The use of DECLARE lasts a short period (as yet to be determined) except if the combat is ongoing. For example, if you DECLARE someone and never attack, you'd have to DECLARE again a few minutes later. However, if you DECLARE someone and then immediately attack, you'd never have to DECLARE again no matter how long the fight lasts (unless your target runs away and there is a long chase before you can attack him again).

So when somebody attacks me, and I respond to the attack, I have to Declare before I can respond? Or better yet, what happens if I accidently declare before I respond to the attack. For example if my targeting alias always Declares someone when I change my variables.

Would it be possible to Defend yourself?

Maybe being attacked should give you temporary 'free declare' which allows you to attack but does not give the same suspect status.

If someone attacks you, you don't have to DECLARE (or DEFEND). How would you know? You'd simply attack them back and if the Avenger doesn't stop you (and ask that you to DECLARE first), you know you won't gain suspect if you kill him or her. Thus, you can't be tricked by illusions or whatnot into wrongly attacking a person.

Thus, you only have to DECLARE if it's conceivable you will become a suspect if you kill the person you want to attack. If someone has already done a DECLARE, then you will not become a suspect if you kill them and therefore you won't have to DECLARE.

To reiterate, you will not be able to make a hostile action on another without doing a DECLARE if it is possible you can become their suspect. If you can attack a person without doing DECLARE, then that means you won't become suspect if you get the kill.

So basically we should have two states to our targeting alias. One just attacks them and then if we get the message that we can't hurt them, we need another to set the declare?

As for the Defend part of my question, I was wondering if Defending yourself would be some sort of loophole.

How is defending yourself a loophole? I'm not understanding.

At first glance, this seems like a very good improvement. I'm sad that it will require additional steps, but I can see how it might be hard to do otherwise. I can envision needing separate targetting methods for people I want to attack or be ready for an attack from...and waiting for people to assault to see who they attack so I can defend the right person...

- I'd be interested in knowing how long the 'declare' will last.
- I think undeclare has abuse potential (declare, attack, undeclare).
- I imagine declare and defend will have to work at range, for purposes of transport and ranged attacks as well as champions...but I'd like to know what the Admin intent for this is.
- How will this interact with transport abilities, if at all? i.e. will people have to declare before they can attempt to summon? (please please please)
- Will declare wear off with death? ie, after vitae or lichdom, will people have to declare again? Or if they were defending, will they have to declare to attack (and potentially get a second kill?)
- How will this handle attacks that are not intentional (pooka, demon, taurian rage)?
- How will this handle area attacks (that geomancer rock thing that hurts people)? Will they have to declare everyone who is there?

I'm asking questions in an attempt to understand and help get as many potential issues thought about as early as possible. I do think this is a pretty good idea.

/edit, some questions already answered while I was typing. Ignore those

I'm not sure how defending yourself would be a loophole, but I thought it might be the type of thing that might get overlooked. Thus I asked the question.

thinking about it a bit, perhaps in situations where one drinks a love potion and there is a lust and reject scenario where defending yourself would bascially allow you to attack someone without punishment.

To be determined. Probably in the 5 minute range.



There won't be an undeclare.



You can declare at any range.



See above. I'm thinking you can summon allies without declaring but anyone else you'd have to declare first.



I'm thinking declare would end except for lichdom. Haven't really thought it through.



Not sure about taurian rage, haven't thought that through either. But entities wouldn't be able to attack until you declare.



Yes, they'd have to declare who would be hurt or they won't be hurt.

Lost me again, you big bear!

I'm really not all that familiar with the various afflictions that let you do things you normally can't.. like masochinsm, clumsiness, peace etc. But I feel like there would be some situation.

I'd suggest not being allowed to Defend yourself just incase, so you don't have to worry about all the permutations of such tactics.

What made me even think of this is, is the fact that if you direct a SAY to a person who you are lusted to, you get the "don't think about harming them" message.

Estarra,

Thank you for commenting on all my reponses. The above is the only one I may not have been clear enough on...My suggestion was that, for example, Narsrim would declare on me, then force me to attack. I suppose the easy solution is to make declare unforceable, that would probably fix the problem.

Also, I suppose we wouldn't be able to attack other people's ents without declaring?

Regarding boulderblast:



Notice this makes some abilities much, much more powerful then they were...a geomancer could now cast this into a room with allies and enemies, declaring only their enemies, and not hit their allies. Food for thought.

Right, you won't be able to force someone to declare.

Regarding other people's ents, I think you wouldn't be able to attack other people's ents if they were in the realm (otherwise you could). Have to check with Roark on that though.

You do not DEFEND yourself. You DEFEND someone else. If you want to stand there and die you do so, if they declare and attack you and you fight back that is fine too. If your friend gets jumped next to you, you may DEFEND him.

How would statues work?

Namely, let's say some enterprising mage takes it upon himself to park on a statue in neutral turf, and Demesne summon people onto it (And yes, I'm aware folks hate that happening - but it does happen).

Now, normally, the person who made the statue gets suspect as well, for helping to kill the person (Or so I've been told). Would the maker of said statue have to Declare in order for their statue to attack the person?

On a further note, let's assume that you -do- have to Declare, if you want your statue to smite someone on neutral turf. Hell, that might even be a good idea to get rid of a really cheap tactic. You build the statue there anyways, and tune it to help folks.

Let's say, Ravin builds a statue, and tunes it for members of Magnagora. I happen to be sitting on his statue, minding my own business, and get attacked - will his statue still aid me, as it's essentially just defending me, and not initiating hostilities? Or would he have to be in the realms, and Defend me (Or Declare the attacker, either way) before the statue would activate?

The normal usage of the command is to DEFEND (notme) but what if I typed DEFEND (me)? That was what I was bringing up.

This would allow me to supposedly attack my "atacker" without requiring myself to DECLARE. However, what happens if a situation arises where someone does an action directed at me, which makes DEFEND think they attacked me, when infact they didn't.

You wouldn't be able to Defend yourself. Just like you can't send yourself a tell or swing at yourself, and so on.

If you're being attacked, meaning someone has to DECLARE on you, then there would be no need for the defend command on your end, since the Avenger would recognize that you didn't start the fight.

I don't even understand your second point. Well, infact, your second point (Or is it a continuation of the first?) holds no merit. The defend command would always be used when you're defending someone else who is being attacked, and not yourself.

Nevermind.

However, people managed to propose to themselves using some odd combination of afflictions in another IRE mud at some point.

It's called a bug.