BattleMaster Community
BattleMaster => Development => Feature Requests => Topic started by: Shizzle on January 03, 2012, 11:12:31 PM
-
Sometimes you're in a situation, for instance when blackmailing or when using politics of the more shady kind, that it's unsettling to know another can hold evidence for your words. I could for instance threaten someone 'privately', only for that person to copy my message and forward it to anyone who'd like to know.
Now in the real world, if I didn't want a message to be recorded, I'd send in a messenger, delivering an oral message instead.
Would it be possible to simulate something similar in Battlemaster? I believe it would deepen interaction and intrigue, for evident reasons. I haven't thought too far about this though, so perhaps I'm missing some less beneficial side-effects.
Ways to simulate this would be a message that can only be read once (and is not delivered in html, so it can't be copied - if that is even possible?) or to add an extra option to the list of Request-Letter-Roleplay-Orders. This 'stamp' would effectively mean that even though copying the message is technically possible, it would be frowned upon or even treated as cheating. It would also allow roleplays where the recipient /does/ somehow record the message (a roleplayed witness?), but with the explicit permission of the sender.
Thoughts? :)
PS: I know there's a feature freeze. I don't mind if this goes into the freezer (granted that it would ever actually get there :P )
-
This is pretty much impossible to do.
However, since faking messages is trivial in BM, I wonder why people don't think of forgery more often. Really, I can forward you any letter from anyone simply by making it up.
-
Sometimes you're in a situation, for instance when blackmailing or when using politics of the more shady kind, that it's unsettling to know another can hold evidence for your words. I could for instance threaten someone 'privately', only for that person to copy my message and forward it to anyone who'd like to know.
Now in the real world, if I didn't want a message to be recorded, I'd send in a messenger, delivering an oral message instead.
Would it be possible to simulate something similar in Battlemaster? I believe it would deepen interaction and intrigue, for evident reasons. I haven't thought too far about this though, so perhaps I'm missing some less beneficial side-effects.
Ways to simulate this would be a message that can only be read once (and is not delivered in html, so it can't be copied - if that is even possible?) or to add an extra option to the list of Request-Letter-Roleplay-Orders. This 'stamp' would effectively mean that even though copying the message is technically possible, it would be frowned upon or even treated as cheating. It would also allow roleplays where the recipient /does/ somehow record the message (a roleplayed witness?), but with the explicit permission of the sender.
Thoughts? :)
PS: I know there's a feature freeze. I don't mind if this goes into the freezer (granted that it would ever actually get there :P )
If it is displayed in a browser, then it can be copied. There are some javascript tricks to try prevent cut and past etc, and there are plenty of extensions, greasemonkey scripts and the like that get around them.
-
I'm not a big fan of forgeries in BM... it just has this dirty OOC undertone stuck to it.
-
This is pretty much impossible to do.
I can think of a way to do it:
Take the message typed, run it through text-to-speech, save the resulting audio file, and play it back in an obfuscated manner (Flash, maybe?) that makes it difficult to simply download the file.
Yes, it's horribly resource-intensive, it requires us to sell our souls, and it still leaves the possibility of recording outgoing audio (either with something like Audio Hijack or just by sending the audio out to something's audio in), but it's more or less what he wants! ;D
-
I can think of a way to do it:
Take the message typed, run it through text-to-speech, save the resulting audio file, and play it back in an obfuscated manner (Flash, maybe?) that makes it difficult to simply download the file.
Yes, it's horribly resource-intensive, it requires us to sell our souls, and it still leaves the possibility of recording outgoing audio (either with something like Audio Hijack or just by sending the audio out to something's audio in), but it's more or less what he wants! ;D
or any decent flash download script to download the entire flash file used to deliver the message.
-
Or FireFox with the AdBlock+ script ...
-
Hmm, text-to-speech for BM, with an English accent--we've found what will bring all the new players, guys!
-
I can think of a way to do it:
Take the message typed, run it through text-to-speech, save the resulting audio file, and play it back in an obfuscated manner (Flash, maybe?) that makes it difficult to simply download the file.
Yes, it's horribly resource-intensive, it requires us to sell our souls, and it still leaves the possibility of recording outgoing audio (either with something like Audio Hijack or just by sending the audio out to something's audio in), but it's more or less what he wants! ;D
If it comes through my browser, I can make a copy of it. It really is that simple. There is nothing you can do about it. Forget any elaborate ideas. Really, I am serious, just forget them. You can write 2 million lines of code, you can write your own browser plugin, heck you can write your own browser for all I care - it will take me a fraction of the time and a tiny fraction of the code to make a copy, and once I've done it, I can share it with everyone else.
-
Actually, let me elaborate:
If it comes through my browser, through my speakers or even just through my DSL line, I can make a copy of it. Even if you build your own hardware and force me to play BM only on the dedicated BM tablet with full encryption and everything.
See CSS (the DVD "encryption" system, not Cascading Style Sheets), HDMI, etc.
You can put millions into it. If you make one mistake (and you will), and there is one guy who finds it, you are toast.
-
Hm. I've been thinking of a few things, but I always get back to the same issue :)
I suppose I could just roleplay an oral message, and deny any reference to it from being real :P
And while I like the idea of forging messages, I must also agree it leans against OOC cheating for me.
-
The problem with forging messages is that the target of the forgery will claim that it's a forgery, and many (most?) people will believe him. Forgeries only convince people that *want* to be convinced. i.e. Those who already want to do something, and just need a public excuse. And once you forge something that is declaimed as a forgery, you get a reputation as someone who forges letters, and thus as a liar.
-
Because I haven't really seen people claim forgery when the letter is actually real. That is a problem that can easily be fixed ;) If we have people starting to claim that real letters are forgeries, then claiming forgeries are real letters becomes easier too.
-
Because I haven't really seen people claim forgery when the letter is actually real. That is a problem that can easily be fixed ;) If we have people starting to claim that real letters are forgeries, then claiming forgeries are real letters becomes easier too.
Good point :)
However, claiming real letters to be forged might prove just ask risky for one's own reputation as claiming forged letters to be real.
Then again, it should be pretty easy to gain (or buy) the support of someone supporting your claim?
-
Good point :)
However, claiming real letters to be forged might prove just ask risky for one's own reputation as claiming forged letters to be real.
Then again, it should be pretty easy to gain (or buy) the support of someone supporting your claim?
I see forgeries as being very IC, and think that if forging was done frequently, it would be fun.
-
Because I haven't really seen people claim forgery when the letter is actually real. That is a problem that can easily be fixed ;) If we have people starting to claim that real letters are forgeries, then claiming forgeries are real letters becomes easier too.
I have seen people do this, though it is rare. Biggest problem is the few times I've seen it happen, a OOC war started about it. With a good number of people claiming it was against the spirit of the game to imply that IG messages are forgeries. This is despite the fact that the "evidence" wasn't a IG message in the same way scribe notes are, but rather a copy paste job, which of course is in no way secure against forgery.
-
Sounds like we simply need to get Tom to declare that forgeries aren't against the spirit of the game. If he doesn't believe they are anyway.
-
Sounds like we simply need to get Tom to declare that forgeries aren't against the spirit of the game. If he doesn't believe they are anyway.
Tom has already declared nobles can't be atheist. How well is that working out?
-
Valid point, sadly. Sounds like there needs to be some divine judgement on those who keep professing they're athiest? >.>
-
Valid point, sadly. Sounds like there needs to be some divine judgement on those who keep professing they're athiest? >.>
Or make it a valid OOC ban reason?
-
Is Atheism still a problem? I can't remember the last time I heard a character say they are atheist, or don't believe in gods.
Remember, though, that atheism is not the same is not following a formal religion, not caring about religion or the gods, or even hating the gods. Atheism is denying that gods exist.
-
Is Atheism still a problem? I can't remember the last time I heard a character say they are atheist, or don't believe in gods.
Remember, though, that atheism is not the same is not following a formal religion, not caring about religion or the gods, or even hating the gods. Atheism is denying that gods exist.
Exactly. I'm totally fine with nobles who don't make religion a major part of their lives, or only pay lip service or don't give a damn. I'm pretty sure you can find sufficient historic examples to justify that.
-
Is Atheism still a problem? I can't remember the last time I heard a character say they are atheist, or don't believe in gods.
Remember, though, that atheism is not the same is not following a formal religion, not caring about religion or the gods, or even hating the gods. Atheism is denying that gods exist.
Yes I still encounter it, even on Dwilight where people really should know better.
-
The problem with forging messages is that the target of the forgery will claim that it's a forgery, and many (most?) people will believe him. Forgeries only convince people that *want* to be convinced. i.e. Those who already want to do something, and just need a public excuse. And once you forge something that is declaimed as a forgery, you get a reputation as someone who forges letters, and thus as a liar.
So you're saying YOU forged the letter to the Zuma, then? I knew it! I always had suspicions of Brance...
Because I haven't really seen people claim forgery when the letter is actually real. That is a problem that can easily be fixed ;) If we have people starting to claim that real letters are forgeries, then claiming forgeries are real letters becomes easier too.
Done it twice, and, interestingly, succeeded in getting folks to believe me and distrust the other person both times.
I have seen people do this, though it is rare. Biggest problem is the few times I've seen it happen, a OOC war started about it. With a good number of people claiming it was against the spirit of the game to imply that IG messages are forgeries.
So we need a way for it to come before the Magistrates.
Next time there's a forgery, file a Magistrates complaint about it. I'm pretty sure we could hand down a clear verdict to govern this issue in about as much time as it takes to let a poll run on the topic.
Heck, kinda makes me want to forge a message, get caught, then open a case against myself. As a dedicated letter-forger and careful misquoter myself, I've several times encountered people claiming it is, as you said, against the spirit of the game. Tom has many times disagreed, and I think most players disagree (see the discussion of the OOC/IC nature of scout reports for materials) with that idea, but it'd be great to get it down officially somewhere.
Exactly. I'm totally fine with nobles who don't make religion a major part of their lives, or only pay lip service or don't give a damn. I'm pretty sure you can find sufficient historic examples to justify that.
Find me a noble who was never baptized, or some similar early-life ritual.
I'm fine as well with nobles not making religion a major part of their lives. I'm not fine with the great majority of players, it seems like, just not having any relation to religion at all.
-
Find me a noble who was never baptized, or some similar early-life ritual.
I'm fine as well with nobles not making religion a major part of their lives. I'm not fine with the great majority of players, it seems like, just not having any relation to religion at all.
I'm with Vellos on this. BM religions don't have a generational dynamic, no one gets indoctrinated as a child. I have no problem with high holy day Catholic-type nobles, it's the non-denominational ones that bother me. I mean, hell, I'm running a religion that people have expressly joined because the main focus is on fighting those evil non-humans, and while there's plenty of other stuff to it anyone who's signed on to fighting all the non-humans is welcome, all four of the Rulers in the geographic area are members, in at least two of the realms being a member of this religion is explicitly a consideration for advancement...And I still can't get even half the populace to pick a side. OOC I wouldn't care if they were all in some other religion (though obviously IC I would be unhappy), but most of them aren't.
And that's on Dwilight, with active Elders and ongoing debates on religious fronts (yay Zuma).
-
I'm with Vellos on this. BM religions don't have a generational dynamic, no one gets indoctrinated as a child. I have no problem with high holy day Catholic-type nobles, it's the non-denominational ones that bother me.
The new region code already has the peasants protest if they have a pagan lord (unless they are still mostly pagan), that should give more incentives. I don't want to push anyone into religion, as that would take away from it, not add.
-
The new region code already has the peasants protest if they have a pagan lord (unless they are still mostly pagan), that should give more incentives. I don't want to push anyone into religion, as that would take away from it, not add.
Right, but that doesn't help much because if the Lord's pagan, odds are good that the region's pagan too. I haven't run into terribly many situations where a religion had a lord in a region, built a temple and had enough of the populace convert, and then the region falls under the authority of a pagan.
-
About time to split the thread...but on the religion enhancements, how about:
knight's religion has affect on region, same as lord's religion?
lord can restrict open estates to only those whose religion matches his?
-
About time to split the thread...but on the religion enhancements, how about:
knight's religion has affect on region, same as lord's religion?
lord can restrict open estates to only those whose religion matches his?
No. Please, don't destroy religion. If it becomes a burden, realms will simply install a state-religion, and we have essentially removed all conflict potential.
-
I did not read all the messages so someone may have mentioned this; I would think that one way of doing this would be to make the threat in a role play message. There is generally the understanding that other people who do not have characters who could legitimately be understood to be present during the event know nothing about it despite the fact that the RP is sent to the entire realm. Let's remember this is a game, we do not need methods of destroying messages for security reasons.
-
Doesn't the 'report' message template destruct after 3 days?
-
... wut? Any message sent persists in the message history for 30 days.
Are you perhaps thinking about scribe notes? Regular scout reports expire after 4 turns. i.e. there are no 5-turn-old scout reports. Battle reports linger for 14 turns.