AMIA ARCHIVE • View topic

SacredOak wrote:

I was recently in a situation where a character attacked me, and I defeated her, and then she logged out to avoid the following RP. Incredibly frustrating when people do this, especially when you need to properly identify them, etc.

I think that's a screeny and report situation.

Quote:

One thing I particularly don't like is when a person (won't mention names) goes and picks a fight, thinking they're going to win, and then refuse to RP when they die.

Gotta agree with this.

And I think its best if people started with themselves first...
Learn to be a good sport and hopefully the culture grows with the server.

Yurell wrote:

SacredOak wrote:

I was recently in a situation where a character attacked me, and I defeated her, and then she logged out to avoid the following RP. Incredibly frustrating when people do this, especially when you need to properly identify them, etc.

I think that's a screeny and report situation.

IMO it definately is. That, to me, is attempting to ignore the IC consequences of your actions. It's a variation of godgaming, and is thus illegal. I can understand if they have to log because something came up IRL, but in that case, it's polite and smart to try to arrange to RP things out later.

Alright, well I don't have a screenshot this time around, but I'll remember to screenshot it next time. I've heard it happens quite frequently with this player, so maybe he/she'll see these posts and remember not to do it in future.

I had an occasion, where one of my characters was in a pvp, got pwned, dragged off by some other characters, refused raise, and was thus decided Perma dead. If it wasnt for possibly the most awesome SD'ing elven save-my-ass random from no-where, that character would still be perma dead. Permadeath RP gets alot of respect. It also brings immense amounts of fun, if you actually try it.

And if you have a reasonably Famous/Infamous character, so the more fun for the server, as one thing leads to another.

Quite typically after a character has been around for so long, died & been brought back constantly, and just generally never experienced any form of real fear in a while, they will develop an immunity to fear of death.

It's one of Amia's biggest faults with the system we have. You can only be "Knocked out" or "raised by an unknown cleric" so many times before a character begins to assume they are immortal. One of my characters used to constantly use it as a bit of a "F U" at a system I felt was flawed.

Is Dart afraid of death? Would he back down from a fight if threatened?

About time you got around to posting in this topic, Zante. Took you 4 pages.

Who the hells is Zante? Ive totaly lost track of this topic.

I can't believe I just got up, only to find that two pages later there's been no change at all. Sure, a few more personal insults, but that's about it.

I'm still waiting to get explaining how characters go from being dead to being alive, without an IC solution connecting said to IC states. To me it still sounds like people wanting others to do things the way they want them to, and no other way at all.

I didn't even read it!

But to answer the title, my stand on mortality and me is about this.

Dev Disco wrote:

I didn't even read it!

But to answer the title, my stand on mortality and me is about this.

That video freaked me out.

*Back on topic*

What i think is needed is MORE Topics like these, WE can THINK about our ACTIONS, and actually PREHAPS POSSIBLY Change ourselves.

The odds are against us, but if one or two actually starts to respect Death...

We might have won a little?

I don't see how everyone being afraid of dying in pvp ICly, when they know of the high rate and number of raise scrolls, not to mention benign clerics with ressurection spells, that are on Amia.

Everyone fearing it, just gives more power to those that run around and pvp all the time, and frankly I hope that for that exact reason, death in pvp will never be more than a trivial loss.

There are a hundred and one ways to loose so much more. And don't take this the wrong way either, but whenever someone with a powerbuild that often wins and defeats others in pvp get frustrated over something like this, I see that as a win for the general public of Amia.

It means evil will have to be more creative.. OR that maybe Evil will start fearing the goodies lynch mobs too now.

Evil doesn't seem to fear good doers. So why complain when the good ones don't either?

Death is too final a thing normally, when it's not final, it's not feared. Everyone and their mum have been there, and the fear of the unknown is gone. People fear torture, kidnappings, extortion and a laundry list of other evil malicious deeds. All ranking HIGH above death.

And the day we start giving penalties to people for loosing in pvp, when someone has a better build, or whatever, is a very sad day for Amian RP.

I had this idea to make death a bit less funny a while ago, which I am going to test in a slightly different form first....

Quote:

Insanity

We've been talking about death being very much not the end so I guess I got a slightly different type of nastiness in mind: insanity.

I admit: this is a big WFRP rip-off.

OK, when you die you get an insanity point. You can also gain insanity point by witnessing horrible events, etc. When you get your first insanity point a roll is made to determine the type of disorder your are 'specialising' in. For example: dementia or agoraphobia. When you have 10 points you go stark raving mad. Between 1 and 10 points the disorder worsens (if applicable).

Disorders cannot be cured by resting, the usual spells, etc. You got to go to specialised NPC (or PC?) that will attempt to cure you. I guess it's nice to offer different type of cures (asylum, quest, skull drilling) with different chances of success.

Disorders will give penalties, which are applied just like RDD penalties.

When you are cured your insanity points are set to 0 and one disorder is taken away. You will get some minor RP quirk as a souvenir (nail biting, a rash, etc), but no stat penalties or random actions. If you get 10 insanity points your current disorder is at its maximum intensity. Your insanity points are set to 0 and you get a shiny new disorder to work on when you get your next insanity point.

There's one major bugger here: levels. A minus 2 ability change will mean a lot to a lowbie, but not that much to an epic character. Not sure what to do with that.

Why doesn't Greater Restoration work? It cures basically everything else.

Well, why should good characters be afraid of the big bullies who threaten to kill them, if the big bullies show no fear or worry of repressions themselves? By the same argument as the OP I could demand that evil characters should be afraid of getting caught and stop doing their thing. I don't see the banites shaking in their shoes because the kohlingen knights will hunt them down and ransack their temple again.

The simple fact of the matter is that in a world where healing and resurrection magic is common like old shoes, the ability to kill someone is not scary.

People should not be afraid and threatened by Darth just because he got better numbers on his character sheat. Being able to kill someone in PvP means absolutely nothing, which is just fine with me.

Seems to me like people are just upset because people don't give their attempts at PvP bullying the desired effect.

Low chance of repressions when the goodshoes stick with teatime-RP.

Last edited by IronAngel on Mon, Nov 16 2009, 12:50 PM, edited 2 times in total.

Yurell wrote:

Why doesn't Greater Restoration work? It cures basically everything else.

No it doesn't. It cures the common little nuisances you can get from most places. It's not a super-power cure-all. It removes the few mechanical penalties in NWN, nothing more. If you suffer from anything else, it won't help you.

The same applies to what Zante said above: healing and resurrection magic is available in a limited form. You can't IC trust it's going to be availalbe. And it won't cure everything. You can't be raised if you're burned to ashes. And you might lose your gear. If your PC assumes it won't happen because it hasn't, you're metagaming. That's so obvious I can't believe there's even discussion about it.

If you want to treat it completely IC, you should be open to treating it completely IC: including measures to prevent you from ever being raised, and getting your gear stolen. As long as you don't consent to that, I don't see how you can use the argument that "I got raised IC before, too."

Doesn't cure lice, for example.

Gravemaskin wrote:

Death is too final a thing normally, when it's not final, it's not feared. Everyone and their mum have been there, and the fear of the unknown is gone. People fear torture, kidnappings, extortion and a laundry list of other evil malicious deeds. All ranking HIGH above death.

Been there, done that.

I've done the ins and outs of playing an evil character on Amia. I've been undercover, I've plotted and schemed, caused others to take the blame for my own characters evil actions or intent. I've tortured, sacrificed and extorted. I've written dozens of propaganda posts, preached to hundreds of characters and held hour-long speeches. I've killed 500+ individual characters, killed the character's loved ones, and the ones they would protect.

In the end... a lot of players simply give that the finger.

"So kill me, I'll be raised within minutes, so you can't harm me."

"I won't agree with my character being tortured and sacrificed. If you want to do that, you'll have to do it without my character being present."

"You say that you'll come after the ones I love? That doesn't affect me. You can't touch me."

"Who cares about your evil faith, your evil followers and your evil deeds? Good always win in the end anyway. We've all learned that in Hollywood movies, and it's not like evil has ever prevailed thus far on Amia anyway."

There was once a serious (really serious, actually) thread on the old Three Kingdoms forums, where several "hardcore" RP'ers bitched and moaned about the inappropriate lack of reaction or displayed fear when 5 blackguards once walked into a neutral Inn, told the sole adventurers sitting by himself at a table to get out, to which the sole adventurer basically replied with "Screw you, I'm not scared by you, you dorks".

Those "hardcore" RP'ers would probably implode, should they ever play an evil character on Amia.

I get into a lot of PvP with Darthion. A lot. And I'm rarely the one actually causing it.

Yesterday, during the 5-6 hours I played, I had a total of 10+ encounters, where old and new characters outright bitched at him, challenged him or refered to his God as filth.

None of those 10+ encounters ended up in a PvP.

Should I go for realism, Darth would have smacked them all down instantly. But I didn't. Why? Because I've done that before. It doesn't have any effect.

Next time I meet those characters, they'll act the exact same way. The players OOCly don't give a shit about Darthion's reputation, his insane amount of malicious acts and deeds and the fact that he can kick the ass of most characters on Amia.

They're all in God-mode. They are their own heroes, in what they see as their own setting, their own storyline made for their own character. A level 3 hin with no history on Amia vs Darthion, level 30, built like a mountain on steroids, sporting five layers of black metal plating and fists the size of Bendir Dale with enough recorded kills to cover the entire Cordor Square with skulls... does it make any difference? Not to the hero of Amia, even if he's got no credentials in comparison.

I've had characters who have attacked/challenged/severely insulted Darthion dozens of times, and gotten a painful smackdown each time, that still put on the very same attitude.. over and over again.

Even the most stupid, inbred moron would eventually realize that trying to piss off the black knight of doom might not be a good idea after the 15'th time of failing miserably at it.

I don't expect everyone to become Darth's b1tches.

I would, however, expect some recognition of 4+ years of constant evil doing... with every spectrum of the tyrants toolbox represented.

Darthion doesn't just beat you and humiliate you. If you pick on him long enough, he'll make sure to give you a living hell... since you'll clearly be living, due to immortal-Amia.

A couple of characters have managed to take it that far, a few times. But I kind of feel bad for having it come to that.

Has it ever occured to anyone, that... perhaps, if they didn't mouth off against Darth, or randomly joined the suddenly gathered attack squad out of nowhere to try and gank him... Darthion would leave them alone?

These days, when a character shows even the faintest tendency of fear, intimidation or respect... I let them slide. Completely. An evil, self-obsessed extorting and manipulating tyrant, such as Darthion, really gets ichy fingers when they see a weak victim to exploit.

But I find it so damn refreshing, to see something other than the repetive short sighted Wisdom 6 God-mode responses, that I just can't force myself to have Darth go all villain on them.

In my last PvP encounter, there was one male elf, who tried to avoid conflict.

Conflict came, righteously so, and quite a few of the Amian Forest bystanders joined in... just because.

He didn't.

When the battle was over, the bodies were piled up and the Banites were towering over their massacre, he politely pledged for the bodies to be left alone, so that they could be raised.

As the Banites were about to leave, he simply emoted:

*Freezes as Darthion walks past.*

Who was left alive?

The elf male, who had the balls to put on the baseball cap, and actually respond to a horrific scene, caused by the vicious acts of evil servants, with a reasonable emotional condition of being struck with a slight hint of fear and intimidation.

And he was left alive.

Smart elf male.

IronAngel wrote:

The same applies to what Zante said above: healing and resurrection magic is available in a limited form. You can't IC trust it's going to be availalbe. And it won't cure everything. You can't be raised if you're burned to ashes. And you might lose your gear. If your PC assumes it won't happen because it hasn't, you're metagaming. That's so obvious I can't believe there's even discussion about it.

If you want to treat it completely IC, you should be open to treating it completely IC: including measures to prevent you from ever being raised, and getting your gear stolen. As long as you don't consent to that, I don't see how you can use the argument that "I got raised IC before, too."

I still don't see how it's metagaming to assume that something that has never happened, will never happen. I've fallen asleep drunk in bars and at parties a good few times through my teen years, and I've never been robbed before. Should I start fearing falling asleep and getting robbed now? The embaresment is the only thing I'd worry about, honestly.

I agree that you have to be open to both sides, sure, and even though none of my characters like the thought of dying and do fear it quite a bit, certain ones of them are definitely more paranoid about what could be taken from them or discovered about them, after they die.

Lalaland wrote:

Well, why should good characters be afraid of the big bullies who threaten to kill them, if the big bullies show no fear or worry of repressions themselves? By the same argument as the OP I could demand that evil characters should be afraid of getting caught and stop doing their thing. I don't see the banites shaking in their shoes because the kohlingen knights will hunt them down and ransack their temple again.

The simple fact of the matter is that in a world where healing and resurrection magic is common like old shoes, the ability to kill someone is not scary.

People should not be afraid and threatened by Darth just because he got better numbers on his character sheat. Being able to kill someone in PvP means absolutely nothing, which is just fine with me.

Seems to me like people are just upset because people don't give their attempts at PvP bullying the desired effect.

You're so full of yourself, Mr Picknick-and-picking-flowers.

Banites fear Bane. The piss their pants, at Bane.

Within the Church, people fear Katsumi and Darth. Because they got the highest rankings, and they are the ones who can, with Bane's favour, make their lives a living hell.

I've RP'ed (read: not PvP'ed) Darthion as an evil tyrannical emotionless freak for 4½ years.

90%+ of the PvP he's been in, has been initiated by others.

And you're stupid enough to try and proclaim that I'm weeping over my supposedly PvP-bullying not working?

Give me a fucking break.

I can't speak for everyone else who gets into PvP. But I've always tried to avoid it.

I just happened to RP a character that everyone ICly hates, and more often than not foolishly and with little to no thinking behind it tries to put down.

Why do you think I've had 7-8 rebuilds with Darth?

Because everyone's constantly fucking gunning for him.

I had my first rebuild, after a paladin flat-out killed him just because he was a Banite. That was the only reason.

That was the point when I realized that I were about to be griefed by the vast majority of good Amian characters at the time (4 years ago), unless I had something to put up against them.

Darthion being a powerbuild is due to everyone who opposes him being so trigger happy.

Not because I get a kick from PK'ing others.

My Weston has very good RP not to be afraid of death. Although he very much so has some better reasons he'd rather not die. When he remembers to sit and think about things; he goes back and forth all the time.

I just RP it to my own PC and hope it'll catch on to put a little value into mortality. As per an old topic on all this.

Last edited by IronAngel on Mon, Nov 16 2009, 13:17 PM, edited 1 time in total.

Dakotaen: I'd call it a gray area. OK, it's not warranted to treat the experience completely OOC and label it simply as metagaming. However, it is clearly not justified to treat it 100% IC either.

The premiss isn't purely IC, so it's not fair to make a purely IC conclusion, either. If you insist that your character does not fear death or loss of gear, because nobody has ever permakilled him or stolen his gear before, you should also accept the possibility of permadeath or gear loss. You know the only reason it has not happened is OOC; drawing a strict, purely IC conclusion from an OOC-caused premiss is biased, unfair and against the spirit of RP.

If your character does not suffer long-term death or financial loss, he does not fear it. OK, that's a somewhat reasonable IC conclusion. But only insofar as the premiss is potentially untrue. It should also apply that if your character does suffer or witness permadeath, permanent damage or financial loss, he does fear it. This will never happen, and the only reason for that is OOC. Your IC lack of fear is guaranteed, because your IC lack of risk is guaranteed by OOC rules.

See the unbalance? If things were purely IC or purely OOC, a logical conclusion would be justified. As it stands, though, the conclusion is biased, unfair and inevitably leads to ridicilous IC situations. Therefore, it is better dropped. If you insist on holding onto your right to a valid IC conclusion, you should also accept that others can test and prove your conclusion wrong IC by causing permanent death, damage or financial loss. As long as you don't, it's poor sportsmanship and highly disruptive to immersion. You can't take the good without the bad.

As for certain people ragging on Mago: as an impartial observer, I can testify for what he's said. Darthion is not a trigger-happy PvP munchkin, and what I've witnessed over the years has been justified and good sports, 95% of the time. It's poor taste to take one's frustrations on the player at all, let alone in public, so please don't.

I've been reading this for about 4 pages and frankly wished to chime in with my two pennies rattling in a jar on one thing. Especially since I know for a fact which little "tea party gathering" with Mr. Cupcake produced the OP at all.

This isn't as much about 'I do not fear death!' on the ooc level as much as the PCs asking themselves "Will I be able to face MY God without shame if I do not do what I know is right against the foes I face? What I have -Sworn- to do and uphold?"

It's a conflict of IC dogmas more than OOC knowledge especially when dealing with PCs that have religious oaths on both sides. The Church of *insert whatever you like* vs followers of *insert whatever you like* vs the Divine Order of *insert what you like* boil down to the same motivation RP-wise or ICly.

"What would my God think if I did/did not?"

And honestly for the truly devout, there -IS NO- fear greater than the thought of disappointing/ticking off their god. Everything else is gray in a field of stark black and white.

On a side note, for a server that's flagging in attendance and numbers, having a heading DM call the rest of the current player base whale d*cks is off putting at best especially when none offered initial insult to warrant it. Btw, no I do feel perfectly fine having said this here. It was a general insult offered to the entire player base so that automatically tossed it out of PMing status.

Please try to accept the fact that not everyone wants to be an adventurer, hero, villain, vigilante or whatever. Some just want to be people that do their jobs or what they enjoy doing. If they happen to become any of the above, then that's character development and PC growth.

Quote:

Please try to accept the fact that not everyone wants to be an adventurer, hero, villain, vigilante or whatever.

What's DnD about then? If not being the above I would play the Sims or Second Life.

IronAngel wrote:

Dakotaen: I'd call it a gray area. OK, it's not warranted to treat the experience completely OOC and label it simply as metagaming. However, it is clearly not justified to treat it 100% IC either.

The premiss isn't purely IC, so it's not fair to make a purely IC conclusion, either. If you insist that your character does not fear death or loss of gear, because nobody has ever permakilled him or stolen his gear before, you should also accept the possibility of permadeath or gear loss. You know the only reason it has not happened is OOC; drawing a strict, purely IC conclusion from an OOC-caused premiss is biased, unfair and against the spirit of RP.

If your character does not suffer long-term death or financial loss, he does not fear it. OK, that's a somewhat reasonable IC conclusion. But only insofar as the premiss is potentially untrue. It should also apply that if your character does suffer or witness permadeath, permanent damage or financial loss, he does fear it. This will never happen, and the only reason for that is OOC. Your IC lack of fear is guaranteed, because your IC lack of risk is guaranteed by OOC rules.

See the unbalance? If things were purely IC or purely OOC, a logical conclusion would be justified. As it stands, though, the conclusion is biased, unfair and inevitably leads to ridicilous IC situations. Therefore, it is better dropped. If you insist on holding onto your right to a valid IC conclusion, you should also accept that others can test and prove your conclusion wrong IC by causing permanent death, damage or financial loss. As long as you don't, it's poor sportsmanship and highly disruptive to immersion. You can't take the good without the bad.

As for certain people ragging on Mago: as an impartial observer, I can testify for what he's said. Darthion is not a trigger-happy PvP munchkin, and what I've witnessed over the years has been justified and good sports, 95% of the time. It's poor taste to take one's frustrations on the player at all, let alone in public, so please don't.

Well put!

And as said, my characters do fear death. In their own ways, for their own reason and on varrying levels depending on the character in question. And I, on an OOC level, do accept the possibility of permadeath, loss of gear/levels/whatever or other negatives. I've said it before, and I'll say it forever; I will accept any "punishment" that isn't just there to be there. For example, I don't mind that one of my characters are killed off, as long as it isn't just done for the hell of it, but has reasoning behind it that relates to an overall storyline.

On a different note, I have to agree with who ever it was that mentioned the thing about evil never fearing good, either. That seems more true than the other way around, in my experience. Evil, though always losing (sadly), never seems to fear any of the goodies.

Last edited by Mr Mago on Mon, Nov 16 2009, 13:36 PM, edited 1 time in total.

colanah wrote:

I've been reading this for about 4 pages and frankly wished to chime in with my two pennies rattling in a jar on one thing. Especially since I know for a fact which little "tea party gathering" with Mr. Cupcake produced the OP at all.

This isn't as much about 'I do not fear death!' on the ooc level as much as the PCs asking themselves "Will I be able to face MY God without shame if I do not do what I know is right against the foes I face? What I have -Sworn- to do and uphold?"

It's a conflict of IC dogmas more than OOC knowledge especially when dealing with PCs that have religious oaths on both sides. The Church of *insert whatever you like* vs followers of *insert whatever you like* vs the Divine Order of *insert what you like* boil down to the same motivation RP-wise or ICly.

"What would my God think if I did/did not?"

And honestly for the truly devout, there -IS NO- fear greater than the thought of disappointing/ticking off their god. Everything else is gray in a field of stark black and white.

On a side note, for a server that's flagging in attendance and numbers, having a heading DM call the rest of the current player base whale d*cks is off putting at best especially when none offered initial insult to warrant it. Btw, no I do feel perfectly fine having said this here. It was a general insult offered to the entire player base so that automatically tossed it out of PMing status.

Please try to accept the fact that not everyone wants to be an adventurer, hero, villain, vigilante or whatever. Some just want to be people that do their jobs or what they enjoy doing. If they happen to become any of the above, then that's character development and PC growth.

The OP wasn't in pure reference to that specific event. That specific event just tipped over the scales for me.

In reference to dogma vs dogma. That doesn't mean you can't step down.

Darthion won't get into a fight he knows he can't win. What purpose would that serve? There's only something to achieve in victory, nothing to achieve in defeat. Or, that's how he and Bane perceives it at least.

Some, could have dogmas or oaths that almost commit them into making a stand, whenever, wherever. Such as paladins, for example, who also happen to be immune to fear.

A paladin should/would always protect the innocent, should they be directly threatened, at the risk of having their own life taken from them.

No matter how much I respect and truly appreciate Yaston (which I do, really, one few players I really, really respect), it is starting to get a bit tedious with his constant ambition to fight Darthion as well.

I mean, Yaston is a hero. He's the white knight in shining armor, and he plays accordingly. And even though he wouldn't turn away from fighting Darthion, you'd think it would be quite reasonable for Yaston to try and find some other means of opposing Darth rather than getting beaten a 14'th time in pure combat.

Yaston has started doing that, actually... so perhaps that's not the best example to give.

But the point is that endlessly suffering the same defeat, and trying to employ the very exact method causing that defeat... really doesn't do much for you.

And this is very much the case with "ordinary" (read: characters without Immunity: Fear) characters who bitch, mouth off, insult, threaten or attack a supervillain, over and over, without variation, without any indication of eventually experiencing fear or intimidation.

Dakotaen wrote:

On a different note, I have to agree with who ever it was that mentioned the thing about evil never fearing good, either. That seems more true than the other way around, in my experience. Evil, though always losing (sadly), never seems to fear any of the goodies.

Speaking from my experiences with Darth... the battle(s) between Good vs Darth/Banites have been sort of... one-sided thus far.

Which really doesn't work to their favour in regards to becoming feared.

Darthion actually feared Raziel, to an extent. Not because of the build, nessecarily (I think Jan had a quite crappy paladin build to be honest), but due to the RP.

When someone makes a Paladin that beams you over with ridiculous amounts of dignity, respect and honour, coupled with the shining good light of Torm sprouting through the gaps of his silver armor as if they were sunrays... then we'll probably see some fear arising among the evil population again.

Trigger-happy paladins (which there have been plenty of in the past) that get beat, over and over, won't quite cut it.

Though... I should say, that most evil doers actually feared the paladh00ms in their prime, + Kald Blake and Trent Blake.

... not only evil-doers, I believe. I don't think the word "Collateral" was mentioned anywhere in their Holy Book.

IronAngel wrote:

You can't be raised if you're burned to ashes.

Is that houseruled? Because Resurrection (not True Resurrection, the standard one) most certainly can raise that - it can even raise someone who has been Disintegrated.

hendrack wrote:

Quote:

Please try to accept the fact that not everyone wants to be an adventurer, hero, villain, vigilante or whatever.

What's DnD about then? If not being the above I would play the Sims or Second Life.

Read the rest of the statement hon. I said not everyone wants to be *lists* and it's a truth among many really. Some want to be ordinary and through being ordinary heroes are born. Farmer John finally got tired of those blasted kobolds going after his cows. He pulled out a scythe or shovel, stole his wife's washboard for a metal vest, took his faithful hound Rambling with him and set out to whack a few heads.

Adventurers are born from common stock. A peasant becomes a squire, becomes a knight, becomes a paladin, becomes a hero.

A long line of heroes/villains produces the black sheep that wants to grow petunias!

Few people plan to be heroes and most that start on that path wind up dead without training. Also I'm slightly tired of the derision heaped upon what's deemed 'tea party' RP. More plots are bred in the bed or at the dinner table or some little dark corner gathering than out in the middle of a battlefield.

How many nations or kingdoms were brought down by a courtesan? How many treaties were sabotaged by a manservant paid under the table?
How many chance sightings of Person X by Person Y at the right (or wrong) time lead to an assassination?
How much information does that 'confidant' of your PC know about your PC that could get them in a world of sucky luck?

Discounting all forms of RP just because it's not deemed dynamic undermines those that do it and if only the RP deemed exciting gets noticed, get ready for that ride into hack and slash.

Oh wait...I think that train's already left the building.

@Mago. Actually hon, sometimes Dogma -does- mean you can't step down. A Paladin is one example where stepping down in a situation he knows he is oath bound to not results in that big fat fallen. So once more, fear of the God served outranks any other fear coming up.

Also for the posters that have mentioned "We face Beholders, Yuan-tis, Illithids, beetles as big as dragons, -actual- dragons, undead legions, vampiric hordes, lizard men that can shake the earth itself, wailing spirits from beyond and creatures born of a darkness so black the pits of the Abyss seem like sunlight!" yeah....yeah I'm sorry. Someone standing in front of me with armor just isn't topping that listing.

http://media.photobucket.com/image/mons ... erNPCs.jpg

This might. The other...hmm...no, not really. Strangely I'll get scared by stuff not even a threat to my PC's life. As for how to instill fear, I'd point to the player Amadeth Gilnes. I'm terrified of him as are every one of my PCs that have ever met his. I'm talking bed-wetting, knee shaking, I would pray under my breath if I wasn't holding it because he was nearby, TERROR.

Last edited by Selmak on Mon, Nov 16 2009, 14:43 PM, edited 1 time in total.

On Page 2, Nekhy wrote:

TormakSaber wrote:

They died ICly, they came back OOCly. Seems cut and dry.

Yeah, and this is where the core of the issue is. This is an unbearable paradox for roleplay. Might work in Groundhog Day, but it makes things difficult for immersion here.

Well you have to strike a balance somewhere, else people would have no reason to play. That said, I think that Amia sacrifices a little too much immersion for the sake of playability.

A player can get over the fact that their character may be out of action until the next reset, if they know it's a definite possibility. It's a whole lot better than losing a whole level or having to roll a new character, but it's not as good as being able to launch themselves repeatedly at an enemy hoping for a day that doesn't start with 'I Got You Babe'

As always, players have the option of not attempting to get into a paradoxical situation in the first place. If they choose to continually provoke an enemy, then there should be consequences down the road. It's the only way people learn to accept that they can't just do whatever the hell they want.

colanah wrote:

@Mago. Actually hon, sometimes Dogma -does- mean you can't step down. A Paladin is one example where stepping down in a situation he knows he is oath bound to not results in that big fat fallen. So once more, fear of the God served outranks any other fear coming up.

Charging recklessly towards certain death that would achieve nothing does not a paladin make. I can understand if sacrificing his life would mean something, but if he is bound to die I doubt his god would blame him from falling back. Destroy the evils you can rather than fall against the ones you can't and allowing the ones you could have to grow.

colanah wrote:

Also for the posters that have mentioned "We face Beholders, Yuan-tis, Illithids, beetles as big as dragons, -actual- dragons, undead legions, vampiric hordes, lizard men that can shake the earth itself, wailing spirits from beyond and creatures born of a darkness so black the pits of the Abyss seem like sunlight!" yeah....yeah I'm sorry. Someone standing in front of me with armor just isn't topping that listing.

When that guy has massacred scores of people that have faced Beholders, Yuan-tis, Illithids, beetles as big as dragons, -actual- dragons, undead legions, vampiric hordes, lizard men that can shake the earth itself, wailing spirits from beyond and creatures born of a darkness so black the pits of the Abyss seem like sunligh?

colanah wrote:

@Mago. Actually hon, sometimes Dogma -does- mean you can't step down. A Paladin is one example where stepping down in a situation he knows he is oath bound to not results in that big fat fallen. So once more, fear of the God served outranks any other fear coming up.

Mr Mago wrote:

Some, could have dogmas or oaths that almost commit them into making a stand, whenever, wherever. Such as paladins, for example, who also happen to be immune to fear.

That's... what I wrote...

:roll:

The main thing to consider - is that it is essentially a game. And games are supposed to be fun. Taking the fun away by making PK, or lag ~victims~ lose more than a little e-pride is probably not the way to go.

colanah wrote:

@Mago. Actually hon, sometimes Dogma -does- mean you can't step down. A Paladin is one example where stepping down in a situation he knows he is oath bound to not results in that big fat fallen. So once more, fear of the God served outranks any other fear coming up.

The paladin who thinks it's a brilliant idea to sacrifice self in the service of the god, isn't serving the god for a very long time, and thus probably doesn't make a very good servant, either. I can see that as the ultimate act of faith on the road to martyrdom, but not as a part of the daily battle against evil.

OK, there's deities who fancy disposable servants, but those are usually found on the evil alignment axis and don't have paladins.

Yurell wrote:

IronAngel wrote:

You can't be raised if you're burned to ashes.

Is that houseruled? Because Resurrection (not True Resurrection, the standard one) most certainly can raise that - it can even raise someone who has been Disintegrated.

No need to nitpick and divert attention from the actual point. Theoretically, you could Resurrect someone if you were to cast the spell on their ashes, of course. But realistically, this is impossible: if nobody saw you getting killed and burned, how would they 1) know to be looking for your remains in the first place and 2) ever have any chance of finding the right pile of dust? I doubt anyone's going to go around spending their hard-earned divine favor, casting spell that costs 10,000 gold (if you want to play it properly) in hopes of hitting someone dead. And I daresay the success of the spell would actually require you to cast it on a specific pile of dust intentionally, not by chance of directing it at some general area.

The point is, however: there are multiple very real, very severe risks involved. Risks that you should take into account, because the only reason they don't happen is OOC. There are plenty of viable IC means of causing permanent death, imprisonment, mental or physical damage or loss of items. Your PC knows they might happen. You know they won't, because you can just OOC say you don't want that. You can't choose to treat one thing completely IC and another OOC, which is the entire point of my post. If you choose to use the OOC protection the rules give you, I don't think you're entitled to bring their effect IC. If you do make such IC conclusions, you should also forsake the protection of the rules and allow others to make similarly viable conclusions. It works both ways, or neither.

IronAngel wrote:

[*Cut because I agree*] If you do make such IC conclusions, you should also forsake the protection of the rules and allow others to make similarly viable conclusions. It works both ways, or neither.

I think that's a fair enough compromise, to be honest.

Eh, I agree pretty much with Gravemaskin's post. I originally hated how there was no death penalty, because that's what I was used to, and everyone would get up from a massive PVP battle and be like.. "Oh well." or something.

I would also like the point out that your statistics regarding you starting PvP are off, by about 40%. I realize this thread isn't about you in particular, or anyone for that matter, so I'll just keep it simple, and you're free to PM me ingame. But the bottom line is.. if your character is hated, and -not- feared by too many, they simply will try to kill you, and you being there is you causing the PvP. (In my opinion.) But that's not the only thing.

Interesting points of view. It seems pretty clear that there's quite a few differing opinions about death and its effects and many people have raised valid points. Personally, I don't know how to treat that, since I'm not usually a part of any of it.

I will say this though: My character has lost every PvP match he's ever been in, not because he's a bad character but because I'm often up against players who've had the time to tune and refine every aspect of their stats, gear and abilities to give them the utmost killing power.

On one hand, I think "Well fair enough, you put the effort in then you deserve to be stronger.", but on the other I kind of feel like "Well this makes the entire PvP aspect of it pointless." If your character is incredibly strong - untouchably so, then even if everyone RPs total obeisance towards you, it's not going to enrich the RP or make things interesting. In fact, if anything it's going to detract from the RP, as now you're forcing other people to abandon what they were doing (and enjoying) to bow and prostrate themselves before you.

The only times I see PvP (and of course the inherent threat involved) as having a use are when the fights are close to evenly-matched... or the difference in strength is made up of more people, not more levels. In any other case it's going to end one of two ways - either the guy who won rides around on his high horse for a bit, glorifying in how awesome he is while the other guy has to watch, or the second guy gets left alone, respawns, and has to go lick his wounds and hope that he doesn't meet the first guy again any time soon.

Because of this, I don't think it's as clear-cut as just "Player X doesn't fear death enough and should have to suffer more for it.". In fact, I think the issue runs a lot deeper, and the OOC intent and build of your own character affect whether it's appropriate or not to even get in a fight, especially if you know you're going to win. Sure, if your RP requires you to act - like a paladin I ran into earlier who saw someone's raised pit fiend and took action - it's a different story. But you have to remember that you're RPing with real people here, and not everyone wants to be slaughtered so that your character can look cool and heroic/villanous. We're playing a game that's not always fair as-is, and adding insult to that injury can upset people just as much as logging out instead of RPing death.

Basically, I feel that if you really want to be involved with RP-related PvP on a semi-regular basis (especially as a bad guy), you should think carefully about your character's capabilities, because nobody wants to fight a character they know they couldn't beat even if they tried. In traditional RPs that's known as god-moding (a big no-no), and it usually means the fun is stripped from the RP immediately... at least for the victim. Sure, I also think people should suck it up and deal with deaths in a proper RP fashion, I just don't think that people should get too annoyed if others don't want to get slaughtered for their personal enjoyment - no matter how in-character it may seem.

In many cases people have a choice to not fight, to not get to the point where they're faced with a fight, and instead..... they choose to fight. It's like they've got a Mortal Kombat announcer dude in their heads.

Quote:

If some evil character comes along they probably think "meh, PvP me and leave me alone so I can return to my previous RP".

Quote:

Sounds like someone is trying to get back at you with the only tool that's left to him - since he probably won't win the fight. And that is making it look like you're powerless.

Quoting this from the first page. Fighting evil chars kitted out for pvp just isn't fun. You'll lose, period. Preparation or better tactics won't help you if the guy is just plain better at building and pvp. So it's a matter of not giving them the satisfaction of the kill, seeing it's all you can do. They are going to kick your arse in pvp anyway, so might as well give them the finger.

If you do manage to not die and actually beat them once, you get the same ''problem'', it's now they who don't care and ignore the loss and come back for more.

About a year ago the banites were actively hunting and killing people around the isle... so the good guys teamed up and knocked down their temple. Instead of stepping back and taking a loss... the banites went on an even bigger revenge killing spree in response which lasted for weeks.

Drow like to complain how surfacers are not afraid of them, but in the same vein one could ask why drow are not afraid of going to the surface, it is after all a hostile land with a lot of light and no ceiling where lolthites get their asses kicked regularly. So why aren't the lolthites afraid of doing surface raids and nabbing people for sacrifices?

It's unfair to call out the ''heroes'' for not fearing the ''bad guys'', if the villains are doing the same thing, they will keep doing their evil deeds no matter what the good guys try, because in the end there is no permanent way to stop them.

I am singling out Darth and the banitesa lot as he started the thread, but this applies to both good and evil factions. The evil factions just seem to demand fear and respect more, but the good guys got none of that either. Do any necromancers fear getting caught by the kellies, does anyone fear of being caught doing bad things in the forest?

Darth isn't scary, drow aren't scary, kellies aren't intimidating, the triadic knights are not seen as a threat. Because they aren't, none is. All of them, good or bad are just a nuisance at best. As much as you want your character to be intimidating... if people are not afraid of you, you aren't fearsome, no matter how fearsome and dangerous you claim he is.

You just aren't going to be feared, and people will not back down to you without a fight no matter who you are.

Yet again, what was said was if dogma means you can -not- step back then you can't. You can be given lovely outs by the other person but your god will rule it a fail and you fall.

I'm not saying they rush up on the stupid train to board that first car. I'm saying they are looking at the situation before them and know in their heart or feel in their heart that turning around and walking away will result in them having failed their oath.

Unlike many, I'm giving the person that stood up and accepted what was coming at least a measure of brains enough to realize 'Yep, I'm likely going to die here but I haven't disappointed my deity'.

They're not disposable, but they do feel they have a duty to perform and have weighed that duty likely many a day and night against their own likelihood of seeing the next sunrise.

Not stupid, conscious of the end results. There's a big enough difference between those two to build a -world- in.

Also Yurell, true but saying you've done it and swinging proof around is the difference between regarding someone as stronger/able and/or a braggart/bard/dreamer.

*grins at the bards* Storytellers know precisely what I mean.

Last edited by hendrack on Mon, Nov 16 2009, 16:05 PM, edited 3 times in total.

To the austrian imposter Lala:

I remember one fight in the forest were you and a couple of forest dwellers decided to jump on a banite and got killed. My char just stood aside and watched the fun, like that elf Mago mentioned.

Quote:

and people will not back down to you without a fight no matter who you are.

In other words, before you do something that might humiliate your character a bit, like just shutting up, you rather give the other players RP "the finger"? Nice.

colanah wrote:

Yet again, what was said was if dogma means you can -not- step back then you can't. You can be given lovely outs by the other person but your god will rule it a fail and you fall.

Hmmm, I didn't think 'Fall or Die' was an acceptable out.

hendrack wrote:

Quote:

and people will not back down to you without a fight no matter who you are.

In other words, before you do something that might humiliate your character a bit, like just shutting up, you rather give the other players RP "the finger"? Nice.

...

hendrack wrote:

Quote:

Please try to accept the fact that not everyone wants to be an adventurer, hero, villain, vigilante or whatever.

What's DnD about then? If not being the above I would play the Sims or Second Life.

Bit of the pot calling the kettle black there, eh Hendrack? :wink:

I do agree, though. If you're unwilling to let your character take the beating, don't play him/her as an ass.

Your point being? Adventurers or heroes don't need to be played as lawful stupid who never back down from a fight. A villain with a bit of intelligence might know when to shut up to save his hide.

Oh no, my point was nothing more than you shouldn't point fingers at others, for "crimes" you're guilty of yourself.

Sadly, very few villains know when to shut up. Even fewer good guys know it. It's a fact of life, sadly. Another fact of life is that a bunch of the people who are played as Lawful/Neutral/Chaotic Stupid, will bitch and whine when the smackethdown has been layeth upon them. It sucks, but it won't stop I'm betting.

Please do explain what RP "crimes" my characters or I am guilty of?

Mortality and You.

Who is online