Page 1 of 2
Sending and its non interaction
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2021 4:24 pm
by JIŘÍ
Hey
Maybe i am in minority (most likely ) but still i would like to voice some things that i see as a big downside with spell "sending".
1) Instant and auto-success
The moment the spell is cast the message can be carried instantly anywhere.
There is no chance for failure either.
2) Performed as a tell
Spell effect is performed as a tell and thus moves role play off screen where noone else could interact with.
3) Free reply.
Myself, i would like to see something different, where sending could create a thing like lightning ball that would state message annonymously in front of character.
This would bring it into interaction with other PCs - one would need to mind where and whom sends it. It would remove free and auto-reply (would require to use own sending).
This change could also make it better scriptable for across server.
Re: Sending and its non interaction
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2021 4:35 pm
by Valefort
Sounds like you're talking about
Whisperwind. As for Sending it's meant to just .. work like you described
Sending.
Re: Sending and its non interaction
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2021 5:29 pm
by JIŘÍ
Valefort wrote: ↑Wed Nov 10, 2021 4:35 pm
Sounds like you're talking about
Whisperwind. As for Sending it's meant to just .. work like you described
Sending.
I am not mistaking spells i am just saying in current form sending is detrimental to the role play.
Re: Sending and its non interaction
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2021 5:54 pm
by EasternCheesE
I don't actually agree as player who performs sending has to actually write it into chat so anyone in vicinity will hear it.
Also, it's a good tool to get in contact with people without using OOC tell mechanics in fact. Everytime i saw it in action, it actually added to roleplay rather than substracting from it.
Can you please give more details on why you consider it wrong in RP perspective?
Re: Sending and its non interaction
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2021 5:59 pm
by YourMoveHolyMan
My character uses it to great success to facilitate roleplay, I also disagree with the original post.
Re: Sending and its non interaction
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2021 2:36 am
by JIŘÍ
EasternCheesE wrote: ↑Wed Nov 10, 2021 5:54 pm
I don't actually agree as player who performs sending has to actually write it into chat so anyone in vicinity will hear it.
Also, it's a good tool to get in contact with people without using OOC tell mechanics in fact. Everytime i saw it in action, it actually added to roleplay rather than substracting from it.
Can you please give more details on why you consider it wrong in RP perspective?
This statement is outright false because effect of spell is done via a mechanical tell mechanic. So you are still using tells for the same thing.
Re: Sending and its non interaction
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2021 2:51 am
by renshouj
JIŘÍ wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 2:36 am
This statement is outright false because effect of spell is done via a mechanical tell mechanic. So you are still using tells for the same thing.
I, also, heavily disagree... Tells are usually something OOC, the use of a "tell" through a sending spell is NOT ooc, and actually very much IC. Even if one is using the tell system for the Sending spell, it is not actually a tell, at least in my eyes.
Also, like it was mentioned, only the receiving end of the Sending spell gets the message telepathically, the one sending it actually has to speak aloud, and anyone close to them can and will hear it being sent, which can trigger RP. It is a spell, there's nothing wrong with it, it's an arcane way of long distance communication. And even then, people also heavily use letters to communicate. I really don't see the problem you see, calling it "non interactive", when to me it works just as it is supposed to.
Re: Sending and its non interaction
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2021 3:50 am
by JustAnotherGuy
There's also the fact to consider that the caster can easily be seen using the amulet. Even more easily seen if they cast it from a spell book, as it requires several casts.
On top of this, most people that I RP with also RP receiving the sending in some way. Having their toon look off into the distance as if distracted, or trailing a sentence off. Things like that.
Re: Sending and its non interaction
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2021 5:01 am
by EasternCheesE
JIŘÍ wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 2:36 am
EasternCheesE wrote: ↑Wed Nov 10, 2021 5:54 pm
I don't actually agree as player who performs sending has to actually write it into chat so anyone in vicinity will hear it.
Also, it's a good tool to get in contact with people without using OOC tell mechanics in fact. Everytime i saw it in action, it actually added to roleplay rather than substracting from it.
Can you please give more details on why you consider it wrong in RP perspective?
This statement is outright false because effect of spell is done via a mechanical tell mechanic. So you are still using tells for the same thing.
I saw that "PC name" : message : hello, meet you at BG/FAI/Soubar often. Not sure if that just means they did the wrong syntax or what as i don't use sending often, but you can't just say "false" to what i've seen with my own eyes. I can be mistaken, sure, but "false" is quite too strong word to depict it.
And, agreeing with other people, i also often see people emoting receiving sending. Basically, when my PC is invited to some gathering or adventure, the group i use to do it with does actually use sending for that instead of OOC tell.
So, once again, can you please clarify more on why it's harmful to RP and how it's better to make it instead of current system?
https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Sending
PnP spell description does actually mention "Can reply in this matter immediately", which means it's a two-side communication link.
Re: Sending and its non interaction
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2021 6:09 am
by DM Dreamer
This had been a long pet peeve of mine. People don't actually use amulets or cast the spells. They just use /t command.
No one is able to police this, but the intent of the spell is clearly for communication to be spoken out loud (at least sender's part of it).
More so, as far as I know the spell is only available to Clerics (Favored Souls) and Wizards (Sorcerers). That's quite limited, it forces people to buy the contact medallions. And with casting time being as long as it is (5 rounds?), most cler and arcanists just use the amulet anyway. Don't even get me started on my assumptios of how few PCs capable of doing so actually prepares the spell.
The amulet costs somewhere around 15,000 GP and has 50 charges, using 3 charges per cast. This means that each Sending cast costs around a 1,000 GP. This is a nice little way to buy quality of life, it's nice little gold drain. Do people use that? From my experience, rarely. From my experience everyone just uses the /t command without paying the gold or speaking their words put loud.
Can we police any of this? No.
Can players use it on their own as role-play tool capable of creating role-play? You tell me.
Re: Sending and its non interaction
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2021 7:35 am
by Hoihe
DM Dreamer wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 6:09 am
This had been a long pet peeve of mine. People don't actually use amulets or cast the spells. They just use /t command.
No one is able to police this, but the intent of the spell is clearly for communication to be spoken out loud (at least sender's part of it).
More so, as far as I know the spell is only available to Clerics (Favored Souls) and Wizards (Sorcerers). That's quite limited, it forces people to buy the contact medallions. And with casting time being as long as it is (5 rounds?), most cler and arcanists just use the amulet anyway. Don't even get me started on my assumptios of how few PCs capable of doing so actually prepares the spell.
The amulet costs somewhere around 15,000 GP and has 50 charges, using 3 charges per cast. This means that each Sending cast costs around a 1,000 GP. This is a nice little way to buy quality of life, it's nice little gold drain. Do people use that? From my experience, rarely. From my experience everyone just uses the /t command without paying the gold or speaking their words put loud.
Can we police any of this? No.
Can players use it on their own as role-play tool capable of creating role-play? You tell me.
One thing that may skew perceptions is the ability to use whisper-lock from the hotbar.
It allows you to limit your spoken message to only those in whisper range.
Now, it still shows up in the combat log that someone casted a spell or used an amulet.
But, if you dont see that and someone just whispers it it may be easy to miss.
Re: Sending and its non interaction
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2021 8:14 am
by DaloLorn
DM Dreamer wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 6:09 am
This had been a long pet peeve of mine. People don't actually use amulets or cast the spells. They just use /t command.
No one is able to police this, but the intent of the spell is clearly for communication to be spoken out loud (at least sender's part of it).
More so, as far as I know the spell is only available to Clerics (Favored Souls) and Wizards (Sorcerers). That's quite limited, it forces people to buy the contact medallions. And with casting time being as long as it is (5 rounds?), most cler and arcanists just use the amulet anyway. Don't even get me started on my assumptios of how few PCs capable of doing so actually prepares the spell.
The amulet costs somewhere around 15,000 GP and has 50 charges, using 3 charges per cast. This means that each Sending cast costs around a 1,000 GP. This is a nice little way to buy quality of life, it's nice little gold drain. Do people use that? From my experience, rarely. From my experience everyone just uses the /t command without paying the gold or speaking their words put loud.
Can we police any of this? No.
Can players use it on their own as role-play tool capable of creating role-play? You tell me.
Casting time is 10 rounds, actually. It's why I've grown fond of Quicken Spell, especially on my spontaneous casters. (As you've noticed with Ilhara recently!
)
Re: Sending and its non interaction
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2021 9:10 am
by EasternCheesE
To me, reducing casting time and lowering the use cost would promote usage of sending over just sending a tell. Spending 1k to spend 10 more rounds to send a message with syntax one must remember (and type the name by hand) always loses to /t which only requires to select the name from the menu and has 0 time and gold cost.
Re: Sending and its non interaction
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2021 9:43 am
by DaloLorn
EasternCheesE wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 9:10 am
To me, reducing casting time and lowering the use cost would promote usage of sending over just sending a tell. Spending 1k to spend 10 more rounds to send a message with syntax one must remember (and type the name by hand) always loses to /t which only requires to select the name from the menu and has 0 time and gold cost.
You only spend 1k if you use an item, and you only spend 10 rounds if you're casting it manually (without quickening).
The problem is, you've got a pricey consumable item or you've got a limited resource (spell slots, and also known spells if spontaneous caster). And that's not even taking into account the very reasonable possibility that a spellcaster doesn't have Quicken Spell.
Re: Sending and its non interaction
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2021 11:41 am
by DM Dreamer
Hoihe wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 7:35 am
One thing that may skew perceptions is the ability to use whisper-lock from the hotbar.
It allows you to limit your spoken message to only those in whisper range.
Now, it still shows up in the combat log that someone casted a spell or used an amulet.
But, if you dont see that and someone just whispers it it may be easy to miss.
One example of using it as role-play tool. Then again, so often even in my events I see players whispering without emoting doing such. In my opinion people around should see your lips moving or your PC leaning towards another. But this is just my pet peeve, I guess.
I'm of mind that Sending shouldn't be so readily available. Nor should other high level magic, like teleportation. It makes spellcasting less special. But that isn't subject of discussion here. The topic being whether or not Sending can be used as a tool to promote role-play. A very good question OP asked here, in my opinion. It comes down to each and everyone of us to promote role-play with tools at our disposal, right?
