a finite amount of appearances to choose from.

Derkistan, I still fail to see your logic. Having a name over your head compensates for nothing IC, it is a purely OOC thing that helps you distinguish who is who. As well, PC's already choose the same headsets out of coincidence, it happens all the time. I'm not saying two of the same headsets are different in physical appearance, but there are IC ways to set yourself apart from someone with the same headset as you via the examine feature which is an IC action. You would then have to assume the headsets on Human A and B are in fact different, but they may look "similar".

o-Mirage-o wrote:

Derkistan, I still fail to see your logic. Having a name over your head compensates for nothing IC, it is a purely OOC thing that helps you distinguish who is who. As well, PC's already choose the same headsets out of coincidence, it happens all the time. I'm not saying two of the same headsets are different in physical appearance, but there are IC ways to set yourself apart from someone with the same headset as you via the examine feature which is an IC action. You would then have to assume the headsets on Human A and B are in fact different, but they may look "similar".

I'm starting to agree with the logic of your position. In fact, I think I do agree with it. Having all names over the heads of all characters is far more metagaming than not having them if one thinks about it long enough.

There are still ways to adapt to a change like the removal of all names. Wearing multiple outfits would become a strategy, then only the people who know a character are familiar enough to know enough of the the wardrobe to properly identify a known character. Also, removing helms often in cities can help eliminate potential suspicion, and having armor/outfits allow for exposed skin. It's never perfect, but seeing an identical version of another character would actually be pretty rare even if deliberate. Of course this won't eliminate the use of disguises, and it would make for a better role-play experience in my opinion.

I love you guys.. but I think it's a little silly to say that you'll have less people metagaming disguises if you take away the OOC ability to tell people apart. In real life, you can tell two people apart even if they're wearing matching outfits because...well.. they have different faces, body types, voices, hair cuts, etc. etc.

In game, it would be impossible to visually tell people apart if they had the same heads and outfits. Sure, you could try to tell them apart by RP styles, but its kind of bonkers to expect everyone to memorize the RP style and mannerisms of every character they interact with.

It's just not practical.

I think the term "disguise" is being blown out of proportion a tad bit. Being in a disguise does not necessarily mean you are trying to replace or imposter another PC. A disguise is something you use to change your appearance to conceal your "own" identity. It can be used so many different ways that it is hard to describe its capabilities.

Take for example: You commit a crime say in Bendir Dale (for what ever reason), you flee the town and head south into the frontier. Someone saw you, you were wearing a black robe with a hood. They go after to try and catch you. You're smart enough to switch out your clothing to try and conceal your identity. If the person chasing you didn't get the chance to examine you, they wouldn't know your facial features, posture, gestures, etc. Eventually they run into you, with your disguise on. Its the first person they have seen since heading into the frontier. You are marked as "suspicious" to them, so they give you questioning. "Did you see a man in black running this way"?, "How long have you been standing here for"? "Is it alright if we search through your belongings"? "Why are you sweating so much right now"? You can answer these questions however you want. You could give them misdirection, you could let them take you in for more questioning, you could try and flee again and make it obvious it was you. And the great thing about the situation is, it could just be another PC in the wrong place at the wrong time, getting all the blame for the thief's crime. It generates RP no matter what. When we have names over top of peoples heads, this type of situation will rarely exist, and it will not have nearly as much substance or effort put into the RP of trying to convict who they think is the criminal.

In a perfect world, things would play out like the situation I described above all the time. We wouldn't need a change to having names over peoples head or not etc. But the fact that people will always know its you just because of a name, regardless if they are meta-gaming or not, they will still know its you...

I briefly played on a server that only showed dots above every PC. No "disguised", no "elven" or anything. Every player had a widget, when they both used it to give consent it would show the name above the character (and saved this for future encounters). Just some random thought from an ex-player that is bored in his night shift.

Don't be an ex-player! Come be Thaegen some more!

How about a new rule for diguises?

Who is online