AMIA ARCHIVE • View topic

Last edited by Dead on Mon, May 06 2013, 3:52 AM, edited 1 time in total.

You do not have to PvP someone to take his summon out. An ultimatum always works, and unfortunately more often leads to PvP. But such is because most of the people tend to mix up evil with pride, and are refusing to lose the summon, even if they are obviously about to die.

However, though the paladins have the obligation to get rid of the undead, there is no explicit exceptions in the rules which states that a player playing a paladin character is allowed to PvP someone without a way out of PvP.

Correct. I think most people in this assume that proper PvP protocol/rules will be observed, but that's not always the case. Of course, the paladin would have to demand it's removal and such, and if they get rid of it then that's that. Of course, they can issue the ultimatum of demanding they return to Kohl or something as well even though that would likely force the evil summoner to retaliate to escape. So yeah, it just depends on what out is given and all that jazz. Not sure if a paladin has to smite the summon out of existence and/or the summoner. Silly paladin codes.

Speaking of which, is it a faux paus to attack just the summon to get rid of it? Of course, they can attack you for doing so, but is attacking a summon the same as attacking a PC? Just out of curiosity.

Correct. I think most people in this assume that proper PvP protocol/rules will be observed, but that's not always the case. Of course, the paladin would have to demand it's removal and such, and if they get rid of it then that's that. Of course, they can issue the ultimatum of demanding they return to Kohl or something as well even though that would likely force the evil summoner to retaliate to escape. So yeah, it just depends on what out is given and all that jazz. Not sure if a paladin has to smite the summon out of existence and/or the summoner. Silly paladin codes.

Speaking of which, is it a faux paus to attack just the summon to get rid of it? Of course, they can attack you for doing so, but is attacking a summon the same as attacking a PC? Just out of curiosity.

Quote:

Of course, they can issue the ultimatum of demanding they return to Kohl or something as well even though that would likely force the evil summoner to retaliate to escape.

This. They don't -need- to fight a summon, if you can conjure up a better reason and place to be. This is already what evil has to do.

Last edited by Dead on Mon, May 06 2013, 3:52 AM, edited 1 time in total.

Naivatkal wrote:

Speaking of which, is it a faux paus to attack just the summon to get rid of it? Of course, they can attack you for doing so, but is attacking a summon the same as attacking a PC? Just out of curiosity.

I once made a "deal" with a person who wanted me to lose my undead. The said person was to fight my undead without me interfering. The result was obvious. If the mentioned person wins, he preformed his holy duty. If he loses, he died preforming his holy duty. Either way he wins.. in a way.

Just an example of an alternative solution.

Yep, that's good too :3

Creative alternatives are awesome.

Alternative solutions....

I agree in some contextes it can work.

Bumped into various "team evils" and other single, obviously evilly aligned characters a few times.

Every single time this happened: I rped my character as truely as I could, clearly letting them know Sumana wouldn't tolerate undead, chromatic dragonkin, etc....practically -begging- oocly that interesting RP would come out of it and the adversary or adversaries -took their ooc leave-. She herself left a few times but gave them ample chance to capture her beforehand.

Today even, one of the players of group of 6-7 people had to offer to let my character pass because "she was there first" in the Lair.

That was very, very immersion breaking. While I appreciate the player's politeness, and this doesn't have to do with players anyhow, the rule played out in a way that didn't make ANY sense IC. Come on, a group of six evil characters come and I could RP my squishy, frail Bahamutian telling them to leave because she was there first? Or they'd kill her then give her an OOC raise and all of a sudden stop hunting there?

Now, I wish all to know I strongly empathise with evil character players. I know you get alot of OOC dirt from people who can't separate IC from OOC.

It's rules like that which makes it so hard to RP evil. You have to walk on eggshells to not offend anyone. At any single moment, players can take their "out" and avoid any conflict RP. Down the drain goes your evil schemes.

Since the rule is obviously there to stay, I wish to make a public announcement then.

I officially forfeit my right to RP before PVP towards my character. I accept my character to get captured, kidnapped, whatever, as long as it makes sense IC. I myself will continue to follow the rule, but when it comes to my rights?

I forfeit those rights to claim my right to realism and immersion in Roleplay.

I promise in return we'll have a hell of a good time and that my character can lose over and over, get maimed, ridiculised, shoved into lava pits necessitating True Ressurection spell to raise, bribed, wrongly condemned, corrupted, smothered, bothered, tickled and/or pickled........I will enjoy it OOCly cause, y'know, IC actions bring IC conséquences right?

I will however continue to respect the rules concerning others.

psycho wrote:

It's rules like that which makes it so hard to RP evil. You have to walk on eggshells to not offend anyone. At any single moment, players can take their "out" and avoid any conflict RP. Down the drain goes your evil schemes.

The "out" is only needed if your character (evil or good or neutral or pony) MUST use pvp to further their goals. I am unaware of any rules dictating that non-pvp conflict requires an OOC "out". Dead wrote it in a very good way, people confuse evil with pride, and I would add people confuse good with stupid and plain as well. Its ridiculous to think you can play evil in a predominantly good setting and not getting ostracised and have to avoid the lynchmobs. Just as ridiculous to think you would be able to play a Paladin in Thay or Luskan and preach on the streets safely for months.

So if your character or yourself MUST have PVP to further said goals, you have to be prepared to go the extra mile of niceness IMHO. You dont need to of course, no rules saying you cant be a douche or you have to respect others, as in, you know, a community. You can offer ridiculous OOC outs and they are still OOC outs. The value of the OOC out will be individual, whats fair to you can be unfair in the other's mind. Your choice to go the extra mile (again, Dead's example, from the sounds of it both the Paladin player and himself had a good time with it) and work it out so the possible PVP can become further RP, or just go with "good enough for me, screw it, I am in the rules" and handle whatever comes out of it, IC or OOC.

Since when did this whole "You can't PvP if someone has Good summons out" come about? My elf was PvP'd by druids for having his Celestial Avenger out. He was PvP'd by all kinds of people for having the summon out.

DerkDerkistan wrote:

My elf was PvP'd by druids for having his Celestial Avenger out.

wat

Sense, it makes none to me.

Druids generally do not like outsiders, even good-aligned ones. For some it doesn't bother them too much if at all. Others want to kill them all. Where native outsiders sit on this scale is up to individual interpretation probably.

serbiris wrote:

Druids generally do not like outsiders, even good-aligned ones. For some it doesn't bother them too much if at all. Others want to kill them all. Where native outsiders sit on this scale is up to individual interpretation probably.

I should hope they get moved towards evil or chaotic if they're willing to outright murder you and a creature that is essentially the embodiment of Good.

I should hope it would depend entirely on circumstance, like most alignment calls. There are many ways to deal with the situation of a Good-aligned outsider you want gone without resorting to murder - not that you could murder the summon anyway, they're not Called creatures so they just get sent back home. The ones who would "outright murder" are probably already evil.

Really depends on the situation

My elf is kind of an asshole and deserved just about every PvP he ever got into.

Druids serve nature. Celestials aren't natural to nature, thus a Druid has every right to ask you to remove it, by force if necessary.

serbiris wrote:

I should hope it would depend entirely on circumstance, like most alignment calls. There are many ways to deal with the situation of a Good-aligned outsider you want gone without resorting to murder - not that you could murder the summon anyway, they're not Called creatures so they just get sent back home. The ones who would "outright murder" are probably already evil.

You would be surprised.

Dead wrote:

You do not have to PvP someone to take his summon out. An ultimatum always works, and unfortunately more often leads to PvP. But such is because most of the people tend to mix up evil with pride, and are refusing to loose the summon, even if they are obviously about to die.

However, though the paladins have the obligation to get rid of the undead, there is no explicit exceptions in the rules which states that a player playing a paladin character is allowed to PvP someone without a way out of PvP.

If the summoner refuses to get rid of the undead, a very effective way is just use lay hands.

It looks good, it's non-pvp solution. Win-win. In case you are playing a paladin, that is.

Guardian wrote:

Dead wrote:

You do not have to PvP someone to take his summon out. An ultimatum always works, and unfortunately more often leads to PvP. But such is because most of the people tend to mix up evil with pride, and are refusing to loose the summon, even if they are obviously about to die.

However, though the paladins have the obligation to get rid of the undead, there is no explicit exceptions in the rules which states that a player playing a paladin character is allowed to PvP someone without a way out of PvP.

If the summoner refuses to get rid of the undead, a very effective way is just use lay hands.

It looks good, it's non-pvp solution. Win-win. In case you are playing a paladin, that is.

How is dealing damage a non-pvp solution?

Cerpin Taxt wrote:

How is dealing damage a non-pvp solution?

Well you do not directly attack the player, just the summon, and in a "non-violent" fashion. Your pally just touch the undead creature and it turns into a pile of ash. It is more subtle and rp-wise than just hack the creature down with holy sword.

Naturally, the summoner may turn it after into a pvp after that. But... may not as well.

Attacking a summon or creature that the player controls constitutes as PvP as you essentially kill something they've used powers on and weaken their position. Not to mention it's hostile in its own right. If you intend to do that you damn well better intend to turn on hostile before you do so, because Spellcasters get pretty annoyed when people don't turn on hostile so half their spells no longer affect you, not to mention that it would be breaking the rules regarding RPing hostility and it is required for people to do so. Which brings me to the idea that maybe full pvp settings should be enabled?

I think that would come under rule 14:

Quote:

Taunting someone with the Taunt-skill, using Turn Undead summons and casting spells such as Darkness is considered initiating PvP. You should set Hostile before doing that.

Guardian wrote:

Cerpin Taxt wrote:

How is dealing damage a non-pvp solution?

Well you do not directly attack the player, just the summon, and in a "non-violent" fashion. Your pally just touch the undead creature and it turns into a pile of ash. It is more subtle and rp-wise than just hack the creature down with holy sword.

Naturally, the summoner may turn it after into a pvp after that. But... may not as well.

That's skirting the intent of the rule with the letter of the rule.

You are still attacking a Player controlled entity, even if it is just by radial button control. This is, to my knowledge, still a PVP action.

I like how the word "attack" and "in a non violent fashion" somehow managed to find itself in the same sentence.

I was trying to give a relatively easy solution how to evade a pvp. The undead summon is gone, Paladin saved his face and the summoner is given a chance to back off.

But what was I thinking, right? It is better to chop each other to pieces and then bitch about it on forum.

I should have known better. As you were, oh the most creative of all sorts.

Under the PvP rules you would be provoking PvP by killing their summon, that's what people are trying to say.

However, I'm thinking you meant to arrange it OOCly as a way to avoid having to fight each other. Sort of like offering that as the 'out'. They could refuse, of course, and then you would resort to PvP. If they accepted, you destroy the summon and both parties go their merry way.

I think that scenario is rather disingenuous to what it means to actually be a paladin, though. A paladin probably wouldn't accept just destroying an undead or demonic summon and then carrying on, as if their job is done. I'm not saying they should then just attack the summoner, as well, but that destroying the summon isn't where that scene should end by a long shot. There's much, much more to being a champion of Good than putting down some evil critters, a good deal of that doesn't have to even involve PvP.

Well yeah, I don't know enough about the Paladin Codes and such to make a reasonable judgement, that's all just from a PvP-possible perspective. Anything else would tag along with/around it.

LetumLux wrote:

I think that scenario is rather disingenuous to what it means to actually be a paladin, though. A paladin probably wouldn't accept just destroying an undead or demonic summon and then carrying on, as if their job is done. I'm not saying they should then just attack the summoner, as well, but that destroying the summon isn't where that scene should end by a long shot. There's much, much more to being a champion of Good than putting down some evil critters, a good deal of that doesn't have to even involve PvP.

It was just an example how to possibly avoid PvP. No one here, especially me, is handing out a book "How to be a good Paladin." I have used Paladin only because it was the first class that comes to my mind as an opposite to undead and evil. Could have been a goodly cleric tossing Heal spells on undead or Banishment on devil summons as well.

I gotcha there, and I didn't mean to come across as ragging on you for it. If it did, I apologize for that!

My intention was mainly to mention that wouldn't (or shouldn't, IMO) be the end of it. If a paladin (or other divinely empowered Good aligned sort who is not allowed ignore Evil acts) is in a situation where a necromancer is like, "Sure, kill my summon, if you can" and the paladin proceeds to do so, but isn't OOCly interested in just PvPing the necromancer, that isn't where the situation ends. The Good alignment compels them to find an actual resolution to the best of their ability, in the case of sorts like Paladins or certain kinds of Divine Champions or Clerics, but I'd hazard that this applies the majority of non-Divine class Good sorts as well. Not turning a blind eye is part of what distinguishes Good from Neutral, and that paladin/etc should know full well that destroying one summoned undead/fiend isn't actually doing much good in the long term; they have to address the source, the summoner. How they do that is another matter entirely, and could be PvP - although that doesn't seem very effective either. Haha.

Strawberry Stallion wrote:

serbiris wrote:

Druids generally do not like outsiders, even good-aligned ones. For some it doesn't bother them too much if at all. Others want to kill them all. Where native outsiders sit on this scale is up to individual interpretation probably.

I should hope they get moved towards evil or chaotic if they're willing to outright murder you and a creature that is essentially the embodiment of Good.

TN druids do not see celestials as good, just as they do not see a devil as evil. All they see is an OUTSIDER in the place where it should not be. They may decide to ignore it, or they may decide to get rid of it, and their alignment will stay in a perfect shape.

Guardian wrote:

It looks good, it's non-pvp solution. Win-win. In case you are playing a paladin, that is.

Its PvP. The moment you start using mechanics to aggro someone, or his summon (familiar, AC, friend) you are in for it.

Dead wrote:

TN druids do not see celestials as good, just as they do not see a devil as evil. All they see is an OUTSIDER in the place where it should not be. They may decide to ignore it, or they may decide to get rid of it, and their alignment will stay in a perfect shape.

Indeed.

There can be any number of reasons why someone of various alignments and creeds might attack someone with a celestial.
Maybe they think you're evil and bound the celestial against their will.
Maybe they're closet Lothites and don't think a male should have a female servitor of any type.
Maybe they think you're using that celestial to taunt poor Ulrik over his late winged wife.

In the end there needs to be a reason that makes sense to the attacking character for pvp. It doesn't have to be 'correct' and it doesn't have to make sense to the target. In fact, it doesn't even need to be clearly expressed to the target.
With some races being played that have viewpoints so entirely alien to humans, it makes sense that some of the reasons might be a bit on the archaic side.

Perhaps there is even role-play potential in figuring out why ICly if you don't understand it.

The only reason explicitly forbidden is the attacker's alignment. "I killed you because I'm evil." doesn't fly. "I killed you because I thought your celestial's wings were so pretty and I want to make a dress out of them", while admittedly off center, is still a reason. From a certain deranged mindset, it is a sensible one at that.

Quote:

All PvP must have a role-playing reason. PvP without a sensible reason is not allowed. Your character's alignment is not a valid reason for PvP.

I've taken some of the comments from here and added it to my third draft of update PvP rules (I've already been working on this for awhile, since January believe it or not).

Stay tuned folks, this is being worked on.

Question about 2 rules concerning PVP

Who is online