Author Topic: My thoughts on PvP (Read 814 times)

Dorganath · « **Reply #20 on:** February 25, 2007, 02:34:37 pm »

OK...subdual damage has been requested in the Requests forum already. It's been stated that it's something we may consider but will most likely not happen at V3's release.
Good natured dwarven brawling can take place right now, today, in the Fort Velensk arena.
And as has been stated many times before, in this thread and others, bullying, abusing the system, hiding behind PvP and other negative things that people may, and likely will, try to do are already against the policies and spirit of this server, and will continue to be so as we expand PvP.
Once more...
We are not enabling open PvP. We are expanding PvP. There is still a requirement of personal responsibility and judgement in this, and rest assured, those who abuse will be dealt with. If the community cannot handle this new responsibility, then the system will simply be removed.

Drizzlin · « **Reply #21 on:** February 25, 2007, 03:26:21 pm »

Quote

Polak76 - 2/25/2007 2:11 PM

Polak76
-----
Useless Trivia:

Apples are more efficient than caffeine in waking you up in the morning.

But which one is going to still be with me come afternoon?!

Polak76 · « **Reply #22 on:** February 25, 2007, 03:43:58 pm »

heh..good point.

About time for a new quote i rekon. Just a little lazy atm.

LightlyFrosted · « **Reply #23 on:** February 25, 2007, 05:02:02 pm »

Something to bear in mind is that even moderately less strict PVP doesn't mean that there will be no rules in place, IC. Just because you CAN challenge someone to a duel to the death in Hlint certainly doesn't mean that you SHOULD - Garent or the duly appointed town guard in whatever town you were in would frown on it if you tried it in a town, certainly, as would any innocent bystanders who would just happen to be unfortunately in the way of your fireballs, missed bowshots, and wild sword swings. Certainly it would have profound implications on walking about with a drawn weapon.

PVP in towns would most certainly be foolish at best, and collaterally lethal at worst. Doing it in the wilderness would be equally risky, as you might draw the attention of wandering monsters who would be more than happy to make a quick meal of the severely-depleted victor - and, for that matter, the loser as well. There's a reason why armed bands of adventurers are required to make expeditions in even common terrain, and why caravans archetypically have armed guards. Woe betide the PVP'ing mage who depletes his or her arsenal of spells upon his/her opponent, only to find himself wanting for firepower when facing a wandering wolf pack or whatnot.

This isn't to say that Joe Adventurer isn't going to have a scuffle or two with his or her fellow adventurers, merely that some caution beyond the sheer mechanics should realistically be payed to one's surroundings in so doing. Sure property damage SOUNDS fun, until you get stuck with the bill...

Chongo · « **Reply #24 on:** February 25, 2007, 08:50:25 pm »

I've seen it fail on some mediocre servers. I've seen it very successful on some of the better ones.

It has a learning curve, and people unfamiliar with PvP *or* used to a less roleplay-oriented atmosphere will obviously feel it. It's not the know-how learning curve, it's the one where you learn to smile, and maintain a jovial heartbeat through all things roleplayed, including character versus character. And mind you all, sink this in now...it is CvC, not you punching it out with a player in Detroit.

We'll see the learning curve. I've had trouble with it, and other things like it, in the past. And it has always been a good community that brings me up to speed on how to keep things fun. Not that tough in a place like we have here.

Like in all other aspects of what Layonara has done, this is the community to see things through to a positive place. So keep your heads up eh?

Stephen_Zuckerman · « **Reply #25 on:** February 26, 2007, 07:19:19 am »

I think that's a very important distinction.

We're loosening the restrictions on CvC, not PvP.

Dorganath · « **Reply #26 on:** February 26, 2007, 07:53:28 am »

Semantics...
OOC hostility and player-to-player griefing still have no place here, regardless of the acronym used.

tubasolo · « **Reply #27 on:** February 26, 2007, 10:03:33 am »

In my experience player versus player combat in MMO's boils down to just a few things. With a few typical reactions. You get a very tiny number of folks who can enjoy player versus player fighting and not take it beyond the game. Then the vastly larger numbers of folks who like to fight other players to prove some sense of superiority to themselves, and by proxy to the defeated, or so it seems. Then you have the largest portion, those who revel in 'killing' other characters to ruin another persons fun. The predominant attitude of these last two groups of folks is that winning is everything. No matter how that victory is achieved. Regardless of the effect it has on the other person. These are the people who claim they are just pushing the envelope so that they can feel challenged (I call "horse pucky" on that.) So from all that you get the hurt feelings, the anger and eventually no player base.

I enjoy fighting other players for the simple fact that it is more challenging than whacking away at some ogre. After I defeat the ogre, however, I don't have to deal with its friends hunting me down months later. Or a merchant type, who is friends with the person I defeated, who will no longer do business with me. I do enjoy the repercussions of my actions, it is what drives me to role play. Also to face situations I couldn't possibly face in real life.

I know I am rambling but... In the thirty years I have been playing D&D, in its many incarnations, I never killed another players character until I played online. It was an aspect of the PnP games that we just knew better than to get involved with. Instinctively we knew that would lead to hard feelings towards one another. However, online, that attitude seems to have died a quiet but messy death. Many folks revel in the thought of 'killing' another players character; in the hopes that the dead characters player will be angry or disheartened. These same folks prey upon the characters much weaker than their character. It's the anonymous nature of the internet and MMO's that allow this type of behavior to surface. Patience I'm getting to it. Now I'm not suggesting that the DM's here come to your house and whoop you for griefing, although I'm sure they've wanted to a time or two. What I am suggesting (preaching to the choir probably) is that you look at yourself and hold yourself accountable for what you do online and in MMO's. That's what your parents tried to drill into you, responsibility. To behave appropriately even when there are no consequences for not doing so. Meh, I've taken enough of your time.

merlin34baseball · « **Reply #28 on:** February 26, 2007, 11:10:43 am »

Ok, I see why PvP would be a good idea. I know of one Cleric who would love a shot at a certain shady individual...
My problem with it lies in this:
My main character has 8 DTs, and by no means will I risk a DT in PvP combat. But what am I supposed to do in game when a situation developes that would call for her to have a PvP moment? Run and hide? Take the insults? Walk away? None of these things my character would do, but I may be forced into roll playing her a different way due to the possibility of a soul strand loss. Characters with a high DT count will be forced to walk away from these situations, when my characters reaction should be to light the offending person on fire...
I think this may cause RP problems for those of us holding onto our last strand or two. If there is no possibility for strand loss then it would be one thing, but I think strand loss should be a possibility in PvP.
My two cents...

Drizzlin · « **Reply #29 on:** February 26, 2007, 12:04:18 pm »

Quote

merlin34baseball - 2/26/2007 11:10 AM Ok, I see why PvP would be a good idea. I know of one Cleric who would love a shot at a certain shady individual...
My problem with it lies in this:
My main character has 8 DTs, and by no means will I risk a DT in PvP combat. But what am I supposed to do in game when a situation developes that would call for her to have a PvP moment? Run and hide? Take the insults? Walk away? None of these things my character would do, but I may be forced into roll playing her a different way due to the possibility of a soul strand loss. Characters with a high DT count will be forced to walk away from these situations, when my characters reaction should be to light the offending person on fire...
I think this may cause RP problems for those of us holding onto our last strand or two. If there is no possibility for strand loss then it would be one thing, but I think strand loss should be a possibility in PvP.
My two cents...

Unless I missed a new change, or something along the way, you do not recieve DTs from pvp deaths.

ShiffDrgnhrt · « **Reply #30 on:** February 26, 2007, 12:18:02 pm »

Quote

merlin34baseball - 2/26/2007 2:10 PM If there is no possibility for strand loss then it would be one thing, but I think strand loss should be a possibility in PvP.
My two cents...

So you'd rather Have PvP with DT loss and risk perming your character? I'd rather be in that Same RP situation and not have to worry about losing a strand, then I could focus on the RP and havee a good fight. Heck, just this past week my PC shiff got into a big fight with some snarky elf mage and Shiff was close to just smiting him, and if a DM was around to sanction it we would beat the hell outta eachother at the Bottom of the Haven mines. But I would be all "nope, aint pvp... gonna lose a strand" if that was at risk... I want my Pcs to stay around... but still be able to RP fighting and PvP Now if that falls into hiding behind the consent rule fine... I dont care, but I want my PC to Perm in some epic battle to save someone, not fighting because some mage called him a stupid troll hugger

Stephen_Zuckerman · « **Reply #31 on:** February 26, 2007, 12:40:33 pm »

Now here's something interesting.

There seems to be a mindset of folks who are interested in seeing some more PvP opened up for RP purposes, but... They don't want to risk a strand if they lose? Where's the RP in that? If you die, and really die, you risk losing a strand.

If your character would put his or her own life in jeopardy by fighting with another character, be it a PC or an NPC, then your character is already accepting the possibility that the Soul Mother will pay him or her a visit. Your character could not know that Strand loss doesn't apply to a certain person who happens to be a "PC"... That's all OOC knowledge. Making PvP more readily available, while not having characters run the risk of Strand loss, opens up the very real possibility that PvP will not be taken as seriously as it should be.

No guts, no glory.

Polak76 · « **Reply #32 on:** February 26, 2007, 02:24:57 pm »

Quote

tubasolo - 2/27/2007 3:03 AM

In my experience player versus player combat in MMO's boils down to just a few things. With a few typical reactions. You get a very tiny number of folks who can enjoy player versus player fighting and not take it beyond the game. Then the vastly larger numbers of folks who like to fight other players to prove some sense of superiority to themselves, and by proxy to the defeated, or so it seems. Then you have the largest portion, those who revel in 'killing' other characters to ruin another persons fun. The predominant attitude of these last two groups of folks is that winning is everything. No matter how that victory is achieved. Regardless of the effect it has on the other person. These are the people who claim they are just pushing the envelope so that they can feel challenged (I call "horse pucky" on that.) So from all that you get the hurt feelings, the anger and eventually no player base.

I enjoy fighting other players for the simple fact that it is more challenging than whacking away at some ogre. After I defeat the ogre, however, I don't have to deal with its friends hunting me down months later. Or a merchant type, who is friends with the person I defeated, who will no longer do business with me. I do enjoy the repercussions of my actions, it is what drives me to role play. Also to face situations I couldn't possibly face in real life.

I know I am rambling but... In the thirty years I have been playing D&D, in its many incarnations, I never killed another players character until I played online. It was an aspect of the PnP games that we just knew better than to get involved with. Instinctively we knew that would lead to hard feelings towards one another. However, online, that attitude seems to have died a quiet but messy death. Many folks revel in the thought of 'killing' another players character; in the hopes that the dead characters player will be angry or disheartened. These same folks prey upon the characters much weaker than their character. It's the anonymous nature of the internet and MMO's that allow this type of behavior to surface. Patience I'm getting to it. Now I'm not suggesting that the DM's here come to your house and whoop you for griefing, although I'm sure they've wanted to a time or two. What I am suggesting (preaching to the choir probably) is that you look at yourself and hold yourself accountable for what you do online and in MMO's. That's what your parents tried to drill into you, responsibility. To behave appropriately even when there are no consequences for not doing so. Meh, I've taken enough of your time.

Nice post btw.

Anyway the other aspect I find interesting is that my PC can have an argument with someone and instantly they want to slay you. Now I feel this touches on metagaming due to most people knowing the background of my char, his level compared to theirs etc. But how many times do we get into arguments in RL with strangers, even really heated arguments where personal insults are thrown? Do we automatically want to kill them?..of course not. Smart people use guile and wit, brash people might throw a punch, weak ones might run and cry...etc. But all in all killing is rare and usually a last resort.

Also there are many forms of PvP. People aren't always going to agree to open conflict in an arena. Rogues and assassins would resort to poisoning or slaying someone while they sleep. Others use curses, some might burn a house down. We can't cater for every degree in a game, but I feel players need to think of these aspects when getting into disputes.

gilshem ironstone · « **Reply #33 on:** February 26, 2007, 02:40:39 pm »

Quote

Polak76 - 2/26/2007 2:24 PM

Anyway the other aspect I find interesting is that my PC can have an argument with someone and instantly they want to slay you. Now I feel this touches on metagaming due to most people knowing the background of my char, his level compared to theirs etc. But how many times do we get into arguments in RL with strangers, even really heated arguments where personal insults are thrown? Do we automatically want to kill them?..of course not.

I totally agree. Although in real life I was in one fight in grade eight, any friends that I ahve who have been in fights with total strangers (fist-fights that is) have told me how most everyone is loathe to go there. And that the instinct not to fight goes up with the amount of training said person has. One friend used to fight all the time in high-school and then started boxing and mixed-martial arts and has since refused to get in to fights with people. And not just because they do not want to hurt the person they are fightin but because they would not want the hassle with law-enforcers as trained fighters are usually held to a higher criminal standard.

Granted these are generalizations and you can think up a rationale for any behaviour.

Praylor Falcus · « **Reply #34 on:** February 26, 2007, 03:01:08 pm »

After having read all the prior post, I have formed this view, thought of these possiable flaws, and will try to offer solutions to them. Please feel free to offer any differing views and suggestions for staff to consider.

PVP: While good for the most part, we must agree some will misuse.

Solutions:
1) Characters may only engage another character that is within a certian level range of themselves, This will stop the mass murder of those newer characters that have no clue as to what is going on. ( the arena will still be available for those that wish to bypass this rule)

2)Fighting in towns would have the possability of of a gm catching you and having both of you arrested, sent to jail, and court. Fines for such actions (this could be done with a system like the portal in north point that charges for transporting you , without the actual transporting) I mean you get in a fight at the local waffle-mart you take the chance of getting arrested, and court and fines

3) Now this problem i have not seen addressed. What of the lurking cleric types that take the advantage of healing a dying PVP'er and getting the exp for it, I see a growing cottage industry from this and what better way to power level a friends new cleric than go pick a bunch of fights and hope your not knocked below -11, so your first level cleric friend can heal you and get exp for it? If your say a level 14 or so you could level the bugger with one or two fights. This could become something of a problem with clerics hovering around word fights like vultures. An character with a target heal would of course be able to do the same thing and i feel this should be looked at and fixed to avoid such practice from even starting.

4) Soul strand loss: as the current policy for soul strand returns is I feel unfair I would think a no return possiable policy in PVP and regular game play would be the only truly fair system, but thats just me so take a deep breath and forgo the flame mail. As to PVP why make it with out the chance, it would make one think before jumping in ozy's face and getting penguined. I mean in real life if you fight the chance of someone dying is truly possiable, the soul strand loss would act as a factor one must consider before PVP'ing

Pen N Popper · « **Reply #35 on:** February 26, 2007, 03:19:04 pm »

While I agree that having some risk involved for PvP is a good thing, the loss of a SS is taken quite seriously by most. If PvP is to encourage more substantial and diversified RP, then it seems best to keep it a low risk activity. I'd be most worried about players harboring bad feelings over the loss of a SS.
Another issue with PvP is retribution and revenge. Since PCs aren't really killed, what's to stop a spreading feud? Not that that couldn't lead to interesting dynamics for RP, but it too could spiral into OOC grouping of warring parties.
Perhaps we should think of PvP on Layo as "beatings" rather than "killings." Perhaps a GM or WL still needs to be involved for a killing (with the chance of a lost SS), while PvP battles (even if game mechanics still result in a return to the bindstone) are referred to as beatings. Does that make sense?

Dorganath · « **Reply #36 on:** February 26, 2007, 04:48:14 pm »

To address Praylor's comments:
1) PvP will be a two-way street. One has to agree to the PvP, so the whole level-range meta-gaming thing really shouldn't be an issue. Also, higher-level characters who establish a pattern of preying on new, low-level players will be found out and dealt with administratively. I'm really not concerned about our ability to keep things under control.
2) In-town situations are always subject to RPed situations with law enforcement. Nothing is changing here.
3) I do kind of doubt this will be much of a problem, unless PvP is so rampant that there will be enough carnage to make it worthwhile for healers, but the amount gained for such a good deed does not really remain significant for a long time. But again, as with all things, if such a thing becomes a problem, we'll eliminate the problem. This might take the form of getting rid of that XP bonus for healing a dying character, which would be yet another in a long list of unfortunate incidents of the few spoiling it for the many.
4) We have talked about possibilities for penalties related to PvP activities. There have been many good suggestions from the Teams and from the community alike. At this time, we're going to go with the "good faith" method, meaning assuming that the community utilizes this system in the best spirit of the game world, then there's no need to introduce additional factors.
To everyone: There's been a lot debate on a system that has not yet been put into use. People are rightly concerned, but let's give this some time before we praise or condemn it. Likely it will morph over time, but let's give things a few weeks before we decide that this won't work or that people will abuse it, etc. Let's try and have some faith in the maturity and judgement of the community and work together to make everything work out best for everyone.
Everyone should know that the last thing anybody wants is for the community to collapse due to the abusers of whatever systems we may implement. Nobody wants that less than Leanthar, and this is his idea.
And as I've said before, I can turn the whole thing off in a moment if it becomes too abused.

tubasolo · « **Reply #37 on:** March 01, 2007, 09:13:26 am »

I have to voice a concern over a few sentiments posted here. The loss of a soul strand is not something your character should even be aware of. In my opinion it is OOC and therefore metagaming if the potential loss of a SS is what dictates whether a PC engages in battle with other PC's. I don't want anyone to think I am picking on them, I'm not.

LightlyFrosted · « **Reply #38 on:** March 01, 2007, 01:04:19 pm »

So far as I've been able to determine, soul strands are character knowledge. As it's a result of character interaction with the goddess of death, I'd say that's going to leave a lasting impression on anyone, no matter how jaded an adventurer - further, there's in-game 'treatises' on soul strands, stating that 'as far as the sages have been able to determine', you only get ten. Returning to pseudo-life after being killed is as in-character as meeting the soul mother. A character who kept track of how many soul strands they had lost would certainly be reluctant to go into any unnecessary scuffles as they approached their allotment, doubly so if they were almost out.

I'm going to just keep an eye on this system, and see how the first few uses of it pan out. Hopefully it won't become a huge issue, but as this is a new and experimental thing, anything is possible.

tubasolo · « **Reply #39 on:** March 01, 2007, 01:05:27 pm »

I stand corrected, Thank you.