The World of Layonara
The Layonara Community => General Discussion => Topic started by: Laldiien on February 24, 2007, 04:30:54 AM
-
[SIZE=16]Rather than keep the monstrous races thread alive, I want to start a new one for the discussion of PvP. [/SIZE][SIZE=16]For me personally, I have never, not in 20 years of gaming, had a positive experience with PvP. I have seen immature children exercising their might; I have seen grief-gangs running around, torturing lower levels; I have seen players unhappy because they were mocked because they didn't want to engage in personal combat against someone that knew they could never beat. [/SIZE] [SIZE=16]I don't like PvP in any incarnation; I never have, and I never will. The only possible exception is the Arena, and even then, with a very limited scope. Dorg mentioned opening up PvP in the hopes the community would be mature enough to handle it. In less than a month, the GM's on the boards have chided the community for meta-gaming, keeping it civil on the boards, what have you. The only *possible* way for this to be fair is to remove the challenge rating from a characters description *AND* to allow the possibility of a lost Soul Strand, with no chance of reimbursement. (Using this as as example only for illustration) Jareg decides he wants to run the foul Half-Orc Honora out of town, he should not know her challenge and he should accept that he may have his butt handed to him with a lost soul strand for his efforts.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=16]My opinion: Opening PvP is a mistake. It will exacerbate the communities existing internal strife and create more. For those saying there is none, Read the "[/SIZE][SIZE=16]Why don't druids get any respect[/SIZE] (http://thread-view.asp?tid=34929&posts=43&start=1)[SIZE=16]" and "[/SIZE][url=thread-view.asp?tid=34982&posts=46&start=1][SIZE=16]Monstrous races[/SIZE][/url][SIZE=16]" and "[/SIZE][url=thread-view.asp?tid=34816&posts=3&start=1][SIZE=16]Rumors and Suppositions[/SIZE][/url][SIZE=16]" threads. This community has fractures. They are not large ones, most are just the normal "I'm right, you're not"mentality that comes when you put any group of people together. But make no mistake, it will increase. Ingame and out, this will breed tension.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=16]All this being said, the Team has said "This is what we are doing". I don't like it, but I will live with it. Thisis the world they created, and I want to stay. But I honestly feel that the decision is ill-considered and will likely be removed due to player complaints within 2 months of deployment. I'd like to be wrong.[/SIZE]
-
I think that the best way to add pvp is to add a small nifty item that when used on a player will give its target a conversation option to accept PVP or not, if accepted then PVP between the two is allowed and so forth so forth (though the lose of soulstrands shouldnt be possible, we're trying to have fun after all, and there is no gain to either sides beyond roleplay to such a situation... so it wouldnt make sense, its not like you're farming xp)
If denied well, its denied :)
the only difference from what we have now is that players wont need world leaders/DMs to approve PVP and could approve it between themselves.
-
Witch Hunter - 2/24/2007 7:49 AM*snip* (though the lose of soulstrands shouldnt be possible, we're trying to have fun after all, and there is no gain to either sides beyond roleplay to such a situation... so it wouldnt make sense, its not like you're farming xp)
So you do not find Quests or Adventuring fun? You risk your strands there, why not when you are PvPing? And it does make sense. If you are going to challenge someone, there should be the added danger of loss. If there is no danger of loss, there is no sting of death. Once you lose your fear of death, you do foolish things, like, say, challenge Lin'da. "oh lol lol, wow, what great fun"
-
Witch Hunter - 2/24/2007 12:49 PM If denied well, its denied :)
Unfortunately this would not stop the people who presently hide behind the PvP rules from continuing to do so.
I know I can't be the only person who is annoyed when people do that.
Nor would it stop people from trying to goad characters into a fight and then mocking them for refusing.
I too would dearly like to believe that as a community we are mature enough to handle this...but I do have my concerns we aren't the same as Laldiien.
I also agree with him that if this system does come into play we need to remove the challenge ratings from peoples character descriptions.
I am sure the team have put a lot of thought into this and I trust them in its implementation. I just hope the community can repay the trust they are putting in us by handling it in a responsible manner rather than abusing it for their own amusement.
-
Of course I find quests and adventuring fun, where did I say I don't? but in such an event I gain experince, lots of it too - in a roleplaying scenerio between to players who decide to PVP - For the sake of doing it without going "OMG NO!@#@!#@!#!@#!!!" moments after and being frusterated.
Perhaps instead of a soulstrand lose you could simply do the reflection period with no grave to return and pray to - theres your lose, spend 2-3 hours with low stats and such.
And true, some players will still hide behind the no pvp rule but that's how things are, not much can be done about that.
-
I am not really for it neither against it, but one very valid comment in my opinion is the fact that soul strand could be lost. I understand the reasoning for adding this to the world and if handled maturely and responsibly could add a lot of roleplay opportunities.
Now I also understand that we all here to have fun, but while having fun it should still be in character and make roleplay sense. So if there are no consequences to PvP thenpeople will just doitfor thefun and not because it really makes sense. My biggest fear is it then evolves into something similiar than World of Warcraft were people are constantly challenging and fighting each othereverywhere.
Now if you want to practise your skill with a friend then the arena is still there, where no soul strands are lost and you suffer no death penalties.
But if you challenge a drow for example in the middle of Hlint to fight and you kill him there or you get killed, that is death as much as you have died to a hostile creature. And I cant see the justification for the soul mother looking away. This challenge should be taken seriously and I personally only think it will be taken seriously if it has consequences such as losing a soul strand. The same consideration should be taken by any person to actually go as far as to kill his opponent.
So I think a situation where both characters get the change to accept the challenge fully knowing the consequences will not only limit the "abuse" of PvP but will also make more sense.
Please not the thoughts expressed here are my personal thoughts and in no way represent the GM team's views on this.
-
PvP will not be opened in the "complete free PvP style á la WoW" but instead, the request-accept way will be the one (just like how it is done already, with the difference that a WL nor a DM has to be the "middle hand" ).
I think the reason for no SS loss in PvP is that SS losses will seriously increase the Player to Player conflicts (differ from Character to Character conflicts). I would never ever request PvP if there is any chance I would be able to inflict a SS loss on someone else, EVEN if I had the permission of the other person.
I would classify anyone who's only afraid of dying with his or her PC if there are any game mechanic penalties to be a rather poor roleplayer. A death is a death regardless whether GP/XP/SS losses are present or not.
And, as Dorganath has mentioned. This system can be closed any second if it is shown that it's not working very well, to let the old PvP rules apply yet again.
-
I am absolutely against PvP myself due to the amount of trouble it will invariably lead to. If we can't as a community be trusted not to metagame dieties, then why would anyone think we could handle PvP?
That said, here is the quote from http://www.layonaraonline.com/forums/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=30619&start=1 (http://thread-view.asp?tid=30619&start=1)
[INDENT] We are going to allow more PvP in certain areas, called siege areas.
[/INDENT] What this implies to me is that I can opt out of PvP by staying out of these areas.
The only time I saw PvP work well was on a server that literally only had levels 2 - 4 (with WL types being 5 or 6). This was a permadeath server. PvP was serious business with serious consequences, had to be approved by a PC kingdom leader, and was on a completely level playing field due to the tight level range.
-
We are going to do two things... and yes they are in testing stages and depending on the maturity of the community they could be ripped out. 1) We will have an item in a characters inventory that they can use to request PvP with another character. The other character in turn must use their item on the requester...then PvP can happen. But PvP can not happen (for either character) again for 60 RL minutes (cool down sort of period). 2) We will (at some point in the future) I hope have PvP zones that will be like a "capture the flag" sort of thing where players will be fighting over towers/forts/keeps and perhaps resources (of some kind or another) in that location. But this is a full PvP area and will not be "required" to explore or have fun--so if you don't like it stay out of it. With that said...sadly nothing has started on this system and it is looking like it never will as there is little to no activity from the team on it. So it may never happen. Have faith people, breath. If you don't like PvP don't engage in it--simple as that. If people grief players rest assured they will not be in the community for very long--simple as that.
//Edit.... since my sanity has already been questioned on this post.
There will of course be an RP reason to do #2 above, otherwise why would I ask/try to have it implemented? RP is what this server is about--I am not going to implement something just to implement it. Lord knows we already have more than enough on our plate than to put more work on our plate. I will not go down a path of researching (let alone implementing) without thinking things through, getting input and feedback, and ensuring it is all based around RP reasons. You won't always know the RP reason but it is always there.
-
Perhaps I have more faith in the community than many, but... I honestly think that this inclusion will work, and will have the intended positive effect.
That said, time will tell. And if I'm right, I reserve the right to let off a good-natured "I told you so." You naysayers get the same if you're right. :)
Personally, I have never been a fan of "open" PvP. However, the PvP allowed with WL or DM interaction has always seemed great... Except for one thing: There's not always an WL or DM around who has a spare moment to assess the situation and click on the wand. They're busy people; no fault of theirs. This will take them out of the loop on this, and... I think that, aside from a few of the newer players, the PvP tool will be used with regard to RP rather than anything else.
And if nothing else, "Pyyran uses PvP Wand" puts across the idea that my threat when "Pyyran draws his sword" is real. More than enough to end most conflicts then and there.
-
Guys, as Leanthar said above and as I said at least once in the "monstrous race" thread....
We are not starting up open PvP. We never said we were, and as far as I know, we have no plans to do so. Please do not freak out about open PvP, grief gangs or hyperactive kids out to prove something.
And once more for emphasis...
People who abuse this system in either way will be dealt with and/or we'll just turn it off.
-
And that is why I continue to love Layo. There are lots of PvP servers out there but I just don't like PvP in general with some limited RP exceptions like in the Arena. Whatever Leanthar is doing I am sure it will work out great like everything else.
-
Mostly I agree with Laldiien , however, coming from a Ragnarok Server where PVP was allowed and people would just come up and SPLAT. I'm kind of jaded. I do think we're better than that. I do agree that there would be some uses for the PVP though that would fall into good rp, and with the way its being implemented , I have faith in it. Ill use a few nights ago as an example.
Rayenoir, Rhynn and Ael were Rping. Ael kept running off. There was something (I wont go into it) causing this , that Rhynn and Raye wanted to take care of. In which case the PVP That would have made sense in this situation would be for Rhynn to want to use a hand spell to keep Ael down. It wouldn't have been humane but it would have been the 'last resort' for Rhynn if she believed Ael was truly in danger. Circumstances like that I can see as fully fitting the rp need for PVP and even then could be played out through rp and rolls.
I have to admit though:
Leanthar - 2/24/2007 8:28 AM
We will (at some point in the future) I hope have PvP zones that will be like a "capture the flag" sort of thing where players will be fighting over towers/forts/keeps and perhaps resources (of some kind or another) in that location. But this is a full PvP area and will not be "required" to explore or have fun--so if you don't like it stay out of it.
Reminds me of Ragnarok's War of Emperium...and that was about the only thing there that I liked.
EDIT: Fixing Laldiien's name, for some reason my brain always registered it as Laiiden before this point.
-
Just my two cents... Unlike many of the PVP servers and games I have played, there is some serious thought and safeguards planned here. It looks to me like there will be a lot of choice on the PC level, and oversight and consequences from the GM level. If you don't like PVP, you will not have to do it... and if you grief others or abuse it, you won't be here long. I think it will work and add a lot of RP potential. There will always be those who will abuse things like this, we just have to allow them to exercise their free will and deal the smackdown with a ban if they knowingly abuse it. I also think there should be no SS loss...but what about some minor XP loss? You die and loose 1,000xp. It annoys, but does not run the risk of loosing your PC forever to the Soul Mother. Or perhaps some equal xp loss to the victor and defeated? I would think twice whether my pvp was required if I knew I was going to pay a price for winning. :-)
-
Stephen_Zuckerman - 2/24/2007 8:50 AM
Perhaps I have more faith in the community than many, but... I honestly think that this inclusion will work, and will have the intended positive effect.
That said, time will tell. And if I'm right, I reserve the right to let off a good-natured "I told you so." You naysayers get the same if you're right. :)
Personally, I have never been a fan of "open" PvP. However, the PvP allowed with WL or DM interaction has always seemed great... Except for one thing: There's not always an WL or DM around who has a spare moment to assess the situation and click on the wand. They're busy people; no fault of theirs. This will take them out of the loop on this, and... I think that, aside from a few of the newer players, the PvP tool will be used with regard to RP rather than anything else.
And if nothing else, "Pyyran uses PvP Wand" puts across the idea that my threat when "Pyyran draws his sword" is real. More than enough to end most conflicts then and there.
I agree with you in the respect of having faith in the community. I think the pvp will be fine. There will always be the ones, or exceptions, that cause problems. However the difference with Layo and the rest of the servers/games I have played, is that Layo has away of weeding out those exceptions.
Maturity, common sense, and respect for your fellow player. This server is full of those three things, from the staff down to the newer players.
-
I always play on pvp servers in any game I play. Layo has really been my only exception. I love the challenge and the enjoyment of pvp. 90% of the time the systems are horribly flawed or simply put they are the same thing over and over. I did play on a pvp nwn server once that had the same rule that Layo has of "you must get permission from the other player", but you didn't need a dm witness. On that server there was pvp all the time, becaue it was set up as a good vs evil server. There were people who did not pvp at all and then those who you knew would. It was a great system, and that server's community couldn't hold a candle to Layonara's community. If they made it work, I know we can, and we can do it better.
-
Eight-Bit - 2/25/2007 3:04 PM I think everyone needs to just chill out and wait. You're forgetting what server you're playing on. Layonara has been PvP free for as long as I have been here and Leanthar is taking a bold step forward in giving everyone the game they want to play. Instead of worrying about it, or claiming it will have no positive effect on Layonara, you should wait and see. .
I have not forgotten what server I play on, nordo I think anyone isneeding to chill. I posed a very civil response to something I did not like. There were opinions supporting and opinions opposing. Leanthar weighed in, as did a few other GM's. That does not change my misgivings, not does it make the it palatable, but I am perfectly willing to wait and see.
I do take exception to the "Leanthar is taking a bold step forward in giving everyone the game they want to play." Everyone who? I don't want it; I loathe PvP. There are others, I'm sure. Please don't speak for me, I'm capable of it myself.
-
Im just glad that people hardly will be able to hide behind the pvp rules as they are in place now, in the end I think it will only cause better roleplay, that people think twice before mocking someone.
-
I've played many PvP servers and absolutely enjoy it. Typically the fashion they were conducted was to initiate a sledging match followed by sending the opposition a tell for PVP. If they accepted, both players click 'dislike' on the party menu and battle begins.
I think PvP can work here but its going to take alot of effort and maturity. Regulating it with the use of an item in the inventory i believe is a step in the right direction. Taking the diffuclty factor from character descriptions & server status are also important factors in my opinion.
The problem I forsee is that becuase Layonara has been starved of PvP for so long, it will be abused the moment it is released to the players. I also believe meta-gaming abused, however in both cases I hope I'm wrong.
All in all though, PvP is definately exciting and brings a new dimension to this game, especially if when/if they implement area's for it. I've enjoyed PvP on other worlds and losing battles is often more fun than winning them, plus it adds to further developing a characters bio (ie, now has a hatred for all toranites!...then again, who doesn't?).
So best of luck with it and I hope to see it used sensibly in future.
Polak76
-
Is there any way we could implement sub duel PvP combat? I think brawling would be much more common then fights to the death. It would also negate the "hiding behind no PvP" issue. Dwarfs for instance like to brawl. I know sometimes RP may generate a legitimate fight to the death, but much more often then not the RP would result in someone getting knocked out and thrown into mud.
What I don't want to see is high school bully RP. Where character say things are are mean, rude, or hostile, then they are insulted by another character, and then try to kill the character that insulted them. That is just generating RP with the intention to PK someone.
Aeon Blues
EDIT: P.S. The issue of removing the challenge rating is a tough one. The reason is that there are server rules related to what level is required to be on what server. If you walk into hint, and organize a party to go to Dregar, then you have to know for sure you are not taking a level 7 or lower character with you, as that might bring down the wrath of a DM on you.
-
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.
-
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?!
-
heh..good point.
About time for a new quote i rekon. Just a little lazy atm.
-
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...
-
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?
-
I think that's a very important distinction.
We're loosening the restrictions on CvC, not PvP. :)
-
Semantics...
OOC hostility and player-to-player griefing still have no place here, regardless of the acronym used.
-
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.
-
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...
-
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.
-
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
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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
-
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?
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
I stand corrected, Thank you.
-
Well, you don't actually 'meet' the soul mother, and she's not exactly a goddess of death. Contrary to a few accounts I've seen, you do not 'see' the Soul Mother whenever you lose a Soul Strand...nor is there really any huge wail effect as far as I know :P
She has the Harvester to do the dirty work like that, anyway. But it is most certainly IC knowledge, and a very traumatizing experience. Think of it not so much as dealing with a goddess of death but as when you die and the bindstone you bound yourself calls your soul back to it at the moment of your death, so that you will not continue on to the Plane of the Lost, a piece of it is ripped away... lose an arm, a leg, a few fingers or an eye, what is that really, compared to losing a piece of your soul? It's a very IC perspective, yes, but I'm not sure why someone with 9 strands lost would attack someone for calling out their mother if they're wary of npc creatures...not any different, there. Caution and wariness all around - if you're near permadeath, you don't go by yourself to the Underdark, right? Even if you really hate drow? The restraint goes in either case. :)
But it's kind of a moot issue, anyway.
-
LightlyFrosted - 3/1/2007 4:04 PM
Returning to pseudo-life after being killed...
Is this a reference to the white glow around a character after respawning or being raised or resurrected?
I'm asking because I know that glow causes a lot of confusion, and "pseudo-life" seems to mean that whoever came back from the dead isn't really alive. If a character respawns or is raised or resurrected, she is completely alive, with a body and all the other usual trappings of a living person. No one is "half alive" after respawning. No one is a ghost or a bodiless soul walking around.
The glow is not so much an in-character thing as an out-of-character indication that the character isn't quite well. Dying is a nasty business, and being brought back doesn't immediately remove the emotional baggage and memories of the trauma.
Personally, I'm not a big fan of the glow. People react based on what they see, and posts here on the forum about people not being ghosts or bodiless souls get lost or missed, so "people become ghosts after they respawn" becomes some sort of truth, even though it isn't true. It also makes it difficult to have some normal RP in town waiting out the reflections, since every other character you know comes up saying, "Oh my! What happened to you? Can I help?" I'd rather choose to RP having died or not rather than have it forced on me by someone else. Yeah, this paragraph is a little off-topic...
Anyway, glowing PCs are fully alive, and are not ghosts or bodiless souls.
-
Hehe yeah, I've seen the "*looks down through himself in shock*" a few times and feel bad saying that you're not REALLY supposed to be transparent...just creates unnecessary confusion I think, as it doesn't say anywhere handy that it is not the case, so people go off what they see. Ahem...anyway yeah. *Shifty.* Topic...topic...