Re: A different marriage idea on 03/09/2007 11:47 AM CST
Links-arrows 41
Reply Reply
I really like the Wed addition. Wich would lead nicely into adding slap wed, kick wed, punch wed ect.


-Serc


"Moon Mages have already been given some of the most ridiculously powerful magic in the game, third only to Warrior Mages and Barbarians" -Armifer
Reply Reply
Re: A different marriage idea on 03/09/2007 03:47 PM CST
Links-arrows 42
Reply Reply
>> Right now folks can opt out of the bonded kiss verb by emoting it -- does anyone do this, why or why not?

For the verbs that have it, I did.

Many do not, though, or are annoying to use (the wink behind me thing for example). LEAN, WAVE, HOLD/JOIN etc... are all rather irritating, but unavoidable unless you simply choose not to use the verb. :\



Rev. Reene

You accept Syralon's offer and are now holding some holy oil.

Syralon says to you, "May the oil make you shiny and full of religion."
Reply Reply
Re: A different marriage idea on 03/09/2007 05:33 PM CST
Links-arrows 43
Reply Reply
I use the emotes sometimes, but I'd love to be able to just use the base verb, too. Just a regular old hug, instead of a loving one. Just a kiss, instead of a light kiss, or what have you. Just snuggle up instead of snuggle up lovingly or cold or whatever.

Please make the wed addition, Nhia, we will all love you forever if you do!


Shadeau Moonith,
Player of.

--
(Drongol dislikes you.)
Reply Reply
Re: A different marriage idea on 03/09/2007 10:35 PM CST
Links-arrows 44
Reply Reply
<<Right now folks can opt out of the bonded kiss verb by emoting it -- does anyone do this, why or why not?>>

I am a tad late to this discussion, but:

I almost always use a regular KISS emote as I hate the bonded-kiss room-messaging like burning.

I really, really want an option to non-bonded-ly LEAN on a spouse. The bonded lean is by far my least favorite enforced-emote of the bonded verbs, since the way my bonded character uses lean makes the "tender smile" almost never appropriate. When I want her to particularly be affectionate, I use snuggle rather than lean, so the affectionate smiling add-on to lean is just an annoyance.

I also particularly hate HOLD, WAVE, and WINK for the ladies. Although my character regularly uses wink at <person> behind me, I often forget that wink <spouse> causes the eyelash batting. We already have an eyelash-batting verb, and I use THAT when I want her to bat her eyelashes.

I would prefer the current "bonded" messaging to NOT be the default messaging, and if this requires an addition like "wed" to the end of the command, then so be it.
Reply Reply
Re: A different marriage idea on 03/10/2007 01:53 PM CST
Links-arrows 45
Reply Reply
yes, I use the emote thing but sometimes I just want the old simple version prior to wedding and it's not an option anymore. I would rather have to add wed to the end to get the bonded version.


Mists and Magic, Ocean Breezes, Deep Rivers Under the Sea, Trails Between the Stars: Where nothing is as it seems.
Reply Reply
Re: A different marriage idea on 03/14/2007 08:41 AM CDT
Links-arrows 46
Reply Reply
Adding this 'wed' syntax onto the wedding verbs so we could pick and choose when to use them (and default to not) would, I think, rank pretty highly among 2007's best changes. :)
Reply Reply
Re: A different marriage idea on 08/19/2008 12:38 AM CDT
Links-arrows 47
Reply Reply
>I'd like to make my semi-annual request for a toggle on bonding verbs or a variable to have a bonded person be able to do/not do the bonded version of an action. The bonding verbs are too cute/cuddly for many of us paired-off folks. My primary character is not rose-bonded, despite a rather costly and elaborate ceremony in game, for precisely this reason. Which means that if either one of us ever try to use consent on our partner's attacker, we'll likely end up getting into it with a GM because it doesn't look, to them, like we ARE bonded.

This, again!


Player of Silvanne, Maiamo Heruaminen Khandrishen

A protagonist must have an antagonist. Otherwise he's just a guy playing with himself.
Reply Reply