Thank you for the worst RP I've ever seen

[bardbard#4]

now i remember why i detest the forums.

makes a circle jerk look enticing.

Holy god...I just peed a little bit while laughing.

[spawnloser]

If there is a middle ground, argue for that.  You seem to be arguing the other way entirely, however, jhunter.

Don't kill someone when it is IC for your character to let that someone live.  Don't let someone live when it is IC for your character to kill that someone.

Roleplay.  Make a scene.  Enjoy it, and try to make everyone else in it enjoy it as well.  That should be the goal.

[jhunter]

Don't kill someone when it is IC for your character to let that someone live. Don't let someone live when it is IC for your character to kill that someone.

That is exactly what I was saying. That -is- the middle ground.

[Sokotra]

Don't kill someone when it is IC for your character to let that someone live. Don't let someone live when it is IC for your character to kill that someone.

That is exactly what I was saying. That -is- the middle ground.

Well, I hate to continue the circle jerk - because I'm not going to argue against something I agree with.  If you read the rest of my posts pertaining to this thread then you might see what I mean without taking any of my statements out of this entire context.  But anyway, I don't blame you for not reading the entire thread because I do the same thing...

Yeah... if it's IC for you to kill someone, fine - do it.  If it's not, then don't.  Great.  We got that down.  My main point is that you can let yourself lose and not use the OOC knowledge that the PC won't die unless you codedly hear that beep and type "kill <person>" until they turn into an innanimate object containing gear and coins.  You could, alternatively, RP that your character thinks the bloody mass lying on the ground is dead and just steal some of their crap or whatever and be on your way "thinking" in RP terms that your character just killed someone.  Okay, I've already probably said this 500 times so I'm done...
/endcirclejerk

[jhunter]

Don't kill someone when it is IC for your character to let that someone live. Don't let someone live when it is IC for your character to kill that someone.

That is exactly what I was saying. That -is- the middle ground.

Well, I hate to continue the circle jerk - because I'm not going to argue against something I agree with.  If you read the rest of my posts pertaining to this thread then you might see what I mean without taking any of my statements out of this entire context.  But anyway, I don't blame you for not reading the entire thread because I do the same thing...

Yeah... if it's IC for you to kill someone, fine - do it.  If it's not, then don't.  Great.  We got that down.  My main point is that you can let yourself lose and not use the OOC knowledge that the PC won't die unless you codedly hear that beep and type "kill <person>" until they turn into an innanimate object containing gear and coins.  You could, alternatively, RP that your character thinks the bloody mass lying on the ground is dead and just steal some of their crap or whatever and be on your way "thinking" in RP terms that your character just killed someone.  Okay, I've already probably said this 500 times so I'm done...
/endcirclejerk

Right, I understand that. I'm just saying that it's just as cheesy to intentionally do that -every- time as it is to go out of your way to make certain they are codedly dead -every- time. It should depend on the pc your playing not just a detached OOC reasoning to either PK someone or to avoid PK'ing someone. I've done what you are talking about a few times. I've also done the opposite. It depends on the pc I'm playing, that should be the only deciding factor.

I'm done as well.

[EvilRoeSlade]

I think that people should realize that not all problems need to be solved by killing, and their characters should realize it as well.  You control what's IC for your character, and you are fully capable of making an enjoyable character that has been designed to foster interaction and plotlines, rather than destroy them.

Can killing someone create interaction and plotlines?  It can.  More often then not, however, it will only remove them.

Does that mean people shouldn't kill each other?

Hell no!  They should do it at every opportunity!  It's a harsh world, and when people feel threatened, competed with, or annoyed, they may well decide to end the life of the perpetrator.  That's the game-world, and there's no need to change it.

I'm not saying people shouldn't kill each other.  I am saying that people should find a middle ground more often.

I see a lot of killing.  I've never seen someone purposefully hire an incompetent assassin who they know won't succeed, just so the target gets the message.  I often see people threaten to kill others.  I rarely see these threats accompanied with the victim being dragged to an alley and beat the shit out of just to ensure that they KNOW the threat can and will be carried out.  When it comes time to kill, leaders are often targetted.  The leader doesn't often recieve one of his underling's head on a plate instead.

It's these little things that will add to plotlines and the game-world far more than killing.

[creeper386]

In response to ERS' post there, which has some fine ideas. It seems whenever people try to do this sort of thing, and ussually someone gets involved that probably shouldn't just because of some sort of brief friendship or something like that.

Way too often I've seen nobles bend down and turn their power and coin to squash someone just because of a threat to one of their distant underlings or even worse someone that like above, is just a commoner friend or what not. Which IMO nobles should be, even in Tuluk, but more so in Allanak, the sort to let the underlings and such, deal with whatever shit they stepped in.

For the most part there just sometimes isn't the playerbase to allow the varying social layers to avoid mixing, just because the upper layers do rely on the lower PCs, even though they shouldn't be that important most the time.

Personally know, I've tried things like this before, using stuff that doesn't involve outright death even though it was within grasp, and I think it's terrific fun. I've never codedly avoiding killing someone and let my character think he succeeded, but it's been awhile since I've played a character that would do killing stuff, and I don't remember a mercy code in place. When did that go in?

Anyways, everyone has good points, but most the time you should probably not expect your characters to have some sort of grand, well RPed death. As you'll probably just get disapointed. Heck, I'm sad when my characters get killed by NPCs because of the lack of interaction, but I doubt alot of code or anything is going to be implemented to stop that, eh?

[Nokturn]

Just to bring the thread back to it's original intention:

I didn't say my character didn't deserve his death. A simple commoner, without a weapon, should not go out in the desert alone (even if it was justified ICly, he needed to get some materials from there), he should have hired a mercenary to guard him or bought the material from someone.

Objectively, that character deserved death and it was a mistake on my part to go out in the desert. However, the character deserved a far more interesting and satisfying death, like the guys knocking him to the ground (I would have RPed with it, no need for code there) and harassing him a bit, maybe explaining their motives, or if it was meant to be a secret kill, emote that somehow.

[Vessol]

I agree with Nokturn. I will not specify at all IC, but lately I have died a lot of unroleplayed raider deaths.
While I see the IC reason, it is a bit tiring. Especialy seeing all the same stories if the raiders seem to tell me their story. Just my two sids.

[bloodfromstone]

This is sort of an aside, but whatever...

I remember when I was the newbest of newbies I saw a fight break out. Both of the combants emoted so well and so interesting that I was blown away. When one of them fled, he emoted stumbling back off of a hard parry, and I don't think I'll ever forget how vividly I saw that scene. I was so intimidated and awed by the writing and RP.

Sadly, this is very, very few and far between, but it was my first experience with pvp in Arm, and I think we should all strive to be as awesome as those two, whoever you were.

[Mr.B]

Am I the only person who misses the days when raiders plagued the desert, when a templar would flay, torture, or murder you for any reason he decided to make up at the moment? Days when gith warbands would eat the playerbase of Armageddon on a regular basis, and fear really permeated the city-living society, that the desert was a totally harsh place. When we, the GDB populace shouted down the buff gith because no-one likes a "boring" code death and shouted for a PC raiding presence. Fact is, no-one likes to lose their hard fought, or played characters and that's understandable, but grow a thick skin because really, the only RP you can control is your own. When a killer goes and murders things left and right with no RP, the game world takes care of them with time as well. It's the nature of Death on Armageddon.. from the moment you make your character, it's coming to get you. Be prepared at all times to let go of your awesome, funnest character to date because you know what? The game world is so huge, and there are so many options and avenues of play that you are certain to find yourself in other absolutely fantastic roles, and really exciting plots and webs of intrigue. Go with the B's blessing.

[Barzalene]

Am I the only person who misses the days when raiders plagued the desert, when a templar would flay, torture, or murder you for any reason he decided to make up at the moment? Days when gith warbands would eat the playerbase of Armageddon on a regular basis, and fear really permeated the city-living society, that the desert was a totally harsh place. When we, the GDB populace shouted down the buff gith because no-one likes a "boring" code death and shouted for a PC raiding presence. Fact is, no-one likes to lose their hard fought, or played characters and that's understandable, but grow a thick skin because really, the only RP you can control is your own. When a killer goes and murders things left and right with no RP, the game world takes care of them with time as well. It's the nature of Death on Armageddon.. from the moment you make your character, it's coming to get you. Be prepared at all times to let go of your awesome, funnest character to date because you know what? The game world is so huge, and there are so many options and avenues of play that you are certain to find yourself in other absolutely fantastic roles, and really exciting plots and webs of intrigue. Go with the B's blessing.

I too like it scary.

[EvilRoeSlade]

Objectively, that character deserved death and it was a mistake on my part to go out in the desert. However, the character deserved a far more interesting and satisfying death, like the guys knocking him to the ground (I would have RPed with it, no need for code there) and harassing him a bit, maybe explaining their motives, or if it was meant to be a secret kill, emote that somehow.

Responding to the part in bold:  No you didn't.  Make a stupid mistake, and you get a stupid death.  Should they have emoted?  It would have been nice and definitely indicative of a mature player, but you can't expect them to.  While it is exasperating to be killed by someone who doesn't emote, it's every bit as exasperating to enter a room in the wilderness, and try to get out a say or emote, only to find that in the process the other party has typed out three direction commands and powerwalked to safety.  (A scenario that often happens even when you had no intention of attacking).  Furthermore, if they were planning on killing you anyway, why should they have bothered to explain their motives?  We're not playing CheesySpyMovie MUD.

In all my many years of playing Armageddon, I've discovered one thing.  Deaths suck.  Some people think that if an emote was attached to a death it wouldn't suck, and I humbly disagree.  When you die, you will rarely understand why your character is killed.  It will often seem that you were killed by a griefer, a twink, or some asshole that decided that killing your PC for arbitrary reasons would be a great way to add more conflict to the game.

To echo others sentiments, and repeat something that I've said many times before, don't focus on your character's death.  Remember how much fun you had with them during their life.  The latter will always be far more interesting.

[corona]

Am I the only person who misses the days when raiders plagued the desert, when a templar would flay, torture, or murder you for any reason he decided to make up at the moment? Days when gith warbands would eat the playerbase of Armageddon on a regular basis, and fear really permeated the city-living society, that the desert was a totally harsh place. When we, the GDB populace shouted down the buff gith because no-one likes a "boring" code death and shouted for a PC raiding presence. Fact is, no-one likes to lose their hard fought, or played characters and that's understandable, but grow a thick skin because really, the only RP you can control is your own. When a killer goes and murders things left and right with no RP, the game world takes care of them with time as well. It's the nature of Death on Armageddon.. from the moment you make your character, it's coming to get you. Be prepared at all times to let go of your awesome, funnest character to date because you know what? The game world is so huge, and there are so many options and avenues of play that you are certain to find yourself in other absolutely fantastic roles, and really exciting plots and webs of intrigue. Go with the B's blessing.

I miss it too! I agree, Mr.B.. preach on, brother man!

[UnderSeven]

I even kind of agree the desert got a little to safe if you really knew what you were doing.  But what is the alternative?  Mul raiders again? I'm much more in favor of pcs enforcing harshness then npcs.  Afterall pcs offer little to no rp, but an npc is most certainly going to without a staff to animate it.

[Vessol]

Real bands of raiders and groups of anti-raiders would be pretty fun I would think, I have seen both also which can have some great RP.
The only reason I was complaining is that I lost two characters IC within 24 hours, I nill go into no more details, plus OOC fustrations, I was kind of upset, so sorry about that. I agree that sometimes the desert is a bit too safe, especialy if you stay on the road.

[bloodfromstone]

Personally, I prefer more longer lived, powerful, established PCs that can continue to affect and drive things than everyone dying to templars and NPCs every day. While I understand the desire for a harsher atmosphere, the idea of people dying in truckloads every day really would cut into the personal side of RP. It's hard to develop loves, friendships, hatreds, and betrayals if the PC turnover rate is too high.
Personally, I like it how it is, for the most part. Stupid mistakes get people killed quickly. Political intrigue gets people killed pretty fast, too. But if someone is careful and/or clever (or boring), they can live for a very long time.

[Red Sunrise]

Personally, I prefer more longer lived, powerful, established PCs that can continue to affect and drive things than everyone dying to templars and NPCs every day. While I understand the desire for a harsher atmosphere, the idea of people dying in truckloads every day really would cut into the personal side of RP. It's hard to develop loves, friendships, hatreds, and betrayals if the PC turnover rate is too high.

I strongly agree with this. The death of just one established PC can really leave a void in a clan or area, and suck the life out of plotlines. If you have a reason to kill somebody, go for it, but think things through... I just hate to see meaningless deaths.

[Halaster]

I also agree that it would be nicer if the harshness of the desert (or most of it at least) came from PC raiders and the like.  The only problem with relying on PC's is that it becomes sporadic at best with the size of our playerbase.  Most people actually manage to get past PC raiders because of their inability to be going at it as consistently as NPC's.  I'm not saying that means we should stick a billion NPC's out there, just... food for thought.

[Majikal]

I also agree that it would be nicer if the harshness of the desert (or most of it at least) came from PC raiders and the like.  The only problem with relying on PC's is that it becomes sporadic at best with the size of our playerbase.

I agree, and lately I've seen some great attempts at raiding which made me smile. As for the complains of quick and non-narrative deaths, sometimes you really just don't have the choice. Getting the jump on someone is sometimes your only advantage. Yes it sounds shitty, but it's very true.. am I gonna walk up to that bigass mean sorceror, or am I gonna sneak up and come out of nowhere with no clue on what's going o n? Often, the only text my target sees is 'a sharpass arrow flies in from the wtf' and beep.
Yay for raiders, yay for harshness,  yea for beefy stompy creatures!

Your char dies, whine for ten minutes and make another one. All kinds of crazy virtual npc skins to hop into, I doubt anyone has played what will turn out to be their favorite character in the end yet.

[Cuusardo]

Wars between raider groups, and wars between raiders and antiraiders would rock.

[flurry]

As for the original post, of course it's impossible to know what roleplay may have preceded or followed that scene, but yeah it would be disappointing to lose a character that way.

I think it often does come down to a balance between the objective to "win" the encounter and the overall effort to roleplay.   Are you willing to sacrifice roleplay for the sake of the win?  Are you willing to sacrifice the win for the sake of roleplay?   Not that it has to be one or the other, but I think sometimes people err on the side going for the win.

I know I made that mistake, and regret it, but I did learn from it.

On the topic of raiders, I think they can be great or can be a real problem.  I don't have the direct experience, on either side, to add much to the discussion, but I'd only hope that raiders try to give more interaction to their victims than an NPC would.