Reset Password
Existing players used to logging in with their character name and moo password must signup for a website account.
- deskoft 1h
- AdamBlue9000 21m Rolling 526d6 damage against both of us.
a Mench 3h Doing a bit of everything.
- Enven 32m
And 20 more hiding and/or disguised

Substance from yo Style: Scoring Attire
All the kids are wearing trendy, posh items this fall!

I've exposed the first piece of our new feature, taking all the details about your tailored outfits and crunching the numbers into a multi-dimensional score. At this early point, we're gathering 10 different metrics covering the quality of work your tailor put into their job, the kind of material, the damage that has befallen it and other factors.

The end result today is only something you will see when you look or glance at yourself. Just a new sentence added after the last paragraph of your body/clothing. supporting 20+ different terms. What you see will change depending on what part of the city you're in (a mixer point of view and a corpie point of view).

This is just the first step. Right now its just for you to see, so you can take efforts to change what might be an incorrect perception of your character prior to others seeing it. In the near future, we're going to open this up so others can see these details (varied according to skill check). This 'attire summary' will be expanded with more details according to skill check too. And further changes will be coming to short descriptions as well.

Awesome. But just a question, how abput those clothes in the stores? Do they have standard score of their own? Or the score only applies to tailored clothes by players?
This sounds really cool! But I'm a little confused about one thing.

How will it work, however? Perspective wise, from the Mix or Topside.

A lot of clothes are neither formal or 'rags', so they could work casually everywhere. Will it be judged based on the material? Unless there will be a new feature so people can decide what 'style' it is (alternative, punk-y, cutesy, mixfashion, formal, etc.), how will it be seen depending on environment?

When this goes live for other people to view your clothing, will it go off all clothing you wear or just what's visible?

My mentions my clothing being 'repaired' which I assume is because I am wearing a patched sling under my clothing, which is otherwise pristine.

Very neat addition though, can't wait to see what kind of interactions it brings.

It's not judging the fashion choices persay. It's more about judging the material used, how new or how old it might be, how valuable an item the skill of the tailor made it.

There's plenty of ugly expensive things that are recognized as expensive and high quality, but there is no judging taste. :)


You just made my clothing look 'cheap'. ;-;"

I just saw your response, sorry for doublepost! But yeah it seems like it's gonna be a cool feature that MAY or MAY NOT change the pricing people put on their tailored items...
Head down to the mix with your pedestrian attire, my dear.
Now I need new stuff made.... harrumph!
when your super armor says you look tattered.Whaaaaat
Armor is next on the hit list ...
Yeah, seems that my armor is tattered and expensive.

armored shortdesc :D

OH. Not done.Yeah, ignore me.
B-b-but it just says my clothes are cheap! Why doesn't it say the quality? Cheap material, I'm pretty sure the tailor was good however.
It's cheap! Throw her off Skywalk!!!
I look cheap. Despite the over all price being more than any any tailored outfit. Damn.
I should have let my dreams be dreams.



Everyone needs to remember that not every tailor has great stats or skills associated with their Artistry nor do they use the best material. What THEY charge and the value of the product does not always line up, which is what we're trying to correct by giving you a way to gauge your IC fashion score.

The tailors who do use the expensive materials and do invest in their skills and stats are going to make you look flash as fuck, and they will likely charge you appropriately to give you that benefit above fledgling tailors as they SHOULD.

Will it show however, if the tailor is poor or mediocre, if you can tell, whether the material is expensive or not?

I am curious how it will look based on the tailor's skill, not just the material. Oh, and curious how it's gonna work with skill-based checks on how nice it is.. most people would be able to tell if clothes look homemade or professionally tailored, right?

You'll know the material by inspecting the garmet and it saying what it's made from. That's on the agenda. You'll know your tailor is crap versus someone else by the value on inspect on a particular article of clothing compared to another one made by someone better.
This is amazing and I'm looking forward to people knowing, for sure, that I am indeed Mixer scum.
Armor is now represented in attire scoring. You can see it when you look at yourself if your armored up and pass the skill check.
It'll show you as 'armored' even if you're wearing a clothing item that covers up all your armor, or disguised in a poncho. Will other people be able to see it in that case when the final feature is in?
It's only seeing what's visible. The armor must be exposed somehow. Perhaps a see through garment?
Those with skill will now also see a detail about the damages to the persons armor.
I can definitely see 'clothing is armored' on myself while wearing a tailored item that conceals all of it, and even with a poncho.
When I wear a poncho it hides the armored desc that was apparent before.
I juuust fixed it. :)
Yeah, just saw your shout. :p
You can inspect individual items of your clothing to get some of the same facts. This should help you figure out what you want to wear.
thoughts on being able to tell whether a person's armed from glancing at them?

if they're wearing a visible holster or scabbard

Is there any plan to incorporate this into automated systems, like the WJF MagLev checkpoint on Green, or other locations where the NPCs hassle "mixers"?

I think that it would be great if a "mixer" could pass as a "corpie" based on style / appearance and RP.

Is the fashion score cumilative or an average?

I imagine a corpie wearing a super fancy all silk dress suit's image would be downgraded by wearing a terribly crafted hat rather than getting an additional boost from said hat's small value.

It shows the rating of each visible piece of clothing, so wearing something damaged that's visible alongside something expensive would get you 'tattered, expensive'. Now that you mention hats though, I don't actually get a rating for a tailored hat I have.
Your damaged and patched clothing is now worth less than it was 5 minutes ago.
Will a similar system be applied to Art too? Paintings and sculptures?
This is a very cool feature, released in what seems to be a wave of cool features added to the game. I know it had already influenced my roleplay in game.

One thing I am curious about is whether or not tailored goods will eventually be able to provide positive or negative charisma buffs based on how well made they are in the same manner some shop bought items do. I'm not a tailor but am a big fan of player economy and anything that encourages players to use player tailors rather than a shop is a plus in my eyes.

(a rare heads up ...)

I'm going to be making the current business attire the 'wage slave' level of business attire - items that have 'silk' in their name or description may be changed to sateen (synthetic cotton) to reflect their current valuation.

Then I'll get actual silk items in the stores at the appropriate prices. You will pay around 14-16k for the pieces that take the most material to make.

Descriptions and Worn messages for the current business attire have been changed to reflect being made of synthetics and sateen. The only prices adjusted were ties -- they kept their silk nature, but were given a boost in value.

The current business dress shoes have be clarified to be synthetic leather. A new material, Cultured Leather has been added to support new shoes that are made out of genuine vat-grown cow leather, and thus worthy of their high price tag. Leather wallets were also renamed to match this determination of where our leather is coming from. :)

Along with that, silk versions of the pantsuit slacks, jackets, blouse, skirt, and dress shirt are now available as well.

Oh, and if the original item kinda sucked with a message before, the new item probably isn't much better. Folks are always welcome to join fix-it and help make things better!

Consider a clock started on when we'll start letting others see your overall state of dress (and have it affect your short desc!), at least a week, but probably before the end of the year.

Oh, and all those new silk (and the ties) items, have more of an effect on your appearance than the current stuff, too!
@MongOfTheWeek it's been discussed. It's definitely possible!
Thank you for getting back to me on that @Slither . It's exciting to hear that is something in consideration and that would certainly be a feature I would love to see in game!
Should we have a quality / expense check added to the pre-trash @review-cloth screening?

IMHO: This would encourage trashing old items that have word descriptions which don't match their new quality / value in-game. It's not necessary, but it would get 'out with the old' more quickly. Reduces the time period where players will have to struggle with choosing clothing based on a sudden OOC change. New players will likely get the IC brunt of the change, and be the least likely to understand why.

Second suggestion: change the amount you get back for recycling quality goods. Probably makes sense to get more money back for more rare materials.

I mean, I get where you are coming from @Lena. I think a check on the value would be good in review-cloth. Should create an @idea section post about that.

As for the value of goods when you recycle, that's already dependent on the value of the item, though it's capped so people can't abuse it.


Thanks for the quick response! Idea thread added.

The delay period before we finish implementing this has ended. Everyone can see your attire summary and there are new short descriptions too!
Suit up, everyone. It's time.

BONUS: "Your makeup is terrible."

Thank you admins for your hard work! Time to get judge-y!

Very cool, thanks guys!
This is a great feature.

I've noticed that there should be a minimum level of stacked armor before you appear as "armored". It's a bit weird to be wearing a fancy WBA and also some neXus mirrorshades which are technically lightly armored but practically useless in that aspect, and you show as "fancy, armored".

This system is amazing, I really appreciate it! I have a few notes:

- Your clothing can over-ride your charisma even if your charisma is high. What if I'd rather my short desc be based on my attractiveness than my wardrobe, but still want to wear nice clothes?

- Despite being well-dressed and having an 'engaging' shortdesc, putting on a shoulder holster with a single bullet hole in it turned my short-desc to 'shabby'. I don't think that would be the first thing people would notice.


I don't know whether the starting cheap clothes are being factored in/weighed in the assessment, so I thought I'd mention it.
I think this is only for tailored clothes.
Just as an example of what I mean, I was just watching KMB and I saw descriptions like these when characters excited the room:

A well-dressed lithe vixen with brown eyes wearing a soft ribbed crewneck sweater who smells unforgettable (Name Omitted) goes west


A well-dressed petite girl wearing a black EcoGear softshell onesie (Name Omitted) goes west.

I'm almost positive the two characters in question have usual shortdescs of say, winsome or attractive.

I personally would like to see those attractiveness shortdescs still figure in, and not be over-ridden by clothes.

After all, you can glance at someone to get a sense of their attire, but you can't glance at someone to get a sense of their coded appearance, it's only evident in their shortdesc.

Or add a flag where if your appearance is high enough, you can choose whether to have your shortdesc be based on your appearance or your outfit.


You start relying on your appearance instead of your attire.

Something like that?

If you're super hot but you're wearing a garbage bag, the first thing people probably notice is the garbage bag.
I disagree, JMo, but even if I didn't, if you're super hot and wearing Dior, the first thing people are going to notice is that you're super hot. That's always the first thing you notice.

All the gorgeous people of Withmore want is a way to stay gorgeous while wearing flash clothes.

I don't think I agree with the super hot in a garbage bag thing. Sure. I will certainly notice you are in a garbage bag. But I don't think that it will magically make me think you have ordinary looks. You will still look hot. Hell, I bet there are some people who could make a garbage bag dress look hot as all hell.

I know that I have personally seen a variety of people I thought attractive done up in "ugly clothes" or whatever and later in more stylish clothes and the didn't get ugly then get hot. They were attractive the whole time.

It's not a great example, but I'm sure that a lot of us have seen Hollywood's lame attempts at making an attractive actress look ugly by making them look like they have no makeup, bushier brows and dressing them is unflattering clothing. How often does that actually make you think that the actress is ugly or even ordinary in appearance?

Maybe it's just me though.

I've circled back around to the attractiveness in short descriptions issue and made the following changes:

- Getting too dirty while being attractive or ugly used to mean nothing, the attractive term would still apply. Now, if you're attractive and get too dirty, your attractiveness will be expressed as 'sullied' and if you're ugly and get too dirty, your attractiveness will be expressed as 'vile'.

- Being attractive, ugly or filthy will now replace being lithe, curvy, tall and other such 'body shape' terms when wealthy or well-dressed such that 'well-dressed lithe woman' is replaced with 'well-dressed attractive woman'. This same thing should occur with baldness, but in the fashion of 'attractive bald man'.

- Being fillthy will now prevent you from appearing as chic or dashing.

Thank you so much Johnny!
Now I'm permanently stuck in a state of being Vile...

Love it, thanks Johnny.

- Being attractive, ugly or filthy will now replace being lithe, curvy, tall and other such 'body shape' terms when wealthy or well-dressed such that 'well-dressed lithe woman' is replaced with 'well-dressed attractive woman'.

@Johnny: This isn't working with 'chic', FYI. I made a bug for it. Thanks!

Being filthy or shabby appears to be hiding builds even when the person has no attractiveness or chic/well-dressed adjective. Is this intended? Why can't I tell that the dirty guy is tall?
...buuuuut it's not always doing it now that I test. Maybe what I saw was a combination of factors or something else IC.
I've seen that too, Vera. In fact I've often wondered if people deliberately leave their ponchos shabby to hide their build.
I don't think anyone's doing it on accident with the ponchos, I just kind of wonder if they should be able to do it.

I've been looking into it for a while and it seems like the update for well-dressed, attractive, etc to replace bodytype only works for the average bodytype. Not sure if that's intentional or not.

And nevermind, apparently I was looking at something else.
Yes, hopefully this can be fixed! Our best clothes are making us look plain :(

I understand what you're saying about preferencing attractiveness over height. But isn't height extremely important because it persists whether a character is disguised or not? And that persistence is important for identifying people?

That isn't how it's supposed to work in the new system, Hek.

If you're a gorgeous mona and you put on chic clothes, you should be a chic gorgeous mona, not a chic mona.

XXXXXX is correct that it's working for size (eg, chic tall bitch), but not attractiveness. It should function like well-dressed does.

(Edited by Johnny at 5:25 pm on 3/5/2020)

Could we look about getting a fix for chic covering up charisma shortdescs?

Is it not working? It seems like in the last day or two I have been seeing clothing AND attractiveness modifiers in short-descs.

Right now it looks like attractiveness is showing up, but not chicness. So something did change. It's different for each type of clothing, Hek. If you're gorgeous and you wear something that would make you well-dressed, you're a 'well-dress gorgeous person'. Previously, if you wore something chic, you'd just be a 'chic person'. Now if you wear something chic, you're just a gorgeous person. Moving in the right direction!

I'm assuming it's being worked on.


Just do what I do.

Embrace the Shabbiness. =) j/k

The shabbiness is a bug in my opinion, too, since it occludes the size of the wearer. Most people now leave their shrouds shabby so you can't discern their build. Should be 'shabby average mano' or 'shabby hulking bloke'.

That is interesting. I had not noticed that until you pointed it out, but you are spot on.

Just wanted to say that in my case the chic modifier is appearing correctly - but is still getting rid of my charisma shortdesc in the process - instead of just not appearing at all @Crook
I think most people who aren't making use of the shabby code to hide adjectives dislike the apparent priority that shabby is set at. Shabby, in my mind, would be a fallback in case no other modifiers were present... on a person that would otherwise be average.

My understanding about shrouds is that combined with disguise skill, it is supposed to help hide your body type as well. A large hulk of a man won't become puny, but those who are skilled in disguise and wear something that loosely covers their body can, in real life as well, change how they walk & carry themselves and so change how others would perceive them.

Someone with a high enough skill, so to speak, could do the same thing without a shroud, just not in this game. That's one of the thing ninjas are famous for.

Something to think about.

Also, this entire thread and the concept are interesting.

Thanks, Johnny and admins.

Necro-bump but 'chic' is still covering up attractiveness modifiers, is there ever gonna be a fix for this at some point?
Your clothing will override attractiveness if its more noticeable due to its chicness (or other adjectives). Attractiveness will show up when you disrobe to various degrees or when the clothing isn't standing out like that. This lets ugly people dress up and be on the same level as the attractive people while dressed and lets the attractive people dominant when you can't ignore their attractiveness :)

(Edited by Johnny at 9:28 am on 1/7/2021)

I understand how that's the intention of doing it. However...

The unintended effect is that some people intentionally wear bad clothing that reduces their attire score down from Chic to Good-looking so that they don't blend in with the people who use Chic to hide their lack of an attractiveness adjective.

It turns into this perceived reality that "Chic" is worse than Attractive. So, many people at Attractive+ actively avoid Chic.

If this happened for "Good-looking" instead of "Chic," then you'd probably see a lot of people actively trying to hit Chic rather than ensuring that their attire isn't too good to trigger the attractiveness adjective loss.

This could push tailors to provide the best possible clothing rather than trying to eke out mediocrity, sometimes intentionally using @holdback to avoid triggering Chic.

Hope that helps explain it better.

I have seen other clothes-related modifiers take priority over chic, overwriting it and enabling appearance-based ones to appear alongside them even with clothes that would qualify for chic, so that again just becomes a matter of having clothing that has another defining thing about it other than being chic, and already pushes tailors to provide the best possible clothing like you say.
The prioritisation of clothing modifiers over attractiveness is something that I've found quite useful for disguise related rp to cover up certain adjectives that could otherwise give away you are not who you are trying to appear to be.

On the other hand it would be nice to get some choice in this as it's a significant stat investment to just get certain descriptors which are then covered by good/bad clothing.

I'm on the side of keeping the attractiveness modifier when wearing chic clothing. It's really frustrating to have poured multiple months' worth of UE into a character's CHA, only to have that modifier hidden away by clothing that looks fashionable and chic. When an IRL supermodel wears a chic outfit, she looks chic yet still looks beautiful physically in terms of face, hair, body shape, etc. When an average person wears a chic outfit, yes the outfit is fashionable on them, but it's not a miracle worker. The presence or absence of an attractiveness modifier can tell players a lot about the character with which they are interacting, which has been encouraged on the BGBB in the past. If the newest NLM star seems to 'lose' her outward beauty when she puts on a chic dress, yet 'keeps' that beauty modifier when she's 'well-dressed', it makes no sense. And it will fool other players as well, as someone whose shortdesc is 'well-dressed attractive mona' might feel that they have more 'charm' and 'star power' than the 'chic tall mona' singing on stage who actually has an attractiveness modifier of 'gorgeous' when not wearing chic clothes.

Johnny, you explained the way it is currently by saying, "This lets ugly people dress up and be on the same level as the attractive people while dressed." However, I think that ugly people - i.e. characters with CHA as a dump stat - need to face the IC consequences of this choice. If a character prefers to spend hours weightlifting instead of following good hygiene practices? That character deserves the low attractiveness modifier no matter how chic their clothes are. Body odor and other negative traits don't magically disappear if you put on a suit and tie. Even an average character with no attractiveness modifier does not necessitate 'equality' in terms of attractiveness. They will still be average if they put on chic clothes, and an attractive character will still be attractive if they put on chic clothes. Chic should use the same code system as 'well-dressed', in which it is added to the shortdesc in addition to the attractiveness modifier, instead of replacing it.

I see two things going on here.

One is some accounts are assuming a system where chic and well-dressed are two differently high score readouts of the same scale while others are assuming one where they are different scales that compete for priority, the latter creating cases where well-dressed (or other modifiers from yet more other variables) would override chic based on how your clothing is made (i.e. it being chic isn't the most standout thing about it.) The latter once again then simply loops back to the abilities of your tailor IC and the resulting properties of your clothing, but if the former assumption was the correct one, then the people basing their argument in it would correctly feel that a 'higher' grade of clothing becomes punishing to their appearance.

The second thing going on, and this is the primary grievance and the one dating back some time that people are referencing, seems to be weighting. Without knowing how things actually look mechanically, it seems to me that perhaps the weighting given to how much of your body is on display versus how much of your body is covered by clothing (exhibiting certain properties) is tuned in such a way that a threshold exists that is crossed by chic but not by well-dressed, in which the 'strength' of the chic descriptor combined with the coverage of its origin far outweighs that of the appearance modifier for showing up. If something along those lines is the case it seems to me that perhaps the head @naked should have a big weight attached to it in terms of causing appearance modifiers to appear, so that it has an easier time competing with clothing and can take on even the weighting given to chic.This would also make it harder for ugly people to dress 'the ugly away' of course, but I don't necessarily disagree with svetlana on that being just living consequences.

I'm going to split this off into a new thread with a new suggestion.