(09-21-2015, 04:38 PM)Kage Wrote:(09-21-2015, 04:17 PM)Ignacius Wrote: In Kage's original example, in my personal opinion, the form is good. Â You'd want to dive at someone as if you intend to tackle them, because although you might not actually tackle them, that denotes a very particular and descriptive action as opposed to just diving at someone's legs. Â I mean, you can infer that it's in a tackling motion, but you may want to dive between them, come up like a football player and aim for the chin, roll through and try to end up on the other side. Â That's endemic to the form, but I also find that it's good for the way I write. Â It saves you from having to OOC out what will happen or even what it will look like. Â People get a very distinct picture.So this was my example.
Code: (Select All)Kage Kiryuu would throw himself at the ground and then tackle the others' feet in an attempt to make him stumble.
Personally, I would write this and not even think twice about it (and also prefer to write it in these two possible ways).
Code: (Select All)Kage Kiryuu threw himself at the ground with the aim of tackling the others' feet in an attempt to make him stumble.
Code: (Select All)Kage Kiryuu throws himself at the ground, aiming to tackle the others' feet in an attempt to make him stumble.
I'm curious, and since you seem to have far more experience with the possible reasoning, why would you prefer the opening post example over the other two if we stick with the format? Or, what makes it more preferable to the others?
For me, there's still ways for the other to 'interrupt' the aim and Kage's throwing of his body. Attempting to catch him mid-air, kicking him etc.
(09-21-2015, 04:16 PM)Flickering Ember Wrote: "People don't think" is the answer to many of life's questions.Which is not good or bad really. People are not omniscient. What one may not notice, someone else might.I'm sorry, but I fail to see what your point is. If you dislike the topic or see no reason then to say "It is what it is," then I also fail to see what value you have to the discussion and why you choose to stay.
In the more general sense, the courtesy sense, it was because if someone comes off the sidelines and tackles Kage sideways, or if his target moves and his legs aren't there anymore relatively early in the motion, etc. Â It gives you, your opponent, and the bouncer at the bar the option of interfering without autoing anything or breaking the syntax.
If there's no one to stop you throwing yourself at the ground, it's not strictly necessary, but if someone wants to grab you and yell, "He's not worth it!" he'd likely have to do so before Kage actually dove.  At least, that's the purpose behind the old convention.  You can use all sorts of wording; I personally try to be a lot more open and friendly so I wouldn't devil the details at all if someone did interrupt him after the fact.  It does look funny if someone grabs Kage off the floor, already entangled with trying to grab some legs and dealing with whatever is coming his way (I'm assuming Kage's version of Ziggy isn't taking being tackled lying down, so to speak).
It's also worth pointing out that using the conditional at that point, especially today, implies someone probably ought to do something. Â That's where you get people "would"ing up to the bar and "woulding" a glass of wine. Â In a way, you get the sense that the person wants to be interrupted. Â That's why I don't recommend it for general RP.
Generally, if Kage's in a fight and no one's stopping him, by the format, he should dive at the legs and would tackle Ziggy, putting the dive in the present tense and giving the tackling of Ziggy (poor Ziggy) the conditional.  That way, Ziggy's character knows what's coming and can probably surmise that Kage's arms are spreading out, he intends to hit him in the midsection, etc.  It gives him a lot more idea of what's going on, even if it actually doesn't go on unless he's hit.
Now, personally, I don't mind the others either, though personally I think the wording is a little weird. Â The first just gives your opponent the ability to get out of the way before the tackle without breaking syntax, but also gives other people the chance to tell Kage that Ziggy is the indestructible Yor, Hunter from the Future, etc. Â It's more inclusive.
So that's why the format of your first response might actually be the best from a mechanical sense, simply because more people can respond to it (and you might actually avoid the confrontation altogether if it's a problem).
Me personally, I would say use whichever seems best for your situation, but what you're doing without thinking is using an old-school form in probably the most polite way possible. Â I wouldn't let anyone tell you you're doing it wrong. Â I think it's probably a better idea especially if it's the first thing happening in combat (giving everyone a fair shake to disengage without having to OOCly tell someone it's coming) than the other two.
But none of those three fail to get the point across. Â The only forms that are taboo are autoattacks (i.e. "Kage dives at Ziggy and tackles him by the legs"). Â Placing the conditional future early is just an invitation to people to react before the shit hits the fan, essentially. Â It's considered good RP etiquette to provide as many people the opportunity, especially early.
