PlaneShift
Gameplay => General Discussion => Topic started by: Pip on October 09, 2005, 02:57:53 pm
-
Rules For Duelling
I ask all guild leaders to enter this discussion so that a set of rules can be agreed upon and these rules can be posted in individual guild forums and adhered to by all parties.
My thoughts are as follows:
1. No duelling in the plaza or tavern at all, or anywhere that is well populated. (Unless by a prearranged audience)
2. A verbal challenge is made giving a) reason for challenge b) weapons preferred (including fists) c) whether magic/potions should/shouldn\'t be used d) place and time e) whether to have seconds
3.The challengee may countermand b), c), d) and/or e) above. The challenge is then verbally accepted/declined.
4. When the conditions discussed in 2. and 3. have been met, the duel should begin - both the Challenger and the Challengee should place themselves at a convenient length facing each other.
5. For training purposes go to an empty room in the arena or away from areas which are busy, where parties can challenge each other as much as they wish. (This may suit those who like to fight each other for fun)
6. In the case of a guild war terms should be drawn up and agreed between the leaders of the warring guilds. Bearing in mind that rule 1. should always apply.
7. If you use the PvP system for your RP fights, then any form of exploitation is not allowed. Commodities like shortcuts may be used for convenience, but not for speed.
This post will be edited as new suggestions are agreed.
edit 1 Added point 6.
edit 2 Changed some points as suggested by Sangwa, thank you
edit 3 Changed point 4. as suggested by Sangwa, thanks again
edit 4 Added to point 1.
edit 5 Added point 7. suggested by Seytra, thank you
edit 6 Added tavern to point 1.
edit 7 Added to point 2. (potions and e)
-
I myself don\'t agree there should be any solid Guild Wars rules besides the ones the devs have implemented.
I agree however, that both parties involved in a Guild War should trace some guide-lines and agree upon them before the battles take place.
-
this sounds very promising , i give it a thumbs up :)
i take you men as a individual guild wars are to be agreed separate.
-
Originally posted by Sangwa
I myself don\'t agree there should be any solid Guild Wars rules besides the ones the devs have implemented.
I agree however, that both parties involved in a Guild War should trace some guide-lines and agree upon them before the battles take place.
I have added point 6) in my original post concerning guild wars which are another issue.
If guild leaders can impress a code of conduct for duelling on their members then a large percentage of the populace will be setting the right tone and example to newcomers and others.
:D
-
This sums up my feelings about how duelling is to be done very well. :tup:
Maybe the guild leaders indeed are the correct audience for this sort of thing, as they\'ll likely influence more players than a post in GD.
Are you speaking of strict duels in the \"duel\" sense, or also of using the duelling system for non duel PvP (like a roleplayed attack by an assassin or something (i.e., strictly IC, but OOC-ly agreed upon beforehand, of course))?
Because these might (in theory) happen in the plaza as well, but should probably still be taken elsewhere for the OOC reason of not leaving a bad impression with newcomers.
-
Originally posted by Seytra
Are you speaking of strict duels in the \"duel\" sense, or also of using the duelling system for non duel PvP (like a roleplayed attack by an assassin or something (i.e., strictly IC, but OOC-ly agreed upon beforehand, of course))?
Because these might (in theory) happen in the plaza as well, but should probably still be taken elsewhere for the OOC reason of not leaving a bad impression with newcomers.
Yes, I see no reason why it couldn\'t apply in this case too.
-
an effective way to impose these rules..
i agree completely with the idea however i am concerned with people actually following them because some guild leaders seem to be in on the whole plaza dueling/guildwar thing. but i think this is a really good thing. this way, if everyone is following these rules but two guilds, those two guilds will have immense pressure to follow the rules.
thumbs up!
Easton Ghent
-
yah i have tryed this before and it never works no matter how hard you try to get it to. You always get the ones who wont listen in the guilds.
-
Ack, I was looking at it in a different light. Since I read \"Guild Leaders\" I thought this was just about Guild Wars ^^, my bad for not paying enough attention.
Well, I think this is a good idea. I\'ll be sure to add this to the rules section, once it is properly finished.
5. For training purposes go to an empty room in the arena, where parties can challenge each other as much as they wish. (This may suit those who like to fight each other for fun)
I think we should add more options. People in Akkio or anywhere far from the arena will have to waste lots of time just to practise. In Oja road and in the sewers are places that can be used like an arena room, since they are most times empty. Specifying the places or simply stating that players who wish to practise should try to do it in an empty room might be more proper.
6. In the case of a guild war terms should be drawn up and agreed between the leaders of the warring guilds.
I would add \", keeping in mind rule 1.\" We don\'t want people to forget that :P.
2. A verbal challenge is made giving a) reason for challenge b) weapons preferred (including fists) c) whether magic should/shouldn\'t be used d) place and time
3. The challenge is verbally accepted/declined. At this point the challengee may countermand b), c) and/or d) above.
Just a wording issue here. I would move \"The challange is verbally accepter/decilned\" to the end of the sentence (ie: The Challangee may countermand b), c) and/or d) above. The challenge is then verbally accepted/declined.)
I hope I\'m being helpful.
You always get the ones who wont listen in the guilds.
And then you kick them.
-
i cant kick people who arnt in my guild and the other leaders dont want to kick them or inforce the rules
-
Thank you Sangwa I agree with all the points you have made and have edited accordingly. :)
Originally posted by Anthonyyy
i cant kick people who arnt in my guild and the other leaders dont want to kick them or inforce the rules
That is exactly why it is necessary to have all the guild leaders taking part in this discussion.
-
i cant kick people who arnt in my guild and the other leaders dont want to kick them or inforce the rules
I understand. But as long as some of us do it, it won\'t be working in vain.
I\'m glad I can be of help, Pip. And here\'s some more:
2. A verbal challenge is made giving a) reason for challenge b) weapons preferred (including fists) c) whether magic should/shouldn\'t be used d) place and time
3.The challengee may countermand b), c) and/or d) above. The challenge is then verbally accepted/declined.
4. When weapons, time and place have been agreed the duel can proceed.
I would change 4. into \"When the conditions discussed in 2. and 3. have been met, the duel should begin - both the Challanger and the Challangee should place themselves at a convinient lenght facing each other;\"
Thanks for your time too.
-
Originally posted by Sangwa
I would change 4. into \"When the conditions discussed in 2. and 3. have been met, the duel should begin - both the Challanger and the Challangee should place themselves at a convinient lenght facing each other;\"
Done :D
-
again, i agree with everythign has been said especially the part about offering more options for duels like Oja Road etc.. The main point for me is that the plaza is not in any way a designated area for dueling. The arena is a good place, along with Oja Road. Basically anywhere outside of the city limits.
@ Anthony- All we can do is participate ourselves and enforce the rules anyway possible. If enough people agree on these rules, it will become an unwritten rule that everyone follows, and eventually, maybe a written rule. We all have our resources and ways of making things work, im willing to help in any way possible to help these ideas get accepted by the majority.
Easton Ghent
-
Ok this is a good dueling system.... i will get our guild to look/agree on these terms
-
1. No duelling in the plaza at all
What area exactly do you mean by plaza? Previously the universal rule for Guild Wars was no Duelling on the steps or lower, and no duelling in the Tavern Either. Maybe something about people heading directly between the two weren\'t to be touched either, I cant exactly remember. You should add the Tavern to that list since it has always been \"off-limits\" in all the Guild wars I have observed, because it was (apparently) some sort of non-verbal non-written but enforced anyway rule.
-
i say all of Hydlaa be off-limits.
The arena is acceptable of course
Easton Ghent
-
i kill some people in Plaza sometimes but that is usually when they challenge me....
-
okay, well do you agree that the plaza should be a designated kill-free zone?
Easton Ghent
-
Originally posted by Pip
1. No duelling in the plaza at all
The GMs have already banned duelling in the plaza.
Originally posted by Pip
2. A verbal challenge is made giving a) reason for challenge b) weapons preferred (including fists) c) whether magic should/shouldn\'t be used d) place and time
In many cases, this is impractical and unnecessary. Simply do not enter a fight you do not personally wish to enter.
Originally posted by Pip
4. When the conditions discussed in 2. and 3. have been met, the duel should begin - both the Challenger and the Challengee should place themselves at a convenient length facing each other.
There are mechanics to the PVP system which all individuals with a good connection are able to exploit:
- hit and run attacks
- bugging the system into attacking the instant the other guy gets within range
- starting the attack before the challenge is accepted, resulting in attacking the instant the challenge is accepted instead of having any sort of wait
- double clicking such that you accept the challenge and start your attack at the same time, while the other guy might have to deal with his reaction time
All of these can be justified in a role-playing context. The alternative is to simply let the guy with the highest stats, best shortcuts, and luckiest dice-rolls win. Since people usually die from the first hit, this is boring to me.
Originally posted by Pip
5. For training purposes go to an empty room in the arena or away from areas which are busy, where parties can challenge each other as much as they wish. (This may suit those who like to fight each other for fun)
Since you can\'t really stop attacking someone easily in a duel, people just train - for better or for worse - in the death realm so that people who are still learning don\'t have to walk all the way back to the arena. The arena however is perfect for last-man-standing style guild wars.
Originally posted by Pip
6. In the case of a guild war terms should be drawn up and agreed between the leaders of the warring guilds.
Every been in a guild war?
-
I think in the tavern there should be allowed fights but only with fists...and not on a repeat occasion..
-
Nonsense. In any decent, proper tavern, fights are either quickly ended by other patrons or forced to the outside. Kada\'s isn\'t some shabby rundown unguarded property >:\\
-
Originally posted by Karyuu
Nonsense. In any decent, proper tavern, fights are either quickly ended by other patrons or forced to the outside.
I would join in...Originally posted by Karyuu
Kada\'s isn\'t some shabby rundown unguarded property >:\\
Indeed, despise having apparent absence of staff and mushrooms growing in it :P
-
Originally posted by Karyuu
Nonsense. In any decent, proper tavern, fights are either quickly ended by other patrons or forced to the outside. Kada\'s isn\'t some shabby rundown unguarded property >:\\
Right, but the brawl would still be there. In my ideal PVP system, you could start fighting anyone at anytime - but with severe consequences for your actions.
-
Originally posted by zanzibar
Right, but the brawl would still be there. In my ideal PVP system, you could start fighting anyone at anytime - but with severe consequences for your actions.
Yes, that would be my ideal PVP system too. Unfortunely we have to make do with what we have at the moment.
-
I thank you all for your comments.
Originally posted by ramlambmoo
1. No duelling in the plaza at all
What area exactly do you mean by plaza? Previously the universal rule for Guild Wars was no Duelling on the steps or lower, and no duelling in the Tavern Either. Maybe something about people heading directly between the two weren\'t to be touched either, I cant exactly remember. You should add the Tavern to that list since it has always been \"off-limits\" in all the Guild wars I have observed, because it was (apparently) some sort of non-verbal non-written but enforced anyway rule.
OK, but I wouldn\'t expect anyone to want to duel in the tavern
Originally posted by Easton
i say all of Hydlaa be off-limits.
I say there are other places that are open and usually empty that would be suitable. But if anyone agrees with Easton, please say so.
I have expanded point 1. though.
Originally posted by zanzibar
The GMs have already banned duelling in the plaza.
Which is why it should be incorporated. Incidentally, of which guild are you leader, Zanzibar?? And the death realm is not a suitable place for this behaviour as many newbies find their way there; unless you find a place well away from the bridge where everyone has to pass.
Originally posted by Sangwa
Originally posted by zanzibar
Right, but the brawl would still be there. In my ideal PVP system, you could start fighting anyone at anytime - but with severe consequences for your actions.
Yes, that would be my ideal PVP system too. Unfortunately we have to make do with what we have at the moment.
And if we get a proper handle on the roleplaying of duels perhaps the devs will see the way forward to give us just that, at least outside the towns.
We must make the best of things as they are for now.
-
Which is why it should be incorporated. Incidentally, of which guild are you leader, Zanzibar??
Incidentally, of what Guild are you leader? You cannot just make a thread for guild leaders only, unless you want to look like a fool. Everyone in the Planeshift community is equally entitled to state their opinion, and If you want to make something like this uniform, like you seem to suggest, you would do well not to ostracise people before you\'ve even started. For the record, I believe being a respected member in a Guild is equal if not higher than a leader of some irrelivant noob guild. Being the \"leader\" of a \"guild\" means nothing. I for one believe that any member of my Guild (if you could call it that now; though technically It still remains) is equal to any other; Thus I will not agree to any of these proposals if he is excluded from stating his opinion. It\'s all well and good to get respected members of the community to say this is a good idea, but last time I checked, they weren\'t the ones doing most of the Dueling and Guild Wars, which is what you\'re trying to regulate. You (should) already know how reluctant the people who duel are to listen to others; perhaps it would be wise not to give them further reason to ignore you?
-
Ramlambmoo does have a fair point but i do agree that some guide lines need to be set and i think what you have here is a great start i for one will post these up for my guild to see in our forum\'s and take there views on the matter.
-
Pip is doing this on my behalaf and as you have probably noticed i cant spell, and i draw your atention to the title of this thread.
it is her intension to get guild leaders to agrea on a code of conduct for guilds to follow and there for she had a right to adress guild leaders on my behalf,and yes this thread was intended for guild leaders whill all coments are welcome.
Deliberutly did not yous my spell checker :)
-
Originally posted by colonel_vanderbal
Ramlambmoo does have a fair point but i do agree that some guide lines need to be set and i think what you have here is a great start i for one will post these up for my guild to see in our forum\'s and take there views on the matter.
If too many people where putting forward their ideas it would be impossible to keep track. Better to do as you say and consult your guild and bring your guild consensus to this forum.
The idea is for guilds to build a code of conduct, which their members must follow and hope that the rest of the community will follow suit. Constructive comments are welcome from anyone.
Originally posted by ramlambmoo
I for one believe that any member of my Guild (if you could call it that now; though technically It still remains) is equal to any other; Thus I will not agree to any of these proposals if he is excluded from stating his opinion.
Your members are not excluded from commenting, it is up to you, as leader, to bring those views to the forum.
This is entitled \"An Invitation to all Guild Leaders\" for a very good reason, which is to keep it streamlined and easy to compile. Guild leaders can discuss within their guilds as much as they wish. Individuals who do not belong to a guild are welcome to comment if they wish.
-
Don\'t stray from the purpose of this topic. It\'s irrelevant to chatter about who has the right to post or not.
This topic is directed to the Guild Leaders, but since it is public, everyone else is free to post. However, the opinions from others besides guild leaders (unless they target possible modifications to the rules) should be kept away from this thread, for organization purposes.
It is up to guild leaders, or organization representatives, to express the guild opinions towards this issue. Personal opinions (may they be from guild members or freelancers) will have little weight in what concerns rule enforcement and will add only to a greater and unecessary number of posts often with the same ideas.
It is up to one\'s common sense if he should spoil or help. It\'s also up to one\'s common sense if he should care. Hopefully the Moderators will clean whatever is reported to be out of place.
Anyway, now to the on-topic part of the post.
While it might be good for new comers to have a clean Hydlaa, it might be unrealistic to forbid just any battle within its walls. Brawls and heated disputes happen often, even in our own communities. Let alone in a place where there are evil entities bent on havoc and chaos.
I think rule 5. covers the most important, and that the GMs should be the ones making sure rule 1. ins\'t abused (abuses consisting in pointless non-roleplayed or training matches in the plaza or overly repeated brawls and disputes inside Hydlaa\'s walls.)
-
Originally posted by Pip
Which is why it should be incorporated. Incidentally, of which guild are you leader, Zanzibar?? And the death realm is not a suitable place for this behaviour as many newbies find their way there; unless you find a place well away from the bridge where everyone has to pass.
*sigh* It would be best of you to avoid ad hominem attacks from now on, especially if you don\'t know the person you\'re making a miserable attempt to insult. The death realm is presently the perfect place for training, because in training, people have a tendancy to die. The way to discourage this would be to encorporate into the game a \"mercy\" function. When the other guy gets down to almost no health, he looses the ability to attack, and you\'re given the option of whether or not to execute him. If you choose mercy, he is free to run away. If you choose to kill him, well we know what happens after that. Additionally, fighting in the death realm distracts people from RP, but it actually helps the \"newbies\" because when they get stuck, they actually have people there who can help them out.
-
just popping my head in to give my two tria..
i don\'t think the Death Realm is a place in which RP dueling could be banned. It is after all the underworld. when i think of underworlds i think of a place that is somewhat chaotic, and lacking in authority or any form of normal laws. Hydlaa on the other hand is a nice, big city.. quite the contrast from a big bad death realm.
as for sangwa\'s point- i think that heated disputes are bound to happen of course, but people must know the consequences of such fights. this way people can use their judgement as to the worthiness of the fight. if they don\'t mind paying a fine, or some form of punishment, then they can fight. if they decide it isn\'t worth the consequences, then they will pass.. and yes, GM\'s should be incharge of preventing random duels with absolutely no RP context in any way.
im trying to avoid all unnecessary confrontation by sticking to the point. i read everything every posts, but i only comment on what is strictly neccessary.. starting.. now..
Easton Ghent
-
As far as DE is concerned, I\'ll surely have this rules implemented, because the Dark Empire is lawful.
However we can\'t expect other evil and chaotic guilds to do the same.
I think the nicest thing for now, RPly and OOCly, would be having lawful neutral guilds watching for the mantainance of order in Hydlaa and Akkio.
This way they could demotivate and attempt punishing players who are engaging others in roleplay (in the peaceful and populated areas), while reporting abnormalities to the GMs.
It doesn\'t matter who leads such guilds. Corruption, unefficiency and unfair behaviour are realistic (In the roleplay enviroment. Corrupted and unfair people OOCly are just bothers and should be burned alive.) There should be more than one though, so that they would keep each other in line and to avoid having one guild with the monopoly of law.
-
Don\'t forget that corruption is usually exercised via corrupt laws.:)
-
so what does this ahve to do with an invitation?
-
Originally posted by druke
so what does this ahve to do with an invitation?
The invitation is to enter the discussion regarding duelling, may I draw your attention to the first post.
-
I have posted the rules agreed so far in my own guild forum for opinions from members as i agree to all so far.
my thoughts on D Realm are for the present if you chose to fight there jump in pit, as i wish to point out that it is planed to expand DR in the future.
-
Originally posted by Easton
i don\'t think the Death Realm is a place in which RP dueling could be banned. It is after all the underworld. when i think of underworlds i think of a place that is somewhat chaotic, and lacking in authority or any form of normal laws.
There is no proposal to ban duelling in the death realm but I do think it is inappropriate to duel on the bridge where newbies have to pass. I was challenged more than once or twice in the death realm when I was new and found it inexplicable.
Originally posted by Sangwa
I think the nicest thing for now, RPly and OOCly, would be having lawful neutral guilds watching for the mantainance of order in Hydlaa and Akkio.
This way they could demotivate and attempt punishing players who are engaging others in roleplay (in the peaceful and populated areas), while reporting abnormalities to the GMs.
It doesn\'t matter who leads such guilds. Corruption, unefficiency and unfair behaviour are realistic (In the roleplay enviroment. Corrupted and unfair people OOCly are just bothers and should be burned alive.) There should be more than one though, so that they would keep each other in line and to avoid having one guild with the monopoly of law.
This is how I see it working too.
-
This is how I see it working too.
Can\'t we force someone into doing this? :P
-
Your members are not excluded from commenting, it is up to you, as leader, to bring those views to the forum.
This is entitled \"An Invitation to all Guild Leaders\" for a very good reason, which is to keep it streamlined and easy to compile. Guild leaders can discuss within their guilds as much as they wish. Individuals who do not belong to a guild are welcome to comment if they wish.
What if my members have conflicting views? Who better to present a view then someone who came up with it? If I were to present my views and those of others, I would surely mis-represent them (even unintenionally) through by own bias.
You are not a Guild leader, so perhaps you should keep quiet then so that we could \"streamline\" this discussion? Frankly I dont think that it ever needed to be streamlined in the first place. Everyone so far has provided their honest and constructive opinion. If you only wanted hte Guild leaders, you should have sent individual PMs and asked them for the opinions of their guild, instead of Publically posting it and then belittling those who have the trivial difference of not nessecarily being the head of a Guild.
It is up to guild leaders, or organization representatives, to express the guild opinions towards this issue. Personal opinions (may they be from guild members or freelancers) will have little weight in what concerns rule enforcement and will add only to a greater and unecessary number of posts often with the same ideas.
Yes, but how many guilds openly support behavior contrary to this? The guild leaders all supported this type of behavoir (proper dueling) beforehand, and will continue to, but they arent the ones who need to change, are they? Sangwa, for example, you have committed to this, but as you said It would be expected and hardly anyone in your guild does anything to the contrary anyway, so what is the use? It is merely pointless discussion. Which you are entitled to, I just thought I would warn you in case any of you harboured some notion of this actually acheiving anything further.
I think the nicest thing for now, RPly and OOCly, would be having lawful neutral guilds watching for the mantainance of order in Hydlaa and Akkio.
This way they could... ... attempt punishing players who are engaging others in roleplay.
Yeah, damn people engaging others in roleplay! Burn them! Make them suffer! Make th-... oh,.. wait? I thought we were encouraging roleplay? *Goes off an reads PS guildlines*
-
Janner guild Leader of Janners Way: says i think you should read all of posts Pip is speaking on my behalf, i felt as a guild leader i would be seen as biased so asked Pip to speak for me, so as a guild leader i have a voice on equal level as other guild leaders.
The reason this is on open forum is so that all involved may see comments and who said them.
-
I think I wasn\'t clear. I meant they would roleplay the law enforcers that would attempt to punish and demotivate the roleplaying troublemakers. That\'s why I added they woud report abnormalities, like pointless duels in populated areas.
I think it adds up to the RP enviroment having someone enforcing laws. Aren\'t you of the same opinion?
-
I think I wasn\'t clear. I meant they would roleplay the law enforcers that would attempt to punish and demotivate the roleplaying troublemakers. That\'s why I added they woud report abnormalities, like pointless duels in populated areas.
I think it adds up to the RP enviroment having someone enforcing laws. Aren\'t you of the same opinion?
Well the more I read it, the less clear it becomes, so I\'ll just go on what you stated just then. Yes, having RP \"law enforcers\" would be a neat idea. I thought the problem more was the OOC Duelers, personally, But its still good. Then again, isnt a RP \"law enforcer\" just basically a GM?
-
RP law enforcers wouldn\'t have GM powers. They would have their bottoms kicked if they engaged with strong troublemakers and they would fail to catch running away thieves of good skill.
However, while doing their roleplay part, they could help GMs with their OOC duty (moderating irrational OOC duelers included.)
-
By all means encourage players to not break PS rules in a RP manner, but feel we do not have the right to enforce the law, only within our guilds can we do so. PS rules are enforced by GMs, that it part of their job.
The intention here is to encourage those who do not belong to a guild, to follow our example, by the way our guilds do it.
As for guilds which do not implement what we decide upon here, I feel are missing out on a great opportunity to show that members of the community care enough to help in trying to solve a common problem.
-
The problem is, Janner, some guilds\' purpose is to cause havoc and chaos and implementing such rules would be against their best interest.
Encouragement only reaches so far. Enforcing might compensate, while providing with a much more realistic and pleasant roleplay enviroment.
I don\'t think it would be much trouble to anyone to acknowledge some guilds as law enforcers. They will still be mortal, defyable and interactive guilds.
-
Originally posted by Sangwa
The problem is, Janner, some guilds\' purpose is to cause havoc and chaos and implementing such rules would be against their best interest.
Encouragement only reaches so far. Enforcing might compensate, while providing with a much more realistic and pleasant roleplay enviroment.
I don\'t think it would be much trouble to anyone to acknowledge some guilds as law enforcers. They will still be mortal, defyable and interactive guilds.
While those of the guilds which are happy to abide to and enforce the rules may recognise a few among their number as law enforcers, the guilds whose \"purpose is to cause havoc and chaos\" would not. Without additional powers all the law abiding guilds can do is report misdemeanors when they see them. Speak to the offenders first of course; they might be new and not know the rules.
-
I see your point but feel we would have the same problem as to which guild/s it would be, unless we take it in terns trying to en-force the rules.:)
-
Originally posted by Pip
Originally posted by Sangwa
The problem is, Janner, some guilds\' purpose is to cause havoc and chaos and implementing such rules would be against their best interest.
Encouragement only reaches so far. Enforcing might compensate, while providing with a much more realistic and pleasant roleplay enviroment.
I don\'t think it would be much trouble to anyone to acknowledge some guilds as law enforcers. They will still be mortal, defyable and interactive guilds.
While those of the guilds which are happy to abide to and enforce the rules may recognise a few among their number as law enforcers, the guilds whose \"purpose is to cause havoc and chaos\" would not. Without additional powers all the law abiding guilds can do is report misdemeanors when they see them. Speak to the offenders first of course; they might be new and not know the rules.
Hmm, I don\'t really see the problem there. When they RP causing havoc and such, then they will also RP trying to run from the law and the results of failing to do so.
If, OTOH, they are OOC and just like to OOC disrupt the game for others, then this is where GMs need to take over.
Originally posted by zanzibar
There are mechanics to the PVP system which all individuals with a good connection are able to exploit:
- hit and run attacks
- bugging the system into attacking the instant the other guy gets within range
- starting the attack before the challenge is accepted, resulting in attacking the instant the challenge is accepted instead of having any sort of wait
- double clicking such that you accept the challenge and start your attack at the same time, while the other guy might have to deal with his reaction time
All of these can be justified in a role-playing context. The alternative is to simply let the guy with the highest stats, best shortcuts, and luckiest dice-rolls win. Since people usually die from the first hit, this is boring to me.
They cannot be justified from an RP POV, because, as you stated, this depends on the OOC capabilities of the player or their computing system and as such is not, and never will be, RP, as much as you may want it to be. It is abuse / exploitation of the system, nothing else. A true RPer will not do these things, but instead fight the fight IC-ly. Also, the fighting system is so limited that the really interesting fights that include maneuvers can\'t be conducted through it, but instead tend to be RP\'d using /me-ing. Yes, this does require very experienced RPers on both sides.
So either fight properly, thereby allowing your opponent the same opportunities instead of exploiting the system to get an unfair and completely OOC advantage, or /me the fight. Failing both, don\'t fight.
This is something that IMO should be included in the proposal:
If you use the PvP system for your RP fights, then any form of exploitation is not allowed. Commodities like shortcuts may be used for convenience, but not for speed.
-
Hmm, I don\'t really see the problem there. When they RP causing havoc and such, then they will also RP trying to run from the law and the results of failing to do so.
If, OTOH, they are OOC and just like to OOC disrupt the game for others, then this is where GMs need to take over.
Exactly my point of view.
-
Sounds good to me.
-
Originally posted by Seytra
Hmm, I don\'t really see the problem there. When they RP causing havoc and such, then they will also RP trying to run from the law and the results of failing to do so.
If, OTOH, they are OOC and just like to OOC disrupt the game for others, then this is where GMs need to take over.
That\'s nice, but how do you distinguish between IC and OOC disruption? Here\'s how I do it, and this may or may not be similar to your own thoughts:
OOC disruption:
- can involve the petition system
- can involve exploiting bugs of the game
- can involve in-game events spreading to the forums and IRC
- can involve the use or abuse of GM powers
- can involve private communications that the other part tries to avoid but cannot (ie harrassment)
So, an example of OOC disruption would be if you had a problem with someone in-game, then you started spamming their mailbox on the forums even as they ask you not to, then you make frivolous complaints to not one but many GMs about that person you harrassed.
However, IC disruption can include murder, the starting of guild wars, betrayal, rumour-mongering, fear-mongering, theft, insults which are not obviously harrassment, etcetera. IMO anyway. I welcome everyone to be critical of it.
-
Originally posted by Sangwa
Hmm, I don\'t really see the problem there. When they RP causing havoc and such, then they will also RP trying to run from the law and the results of failing to do so.
If, OTOH, they are OOC and just like to OOC disrupt the game for others, then this is where GMs need to take over.
Exactly my point of view.
OK, I see what you are saying. Sangwa, are you volunteering your guild? I am sure we can\'t force anyone to do it, maybe ask for volunteers and somehow take it in turns. How would we notify which guild was being the \"police\"? Perhaps someone would be willing to start a new guild with a few members from each of the other guilds...........?
Originally posted by Seytra
This is something that IMO should be included in the proposal:
If you use the PvP system for your RP fights, then any form of exploitation is not allowed. Commodities like shortcuts may be used for convenience, but not for speed.
Good point
-
Originally posted by zanzibar
That\'s nice, but how do you distinguish between IC and OOC disruption? Here\'s how I do it, and this may or may not be similar to your own thoughts:
OOC disruption:
- can involve the petition system
- can involve exploiting bugs of the game
- can involve in-game events spreading to the forums and IRC
- can involve the use or abuse of GM powers
- can involve private communications that the other part tries to avoid but cannot (ie harrassment)
So, an example of OOC disruption would be if you had a problem with someone in-game, then you started spamming their mailbox on the forums even as they ask you not to, then you make frivolous complaints to not one but many GMs about that person you harrassed.
However, IC disruption can include murder, the starting of guild wars, betrayal, rumour-mongering, fear-mongering, theft, insults which are not obviously harrassment, etcetera. IMO anyway. I welcome everyone to be critical of it.
Anything that is detrimental to someone\'s char and not previouisly agreed upon is OOC disruption. This includes challenging. For someone to be allowed to challenge some one else, they must previously (at least OOC-ly) have agreed upon that to happen.
If this does not have an RP reason, then even if it is mutually agreed upon it is OOC disruption because others will have to put up with the baseless fighting, which has already been classified as not acceptable all by itself in point 1.
Also, anything that is otherwise not RP is OOC disruption, including undesignated OOC and dropping of items, movement of chars to make fun of the game (i.e., stepping into others, especially repeatedly, jumping or doing the popular walking backwards \"moonwalk\" ).
IOW, even things that are beneficial to one\'s char can be OOC disruption, like someone dropping circles around you or even handing things over via /trade. These are another form of harassment.
All of these are easily distinguished from IC disruption, because there is no RP context for them.
In the very rare case that there actually is someone who actually acts like that IC-ly, this person would then need to ensure that it is done realistically, which does take a lot of thought and effort, like describing oneself very well and also detailing all the actions that lead up to the odd behaviour, taking into account the IC situation and reactions of the others (even if it is \"/me ignores that and proceeds to do XYZ\" ), i.e., a whole lot of /me-ing. Obviously if you are already known as good RPer you\'ll have less trouble coming accross correctly than when you\'re not known at all, but it still is far from being a trivial task. Also, consistency is key, even more than usual.
Given these clear distinctions and provided there is a proper RP reason for it, what you listed as IC disruptions I agree with to be actually IC.
As for the \"police\" guild: There is (or was) the \"Hydlaa Law Enforcement\" guild, headed by Monketh.
-
Originally posted by Seytra
Anything that is detrimental to someone\'s char and not previouisly agreed upon is OOC disruption.
Reading through your post, I find that position to be impractical, unproductive, and harmful to the game. Boring and unrealistic and outside the tradition of role-playing also come to my mind.
However, I have a simple solution: By playing Planeshift, you agree to bad things happening to your character from time to time, perhaps often, perhaps never. Bad things happen in every single RPG. Heck, bad things even happen to you in the Candyland boardgame!
-
Anything that is detrimental to someone\'s char and not previouisly agreed upon is OOC disruption.
Previously agreed upon by whom?
The problem is, Janner, some guilds\' purpose is to cause havoc and chaos and implementing such rules would be against their best interest.
This has been my point all along; Most of you in here have agreed to this (at least in principal), but then again most of you in here arent the problem, which is why have been dismissive of any of this actually working. Furthermore, I dont really like the idea of having self appointed Vigilante stlye guilds running around enforcing things that they came up with. Well, I mean from a RP perspective I would love it for the challenge to tear into them, but from a neutral perspective its not going to acheive much, since the only people who would listen to them would be the people who dont need to change.
-
I for one am happy to abide by the main reason for this topic so as soon as i can wrap it up in my guild as still a few members to see it, will inform my guild to abide by them.
One comment from member, seconds, i feel that should be optional but mention it anyway.
I feel the police thing is a separate issue, and must have GM approval and be consulted with to make that work.
-
Originally posted by ramlambmoo
Anything that is detrimental to someone\'s char and not previouisly agreed upon is OOC disruption.
Previously agreed upon by whom?
Agreed by me and you comes into my mind.
Rude actions in the game need some explanation first because I have to react in one or another way. If this is RP, my character has to react in a RP manner depending on my character. If this is because you are a 9-year old noob, I as a player will add you to my ignore list.
-
Originally posted by Bereror
Agreed by me and you comes into my mind.
Rude actions in the game need some explanation first because I have to react in one or another way. If this is RP, my character has to react in a RP manner depending on my character. If this is because you are a 9-year old noob, I as a player will add you to my ignore list.
If people can\'t tell the difference between role-play dialogue and 9-year-old noobs, if people need an explanation first before someone else says anything with a hint of malice, then gentlemen - we are in trouble.
-
First off, when you made this thread i thought you cant go telling people what to do its up to guild leaders how they run their guilds what say should you have in the matter. then i decided not to post, but i still think the same.
i see how you call it an invitation... but that means nothing.
one point of positive i do have to say, if you want to be a bunch of people who follow the same beleifs what about creating allience things like their used to be. i know nothing about these as they were beofore my time.. the only one that comes to mind is citadel of the light not sure what they were about or what happened to them or even if they are the sort of thing i mean but there you go.
also i only read what i thought was worth reading.
Edit: as it seems to be the fashion in this thread...
please delete
-
The Alliance system is more for the purpose of guild wars... except that since the wipe, they no longer work for guild wars.
This seems more like a treaty than anything else.
-
yeah... when you sign a treaty you create an allience sort of thing. but i still think its stupid.
-
I am pleased to inform all that i have just witnessed a duel done in the fashion we are discussing well done The chosen few and The Klyros of Fury :]
-
Erm. Well... \"fair\" duels have always taken place here and there. This isn\'t exactly new.. :) Just not widely agreed upon.
-
what karyuu said, also more depending on your view of fair... i payed someone to let me kill hmi before but it was all for a reason.
also by the whole allience thing i mean a group or organisation... alliences dont just have to be for wars. just a group of guilds who want to follow the same ideas sort of thing. i think organisation is a better word.
-
A small point potions / food in 2. should be agreed opon as well.
-
done - edit 7 Added to point 2. (potions and e)
(see first post)
-
and why do you have to post like that. if i did it everyone would be screaming spam and sirens would go off.
-
Sorry for Pips short post but she had to dash to a appointment will get here to expand here post when she returns :)
-
For those interested, I present the Code Duello. It covered affairs of honor between gentlemen both in Europe and the America\'s (particularly in the south). Should members of the realm choose to civilize dueling, I suggest that they adapt this code and use it as a model. Bear in mind though that the Code Duello was used only by men of honor. To those who have no honor it will be worthless.
SensoTaka Kishu : Leader of the Defenders
The Code Duello, covering the practice of dueling and points of honor, was drawn up and settled at Clonmel Summer Assizes, 1777, by gentlemen-delegates of Tipperary, Galway, Sligo, Mayo and Roscommon, and prescribed for general adoption throughout Ireland. The Code was generally also followed in England and on the Continent with some slight variations. In America, the principal rules were followed, although occasionally there were some glaring deviations.
Rule 1. The first offense requires the first apology, though the retort may have been more offensive than the insult. Example: A tells B he is impertinent, etc. B retorts that he lies; yet A must make the first apology because he gave the first offense, and then (after one fire) B may explain away the retort by a subsequent apology.
Rule 2. But if the parties would rather fight on, then after two shots each (but in no case before), B may explain first, and A apologize afterward.
N.B. The above rules apply to all cases of offenses in retort not of stronger class than the example.
Rule 3. If a doubt exist who gave the first offense, the decision rests with the seconds; if they won\'t decide, or can\'t agree, the matter must proceed to two shots, or to a hit, if the challenger require it.
Rule 4. When the lie direct is the first offense, the aggressor must either beg pardon in express terms; exchange two shots previous to apology; or three shots followed up by explanation; or fire on till a severe hit be received by one party or the other.
Rule 5. As a blow is strictly prohibited under any circumstances among gentlemen, no verbal apology can be received for such an insult. The alternatives, therefore -- the offender handing a cane to the injured party, to be used on his own back, at the same time begging pardon; firing on until one or both are disabled; or exchanging three shots, and then asking pardon without proffer of the cane.
If swords are used, the parties engage until one is well blooded, disabled, or disarmed; or until, after receiving a wound, and blood being drawn, the aggressor begs pardon.
N.B. A disarm is considered the same as a disable. The disarmer may (strictly) break his adversary\'s sword; but if it be the challenger who is disarmed, it is considered as ungenerous to do so.
In the case the challenged be disarmed and refuses to ask pardon or atone, he must not be killed, as formerly; but the challenger may lay his own sword on the aggressor\'s shoulder, then break the aggressor\'s sword and say, \"I spare your life!\" The challenged can never revive the quarrel -- the challenger may.
Rule 6. If A gives B the lie, and B retorts by a blow (being the two greatest offenses), no reconciliation can take place till after two discharges each, or a severe hit; after which B may beg A\'s pardon humbly for the blow and then A may explain simply for the lie; because a blow is never allowable, and the offense of the lie, therefore, merges in it. (See preceding rules.)
N.B. Challenges for undivulged causes may be reconciled on the ground, after one shot. An explanation or the slightest hit should be sufficient in such cases, because no personal offense transpired.
Rule 7. But no apology can be received, in any case, after the parties have actually taken ground, without exchange of fires.
Rule 8. In the above case, no challenger is obliged to divulge his cause of challenge (if private) unless required by the challenged so to do before their meeting.
Rule 9. All imputations of cheating at play, races, etc., to be considered equivalent to a blow; but may be reconciled after one shot, on admitting their falsehood and begging pardon publicly.
Rule 10. Any insult to a lady under a gentleman\'s care or protection to be considered as, by one degree, a greater offense than if given to the gentleman personally, and to be regulated accordingly.
Rule 11. Offenses originating or accruing from the support of ladies\' reputations, to be considered as less unjustifiable than any others of the same class, and as admitting of slighter apologies by the aggressor: this to be determined by the circumstances of the case, but always favorable to the lady.
Rule 12. In simple, unpremeditated recontres with the smallsword, or couteau de chasse, the rule is -- first draw, first sheath, unless blood is drawn; then both sheath, and proceed to investigation.
Rule 13. No dumb shooting or firing in the air is admissible in any case. The challenger ought not to have challenged without receiving offense; and the challenged ought, if he gave offense, to have made an apology before he came on the ground; therefore, children\'s play must be dishonorable on one side or the other, and is accordingly prohibited.
Rule 14. Seconds to be of equal rank in society with the principals they attend, inasmuch as a second may either choose or chance to become a principal, and equality is indispensible.
Rule 15. Challenges are never to be delivered at night, unless the party to be challenged intend leaving the place of offense before morning; for it is desirable to avoid all hot-headed proceedings.
Rule 16. The challenged has the right to choose his own weapon, unless the challenger gives his honor he is no swordsman; after which, however, he can decline any second species of weapon proposed by the challenged.
Rule 17. The challenged chooses his ground; the challenger chooses his distance; the seconds fix the time and terms of firing.
Rule 18. The seconds load in presence of each other, unless they give their mutual honors they have charged smooth and single, which should be held sufficient.
Rule 19. Firing may be regulated -- first by signal; secondly, by word of command; or thirdly, at pleasure -- as may be agreeable to the parties. In the latter case, the parties may fire at their reasonable leisure, but second presents and rests are strictly prohibited.
Rule 20. In all cases a miss-fire is equivalent to a shot, and a snap or non-cock is to be considered as a miss-fire.
Rule 21. Seconds are bound to attempt a reconciliation before the meeting takes place, or after sufficient firing or hits, as specified.
Rule 22. Any wound sufficient to agitate the nerves and necessarily make the hand shake, must end the business for that day.
Rule 23. If the cause of the meeting be of such a nature that no apology or explanation can or will be received, the challenged takes his ground, and calls on the challenger to proceed as he chooses; in such cases, firing at pleasure is the usual practice, but may be varied by agreement.
Rule 24. In slight cases, the second hands his principal but one pistol; but in gross cases, two, holding another case ready charged in reserve.
Rule 25. Where seconds disagree, and resolve to exchange shots themselves, it must be at the same time and at right angles with their principals, thus:
If with swords, side by side, with five paces interval.
N.B. All matters and doubts not herein mentioned will be explained and cleared up by application to the committee, who meet alternately at Clonmel and Galway, at the quarter sessions, for that purpose.
-
meh. Might does not equal right. Who is an isn\'t honourable is a matter of personal opinion. How honour is expressed and respected is also dependant on the individual.
If you\'re out for revenge, why not seek it at any cost? All this structure seems suffocating.
-
I have read the entire thread, and there are many valid points. I understand what is trying to be done here, and would agree that some sort of order should be established. That being said, I do believe this is entirely the wrong way to go about it. As such, I would like to give some reasoning for this and make a few suggestions.
1. There are a few guilds that are not going to follow the rules regardless of their alignment and/or personal views on the subject. The leaders and members are just not going to take that much interest in it in the long run. Once these guilds begin disrupting the attempted order, things are going to fall apart and everything will resort back to \'normal\'.
2. In an RP light, there is no reason for any guild to follow these guidelines except for lawful guilds. Even then, it will only be the point of lawful guilds that are dedicated to law and order that would follow such rules. Other lawful guilds that take a stance similar to \'tradition before laws of the land\' would not find it necessary to follow these rules if they do not mirror their tradition in an RP sense. Neutral guilds should have no stake in the matter as they would be more inclined to keeping balance between the law and the chaos.
3. Law and order can only be recognized and demonstrated as having meaning if people are either forced to obey (punishment) or have a deep seated reason to obey (tradition, manners of honor, allegiences, religion, etc) without punishment. At this time, little of either exists. I have seen many people duel in the Plaza and wars spill over into the Plaza. Even if guild leaders do get onto their members, it starts again the minute everyone relaxes. Likewise, there are those few RPers who attempt to explain the \'laws\' to the duellers, but for the most part they are ignored. There exists no power (regardless of who possesses it) that makes obeying the laws/rules desirous.
If you truly want all guilds involved and want the possibility of the rules/laws serving a purpose other than fuel for complaints, I would suggest getting all guilds and as many non-guild members involved as possible. What you need first are laws... all towns, countries, and communities have laws. In light of this, not all towns, countries, and communities have policing forces or judicial bodies or even centralized governments. But they all do have laws and defined punishment for breaking those laws. These need to be realistic laws, not just focused on duelling and guild wars. As an example, make the carrying of weapons inside of the Hydlaa walls illegal. Therefore duelling inside Hydlaa walls would be illegal as well as murder and so on. Don\'t just focus on one minor detail, but upon the whole world available for RP. By doing so, you give more credence to the alignments, more justification to the guilds in performing their goals, etc.
As far as policing forces are concerned there are many options. But, again, I would say make sure that everyone* is involved. Have a member or a couple of members from each guild serve as part of some policing unit. Equal representation will help keep balance. Also, insure they have some sort of authority, both within their guild and outside in the matters of upholding the laws. If needs be, create a council -- again of members of each guild -- that are responsible within the respective guilds for assisting the \'police\' and ensuring that the police are not abusing their powers. It would also be wise to have these laws available (in the library?). With most newbies they are completely unaware of the unwritten rules much less any actually agreed upon rules. Have a role created in which there are certain people who recite the laws... in the Plaza, in the case of laws being broken, etc.
To make the punishments a bit more realistic, have the police force the only group allowed to use weapons in town. Therefore any law-breakers must fear capture and/or punishment, which may be as simple as sending them to the DR. They will eventually get tired of getting sent there. If a specific guild member causes too much havoc, have them removed.
note: A bit of common sense should be used here in considering who \'everyone\' should be. Obviously not every newbie that walks into Hydlaa need be considered. But there are many non-affiliated members that are serious and should be taken into consideration, not just guild leaders.
-
In an RP light, there can be guilds and characters that are lawful and others that are not. They can either follow the laws or ignore them.
But the rules here are not for RP -- they are for players (or actors) behind these guilds and characters.
Role playing is a theater with characters and actors. If one character is rude against another, it doesn\'t mean that they cannot have a beer together after the spectacle is over. They just follow the script (or create one in the RP world), they know it and there is nothing personal.
Just the script needs to be explained to other actors. If you look at the rules in the first post by Pip, they make perfect sense. They are just limiting your character\'s or guild\'s actions to make sure that there are no misunderstandings.
If the script is not explained or some actors didn\'t get it, actions on the stage will continue behind the scenes. Please remember, there are many spectators (newcomers to the game), who have no idea, what is going on. They think that\'s the way how they should act in this game.
-
Originally posted by Bereror
In an RP light, there can be guilds and characters that are lawful and others that are not. They can either follow the laws or ignore them.
But the rules here are not for RP -- they are for players (or actors) behind these guilds and characters.
Role playing is a theater with characters and actors. If one character is rude against another, it doesn\'t mean that they cannot have a beer together after the spectacle is over. They just follow the script (or create one in the RP world), they know it and there is nothing personal.
Just the script needs to be explained to other actors. If you look at the rules in the first post by Pip, they make perfect sense. They are just limiting your character\'s or guild\'s actions to make sure that there are no misunderstandings.
If the script is not explained or some actors didn\'t get it, actions on the stage will continue behind the scenes. Please remember, there are many spectators (newcomers to the game), who have no idea, what is going on. They think that\'s the way how they should act in this game.
I know what RP is, but thanks for that description. I have read the rules presented by Pip and frankly I don\'t think they make perfect sense. I don\'t know how many times I have read that PS is an RP world... there is even a good thread on it right now ... so this whole debate seems a bit off to me.
But, you do illustrate the problem very well. This whole nonsense of a script. Our lives are not scripted (take that as IRL or IC, whichever you want), we live them according to the circumstance that arises within the environment we inhabit. If we limit what a player can do with his/her character without creating an in game reason for that, then we have done nothing but limit the ever-so-important RP focus of the game. If we live according to some idea of a script, we aren\'t actually attempting to live roles but to just meet out predetermined encounters. It goes from being an MMORPG with the potential for every possible situation to your basic every day console RPG. The only difference is the luxury of multi-player action, but without the interaction.
Make the rules relevant, make them laws, give them substance. To quote you \"They can either follow the laws or ignore them.\" If that is the stance you are taking then what good will they be? It is this position on the subject that has created the problem in the first place.
The rules are currently being ignored, so why create more of the same rules to be ignored? Just a thought.
-
Originally posted by Askr
Make the rules relevant, make them laws, give them substance. To quote you \"They can either follow the laws or ignore them.\" If that is the stance you are taking then what good will they be? It is this position on the subject that has created the problem in the first place.
To illustrate, why I think some kind of rules are necessary, here are some imaginary situations.
1. Happening somewhere on the road between Hydlaa and Akkaio.
I am on my way from Hydlaa to Akkaio when I meet somebody, let\'s call him Warbash (I hope nobody uses this name :) ). Never met him before, so I do not know who the character or the player behind him are.
Warbash: \"Give me your tria or die!\"
Warbash: \"[ No offense :) I\'m a robber ]\"
Me: \"I will give you nothing! You have to kill me first!\"
Me: \"[ How hard do you hit? I have only normal swords from Harnquist ]\"
Warbash: \"[ OK, I will use only one sword to give you a chance :) ]\"
Warbash: \"As you wish! Prepare for the fight!\"
You can continue from here with a great number of possibilities, like asking for a protection from a guild, joining a group and start hunting the robber etc. If done the right way, everybody involved will have fun for several days.
This is what I call role playing.
2. Happening at the Hydlaa Plaza.
Me talking to somebody next to me.
Me: \"I lost contact with my father after he went to Stone Labyrinths.\"
Somebody else: \"Why did he go there?\"
Warbash has challenged you to a duel.
You have declined Warbash\'s challenge.
Me: \"Lets go to the tavern and have a beer. Then I can tell you the story.\"
The information shown up between the dialogues has no value at all and has nothing to do with the role playing. It is just another noise from the server.
Somebody else: \"Is the tavern already opened?\"
Warbash has been killed by a rat.
Me: \"I hope so. Let\'s go and check out.\"
Why there is a need for rules and especially for guilds? Because when a new player joins the game, he looks around and sees many different characters. Some have just names, others have character names and guild names. So he decides that the ones with guild names have been into the game longer and know, what they are doing. If guild members act like noobs, that\'s the message new players get -- this is another \"kill everything that moves\" type of game.
As the subject says, this is an invitation to all guild leaders to discuss the issue and come out with some kind of rules that help the game to become enjoyable for everybody.
-
Well said this is why it was felt that guild leaders could help by leading by example with there guilds. :))
-
I have stated in our guild ruling that this guild should be followed.. so i am expecting most other guilds should have this in there guild rules
-
Originally posted by Bereror
To illustrate, why I think some kind of rules are necessary, here are some imaginary situations.
1. Happening somewhere on the road between Hydlaa and Akkaio.
I am on my way from Hydlaa to Akkaio when I meet somebody, let\'s call him Warbash (I hope nobody uses this name :) ). Never met him before, so I do not know who the character or the player behind him are.
Warbash: \"Give me your tria or die!\"
Warbash: \"[ No offense :) I\'m a robber ]\"
Me: \"I will give you nothing! You have to kill me first!\"
Me: \"[ How hard do you hit? I have only normal swords from Harnquist ]\"
Warbash: \"[ OK, I will use only one sword to give you a chance :) ]\"
Warbash: \"As you wish! Prepare for the fight!\"
You can continue from here with a great number of possibilities, like asking for a protection from a guild, joining a group and start hunting the robber etc. If done the right way, everybody involved will have fun for several days.
This is what I call role playing.
2. Happening at the Hydlaa Plaza.
Me talking to somebody next to me.
Me: \"I lost contact with my father after he went to Stone Labyrinths.\"
Somebody else: \"Why did he go there?\"
Warbash has challenged you to a duel.
You have declined Warbash\'s challenge.
Me: \"Lets go to the tavern and have a beer. Then I can tell you the story.\"
The information shown up between the dialogues has no value at all and has nothing to do with the role playing. It is just another noise from the server.
Somebody else: \"Is the tavern already opened?\"
Warbash has been killed by a rat.
Me: \"I hope so. Let\'s go and check out.\"
In the above two examples you have given IC interaction mixed with OOC messages -- one is your discussion the other is from the server.
The first we will all have to put up with because you are doing it in IC chat, the other noone has to see because we can all switch to the chat tab. Seems a little weak to me. To me neither has any value. I don\'t enjoy being confronted with IC/OOC mixed chat every two seconds in the game. To me that is not roleplay. I don\'t want to see choreographed scenes, I wan\'t to see actual role-play in all its myriad forms.
Why there is a need for rules and especially for guilds? Because when a new player joins the game, he looks around and sees many different characters. Some have just names, others have character names and guild names. So he decides that the ones with guild names have been into the game longer and know, what they are doing. If guild members act like noobs, that\'s the message new players get -- this is another \"kill everything that moves\" type of game.
As the subject says, this is an invitation to all guild leaders to discuss the issue and come out with some kind of rules that help the game to become enjoyable for everybody.
When a new player joins a game it is not just the guilds they see not RPing. They often ask the GMs questions and get responses in what is supposedly IC chat, such as: \"Have you read the guide?\" They also see non-guild members talking OOC in the IC chat channel. There are more short term young players looking for that next game of the week, then there are actual RPers in any given location at any given moment. It has nothing to do with guilds, but with the atmosphere and the environment that the newcomers are met with.
On the other hand, there are those of us who will force the newcomes to RP and attempt to instill in them that concept from the beginning. We do this by RPing every given situation, and using RP to inform the newcomers of the basics, the unwritten rules, and so on in the PS Realm.
As has been stated, these rules will do nothing for the people that need them. Those that are following them, in all likelihood already were for the most part, and the ones that didn\'t care still won\'t.
-
Originally posted by r.guppy
Well said this is why it was felt that guild leaders could help by leading by example with there guilds. :))
What has been proposed when guild members do not follow the rules?
Who enforces those rules and to what extent do they have the power to enforce them?
Why must the burden fall on guild leaders when they are in fact a minority, where as the rest of the RP community would do a much better job to significantly limit such destructive activities?
-
This is intended to help clean up random fights that have plagued us all, as to what powers we have none only within are own guilds, and to why Guild Leaders, they control to some degree the actions of there guild members, as to why not RP community you are welcome to try, i will help in any way i can. :)
-
Originally posted by r.guppy
This is intended to help clean up random fights that have plagued us all, as to what powers we have none only within are own guilds, and to why Guild Leaders, they control to some degree the actions of there guild members, as to why not RP community you are welcome to try, i will help in any way i can. :)
Why not RP the random fights? The world is not without such occurences.
Guild leaders have no more control over their members than you or I have over each other. There is only the level of respect and degree to which the members are willing to accept the semblence of authority that is granted to guild leaders when joining their guild.
I RP situations like this all the time. I RP giving information to newbies, RP helping them with their RP, giving them mini-quests for me so that they can earn the weapons, money and armor they are constantly asking for. I interact with them, instead of ignoring them. I attempt to teach them and assist them to join in the RP, instead of running around shouting the same ridiculous nonsense over and over.
To tell you the truth, I am a bit dissapointed in the level of RP, the lack of RP presence, and the leadership/actions of many guilds/guildmembers. This idea is just another demonstration of these same problems.
I have found that the non-RPers who want to duel, and be OOC, and not take into account the fact that PS is an RP realm, quickly tire of being confronted by RP and being forced to RP. They then stop doing the nonsense, whether that is running around yelling for weapons, armor, trias, etc or constantly challenging everything in sight. Rules aren\'t going to do that, no matter how much you want them to.
-
I agree.... fighting and duels are entirely in character. Even running around challenging everyone to a fight is in character. But, because people are annoyed by it, they attack it by saying it\'s OOC / not RP.
-
Well i have to disagree have you been around by Harnquist over the last few days i have and hardly a few random fights have happened, were as before there was hardly a time when there was peace from it, so i say i think it is working all ready. :D
-
Originally posted by r.guppy
Well i have to disagree have you been around by Harnquist over the last few days i have and hardly a few random fights have happened, were as before there was hardly a time when there was peace from it, so i say i think it is working all ready. :D
???? I haven\'t been on in over a week, but I would always hang around harniquist or the tavern, and fighting was rarely a problem.
-
Well i am wondering why you haven\'t been on in a week.
but is the reason for your comment the fact that you were dueling there to prove how good you were with your daggers, or is it you do not wont this agreement to go ahead, as the player you RP is lets say not on the side of good or lawful.
Because if it is then say so so we all no you are stating the case for the other side of this debate.
-
Originally posted by zanzibar
???? I haven\'t been on in over a week, but I would always hang around harniquist or the tavern, and fighting was rarely a problem.
Fighting still isn\'t a problem. There has not been, at least since I\'ve joined, ever a point when there was so much fighting that you could not go on about your business.
And, as far as I have noticed, the amount of fighting is about the same and its usually the same faces.
-
If there was not a problem then why is this even being talked about i remind you sir of one of your guild rules.
To be a Guild Knight is to help where help is needed, (to support good causes )and to bring even the lowliest farmhand into a person worthy to be King. To be a Guild Knight is to become a person who anyone can trust, anyone can talk to, anyone can look up to, anyone can join.
(That is our dream and goal, and may it be upheld.) :))
-
Originally posted by r.guppy
Well i am wondering why you haven\'t been on in a week.
but is the reason for your comment the fact that you were dueling there to prove how good you were with your daggers, or is it you do not wont this agreement to go ahead, as the player you RP is lets say not on the side of good or lawful.
Because if it is then say so so we all no you are stating the case for the other side of this debate.
1. I haven\'t been playing because I\'m banned.
2. I don\'t duel in the plaza except on rare occassions, and in other instance unfortunate occasions.
3. I duel for fun, not to prove that I\'m the most \"leet\".
4. The people who will agree to your ideas are most likely already abiding by them.
5. \"Good\" and \"lawful\" are not the same thing at all. You can be lawful evil or chaotic good.
6. There is no single other side to the debate, it isn\'t a black and white world.
-
I must thank you for being honest about why you were not on line.
Also i take your point on lawful and good , but only used them to represent good. :))
-
Originally posted by r.guppy
I must thank you for being honest about why you were not on line.
Honest? Why would I lie about it? lol
-
Quote:
Originally posted by r.guppy
I must thank you for being honest about why you were not on line.
Quote:
Honest? Why would I lie about it? lol
I was not implying you would, you did not have to say at all, so was being polite and complementing you on your honesty. :))
-
Originally posted by r.guppy
Quote:
Originally posted by r.guppy
I must thank you for being honest about why you were not on line.
Quote:
Honest? Why would I lie about it? lol
I was not implying you would, you did not have to say at all, so was being polite and complementing you on your honesty. :))
You still don\'t understand.... then again you don\'t know the circumstances of my banning, so I\'ll let it rest.
-
You look for what is not there in me i speak plane english, because i am english, so if leave it be you wont then so be it. :))
-
Originally posted by r.guppy
If there was not a problem then why is this even being talked about i remind you sir of one of your guild rules.
To be a Guild Knight is to help where help is needed, (to support good causes )and to bring even the lowliest farmhand into a person worthy to be King. To be a Guild Knight is to become a person who anyone can trust, anyone can talk to, anyone can look up to, anyone can join.
(That is our dream and goal, and may it be upheld.) :))
I am not sure what being a Guild Knight, or the goals of the Guild Knight, has to do with the first question in your post.
As far as the goals of the Guild Knights are concerned, I uphold them consistently. In addition to those goals, I have my own code that has been passed down in my family from generation to generation (IC) that I also uphold. So there is absolutely no reason for you to remind me of what my guild\'s goals are.
All I see out of this is the same nonsense: \'We can\'t RP it and it interferes with our normal RPing, so lets make rules so that we don\'t have to deal with it.\' Sangwa proposed an excellent idea, it was basically glossed over in favor of creating rules. No more discussion about it.
Right now, since this is all directed at guilds, the only people that will be affected by it are guild members. It is absolutely meaningless for anyone else. Create RP Laws and they affect everyone. The punishment for breaking RP Laws can be met out upon anyone -- guild member or not. The evil and chaotic guilds have something to rally against. The lawful and good guilds have something to support. The neutral guilds know where to keep balance. And it is all done in RP, which is the whole point of this game.
-
I quote from your guild rules again if i may, (to support good causes).
Or are you saying this is not for the good. I also say to you ask your guild leader his thoughts on this matter sir. may i ask do you obey your guild rules? This is not meant as a insult just wondering.
-
Originally posted by r.guppy
I quote from your guild rules again if i may, (to support good causes).
Or are you saying this is not for the good. I also say to you ask your guild leader his thoughts on this matter sir. may i ask do you obey your guild rules? This is not meant as a insult just wondering.
Janner for a while you were making sense. Now you are really starting to fail to do so.
As has been stated... wait... I shall quote for you exactly....
Originally posted by Bereror
But the rules here are not for RP -- they are for players (or actors) behind these guilds and characters.
This quote was a few posts up and the bold is mine obviously. It is a point that has been made consistently.
As these rules have absolutely no RP value whatsoever, your point is moot. IC my character would have no understanding of this debate. OOC my guild\'s alignment does not matter, therefore whether I think this is good or not is irrelevent. Make this about laws (as I have so many times suggested) and then we can discuss what my character would do.
As far as my guilds rules are concerned, perhaps you would like to find a concrete list of GK rules... I\'d be interested in seeing them ;).
As far as, my guild leader, well as you are quite aware ... and I am sure everyone else is ... Sirunie has not made an appearance on this thread.
Again, what any of this has to do with anything, Janner, I am entirely not certain.
-
Chat between Sirunie and me. Sun 09-Oct-2005 12:42:22 Janner
(13:45:11) Sirunie says: yeh :D
(13:45:31) Sirunie says: You are a good adversary Janner
(13:45:44) Janner says: try to be
(13:45:52) Sirunie says: You are
(13:46:34) Sirunie says: i have dueled to many times I have minus 1029 duel points now LOL
(13:46:46) Janner says: getting pip to do post about rules for DUILS IN GUILD SECTION SO WE ALL AGREE ON WHOT IS BEST
(13:47:06) Janner says: opps caps sorry
(13:47:21) Sirunie says: What is agreed upon I will abide by
(13:47:59) Janner says: the idea being it will help ease the tension on duels
(13:48:19) Sirunie says: sounds good Janner
So as you can see for yourself.
:))
-
Originally posted by r.guppy
Chat between Sirunie and me. Sun 09-Oct-2005 12:42:22 Janner
(13:45:11) Sirunie says: yeh :D
(13:45:31) Sirunie says: You are a good adversary Janner
(13:45:44) Janner says: try to be
(13:45:52) Sirunie says: You are
(13:46:34) Sirunie says: i have dueled to many times I have minus 1029 duel points now LOL
(13:46:46) Janner says: getting pip to do post about rules for DUILS IN GUILD SECTION SO WE ALL AGREE ON WHOT IS BEST
(13:47:06) Janner says: opps caps sorry
(13:47:21) Sirunie says: What is agreed upon I will abide by
(13:47:59) Janner says: the idea being it will help ease the tension on duels
(13:48:19) Sirunie says: sounds good Janner
So as you can see for yourself.
:))
You are joking right? Once again you have failed to clarify yourself. You have immediately brought IC into OOC and attempted to mix everything up. Now onto your most recent post:
Did Sirunie read the rules or was he just agreeing without any prior knowledge? Did you bother to make sure that he was aware of the entire discussion? Do you bother to ask whether he has had time to seriously contemplate such a decision or whether he brought the discussion up with his guild?
I know you desperately want this, Janner. It is blatantly obvous. But, just because you do, does not mean it is a good thing.
Since you are hung up about it. Here is my issue from an in-game POV:
\"I belong to a good guild, that is neither lawful nor chaotic. Therefore I do not see these (OOC) rules as being beneficial to the greater good (which is all that matters) because they are a way of limiting the power of good people to rightly defend themselves from the actions of the evil and destructive forces that plague our world and society.
\"We can in no way hinder the freedom of our good citizens in an attempt to rein in the evils of our wonderful community
\"These rules appear to me to be the corrupted attempt at control, by those who erroneously believe they are in some way at risk from the less orderly actions of others. It is also obvious that this was never a well thought out stance and as such will lead to the greater risk of overzealousnes and fanaticism.
\"I see these rules, whether or not they were originally felt to be good, as the doorway to a great evil in this world. Because of the attempt to force another under the yoke of the few, they are in no way for the greater good and therefore I must oppose such heinous actions.
\"To see so many good guilds succombing to the corruption of power has made me quite concerned with the path that our community is heading down. I can only hope that we are not thrust into the realm of tyranny and domination because of erroneous decisions hastily made.\"
Back to OOC: It is obvious that you have not thought about this enough, Janner. As can be easily demonstrated, regardless of whether or not you think it is for the greater good, other good aligned people can view it as a great evil. Getting a spur of the moment decision from a guild leader who has not been active in the discussion does not validate your stance. Although your fervor, does validate the above IC stance my character could take.
-
Sorry read rules before they are posted or even disused or even ink dry, desperately want this? were did that come from, there is a vote open to all, so every one gets to have there say, the log was to prove i had spoken to him and his words \"What is agreed upon I will abide by \"
Control? Why and how? I have a guild of individuals; if i was a control freak why not start there have a guild of mindless robots.
Well thought out? then why bother even asking anyone their thoughts just post my idea and ignore comments from others.
Deciding on rules for a duel evil ?.[\"I see these rules, whether or not they were originally felt to be good, as the doorway to a great evil in this world. Because of the attempt to force another under the yoke of the few, they are in no way for the greater good and therefore I must oppose such heinous actions.] You lost me.
20 Posts in this thread from me so think i have taken part.
-
Originally posted by r.guppy
Sorry read rules before they are posted or even disused or even ink dry, desperately want this? were did that come from, there is a vote open to all, so every one gets to have there say, the log was to prove i had spoken to him and his words \"What is agreed upon I will abide by \"
Control? Why and how? I have a guild of individuals; if i was a control freak why not start there have a guild of mindless robots.
Well thought out? then why bother even asking anyone their thoughts just post my idea and ignore comments from others.
Deciding on rules for a duel evil ?.[\"I see these rules, whether or not they were originally felt to be good, as the doorway to a great evil in this world. Because of the attempt to force another under the yoke of the few, they are in no way for the greater good and therefore I must oppose such heinous actions.] You lost me.
20 Posts in this thread from me so think i have taken part.
I lost you? lol
Okay, after having reread this several times I think I have deciphered your post. Of course I could be mistaken, it is rather difficult to tell.
Yes \'desperately want this\', you brought this same nonsense up as a response to me in another thread. You have brought it up again through Pip in this thread. Yes, desperately want this. There have been a great many posts that seriously doubt the functionality of these non-RP rules with just as many posts proposing better RP methods but instead of taking those points and running, you have consistently brought it back to these rules. If you didn\'t it wouldn\'t be an issue, it would be left alone and all would go on as it has been.
The vote came about after the thread, not before. If you had done it before there would have been a chance for people to decide whether or not rules would be beneficial and then and only then work together to decide upon those rules. Not the other way around. Likewise the poll had but two options, support of these rules or not support them. There was no option for OOC rules vs. IG rules, or anything else. In my view I have been forced to choose the lesser of two evils.
Control is easy enough. Rules are meant to control something. Prevention of chaos is controlling the tendency towards chaos. Preventing duelling in the plaza is controlling the manner in which duelling happens. Yes, control. The fact that you question this is a bit perplexing to me.
I\'m not quite sure how I lost you. I was farely to the point in my IC post. I can only assume that you chose not to read the entire message because you were in a rush to comment.
I am glad you had spoke to him, but that was not upon this forum. Sirunie has put no input into this thread, nor has he presented the information to his guild in any manner. I place little weight in the log, it means squat to me. Although you obviously place great credence in logs, since you so often offer them up for everyone\'s perusal.
The fact that you have 20 posts in this thread means about as much as the log you presented. How many of those posts were under 4 sentences?
-
The light goes on in my head, your beef is not with what i do i think but with me, as you brought it up the thread you talked about is what this is about.
I stand by what i said in that thread, and ask you did you ask them if it was true, because if such was said about me or a member of my guild i am shore I would have been asked.
And yes i am short in what i type as i fell no need to do a paragraph were a sentence will do.
Ask a GM if you are allowed to fight in the plaza, the answer is no, not my rule.
This debate on rules for guilds to follow is meant to clarify how a dual is conducted not stop them, as a knight you of all people should understand the need for a common agreement on how this is done.
-
Originally posted by r.guppy
The light goes on in my head, your beef is not with what i do i think but with me
That\'s weak. Also, it shows that you don\'t truly understand the criticisms people have of your idea.....
-
Originally posted by r.guppy
The light goes on in my head, your beef is not with what i do i think but with me, as you brought it up the thread you talked about is what this is about.
I stand by what i said in that thread, and ask you did you ask them if it was true, because if such was said about me or a member of my guild i am shore I would have been asked.
And yes i am short in what i type as i fell no need to do a paragraph were a sentence will do.
Ask a GM if you are allowed to fight in the plaza, the answer is no, not my rule.
This debate on rules for guilds to follow is meant to clarify how a dual is conducted not stop them, as a knight you of all people should understand the need for a common agreement on how this is done.
My beef isn\'t with you. The only beef I have is with all the non-RP elements that are thrust in everyone\'s face in this game -- by players and GMs alike. You don\'t have to like that, but the first thing I saw when I was looking into this game was how it was dedicated to role-playing. If you can\'t role-play something as simple as random duels or outbursts, then you are a rather poor role-player.
I know the other thread is what this is about. Which is my whole point you have asked Pip on your behalf to create an entire set of rules to validate a point you failed to make in another thread. That point was erroneously made before, and now is even more so. Not my problem, that was your choice to do. You were not in the right then, you are not now.. no matter how much support you get.
There is no need for a common agreement. No one needs to agree on anything in life. That is the luxury we have as humans. That is even more the point in a game as we are no longer limited by the basic constraints that as humans we are limited. Your choice to not accept this does not necessitate a rule to make the RP world conform to your ideals.
As far as your comment on asking a GM, you are grasping at straws. This is not about just the Plaza or anything else, your rules are about conduct. How you have to ask, what plans have to be made, who all has to be in agreement.
-
I enjoy dueling in the plaza,please dont take it away. ;(
-
Hello and welcome nice to hear from you at last, strait to point.
And the rest of it do you have something to say, I for one wont to no do you confirm this:
Quote:
Originally posted by r.guppy
Chat between Sirunie and me. Sun 09-Oct-2005 12:42:22 Janner
(13:45:11) Sirunie says: yeh
(13:45:31) Sirunie says: You are a good adversary Janner
(13:45:44) Janner says: try to be
(13:45:52) Sirunie says: You are
(13:46:34) Sirunie says: i have dueled to many times I have minus 1029 duel points now LOL
(13:46:46) Janner says: getting pip to do post about rules for DUILS IN GUILD SECTION SO WE ALL AGREE ON WHOT IS BEST
(13:47:06) Janner says: opps caps sorry
(13:47:21) Sirunie says: What is agreed upon I will abide by
(13:47:59) Janner says: the idea being it will help ease the tension on duels
(13:48:19) Sirunie says: sounds good Janner .
-
Originally posted by r.guppy
Hello and welcome nice to hear from you at last, strait to point.
And the rest of it do you have something to say, I for one wont to no do you confirm this:
Quote:
Originally posted by r.guppy
Chat between Sirunie and me. Sun 09-Oct-2005 12:42:22 Janner
(13:45:11) Sirunie says: yeh
(13:45:31) Sirunie says: You are a good adversary Janner
(13:45:44) Janner says: try to be
(13:45:52) Sirunie says: You are
(13:46:34) Sirunie says: i have dueled to many times I have minus 1029 duel points now LOL
(13:46:46) Janner says: getting pip to do post about rules for DUILS IN GUILD SECTION SO WE ALL AGREE ON WHOT IS BEST
(13:47:06) Janner says: opps caps sorry
(13:47:21) Sirunie says: What is agreed upon I will abide by
(13:47:59) Janner says: the idea being it will help ease the tension on duels
(13:48:19) Sirunie says: sounds good Janner .
Janner you miss the point. It doesn\'t matter if Sirunie confirms it or not. I don\'t doubt the validity of the log. What I am saying though, is that log (like all the ones you offer) mean nothing to me. Here are the reasons:
1. You asked Sirunie without ever making sure that he is aware of the rules.
2. You had no proof that he has even considered the rules himself.
3. Sirunie has made no effort to discuss these rules on this thread.
4. Sirunie has not brought these rules up for discussion to the guild. Remember I am a member, I know whether it has been discussed.
5. Regarldess of whether Sirunie has agreed with you on anything, there is no reason to believe that he has any interest whatsoever in the discussion at hand.
So, regardless of whether you get him to come to these message boards or not, Janner, the above log means nothing.
So basically, if you want to be taken seriously, you need to put forth the effort to make a serious defense of these rules. One line posts are not a serious defense. It is impossible to make a worthwhile defense of anything in less than 15 words. Quoting logs is not a worthwhile defense. A few inane rules that are not RP, made in less than a week is not a well thought out remedy to an in-game problem.
And then of course there is his one post on this thread:
Originally posted by sirunie
I enjoy dueling in the plaza,please dont take it away. ;(
This seems to me, he is not all that interested in supporting the rules you have proposed.
-
Well i agree on it in some points.. an Evil guild wouldn\'t abide by these rules depending on there purpose (eg. If there were to disturb all good order then they wouldn\'t abide by these rules) but some guilds who aren\'t fighting guilds like the CoV have a choice to abide by these rules or not, but good helping guilds like GK,Janner\'s Way and SoG and etc. should abide by a set of rules but they do not have to be \"No duelling in the plaza\" as some areas like the Temple are in the plaza and that is a good battleground and should be allowed not disallowed...
-
Out of friendship to Sirunie I have left that topic alone (the other thread)
I will now wait for his response, (to this topic) if one is not forthcoming then i will speak no more of it, as I respect his right to stay silent.
-
Originally posted by darkw00t
Well i agree on it in some points.. an Evil guild wouldn\'t abide by these rules depending on there purpose (eg. If there were to disturb all good order then they wouldn\'t abide by these rules) but some guilds who aren\'t fighting guilds like the CoV have a choice to abide by these rules or not, but good helping guilds like GK,Janner\'s Way and SoG and etc. should abide by a set of rules but they do not have to be \"No duelling in the plaza\" as some areas like the Temple are in the plaza and that is a good battleground and should be allowed not disallowed...
It is good to see someone else finally give some input. Why must good helping guilds follow these rules? That would be lawful guilds. Good guilds are dedicated to \'good\' not \'law\' and therefore rules. You are mistaking the two.
Also, how does having these rules fall under the confines of \"helping\". Specifically how do these rules fall under the confines of helping in respect to :
\"To be a Guild Knight is to help where help is needed, to support good causes and to bring even the lowliest farmhand into a person worthy to be King.\"
I don\'t see this falling under any of these prerequisites. These rules are not necessary. They are not a good cause. They will not bring the \'lowliest farmhand into a person worthy to be King.\'
-
Your very first post.
I have read the entire thread, and there are many valid points. I understand what is trying to be done here, and would agree that some sort of order should be established. That being said, I do believe this is entirely the wrong way to go about it. As such, I would like to give some reasoning for this and make a few suggestions.
1. There are a few guilds that are not going to follow the rules regardless of their alignment and/or personal views on the subject. The leaders and members are just not going to take that much interest in it in the long run. Once these guilds begin disrupting the attempted order, things are going to fall apart and everything will resort back to \'normal\'.
2. In an RP light, there is no reason for any guild to follow these guidelines except for lawful guilds. Even then, it will only be the point of lawful guilds that are dedicated to law and order that would follow such rules. Other lawful guilds that take a stance similar to \'tradition before laws of the land\' would not find it necessary to follow these rules if they do not mirror their tradition in an RP sense. Neutral guilds should have no stake in the matter as they would be more inclined to keeping balance between the law and the chaos.
3. Law and order can only be recognized and demonstrated as having meaning if people are either forced to obey (punishment) or have a deep seated reason to obey (tradition, manners of honor, allegiences, religion, etc) without punishment. At this time, little of either exists. I have seen many people duel in the Plaza and wars spill over into the Plaza. Even if guild leaders do get onto their members, it starts again the minute everyone relaxes. Likewise, there are those few RPers who attempt to explain the \'laws\' to the duellers, but for the most part they are ignored. There exists no power (regardless of who possesses it) that makes obeying the laws/rules desirous.
If you truly want all guilds involved and want the possibility of the rules/laws serving a purpose other than fuel for complaints, I would suggest getting all guilds and as many non-guild members involved as possible. What you need first are laws... all towns, countries, and communities have laws. In light of this, not all towns, countries, and communities have policing forces or judicial bodies or even centralized governments. But they all do have laws and defined punishment for breaking those laws. These need to be realistic laws, not just focused on duelling and guild wars. As an example, make the carrying of weapons inside of the Hydlaa walls illegal. Therefore duelling inside Hydlaa walls would be illegal as well as murder and so on. Don\'t just focus on one minor detail, but upon the whole world available for RP. By doing so, you give more credence to the alignments, more justification to the guilds in performing their goals, etc.
As far as policing forces are concerned there are many options. But, again, I would say make sure that everyone* is involved. Have a member or a couple of members from each guild serve as part of some policing unit. Equal representation will help keep balance. Also, insure they have some sort of authority, both within their guild and outside in the matters of upholding the laws. If needs be, create a council -- again of members of each guild -- that are responsible within the respective guilds for assisting the \'police\' and ensuring that the police are not abusing their powers. It would also be wise to have these laws available (in the library?). With most newbies they are completely unaware of the unwritten rules much less any actually agreed upon rules. Have a role created in which there are certain people who recite the laws... in the Plaza, in the case of laws being broken, etc.
To make the punishments a bit more realistic, have the police force the only group allowed to use weapons in town. Therefore any law-breakers must fear capture and/or punishment, which may be as simple as sending them to the DR. They will eventually get tired of getting sent there. If a specific guild member causes too much havoc, have them removed.
note: A bit of common sense should be used here in considering who \'everyone\' should be. Obviously not every newbie that walks into Hydlaa need be considered. But there are many non-affiliated members that are serious and should be taken into consideration, not just guild leaders.
__________________
Askr Folkwarder
Crystal Knight of the Guild Knights
very well thought out and presented so why in your last few posts the complete opposite stance is now adopted; I must admit it is as if you are now not the same person?.
-
Originally posted by r.guppy
very well thought out and presented so why in your last few posts the complete opposite stance is now adopted; I must admit it is as if you are now not the same person?.
Why did you quote my entire post?
I have been thinking the same thing about you Janner...lol. Not only has your spelling improved on a few recent posts, but you have begun to make much more sense. Your grammar has improved as well, though your capitalization leaves a bit to be desired.
What specifically demonstrates a change in stance on my part? My stance hasn\'t changed any, I have simply addressed various different issues that keep getting brought up. Such as \'lawful vs. good\' which was point 2 I believe. Then of course there is my commentary to the pointless log you posted, which I believe speaks for itself.
Of course 8, and again 11, posts up is my discussion of the lack of RP in an RP-centered game. I do believe that would be relevant in the entire RP-centric nature of that post.
13 posts up was an IC and OOC defense of my stance and falls perfectly within point 2 again.
Care to try that little bit of nonsense again? Shall I quote posts of other players that are supported by my original post?
You are getting a bit away from the point of this thread in an attempt to prove a point that you cannot make. It is impossible to validate this in any real sense, Janner, because of the nature of what it is and because of the nature of alignments.
-
Time to bring some logic back into this discussion.
To begin with I used the term duelling as this is how PvP challenges are expressed in game. They could as easily be called \"rules of engagement\".
1. Duelling has been banned from the plaza (ie from the steps into the middle and in front of Harnquist\'s shop) by the GMs (as I understand, but waiting for confirmation) and therefore must be included in any rules. There are open and unpopulated areas just off the plaza where duelling has not been banned and are therefore not disallowed under these rules.
2. By asking guild leaders to discuss and agree a set of rules, it was my intention to reach as many players as possible. Guild leaders are in a position to put the rules before their members and discuss among themselves, and then bring a consensus to the main discussion. That\'s how politics works. If a guild has too widely conflicting views among it\'s ranks then some members need to reconsider which guild they belong to. Guild leaders are in a position to enforce their members to follow the rules or face ejection. The alignment of the guild is immaterial as the rules are intended to assist roleplay not be a replacement for in-game laws. If a guild leader fails to bring it up for discussion in the guild then members can do so and ask their leader to present their views to the forum.
3. The rules are intended to be an OOC guide, to cut down on OOC spam challenging, of all and sundry, by certain players who hang around the plaza waiting for unsuspecting newbies to come along, and to make players think about the act of fighting someone in a roleplaying way.
4. Without open PvP, it is necessary to arrange (at least in principle) a role play act of assassination or murder etc. in OOC mode before it can take place. Rules can be adapted to the situation whether it be for a formal honourable duel between gentlemen or a brawl between evil entities.
5. Rule 5 can include the death realm if desired, (IMO) as long as fighting is not centred on the bridge.
6. The discussion is about working around the gameplay functions currently in place; suggestions for new game functions for pvp should be addressed to the wish list.
7. The issue of law keepers is another matter, I would personally welcome the introduction of laws, law enforcement, and a judicial system, but that is a separate issue, and much greater than this small contribution. It would be great to see another thread started on this but fear it is a matter for the government of Yliakum (another item for the wish list, I think). In the absence of an in-game set of laws, we can only go by RL to decide what is lawful and what is not.
8. Detailed codes of conduct such as \"Code Duello\" presented by Sensotaka, are a matter of law, and as such are a separate issue.
9. The vote currently taking place is open to everyone, and if the vote ends in favour I will ask for the rules to be stickied so that everyone, not just guild members, can be guided by them.
10. Neither I nor anyone else expects matters to improve overnight, but small hope is no reason not to try.
-
4. Without open PvP, it is necessary to arrange (at least in principle) a role play act of assassination or murder etc. in OOC mode before it can take place. Rules can be adapted to the situation whether it be for a formal honourable duel between gentlemen or a brawl between evil entities.
Rules rules rules.... there are many advantages to letting things procede naturally or organically based on the set mechanics of the game. Assassins and murders and muggings are not volountary. Ok, the rules posted are \"nice\". They\'re good for duel between lawful characters. Dragon Council and Dark Empire members would abide to them surely, but they would do so organically and naturally based on role-playing. In essense, this thread serves no purpose.
-
Originally posted by Pip
Time to bring some logic back into this discussion.
To begin with I used the term duelling as this is how PvP challenges are expressed in game. They could as easily be called \"rules of engagement\".
Which as anyone who has ever been in military service can tell you, there exist no rules that all must follow when it comes to conflict. Therefore you have just negated the effectiveness of your second point.
1. Duelling has been banned from the plaza (ie from the steps into the middle and in front of Harnquist\'s shop) by the GMs (as I understand, but waiting for confirmation) and therefore must be included in any rules. There are open and unpopulated areas just off the plaza where duelling has not been banned and are therefore not disallowed under these rules.
I think most people are well aware of this, except for newcomers. In which case it is easier to inform them of the matter than it is to create a set of \'rules of engagement\' which don\'t apply to the situation.
2. By asking guild leaders to discuss and agree a set of rules, it was my intention to reach as many players as possible. Guild leaders are in a position to put the rules before their members and discuss among themselves, and then bring a consensus to the main discussion. That\'s how politics works. If a guild has too widely conflicting views among it\'s ranks then some members need to reconsider which guild they belong to. Guild leaders are in a position to enforce their members to follow the rules or face ejection. The alignment of the guild is immaterial as the rules are intended to assist roleplay not be a replacement for in-game laws. If a guild leader fails to bring it up for discussion in the guild then members can do so and ask their leader to present their views to the forum.
Does anyone know the percentage of guild members to non-guild members? The alignment of the guild is role-play, OOC rules are not roleplay. So yes the alignment is a key factor in the viability of these rules in regards to roleplay. You can\'t get much more backwards than your comment.
3. The rules are intended to be an OOC guide, to cut down on OOC spam challenging, of all and sundry, by certain players who hang around the plaza waiting for unsuspecting newbies to come along, and to make players think about the act of fighting someone in a roleplaying way.
There is far more OOC spamming from conversation and idling than there is from duelling. You have discussed little as far as roleplaying a fight. The following rules do not demonstrate actual role-play, but instead demonstrate the desire to have everything scripted, pre-approved and without any spontaneity whatsoever.
Originally posted by Pip
Rules For Duelling
1. No duelling in the plaza or tavern at all, or anywhere that is well populated. (Unless by a prearranged audience)
2. A verbal challenge is made giving a) reason for challenge b) weapons preferred (including fists) c) whether magic/potions should/shouldn\'t be used d) place and time e) whether to have seconds
3.The challengee may countermand b), c), d) and/or e) above. The challenge is then verbally accepted/declined.
4. When the conditions discussed in 2. and 3. have been met, the duel should begin - both the Challenger and the Challengee should place themselves at a convenient length facing each other.
5. For training purposes go to an empty room in the arena or away from areas which are busy, where parties can challenge each other as much as they wish. (This may suit those who like to fight each other for fun)
6. In the case of a guild war terms should be drawn up and agreed between the leaders of the warring guilds. Bearing in mind that rule 1. should always apply.
As can be seen the only rule not listed is the one concerning shortcuts -- which I would agree with having no RP value whatsoever.
4. Without open PvP, it is necessary to arrange (at least in principle) a role play act of assassination or murder etc. in OOC mode before it can take place. Rules can be adapted to the situation whether it be for a formal honourable duel between gentlemen or a brawl between evil entities.
It is neither necessary nor desired. Fights do not break out in prearranged manners. People do not respond in this way, why would your characters?
5. Rule 5 can include the death realm if desired, (IMO) as long as fighting is not centred on the bridge.
This I might agree with, but frankly it doesn\'t really matter. Duelling on the bridge has never kept me from crossing it.
6. The discussion is about working around the gameplay functions currently in place; suggestions for new game functions for pvp should be addressed to the wish list.
I am not discussing PVP functions, because frankly I could care less. The current PVP functions suffice for a game that is supposed to be RP-centric. They could be improved upon but that is neither here nor there.
7. The issue of law keepers is another matter, I would personally welcome the introduction of laws, law enforcement, and a judicial system, but that is a separate issue, and much greater than this small contribution. It would be great to see another thread started on this but fear it is a matter for the government of Yliakum (another item for the wish list, I think). In the absence of an in-game set of laws, we can only go by RL to decide what is lawful and what is not.
Then why isn\'t that being discussed, instead of wasting everyone\'s time with this? That would have been far more relevant to an RP-centric game.
8. Detailed codes of conduct such as \"Code Duello\" presented by Sensotaka, are a matter of law, and as such are a separate issue.
This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Code Duello and what you have created are just a matter of degrees. They are still rules and as are not a separate issue. You are attempting to make rules for duelling. Code Duello is a set of rules for duelling. No difference except in degree.
9. The vote currently taking place is open to everyone, and if the vote ends in favour I will ask for the rules to be stickied so that everyone, not just guild members, can be guided by them.
Yes I am aware of the 19 people who have voted. The GK has over 100 members. 19 people is not an accurate reflection of a proper PS opinion.
10. Neither I nor anyone else expects matters to improve overnight, but small hope is no reason not to try.
I would like to understand why you thought these rules would improve matters at all, but I cannot. Newbies will still act like newbies. Your rules will not change that. People who are actually interested in RP will have no use for your rules, because very few will find that they apply to their characters. Who does that leave?
-
Originally posted by zanzibar
4. Without open PvP, it is necessary to arrange (at least in principle) a role play act of assassination or murder etc. in OOC mode before it can take place. Rules can be adapted to the situation whether it be for a formal honourable duel between gentlemen or a brawl between evil entities.
Rules rules rules.... there are many advantages to letting things procede naturally or organically based on the set mechanics of the game. Assassins and murders and muggings are not volountary. Ok, the rules posted are \"nice\". They\'re good for duel between lawful characters. Dragon Council and Dark Empire members would abide to them surely, but they would do so organically and naturally based on role-playing. In essense, this thread serves no purpose.
Thank you Zanzibar, nice to see someone state the obvious.
-
Originally posted by Askr
Which as anyone who has ever been in military service can tell you, there exist no rules that all must follow when it comes to conflict. Therefore you have just negated the effectiveness of your second point.
If you think that then you don\'t pay much attention to the news or politics; I do know someone who was in military service (11 years), it seems you don\'t.
Originally posted by Askr
I think most people are well aware of this, except for newcomers. In which case it is easier to inform them of the matter than it is to create a set of \'rules of engagement\' which don\'t apply to the situation.
While compiling rules, under consultation, the rule that most people are well aware of, though some ignore anyway, could not be left out.
Does anyone know the percentage of guild members to non-guild members? The alignment of the guild is role-play, OOC rules are not roleplay. So yes the alignment is a key factor in the viability of these rules in regards to roleplay. You can\'t get much more backwards than your comment.
I take your point that the object of a guild is roleplay, but guilds have forums for OOC discussions so I stand by my statements.
There is far more OOC spamming from conversation and idling than there is from duelling.
Yes, but that problem is not being addressed here.
You have discussed little as far as roleplaying a fight. The following rules do not demonstrate actual role-play, but instead demonstrate the desire to have everything scripted, pre-approved and without any spontaneity whatsoever.
Not at all, the rules are intended to make players stop and think before just challenging an opponent out of the blue. It just takes a little imagination to roleplay the build up to a fight. The pre-approval is only necessary when someone wants to roleplay an assassination or murder; without the cooperation of the victim I don\'t see how that is possible. One doesn\'t have to stick to every detail outlined, just pick the points relevant to your own situation.
As can be seen the only rule not listed is the one concerning shortcuts -- which I would agree with having no RP value whatsoever.
Your point being....................?
It is neither necessary nor desired. Fights do not break out in prearranged manners. People do not respond in this way, why would your characters?
I disagree; louts go out on a Saturday night with the intention of getting drunk and getting into a fight; boxing matches, wrestling matches, even street fights are pre-arranged. It only takes a bit of imaginative roleplay to adapt the rules to your own situation. As I have already said, without open pvp, I don\'t see how it is possible to murder or assassinate without the cooperation of the victim.
I am not discussing PVP functions, because frankly I could care less. The current PVP functions suffice for a game that is supposed to be RP-centric. They could be improved upon but that is neither here nor there.
The comments I made were not directed at anyone in particular, I was merely trying to clarify the point of the discussion as some people seemed not to have grasped it. There were some suggestions earlier in the thread about pvp functions. Why would you think I was talking to you?
..........I would personally welcome the introduction of laws, law enforcement, and a judicial system, .....................
Then why isn\'t that being discussed, instead of wasting everyone\'s time with this? That would have been far more relevant to an RP-centric game.
Because the matter of law enforcement was raised as a result of this discussion, it is a separate issue. Since you are so keen, why don\'t you start a discussion thread yourself? I was concentrating on just one small issue not trying to fix the game.
This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Code Duello and what you have created are just a matter of degrees. They are still rules and as are not a separate issue. You are attempting to make rules for duelling. Code Duello is a set of rules for duelling. No difference except in degree.
OK, so \"Rules for Duelling\" was a bad title. Personally I think they are a little over-detailed, but they are what has arisen from the discussion. Code Duello is something that some people might want for the purpose of role-playing proper duels but my \"rules\" are a guide for players who wish to engage in pvp challenging. That is the difference.
Yes I am aware of the 19 people who have voted. The GK has over 100 members. 19 people is not an accurate reflection of a proper PS opinion.
Yes, the vote is very disappointing so far, but at least I am attempting to make a difference not being obstructive or destructive just for the sake of it. You are the one wasting your time in this thread you have made no suggestions for changing or adding to any of the rules. You don\'t have to agree just vote nay.
I would like to understand why you thought these rules would improve matters at all, but I cannot. Newbies will still act like newbies. Your rules will not change that. People who are actually interested in RP will have no use for your rules, because very few will find that they apply to their characters. Who does that leave?
That leaves the average player in planeshift, the one who has been in game for a while and still doesn\'t understand what it is all about because all around him, he sees players fighting each other with no explanation, people talking in OOC manner, and not being told off either because there is no GM or the GM doesn\'t care.
Wouldn\'t you agree that if the rules were stickied where newbies would see them (maybe), then they might at least do some good??
-
In the interest of a fair debate i must post this reply from a GM.
Funny you should mention this. It was one of the topics in the Sunday GM meeting. NO, there is no official rule banning duels in the plaza, but the GM\'s are still trying to get such a ban approved.
-
Originally posted by Pip
If you think that then you don\'t pay much attention to the news or politics; I do know someone who was in military service (11 years), it seems you don\'t.
That is rather inane. When people are in conflict they never warn the opposing force prior to attack, particularly in the case of preemptive attacks. I do know many people in the military, I also know many people who have made it a point to study strategy.
Speaking of the news, just how often does one country (in the news or not) warn another country of an impending attack?
Originally posted by Askr
I think most people are well aware of this, except for newcomers. In which case it is easier to inform them of the matter than it is to create a set of \'rules of engagement\' which don\'t apply to the situation.
Originally posted by Pip
While compiling rules, under consultation, the rule that most people are well aware of, though some ignore anyway, could not be left out.
And this refutes my statement in what manner?
Originally posted by Pip
I take your point that the object of a guild is roleplay, but guilds have forums for OOC discussions so I stand by my statements.
I wouldn\'t expect you to not stand by it, incorrect as you may be. The point of PS is RP, not just guilds. OOC forums are for OOC discussions and in no way validate OOC anything taking place or affecting in-game IC role-play. So regardless of whether you stand by your statements or not, they have no valid place in RP.
Originally posted by Pip
There is far more OOC spamming from conversation and idling than there is from duelling.
Yes, but that problem is not being addressed here.
So you agree? Then why aren\'t you at issue with the more destructive and disruptive influences? It would seem to me to be more important to solve the major problems that disrupt RP then it would be to deal with th minor problems that can be RPed through rather easily.
Originally posted by Pip
Not at all, the rules are intended to make players stop and think before just challenging an opponent out of the blue. It just takes a little imagination to roleplay the build up to a fight. The pre-approval is only necessary when someone wants to roleplay an assassination or murder; without the cooperation of the victim I don\'t see how that is possible. One doesn\'t have to stick to every detail outlined, just pick the points relevant to your own situation.
Again it is not necessary to think before challenging someone -- that goes against the very definition of spontaneity. There is not necessarily any build up to a fight. I can walk up to anyone I wish and throw a punch. No build up required, no prior thought. Crimes of passion are an example. Not all murders or crimes are premeditated.
How is it possible? You walk up to them and attempt to kill them. If you want to duel it, then duel it. If you win call it murder, call it whatever you want. If you have issue with the inability to murder without premeditation don\'t change the rules for duelling attempt to change the manner of PK. You are doing this all backwards.
As can be seen the only rule not listed is the one concerning shortcuts -- which I would agree with having no RP value whatsoever.
Originally posted by Pip
Your point being....................?
You stated:
Originally posted by Pip
3. The rules are intended to be an OOC guide, to cut down on OOC spam challenging, of all and sundry, by certain players who hang around the plaza waiting for unsuspecting newbies to come along, and to make players think about the act of fighting someone in a roleplaying way.
To which I replied with:
Originally posted by Askr
There is far more OOC spamming from conversation and idling than there is from duelling. You have discussed little as far as roleplaying a fight. The following rules do not demonstrate actual role-play, but instead demonstrate the desire to have everything scripted, pre-approved and without any spontaneity whatsoever.
Followed by all but one rule and the above quote to which you have responded. Was I unclear in any way? Your rules, even though you falsely state they are, are not about RP at all but about OOC. This you have admitted many times. By limiting the variety of RP encounters and acctions, OOC rules will not improve the quality of RP.
My point is clearly made.
Originally posted by Pip
I disagree; louts go out on a Saturday night with the intention of getting drunk and getting into a fight; boxing matches, wrestling matches, even street fights are pre-arranged. It only takes a bit of imaginative roleplay to adapt the rules to your own situation. As I have already said, without open pvp, I don\'t see how it is possible to murder or assassinate without the cooperation of the victim.
I am glad you disagree. I am beginning to wonder whether you actually have spent any time in public. Between comments like these and your above comment on pre-agreed military conflicts I am becoming more and more convinced you see the world from the confines of rose colored glasses.
You are not just talking about murder or assassination in your rules. They were never limited to solely murder and assassination. Duels and Guild Wars are actually the predominant focus. This point is therefore moot.
Originally posted by Pip
The comments I made were not directed at anyone in particular, I was merely trying to clarify the point of the discussion as some people seemed not to have grasped it. There were some suggestions earlier in the thread about pvp functions. Why would you think I was talking to you?
Because it was in a reply to my post, after quoting my comments. I don\'t know...hmm...because you never changed who you were directing your statements towards, therefore logically they would be directed at me as a continuation of current conversation.
Originally posted by Pip
Because the matter of law enforcement was raised as a result of this discussion, it is a separate issue. Since you are so keen, why don\'t you start a discussion thread yourself? I was concentrating on just one small issue not trying to fix the game.
Why wasn\'t the matter brought up before this discussion? That was my first thought on solving the problem, after all this is an RP world not a first person shooter.....
Creating RP laws will not be a fix to the game. Although, I find it amusing that you have made that connection.
Lack of Rules = Broken Game that needs fixing.
I don\'t need to start another discussion. The mention of laws, law enforcement and so on has been mentioned multiple times on this thread. As such, this thread will suffice. It is all within the confines of this thread since the title is simply \"An Invitation to all Guild Leaders\" and not specifically with a rules on duelling. If the decision had been made earlier to forego the original failing attempt at creating rules for something that you agree is better (see your above quote) then why did you not focus on that?
Originally posted by Pip
OK, so \"Rules for Duelling\" was a bad title. Personally I think they are a little over-detailed, but they are what has arisen from the discussion. Code Duello is something that some people might want for the purpose of role-playing proper duels but my \"rules\" are a guide for players who wish to engage in pvp challenging. That is the difference.
Proper duels? LOL.
The only requirement for duelling in Old Iceland was that it be performed on an island. There were no other predefined rules. Anything could be made up spontaneously, but the opponents never had to agree with them or even listen to them. Once they set foot on the island, entered the square, everything was fair.
One gentlemen was even forced to bite his opponents throat out to win. :o)
Proper duels are a matter of opinion, culture, and predefined agreements by the opponents. Its all circumstance.
Which I stated before to Janner. Which is why he felt the need to have you create this thread.
Originally posted by Pip
Yes, the vote is very disappointing so far, but at least I am attempting to make a difference not being obstructive or destructive just for the sake of it. You are the one wasting your time in this thread you have made no suggestions for changing or adding to any of the rules. You don\'t have to agree just vote nay.
I haven\'t made any suggestions? You are not one of these people who comments without actually reading the thread are you? My first post contained suggestions. I will make no suggestions concerning the Duelling Rules, because I don\'t support them. Likewise, I don\'t see the value of them therefore my only suggestion would be to scrap them.
Originally posted by Pip
That leaves the average player in planeshift, the one who has been in game for a while and still doesn\'t understand what it is all about because all around him, he sees players fighting each other with no explanation, people talking in OOC manner, and not being told off either because there is no GM or the GM doesn\'t care.
So then your issue is with the GMs and the veterans who don\'t RP and don\'t assist the newbies? Its not at all with duellers. How very odd.
Originally posted by Pip
Wouldn\'t you agree that if the rules were stickied where newbies would see them (maybe), then they might at least do some good??
Nope. The fact is very simple the newbies don\'t bother reading the Players Guide, much less the stickied threads on the forums. You don\'t realize why most disruptive newbies join the game, I guess. Because it is another MMORPG that they can play for free. They don\'t come here to RP, they come here to play a game. They don\'t want to live in the world and make alliances and create a history and so on and so forth. And the few that do, well they won\'t be trouble anyway. That is assuming they stay long enough to play and aren\'t chased off by the GMs talking OOC or the veterans standing on the steps of the Plaza idling.
I would suggest getting the rules in game. Put them in the library, create a role as law-reciter, and so on. That way the newbies, troublesome players and veterans who aren\'t helping, can\'t avoid them.
Don\'t get me wrong, I am glad you are trying to do something. I just think you are going about it all wrong.
-
1: Daunt no about your Country but mine adders to Geneva convention were it stats you must declare war first. (ie we are going to attack you)
2: Me 11 years (British Infantry) rigid rules for fighting i assure you.
3: I wont go on as the rest will be deleted service to say i have had enough please drop it.
-
Originally posted by r.guppy
In the interest of a fair debate i must post this reply from a GM.
Funny you should mention this. It was one of the topics in the Sunday GM meeting. NO, there is no official rule banning duels in the plaza, but the GM\'s are still trying to get such a ban approved.
Interesting. However, even though there is no rule banning fighting in the plaza, there is a rule which bans players from interfereing in the RP of other players.
-
Originally posted by r.guppy
1: Daunt no about your Country but mine adders to Geneva convention were it stats you must declare war first. (ie we are going to attack you)
2: Me 11 years (British Infantry) rigid rules for fighting i assure you.
3: I wont go on as the rest will be deleted service to say i have had enough please drop it.
In the history of mankind the Geneva Convention is a rather recent bit. And also I\'m afrain you are confusing the Geneva Convention with the Charter of the United Nations. Likewise, preemptive strikes are perfectly \'legal\' and happen before an actual declaration of war.
To clarify what you have in your 11 years of military service failed to learn. The Geneva Convention governs the protection of the soldiers in the conflict. It is actualy stated in the convention that the Geneva Convention does not support or legitimize conflicts. On the other hand, the Chart of the United Nations concerns itself with defining the concepts of war and what is expected in such situations.
Rigid rules? Such as:
1. informing your adversary that you are going to attempt to kill him before you do?
2. notifying your adversary of what weapons you use and when you plan to use them?
Perhaps you were well known for giving out strategic information to your adversaries, but that is not the normal operating procedures for soldiers at war.
Perhaps you were not so well informed. So please do not ask me to drop it. Throwing your misinformed information out there does not validate anything you have said up to this point. Next time you are going to use your military history, make sure you are correct in what you are saying first. This is twice now you\'ve used it without merit.
-
Askr:
Why do you see the PlaneShift world as a battlefield?
Better play CounterStrike if you prefer that.
-
Originally posted by LigH
Askr:
Why do you see the PlaneShift world as a battlefield?
Better play CounterStrike if you prefer that.
He\'s not saying that PlaneShift is a battlefield.
He\'s saying that the rules proposed are unrealistic if they become part of the mechanics of the game.
-
Originally posted by LigH
Askr:
Why do you see the PlaneShift world as a battlefield?
Better play CounterStrike if you prefer that.
Why do you assume I see the PS world as a battlefield? Out of all my posts that is all you could come up with?
Hmm..all my complaints about lack of RP managed to be turned into seeing the PS world as a battlefield.
My suggestions about a better way to accomplish what is being attempted centered around, not RP mind you, but turning PS into a battlefield.
How very odd of you.
-
Originally posted by zanzibar
Originally posted by LigH
Askr:
Why do you see the PlaneShift world as a battlefield?
Better play CounterStrike if you prefer that.
He\'s not saying that PlaneShift is a battlefield.
He\'s saying that the rules proposed are unrealistic if they become part of the mechanics of the game.
Thank you again, Zanzibar, it is nice to see that my words are not completely lost on the masses.
-
Originally posted by Askr
Thank you again, Zanzibar, it is nice to see that my words are not completely lost on the masses.
I\'m hardly the masses.... btw, guppy sent me a PM accusing me of being you. I ~really~ think this thread is pointless, and probably won\'t post in it again unless there\'s a really good reason to.
-
Duelling is it realy that simple ?
This is only my opinion.
1: If you are challenged and you accept thats your problem if your killed. Dont accept otherwise.
2 : If the duel spamming in the plaza is annoying you turn off the appropriate filters.
3 : Its a duel all tactics are fair from potioning up to distance killing to what ever is going to save your life.
Learn the counter attack or ask some one for help to learn how , but stop having an excuse for loosing , stand up and say i lost it wont happen again ill learn and win the next time.
This is only an outline of my views any other suggestions or input is very welcome.
I think Janner was trying to bring some sort of order to the realm of PS because it can be a bit chaotic at times. Unfortunately the fun is in the chaos . perhaps a guild of rangers as like Rangers of yliakum could RP peace keepers but there would always be chaos at one time or another .. Makes for good `in game RP.
Oh well i have had a say just hope i didnt step on any toes.
-
This thread has strayed of topic. First Warning.
-
@ zanzibar: A PM is \"private\". Telling its content in public violates the \"Netiquette\". If it is offending, tell it a moderator - but not the public.
This answer was based on my experience as Super Moderator of another board.
__
@ Askr:
Thank you for clarifying - and please excuse my provoking style to ask.
My point of view is based on the assumption that duelling was made to be rather unimportant by the developers, that they don\'t want to urge the players to duel each other, by telling us: \"Duel Points are rather useless, you can only brag with them\".
Your point of view seems to be based on the assumption that duels and wars are a usual part of roleplaying.
Still, I am often unsure, if the moderators and game masters have to support the wishes of the developers, or the wishes of the majority of players. They tend to differ from time to time...
-
Originally posted by sirunie
I enjoy dueling in the plaza,please dont take it away. ;(
I quite understand that you enjoy it, but there are a few of us that suffer from combat lag, (ie. whenever there is a combat event nearby our graphical clients freeze even though I can see the combat in my terminal window).
I already have to avoid the arena and Ojaveda warehouse (the sheer number of combat events mean that i can only move two or three steps at a time) and even get frozen in the deathrealm at times.
So I personally and some of my friends would like people to respect the no duelling in the plaza rule even if it is unofficial :)
-
Originally posted by LigH
Thank you for clarifying - and please excuse my provoking style to ask.
My point of view is based on the assumption that duelling was made to be rather unimportant by the developers, that they don\'t want to urge the players to duel each other, by telling us: \"Duel Points are rather useless, you can only brag with them\".
Your point of view seems to be based on the assumption that duels and wars are a usual part of roleplaying.
Still, I am often unsure, if the moderators and game masters have to support the wishes of the developers, or the wishes of the majority of players. They tend to differ from time to time...
The devs also intended PS to be an RP world, but even their GMs fail to enforce this. Point being, regardless of whether it was intended to be the main point of PS or not, duelling has taken on a significant role within the game for many players and characters. If the devs didn\'t want it to take place, they would not have made duelling available in game.
My point has never been about whether duels and wars are the usual part of RP. Again, I am not sure how you minimalized my posts into such a stance.
This thread has never been about how best to solve the issues between duellists and non-duellists, RPers and Non-RPers (or limited RPers, rather), and so on. It has always been about turning duelling into a \'gentleman\'s sport\', which is nonsense. Janner has even admitted to that. With that in mind, I find this discussion to be useless, because as is obvious any worthwhile suggestions that would benefit the game will be ignored in favor of the previously desired outcome. In other words, there were never any intentions of getting input from anyone if it didn\'t match the criteria of forcing duelling into a \"gentleman\'s sport\" and therefore validating Janner\'s stance on the subject.
I pointed that out before, and I will do so again. It has been mentioned several times, by several people that laws and law enforcement of some type would be the best method to solving these issues.
-
I think this discussion is more or less in vain.
As stated before me, everyone has the option to autodecline/manually decline/ignore..
Of course it enervates others when the ALL-tab is spammed by fighting or when the fight is even right in front of someone maybe even _through_ (the body) someone. So the only thing which has to be clearified imho are the locations where (ooc-) fights shouldnt take place. And I join the ones who say that this kind of fight should not take place on the plaza or in the tavern.. or in any other location where RP is taking place at the moment.
But this only is valid for the implemented fighting system _atm_ as long as they havent implemented a better solution (and there are many suggestions about this in other threads) yet. Imho those rules are not valid for rp-fights at all. Simple reason: If a fight is really rped and there are other people (for example in the tavern) who dont want the fight to take place there, the combatants can more or less easily be thrown out... of course with the means in RP and not with the help of GMs (who usually are ooc, if not stated otherwise.. but then there has to be a _good_ reason why a semi-god should appear to only kick somebody out of the tavern to not disturb others... a semi-god isnt a bouncer, imho).
-> Me and my guild votes for yay so far. But only as temporary solution and not valid for RP fights.
-
Go to options / chat filters. You\'ll see that it\'s possible to eliminate all fighting from the chat window.
-
I say yes online few hours 10+ challenges for no reason found off button.
-
Originally posted by semper
I say yes online few hours 10+ challenges for no reason found off button.
Uh, where were you when you were challenged? If you were in the arena, then duelling is why people go there.
-
in middle bit by shop, when shopping / selling
-
Someone asked me why this thread was off topic. Simple. So far all I see is two sides fighting over something which has nothing to do with guilds. If you want to debate something fine. When you want to debate something for 7 pages not fine.
Now, this is the second warning. Next I will close the thread.
-
Originally posted by AendarCallenlasse
Someone asked me why this thread was off topic. Simple. So far all I see is two sides fighting over something which has nothing to do with guilds. If you want to debate something fine. When you want to debate something for 7 pages not fine.
Now, this is the second warning. Next I will close the thread.
I agree that it isn\'t about guilds anymore. Just move it to General Discussion. Problem solved.
-
Me say before me new but took long time to read and try to under stand.
Me think from your last post you now stat your true felling, you no wonted this to happen and have all along set out to destroy it.
i will say that the resin for this post was a attempt to bring order to mayhem, and think the idea of rules for duels be a good idea, and a start no matter how small can in time make a big difference.
Me think back stab, murder is a different issue all together, as i am understanding is not yet implemented, so to do this you have to talk, ie RP.
And war witch has all ready been stated is up to guilds, as i see it thats the only type of war in game anyway, and i further point out that there is no option in creation place, for a soldier, only option for a archer, (not in game yet) so this says to me makers of game do not wont wars or not needed yet.
Added this as me forget.
Me also would say we have a police force in game, called GM`s and as i understand it they were once and are still players, so fell this is best left to them as they no problems and should no best how to handle them.
-
me thinks you are hard to understand
-
Me try much harder to talk better if you tell me whot was hard to understand please
-
Originally posted by semper
Me say before me new but took long time to read and try to under stand.
Me think from your last post you now stat your true felling, you no wonted this to happen and have all along set out to destroy it.
i will say that the resin for this post was a attempt to bring order to mayhem, and think the idea of rules for duels be a good idea, and a start no matter how small can in time make a big difference.
Me think back stab, murder is a different issue all together, as i am understanding is not yet implemented, so to do this you have to talk, ie RP.
And war witch has all ready been stated is up to guilds, as i see it thats the only type of war in game anyway, and i further point out that there is no option in creation place, for a soldier, only option for a archer, (not in game yet) so this says to me makers of game do not wont wars or not needed yet.
Added this as me forget.
Me also would say we have a police force in game, called GM`s and as i understand it they were once and are still players, so fell this is best left to them as they no problems and should no best how to handle them.
*sigh* No. We aren\'t against it \"just because\". There are real, well thought out, valid reasons to not like those rules. Also, GMs are not players. They are not a police force. They\'re moderators, and they prevent cheating and harrassment and violations of Planeshift rules and mechanics.
This is something entirely different. These are essentially role-playing laws that a city or township would have. They would be outside the scope of GMs, and they would HAVE to be enforced by PLAYERS. AKA, the citizens of Hydlaa or Akkaio.
-
Originally posted by zanzibar
These are essentially role-playing laws that a city or township would have. They would be outside the scope of GMs, and they would HAVE to be enforced by PLAYERS. AKA, the citizens of Hydlaa or Akkaio.
Just one question: \"How?\"
> (Me) said: No duels on the plaza!
> (Troublemaker) said: I don\'t care.
> (Smartass) said: Did the Octarchs write that rule? No.
And GMs stand around, watch, and are either as careless, or as helpless.
As far as I can see in the poll, still a majority wants to support Pip\'s proposal of duelling rules. But as you already stated correctly: What are rules good for, if the game technology does not support forcing them?
I really would like to do more roleplaying with well prepared plots which take several days to be solved. But reasonless \"duels\" (removing the \"gentlemens agreement\" part of its meaning) really conflicts with my opinion about roleplaying.
-
Me well confused?-!!
You said )*sigh* No. We aren\'t against it .( sounds me to you want !?!
then you say )\"just because\". There are real, well thought out, valid reasons to not like those rules. ( not want!?!.
And you not thing GM`s police :) prevent cheating and harrassment and violations of Planeshift rules and mechanics. ( Me think that police work.
And this )This is something entirely different. These are essentially role-playing laws that a city or township would have. ( Think you as confused as me no one make laws just guild guides.
you say )GMs are not players( me meant when not GM`s
-
Whether or not dueling should be allowed is not a guild related issue. The Wish List, this thread should be made.
Closed.
-
Ahahah..! Ah man, for fear of suffering Aendar\'s wrath, I\'ve simply moved the thread to General Discussion ;) Tell anyone who gets lost looking in other places. It would be hard to create a whole new thread for this, so right now Aendar simply doesn\'t have to deal with it in his domain :)
*placates Aendar with some belated birthday cake and scurries off*
-
*takes the cake*
Aendar is appeased.
For now.... X(
-
1: An Invitation to all Guild Leaders.
I want no were else but in this place, can guild leaders have talk private, and be able to see all responses.
(for clarity, there is nowhere to talk and see who sent what, but on here)
2: ME think this was talk on getting a common consciences on how to RP a duel.
(Again for clarity, an attempt to make duels more fun instead of challenge - decline/accept, not a work-around to PvP. Even this was catered for in the proposals)
3: Me no under stand war talk?
(As was stated this was to be and is decided by guilds who want to fight each other, so all talk of war was not even meant to be in this discussion and was a clear attempt from those people who did not want this to happen, to kill this thread, and hey guess what; partly worked.)
4:This from other thread good valid against reason hope you mind not
Quote:
Not to the thought that there was a right and wrong way to duel, but to making more rules.
This is a matter of what is considered to be polite. But it cannot be allowed to become more than that. The endless rush in the forums, to make everything subject to rigid rules, stifles creativity.
1. There is RP that will require being impolite.
2. \"Hide and go Kill\" is too much fun, cannot be stopped, and the small disruption that a chase scene will bring, is attractive to Noobs, it shows them there is action to be had.
3. Similarly, a duel, loudly announced, and fought out of earshot but not out of view of the usual plaza gathering, perhaps on the other side of the fountain from Harnquist, would be a public spectacle, attractive to the newcomer and beneficial to PS.
I vote that this etiquette, \"A Duelling Code of Honor\" be published, as a book in the Library, to be specifically labeled as a guideline for those who are noble, and seek to follow the traditions of polite and honorable duelling.
It could then be taught to Noobs, by simply referring them to the Library. (Which needs a master catalog of titles, by the way.)
But do not ever call it a rule. Rules will be broken by all too many who have made breaking anything that is called a rule their sole mission.
You will get vastly more result than any rule will give you, if you simply say that this way of duelling is considered a noble and polite tradition and are disdainful of those who are ill-mannered.
Courtesy cannot be imposed upon the unwilling. You must lead by conspicuous example, and show how attractive it is to be elegant, instead.
The Dark Lady
Verrliit
end quote
5: Talk like this good for debate, point being get over your say nice.
(no need to get all off track to get your point accross that you do not want this)
6: Why you move after long time here?
(Out of curiosity, why did it take 10 days and over 100 posts to decide this did not belong in guilds but in wish list, and then closed. Then reopened in General Discussions)
(i am a friend helping him get his point across)
-
The thread originally belonged in the Guild Forum, but it went off-topic. When threads do that, they other get locked or moved. I decided for the latter. This was never moved to the Wishlist.
Semper, your posts are unfortunately really hard to understand. To quote someone, please use the following tags:
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by (NAME):[/i]
Their exact text gets pasted here
[/QUOTE]
It will make reading a ton easier :) Thanks!
-
Guppy, there is no way that you can say that your rules encourage role play. That\'s simply innacurate, and it shows that you haven\'t been really paying attention to the criticisms of your idea.
Playing dirty, being stabbed in the back or murdered, when does right, is just as valid RP as being nice to eachother all day.
-
I wil try to anser your question,were i can.
Originally posted by Semper
1: An Invitation to all Guild Leaders.
I want no were else but in this place, can guild leaders have talk private, and be able to see all responses.
(for clarity, there is nowhere to talk and see who sent what, but on here)
2: ME think this was talk on getting a common consciences on how to RP a duel.
(Again for clarity, an attempt to make duels more fun instead of challenge - decline/accept, not a work-around to PvP. Even this was catered for in the proposals)
3: Me no under stand war talk?
(As was stated this was to be and is decided by guilds who want to fight each other, so all talk of war was not even meant to be in this discussion and was a clear attempt from those people who did not want this to happen, to kill this thread, and hey guess what; partly worked.)
4:This from other thread good valid against reason hope you mind not
Quote:
Not to the thought that there was a right and wrong way to duel, but to making more rules.
This is a matter of what is considered to be polite. But it cannot be allowed to become more than that. The endless rush in the forums, to make everything subject to rigid rules, stifles creativity.
1. There is RP that will require being impolite.
2. \"Hide and go Kill\" is too much fun, cannot be stopped, and the small disruption that a chase scene will bring, is attractive to Noobs, it shows them there is action to be had.
3. Similarly, a duel, loudly announced, and fought out of earshot but not out of view of the usual plaza gathering, perhaps on the other side of the fountain from Harnquist, would be a public spectacle, attractive to the newcomer and beneficial to PS.
I vote that this etiquette, \"A Duelling Code of Honor\" be published, as a book in the Library, to be specifically labeled as a guideline for those who are noble, and seek to follow the traditions of polite and honorable duelling.
It could then be taught to Noobs, by simply referring them to the Library. (Which needs a master catalog of titles, by the way.)
But do not ever call it a rule. Rules will be broken by all too many who have made breaking anything that is called a rule their sole mission.
You will get vastly more result than any rule will give you, if you simply say that this way of duelling is considered a noble and polite tradition and are disdainful of those who are ill-mannered.
Courtesy cannot be imposed upon the unwilling. You must lead by conspicuous example, and show how attractive it is to be elegant, instead.
The Dark Lady
Verrliit
end quote
5: Talk like this good for debate, point being get over your say nice.
(no need to get all off track to get your point accross that you do not want this)
6: Why you move after long time here?
(Out of curiosity, why did it take 10 days and over 100 posts to decide this did not belong in guilds but in wish list, and then closed. Then reopened in General Discussions)
(i am a friend helping him get his point across)
Points.
1: there is no where but here, and as the title was not respected had littel choice in matter of who posted.
2: Yes it is a attempt to stop randem challenges by guild members, and encourage Role Play.
3: The talk of war was first brought up as guild war, it was felt that that was best delt with by guilds involed, the rest in my opinion was a attemt to disrupt this post by non guild players for their own ends.
4: Yes it was a good well thought out response, shame all dont do the same.
5: Yes i agree no need to twist things as it only spoils things.
6: Cant answer this sorry. :))
-
In answer to you zanzibar, I refer you to the post by Seytra, in Pips poll, as it it put far better than i could.
Anyway, I will certainly vote \"Yay\". These are, to me, first and foremost OOC, simply because the problem they are supposed to solve is completely OOC: the mindless, un-RP duelling everywhere that is cluttering up the chat window and looking and sounding just plain stupid. Thereby it removes all sense of realism and makes PS look like a duelling game.
I can\'t help but wonder why some think that reducing that is detrimental to RP. To be more specific, I fail to see how a challenge window, popping up randomly without any further notice, without you even knowing the sender except for the name that is stated in the chat window, could possibly be classified as RP.
As I have stated before, this is not RP, it is merely a sad try to phrase pure OOC PvP happiness as RP. RP is different, it requires a level of mutual, completely OOC, trust that is not attainable through any pop-up window.
Therefore, these points exist to govern the OOC conduct, with having the side-effect of increasing likelyhood to have actual RP, by simply requiring people to, in whatever form, talk.
There is no random duelling IC.
To be clear: characters may very well disregard these points. However, players won\'t. Or shouldn\'t, if they strive to be(come) good RPers. Therefore, even if a character disobeys the IC interpretation, the player of that character won\'t ignore the OOC convention. That\'s a major difference.
Like talking undesignated OOC vs. talking about something completely different yet IC in an IC discussion. Second is RP, first is not. But I disgress.
Whether or not they will or should become IC law is of no importance to my decision (though I think they should eventually become, in part, IC law, as it is really natural). They solve an OOC problem and they are OOC. And I vote for them, completely OOC. Yay.
:))
-
i) stay out of the arena
ii) filter combat messages out of the chat
iii) set challenge to auto-decline
Once you do all this, I really don\'t see what the big deal is. I don\'t even see much random duelling at harniquist anymore, I only see it in the arena.
-
Now this is interesting why should someone have to do that.
i) stay out of the arena
ii) filter combat messages out of the chat
iii) set challenge to auto-decline
Be denied training in arena, both practical and physical, and good loot and PP.
Go through hassle of filter combat messages out of the chat.
O no we finally agree help :) set challenge to auto-decline.
and your reply to this in Pips post, to Seytra.
Quote:
Originally posted by ramlambmoo
Quote:
There is no random duelling IC.
What if your character likes randommly attacking people? Its conceivable, especially if you were Chaotic Evil. You\'re just making a generalisation because of the behavior of some people.
Absolutely not, no. Please read on.
Quote:
Originally posted by ramlambmoo
Quote:
Or shouldn\'t, if they strive to be(come) good RPers.
Thats your opinion, that it is required that you must follow these rules to be in character.
Also not, the distinct diffrence is IC and OOC, as I\'ll try to expres in the end.
Quote:
Originally posted by ramlambmoo
Quote:
Therefore, even if a character disobeys the IC interpretation, the player of that character won\'t ignore the OOC convention.
How are you to simultaneously obey these rules OOC but disobey them IC? Using the example of the theif or brigand again, are you to walk up to someone and OOC ask them what their skill level is, whether you want magic in a duel, etc, stand around for them to reply and then start a fight? To me, that breaks the realism more, and defeats the entire purpose.
Yes, absolutely. When I receive a random duelling request, I am always going to ignore it. I know that a true RPer will never just send a duelling request. Instead, they will state that they have an IC reason to attack you. In almost all cases, you will know the reason or that there is one.
You won\'t necessarily need to be so really specific about things in that case, but the general idea remains, for the simple reason that while your char might be very high in level compared to mine (or vice-versa), this difference might be due to a whole lot of factors that are entirely OOC. It is this problem of the actual levels being 100% RL related and 0% RP related that makes the duelling system almost inherently unusable for IC fights. These are better RP\'d instead of fought, which has the added benefit of allowing a lot more interesting battles, though that also requires a high level of discipline on both sides.
If, however, you use the duelling system for RP, then you must make sure that the ensuing fight will actually have some realistic resemblance of the RP of both players.
The effort to make sure that your \"target\" knows that you are IC, and a trustworthy RPer (OOC, not IC, mind you!) will usually be what counts in whether or not a duel will be accepted or not.
Even when you\'re chaotic evil and mad, you will not simply send a challenge to someone OOC-ly. Instead, you will RP that, if your wish to fight is actually IC and not OOC jerkiness. Also, you would make sure t5hat you only attack people of whom you are sure they also are IC, _and_ you would also make sure that the situation they RP actually gives an opportunity for you to attack. In almost no way would you manage to randomly attack someone who just moments ago RP\'d \"/me looks around warily\".
The scene would then be something like this:
Madman: *giggles silently, looking at Victim*
Victim:
Madman: *draws the dagger and moves closer, stifling the giggles*
Victim: *is still not suspicious*
Madman: *suddenly jumps forward to stab Victim*
Victim: *is caught by surprise and barely manages to evade the first blow and assumes a defensive position*
Only now is the duelling request to be sent!
Also, since the plaza is IC-ly properly guarded, you would then have to RP beign arrested if you get caught, which you will also have to RP. In no way can you just duel and walk off. These are the problems that are most easily \"overlooked\" by those that \"RP chaotic / evil chars\". I am very much inclined that it is ignoring on purpose, but I might be wrong. If I were wrong, though, then all the trouble Monketh was having with trying to RP a guard division would never have arisen, so it is fair to assume that almost all of those \"RP\"ers are merely out to very OOC-ly do some PvP.
Edit: And even then, out of courtesy, you would likely relocate the actual fight to somewhere else. IC you wouldn\'t move locations, but OOC-ly you would, as convention to keep the plaza clean./Edit
I sincerely hope that this explains things.
this comment to Seytra post.
Seytra, the battle you described was colourful and it would work. HOWEVER, I strongly believe that such things as arrests, protection, revenge, and murder should be built into the very mechanics of Planeshift itself. But for now, the system you described is the best we can do.
\"does that sound to you like it sounds to me\"? it would work? But for now, the system you described is the best we can do?
-
Originally posted by r.guppy
Originally posted by Zanzibar
i) stay out of the arena
Be denied training in arena, both practical and physical, and good loot and PP.
This has made me think about somethink. Some people gets irritated by the random dueling in different places, especially Hydlaa.
Are the same people disturbed by the random killing of Gladiators, Mercenaries, Rogues and such ?
And, are the same people killing them, in the way like many others do?
Now, if you think from your char perspective, all the NPCs are same as players. So... how it come that so great part of this community is trying to rp and care only about dueling beatwen players?
I\'m just wondering, not trying to accuse someone for somethink.
-
In the arena they are there to fight, that is there Job to fight, i think it would be hard to role play a fight with them, as they have limited speech.
As for meeting with them out side again you fight them or run.
Just my thoughts. :)
-
Originally posted by r.guppy
Now this is interesting why should someone have to do that.
Originally posted by Zanzibar
i) stay out of the arena
ii) filter combat messages out of the chat
iii) set challenge to auto-decline
Originally Posted by r.guppy
Be denied training in arena, both practical and physical, and good loot and PP.
Go through hassle of filter combat messages out of the chat.
O no we finally agree help :) set challenge to auto-decline.
Someone should do that for the same reason that you believe someone should not duel in the Plaza or in Hydlaa altogether. You wish to limit the enjoyment of PS for others so that your gaming experience is more to your liking, but you do not think that you should limit yours so they may enjoy theirs. So much for courtesy and respect.
Training, Good Loot and PP are all OOC issues as Seytra so quickly pointed out. Unless you are interested in maxing skills it shouldn\'t really matter to RP. I mean after all if you are a good and true RPer then you should be able to come up with an RP reason why you aren\'t going into the arena. If you can\'t do that then it doesn\'t really matter because you aren\'t RPing anyway. If you feel the need to go gain levels then you should be able to RP the dangers you are facing, that is if you are a good and true RPer. If you are just going in there to gain levels, then I doubt you are all that concerned with your RP since little to no RP goes on in the Arena anyway. Instead it is a lot of spawn camping and spawn camping is never RP.
-
Training and Loot are both COMPLETELY in character. It\'s ridiculous to maintain otherwise.
Edit 1: Originally posted by r.guppy
Now this is interesting why should someone have to do that.
i) stay out of the arena
ii) filter combat messages out of the chat
iii) set challenge to auto-decline
Be denied training in arena, both practical and physical, and good loot and PP.
Go through hassle of filter combat messages out of the chat.
O no we finally agree help :) set challenge to auto-decline.
The arena is for fighting. The arena is for duelling. Deal with it. We go to the arena to fight so that we don\'t bug the people chatting near harniquist.
Edit 2: Being annoyed, being scared, being hurt, and being KILLED is all a part of role-playing games.
-
Originally posted by Askr
spawn camping is never RP.
It is not the camping part of it, that is not RP.
If you were to run a route from one end of all the maps, to the other, there would be no RP inherent in a single kill.
Unless you count the trivia that an NPC might have wandered away from it\'s spawn point, or you find virtue in wasting time running.
To say that camping is wrong, is as foolish as saying you should not train strength. There is an advantage to both, and a savings in time as you negotiate the mechanics of the world.
This is a feature of PS. Take it for granted, and RP around it.
Watching to see what loot a spawn will drop next, and for a group of players, gambling the roll to see who gets it, is one of the few diversions that the Devs have given us.
But then, you probably don\'t like bingo either.
Verrliit
-
Originally posted by Verrliit
To say that camping is wrong, is as foolish as saying you should not train strength. There is an advantage to both, and a savings in time as you negotiate the mechanics of the world.
Sadly, no matter what arguments anyone may try to make, currently camping is completely OOC :) There is an advantage to exploiting various bugs in the game too (not that I\'m saying camping is such), but advantages may not all be roleplayable, or fair.
-
I am lost for words.
zanzibar
Training and Loot are both COMPLETELY in character. It\'s ridiculous to maintain otherwise.
Edit 1:
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by r.guppy
Now this is interesting why should someone have to do that.
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i) stay out of the arena
ii) filter combat messages out of the chat
iii) set challenge to auto-decline
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Be denied training in arena, both practical and physical, and good loot and PP.
Go through hassle of filter combat messages out of the chat.
O no we finally agree help set challenge to auto-decline.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The arena is for fighting. The arena is for duelling. Deal with it. We go to the arena to fight so that we don\'t bug the people chatting near harniquist.
Edit 2: Being annoyed, being scared, being hurt, and being KILLED is all a part of role-playing games.
We Agree again :)
-
Originally posted by Karyuu
Originally posted by Verrliit
To say that camping is wrong, is as foolish as saying you should not train strength. There is an advantage to both, and a savings in time as you negotiate the mechanics of the world.
Sadly, no matter what arguments anyone may try to make, currently camping is completely OOC :) There is an advantage to exploiting various bugs in the game too (not that I\'m saying camping is such), but advantages may not all be roleplayable, or fair.
Karyuu Sweetheart, I apologize for being unclear.
My point is:
Camping will exist as long as spawn points do not move out of sight to an unpredictable position with every kill. (And a hunter can\'t talk while moving.)
It does not matter if you like camping, or whether you can RP while doing it.
Originally posted by Verrliit
This is a feature of PS. Take it for granted, and RP around it.
Forgive me dear, but I really think that arguing about it is a complete waste of time.
Verrliit
-
I did misunderstand what you meant, and for that I apologize. However, if I may make both a formal and personal request: the \"dears\" and \"sweethearts\" are too patronizing for my taste :) Best use them with others.
-
I think this is a good resin for the proposal.
From Talads post 0.3.012 ready.
- Penalties now increase with each decline:
1) 1 min lockout
2) 5 min + warning
3) 10 min + 10 advisor point fine + 10 duel point fine, if duel spam + death
4) 30 point fine(s) + death + kick from server
- Penalties expire with gameplay time, and can be lowered by getting an accept from a player with no penalties and a enough advisor points.
- Penalty level is saved to the player\'s account entry in the database, so repeat offenders can\'t escape it. (relog resets to 3rd level) :))
-
There\'s a difference between duel spamming and the style of duelling you\'re prescribing. Duel spamming sucks, but stabbing someone in the back is entirely within RP. Then again, I also say that this discussion serves no purpose so what do I know.
-
Then instead of pointless post why no give us your way of doing a duel.
I have said in the poll vote this is intended as a guide only.
And we have tried to allow for other types of use for the challenge, so instead why not give us your views and if posable it can be integrated.
I except that to back stab someone you have to play it different, but to do it you have to get the player to play along or they will simply say no.
:))
-
Originally posted by r.guppy
Then instead of pointless post why no give us your way of doing a duel.
I have said in the poll vote this is intended as a guide only.
And we have tried to allow for other types of use for the challenge, so instead why not give us your views and if posable it can be integrated.
I except that to back stab someone you have to play it different, but to do it you have to get the player to play along or they will simply say no.
:))
My post was not pointless, perhaps you too simple minded to gather it\'s meaning.
My way of duelling? Sure. Don\'t break the official planeshift rules. And that\'s it. Everything else goes. Now, you might piss off people, you might gain a negative reputation, but as long as it\'s within the official planeshift rules then it\'s within the scope of role-playing. If it\'s not within the scope of role-playing and it\'s being disruptive to the RP of others as REASON defines it, then you would be in violation of planeshift rules.
No. Your rules are not a guide.
They were merely one way to do things.
One way among many equally valid ways.
It is ENTIRELY within RP to agree to honourable combat, than the other person plays dirty.
That other person would then get a bad in-game reputation through completely in character role-playing.
This discussion is truly insane.
-
You miss the point, if you wont to play dirty thats fine, just make it clear that is your intension, go through motions then fight dirty, i see nothing wrong in that, it is all part of role play, if everyone was nice BORING.
:))
-
Originally posted by r.guppy
You miss the point, if you wont to play dirty thats fine, just make it clear that is your intension, go through motions then fight dirty, i see nothing wrong in that, it is all part of role play, if everyone was nice BORING.
:))
Why should I give a warning for playing dirty within the confines of RP? The possibility of people acting in strange and surprising ways should be assumed to exist when one plays an RPG.
-
I would think that was plan but as its not.
You stat your intentions, play it out no one hurt (feelings) no complaint, you get your bad rep but no in game harm done.
:))
-
Sadly, no matter what arguments anyone may try to make, currently camping is completely OOC :)
I.E, No matter what anyone else says, Im right. Jee, that adds alot to the discussion... perhaps you could give us some points as to why this is the case? You cant just say \"Im right and you\'re all wrong\" without saying why. Also, you cant just dismiss everyone else\'s \"arguements\" prior to them saying them: Such a closed minded attitude leads to people just pointlessly stating their arguement and not listening, instead of an active discussion between people.
-
Perhaps you can make effective arguments as to why standing at a spot you OOCly know a monster \"randomly\" and unrealistically appears in, over and over and over, can be considered roleplay? :)
-
In the case of arena it is easy you go there to train and you beat your opponent (monster/rogue ect), and the next opponent steps up to fight you.
Therefor if you were inclined you could walk up to the opponent and say \"i wish to tack part in the tournament and was sent to you by the arena master so defend thyself\" on winning you could say i wait the next challenge and up they pop, and so on.
:))
-
I think those rules are quite nice. I will make a voting in my guild about them.
-
What I have said here and in the poll is right.
It is up to whoever is dueling to decide what they do.
-
Just a reminder a few days left to vote. :))
-
Originally posted by Drey
It is up to whoever is dueling to decide what they do.
I agree completely, and that is why the ideas of Code Duello being proposed by Sensotaka and myself, were intended, not as rules, but strictly as a guidline and protocol for noble duelling.
The purpose of the Code Duello is to provide duelling in affairs of Honor, with the ceremony, elegance and perhaps even beauty, that Honor and Nobility demands. If this is done while making a very public display, it will not only entertain and intrigue the five-minute Noob, but teach by example, the vast difference between the artistry of an elaborate RP and a simple wordless gutter fight.
Those who choose to fight in the gutter, may also live there if they wish.
Originally posted by Karyuu
Perhaps you can make effective arguments as to why standing at a spot you OOCly know a monster \"randomly\" and unrealistically appears in, over and over and over, can be considered roleplay? :)
Not all parts of PS are roleplay, nor should they be, nor is everything that is not roleplay, bad or wrong.
But since you asked, it is only a trivial exercise of imagination, to account for the static spawn points within RP:
The Gods have chosen to spawn monsters in places that have been found by the citizens of Yliakum, and those places that are the easiest to find, are the best known.
The scholars of the world, who sometimes commune with the Gods, indicate this to be their intended purpose: that the inhabitants of the world should use the monsters for training skills, and to obtain various items of value.
Those who have thus been blessed, thank the Gods for their gifts.
Verrliit.
-
To Ramlambmoo and Verrliit,
The idea is that one should be in character at all times.
Monsters randomly spawning in the same place over and over again is unrealistic and not justified by RP.
Therefor, taking advantage of this aspect of the game, i.e. camping spawns, is out of character.
Since camping is out of character, and one is supposed to be in character at all times, then people aren\'t supposed to camp.
-
By Zanzibar
To Ramlambmoo and Verrliit,
The idea is that one should be in character at all times.
Monsters randomly spawning in the same place over and over again is unrealistic and not justified by RP.
Therefor, taking advantage of this aspect of the game, i.e. camping spawns, is out of character.
Since camping is out of character, and one is supposed to be in character at all times, then people aren\'t supposed to camp.
I agree one should where possible should be in charactor, that\'s that out the way.
Monsters do its a fact spawn in same place, lets stretch the imagination a bit, not just one monster but a few in same area, think of them as a herd grazing in one place, and you are a hunter hunting them, now if you are good at your job you know where and when to look for them, and most monsters are creatures of habit and stick to same grazing places or hunting grounds.
So to stand in same spot is not i think out of character as in RL animals tend to stay in a limited area or hunting ground.
Now back to the subject of this post; duelling.
originally posted by Verrliit
Originally posted by Drey
It is up to whoever is dueling to decide what they do.
I agree completely, and that is why the ideas of Code Duello being proposed by Sensotaka and myself, were intended, not as rules, but strictly as a guidline and protocol for noble duelling.
The purpose of the Code Duello is to provide duelling in affairs of Honor, with the ceremony, elegance and perhaps even beauty, that Honor and Nobility demands. If this is done while making a very public display, it will not only entertain and intrigue the five-minute Noob, but teach by example, the vast difference between the artistry of an elaborate RP and a simple wordless gutter fight.
Those who choose to fight in the gutter, may also live there if they wish.
I quite agree.
-
Well I have been reading and reading and haven\'t even read all posts made hear but seems pretty aparent people don\'t really agree on the \"rules\"
To return to the starting post I think it\'s therefor questionable if a guild should impose it\'s leaderships view on this on it\'s members. The guild should be an RP element in that the people share a common goal, but I don\'t see the guild as a RP regulation maker.
-
Yes the first post by Pip:
An Invitation to all Guild Leaders
Rules For Duelling
I ask all guild leaders to enter this discussion so that a set of rules can be agreed upon and these rules can be posted in individual guild forums and adhered to by all parties.
My thoughts are as follows:
1. No duelling in the plaza or tavern at all, or anywhere that is well populated. (Unless by a prearranged audience)
2. A verbal challenge is made giving a) reason for challenge b) weapons preferred (including fists) c) whether magic/potions should/shouldn\'t be used d) place and time e) whether to have seconds
3.The challengee may countermand b), c), d) and/or e) above. The challenge is then verbally accepted/declined.
4. When the conditions discussed in 2. and 3. have been met, the duel should begin - both the Challenger and the Challengee should place themselves at a convenient length facing each other.
5. For training purposes go to an empty room in the arena or away from areas which are busy, where parties can challenge each other as much as they wish. (This may suit those who like to fight each other for fun)
6. In the case of a guild war terms should be drawn up and agreed between the leaders of the warring guilds. Bearing in mind that rule 1. should always apply.
7. If you use the PvP system for your RP fights, then any form of exploitation is not allowed. Commodities like shortcuts may be used for convenience, but not for speed.
This post will be edited as new suggestions are agreed.
edit 1 Added point 6.
edit 2 Changed some points as suggested by Sangwa, thank you
edit 3 Changed point 4. as suggested by Sangwa, thanks again
edit 4 Added to point 1.
edit 5 Added point 7. suggested by Seytra, thank you
edit 6 Added tavern to point 1.
edit 7 Added to point 2. (potions and e)
This bit.
I ask all guild leaders to enter this discussion so that a set of rules can be agreed upon and these rules can be posted in individual guild forums and adhered to by all parties.
I am taking for granted the proposed rules were posted in guilds, as i did in mine and asked for comments.
By Pestilence
To return to the starting post I think it\'s therefor questionable if a guild should impose it\'s leaderships view on this on it\'s members. The guild should be an RP element in that the people share a common goal, but I don\'t see the guild as a RP regulation maker.
So a leader does not lead a guild by first discussing a new rule or way of doing things, then implementing a rule or in this case a guide line? :))
-
Originally posted by r.guppy
I agree one should where possible should be in charactor, that\'s that out the way.
Monsters do its a fact spawn in same place, lets stretch the imagination a bit, not just one monster but a few in same area, think of them as a herd grazing in one place, and you are a hunter hunting them, now if you are good at your job you know where and when to look for them, and most monsters are creatures of habit and stick to same grazing places or hunting grounds.
So to stand in same spot is not i think out of character as in RL animals tend to stay in a limited area or hunting ground.
I don\'t think that\'s the case.
-
So a leader does not lead a guild by first discussing a new rule or way of doing things, then implementing a rule or in this case a guide line? :))
Depends on the guild for one. There are several guilds that claim to not really have a leader just a kinda spokesperson. Not really effective in my idea but those are there.
Second I didn\'t mean it wasn\'t possible for guilds to have such rules I am wondering if guilds should be the ones enforcing it.
Some guilds roleplay they have a common goal and this way guilds are involved in roleplaying, but I see them as tools for roleplaying. Tools also to increase fun by bringing you into contact with people that feel the same about things.
Now with some guilds I think roleplaying is their main purpose and then obviously you could ask your members to have a certain kwality of roleplaying, but there are also many guilds who\'s main purpose has nothing to do with roleplaying.
Like for example the knowledge seekers. Their purpose is to find as much knowledge as possible. Ofcourse you could and should use this when roleplaying, but roleplaying isn\'t required to gather information. So why deny members acces to your guild who are nice and gather information like no other but can\'t roleplay and don\'t feel much for learning it?