Animal Language Character Restriction

[Dreams]

Why can’t people emote whilst in common? Describe the body language of the animal. Rangers and druids will understand if they’ve learnt anything.

[NPC Logger Number 2]

Why can’t people emote whilst in common? Describe the body language of the animal. Rangers and druids will understand if they’ve learnt anything.

You don't think it is annoying to have to switch languages every other post? You think most Druids aren't already constantly switching between 3-4 languages before this change?

[Baseili]

Its three keystrokes, four if you count the spacebar.

[NPC Logger Number 2]

Its three keystrokes, four if you count the spacebar.

[Skibbles]

Its three keystrokes, four if you count the spacebar.

You're right, but it's 4 more than it used to be - then 8, 12, 16, and so on.

It's not a big deal, ideally, until you forget a few times you thoughtfully typed out a medium sized emote only to realize you forgot to switch languages and it gets weirdly clipped and you have to type it all over again.

Then you're quickly hitting hundreds of keystrokes you didn't need to make and the chat window looks goofy.

The difference so far between animal and the sign/cant is that the sign/cant are emotes to begin with - thus mix easier with character limits. If we keep the limits, and punish the emotes, maybe animal can go from ' to random animal noises or movements like cant.

Though I don't see why we can't have emotes plus a character limit unless there's just some mechanical limitation that isn't worth the trouble to fix.

[TooManyPotatoes]

The character limit prevents the communication of nuance, which is a vital component of the best examples of roleplay.

There is doubtless plenty of examples of players using animal language incorrectly. There's also many more terrible examples of common. But unlike common, at least the majority of us are spared the worst of it (other than a comical excess of ''''' '' '' ' ''). Would you perhaps consider limiting the 6 int half orc to 25 characters?

At a minimum, emotes shouldnt contribute to any character limit in any language. I can see the argument for limiting the actual speaking, but any mechanical limitation like this is inevitably gonna cause more problems than it solves. At least letting emotes through will allow the good roleplayers to work around the problem that has been created.

[NPC Logger Number 2]

To those people looking down their noses at us druids telling us to get over it, it is only four keystrokes, etc. I challenge you to limit your posts to 25 characters and switch languages every time you emote for just a day. I guarantee you won't be able to handle that crap for 30 minutes before rage quitting and coming on here to make an angry forum post.

[Nitro]

Limitations =/= harmful to RP. Limitations are good for creativity.

Trying to argue that limiting our ability to emote does not harm RP is just absurd, to put it nicely. The fact that *the red fox chases its own tail running around in circles* has to be broken up into two separate posts and that the emote will probably be broken so that most people can't even understand it so that the poster will have to type it again in a non-broken format or send tells to clarify what they just did to everyone present is just.... It's just dumb.

Edit: Also, I doubt any of the "animals can't talk" people have actually studied whales or dolphins, animals which have incredibly complex languages that may even be too complex for the feeble human brain to ever translate.

If you'd actually read my post instead of posting an indignant reply to the first sentence, you might have noticed that I did in fact speak against the restriction on emotes.

[Baron Saturday]

I'm a huge fan of the idea behind this change, as I do find the way most people use the animal language to be incredibly jarring, but I agree that it could use more nuance than a hard 25 character cap. Could that character limit be made to ignore emotes in the character's preferred style or things bracketed to be spoken in common?

It might also be cool to update how animal is translated - i.e. "Hello" becomes *chirps and warbles*, *yips and growls*, etc. Pick a bunch of animal noise descriptors, stick 'em in a list, have the system spit out two of them together.

[Dreams]

It’s really not a big deal. It probably suggests that lengthy conversations shouldn’t really be had by animals or in animal form. It absolutely encourages you to be more creative with how you’re getting your message across. Hot tip: you just add -an or — at the start of what you’re typing. It is 2 or 3 keystrokes and you don’t even have to press enter.

For a real example:

-an Danger ahead!
— *The wolf stops and lowers its head. Both ears are alert and facing forward. His tail goes low.*

Which to me seems a bit nicer than:

-an Are you coming to the pie party later? There’s going to be lots of pies but I’m worried that one of those dastardly necromancers is going to show up and put a finger in it. And I don’t just mean dip his own finger into the pie, he’s going to dip someone else’s!

[TooManyPotatoes]

-an Are you coming to the pie party later? There’s going to be lots of pies but I’m worried that one of those dastardly necromancers is going to show up and put a finger in it. And I don’t just mean dip his own finger into the pie, he’s going to dip someone else’s!

Fortunately this will now become:

[Animal language] Are you coming to the pie
[Animal language] party later? There's goin
[Animal language] g to be lots of pies but
[Animal language] I'm worried that one of th
[Animal language] at one of those dastardly
[Animal language] necromancers is going to
[Animal language] show up and put a finger
[Animal language] in it. And I don't just m
[Animal language] ean dip his own finger in
[Animal language] to the pie, he's going to
[Animal language] dip someone else's!

if the above screenshot is anything to go by.

[NPC Logger Number 2]

-an Are you coming to the pie party later? There’s going to be lots of pies but I’m worried that one of those dastardly necromancers is going to show up and put a finger in it. And I don’t just mean dip his own finger into the pie, he’s going to dip someone else’s!

Fortunately this will now become:

[Animal language] Are you coming to the pie
[Animal language] party later? There's goin
[Animal language] g to be lots of pies but
[Animal language] I'm worried that one of th
[Animal language] at one of those dastardly
[Animal language] necromancers is going to
[Animal language] show up and put a finger
[Animal language] in it. And I don't just m
[Animal language] ean dip his own finger in
[Animal language] to the pie, he's going to
[Animal language] dip someone else's!

if the above screenshot is anything to go by.

This is EXACTLY what you can all expect to see if this is not reverted. Either that or animals just speaking sylvan or elven instead.

[Nitro]

Good. Let's hope their RPR is adjusted accordingly until maybe they find reasons to do their social RP outside of animal forms.

[NPC Logger Number 2]

Good. Let's hope their RPR is adjusted accordingly until maybe they find reasons to do their social RP outside of animal forms.

This seems a lot like you're saying someone else's fun is wrong.

[Miaou]

I'm a huge fan of the idea behind this change, as I do find the way most people use the animal language to be incredibly jarring, but I agree that it could use more nuance than a hard 25 character cap. Could that character limit be made to ignore emotes in the character's preferred style or things bracketed to be spoken in common?

It might also be cool to update how animal is translated - i.e. "Hello" becomes *chirps and warbles*, *yips and growls*, etc. Pick a bunch of animal noise descriptors, stick 'em in a list, have the system spit out two of them together.

God no. It's bad enough seeing rogues turn into break dancers when they decide to type in back to back messages. I don't see why pigeonholing and limiting nuance of our own emote use to show what sound is being made, if there even is a sound! Body language is key to how animals convey things. I don't want to see the wolf totem suddenly squalking or the snake druid roaring like a lion.

Like Nevrus mentioned, I don't agree with taking away the main methods of interaction for this game just because a few people use it in a way that is deemed incorrect.

Good. Let's hope their RPR is adjusted accordingly until maybe they find reasons to do their social RP outside of animal forms.

If that is your expectation, why isn't RPR adjustments the method used to discourage the behaviour in the first place? This entire change is a very roundabout way to deal with the few.

[Baron Saturday]

God no. It's bad enough seeing rogues turn into break dancers when they decide to type in back to back messages. I don't see why pigeonholing and limiting nuance of our own emote use to show what sound is being made, if there even is a sound! Body language is key to how animals convey things. I don't want to see the wolf totem suddenly squalking or the snake druid roaring like a lion.

Fair point!

[Baseili]

Considering how populated arelith is compared to the size of the DM team, I imagine its probably easier to apply a limit to what should be short and direct forms of communication rather than adding more reports to the pile. Plus animals don't exactly talk like we do, if you're a snake talking about pies and necromancers that is the complete opposite of nuanced you're literally just putting -an before a regular sentence.

[NPC Logger Number 2]

Considering how populated arelith is compared to the size of the DM team, I imagine its probably easier to apply a limit to what should be short and direct forms of communication rather than adding more reports to the pile.

Except now we'll be reporting druids for just making a bunch of short choppy posts and broken emotes when trying to RP with their friends just so the DM's can come and punish them for not playing the way you like.

[Xerah]

Except now we'll be reporting druids for just making a bunch of short choppy posts and broken emotes when trying to RP with their friends just so the DM's can come and punish them for not playing the way you like.

This type of response isn't really helpful. Someone can look at that sort of thing the exact same way someone might look at a LG elf having dinner with a CE drow as if they were good friends. Those two might be playing the game the way they want to but there is a certain level of lore to uphold in the world and having discussions about tea and crumpets in an animal language is just as silly as the elf and drow.

[Kalgoon]

Is the issue that players are having in-depth conversations or that onlookers are being bombarded with nonsense?

If the former, do remember that it's sentient beings using Animal Language this way and new words can be created for old languages, as Hawai'i has proven. Complex concepts can also be broken down into multiple words, like "walking metal enemy" for a construct.

If this is the latter, just make Animal Language semi-invisible. Don't output any lines in chat unless the player emotes or it is understood. How often do people actually notice every little movement, smell, or sound an animal makes?

[TroubledWaters]

It's gotta be a pain to have to switch languages just to do longer emotes, but it absolutely makes sense to me that animals aren't discussing existentialism and post-colonial literature while gnawing on some desiccated badger cadaver.

Can't we just have emotes not count toward the character limit? Is that possible?

Edit:

Is the issue that players are having in-depth conversations or that onlookers are being bombarded with nonsense?

I think the issue is that it doesn't make sense to carry out long conversations as a bear, the same way that you can't have long discussions in Thieves Cant. I think like cant, animal communication should be simple.

[Drowboy]

Does your character really need to spend all of their waking time as, like, a rat?

That seems, ironically, kinda unnatural.

[Inordinate]

Does your character really need to spend all of their waking time as, like, a rat?

That seems, ironically, kinda unnatural.

This has nothing to do with the issue being raised in this thread.

[Skibbles]

For a real example:

-an Danger ahead!
— *The wolf stops and lowers its head. Both ears are alert and facing forward. His tail goes low.*

Which to me seems a bit nicer than:

-an Are you coming to the pie party later? There’s going to be lots of pies but I’m worried that one of those dastardly necromancers is going to show up and put a finger in it. And I don’t just mean dip his own finger into the pie, he’s going to dip someone else’s!

Why are you using two different examples, one disproportionately ridiculous, to prove a point about switching languages? Wouldn't this be a better example?

-an *The wolf stops and lowers its head. Both ears are alert and facing forward. His tail goes low.* Danger ahead!

or

— *The wolf stops and lowers its head. Both ears are alert and facing forward. His tail goes low.*
-an Danger ahead!

Now which one is going to be not only easier to type, but also require one less entire line in the chat log for easier reading?

[Emotionaloverload]

I approve of any change that discourages living in animal shape which tends to always creep up as a persistent issue (in my 100 years here - surely its been at least that long a time). Especially when polymorph appears to be unlimited now (for totems, anyway).

If you really have to have a prolonged and intricate conversation, unshift.

THAT said, emotes really shouldn't be included in the limit. I have used emotes to express animal/monster shape more than I have ever used any dialogue. It should be given more leeway. And if someone does manage to have a long philosophical debate using just gestures in animal shape then honestly, they should be allowed to, at that point.

-Old old Shy