[MUD-Dev] Re: Room descriptions

[apocalypse at pipeline.com]

>> On Sat, 26 Sep 1998, Orion Henry wrote:
>> 
>> > A room description does not affect a character and therefore
>> > should not pretend to.  In an ideal situation a room should not
>> > even make mention of objects or people.  It should be concise
>> > and at most two sentences long.

It dosent? If it dosent affect him? why when describing
rooms or interiors, or exteriors for that matter do we
say how it looked, how we FELT in it, how we liked/disliked 
it..It affected us enough, that we consciously, and 
sometimes verbally relate to what it did to us?

>From  : Raph Koster :
>> Again, the same accepted wisdom. I am more interested in WHY we feel
>> that's the way it should be.

AYE, I'll second the motion..Thats my line of thinking also,
why has it become so accepted, that we have to go to great
lengths to be so "correct" that were trying to make a room
description do ALL the cognitave work for the viewer?

> ALL quotes following are From: Hal Black :
>I think the reason why we feel this way was touched on by both you and
>Mr. Darklock.  Namely, the Vampire doesn't like to feel sun on his face and
>the scenario on Legends that transports people to various situations.  It
>makes sense for a young boy to have great joy in bubble-gum, but probably
>not so for a stodgy vampire.

Hmmm...Im going to have to say that is very, very, literal 
in the assumption of how a vampire would feel about 
sunlight. From most game systems where vampires are used,
all were once human (even CAINE the first.), and im sure
all at least once, liked sunlight. So, why is it impossible
for the vampire to not long, yearn, and terribly desire
the sun? In every writing, every book, every scrap of
RPG, ive not yet, seen even ONE, that didnt. This is
a tremendously good example of what a good room description
should do....Make the character feel and think about
what, who, and where he is. Im a vampire, a creature of the
night...lost to the sun....lost to warmth....and here,
for some reason, I am reminded of my nature, maybe
there is hope yet...I CAN...I WILL...reach Golconda....


>Thus, the main objection is probably to the fact that most descriptions are
>viewer-independent, and therefore really not a true perception.  

And why shouldnt they be? What should a room say?
what the viewer wants it to say? what the observer
wants it to be within his perception? I'd have
to say no on all counts. The room itself is independent
of the viewer, its not part of his anatomy, but now
walking into the room he has to do that complex task 
every living thing does all the time. Cogitate, infer,
and search. 
How is being "viewer dependent" any truer a perception
than what we alread have? Your just forcing the viewer
to see a different perception..Who are we to say what
they see? they're all different, they're all the same,
they're seeing it without my knowledge, and without
my knowing whats inside their head. So, how is saying,
a stodgy old vampire takes no notice of the sun, or a
baby must put the gum in his mouth (maybe he already did
and dosent like used gum), or the business woman 
cares about her shoes...maybe shes rich, and LIKES having
an excuse to buy more shoes, how is ANY of that any
more a "true" perception than the room descriptions
in say Raph's post???? How do we know? We don't,
and I would say that to get a "true" perception of
the room, we let them percieve it, within the guidelines
we establish, for the story-line we are advancing,
to the ends we wish. Theyve come to us to be told a 
story, to be put into another "reality", to play within
our universes. Lets let them do the work they want to do,
imagining.

>    string long() {
>      return 
>"Glorious sunbeams pierce the fluffy cumulus clouds here and bring joy\n\
>to your heart as they caress your face.\n"
>    }
>
>Obviously this is not viewer-sensitive as has been pointed out earlier.

Again, it, by pure force of what it is, must be
independent of the viewer. And in so doing, has the power
to make the viewer act in a huge array of ways. From
a few lines of text, you have just caused that bored
vampire (maybe...just maybe) to reflect, to pause, and
maybe if he read it, and the room is designed to do so
he may interact, maybe that sunlight episode, causes
him to search out the means to aid himself...Maybe
it causes him to search for a cure, to attain the power
to be IN the light again. And in purely game terms, it
adds depth to those that perceive its meaning, AND
in so doing maybe some cynical players complain, and
the ones who see what its trying to do, explain it,
thereby increasing the enjoyment and immersion for all.

>It is much like those point-of-view narratives they used you make you write in
>grammar school.  Write about your room from your point of view, your mom's 
>point of view, your cat's point of view, and a roach's point of view.  The
>challenge is to write room descriptions the same way.

Id argue those assignments were meant to look outside yourself,
and in so doing to "see" yourself. A very true wisdom is the
fact that its hardest to see yourself. By trying to
see outside yourself, you see what you miss everyday. And
again, this is exactly what that great sunlight-vampire 
example does, its perfect.


>One of the things that I have planned for my mud is to do some observer-
>specific rendering of sensations.  Certainly everyone doesn't see things the
>same way, or even notice the same things.  This may even extend to context.

The first part is interesting, and merits exploration. The 
second part however, is a self-proof of why a room
description must be not conforming to EVERY 
viewpoint. If sam and mark walk into the room, and sam
sees one room, and mark sees an entirely different room,
in the SAME room...How can that be possible..Your doing
what you didnt want to do, your forcing mark to NOT 
see what sam sees, however minutely or broadly...Who is to say
mark DOSENT see what sam sees and vice-versa?
If you leave the room description alone, and write
it cleverly enough once, it will evoke the myriad
of responses and reactions your looking for.
I cant even begin to think of a description that
wouldnt work for everyone. The room description
is a magical thing in my eyes. It has so much power
in so little space. Try this one...
"The room is clogged with a greasy, black, oily smoke on which
you cough."

A vamp walks in and sees it...He dosent need air? why is he 
coughing!!! magic smoke?!? a new strain of vampire attacking
gas?!?

A "buisiness woman" walks in and sees it...Smoke?? here??
a fire? is it messing up my hair? im couging, i need to leave.

A firefighter : SMOKE!!!! i have GOT to put out the fire!!!

A child : im coughing, i dont like it...this is what it feels like!
no air, (intuition - I need to leave!) I "feel" the smoke, they called 
it "greasy", this is what they define as "greasy".

and I can go on, and on, and on.
in just 1 line, an entire complex thought process has been evoked
in EVERYONE..without having to add in complex, un-necessary,
gender/race/age/class/time-of-day/etc specific routines.
It is the embodiment of the power of the spoken/printed word, it did
ALL the work for me, and in a very neat way.

>For example, a cannister labeled "Bio-hazard" will certainly attract more
>notice in a day care building than in a pharmaceutical factory, where there
>may be hundreds of such cannisters.

Oh thats backwards...A pharmaceutical facility, like shipping companies
like chemical companies do daily drills on how to clean up
and prevent toxic problems. They live, and breathe to not mess up.
They notice every canister, its position, its condition, etc..
(This I know from first hand-experience working at a plant
where "back-planes" for all kinds of computer devices were made).
I was doing network design, and I was reminded daily of hazardous
areas/items/procedures, and i was nowhere near the toxic stuff that
they lay down over the "copper tracks" on the boards.
And a daycare center? why would they take more notice?
Would they know what the symbols meant? it could be a tank
of helium for all they know, they have NO idea what it is,
means or does, it has no relevance to them. They leave it
there, until someone freaks and says "OH GOD!! get it out!!
its toxic!!"..


>  In conclusion, I think the objection corresponds to treating all visitors as
>if they have the same thought processes, when the set of visitors may be
>in fact heterogeneous.  

It wouldnt matter if they were all of the same "make-up" or not. They
are going to see the room, they may attach significance to it, they
may not, but somewhere, in the back of their head, is that phrase
"The sun was warm on my face, it felt good", which could spark
imagination, RP, or thought later. 
Im an orc, why would the sun feel "good"...I HATE GOOD!!! DEATH
TO GOOD!!!! (player goes on killing spree)
Im a vamp, the sun is my goal...humanity...the eye of the god who
forsook me...my lost life....I WILL...get it back!!
Im a baby...wow...I wanna stay here! warm! like momma!
OR (instinctively - GOOD!! stay! seek out other warm!!).

MY OPINION : Why do we have to spoon feed them a "stack of boxes?"
as an independent room item, thats part of the problem already, 
most players lack imagination, thats why they're bored. They're 
getting spoon fed too much info, or in the case of a "bad" 
description, too little. Games in general appeal more to us at 
a younger age, and the ones that force us to imagine,
within a set of defined inputs, (for me at least) 
were the best.

- A "soul death axe" (wizards crown on c-64) ??
whats THAT! hrm, it sucks the soul outta the victim,
and it sounds bad, oh yea now im cookin!!! when in 
reality, it just sucked some life, and stunned the target. Now, I look
at it, and analyze it away...Ive forgotten, in some respect, how to use
what I see to bring myself into the game. Ive forgotten how to read 
and infer..How to feel through the use of a simple phrase, ive lost
part of my imagination. Ive been so spoon fed on pre-made, closed
in, "geared-to-MY-perception" games/items, that im no longer
interested, I dont take the time to imagine enough, to get "into"
the game. I play it to end it, to go on to the next pre-processed,
burger-packaged, fast-food designed, hand-holding game I can
get my hands on. What happened to Wasteland? Tradewars 2002?
and the countless other games that forced me, laughing and
enjoying all the way, to imagine?! to explore...to expand
my ability to grow beyond my current perception by forcing
me to read, re-read, and triple read something to see it 
in a different light.

(The strength of my statements in this last paragraph, reflect
what my opinion is, and what ive been able to gather from
people I RPG with, please take it in context, and not
as an attack on anyone's viewpoint.)


Shakti.