[MUD-Dev] UI Issues: Anti-scripting techniques

[Maddy]

Previously, clawrenc at cup.hp.com wrote....
> In <E0xGPqU-0004ON-00 at crucigera.fysh.org>, on 10/01/97 
>    at 08:06 AM, Maddy <maddy at fysh.org> said:
> 
> >Previously, clawrenc at cup.hp.com wrote....
> 
> >> In <199709260444.3287300 at bedford.net>, on 09/26/97 
> >>    at 12:15 AM, "Brian Price" <blprice at bedford.net> said:
> 
> >> Note: A key value here is the ability to interrupt such a stack of
> >> entered commands.  Consider the case:

[Very long example about seeing stuff whilst going somewhere]

> >> This is of course an extension of the more general Panama Canal
> >> scenario.
> 
> >The problem I have with the second example, is that it implies that
> >the user has to notice something that their character has noticed. 
> 
> This centers on a core disagreement between myself and most of the
> rest of the list: How closely should the human player be tied to his
> character in brain, or if you wish, what level of inteliigence,
> awareness, and cognisance should the character have as seperate from
> its human player?
> 
> My preference is to view the character as dumb as a post if not
> dumber.  It is effectively a virtual blob of nerve-twitching meat
> awaiting instruction and guidance from its "spirit" the human player. 
> If the player doesn't explicitly say to do something, in general, the
> character will do nothing.  If the human does say to do somthing, the
> character will attempt to comply (almost) without question.  The limit
> here is that the character has small remnants of self-preservation
> reactions, such as withdrawing from fire or pain, or ducking when
> attempting to enter a low doorway.

Well that does make sense, but this example is a lot different than giving
the character some form of AI.

> >Surely if something interesting is spotted, the character should stop
> >there and then offer the chance to resume the journey?  
> 
> Why should it?  It was already been instructed to walk on a
> predetermined path.  Why should it stop?

Because by implication, if you type "go London" you actually mean "go London
and keep an eye out for stuff".

> Should the character stop because it saw something it deemed,
> "interesting"?  What is interesting?  Should it stop because it saw
> gold?  What if Boffo had seeded the entire path with small fragments
> of gold leaf, thus causing Bubba to have to stop and examine each one,
> while Boffo could run ahead?

Ah that is going too far in the other extreme.  I'd imagine it'd say that
the ground is covered in gold leaf and that once you've seen it - you've
seen it.  But then since you're running you'll be less likely to notice
things anyway.  From my point of view, "interesting" is anything that the
character doesn't expect to see.

> For me this is all just other facets of the character intelligence and
> autonomy question.  As soon as you grant characters any value outside
> of their human players you have opened a pandora's box of
> inconsistancies and paradoxes with no elegant or consistant solution.

Maddy