[Policy] Enforce Voice/Face Recognition a bit more [Existing Policy - Binned]

[Kaed]

That's kind of dumb though, in an emergency situation, you don't want to have deal with a computer voice saying "BOB MCURSIST:" before everyone talks. It's really lazy and hand-wavy, and doesn't make that much sense if you think about it.

How is a random headset conveying that information? By ID card? What about the people who don't have an ID card but still show up by name on the radio?

Are they entering it in on the non-existent keyboard on the side of the headsets?

If it's displaying a name, how is it doing that? Do the headsets now have a holopad on them?

Are they all omniscient super headsets that know all things at all times? Why haven't we moved that technology to something more helpful, like a security antag detector?

These are all things that would require a bit of mechanical change to make sense.

Now, I could get behind the idea of making it so all headsets can be tuned to a particular person (not by ID necessarily, because that would preclude people who don't have one like Wizards), which then broadcasts their name along with their speech, which is displayed as a little holo pop up to everyone hearing it. But the headsets would have to have a function where people who haven't done that show up as unknown or something. They might even need to be resprited.

But then you'd also run into the problem where someone else takes a person's headset, and is showing up under their name. People who know that person would clearly no it's not that individual. How do you convey that it's a different voice?

[Zundy]

This would only work via mechanical enforcement. Roleplay rules/standards won't work as it's far too vague and easily overcome with too many variables.

Having a system like the one delta mentioned might work - an unknown voice which becomes permanently known after you examine the person which then persists across rounds. You'd have to give players the option to flavor text their own voices though or something similar so this could be displayed on the chat, perhaps as a hyperlink that says "voice says" which you can click on for the text but this is extremely clunky and would cause problems with blank texts.

[Bauser]

Considering the high number of players, unless you want 50% of every radio message to be "masculine human voice," the only way I could even imagine of enforcing this mechanically would be to allow people to select their own voice descriptors in character set-up.

 

Voice: [1] [2]

...

Please select two:

Smooth

Clear

Gruff

Loud

Timid

Grating

Breathy

Nasal

High-pitched

Deep

Monotone

Shrill

...

Masculine

Feminine

Androgynous

etc.

 

But ultimately... this sounds like a whole lot of work for a mechanic that could be quite problematic and, for some, wholly undesirable. I like it, personally, but it really constitutes a fundamental change to our whole in-game concept and execution of character recognition. I mean, what if you're looking at two strangers who have the same voice? They both say something and you can't tell who said which even though they're on opposite sides of you? That's an isolated example, but this idea would be FULL of problems like that.

[ben10083]

This seems more of a regular suggestion, not a policy suggestion, can you please elaborate how this is a policy suggestion?

[Faris]

This seems more of a regular suggestion, not a policy suggestion, can you please elaborate how this is a policy suggestion?

 

It's been stated that this is already mechanically unfeasible due to a large number of variables that need to be accounted for.

 

I'm against any form of mechanically enforcing this. Too many exceptions to consider and it has too high of a potential to cause frequent problems.

 

Anyhow, per my previous post. The player already has a few methods to properly conceal themselves. The fact names are shown is for ease of of gameplay, you don't have to know everyone, my characters for example won't know new comers. This is really a roleplay standard which we enforce when we find people taking it to the extreme as while the examine option is very easy to use and look back at, in-character, your character is not guaranteed.

The mechanics provided are meant to complement and assist in your roleplay. There are still in-character limitations people should adhere to. I'm not sure what to add more here as this is already covered by the rules.

[Kaed]

This seems more of a regular suggestion, not a policy suggestion, can you please elaborate how this is a policy suggestion?

 

It's been stated that this is already mechanically unfeasible due to a large number of variables that need to be accounted for.

 

I'm against any form of mechanically enforcing this. Too many exceptions to consider and it has too high of a potential to cause frequent problems.

 

Anyhow, per my previous post. The player already has a few methods to properly conceal themselves. The fact names are shown is for ease of of gameplay, you don't have to know everyone, my characters for example won't know new comers. This is really a roleplay standard which we enforce when we find people taking it to the extreme as while the examine option is very easy to use and look back at, in-character, your character is not guaranteed.

The mechanics provided are meant to complement and assist in your roleplay. There are still in-character limitations people should adhere to. I'm not sure what to add more here as this is already covered by the rules.

 

Alright, look. If we cut away all the chaff about mechanics and things that are QoL for ease of roleplay when you examining someone, what's I'd really like better enforcement of is the radio system, so people stop doing things like this.

5 minutes into round

Burnman the Wizardmaster says: "Greetings, mortals! You don't know me, but I am your doom!"

Urist McBarman says: "What kind of a name is Burnman?"

And then my immersion is broken and I hate Mr McBarman now. Even if it's just making not metagaming obvious offstation antags by name on sight, I would be happy.

[Faris]

5 minutes into round

Burnman the Wizardmaster says: "Greetings, mortals! You don't know me, but I am your doom!"

Urist McBarman says: "What kind of a name is Burnman?"

 

That is already something we enforce when noticed or reported. Rules don't mean people will never do it.

A character will not know who an exterior antagonist is without evidence providing it or told.

[Kaed]

Alright, then I guess it's not a problem. I sort of assumed it wasn't enforced, so my bad. :V

[Faris]

Alright, then I guess it's not a problem. I sort of assumed it wasn't enforced, so my bad. :V

 

It's alright, I understand how frustrating this can be when it happens. I'm going to move this as a policy that's already present.

[BurgerBB]

I think this needs to be implemented mechanically in some way. Will take a lot of effort to make.

[Pacmandevil]

I don't think it needs to be implimented at all, really.

Any mechanic that does it would probably be less "muh ehmershum", while also being more of a pain in the ass.

Or would be irrelevant after a few rounds.

[Faris]

I don't think it needs to be implimented at all, really.

Any mechanic that does it would probably be less "muh ehmershum", while also being more of a pain in the ass.

Or would be irrelevant after a few rounds.

 

There's an a lot of variables that need to be accounted for that make this a mechanical thing to be extremely unfeasible.

[Pacmandevil]

You're acting like I don't know that. regardless of the logistics behind the mechanic. it'd probably be shit is what I'm saying.

[Faris]

You're acting like I don't know that. regardless of the logistics behind the mechanic. it'd probably be shit is what I'm saying.

 

I'm concurring with you.

[Pacmandevil]

oic

[Faris]

Alright, then I guess it's not a problem. I sort of assumed it wasn't enforced, so my bad. :V

 

It's alright, I understand how frustrating this can be when it happens. I'm going to move this as a policy that's already present.

 

Locking and archiving.