"Find out in game" rule change

[julie2]

a character know what a certain substance is before he/she has ever seen or heard about it, or what a machine does even if he/she is the first to ever use it... not exactly realistic...
therefore i think it would be better if its the players who did the job...

Hey, areyou saying that Alexander Graham Bell didn't know what the telepone was supposed to do before he actually put one together and tried it out ?That information makes the game more realistic, not less so./Nobody IRL has ever been half-so-much in the dark about exactly what is they'r etrying to achieve as Cantrians used to be, before this change

That's one of the changes that definitely needed to be made. Some machines and tools were simply not being made because nobody could guess what the machine was supposed to do, and they couldn't waste all the time and resources required to find out. In some cases they would need to rich just to satisfy their curiosity. In other cases, they still wouldn't know once they had the damned thing. (eg suppose you bulid a digging machine in an area where there's no resource it will actually work on? You might well actually do that, blithely assuming it will do all the same jobs a shovel will do. Or suppose you makea crowbar, but never happen to think of applying it to the only thing that's affected by a crowbar? I'll bet that's happened a few times.)

That said, I do agree with some people's reservations. The change is too sweeping., and I'm sad that it makes so much of ythe info. in encyclopaedias, well, not redundant, I guess, but cosmetic, which is bound to be dicouraging to the players of characters like Hobbes.(One of my chars was planning to compile an encyclopedia , but the concept she had was tantamount to an in-game Wiki, so I'm feling prettty deflated myself)

But it's the least of two evils, I reckon. If the changes were less sweeping, I can see that it wouldn't be easy to tell people where to draw the line, and the board might be swamped with blazing rows about that. Especially with some people insisting that you shouldn't know what you're tryingto do until you've finished doing it, and other extraodinary notions like that. So maybe this is the only way to go, realistically.


Thanks, Jos

[julie2]

I agree that characters should still be limited to knowing what they themselves have had experience with. For example, someone living where there are no bears shouldn't know they exist elsewhere, unless that character has heard or read of them.

I guess the same would go for resources. If a char has never seen or heard of copper, how would they know that it even existed?
.

That's OK in princinple, but in practice it's a lot more muddy. One problem is that people don't pass on anywhere near as much info. in Cantr as they do IRL, for thesimple reason that they only havean infintessimal fraction of the time we have IRL. You can't fix that, you can only work round it by assuming a certain level of background conversation, similar to that which would occur IRL. I mean you assume, (f you live in a busy sea-port ) that at sometime somebody would have mentioned in your hearing that lions exist in the world, eveni if that conversation didn't actually happen. If you live on a tiny isolated island which doesn't have lions, then you wouldn't assume that, however. That's the policy I've been following, anyway.

Another problem with being too rigid about that is that once you've played several characters for some time, you've no hope of remembering who knows what, not to that level of detail.

We're told to assume a complete vocabulary on spawning, 'cos it isn't realistic to go through the complex prcess of learning a language as a Cantrian character., and role-playing that would be supremely tedious, and leave no time for any other kind of social interaction. Well, if you know the words, you also know the concepts which those words represent,
or they're nothing but meaningless strings of letters. Explicitly re-learning all those concepts would be just as daft as explicitly re-learning the language. No-one's said that you don't have to studiously re-learn every concept in-game , but I've assumed that you don't because a rule that says you do would be mad. (like one newspawn who claimed not to know what a building was, even though they knew what to call it. Nobody troubled to explain, 'cause we could all see how tedious that process might get. Somebody actually truobled to point out that was pretty paradoxical, to know the word but not the concept. Not me, I just sighed. At least the character turned out to be bonkers , which explained a lot)

I think most of us just let ourselves guided by our instincts on this qyuestion. It's usually obvious what kind of knowledge would be way beyond a charater's reach.

[Surly]

This is a dangerous issue... personally I feel a line has to be drawn somewhere. For instance, chars should know that to smelt iron they need a furnace. They should not know what materials are needed until after they build it.

While I frequently attack the secrecy of Cantr, there is a middle ground here. Nobody benefits from total transparency.

[formerly known as hf]

These are exactly the problems I have - does my character in Kwor that has seen some things like hemp and bergamot oil from other islands, stop being surprised at this new resource?

I'm coming around to the idea of this - but I think there needs to be a further clarification as to how to deal with it from a character stand point - do all my characters now know, and do all of my newspawns to come now know everything in the wiki?

If the answer i no - how is it going to be possible to make sure that characters only use information they have gathered - not only from the point of view of the players dept., but as a player?

Am I breaking the rules if Tyrwhitten copies across the information I can see on the wiki onto his compendium?

[Nick]

If the answer i no - how is it going to be possible to make sure that characters only use information they have gathered - not only from the point of view of the players dept., but as a player?

This is one of the biggest arguments for the Wiki, IMO. Which many of you seem to have forgotten.

[julie2]

This is a dangerous issue... personally I feel a line has to be drawn somewhere. For instance, chars should know that to smelt iron they need a furnace. They should not know what materials are needed until after they build it.

While I frequently attack the secrecy of Cantr, there is a middle ground here. Nobody benefits from total transparency.

Whilst I'd also like to draw a line, I can see numerous problems with deciding where to draw it and explaining to people how to keep the right side of it.

Why should people have to build a furnace first, THEN find ou what resources they need for smelting afterwards? I'm sure the first smelting furnaces IRL were built by people who knew EXACTLY what they meant to put in to them. Technological development just doesn't work in a hit-or-miss fashion like that, especially not on an industial scale, and there's no darned reason why it has it be "let's build-a-factory, fill it with mysterious machines, then find out if there's any kind of realistic use for them round here" in Cantr. I mean, c'mon you'd design the machine to burn the fuel you have access to, wouldn't you? You wouldn't be waiting with your heart in your mouth to see whether it burns coal (which you have) or charcoal (which you haven't even heard of).

[west]

Am I breaking the rules if Tyrwhitten copies across the information I can see on the wiki onto his compendium?

I would say yes. Because the wiki, while dealing with in-game concepts, is compiled and exists outside of the game. Instead of being a build menu every character has access to (and is therefore actually programmed and part of the game itself) you'd be taking other peoples' work OOC, from outside the game, and putting it inside the game. Plus, of course, there's no guarantee that what's in the wiki at any given time is accurate. I've had to make quite a few corrections already.

[rklenseth]

Seems like someone has deleted everything I worked on so fuck the Wiki as far as I'm concerned. I'm not adding anything ever again to to it nor am I going to look at it again. That really pisses me off considering I worked for a few hours on it and then someone goes and deletes it because they didn't like it.

[west]

Seems like someone has deleted everything I worked on so fuck the Wiki as far as I'm concerned. I'm not adding anything ever again to to it nor am I going to look at it again. That really pisses me off considering I worked for a few hours on it and then someone goes and deletes it because they didn't like it.

You can roll back the changes, RKL. You DO realize that, right? It's not gone forever.

[rklenseth]

I know but what is the point if it will be deleted again though;

Here is what I originally added and was working on until someone deleted it. All I would like to know is why it was deleted?

Working Listing and Description of all Cantr II Weapons and Protection

1. Apache Throwing Star - This deadly primitive weapon comprises of two sharpened sticks put together to resemble a star or a cross. It was used both as a melee and missile weapons by the Apache Indians in hunting and warfare. For image click here [1] (http://www.primitiveweapons.com/products/apachts.jpg) Weapon Type; Light, Piercing, Missile, Melee

Building Requirements - 150 grams of wood and a knife.

2. Atlatl - A primitive weapon where a stick, which is the handle, is used to throw a dart like missile. It was used mainly by ancient hunters and many argue that it is more accurate in a skilled hunter's hands than a bow. For image click here [2] (http://www.nps.gov/amis/eatlatl.gif) Weapon Type; Light, Piercing, Missile

Building Requirements - An atlatl dart and an atlatl handle.

3. Billy Club - A thick, wooden club used by English law enforcement from the 18th Century to the early 20th Century. Mainly used to quell large crowds of people into dispersing with as little deadly force as possible. For image click here [3] (http://www.civilization.ca/tresors/souv ... obj11b.jpg) Weapon Type; Light, Blundgeon, Melee

Building Requirements - 200 grams of wood and a knife.

4. Blow Dart Pipe - A wooden pipe using the power of the Human lung to propel a dart. Used among South American Indians in the Amazon and as an assassin's weapon in Eurasia. Poison is often employed by this weapon which is where the real damage from the tip of the dart often occurs. For image click here [4] (http://takumedia.net/tribis/punan%20blow%20pipe%20.jpg) Weapon Type; Light, Piercing, Missile

Building Requirements - 110 grams of wood and a knife.

5. Bagh-nakh - A primitive weapon that worn on the fist. It often has spikes added to it for maximum punching damage. Used by North American Indians as a secondary or assassin like weapon due to its easy conceal ability. For image click here [5] (http://therionarms.com/sold/com005d.jpg) Weapon Type; Light, Piercing, Blundgeon, Melee

Building Requirements - Bone - 30 grams of small bones and a knife. Bronze - 30 grams of bronze, a chisel, a flatter, a set hammer, a peen hammer, and an anvil. Steel - 30 grams of steel, a chisel, a flatter, a set hammer, a peen hammer, and an anvil.

6. Bone Club - A primitive club made from large animal bones.

Weapon Type; Light, Blundgeon, Melee

Building Requirements - 120 grams of large bones.

7. Spears - Usually a long shafted weapon with a metal or bone tip. Throughout Human history different types of this weapon have been created either for throwing or defense.

Weapon Type; Medium, Piercing, Missile, Melee

Building Requirements - Bone - A medium wooden shaft, a bone spear head, and a hammer. Steel - A medium wooden shaft, a steel spear head, and a hammer.

8. Boomerang - A primitive weapon used for hunting. After being thrown it has the ability to come back to the thrower.

Weapon Type; Light, Slashing, Blundgeon, Missile

Building Requirements - 150 grams of wood, and a knife.

[west]

I went in and looked at it, and though the information was good the organization was not. What you should do is take that information and make a separate page from it, with a table of contents and everything, and put a link to THAT page on the weapons list, rather than appending all that information to one page. Nick and I and others are working to make sure the wiki is comprehensive, organized, and efficient. I'm sure that's the only reason it was taken from that page.

[mortaine]

Nick and I and others are working to make sure the wiki is comprehensive, organized, and efficient.

I am tremendously amused by the fact that this wiki was thrown up without anyone taking the time to set out a guide that says "here's how to organize information, folks," and there's no specific person or dept. whose role it is to do so. Is the wiki supposed to be edited/added to by players, or should we just sit back and wait for the rest of you guys to figure it out?

[Nick]

Some of us take the initiative to organise it without having an allocated department to do so...
Pure coincidence we're both in the Marketing Department... as the MD has no relationship or authority over the Wiki.
However, if you add something I don't like I will edit it.

And yes, RKL. I didn't like where you put that info, either. You had put it on a page that broadly described the different types of weapons. I'd have rathered if you put each of those descriptions in actual pages for the respective weapon type. For right now, my priorities are to organise how the information in the Wiki is stored. The framework that West, myself, and other avid supporters of an OOC knowledge base lay will allow for more information to be added by a broader scope of players.

[mortaine]

Some of us take the initiative to organise it without having an allocated department to do so...
Pure coincidence we're both in the Marketing Department... as the MD has no relationship or authority over the Wiki.
However, if you add something I don't like I will edit it.

And yes, RKL. I didn't like where you put that info, either.
...

For right now, my priorities are to organise how the information in the Wiki is stored.

Ah, but RKL (and others) was putting the information into an organizational scheme that made sense to him.

Herein lies the problem: do you (generic you) want people to be able to go to one page with lots of information, or several different pages, each with one individual chunk of information? Both organizational structures are valid in different circumstances. The guiding decision for which structure to use in the wiki should have been made before it was launched. But now must be made by someone, so that you will stop deleting RKL's hard work and vice versa.

[Nick]

Well RKL's hard work isn't really 'deleted'. It's still there, it's just not displayed. Would only be too easy to replace his data where it fits.

And I believe that we should have a sort of redundant system of organisation.

For example;

The cotton page should have everything there is to know about cotton. How to gin it, spin it, weave it, and sew it. Yet, there shoudl still be a mention on the loom page on how to weave cotton, as well as how to weave hemp, etc.

RKL's addition, although well put together, was seriously misplaced. The page it was added to, which I wrote, was defining the difference between bladed weapons, bows, and basic/primitive weapons. His addition really threw off the theme of that page. As I said earlier in this topic, I think his info should be added to each weapon page, individually.

Just to end all questioning by the way, I was the one who removed RKL's stuff from the page.