AMIA ARCHIVE • View topic

1: When you meet a party or people in a dungeon, the group that got there first has priority and one should leave the hunting grounds to them.

2: When you engage in hostile RP, each has the opportunity for a PVP "out" to avoid combat

My question is, which rule supercedes the other?

Example: I meet an evil summoner with undead summoned at the beginning of a dungeon. My lawful good character would logically either attack undead, or ask the summoner to leave and/or banish his undead. Say the player wants a "PVP OUT"....

A) Is it -him- that should then leave the area and my character would be free to "steal" the dungeon from him after?

B ) Or should my -character- leave the area because he chose a "PVP OUT" , though he was in the dungeon first so I have to leave it to him?

C) If a combat initiates and my character wins, should I leave the area to allow him to respawn, or use PVP tool raise, and then leave myself so he can continue the dungeon?

This is rather confusing to me and quite anti-immersive, honestly. That is, until I figure out how I should handle things IC.

Thanks

I don't know about officially, but I've always gone with C. PvP can still be part of RP, but it's kind of a dick move to kill someone just to steal their hunting area. Out's don't always specifically mean giving someone the option to run away however. It can be submitting to a set of demands and the like too.

I echo what Jim said. Basically, you could PvP them and (win or lose) leave them the area still.

Alternatively, you could always leave. Your character might grow wary. Maybe that mage isn't flying solo. Maybe he has friends hidden in the shadows. You could opt to pick a more favorable battleground for the next time you see the necromancer.

I agree, I suppose it's the best compromise.

Though personnally i've always found anti-immersive the dungeon priority rule, the ABC order of loot, the PVP out, etc ... they're all made for players to not feel exasperated OOCly in my opinion.

It's really a shame that immersion has to be broken somewhat because there are a few bad apples from time to time.

If people could at least -take everything from an IC viewpoint- and be -kind OOC-.

I've played on other RP servers where those rules weren't implimented and it worked just fine though.

Especially since dyinghere is a non-object here as there are next to no consequences mechanically, and you also have the PVP wand to ressurect people.

psycho wrote:

Though personnally i've always found anti-immersive the dungeon priority rule, the ABC order of loot, the PVP out, etc ... they're all made for players to not feel exasperated OOCly in my opinion.

The dungeon-priority rule is a good rule. I've ran into so many people who thought that just because they were playing evil characters, they could bully people out of hunting places. It's bland, it's boring, and it's stupid.

ABC order of loot is purely IC. Don't like it? Fix it IC.

PvP outs are good, too. Too many times you get the people that like to think "bow to me or die" is stellar RP. It's almost always fishing for PvP. Fishing for PvP is silly.

I'm trying to remember if it was written anywhere officially or just something that was brought up a lot, but I know that at least a few years ago it was said that the PvP rules also protect someone from having their hunting area taken from them by being killed in PvP. So even if you kill the character/party who was there first, you cannot proceed to hunt in the area from there; they were still there first, they still get to use the area until completion or departure.

I don't know if the stance on this has changed, honestly!

I'll have to go see if it's written somewhere.

... Nope. I couldn't find it in any of the rules stuff, so it's buried somewhere in the depths of the forum. But yeah, C is the case that pretty much everyone I've had experiences with goes by, even if it isn't a hard set rule. It seems to flow intuitively out of the two rules cited, after all.

I understand your points of view but there's -still- something not quite right to me,

My character ICly knows where some evil characters spend much time hunting.

Though, no matter what, say the story led her to need to capture one of them, or on the other side of the fence, the evildoers wished to kidnap Sumana, we could just invoke the "hunting ground rules" for little to no IC consequence for IC actions.

The way it stands now, hunting grounds now indirectly stand as -sanctuaries- of sorts, because of the OOC rule.

Example: Say I where a bad sport wanted to avoid IC consequence, i'd just taunt them forever and then enter -any- closeby hunting area, saying " you can't kill me, or if you do, you have to use the wand on me 'cause it's -my- dungeon cause I got here first....HA!

Naturally, it's just an example and rather exaggerated, it's just to demonstrate my point.

I'd never actually do that, I do hope that's clear!

EDIT: I guess this is just one of those things on the server that annoys me, but probably won't change. Many positive aspects outweight that, as I absolutely LOVE Amia. But as for immersion ... well, it's little things like that which in my opinion makes RP a little broken and Diablo-izes the whole experience.

Though honestly, I might be nitpicking a little. Amia's awesome.

If you want to capture someone and not have them invoke the hunting ground rules, maybe try one of two things:

1) Have a DM oversee it. So long as there's a story behind it, they'd be all for the RP.

2) Ask the player? Say "Hey, I know you were hunting, but I've been hunting you. Mind if I take your body someplace?"

i would definitely, given the scenario you describe, give him a pvp "Out" then if he did not take it (Fight or flee!) I would pvp the shit out of him and LEAVE his corpse there.
After 5 min you get up automatically anyway.

Here's my blunt reasoning - He is a evil monsterous bastar of a shameless whore. Kill him. Don't concern urself about the player behind. It fucks immersion if you start caring about the player.

Very_Svensk wrote:

Here's my blunt reasoning - He is a evil monsterous bastar of a shameless whore. Kill him. Don't concern urself about the player behind. It fucks immersion if you start caring about the player.

The moment an evil character kills yours for being such an outrageously self-righteous, would-be-benevolent goodie-two-boots, I can guarantee that there will be a river of OOC tears. It's odd how the opposite situation seems to be entirely okay.

Sphinx wrote:

Very_Svensk wrote:

Here's my blunt reasoning - He is a evil monsterous bastar of a shameless whore. Kill him. Don't concern urself about the player behind. It fucks immersion if you start caring about the player.

The moment an evil character kills yours for being such an outrageously self-righteous, would-be-benevolent goodie-two-boots, I can guarantee that there will be a river of OOC tears. It's odd how the opposite situation seems to be entirely okay.

What Sphinx said.

Especially the red part is half amusing, half tragical.

So much butthurt, but also truth.

The real problem is the PvP without substance. Kill my character all you like. Just provide me with some depth to the roleplay, instead of just "I'm Buck and I like to fuck."

You don't have to break character to back off from combat just because the person hunting is transgressing against your principles. Even a paladin should be able to see that fighting someone in an area where they could be ambushed by gribblies at any moment (read: respawns) might be tactically unsound, much like trying to wrestle someone in a canoe about to drift over a waterfall.

If people opt to ignore RP when it comes to capturing them whilst they're out in the wild, then they're probably not the types of people you want to be encouraging to continue playing this game anyway. RP is RP, you cannot ignore it. If the person accepts the combat, then they're accepting all the consequences to it too.

If you manage to kill them, then you can probably take them out of the hunting ground and lead to some in depth RP, but use personal judgement and don't just do it just for the sake of grieving them or taking them out of an area for a friend to level there instead.

So many times I see PvP take place and then people just leave the bodies afterwards. Sometimes that's okay, but it's better if you actually spend some time RPing with the person instead of just killing them, and leaving them to wonder how to RP it themselves. If death has little meaning in this game, don't kill them, capture them and do something with them that does have meaning instead. Make a story.

Last edited by Dead on Fri, Apr 26 2013, 12:01 PM, edited 2 times in total.

psycho wrote:

1: When you meet a party or people in a dungeon, the group that got there first has priority and one should leave the hunting grounds to them.

2: When you engage in hostile RP, each has the opportunity for a PVP "out" to avoid combat

My question is, which rule supercedes the other?

Example: I meet an evil summoner with undead summoned at the beginning of a dungeon. My lawful good character would logically either attack undead, or ask the summoner to leave and/or banish his undead. Say the player wants a "PVP OUT"....

A) Is it -him- that should then leave the area and my character would be free to "steal" the dungeon from him after?

No. You cannot 'steal' the hunting grounds from anyone under any circumstances.

psycho wrote:

B ) Or should my -character- leave the area because he chose a "PVP OUT" , though he was in the dungeon first so I have to leave it to him?

Even if PvP happens and if you win, you have to leave unless he explicitly wants to leave.

psycho wrote:

C) If a combat initiates and my character wins, should I leave the area to allow him to respawn, or use PVP tool raise, and then leave myself so he can continue the dungeon?

Yes.

These are answers from the server rule perspective. If they want to be left alone to hunt, you have to leave them alone to hunt. If they want to RP, they may choose to do such.

Very_Svensk wrote:

Here's my blunt reasoning - He is a evil monsterous bastar of a shameless whore. Kill him. Don't concern urself about the player behind. It fucks immersion if you start caring about the player.

Svensk you've been here for 8 years. You know way better than that.

Wow, that's a truly terrible rule.

I said the same the first few days on Amia. But then I realized that if we allowed people to chase away other people from the hunting ground there'd be a lot of butthurt and a lot of senseless PvP. Just imagine an average party hunting the giants when your average epic powerbuild joe appears and decides that he's going to kill the King for loot.

I like the proposal put forward near the start. Have PvP, but after the PvP, give them an OOC Rez, leave and go somewhere else. Both players get their full cents that way.

Dead wrote:

I said the same the first few days on Amia. But then I realized that if we allowed people to chase away other people from the hunting ground there'd be a lot of butthurt and a lot of senseless PvP. Just imagine an average party hunting the giants when your average epic powerbuild joe appears and decides that he's going to kill the King for loot.

And THIS is why the pvp rules need an overhaul. I want mr power build to be able to totally steamroll the poor party to bits if he has reaspn to.
It's VERY awkward and incredibly immersion breaking when joe the banite black dragon decides to go "Oh. You were here first
Nevermind I'll leave" to the trio of paladins that are out hunting.

The eff?

@ Dead - I'm testing a new approach. The Brickwall-meets-head liberal approach. Also! You don't need to give ooc raises anymore!

Several reasons were given in this very thread, Svensk. The rules are in place so Joe Powerbuild doesn't flaunt his e-dick around to ruin everyone else's gaming experience. In other words, the rules are there for precisely the same reason why you're advocating their removal.

DerkDerkistan wrote:

Several reasons were given in this very thread, Svensk. The rules are in place so Joe Powerbuild doesn't flaunt his e-dick around to ruin everyone else's gaming experience. In other words, the rules are there for precisely the same reason why you're advocating their removal.

Yep. Because people will do this. People already do this to a point. Some players enjoy just making powerbuilds that can walk over everything so why should they have a green light to walk all over PCs without any repercussions because the rules now allow them to?

Where are these griefers... I dont see them. Never have really? All i see are decent players trying to RP their character. (Except that douchebag in wiltun with 20/20/20/20/20 cheated stats)

There are a few cases of bullies around hunting grounds, but they are bullies IC'ly, and players go buttfuck rampage OOCly on them. For playing their characters.
My shifted stance is due to experiencing Evil's side lately and how hated Evil players are on a personal level and how much messed up the RP is on the bad side of the fence.

I advocate the viewpoint regarding free and liberal rules - And whenever problems arise they are dealt with on a higher instance if players cannot handle the issue themselves in the first instance.
People are at core nice and decent - Misunderstandings is the root of evil (haha). Simplify and put more power in the hands of the players.

The PvP rules don't make sense, and the grind-protection rules don't make sense either. When you're out in the wild you should expect violence. Violence from monsters and violence from other adventurers. Doesn't make any sense that a character should be role played like he is immortal because he can screenshot you breaking a rule and get you banned for it. Seems like everyone on this server hates confrontation even when it is between two imaginary characters where they have nothing to lose but 5 minutes of their time and potential income. People get beat up over money and shiny shit all the time in Faerun (and in real life). If you don't want to go out, adventure, and get in fights, then stay in the city where you are protected by an uncountable number of guards, sell some oranges out of a cart, and be a family man. There's too much egregious behavior I've see n where one side is forced to walk on egg shells due to rules while the other side is acting like an asshole without repercussion.

Derk wrote:

The real problem is the PvP without substance. Kill my character all you like. Just provide me with some depth to the roleplay, instead of just "I'm Buck and I like to fuck."

Define substance. Sounds like you want to be provided with a compelling interaction when it's entirely unrealistic. People peacock all the time, and if you don't want to nod your head and give them what they want, either one up them or expect a response.

It's threads like these that reinforce the need for stupid rules. I hate the PvP rules. I'm used to a ruleset that pretty much says "Hostile first, don't break character, and don't PvP the same person twice in a day". But then these threads crop up, and show that a non-passworded server can't be trusted with it.

NinjaClarinet wrote:

It's threads like these that reinforce the need for stupid rules. I hate the PvP rules. I'm used to a ruleset that pretty much says "Hostile first, don't break character, and don't PvP the same person twice in a day". But then these threads crop up, and show that a non-passworded server can't be trusted with it.

You don't make sense? These kind of threads reinforce the opinion that we have a bunch of to complicated and messed up PvP rules when we in truth should just let the playerbase act according to their character; Like a majority of the others RP servers promote outside amia.
Our rules only cause confusion, whining and promote more OOC behaviour.

Roleplay should be met with roleplay - Not // WE WERE HERE FIRST!
What kind of rule is that on a roleplaying server...

I can UNDERSTAND the need for such rules in the youth of amia - But we are older and wiser now; and all the use the current "Grind protection rule" (GPR) enforce is a bunch of butt-hurt players sending screenshots to the DM's when Bad/good guy is trying to ROleplay his character.

It makes perfect sense. It's not hard to RP a character that squashes anyone that vaguely inconveniences them. It's not hard to justify it with a shallow excuse, your alignment, your weird bloodline, the mental disorder you made up on the spot, your tragic angsty back-story, or even just "the wilds R dangerous". Is it IC? Sure. Is it compelling? Does it create a story? Is it even good RP? Not a chance, which is why we have protections in place. Keeping strictly in character is fine, but it's very unwise to assume that all IC behavior is constructive IC behavior.

I think the questions have been awnsered. Not much sense to discuss the pvp rules again when Glim already made it clear in the last topic those are being worked on.

You are a partypooper kraut.

NinjaClarinet wrote:

..and don't PvP the same person twice in a day".

No such rule.

People don't even understand the rules due to their complexity and the above is a prime example.

I rest my case.

(He said he's used to such rules, I believe. Meaning in the past, on other servers, I imagine.)

Rigela wrote:

(He said he's used to such rules, I believe. Meaning in the past, on other servers, I imagine.)

What Riggy said.

The rules are not hard to understand if you have the capability to read. I mean, really :/

For the time being on this server I was in PvP fight four times (which is literally like once per year). I remember exactly each one of them.

Just to let you know, not once have I raised the fallen, not once I have justified myself for the killing (I did not have to since it was not me who initiated the fight, not once.) Basically, and I know it may sound cheeky, I fuck the PvP rules. You can tell from the RP if you are in conflict with a solid RPer or a whiny wanker. If he's a wanker, set on the ignore mode and walk off. If he's solid, play along.

And by the way, //WE WERE HERE FIRST! once led to a PvP as well. I was so extremely pissed by the lame excusion of why the group is on the sacred grounds that I even skipped my rule about ignoring wankers and just wasted them. True, I expected ban or at least a warning from DMs, but the other party did not report it. Probably because they knew it was them who fucked the situation up in the first place. Play with the matches and so on...

If one thing pisses me off everytime, it is when you answer OOCly to a IC situation. It's a mark of a twat.

I am sick tired of these threads. Even more of the PvP rules. If you can't imply common sense, or if you can't suck up the fact you've been beaten, go play Tetris.

If it was up to me, I'd cancel the PvP penalties. Totally - OOC jerks would get ban the moment they'd harrass other players with no real RP reason. No warnings, no temporary bans, straight execution. Would work like a charm and way better than rules, I tell you. But each coin has two sides - whinning and false accusations would be punished as well. Because quite frankly, there is more whinning about "legal" PvP than there is about the illegal.

Everyone can create a screenshot. Is not a big deal, really.

And a question that really no one answered yet is - Why is everyone so pissed about death in PvP? When you put aside your big fat ego, you loose nothing. So what's the big deal?

I mean, c'mon - more rules = more complications and more bitching, because it's a free space for word playing/twisting.

I will say that while it's immersion breaking, often times I find it less stressful to just go somewhere else. My PC probably could come up with just about any reason to kill yours, to take what she came for, because she's a tyrant, and that's exactly what evil tyrants do. They walk on you. But I'm happy not doing that, because on an OOC level, I find that would be truly annoying to the other player, and it would benefit us both (rather than just me after the OOC headache of having to have PvP'd) to just go someplace else.

Honestly, the fact that there was an undead there, well, I guess if you're a Kelemvorite then maybe that sucks, but don't be surprised if a Cyricist just decides he doesn't like the style of your armor and has just as much reason to attack you. The situation can go both ways.

That being said, every powergamer I've encountered while hunting (mostly good aligned ones) have been among the most courteous players I've encountered on Amia and I can't fathom why you'd bunch them into the griefer category, when ironically I've had most of my trouble with griefers nowhere near any dungeons.

@ Guardian - Awesome post! You are even more liberal than i am! <3

@ Needled127 - Technically then, The Pvp Rules prevent you from Roleplaying your character properly? No?

What needled said about Wise builders ( There is no such thing as Powerbuilding Imo), is interesting and rings true. I experience the same. Now you ask me why?
Powerbuilder = Old Amian Player. = A player that know all the Changes, Updates and alterations of our classes. They alone have the knowledge to make the "Ultimate killer"; The so called powerbuild.
But if you have been here 3-8 Years you are generally a very nice and wise person.

Aka - This is why powerbuilders are nice guys. And this is why everybody and nobody is a powerbuilder

I honestly don't care what the PvP rules are just so long as whatever they currently are, everyone is forced to abide by them.

I can play along with anything. I've already posted my 1,000 solutions in the last 50 death penalty topics as to how to solve the PvP problem. I personally think making more PvP and furthering the fact that it's worthless is a step in the wrong direction, but it can't be any worse than it is now.

To reiterate, if you encounter someone in a dungeon, yes, you can build the RP to engage in PvP. Following all the necessary rules of PvP, of course. But win or lose, you will be giving the the 'right of way' to the party that was already there. Find some way to leave, after the fact.

While you each may claim to have very little interactions with people who abuse these rules, it is not the case that it doesn't happen. I can personally attest to seeing way too many cases about people causing grief by skirting around people in the dungeons, or killing other folks and traipsing over their bodies to claim the boss loot.

There's a lot of room within these rules to still foster RP, in tons of different directions. To create stories, to foster nemesis relationships, etc, etc. And to do it all in a way that doesn't cause OOC grief.

Mr. Hackums wrote:

To reiterate, if you encounter someone in a dungeon, yes, you can build the RP to engage in PvP. Following all the necessary rules of PvP, of course. But win or lose, you will be giving the the 'right of way' to the party that was already there. Find some way to leave, after the fact.

While you each may claim to have very little interactions with people who abuse these rules, it is not the case that it doesn't happen. I can personally attest to seeing way too many cases about people causing grief by skirting around people in the dungeons, or killing other folks and traipsing over their bodies to claim the boss loot.

There's a lot of room within these rules to still foster RP, in tons of different directions. To create stories, to foster nemesis relationships, etc, etc. And to do it all in a way that doesn't cause OOC grief.

How many cases a year? Hard numbers please

I need you to trust me that its enough. I don't really have the will to search through our annual griefing reports to count every single number of this specific infraction. Its quite a bit.

I'm certain that other DM's could chime in as well if you still don't believe.

I'm gonna have to put on my tinfoil hat and say that your argument is invalid then. Sorry.
"A lot" by my standards can be "Not so much" by other standards.

And it's a well known fact to never trust people on the Internet no?

It is also very healthy to keep statistics, it provides transparency and you can evaluate trends and see if certain effects work or not.

The only trend that's relevant here is that its an issue that enough people are upset about when it happens to them. That's why the rule's been kept in place, and that's why I don't foresee it changing.

And to be perfectly honest, it doesn't matter what your standards are in this case. Let's say, for sheer purpose of example, that it's not up to your standards. So what would that even mean? That we're going to be okay now that Svensk is capable of handling a heap of player complaints, when he doesn't have the means? Or that because you personally could handle the amount of complaints, that the DM should then decide to suck it up and deal? I'm not intending to be rude, I'm simply trying to point out that its silly trying to measure our standards when only one standard really applies.

"A lot" refers to the standards of the DM team, the ones who handle these issues, and are presented with them to a point where its exhausting, and to where its clear that a solid group of players become very upset when they're trampled over in this fashion.

My new job is following people to the Fire Giant King, waiting for them to engage him, using a Mords scroll on them, turning them to goo, and claiming the King's loot for myself. ALL. THE. TIME.

These rules have nothing to do with a person's ego and their not wanting to lose PvP. It's about creating an enjoyable experience for the players who share the server with you. PvP can be fun. It can be more fun than any other kind of RP. The problem isn't those specific instances of PvP. The problem is people who just want to use their character's race/religion/mental condition to bully other people because they can build a Fighter/Rogue/Weaponmaster like a fucking champ. The problem is that, as Guardian proved below your post, Svensk, this server is absolutely not wiser (even if it is older).

I'm glad you told me that you're a dick, Guardian. Now I know to avoid you, as you have no interest in the greater story and really only care about your e-peen. I mean, really.

To answer Cerpin, substance is any roleplay (PvP and not PvP) that creates a compelling story that lingers beyond the initial meeting, something that causes a character to think and evolve. Where is the value in getting shat on (or being the shitter) by someone in any environment if both parties are going to forget all about it the next day? Hell, 10 minutes later, even. It seems like a colossal waste of time for both sides.

What? You don't want to play with me, Derk? Someone I have never ever ... not once met in game (and if I did it was not worthy of remembering)?

I think I'll cry myself to sleep tonight :roll:

Keep it civil.

The RP is what you make of it, cooperation goes a long way in fostering a rich environment.

Very_Svensk wrote:

But if you have been here 3-8 Years you are generally a very nice and wise person. [/i]

Generally. I know more than several people who've been around for that long and who are among the biggest assholes I've ever encountered in my life. One rotten apple ruins the entire basket. That's why there are rules, to keep the rotten apples at bay.

DerkDerkistan wrote:

I'm glad you told me that you're a dick, Guardian. Now I know to avoid you, as you have no interest in the greater story and really only care about your e-peen. I mean, really..

I think I'll start counting the times you call people dicks and then bring that argument against you every time you call someone a rulebreaker and write something like "I will avoid you because you are bad."

I actually stopped playing on Amia as a result of one of these interactions. Just played here for a couple weeks with a friend and was having fun.

We went to a dungeon and there were about 5 people right at the entrance all standing around talking. We said hello and they ignored us so we walked past and began killing stuff.

One of them immediately FREAKS OUT and starts spamming chat with OOC messages about us "jumping them" in the dungeon and whatever else. I have no idea what they're even talking about or what any of these means.

Isn't this a roleplay server? I was just being completely in character. I walked in, saw some people, they ignored my greeting so I continued with my business.

So, I decide that I'll just stand around and wait at the entrance for the mobs to respawn. Then we can move through the dungeon after this first group. However, apparently this isn't okay for one of the people in that group that is a higher level. They just stand there waiting with us the whole time then kill all the monsters as they respawn to block us from following after them.

I think its incredibly stupid that dungeons can be "claimed" by people. In fact, I felt it was so stupid that I haven't played since. Just stopped by the forums for the first time since then and saw this thread so I figured I'd add my story.

Well, it does state in the rules that you can't take over someone's hunting ground soo.... maybe they shouldn't have 'freaked out', but they were in the right. After all, they were probably roleplaying before going in because it's a roleplaying server.

You could have, however, waited until they started, then BSed at the entrance for a bit so the mods would respawn when you were ready to go through. Perfectly legit, unless I've misunderstood something.

Naivatkal wrote:

Well, it does state in the rules that you can't take over someone's hunting ground soo....

Ok, but obviously it wasn't in use at the moment. I just find it very stupid that so much drama could be caused by something that has like a 3-5 minute delay?

Either they could have answered when we came in and engaged with us, shut up when we went in before them and wait the 3-5 minutes, or let us wait the 3-5 minutes instead of leaving 1 person behind to screw us over just because.

I also didn't appreciate being called "scum" and insulted in OOC just because I walked into a dungeon and started fighting mobs because the group of people there were too busy talking with each other to acknowledge my presence.

*shrug* Poof.. I'm gone.

Question about 2 rules concerning PVP

Who is online