Keep Conflict Alive
-
No one should be nervous about doing anything and if anyone left over our PvP policy then that's just silly! Especially leaving without actually talking to a DM to see if there is a misunderstanding first.
-
I don't understand the apprehension here. Nothing is -changing.- It's tweaks to the existing system that has been in place for quite some time. Just keep doing as you were, people. If you know how to handle PvP properly it doesn't seem like any of this will affect you greatly. Not sure why anyone would leave over this.
-
Fireblood, just because you don't have a "powerbuild" - and a lot of stylish, evil, successful characters don't - doesn't mean you don't know how spells, skills, stats, potions and so on work. You can always defend yourself from anything, you just need to learn the mechanics behind it. Also, the word "powerbuild" is getting old and has no real meaning. People build their characters in a way that reflects their concept. If they incidentally make it as strong as possible- well, then we should congratulate them for having the good sense to do so.
What you don't get, Fireblood, is that very few evil characters are going to kill your near helpless, gimped priestess of Kelemvor. They'll probably have a good chuckle at how terrible of a fight she put up and send her on her way, humiliated. FD usually just happens when you go out of your way to get it: You piss off the wrong person too much. You continue fighting/plotting against someone who warned you several times. You call Tyr a retard in front of his high priest. You commit ten murders and are caught. You play a cool evil character and run into a gank-squad. The situations you are making up just don't happen. I've never met an evil PC that had no style at all because usually DMs on any server are pretty quick to give them a 1-on-1 about why they shouldn't just FD everyone they come across, and trust me, I have heard that talk a few times before.
@Broken:
Should DMs be consulted when PvP is escalating? Yes.
Should they be present when PvP actually happens? Preferably.
Should they be directly involved in the outcomes of PvP? No.
Should they alter the outcomes after PvP? No.Exactly. Wow. How'd you sum up all my incoherent rambling so nicely? I approve.
I really agree with these points. The whole OOCness of pvp lately has left the server a hell of a lot poorer. I really do think that the OOC Dm save that certain players clearly have, has damaged the rp, conflict and tension on the server.
I think honestly the whole druids versus cult conflict ended up being a bit of a mess, purely for all the oocness which was involved in it.
Firstly with Crey, as far as I am concerned the player should have gracefully retired after his first rped, logical and ic death, which was not at the hands of Jacob, but actually much earlier, at the hands of the last High Druid Nami.
Crey had been making threats to burn down the glade and destroy the druids, actually icly entered the glade to desecrate it, happened upon Nami, who promptly ate him. Clearly, if a character does something like threaten to kill the druids, destroy that which icly they are sworn to protect then march right into the glade and threaten the High Druid, that high druid has very clear ic reasons to kill that character, which Nami promptly did, acting in a very logical, consistant and IC way.
Now for killing Crey Nami had very serious and logical IC reprucusions, which actually ended in the character ending and going into retirement. Namely Nami had to hand herself in, and was effectively removed from the game, a character which the player had put tremendous amount of effort in. This was IC and logical and a good end to two characters, as it happened in a clear and logical IC way.
However Crey received his OOC escape number one, was brought back from the dead, and reinstated, despite, the other character being effectively destroyed. This I found exceptionally distasteful as not only had the losing chracter escaped the IC consequences of his actions, for OOC reasons, but another player lost, his/her hard worked on character for OOC reasons.
As for Jacob being able to take out the cult, as soon as Nami died, he had perfect ic reason to go after Crey at this point, on account of being serious about an evil malarite and had opportunity to take out Crey, but didnt for ooc reasons.
Then Jacob did something dumb, got caught in a one sided duel, that he lost because of his ic (and perhaps my ooc) stupidity, got his ass hauled to East Way and nearly got sacrified to Talos. At which point Moloch saved me with a Malar panther.
Now on new occassion, the cult, I think five or six strong, first time I had seen them together along with crey, were in the wilds, and I bumped into them with a little help, with two other druids. This I felt this was a fair match up, as myself and Q had the slight advantage of level, while they clearly had advantage in numbers.
We floored them, as they made the mistake of thinking Jacob was the most dangerous, when actually it was the rapid shooting, sneak attacking Q, who always packed lots of tricks. As my evil malarite had all the people causing all the noise at his mercy, it would have been very logical to kill them all now, which I didnt as Moloch asked me not to, although I couldnt justify not doing so ICly, so they escaped eventually, through a cube plot device.
A few days later, they led Jacob into a well thought out trap in the wilds, and kicked his ass. They had a DM present ULK, I think allthough could be wrong and were ready to kill me. As their objectives were to kill the druids and destroy the glade, it would have made perfect IC sense to do so, ULK also thought so as well. I pointed out though that I had them at my mercy in the reverse situation a couple of days ago and they escaped for OOC reasons, so the reverse should hold true, which is what happened.
Anyway, as I was getting more than a little annoyed by OOC escapes on both sides, I very politely said to the players on both sides, we should quit it and resolve this icly. We had a great show down in Eveningstar, four on four and two of the CUlt got killed. In this showdown the cult managed to kill bystanders and opened fire first.
Now after this both of the cult members killed, were raised straight after. Did this feel irratating after we had clearly beat them in a IC battle, where the NPC's present, had no reason whatsoever to raise them yes. It was just another OOC escape to IC actions. It would have been much better for the defeated to gracefully retire at this point, as this clearly was a conclusion to a battle and they got a bail.
As for Talon, neither of us had any OOC special help, we both agreed to resolve matters ICly. I killed her in tasteful fashion, and then my prime ally burnt her corpse, as we both agreed before hand would be the fate of Talon, should Jacob manage to kill her, expressly so she couldnt be raised, as both of us, were sick to death Icly and OOCly of players come back from the dead.
For the death of Talon, Jacob in effect was exiled from the city, couldnt enter it, earned the hatred of most of the charcaters and beared seriously IC consequences for his actions. That he was cut off from the city and would be allies, for his actions, is probably why he got killed eventually. When he was actually killed, that was it, I didnt want him brought back, Tinker suggested, time to end his story, which I agreed with.
Now imagine, how annoying it is, to have comitted ic actions, which icly, probably lead to the death of your character, for the person you killed, to be brought back from the dead, when they were not only killed, but clearly had their body destroyed as well.
It left a very sour taste in the mouth, to have a character I had patiently developed, and rped into a position of influence killed, then for the player who indirectly killed him, come back from very clear cut pvp death, when it was clear Jacob wasnt coming back. This I dont like as I have paid IC consequences for my actions, which lead to my death, yet the cult player has fully escaped the IC consequences of her actions for purely OOC reasons.
Also and to be honest, I really didnt like wanting OOC escapes myself, and felt cheapened when I got them, but thought if the other side is getting them, I probably should. Then I was really annoyed, when I thought all sides agreed to IC conflict resolution, then surprise surprise ooc escape for the losers.
I think had the cult got to where they were, through purely IC actions, I would be praising their accomplishments. As they have got there through special favours, I dont respect the chracters nor most of the players. This isnt isolated, as I know an awful lot of players, not all of whom have written here, are pretty angry, that the cult, clearly has been bailed out, far more times than should be even by a vast stretch of the imagination for OOC reasons. That this topic is right now, about 11 pages long, should be suggetive of how annoyed people are.
Here would be my suggestions:
-
The soft rule, of having three encounters before fd pvp happens should be enforced. Unless one character does something incredibly dumb, which would ICly and logically result in that player dying. Examples include walking into Zhentil keep and pissing on the statue of Bane or walking into the druid grove and telling the High Druid, that your going to desecrate away…
-
PVP death, should result in permadeath and this should be enforced. It really is griefing on a grand scale, for someones killer, to pay grave consequences for their actions, such as execution, being bounty hunted, or exiled; then for the person they killed to come back from the dead, when things have died down, usually their killer....
-
Dms should help facilitate pvp, there is lots of clever ways this can be done, by helping rival groups bump into each other, such as malar panther telling a druid, where the zombie cult went, or a peasent in eveningstar running up to a red hart and telling them were the bandits went.
-
Dms shouldnt decide the result of pvp. It really is better left to the players, because if it isnt, it causes bad feelings on the side, which didnt have DM help.
-
Let IC conflict resolve itself in an IC way. Real IC danger, such as consequences for risky IC action, pumps things up, and makes character behave more realistically. OOC protections, which let players act in a completely ICly unrealistically way, both diminish realistic and believable stories, and get the backs of players up. IF an action is clearly stupid for a character, they should pay the consequences of that action, if they do it. If they dont pay that consequence, it isnt realistic, and immersion is broken.
-
Have consistant rules for 'all' players. While this isnt the first point, it is I think the most important point. If one player has one set of rules and another player another set of rules, it merely creates ooc conflict, which this server doesnt need. With one set of rules, equally applied to everyone, no one will feel OOCly done badly to.
It is annoying for instance to be categorically told, that disguises are not supported on COA by the Dms, then when a perceived favourite walks around in disguise, everyone else is suppossed to respect it somehow. Its even more annoying to be killed by someone, that by rights, you should have killed, but didnt out of OOC reasons. Especially considering that when your a a mature rper, and you have put a lot of time and energy into your charcter.
The best stories are believable, believable stories are what is I think is at the very core of what makes an excellent role play server, for believable stories, characters must be allowed to act naturally and they can only do this if they act ICly, and acting ICly involves risk, sometimes risk pays off sometimes it doesnt, either way, the risk creates tension and conflict. When IC risk is removed, characters dont behave in a believable way, which doesnt create a believable story, which in turn weaken roleplay and breaks immersion and leads to the sorts of unrealistic situations, such when a CG Queen doesnt intervene to stop a wanted enemy of the city from escaping.
Let IC conflicts resolve themselves in a logical IC way, seriously, this will enhance the server dramatically and cull a lot of the bad feeling OOCly, that this whole series of events have created among much of the player base. IC conflict is at the heart of a roleplay server which leads to the best and most realistic stories, which engages players and makes for an interesting server.
Spartan
-
-
From what I have gathered, People have gotten this notion.
If the DM's like a concept that person gets insta-Saves in PvP.
This sets off two different thoughts:
A) If I have a good concept, I get instant protection from DMs.
B) If I try and kill these people the DM's are just going to save them so why bother.
THese are both stupidly wrong.
Something we had going great during the civil war that has dissipated since then are the different forms of PvP. PvP isn't just hack and slash and kill. PvP is spying, working to thwart, giving the opponent a disadvantage.
From what I have seen (I have not been involved in the Cult plot so sorry if I am wrong) but the Cultists have been doing just this. I am sure they spied a lot, I mean wasn't one a sheriff once? They have been trying to get the city to submit to them without going all full force even when they could 2 shot half the people on the server. They ambushed the competition and ransomed them. This not only shorts the competition out money for items to help fight but also sends a message to the populace saying "Hey these peeps are weak! Come join us!"
This is what the DM's want and this is what the DM's will interrupt Hack and Slash PvP for in order to get more of this. If I am wrong strike me down but I know this is what I talked to a DM about during the civil war and I haven't seen much of it yet anymore.
-
Any chance of a TLDR; version of that rant?
-
@Undead:
Any chance of a TLDR; version of that rant?
Which rant? lol
-
Wrote the funniest wall of text every.
Seriously.
Jacob was the FIRST person the DMs intervened to save from a premature PKing at the hands of the Cult.
I also had to interject to resolve a PKing conflict you had with another player just a few days earlier.
So seriously, you of all people, should be far more appreciative of this since several times this philosophy of the DMs saved your character from deaths you didn't want so you could continue your story longer.
As you have many times pointed out the problem with a mentality that develops amongst players who are quick to PvP wherein you think "I have to PK this guy before he PKs me because then I'll lose".
-
I'm going to be honest. Not gonna read all that… I skimmed it, however, and here's a point I'd make. In the example of Crey and Nami....Moloch has clearly stated that only DMs or the player of the character can decide that said character is permanently dead. It is a choice. Now, I'm not promoting just respawning and tracking down the people that killed you, and maybe that could have been handled better. I do not know. I was not there. But the fact remains that nobody has the right to force a player to retire a character aside from the DMs. Even then, I would hope it is not done lightly.
The vibe I'm getting from this thread is honestly not anything against PvP rules. The way I see it, many people feel that the Cult have been given favoritism. I can't speak on that ad....well, I haven't the faintest clue. But perhaps the solution here is simple. My guess...and it is only a guess...is that the guys playing the Cult took the time to find a DM willing to help and explained the situations to them. I'll be the first to admit that finding a DM that has time is -hard.- It's a pain in the ass and it's hard. But usually, they really are willing to help once you get one. This is not favoritism, people. If you do not seek out assistance, you will likely never receive it.
Now, since I've contributed to the derailing of the topic by adressing that, I'll just try to reel it back in. The complaint being issued is that PvP being OOCly adjusted by DMs has adversely affected the server? I don't disagree, that would be disruptive. If you read Moloch's more recent post, one of the adjustments, the response to community outcry is that these interventions are IC to avoid ruining immersion.
If a group of badguys sets up an escape plan with their allies before being captured, they deserve to do it. They at least deserve to try. If a group of goodguys wants to go murder the most recent baddies, maybe before the mob departs, the commoners demand them brought alive for proper trial so they can see for themselves they are dead. This guides the RP and the PvP towards a more reasonable end for everyone without bogging down immersion. And Moloch, if I've interperetted that wrong, please correct me.
-
I'll sum up the events.
Cult beats everyone up for weeks without a loss.
Cult gets overconfident, attacks an announced trap.
Gets beaten, all of the PCs that had formerly been beaten by the Cult and neither FD'd nor looted suddenly dry loot the Cult, and then throw a hissy fit when they aren't able to perform a lawful execution, because of IC actions, rather than OOC ones.This thread is stupid.
-
This is related to this topic, but slightly off my main points. An issue which has come up, is the perception, that if you dont want to engage in pvp, you might be forced into it, against you will. There is IC ways to escape such, which 99% of the time work. I was only half wanting to write this, as its OOC, but I think some people think its genuinely unavoidable. Its not.
Here is my survival guide to avoiding pvp
-
When playing your aspiring chamption of light/lord of darkness, dont bite off more than you can chew. A high wisdom of high intelligence character wont for example charge head first into their main enemy base, unprepared. Take the time to build up your character then move. I quite agree, it can be interesting, to be shining good, or clearly evil from day one, but the subject is survival. Dont announce your position untill you can attack from a position of strength.
-
Make lots of allies, this is great for building up joint concepts and going for larger faction goals and creates more roleplay for more people. Having half a dozen well armed friends, also makes you a much harder target.
-
Dont walk alone in the sewers/slums, thats asking for trouble, as you are away from the eyes of the authorities. Preferably avoid them entirely, unless you have good IC reason to be there and back up.
-
Never volunteer to walk into the infernal base/chaotic good ranger hideout for a chat, with your sworn enemy who wants to kill you. If you are isolated you are dead. Always meet suspicious parties on neutral ground and preferably well lit public places, such as the ground floor of the pride. If you do walk into the hideout of a guy who clearly ICly wants to kill you, you dont have the right to complain the obvious happened afterwards.
-
Untill you are stronger quest within the city. You cant be attacked, unless it is in exceptional circumstances, within its walls.
-
Always quest with people you trust. If you dont ask peoples names before a quest and one of them turns on you, by rights they have you. If you quest will the guy with the skull helm, who then reveals himself to be a priest of Cyric mid quest, you shouldnt be surprised if they turn on you. If you quest with team shiny good, you wont be backstabbed. For evil, establishing yourself, with a gang of cut throats and working with them, if the key to survival, so you evade those pesky CG vigilantes.
-
Always wander outside the city, with your band of allies, you made, when in the earlier levels. Ambushing one person is easy, ambusing a tightly knit party of four or more, who work together frequently very hard.
Incidentally, when obeying these rules, I havent lost a single character. I intentionally dont always obey these rules, as danger and conflict, can be fun. I did want to show though, there are sensible ways to avoid PvP, if you really want to. Which I felt the need to do, just to show players it can be done.
-
-
Now imagine, how annoying it is, to have comitted ic actions, which icly, probably lead to the death of your character, for the person you killed, to be brought back from the dead, when they were not only killed, but clearly had their body destroyed as well.
It left a very sour taste in the mouth, to have a character I had patiently developed, and rped into a position of influence killed, then for the player who indirectly killed him, come back from very clear cut pvp death, when it was clear Jacob wasnt coming back. This I dont like as I have paid IC consequences for my actions, which lead to my death, yet the cult player has fully escaped the IC consequences of her actions for purely OOC reasons
Understand what really happened OOC and IC before you go complaining. Your rant here comes from you being uninformed and ignorant of what went on behind the scenes. Both you and I reaped the consequences of our actions in a fitting way. Unlike Jacob, Talon had allies on both sides who worked to bring her back IC to continue the plot.
I fully accepted Talon's death and was ready to move on but was convinced otherwise. She is paying the consequences of her IC actions right now in ways you don't understand IC or OOC.
-
Avoiding PvP is not the goal of this thread. Making PvP fun and immersive for everyone involved is.
-
Avoiding PvP is not the goal of this thread. Making PvP fun and immersive for everyone involved is.
That, and again, folks, PKing doesn't mean you ended someone's character. They can get raised, only a DM or the player themself can make an event permadeath.
Jacob could have gotten raised after his death too. Also note, Talon stayed dead for a good span of time too, giving her killer time to consolidate his control and not challenging him further for the position of High Druid. That showed high levels of maturity.
-
Avoiding PvP is not the goal of this thread. Making PvP fun and immersive for everyone involved is.
I quite agree with you actually. I think pvp helps makes the server interesting. More to the point it creates tension, which enhances the story.
My first post could be summed up as: I think we should have pvp, hey its cool, but please lets let IC conflict be resolved ICly.
My second post, was for players, which want to avoid pvp, as there is the perception, wrongly, that it is unavoidable and not everyone likes pvp. This was to show, that it could be done.
-
This thread is stupid and should have been locked a long time ago.
-
@AWESOMEMAN:
This thread is stupid and should have been locked a long time ago.
Well, technically it is keeping conflict alive by staying open, so this thread had a purpose and stuck with it.
-
I don't mind DMs saving an unfavored group so long as
A: It's not immersion breaking and lacking in sense
B: Doesn't happen too often
I haven't been playing on CoA for a long while now, but from what I've read I do think the DMs have gone a bit overboard as to how much they've been interveining in the Cult-related conflicts.
Once or twice, alright. Six times in a row? Nah…
Although perhaps it's really not their fault. The problem is that people get WAY too attached to their character and how much loot and levels they have, and thus that yummy loot is so tempting to them.
I see people here speaking about how they "put effort" into their characters. That leaves me with a "wtf" feeling. This is a GAME. You're here to have FUN. You put effort in your WORK and STUDIES, not into your LEISURE.
Come on, people. It's about the path, not the ending. As it's a game, so what if you crash and burn in the end, so long as the ride was awesome.
-
And the whole: "Oh but it's IC for my character to FD all his enemies" doesn't really fly. If that's the case, then you made a boring character.
-
I dunno about everyone else, but I'm ready to PK some characters this Sunday…
-
I dunno about everyone else, but I'm ready to PK some characters this Sunday…
You're incapable of doing this. You could FD them, though!