Zhaneel2007-10-08 02:36:18
Just wondering if anyone happened to have a -free- or relatively cheap debating script? I know these things are rather difficult to create but I am quite lazy when it comes to that skill, I hate having to use it.
Unknown2007-10-08 13:11:59
QUOTE(Zhaneel @ Oct 7 2007, 09:36 PM) 447556
Just wondering if anyone happened to have a -free- or relatively cheap debating script? I know these things are rather difficult to create but I am quite lazy when it comes to that skill, I hate having to use it.
I thought about writing one for awhile, but I gave up before I even started.
If someone could help me gather the lines, the actual coding part would be easy. I've just been too lazy to gather all of the dramatics afflictions, win/loss/tie messages, etc., especially since I don't debate often. If anyone is willing to help me gather the lines, let me know. If I ever finish a debating system, it might not be completely free, but it would be very cheap anyway.
Severian2007-10-26 05:05:25
I plan to include a debating script in lua for mushclient in my system. If you have the necessary compatibilities I would be happy to post that portion for anyone who wants it.. it will probably be a long time in the making, but so far I have a pseudocode version of it written out and edited by a professional, high end lusternian coder, so hopefully it will work out.
I think it is more efficient to reflex the dramatics afflictions inside of your actualy curing group. Is this true? Do dramatics afflictions affect my ability to debate?
Cheers!
Daniel
I think it is more efficient to reflex the dramatics afflictions inside of your actualy curing group. Is this true? Do dramatics afflictions affect my ability to debate?
Cheers!
Daniel
Raikas2007-12-14 12:33:31
So, while I was searching for a list of the debate lines, I came across this post. It's the only relevant I discovered, so I thought I'd just bump this one up instead of making a whole new one. ^.^
I'm trying to put together a little system for debating, but I don't have the various lines. I know I've seen a list of them somewhere before, but I can't find it now for the life of me. Do any of you happen to have the debate attack/mindset combinations that you'd be willing to share?
I'm trying to put together a little system for debating, but I don't have the various lines. I know I've seen a list of them somewhere before, but I can't find it now for the life of me. Do any of you happen to have the debate attack/mindset combinations that you'd be willing to share?
Forren2007-12-14 12:49:52
^You approach (%w) for a debate, but %w quickly rushes away.
Ye olde target is shattered
^You argue with sweeping authority, buttressing your broad claims with dogmatic assumptions and justifications. Your argument leaves (%w) staring at you in stupefaction, and {his|her} continued silence must obviously be taken for concession.
Win
^You argue with sweeping authority, buttressing your broad claims with dogmatic assumptions and justifications. With great glee, (%w) rips apart your arguments with brilliant logic, transforming your entire discourse
Loss
^You argue with sweeping authority, buttressing your broad claims with dogmatic assumptions and justifications. (%w) splutters in confusion, unable to refute your argument.
Tie
^You passionately present your case, fervently arguing your points with emotional appeals. (%w) frowns at you and shakes {his|her} head, but concedes the argument to you.
Tie
^You passionately present your case, fervently arguing your points with emotional appeals. (%w) is so overwhelmed that {he|she} eagerly capitulates to the emotional demands made in your argument.
Win
^You passionately present your case, fervently arguing your points with emotional appeals. After a dramatic pause, (%w) exposes your argument as nothing more than a baseless form of emotional blackmail.
Loss
^You unscrupulously quibble about the smallest points in your argument, bringing up esoteric minutiae to support your theories. (%w) can only blink in astonishment at your astounding logic.
Tie
^You unscrupulously quibble about the smallest points in your argument, bringing up esoteric minutiae to support your theories. (%w) agrees with the logic and concedes all your points.
Win
^You unscrupulously quibble about the smallest points in your argument, bringing up esoteric minutiae to support your theories. (%w) laughs in your face and counters every point you raise with facts of arcane trivia that deflates your entire
Loss
Ye olde target is shattered
^You argue with sweeping authority, buttressing your broad claims with dogmatic assumptions and justifications. Your argument leaves (%w) staring at you in stupefaction, and {his|her} continued silence must obviously be taken for concession.
Win
^You argue with sweeping authority, buttressing your broad claims with dogmatic assumptions and justifications. With great glee, (%w) rips apart your arguments with brilliant logic, transforming your entire discourse
Loss
^You argue with sweeping authority, buttressing your broad claims with dogmatic assumptions and justifications. (%w) splutters in confusion, unable to refute your argument.
Tie
^You passionately present your case, fervently arguing your points with emotional appeals. (%w) frowns at you and shakes {his|her} head, but concedes the argument to you.
Tie
^You passionately present your case, fervently arguing your points with emotional appeals. (%w) is so overwhelmed that {he|she} eagerly capitulates to the emotional demands made in your argument.
Win
^You passionately present your case, fervently arguing your points with emotional appeals. After a dramatic pause, (%w) exposes your argument as nothing more than a baseless form of emotional blackmail.
Loss
^You unscrupulously quibble about the smallest points in your argument, bringing up esoteric minutiae to support your theories. (%w) can only blink in astonishment at your astounding logic.
Tie
^You unscrupulously quibble about the smallest points in your argument, bringing up esoteric minutiae to support your theories. (%w) agrees with the logic and concedes all your points.
Win
^You unscrupulously quibble about the smallest points in your argument, bringing up esoteric minutiae to support your theories. (%w) laughs in your face and counters every point you raise with facts of arcane trivia that deflates your entire
Loss
Raikas2007-12-14 15:58:01
Beautiful! Thank you!
It looks like I'm still missing the line for a Pontification tie, though, if anyone has it.
By the way, if someone else debates me first, does it simply switch the "You" at the beginning with his/her name? Everything else the same, or is it different lines if you're on the defense?
It looks like I'm still missing the line for a Pontification tie, though, if anyone has it.
By the way, if someone else debates me first, does it simply switch the "You" at the beginning with his/her name? Everything else the same, or is it different lines if you're on the defense?
Forren2007-12-14 16:08:49
You can't learn anything about their mindset from their attacks on you, only from your attacks on them. These are the exact triggers I use - nine in total for each attack/mindset combination.
Raikas2007-12-14 16:21:50
If you look at the top of that first message, Forren, the ego-shattering message got pasted twice. ^.^ Innocent error, I know, but that leaves me with only 8 of the 9 messages. I guess it's not the pontification tie, but the win that I need.
And thanks for the tip on the offense/defense difference!
And thanks for the tip on the offense/defense difference!
Forren2007-12-14 16:39:24
QUOTE(Raikas @ Dec 14 2007, 11:21 AM) 465847
If you look at the top of that first message, Forren, the ego-shattering message got pasted twice. ^.^ Innocent error, I know, but that leaves me with only 8 of the 9 messages. I guess it's not the pontification tie, but the win that I need.
And thanks for the tip on the offense/defense difference!
And thanks for the tip on the offense/defense difference!
Oops, fixed.
Unknown2007-12-14 16:45:48
QUOTE(Forren @ Dec 14 2007, 10:39 AM) 465850
Oops, fixed.
You are my hero.
With these, I can finally get to work on that debate script I've been intending to do for awhile.
Now I just need dramatics afflictions...
Eldanien2007-12-15 02:45:26
You can RUB (focus enchantment) and then debate off balance. If you have the smallest inkling that you have a dramatics affliction, you may as well.
Unknown2007-12-17 12:37:23
QUOTE(Eldanien @ Dec 14 2007, 08:45 PM) 466099
You can RUB (focus enchantment) and then debate off balance. If you have the smallest inkling that you have a dramatics affliction, you may as well.
You shouldn't have to rub your focus enchant. According to the enchanting AB, it works passively, draining 1 charge every hour (or something like that). So, if someone has a focus enchant, they shouldn't need to worry about dramatic afflictions at all.
Is it possible to cure the afflictions with dramatics without interrupting your debating offense?
Eldanien2007-12-17 13:42:16
I've always had to rub mine to cure the afflictions. On more than one occasion, I realized several hours later that I still had dramatics afflictions I didn't catch, and rubbed them away.
Also, the charges seem to fade 1 per RL day. Put it on a brooch and you'll never have to worry about getting another one again.
Also, the charges seem to fade 1 per RL day. Put it on a brooch and you'll never have to worry about getting another one again.
Gwylifar2007-12-17 13:47:40
I don't think you can put it on a brooch.
Eldanien2007-12-17 13:49:29
Oof, right, right. Pendants and beads only. My mind's in the clouds today.
Ilyarin2007-12-17 16:04:38
Incase anyone still wants a debate system, this is the script I use*, and is for cMUD, or zMUD. You'd have to use wrapwidth 0, however. IPA/IPO/IPE is just the name of my aliases for debating, ie Influence PEdantic, etc.
* Minorly modified to show #echo instead of an alias in my system. You should also substitude @TARGET with the relevant variable. The messages below don't pull the target's name from the messages, as not all messages contain the name of who you debated.
* Minorly modified to show #echo instead of an alias in my system. You should also substitude @TARGET with the relevant variable. The messages below don't pull the target's name from the messages, as not all messages contain the name of who you debated.
CODE
TRIGGER LINE:
  {^(%w) argues with sweeping authority, buttressing {his|her} broad claims with dogmatic assumptions and justifications. (*)$
VALUE:
#if (%pos("you",%lower(%2))) {
  #gag
  #if (%2 == "The argument is so preposterous and so full of holes that you don't know where to begin to dissect it, and before you realize it your silence has been taken for concession.") {
    #echo %ansi(12)%1 used Pontification on your Cautious. Loss.
  } {
    #if (%2 == "With great glee, you rip apart his arguments with brilliant logic, transforming the entire discourse into an example of absurdity." or %2 == "With great glee, you rip apart her arguments with brilliant logic, transforming the entire discourse into an example of absurdity.") {
      #echo %ansi(10)%1 used Pontification on your Analytical. Win.
    } {
      #echo %ansi(3)%1 used Pontification on your Pedantic. Neutral.
    }
  }
}
===
TRIGGER LINE:
  ^(%w) passionately presents {his|her} case, fervently arguing {his|her} points with emotional appeals. (*)$
VALUE:
#if (%pos("you",%lower(%2))) {
  #gag
  #if (%2 == "As temperaments cool, you quietly but firmly expose the argument as nothing more than a baseless form of emotional blackmail.") {
    #echo %ansi(10)%1 used Passion on your Cautious. Win.
  } {
    #if (%2 == "The tempestuous argument overwhelms your careful preparation, leaving you shocked to the point where you find yourself capitulating to the emotional demands made in the argument.") {
      #echo %ansi(12)%1 used Passion on your Pedantic. Loss.
    } {
      #echo %ansi(3)%1 used Passion on your Analytical. Neutral.
    }
  }
}
===
TRIGGER LINE:
  ^(%w) unscrupulously quibbles about the smallest points in {his|her} argument, bringing up esoteric minutiae to support {his|her} radical theories. (*)$
VALUE:
#if (%pos("you",%lower(%2))) {
  #gag
  #if (%2 == "You can only blink in astonishment at his mindboggling logic." or %2 == "You can only blink in astonishment at her mindboggling logic.") {
    #echo %ansi(3)%1 used Pettifoggery on your Cautious. Neutral.
  } {
    #if (%2 == "The logic of this argument is sound and you find yourself conceding to all the points raised.") {
      #echo %ansi(12)%1 used Pettifoggery on your Analytical. Loss.
    } {
      #echo %ansi(10)%1 used Pettifoggery on your Pedantic. Win.
    }
  }
}
===
TRIGGER LINE:
  ^You argue with sweeping authority, buttressing your broad claims with dogmatic assumptions and justifications. (*)$
VALUE:
#gag
#if (%pos("continued silence must obviously be taken for concession",%1)) {
  #echo %ansi(10)Used Pontification on %proper(@TARGET)'s Cautious. Win.
} {
  #if (%pos("transforming your entire discourse into an example of absurdity",%1)) {
    #echo %ansi(12)Used Pontification on %proper(@TARGET)'s Analytical. Loss. Use IPE.
  } {
    #echo %ansi(3)Used Pontification on %proper(@TARGET)'s Pedantic. Neutral. Use IPA.
  }
}
===
TRIGGER LINE:
  ^You passionately present your case, fervently arguing your points with emotional appeals. (*)$
VALUE:
#gag
#if (%pos("argument as nothing more than a baseless form of emotional blackmail",%1)) {
  #echo %ansi(12)Used Passion on %proper(@TARGET)'s Cautious. Loss. Use IPO.
} {
  #if (%pos("concedes the argument to you",%1)) {
    #echo %ansi(3)Used Passion on %proper(@TARGET)'s Analytical. Neutral. Use IPE.
  } {
    #echo %ansi(10)Used Passion on %proper(@TARGET)'s Pedantic. Win.
  }
}
===
TRIGGER LINE:
  ^You unscrupulously quibble about the smallest points in your argument, bringing up esoteric minutiae to support your theories. (*)$
VALUE:
#gag
#if (%pos("can only blink in astonishment at your astounding logic",%1)) {
  #echo %ansi(3)Used Pettifoggery on %proper(@TARGET)'s Cautious. Neutral. Use IPO.
} {
  #if (%pos("agrees with the logic and concedes all your points",%1)) {
    #echo %ansi(10)Used Pettifoggery on %proper(@TARGET)'s Analytical. Win.
  } {
    #echo %ansi(12)Used Pettifoggery on %proper(@TARGET)'s Pedantic. Loss. Use IPA.
  }
}
  {^(%w) argues with sweeping authority, buttressing {his|her} broad claims with dogmatic assumptions and justifications. (*)$
VALUE:
#if (%pos("you",%lower(%2))) {
  #gag
  #if (%2 == "The argument is so preposterous and so full of holes that you don't know where to begin to dissect it, and before you realize it your silence has been taken for concession.") {
    #echo %ansi(12)%1 used Pontification on your Cautious. Loss.
  } {
    #if (%2 == "With great glee, you rip apart his arguments with brilliant logic, transforming the entire discourse into an example of absurdity." or %2 == "With great glee, you rip apart her arguments with brilliant logic, transforming the entire discourse into an example of absurdity.") {
      #echo %ansi(10)%1 used Pontification on your Analytical. Win.
    } {
      #echo %ansi(3)%1 used Pontification on your Pedantic. Neutral.
    }
  }
}
===
TRIGGER LINE:
  ^(%w) passionately presents {his|her} case, fervently arguing {his|her} points with emotional appeals. (*)$
VALUE:
#if (%pos("you",%lower(%2))) {
  #gag
  #if (%2 == "As temperaments cool, you quietly but firmly expose the argument as nothing more than a baseless form of emotional blackmail.") {
    #echo %ansi(10)%1 used Passion on your Cautious. Win.
  } {
    #if (%2 == "The tempestuous argument overwhelms your careful preparation, leaving you shocked to the point where you find yourself capitulating to the emotional demands made in the argument.") {
      #echo %ansi(12)%1 used Passion on your Pedantic. Loss.
    } {
      #echo %ansi(3)%1 used Passion on your Analytical. Neutral.
    }
  }
}
===
TRIGGER LINE:
  ^(%w) unscrupulously quibbles about the smallest points in {his|her} argument, bringing up esoteric minutiae to support {his|her} radical theories. (*)$
VALUE:
#if (%pos("you",%lower(%2))) {
  #gag
  #if (%2 == "You can only blink in astonishment at his mindboggling logic." or %2 == "You can only blink in astonishment at her mindboggling logic.") {
    #echo %ansi(3)%1 used Pettifoggery on your Cautious. Neutral.
  } {
    #if (%2 == "The logic of this argument is sound and you find yourself conceding to all the points raised.") {
      #echo %ansi(12)%1 used Pettifoggery on your Analytical. Loss.
    } {
      #echo %ansi(10)%1 used Pettifoggery on your Pedantic. Win.
    }
  }
}
===
TRIGGER LINE:
  ^You argue with sweeping authority, buttressing your broad claims with dogmatic assumptions and justifications. (*)$
VALUE:
#gag
#if (%pos("continued silence must obviously be taken for concession",%1)) {
  #echo %ansi(10)Used Pontification on %proper(@TARGET)'s Cautious. Win.
} {
  #if (%pos("transforming your entire discourse into an example of absurdity",%1)) {
    #echo %ansi(12)Used Pontification on %proper(@TARGET)'s Analytical. Loss. Use IPE.
  } {
    #echo %ansi(3)Used Pontification on %proper(@TARGET)'s Pedantic. Neutral. Use IPA.
  }
}
===
TRIGGER LINE:
  ^You passionately present your case, fervently arguing your points with emotional appeals. (*)$
VALUE:
#gag
#if (%pos("argument as nothing more than a baseless form of emotional blackmail",%1)) {
  #echo %ansi(12)Used Passion on %proper(@TARGET)'s Cautious. Loss. Use IPO.
} {
  #if (%pos("concedes the argument to you",%1)) {
    #echo %ansi(3)Used Passion on %proper(@TARGET)'s Analytical. Neutral. Use IPE.
  } {
    #echo %ansi(10)Used Passion on %proper(@TARGET)'s Pedantic. Win.
  }
}
===
TRIGGER LINE:
  ^You unscrupulously quibble about the smallest points in your argument, bringing up esoteric minutiae to support your theories. (*)$
VALUE:
#gag
#if (%pos("can only blink in astonishment at your astounding logic",%1)) {
  #echo %ansi(3)Used Pettifoggery on %proper(@TARGET)'s Cautious. Neutral. Use IPO.
} {
  #if (%pos("agrees with the logic and concedes all your points",%1)) {
    #echo %ansi(10)Used Pettifoggery on %proper(@TARGET)'s Analytical. Win.
  } {
    #echo %ansi(12)Used Pettifoggery on %proper(@TARGET)'s Pedantic. Loss. Use IPA.
  }
}
Unknown2007-12-17 20:49:39
I basically copy/pasted this into Zmud... and it didn't even take effect even once while I was debating. Like the trigger lines just aren't firing at all. I don't have the time right now to figure out why, but something is weird...
Unknown2007-12-17 20:57:36
QUOTE(Rian @ Dec 17 2007, 02:49 PM) 467039
I basically copy/pasted this into Zmud... and it didn't even take effect even once while I was debating. Like the trigger lines just aren't firing at all. I don't have the time right now to figure out why, but something is weird...
This uses some of his own variables, which probably don't exist in your system. It's also not in a format that can be copied and pasted all at once into the zMUD command bar. Copy each trigger one at a time by creating a trigger and copying the trigger section into the name, then copy the value into the value section. I also notice that his post has been edited to use the @target variable instead of @syswhatever.target it was using before, which will probably make a difference. In any case, this relies on your debate enemy being stored in the @target variable.
Unknown2007-12-20 06:51:54
Aye... I noticed both of those things... and as I was already using the @target variable for this very purpose it fit right in. And no, I didn't paste into command line, but did as you said...
