no /em

[Que]

Removing /em is a huge step back in the development of a better roleplay server.

[TheLegitHabibi]

I always use it like this:

* James Bond. runs up to a guy with a bat.

/em you'd be able to see the brown baseball bat has dried blood stains.

* James Bond. attempts to hit a player on his head.

Notice that I write attempt. I give him an option. I don't force him to fall on the ground. He can roleplay avoiding it.

That's one more use of the /em.

Then I ask him, /em would I succeed and if yes would you fall unconscious?

I don't see how that's the bad use or the "shitest use" as Reece defined it

[ANUNNAKI]

I've spoken with a few devs, /em will be returning in the future.

[Ted]

You don't need to type attempt. You also don't need to let someone know that they can go your way with the roleplay or not. The roleplay will go however it likes.

The original intention of /em was for third person.

[ANUNNAKI]

You don't need to type attempt. You also don't need to let someone know that they can go your way with the roleplay or not. The roleplay will go however it likes.

The original intention of /em was for third person.

You don't need to type attempt but you do however need to give the player an option within your action. If you don't, you would be breaking Argo's no force RP rule.

[Pingster]

The original intention of /em was for third person.

*me ?

But yeah, original intention of /em was describing environment.

[Ted]

You don't need to type attempt but you do however need to give the player an option within your action. If you don't, you would be breaking Argo's no force RP rule.

You shouldn't need to be force fed options as a player you should know yourself there are always options.

Yeah that's what I mean't Pingster I got them mixed up.

[Jubin]

I remember when the /em was first introduced I did not see the use of it then as well I don't see the use of it now, beside being the duplicate of /me command. I don't see why can't you describe the environment with /me as well as all the NPC characters and their dialogues.
I see a lot of people here used them for giving options.

I always use it like this:

* James Bond. runs up to a guy with a bat.

/em you'd be able to see the brown baseball bat has dried blood stains.

* James Bond. attempts to hit a player on his head.

Notice that I write attempt. I give him an option. I don't force him to fall on the ground. He can roleplay avoiding it.

That's one more use of the /em.

Then I ask him, /em would I succeed and if yes would you fall unconscious?

I don't see how that's the bad use or the "shitest use" as Reece defined it

Maybe I am just weird that I always assume that people react to my role playings anyway that I don't need to write down their options for them and kind of guide them in their way.

[Groopy]

You guys are fun, how about instead of removing half of stuff that's useful and players want it you actually remove the ones that abuse and misuse it? do you expect admins just to sit and /ban clear hackers and do nothing else or also handle other abusers and misusers? why do you go by such policy where one abuser can get one whole command or system removed while other 90% uses it correctly? so what if someone hacks in the server or bot attacks it, you'll remove the server because it was abused?

[JDC]

Many of you here have a very myopic perspective of the reason /em was removed.

It was not removed simply because of the fact that it was abused. It was also removed because some people were using it in an attempt to turn this server into something that it is not. (a place that supports IC/OOC, which the developers have made it clear it is not)

If someone wants to use those roleplay styles and crutches from other servers / tools for people with low imagination/RP skills, that is their choice. However, that does not mean that the developers will support it, and it certainly does not mean that the scripts will support an encourage it either.

EDIT: Also, everything Jubin said.

[Ted]

Maybe I am just weird that I always assume that people react to my role playings anyway that I don't need to write down their options for them and kind of guide them in their way.

Then I'm weird too

[Que]

* Que shoots the ball.

/em The ball is flying high and far away, landing in a bush.

* Que shoots the ball.

* Que sees the ball flying high and land in a bush far away.

Yes, you can convert the /em to a /me. But that does not make it the better option.
/em is simply a good command, and players being unable to use it properly should not be the main cause of the removal, neither even be a reason for any removal that is actually benefiting the role play and the server; which is the case with this one command.

I've spoken with a few devs, /em will be returning in the future.

Goodie!

[Kaze]

* Que shoots the ball.

/em The ball is flying high and far away, landing in a bush.

* Que shoots the ball.

* Que sees the ball flying high and land in a bush far away.

Yes, you can convert the /em to a /me. But that does not make it the better option.
/em is simply a good command, and players being unable to use it properly should not be the main cause of the removal, neither even be a reason for any removal that is actually benefiting the role play and the server; which is the case with this one command.
Goodie!

Yes, I've 'converted' the /em numerous of times in RS5 but its not the same.

[Leon.]

so basically by /em being removed, i'm being told i have to roleplay the way someone else wants me to? i'm being told argonath isn't a community open to other ideas now? we are a community of our own after all, from all over the world. how does that work out when we're so deeply disturbed by how someone else roleplays or how they choose to use a roleplaying tool? that's absurd and pathetic in my book.

Example of incorrect usage:

* JDC kicks a grandma on to the street.

S/F? ([RPIT]JDC (69))

so tell me exactly why you care so much about how someone chooses to use an extremely versatile command? someone saying S/F doesn't necessarily harm you, me, or anyone in any way, does it? sounds to me like self-righteousness.

roleplay is fun when you have more opportunities and tools at your disposal, although you might not necessarily need them. just because you have a screwdriver, should you ditch the drill?

Yes, especially your post.

We have players from nearly all countries; it is normal that some aren't good at English or use S/F. Yes, sometimes they may not know how to RP properly, but that doesn't make them "stupid" or "mentally-challenged."

this^^. i don't understand the unnecessary disrespect towards people who choose to roleplay using IC/OOC brackets and S/F, especially marking them down as mentally deficient simply because they do something different and you don't like it. they aren't even a threat, and neither are those who choose to l33tclassic /me roleplay. we're all friends here, right?

[JDC]

so basically by /em being removed, i'm being told i have to roleplay the way someone else wants me to? i'm being told argonath isn't a community open to other ideas now? we are a community of our own after all, from all over the world. how does that work out when we're so deeply disturbed by how someone else roleplays or how they choose to use a roleplaying tool? that's absurd and pathetic in my book.

Let's look at fire missions and imagine I am a selfish fireman who wants money. Just because some other players want me to play fairly and help everyone share with each other, that does not mean I should be disallowed from my playing style of racing first to the mission and ramming / leaving the other firemen, trying to put out all the sources by myself, and not tell anyone the mission is over. After all, we all have different playing styles, right?

Argonath has always encouraged roleplay based on creativity and imagination. Just because it is open to different ideas, that does not mean it will always support them (allowing != supporting), especially those that go against the vision of how it was planned to be.

so tell me exactly why you care so much about how someone chooses to use an extremely versatile command? someone saying S/F doesn't necessarily harm you, me, or anyone in any way, does it? sounds to me like self-righteousness.

S/F is for people with little or no imagination. As Jubin said, I must be weird because I assume people will respond to my roleplay instead of me having to outline all their options for them.

S/F is imagination-limiting in the aspect that it only allows for two immediate outcomes (success or fail) of a single particular roleplay action, rather than giving the maximum possibility for the other player to input their own mix into the roleplay. You pursue a black-and-white mentality rather than an open-ended one.

And from the removal of /em, it seems the developers do not agree with you either.

roleplay is fun when you have more opportunities and tools at your disposal, although you might not necessarily need them. just because you have a screwdriver, should you ditch the drill?

> implying "IC/OOC" / "S/F" / "for those without brains:" is a "drill", or something more "advanced" compared to the imagination- and creativity-based roleplay that Argonath has long encouraged and pursued, which in your example is the more primitive "screwdriver"

this^^. i don't understand the unnecessary disrespect towards people who choose to roleplay using IC/for those without brains: brackets and S/F, especially marking them down as mentally deficient simply because they do something different and you don't like it. they aren't even a threat, and neither are those who choose to l33tclassic /me roleplay. we're all friends here, right?

Imagine a church, it could be any church. In the teachings of some major religions, people of other faiths are welcome, even atheists (after all, they say a certain carpenter's son came for the sick, not for the healthy) and antitheists. However, that does not mean the church will encourage the acts of those who go inside and yell "F*CK RELIGION" over and over again.

(for those wondering, I'm agnostic)