KILLKILLKILL!!!

[mansa]

I cannot think of 12 permanent, change-your-pfile type coded things I could do.

I can think of many temporary things.

I can think of many permanent things outside of the pfile.

Can you elaborate?

He said coded, harmful things. Not permanent things.

However, there are several permanent damaging things that can be inflicted codedly without the assistance of staff.

If there is examples as to what you can do with other characters, maybe people will do those examples, instead of doing the only things that they know how to do.
Kill you and Steal your crap.

Well, I've seen scars for missing eyes, missing ears, and missing fingers... that's a start!

I can't codedly add a scar to you.  You must do it to your own character.

[Cutthroat]

I think it's okay to say you can 'use whip <person>' to, well, whip a person with your whip. Whipping IRL leaves some nasty scars... maybe it does IG too.

[My 2 sids]

THANK YOU FOR THIS POST!!!

there isn't going to be that much rampant murder in Zanaths.  

First, the reason people live in cities (esp in terrible/ oppressive cities) is for safety!!  The fact that PCs can lead, realitivly, safe lives has a lot to do with the cities not being as dangerous as the wilderness OR places like UT and Labyrinth.  

Second, the cities are (again it's all relative) peaceful.  There is a consistency to life brought about by living under some kind of government.  That's because at some point, in some way, there is an established sense of justice -- the nobles rule because of the divine justice of the gods; you get to play 'kick the skinny' because there is justice in tormenting these evil things; superstitions of all kinds almost always revolve around some kind of justice.


There is PKing because players decide to PK

Players do play a role in what happens in game, so can't blame something on some "system"

PK isn't the most efficient for your Character -- it is most efficient to "win" at the game (a player reason)

[Fathi]

I can't codedly add a scar to you.  You must do it to your own character.

I wasn't aware that was what was being discussed. I was under the assumption "without staff help" just meant "PCs can do it without imms."

The list is a lot shorter if we limit it to what one PC can do to another PC without the victim's assistance, yeah.

[Niamh]

This is a game that focuses heavily on roleplay.  Why does the damage done to a PC need to be coded?

[AmandaGreathouse]

This is a game that focuses heavily on roleplay.  Why does the damage done to a PC need to be coded?

Thank you.

This.

X 10000000.

[musashi]

This is a game that focuses heavily on roleplay.  Why does the damage done to a PC need to be coded?

Because a lot of folks don't trust other folks to roll with it?

[Greve]

There's a general lack of coded ways to compromise others. If you don't have one of a few uncommon skills, you cannot touch another character in any coded way besides attacking them. Attempting to steal something is borderline suicide if you are not a highly skilled pickpocket, and even if there was something like a laxitive poison, inflicting it on another character is almost impossible without sticking a sharp object in them. Since ignoring undesirable roleplay is so easy (and common), coded actions are often seen as the only solution, and to most characters, this amounts to little more than "kill" and "shoot". There's no way to get someone's shirt stained by throwing something at them, or spilling their drink, or even removing them from their seat with the brawl code. Player characters often do not have a reputation for you to sully, or are so deeply ingrained in the AIM circles that any such attempt would be futile. Few players are really worried about something like that because it's usually pretty obvious when someone is deliberately trying to ruin somebody's reputation, and one will find that it is ignored because of that. If your character has a close friend, relative or colleague, are you going to pay much attention to some random person who tells you they saw your friend go home with a necker whore when you know they would never do that? When all it takes to confirm is a quick Way? When you haven't seen a necker whore PC in the city for six months?

The game's premises give us few possibilities for the more interesting aspects of social roleplay, and the playerbase is too complacent to allow it anyway. It takes two things to remedy this: a change of code and a change of mentality. The code needs to have more options, but it doesn't even allow us to be anonymous let alone do anything to others outside of a select few all-or-nothing skills. The mentality of the playerbase needs to change so that everyone isn't an unshakable bastion of security and knowledge. This is true within all elements of the game, from crime to business to socialites. As someone smart once said, you can't cheat a character unless you also cheat the player; if the player knows something, most of the time they will let their character know the same just to avoid being the subject of undesirable roleplay. This is both the fault of the players for not allowing anything bad to happen to their characters, and the fault of the game for not discouraging that kind of behaviour.

[Aaron Goulet]

This is a game that focuses heavily on roleplay.  Why does the damage done to a PC need to be coded?

This.  Because, I can tell you, I've had characters fucked over by non-coded consequences (usually social in nature) FAR more times than by coded consequences, and the effects are usually longer-lasting (with the exception of death, which only holds me back until my next character application gets approved).

[Jdr]

If we're encouraging less PK, why is it that the staff are slowly but surely relieving high leadership roles of their governmental rights (such as, for example, forced bondage or slavery)? It seems a little contradictory.

[KankWhisperer]

I think its just as bad to leave someone alive because you think it will be fun to have an arch nemesis oocly as it is to kill someone because oocly you like to kill other players. If your character would kill them, then do it, if not then don't.

[Decameron]

I think its just as bad to leave someone alive because you think it will be fun to have an arch nemesis oocly as it is to kill someone because oocly you like to kill other players. If your character would kill them, then do it, if not then don't.

Thank you.

Realism. Perhaps the motto should be changed to: "Mutilation , Corruption, and Betrayal .. Just don't kill any one."

[drasik]

Sometimes the internal RP of a PC makes anything -but- murder not an available option. Yes, I agree murder should be a last option, but when there are not other
options as given by the RP of the situation, doesn't matter if the killing PC wants to give way to another option if it'd be going against their RP to do so. And I'm not
talking about Jack the Ripper type of PCs either.

[mansa]

This is a game that focuses heavily on roleplay.  Why does the damage done to a PC need to be coded?

Armageddon isn't a MUSH.  If I type:
">emote throws a spear at you!"
or
">throw spear you"

It will give two different responses.  One you can react to, and another you cannot react to.

If I type:
">emote chops off your arm."

You can either:
Go with it
or
Say, "OOC Stop power emoting, I dodge that."


There is no random dice rolls to dictate authority of emoting in situations.  You just have to go with what the other person is willing to allow to happen.


If you read Greve's response, I think he brings up two big points as to why people resort to the one of a few coded responses we have to "interact" with.  People dislike having their characters harmed.  They will retire their character if they don't like playing it.  This is a game where people want to have fun, primarily, and roleplay around in an interactive world.

In My Opinion, If you ask someone if they want their character harmed, most likely they will say no.  If you force it upon them, via coded action, they can't say no.


I would enjoy more authority over other characters, (and them over me), in order to force certain situations over them, (and them over me).  Templars have awesome authority in jail cells, and can dictate almost any outcome there.  Some noble/merchant houses can share that same 'Checkmate' situation, but usually we're left with the few coded outcomes.

That's why I think people resort to killing each other.

[roughneck]

There is PKing because players decide to PK

Players do play a role in what happens in game, so can't blame something on some "system"

PK isn't the most efficient for your Character -- it is most efficient to "win" at the game (a player reason)

Everyone who's ever pk'd knows that the fastest way to die and 'lose' the game by this definition is to go out and pk somebody else.  If you pk you will be pk'd without fail.  It's a law of nature on Zalanthas.  The people trying to 'win' at the game are the ones upset by losing their character before they reached level 30 and led the quest for the golden sword.

At the very least it's a feasible argument.

My real point, and it's more of a bunny trail really is that this whole 'win the game' concept has had a good, long run on the boards and I think it's time we phase it out.  It's a very loaded, very bandwagon phrase which ends up entirely slanted by the paradigm of the person using it.

Every player has a different opinion and moral judgment on the topic of pk.  So does every staff member, or at least it seems that way.

My thoughts on pk are that it's a legitimate part of the game and that you're PC just as entitled to a satisfying life/death on Zalanthas as a random person is in RL and that a player needs to be satisfied with whatever they end up with, a cliche-ic 'live every day as your last' sort of approach.  I also think pk is a very unpredictable, exhilarating type of rp to engage in... unless you way out-gun the character you're trying to take out.  It can be a similar rush to a high-stakes round of poker.  I also think most pk's could be easily avoided and that they typically happen because a character practically asked for it (I include myself and the times my own characters have been pk'd in this as well).

I don't present this opinion as something that should be taken as any kind of objective, moral truth about roleplaying on Armageddon but simply to make the point that we all have opinions on the issue and we all play together with these different opinions.  You have to play with me and my philosophy, I have to play with you and yours and we all have to bend to the imms' arbitration.  This is a really good discussion that will improve everybody's enjoyment of the game but posts coming from a self-ingratiating moral high ground aren't going to get through to anybody.  Stories and examples of fun, effective alternatives to pk and personal experience will.

[My 2 sids]

If we're encouraging less PK, why is it that the staff are slowly but surely relieving high leadership roles of their governmental rights (such as, for example, forced bondage or slavery)? It seems a little contradictory.

That's the whole issue, most characters WOULDN'T kill  --- however brutal a society they live in, they're not psychotic killers.

ICly things like maiming, branding, public ridicule, slavery, etc would all be the same.




** speaking of slavery,  would it make a difference if time was a factor?  What if we reworked how slavery was done in the society -- allowing for more PC freedom?

Perhaps minor criminals and the very poor are only enslaved for a few months to a year (no more than what would be required of any other organization)    Surely then people wouldn't feel like they need to store or kill off their PC because they _know_ eventually circumstances will change.



EDITED TO ADD

Maybe this is where I'm differing.   As a player,  if I'm sitting behind the screen and another player is willing to take the time to actually role-play out not only one scene but all consequences afterward...  that gets me jazzed because hey I (as a player) am suddenly part of a plot/ living PC history; even if it is at the cost of PC's pain.

What's frustrating is when I'm out of the loop and someone just up and kills off my PC.  It's like "hey, your PC is so unnecessary to the game... might as well just remove him/her from the game entirely"

[roughneck]

If we're encouraging less PK, why is it that the staff are slowly but surely relieving high leadership roles of their governmental rights (such as, for example, forced bondage or slavery)? It seems a little contradictory.

That's the whole issue, most characters WOULDN'T kill  --- however brutal a society they live in, they're not psychotic killers.

ICly things like maiming, branding, public ridicule, slavery, etc would all be the same.




** speaking of slavery,  would it make a difference if time was a factor?  What if we reworked how slavery was done in the society -- allowing for more PC freedom?

Perhaps minor criminals and the very poor are only enslaved for a few months to a year (no more than what would be required of any other organization)    Surely then people wouldn't feel like they need to store or kill off their PC because they _know_ eventually circumstances will change.

I think most characters would definately kill.  I think most of us that post on this board would kill if we were placed in Zalanthas and traveled as many spans of lawless deserts and alleys and were subject to an environment full of brutality the way our characters are.

We're all approaching this issue as people who have probably never even had to kill the food we eat.

But I suppose this is boiling down to our thoughts on human nature if we go this route, instead of what makes for the best kind of rp.

[My 2 sids]

But I suppose this is boiling down to our thoughts on human nature if we go this route, instead of what makes for the best kind of rp.

Which goes back to my original point... this isn't Anarchy!    However brutal the IC world is, there has been enough peace and non-killing to establish highly sophisticated civilizations!!    As long as there is a shred of hope in the system -- people will willingly go along. 

All societies take some kind of stand against murder because if the death rate exceeds the birth rate, the society ends.

[Reiloth]

This is a non-issue.

It's a MUD, where you use code to back up your actions. If your character, not the player, is within their rights to mutilate, murder, betray, or corrupt as they will, so be it.

I find it odd to have a staff member make such a general 'stance' statement, where obviously there can be no specific examples. PKing, or rather, one character killing another character, is commonplace in Armageddon. Should it be the OOC 'first decision' in a situation? I've been in situations where killing my character was not only feasible, but what ICly should have happened, and I felt the other player OOCly holding back. Do I blame them? No. Empathy for other human beings is paramount in a situation where you are about to permanently KILL another person. But -- Again, if the character should do it, the player should do it.

[bardbard#4]

one time, this ho got all up in my grill.  she called me her baby daddy.  that was bad for the family business.  so i poisoned her ass, 'splained why she was "fronting", then got all up in that bitch.

with my knife.

[jcljules]

I'd just like to say that there's not enough conflict between PCs in game right now. And while this might seem counterintuitive, that's why I think PK isn't always the best option. PK is an immediate end to the conflict, which is kind of sad, since its so rare these days.

[Fathi]

I'd just like to say that there's not enough conflict between PCs in game right now. And while this might seem counterintuitive, that's why I think PK isn't always the best option. PK is an immediate end to the conflict, which is kind of sad, since its so rare these days.

Just to play devil's advocate, this isn't always the case. Many a lengthy rivalry and plot has formed as a result of someone or another being murdered. Revenge, cover-ups, frantic searches, struggles for leadership... the death of one character can often start more conflict than it ends.

[drasik]

All I can say is this: If you have a problem with the way a player killed your PC instead of using another method of punishment, use the complaint feature within the request tool.

That's all there is to it. Sometimes the person being killed gives no other recourse, but to kill them off.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

This is a game that focuses heavily on roleplay.  Why does the damage done to a PC need to be coded?

Because a lot of folks don't trust other folks to roll with it?

Agreed.

Still, I have had good experiences for the most part when it comes to that ... but coded results would certainly make me more confident.

[Niamh]

First off, we ask players not to enslave other PCs because of the restrictive nature of the role of slave.  A slave role has to rely on other people for a great deal, and it can end up tedious and limiting.

Second, I am not trying to discourage people from killing others at all.  I'm not trying to criticize you and tell you that you all suck.  The entire point of this thread was to get people thinking about alternatives to killing, and what sorts of fun and interesting things those options can bring about.