>Is it poor roleplaying....
>
>
>
>
>1.a) ...to take advantage of demon-faced talismans to use
>no_remove weapons?
>
>It seems very thick on game mechanics knowledge, and thin on a
>roleplaying approach to weapons and armor. Yet, maybe these
>talismans sapping the strength needed to hold onto a weapon is
>something people in a medieval fantasy world would think
>about.

I disagree. My character knows he's hopelessly stuck to a spear, but he doesn't want to use that spear, so maybe he wagers if he's weak enough he'll be forced to drop it. Same idea, I guess you could roleplay being truly cursed by it, I think that's a tad extreme but I guess it'd be better roleplay if you pretended to be scared by cursed weapons. This reminds me of my first paladin, I uncursed someone who said their weapon was cursed not realizing they'd want to keep it cursed. I guess sometimes its better roleplay forgetting some of the stuff you learn about OOC game mechanics. Here I'd lay it up to game balance, good weapons are often cursed for the inability to be disarmed and in that light, its not meant to be a dehabilitating hindrance. I wouldn't call it bad roleplay to use the -str items, but I would call it stellar roleplay if you didn't.

>
>
>
>
>1.b) ...for a good aligned (or Sylvan?) character to take
>advantage of demon-faced talismans to use no_remove
>weapons?
>
>I don't know about CF, but in AD&D there is a lot of lore
>about demon's and their talismans. Using them to reduce
>strength doesn't seem right.

Theoretically, you could assume demons are a natural part of Thera. Its a talisman bearing a demon, not necessarily a demonic item. I wear a necklace depicting a demon, I don't worship demons or anything.

>
>
>
>
>2) ...to tell your groupmate not to sacrifice the mob's
>limited weapons while leveling because you know they'll return
>without the weapons?

This falls under game mechanics as well. Two things, I don't understand why people would naturally go through the trouble of sacrificing every scrap of crap they come across and at the same time, I understand why mobs just don't load up on the stockpile of weapons at their feet. Its sort of like, if you're fighting a cityguard and a hero hands the city guard a level 52 quest sword, why doesn't he wield it? I don't consider this bad roleplay, its just something you have to ignore in game.

>
>Your first thought is to destroy, but in Thera it actually
>works to your advantage to leave them lying on the ground.
>
>
>
>
>3.a) ...to know know questy stuff with characters that have
>never been to that quest area?
>
>I've never known what to make of this. Should our characters
>not know what phrase to say to invoke unique object X, or how
>to gain entrance to area Y? Should our characters know what
>various equipment does? Should our characters have to pretend
>to relearn the steps through Hell each time we go? Should we
>know how dangerous certain areas are, and how to minimize that
>danger?
>
>
>
>
>3.b) ...to know general game knowledge?
>
>Should a level 1 with a hometown of Udgaard know the way to
>Balator? Should a level 1 know the stats on pale skull rings
>and wide copper bracelets? Should a character of one class
>intimately know the skills of another class and the usefulness
>of those skills?
>
>

These two can be summarized easily. I usually add into my role somewhere that I learned alot about items from frequenting auctions, or learning from a mentor, or a stringent education, or eavesdropping on merchants, or whatever. Your knowledge might be from a map you bought from a smuggler in Seantryn Modan, or you heard a tale about a staff of striking from a soldier in your guild, or whatever. If you don't have a reason to know something you really shouldn't, stellar roleplay is purposefully including things you don't know but its not horrid roleplay to know something more then what you look like when you roll a new level 1 character.

>
>
>4) ...for a gnome to kill gnomes of Hillcrest for that
>gnome only sword?
>
>Ok, I know the answer to this one... but... but...

Yeah, this bothers me and I don't know why. I think its because ideally, no neutral or goodie would kill someone/something specifically for their armor except in certain circumstances. Would a reasonable, non-evil human kill someone to steal their car? No, that would be killing someone out of greed, IE an evil thing to do. However, thats idealism, in reality the game would be terribly hard to play if goodies for instance could only gear off of evils (and then, only if they had a legitimate reason to kill the guy) and by requesting. In fact, I also find it awfully hard to justify requesting something from a mob who apparently needs their item. IE, Basilica is under siege and you're going to strip its generals?

It boils down to game mechanics, and for the most part, just turn a blind eye. It would be stellar albeit incredibly difficult roleplay to never kill anything just because you wanted the armor they have.

>
>
>
>
>5) ...to know zilch about the leader of your cabal because
>you are never on at the same time as them?
>
>One of those unavoidable problems, I suppose.
>

I know about the president and yet I've never personally met him. Same applies, stories travel, you have to assume your character is living in a real environment and in this environment they aren't blind. How do you know someone's name when you first meet them (before you meet them)? Magically you see a duergar and you know his first and sometimes last names, as well as their guild standing, title and etc. In fact, a voice echos in your head and you know the same thing, and a person who you may have known for 200 years with your elf, you can't recognize their voice because you have dirt in your eyes. Some things are based on the fact that this is a game, and you have to cope, and other things you should just know because the heroes and leaders and etc of your character's day are infamous in the world of Thera.

>1.a) ...to take advantage of demon-faced talismans to use
>no_remove weapons?

Good question, my thinking on this topic is usually from the POV of 1.b. I'm not sure but i think i have to go with yes, it's ok.
If characters understand what a cursed weapon is and how losing strength disables a cursed weapon i see it working. Of course in book terms i imagine it's a bigger deal than going and chopping down one creature for his item :>

>1.b) ...for a good aligned (or Sylvan?) character to take
>advantage of demon-faced talismans to use no_remove
>weapons?

I would be uncomfortable.

>2) ...to tell your groupmate not to sacrifice the mob's
>limited weapons while leveling because you know they'll return
>without the weapons?

Not a situation i've really come across before, i'm not usually terribly bothered about saccing a mobs gear after i've killed it.

>3.a) ...to know know questy stuff with characters that have
>never been to that quest area?

Yes/No. We shouldn't really, but it's a giant pain in the ass and feels daft to have to breeze through the steps pretending you didn't know what they are in advance.

>3.b) ...to know general game knowledge?

I have no issue with this, it just implies you know a lot, may have travelled in your non-adventuring days. I balk at showing extreme knowledge of other classes, especially if you have know way of knowing. The best i can do is throw out vague comments (Can't you do one of those throw type moves i've seen others of your guild use?)

>4) ...for a gnome to kill gnomes of Hillcrest for that
>gnome only sword?

I always find that one wrong, but i don't know why. Humans kill humans all the time. For some reason i set a different standard for humans...

>5) ...to know zilch about the leader of your cabal because
>you are never on at the same time as them?

That's just sad, i guess it reflects on how IC interactions go on. Characters who's times overlap you and the leaders should be able to pass on info and you should hear of his heroic deeds or some stuff. I guess it's just the way people think of players more than characters.

>1.a) ...to take advantage of demon-faced talismans to use
>no_remove weapons?

Of course not. That, in my opinion, is the character using their knowledge, plus common sense, to reach their goals.

>1.b) ...for a good aligned (or Sylvan?) character to take
>advantage of demon-faced talismans to use no_remove
>weapons?

I don't see why it would matter. If the person can wear the item, (no anti-good tag, etc.) then what is the harm. Like the above, they are using their intellect.

>2) ...to tell your groupmate not to sacrifice the mob's
>limited weapons while leveling because you know they'll return
>without the weapons?

hhmmm... Interesting. This one is a bit different. I have never come across this problem, mainly because I don't automatically sacrifice every piece of equipment that a mod leaves. But then, if the object is still lying there when the creature returns, I would assume it would simply pick it's weapon back up.

>3.a) ...to know know questy stuff with characters that have
>never been to that quest area?

Of course not! Do you really want to relearn everything every time you create a new character!? To learn how to get from place to place again, to go through the inane act of asking every stupid question you already know the answer to? To have to ask where to practice, train, where your guild is, where this town is, how to get to this place, how to get back!? To research every cabal or religion you want to join all over again? That would just be silly. It's a fantasy world, so naturally your past lives would effect your current one... just think of it as reincarnation, only here, you somewhat do have knowledge of your past lives... to an extent.

>3.b) ...to know general game knowledge?

See above... also, what is the point of having a helpful webpage with general information about the mud, if your just going to have to ask it all in game?

>4) ...for a gnome to kill gnomes of Hillcrest for that
>gnome only sword?

But... but, what?! Would a human not kill a human, JUST because thier are human? Better yet, would a drow? An arial? or any other race? If Thera is real life for our characters, look at real life for us? Do we not kill each other, regardless of the fact that we are both human? Granted it would be a little unrealistic for EVERY gnome to do it probably, but that doesn't mean that there aren't crazy gnomes out there, running down the street screaming at the top of their lungs, swinging their sword like a mad man.

>5) ...to know zilch about the leader of your cabal because
>you are never on at the same time as them?

Why, if you are never both on at the same time, would you know anything about them, short of what you have heard. This falls into taking IC information from one character, into another character. (i.e. having two characters is different cabals, to make a perfect example) If you two never meet, never talk, never see each other, then I wouldn't think you should know anymore about them than what you have heard.

>Hutto, the Sleepy Nitpicker

fleshofchaos

"Do not merely practice Art, but penetrate to the very heart of it. For only Art and Science elevate man to the Godhead." Ludwig Van Beethoven

1.a) Not really. Can you picture IRL a weapon being "stuck" to your hands? No? Well that's because magic holds it there in Thera. If you, IRL, did actually happen to have say a rake stuck to your hand and you wanted to go out partying that night, you'd want to remove it, even if it meant a temporary lack of comfort.. eg lube your hand up real good and put if over the stove. Same applied in CF with cursed weapons and talismen (<- temporary lack of comfort being the strength loss).

1.b) Yes, that is terrible roleplay for a Sylvan. A good align in general *could* have a valid reason for it, but they'd be stretching it.

2) Yes, that is just using OOC knowledge = terrible roleplay.

3.a) Yes, see 2)

3.b) Yes, see 3.a)

4) Good, you know the answer is no. Humans kill humans for anything under the sun, why can't gnomes?

5) Not at all. I now zilch about the head honcho of Fujitsu Consulting in Japan, why should CF be any different?

"Once you can accept the universe as matter expanding into nothing that is something, wearing stripes with plaid comes easy."
- Albert Einstein