kill command: Instant attack or no?

[Harmless]

Should the 'kill' command always lead to an instantaneous attack with no warning of the start of combat to the victim? Or, perhaps should there be some instances (or maybe every instance) when there is some delay first?

Should 'backstab' and 'sap' be the way one gets that first, instantaneous attack without warning to the victim, and for all others, be they drov beetles, mekillots, or people in taverns or in the street, 'kill' needs a slight delay before the first attack in order to represent the approach and intent to shoot, with an echo sent to the victim who can then have a brief shot at 'fleeing' before they get reel-locked and murdered?

To compare, 'assist' will not always cause an immediate attack, but instead awaits the next "round" of combat before you attack. However, a victim of an 'assist' can 'flee' before being struck.

See code, discuss.

Code Select Expand



>kill dwarf

You approach a dwarf with the intent to fight.

(about 1-2 seconds later)

You bludgeon the dwarf in the head.



Dwarf sees:

Code Select Expand



The tall, muscular man approaches you.

(1-2 seconds later)

The tall, muscular man bludgeons you on the head.



(versus):

Code Select Expand



>sap dwarf

You sneak up on your target... (victim gets no echo, as it is currently)

You sap the dwarf on the head, sending him reeling.



[Harmless]

Bash should also be instantaneous... after all, it is a charge, with the risk of falling. Other commands should be instantaneous as well.

I just know from years of playing that kill is the favored way to start a fight, but it is the one way that takes (literally) no skill. Maybe it is time we take a look at this.

[Veselka]

On the contrary, Kill takes a lot of skill.

If you aren't skilled, it comes with a heavy delay that exposes you to massive coded drawbacks.

If you are skilled, it comes with a heavy delay that provides with you with massive coded advantages.

If you RP in-between, which you should, it comes with the burden of knowing when to use it, and when to not.

[RogueGunslinger]

To what purpose. I'm not sure I'm cool with the idea of giving victims more chance to survive.

[BrainySmurf]

Engagements opened with the kill command are massively biased towards the victim already. This is unnecessary.

[MatisseOrOtherwise]

Agreed, this is unnecessary.

[Hauwke]

I think its a neat idea, but putting a delay on it would be unfair I feel given the ridiculousness that is the ability to spam the flee command, you dont get an attack of oppurtunity if you fail to run, you can just spam it as fast as you can and you will get away upon which you might get hit but not always, then you have the fact that the person who used the kill command is heavily delayed even though both people were just involved in the same combat, one gets to run and the other has to stand there like an idiot for several seconds.

All of this combines to give the attacked a huge advantage on getting away. They dont need an extra second or so to be able to run off. Unless maybe kill was given no delay after use? Thats about the only way I see it being balanced, but on doing that, you would get attacked by a mek that hasnt got a delay on it and so follows behind instantly.

[Cind]

The kill command being instant with no delay/second chance to the typer is the reason I don't tavern brawl anymore. I make that typo way too easily.

[Harmless]

Okay, so we're cool with being able to instantaneously close the distance to a target in melee combat and land a first strike, even though it already has drawbacks.

Just saying, that even though it has some drawbacks and puts you at risk, if you know you're likely to kill your target, the target may never have a chance and all it took was high strength for you to end the fight.

I'm fine with things as they are, myself...but it isn't realistic in some situations. Maybe it should be a situational thing.

[Riev]

I can see where it comes from, but man am I going to trigger "approaches you with intent to kill" to call off "flee self" and call it roleplaying.

Its like Synthesis' intra-room grid where you can't just run in and attack someone from a span of like half a mile. I just don't think it would work.

Though I like the idea of reversing it, where backstab/sap/bash would be instant and kill/disarm/kick/etc would be pre-and-post delay. It'd change things up, but I don't think it would have the effect you're hoping for.

[BrainySmurf]

you know you're likely to kill your target, the target may never have a chance and all it took was high strength for you to end the fight.

This is not typically true barring half giants or very strong dwarves,  and the latter is debatable. The real way to be sure is a locked door, not a high power differential. My human warrior with high strength and weaponskills high enough to branch adv weapons once attacked a sitting target who was non combat and unarmed.

Reeled them, they stood up, fled, got reeled by my attack of opportunity. By the time my kill delay was up, they were out of the zone we were in entirely.

If we're going to nerf kill, we need to do something like increase reel to the point where getting reeled on your way out of a room gives you delay the same as the person who typed kill on you.

Edit: I would also be cool with a nerf to kill if bash could be used on a sitting target that was not in combat, ala knocking them off their chair, giving warriors flight suppression indoors and rangers flight suppression outdoors (ala charge, although mounted targets might need reworking). Basically as it stands, pinning down your target long enough to finish them is so challenging in Arm, apartment ganking is meme tier for its necessity to confirm a kill against 90% of targets.

[Feco]

Like others have said, I think "kill" already favors the victim under many circumstances.

The newish "threaten" and "chase" commands also softened things nicely.  It's no longer necessary that one enter a room and >kill in order to force interaction.

[Riev]

you know you're likely to kill your target, the target may never have a chance and all it took was high strength for you to end the fight.

This is not typically true barring half giants or very strong dwarves,  and the latter is debatable. The real way to be sure is a locked door, not a high power differential. My human warrior with high strength and weaponskills high enough to branch adv weapons once attacked a sitting target who was non combat and unarmed.

Your experience not withstanding, current events renders this a moot point. A 0day dwarf can, indeed, kill an unarmed person with a simple command.

However, I don't think a 2second delay would have saved anyone, either.

[Delirium]

IMO, if you idle at the bar, that's on you.

Yeah, griefers suck, but I'd still rather die to a sudden, public killing than an NPC. Tara's death in Buffy was horrible and unfair and sudden, but it was meaningful to Willow's story and everyone else around her.

[Riev]

IMO, if you idle at the bar, that's on you.

Yeah, griefers suck, but I'd still rather die to a sudden, public killing than an NPC. Tara's death in Buffy was horrible and unfair and sudden, but it was meaningful to Willow's story and everyone else around her.

It wasn't public.
Some of us take more offense to the handling of the situation, than the situation itself.


On topic, I don't think the pre-delay would be beneficial or solve the issue at hand. It is an interesting twist, but that is really all it is.

[Feco]

I'm super lost.

[Riev]

I'm super lost.

This is coming from 2 recent incidents where someone rolled up a 0-day dwarf warrior and, with no noticeable roleplay involved, murdered two PCs. (It may have been 2 different dwarves, likely same player). This involved simply standing in a bar, drawing a weapon, and typing "kill" providing an instant attack, a reel, and a followup for the knockout/kill.

Harmless is suggesting that kill has a pre-delay lag on it, so that people have time to react, to maybe reduce this kind of situation from happening again.

[Miradus]

The level of panic, over-reaction, and hysteria over these two events is far worse than the events themselves.

That griefing method has been documented and known for what, ten freakin' years now? And you've seen two instances of it?

Have any of you ever paid attention to the room echoes going on in the Gaj? There's people being attacked and possibly murdered left and right. And suddenly everyone is like, "OMG IT MIGHT HAPPEN TO ME -- NOOS! I HAS PLOT ARMOR!"

We inhabit a virtual world that George R.R. Martin would consider too harsh. I don't see how dying to this is any worse than running into an uber-carru or walking into a one-shot mek on the Ivory-Salt road. There's another bar where dwarves don't rush out of the dormitory and kill you. It's called "Red's Retreat". Prices are a little higher, assumably because they have a no-murderdwarf rule.

I'd like just one of you to come up with some IC response to this. Sell "guard" services in the Gaj. Announce a pogrom against psychotic and unstable dwarves in Allanak. STAND at the bar or buy a wooden cane and wield it as a prop (knowing that it codedly will be a weapon).

ANYTHING but asking for yet more CODE RESTRICTIONS on the game.

[Harmless]

Maybe guard should be able to be applied to a table.

Guard the bar, or a table, and you have a small chance to guard everyone sitting at it from one attacker. It would be far less effective than guarding an individual.

[Riev]

Maybe guard should be able to be applied to a table.

Guard the bar, or a table, and you have a small chance to guard everyone sitting at it from one attacker. It would be far less effective than guarding an individual.

I WOULD like to see the soldiers in and around the Gaj be more effective than a simplistic Kill-Box when someone accidentally kicks in a brawl. Theres like 8 of them and they just linger around.

I would +1 the idea that bar bouncers/onduty guards guard the people at the bar, somehow. I don't know if the code would allow for it, but I'd be down.

[Brytta Léofa]

I'm not totally opposed to a kill delay or anything, but it makes newbie mages more powerful.

[mansa]

I'd rather have code that prevents new characters from using combat commands in certain rooms until a certain timer is met.

[Harmless]

I do think that with the incredible strength that dwarves have that they really should just be made karma-restricted, also. After all, they are rare, in the lore of the game, far more rare than elves, half-elves, or humans. Secondly, the power they have straight out of the box has clearly and amply been demonstrated. It exceeds most magickers' in terms of ability to kill, as I personally have come to realize through playing multiple new 1 and 2 karma magicker subguilds. It stands to reason they ought to be available only after someone has shown some experience with the game just like all the other guilds, subguilds and races which give a player the ability to inflict an easy PK.

[Armaddict]

Knee-jerk reactions abound.

No need for this change.

[Harmless]

in this thread, I am suggesting an idea that is definitely prompted as a reaction to recent events, but some of these opinions, and ideas are ones that have been suggested before by others and now I just more strongly agree with them.

....such as finally wanting to agree with what others have said about dwarves

...feeling kind of annoyed that in my experience with PK that the "kill" command takes priority as a preferred method of initiating PK over other skill-based combat starters, and

...feeling like "guard" is an underpowered skill, or that bodyguards are in low demand and that they could get some kind of buff in the PK environment.


Also, I am going to go ahead and compare this griefing shit to school shootings and right-wing conservatives saying that it is "knee-jerk" to want to ban rifles and other deadly firearms when it is yelled for more loudly to make that change. Sorry, but the time to discuss a change is whenever the fuck we want to discuss it, and the fallacy of "this is a knee-jerk reaction" is just that, a fallacy. We can still talk about it, as long as we don't go into specifics of IC events, which I have not

[Lizzie]

Changing the system to address the actions of a few (in this case, possibly even only the one?) seems counter-productive.

If someone is abusing the code, then it needs to be pointed out to that person, and the person needs to be instructed to stop. If they don't stop, they need to be ejected from the game. If they create another character to continue in the same vein, then the player file needs to be ejected, and perhaps so does their IP address.

Why further limit roleplay, due to the actions of a few who choose not to be responsible players?

Attempt to educate the irresponsible. If that doesn't work, remove them. No need for the rest of the playerbase to change how WE play, just because a couple of people choose to be dicks.

[Harmless]

I totally hear what you're saying, but would it actually be that much of a restriction to do any of the things suggested? All of them are already counterbalanced -- for example, a guard can only stop an attacker on a successful skill check, and I already suggested that it be penalized if you don't guard a specific person. Or, if dwarves are 1 karma, they can still be special-apped by anyone. They just can't be rolled straight out of chargen on a fresh account, but anyone who wants to play one can give it a shot. Is that a nerf to dwarves? yes, but is it a restriction to roleplay? nope.

In any case, it is totally up to staff how they choose to run the game, or how they choose to take action to penalize specific players (if that is even possible in the case of griefing), but I am still entitled to my opinion, and I wouldn't mind any of the changes suggested so far.

[valeria]

Changing the system to address the actions of a few (in this case, possibly even only the one?) seems counter-productive.

I strongly agree with this sentiment.  I also don't necessarily thing it's bad to discuss things like approach combat or approach movement, despite what triggers them.

Rather than a combat approach, I would rather have it as part of your sdesc, like we have "naked" as part of your sdesc now.  "The armed tall, muscular man enters from the north."  I'd think you would notice that someone is walking in with swords in their hands.  If nothing else, other people would probably turn to look.  It would probably also be easier to codedly implement than a combat approach and all the necessary exceptions.

People with slight of hand could silently draw their concealed weapon after they've entered a room.  Otherwise, you will either be seen entering with a weapon, or drawing your weapon, which should put people on notice that you might be up to no good.  Or might earn you a "hey, Amos, why are you carrying that training sword out of the training hall."

It might also help the issue of people from walking around with training weapons for days until a soldier points it out to them.

[MatisseOrOtherwise]

'Armed' in the SDesc has many problems. Not only is it bulky, but it invalidates 'ready' commands from sleight of hand, etc.

How about we just accept these events as outliers, punish them accordingly, and move the fuck on?

(Dwarves should be 1 Karma, though.)

[Armaddict]

No, it is a knee jerk reaction.

Calling it out as such is not comparable to school shooting negligence, -that- is a true logical fallacy to assert that it is.

Don't say stupid shit.

Some people died to a dwarf and instantly cried out about how unfair it was because they were sitting there and not expecting it.  This is not new shit, this is not the terrible weight of injustice, this is a video game where they are upset they lost a character.  Stop blowing shit up and insisting there are no feel bads in the game, or that we need to overhaul everything whenever someone gets feel bads.

[Harmless]

in a GDB where half the shit people post is either outright toxic, inflammatory, blatantly biased or self-serving or all of the above, I totally and completely reserve my right to post what I want, as long as I follow the GDB rules. Sorry! 

[Armaddict]

Okay.  But I'm still going to post with actual perspective on it as a knee jerk reaction and call it out as such, and bringing in the comparison of school shootings in order to defend that reaction was a stupid move.  No one is advocating rolling up a character with the sole intention of finding an afk person and attacking them.  The frequency of such, and of it actually resulting as desired, is actually very small.

Suggesting what equates to a complete combat change that makes everyone safer from anyone who'd want to kill them is overhype and overreaction, and putting it under the banner of stopping griefing is incredibly narrow in perspective of overall gameplay...unless you're building a defensive game where dying is hard.

Put dwarf behind the karma wall if you want, but we're already having the argument against the karma wall as is.

[Riev]

Woah woah now guys.

Differing opinions? On MY GDB?

This cannot stand.

[Veselka]

Why the hell would we want to make ArmageddonMUD safer?

[valeria]

'Armed' in the SDesc has many problems. Not only is it bulky, but it invalidates 'ready' commands from sleight of hand, etc.

The way I was picturing it, it would tick on when you "eX" "draw" weapon, and tick off when you "sheath" weapon. So if you were pulling a weapon with sleight of hand it wouldn't tick on, if that makes sense.

But let's be real. If you're sleight-of-handing a weapon and not hidden, I don't think it would be crazy that people may notice you're armed.

[CodeMaster]

a dwarf without a collar is worth keeping an eye on

[Scrumpkin]

Knee-jerk reactions abound.

No need for this change.

Making twinks more twinkish.  I agree with Armaddict, no need for this change.

[azuriolinist]

As many have said above, if this is to address the recent events, I think the best course of action is for staff to watch -- if not outright stop -- any applications coming from the one or two people at fault. There's no need for a change that might negatively affect all because of one single and rare case.

That said, if there was a way to attempt to prevent one's victim from escaping combat while inside combat (besides trapping them in a room with only one exit), I might have been more in favor with this idea. As it stands, it's pretty easy for the victim to FLEE a combat situation (unless RNG isn't in their favor).

A short delay after 'kill' is entered, that I could maybe get behind if only to give the slimmest window of a chance for the victim to (if given any hint by the instigator) notice and react. But I'd leave out the echo.

[Nao]

As many have said above, if this is to address the recent events, I think the best course of action is for staff to watch -- if not outright stop -- any applications coming from the one or two people at fault. There's no need for a change that might negatively affect all because of one single and rare case.

That's impossible because there is no way to identify those people. IP addresses are pretty easily changed, so they can just make a new account and start over.

I don't think combat changes to combat that apply to all characters are a good solution, either - as others have pointed out, the code already favors whoever is being attacked, and before these incidents? The consensus seems to have been that cities are too safe already.

[Miradus]

People have been ignoring the room echoes in the Gaj too long as it is. Ever pay attention to those? There's random knifings, beatings, attacks, etc. going on the entire time you're sitting there chatting up Miss MelonBreasts. There's even a filthy breed pissing in the corner and pools of vomit on the floor. If this was a bar in real life, there's no way you'd be in there unarmed.

The only code change I would support is increasing the space at the bar.object so that more than one person can stand there at a time. Harder to stumperize me if I'm standing.

[Delirium]

Stand code is weird with bars. Try "stand ON bar"  - yes, it's quirky, but it works. You will stand at the bar if it's set up to allow it.

[CodeMaster]

People have been ignoring the room echoes in the Gaj too long as it is. Ever pay attention to those? There's random knifings, beatings, attacks, etc. going on the entire time you're sitting there chatting up Miss MelonBreasts. There's even a filthy breed pissing in the corner and pools of vomit on the floor. If this was a bar in real life, there's no way you'd be in there unarmed.

The only code change I would support is increasing the space at the bar.object so that more than one person can stand there at a time. Harder to stumperize me if I'm standing.

All you have to do is move the stools away from the bar and you can stand (I think it's "get stool bar" or "pull stool bar" or something like that)

[Miradus]

Huh. Learn something every day. Thanks!

get stool bar;throw stool breed

Now if I can just learn to stop going back for the fucking beetle, or knife, or whatever object I think is worth my life to try and snatch back from the mob that nearly killed me the first time.

[Harmless]

People have been ignoring the room echoes in the Gaj too long as it is. Ever pay attention to those? There's random knifings, beatings, attacks, etc. going on the entire time you're sitting there chatting up Miss MelonBreasts.

As far as I know, and I have been playing the game for many years and spent many hours reading those Gaj echoes, there are not random "knifings" at the Gaj in the echoes. Look/read harder; there are brawls, cups thrown, savage FISTFIGHT beatings, but not knifings/murders.

Murder is pretty serious. Look at city elf culture docs; if a city elf is just straight up murdered, then there WILL be vengeance. Look at the things even NPC soldiers of His Arm say once they have finished killing a murderer or PC who attempted murder -- they do not tolerate random MURDER.

Murder is important and common, but it happens for a reason; it sends a message, or it is supposed to. It earns someone coin, or costs someone else coin. Life is not quite worthless in Zalanthas; people do not just shrug when someone is randomly MURDERED. In fact, murder, i.e., BLOOD, is the most impotant currency in game.

You save murder for when it counts, because the long Arm of Allanaki law will eventually catch up to you, and you'll find yourself in the Arena facing certain death even if you thought you did well to hide your tracks.

If this was a bar in real life, there's no way you'd be in there unarmed.

Actually, it has been a PC-driven cultural convention for years to question why people are standing around armed in the Gaj. It makes people nervous, rightly so, and on countless occasions His Arm soldiers, from eager redshirt recruits to Sergeants, have asked people in the Gaj to shove those weapons aside, even if it was LITERALLY A CRAFTING KNIFE-PICK item.

If we're going to have a cultural shift where people walk around with weapons all day long, expecting another random murder attempt, then that would be quite a change from years of the standard I have seen.

The same has not been true in Rinthi bars, where murders have happened for IC reasons and weapons are held aloft without question.

[Armaddict]

Actually, it has been a PC-driven cultural convention for years to question why people are standing around armed in the Gaj. It makes people nervous, rightly so, and on countless occasions His Arm soldiers, from eager redshirt recruits to Sergeants, have asked people in the Gaj to shove those weapons aside, even if it was LITERALLY A CRAFTING KNIFE-PICK item.

Which is precisely the backdrop of why they should not be viewed as safe spaces.  Everyone in there is armed, just not wielding.  A knifing -can- erupt at any given point.  A clubbing.  That doesn't mean it's not without repercussions, and it also doesn't mean you should be able to escape from it easily.

[Miradus]

If we're going to have a cultural shift where people walk around with weapons all day long, expecting another random murder attempt, then that would be quite a change from years of the standard I have seen.

Good! Let's do it.

[Harmless]

Not everybody wants to play a character who would walk around with a weapon in hand at all times. Also, if the paradigm shift to be WIELDing (I admit we are all mostly armed, just not wielding, but not wielding +reel lock = death), that might be fine if it happened with some actual roleplay behind it. Instead we have a trend where there is no warning  not even an emote or a say command, before the kill command.

I am still going to argue that normally, roleplayers roleplay before a kill attempt; it doesn't have to always immediately precede the attack, but if someone rolls up a character just to walk into a bar and >kill the first weak-looking unarmed PC they see, then the kill command is not being used as intended in an RPI.

There seems to be some kind of embrace of this new standard. That is fucked. I think if we are going to be "cool" with non-roleplaying shitheads trolling us with random, RP-less attacks, then at least a bit of coded warning that the first strike is coming is needed.

I am cool with many qualifiers added to a code change. Make it so this change only happens in certain bars. Make it so guards have an easier time keeping an area secure from random attacks. Make it so the kill command delay only applies in crowded rooms. Whatever the case, discipline actions are not guaranteed to work for the future. 20-30day plus stories are being ended due to the unilateral action of shitty roleplayers and that is probably not what was intended for an RPI.

[Vox]

Being victimized is never fun, even in the imaginary confines of a role-playing game. Those of us invested in living out as true to our characters as we can in game often feel the actual feelings we're RP'ing. So losing a character regardless of level of RP of the attacker before or after is never going to be met with a smile and a vibrant leap from the keyboard after the beep and Mantis Head pop up. Understanding that anyone around you in the brutal world of Zalanthas can draw a weapon and try to kill you is sort of the 'play at your own risk' of MURDER, CORRUPTION, BETRAYAL, regardless of how much time you've chosen to invest in playing this game. And while it's very possible that this was just a griefer trying to grief it's also possible that it was some new player fresh from a world of Hack n Slash MUD's getting up to test combat on the first warm body they saw, it's also possible this (also probably new player) thought they were doing what their character should do.. it could just as easily have been that a patrolling NPC soldier was triggered and insta ran in to subdue the criminal, save the other player and end the 'attempt'. But bad luck in this case for the victim lead to a quick, punishing death. The issue to me though is the outcry of what players think is fair/possible/expected when it comes to things that happen to their characters. Including some PC apparently attacking like an aggro NPC. And now that it's gotten so much attention, it will probably spawn the occasional copy-cat griefer.. and I truly don't think we should care.

I've OHK'ed players before after wishing up to staff declaring my intention and then RP'ing a brutal scene with lots of hemotes and thoughts that everyone but the victim gets to see and enjoy. And while I did everything by the book I still felt OOC'ly bad that they didn't get some kind of beautiful death scene even though an assassin contract was just completed cleanly, efficiently, realistically and totally IC. I can only imagine the feeling of being robbed of that character's goals and dreams, connections and time invested when they're kicked violently out of the game wondering how and why. Meanwhile I'm vainly hoping they feel special that someone actually paid an assassin to murder them. But let's be real, they definitely don't feel that immediately and probably sent in a request to Staff asking if it was a Bug.. Maybe months from that death they may look back on it and be able to detach and see the greater story at work but I bet they're still salty. Would they be less salty if they saw a quick flavor emote before getting murked? I don't think so.

At the end of the day, whether we're getting assassinated or violently assaulted, there's things that are going to happen to our characters that are beyond our control. It sucks to think that a 'griefer' was behind the wheel of a character's demise, but if we can stay in the greater story of the game then that 'griefer' is just a homicidal maniac, and best believe Zalanthas has more than a few. IC'ly this event has unintentionally created multiple plots and a general unease of dwarves wandering into taverns and that's f'ing AWESOME. OOC'ly Staff will certainly do what they can to track the offending player and cut them off at character creation.. but if they get through, guess what.. DANGER. And danger, is always good.

So, hell no, please don't give validation to a random griefer's intent to cause grief by actually changing the game to address something that isn't even a real issue. Just stay frosty when you see a dwarf carrying around a spiked club..

[Harmless]

Nice post and all, but the 20 year old code behind >kill is basic as fuck, I am going to stick to my guns with that one and bow out of the thread, enjoy your shitty RP, if this goes on too long I am just gonna check out from the MUD entirely because I didn't sign on to RPI for this shit, maybe go and read a good book or some shit.

Will file staff and player complaints on my way out, fwiw.

Btw, ironically yes, yesterday I had another dose of good RP with the game but sure as fuck none of it revolved around mindless PK bullshit, not at all.

Fix basic ass code, make >backstab and >strategy work again. GG griefers

[valeria]

I'm not going to let a solo griefer drive me away from my game, kthx. Staff seems to be pretty on top of the specific issue.

I WOULD like an "armed" adjective for entirely different reasons, and I think that wanting a combat approach is legitimate (even if I don't agree with it). It's not all about the griefer.

[Harmless]

Gah. One last post to clarify my threat to ragequit (yeah, like I can do that after being on this game for so many years. Just take it as an expression of rage.)

But, I Disagree, staff do not appear to be on top of it, yet. Staff and player complaints were just filed for them to read.

Reasons for wanting to peace out are as much about the community's apparent total blasé over this shit, shown i this thread, as well as the griefer himself. I get to be told that I am saying "stupid shit" in this thread because I find the code that allows fresh out the box trolls to do this to be garbage and wanted to discuss ways it can be improved.

I am not asking for game balance, RP restrictions, etc. I am asking for intensive RP which by definition is code driven and roleplay driven, but not purely code driven.

See and read the contents of my posts, I really have said it all now.

[valeria]

I don't think that disagreeing with your idea is the same as saying that you're saying stupid shit. And I'm not sure that disagreement with your proposed solution is a blasé attitude. If you had brought it up at a different time you probably still would have seen disagreement because 10 people can look at a problem and not all agree on what the specific solution should be.

I do think people are sensitive to wanting to react to one guy who is probably going to get bored before too long. I know I certainly am. Is combat approach a good idea on its own? Maybe. But you can't expect people not to think of the context it's being raised in, and being leery of being reactionary.

There are clear indications that a certain sort of person is being monitored and shut down when they try to start things. I can't go into details, but the change has been apparent if you've been around for the incidents.

[azuriolinist]

I'm actually glad you've brought this discussion up, because the combat code could definitely see some improvement -- especially if your argument is for intensive roleplay. I still don't believe tacking on a delay to the kill command is the way to go about it. When it becomes reflex for players to leave the room when The tall, muscular man approaches you. is printed on the screen, is that any more conducive to roleplay than the way the kill command works now?

The way the combat code works now, it's so fast-paced it's difficult to shoot out an emote, much less roleplay successfully once combat is initiated. More so in high pressure situations. I think the entire thing needs an overhaul if we want to encourage roleplay during combat.

That said, to address this specific situation, maybe the way defense works when unarmed could be changed. I've always been iffy with the way it currently works. When a PC is unarmed versus an armed opponent (and on equal footing, let's say), it's as if they're suddenly fighting drunk and running headlong into each swing. But armed, that same PC starts dodging blows left and right.

Now, I could see the reach of a weapon being a factor in this situation. But being unarmed still gives an overly large hit to a PC's defense, imo. What if the hit on defense when unarmed was lowered just enough so that an unarmed PC would generally not be immediately hit with reeling blows (in a fairly skill-equal situation), but also enough so that being unarmed remains a risk? A realistic risk.

[puella]

That said, to address this specific situation, maybe the way defense works when unarmed could be changed. I've always been iffy with the way it currently works. When a PC is unarmed versus an armed opponent (and on equal footing, let's say), it's as if they're suddenly fighting drunk and running headlong into each swing. But armed, that same PC starts dodging blows left and right.

Now, I could see the reach of a weapon being a factor in this situation. But being unarmed still gives an overly large hit to a PC's defense, imo. What if the hit on defense when unarmed was lowered just enough so that an unarmed PC would generally not be immediately hit with reeling blows (in a fairly skill-equal situation), but also enough so that being unarmed remains a risk? A realistic risk.

I like this idea; one thing unrelated that it would address (which is more a pet peeve of mine) is that the way unarmed combat works sort of forces us to always have 'weapons out' when we are outside the gates.  If being unarmed weren't so devastating, we could actually go around with weapons sheathed and draw them when we encounter an enemy, rather than riding around with them out already.

[CodeMaster]

My post in this thread was probably a little insensitive because I didn't know all the details.

If you look at Armageddon through the game theory lens, with a goal of "winning" and surviving, one dominant strategy is to play an invisible magicker or a templar.  Nuff said.

Another dominant strategy is "alwayshide" - sneak around solo with your weapons out, use the Way to communicate with everyone, and asymmetrically pk your enemies (and their friends) whenever the naive fools deign to come out of hiding to help a newbie or sit "alone" in the Gaj for a few minutes.  Ha, ha, ha...

And the third dominant strategy, if all you care about is griefing with a brand new character, is to roll a dwarf warrior with prioritized strength and attack anyone trying to play "normal people" who walk down the street without leaping from shadow to shadow, and who are stupid enough to sheath their bastard swords so they can have a drink.

Seeing how defenseless they are, the players playing "normal people" are incentivized to adopt the alwayshide strategy (it is the most accessible/acceptable dominant strategy), and we end up in a setting where it's harder to tell stories because everyone's hiding or magick.

I've been annoyed by the alwayshide style of play, which is super easy now that you can move around while hidden, but I have to admit I've also been complicit.

Fortunately, when I look at the new classes, I feel like they're addressing this problem by requiring you to team up to fully execute the alwayshide strategy I describe above.  (And Vox, if you're reading this, that's why I think it's not necessarily bad that assassins were dissembled the way they were; but I know we'll both miss them.)  If you're teaming up with and reliant on other PCs, you're telling better stories.

But I think the griefer strategy needs to be looked at, hence this thread.  And I think the best thing we can do is to reduce combat effectiveness of brand new/low-skilled characters.  This would force the new character to put in a couple hours of playtime -- which would, incidentally, be quickly rewarded with a more powerful character.  It's not a solution but it's a stop-gap and in the meantime you have a "contributing" character doing stuff in the world

[Miradus]

Nice post and all, but the 20 year old code behind >kill is basic as fuck, I am going to stick to my guns with that one and bow out of the thread, enjoy your shitty RP, if this goes on too long I am just gonna check out from the MUD entirely because I didn't sign on to RPI for this shit, maybe go and read a good book or some shit.

Will file staff and player complaints on my way out, fwiw.

Btw, ironically yes, yesterday I had another dose of good RP with the game but sure as fuck none of it revolved around mindless PK bullshit, not at all.

Fix basic ass code, make >backstab and >strategy work again. GG griefers

What exactly is it with the players of this game that so many of you think you're so important to keeping this shit rolling along that people will immediately capitulate to your demands if you threaten to quit the game?

I've quit the game like three times now and each time I came back, guess what, it was still here.

[BrainySmurf]

Combat code in Armageddon is insanely clunky. There's a million things  that absolutely need to be looked at and have sat on the back burner for decades. I could write a list here as long as my arm about all of them. If anyone at all gives a care about my opinion on such matters, that is something for a different thread.

Someone's already mentioned it, but the issue with this incident is not the instantaneous nature of kill. I would argue a more productive approach would be to rework how unarmed combat works. Specifically:

Reduce the penalty for being unarmed by a large margin (not entirely) so that it is a noticeable but modest penalty.
Balanced by: give the recipient of a disarm an after-attack delay so they can't re-equip and have to fight a couple of rounds at a modest penalty.

Also worth examining is the affect of stun. Your ability to eat your opponent's stun in this game is a very bimodal impact. Either it's negligible because you're fighting someone armed who has training and only lightly hitting them, or you got them unarmed and sitting and you devour their entire st pool in one or two hits. Personally I think we should reduce stun damage of blunt weapons, and compensate by making reel code actually delay your opponent by a larger margin. This is especially useful in my opinion because you cannot train your stun pool -- that is dictated by your stats -- but you can gradually increase your reel resistances, allowing a diligent person to train for the consequences of getting clobbered unexpectedly by a club.

Either or both of those solutions would address the issue at hand. Putting a pre-delay on kill, however, would just make combat even more clunky and make certain already difficult to manage gimmicks totally horrible to manage.

[MeTekillot]

I mean, in the interest of realism, even if you're a hard motherfucker, if you go bare-handed at someone with a 3 foot long sword, you're going to have a really, really, really bad time, unless their leg is broken or you're on speed, or something.

[BrainySmurf]

Likewise in the interest of realism, one doesn't forget how to move their feet (dodge) because they don't have a sword in their hand. Yet the unarmed penalty strongly affects your ability to dodge. Obviously going unarmed against an armed opponent will end in your defeat, if only because they can hurt you and you're bouncing off of them. It's the defensive penalties that seem particularly outrageous when we vacillate between "I have a sword in my hand and I can dodge you endlessly" to "I do not have a sword and now you cannot miss me at all."

[Armaddict]

If it -isn't- a knee jerk reaction, and it's just a thought out reason for why combat should be slowed down to allow people to not get ambushed/surprised and die, then it's been brought up in various approach threads that you can search for.  Some of them had huge lists of pros and cons if I recall, and some really innovative ideas on how to 'spread out' rooms as far as the instant closer.  In the end, though, it has generally been an unfavorable reception.

I don't think that unfavorable reception should change merely because someone can fall back on the 'loss of story' attack once again.  It's an attack that intentionally tries to infer that people who argue with it are against roleplay, which is entirely untrue, and I've posted various times about how the overuse of the 'loss of story' attacks equating with 'I don't agree with my death' instances was something easily ignored at this point.

Also worth examining is the affect of stun. Your ability to eat your opponent's stun in this game is a very bimodal impact. Either it's negligible because you're fighting someone armed who has training and only lightly hitting them, or you got them unarmed and sitting and you devour their entire st pool in one or two hits. Personally I think we should reduce stun damage of blunt weapons, and compensate by making reel code actually delay your opponent by a larger margin. This is especially useful in my opinion because you cannot train your stun pool -- that is dictated by your stats -- but you can gradually increase your reel resistances, allowing a diligent person to train for the consequences of getting clobbered unexpectedly by a club.

This, however, is a new idea that has not been presented in some time that is not a huge mechanic disruption; re-examining the impacts on stun.  Some testing could be done on staff side to see if there are suitable tweaks to be made that help in the rare grief situation, without simultaneously diluting the ambush situation.

[Hauwke]

Despite what movies tell people, the vast majority of fights are going to be won by the larger individual. Why? A ton of reasons.

1: Wrist strength. It takes that to parry a blow, and every time you parry its going to sap a little energy from your arm. Having a stronger wrist means you have to put slightly less of yourself into it.

2: Reach. There is a huge difference between the arm belonging to that 5'6 guy and that 6'6 guy. It might not look like much, but it is the difference between having to take a large step forward to swat that guy in the face, and a regular step. Big guy go further.

3 The ability to 'absorb' damage. Now this one is tricky, but generally the larger individual is going to have more fat and muscle on their body by virtue of being larger. Historical records have shown that gladiators, the prized ones at least, were overfed to make them fat. Guess why? So that when they inevitably got slashed in the gut, they didnt actually die from it. Same concept but on a slightly smaller scale.

4: Stronger arms. The simply ability to overpower another person is invaluable.


The only one of these that Zalanthan dwarves lack, is reach. But that can be easily fixed by giving them a longer sword.

As for realism when it comes to being unable to dodge when unarmed, yeah that one is kind of confusing and I cannot really explain that one other than dodging is hard as fuck and super tiring. Try it some time, get a friend to swing a stick at you and try to not get whooped with it.

[Harmless]

fatigue mid-combat does not seem to be simulated at all, either. there are move points, spent when you use certain skills or abilities. however, it appears you can fight indefinitely without using skills, retain your move points, and not seem to get tired.

I emote being tired, sure, but codedly, I do not think I am getting penalized for a prolonged fight.

If dodging takes energy, then dodging (+/- parrying, blocking, attacking, etc) should be most likely to succeed early in a fight. later in the fight, dodging should get harder and harder with some other element of fatigue coded in.

maybe fatigue should just be coded with move points, and a little move is lost when you do certain common combat things. maybe some other form of fatigue during combat should be tracked independent of move points. Maybe it already is, in the nebulous "balance" feature that I hear exists. Either way, it doesn't seem to have a very sensical implementation.

if people don't like a change to dodging/fatigue that makes it harder to ambush-kill before they flee, then implement a "hamstring" command and give it to warriors and assassin/thug types. It'll greatly penalize dodging. You can use it as a opener and then your next few attacks will be very likely to destroy your unarmed opponent who may rely on agility and dodging to survive.

BTW, I am glad that people are in the mood to discuss combat revamping again instead of just falling on "knee-jerk knee-jerk."

[azuriolinist]

I emote being tired, sure, but codedly, I do not think I am getting penalized for a prolonged fight.

From what I've seen, no, there are no coded penalties unless you're in an unfavorable situation, from what I recall.

I like the idea of implementing fatigue in combat. And Hauwke, I agree. Being unarmed might speed up the process, but regardless of whether or not you're armed, dodging is draining.

[SuchDragonWow]

It doesn't seem necessary.  I don't see what it adds to the game.  Maybe a pre-delay where both parties can do nothing codedly except emote.  I'd be fine with that, but if it doesn't involve something to do with adding more avenues for roleplay, then it's not needed, imo.

[Vox]

Edited for trolling. - Delirium

While I'm not a fan of additional code being added I do think the combat code can continue to be updated(hack and riposte are good examples of that slowly starting actually), but your suggestion of a delay before combat even begins is just nonsense in my opinion so I stated why with a hope that we can bridge the short-comings and 'basic as fuck'ness (as you say) in certain areas of the code with actual RP of our own regardless.

[Harmless]

Vox, while I deserve your snark for the emo-tastic shit I was posting and don't deny that, the reason I replied that way to you was because your reply to all of the discussion could be summarized as "you died, you're upset, get over it, the game's harsh." Not useful, not accurate, and not discussing the topic, but thanks anyway for your two sids.

[Vox]

Vox, while I deserve your snark for the emo-tastic shit I was posting and don't deny that, the reason I replied that way to you was because your reply to all of the discussion could be summarized as "you died, you're upset, get over it, the game's harsh." Not useful, not accurate, and not discussing the topic, but thanks anyway for your two sids.

That feels like a gross oversimplification of my post but I get it. Please know I wasn't trying to be dismissive, just sharing my honest opinion on the matter.

[najdorf]

It has been mentioned either here, or somewhere else before, but the real cool thing would be a new reaction skill.

skill react_combat:

If attacked while unarmed, the skilled defender gets a chance to reach to their weapon (closest worn on the belt) and draw it. Being observant (watching the target) and agile improves your chances.

success should be based on a formula including attackers agility, sneak/hide status, offense, etc. and defenders agility, watch, defense, etc.

and should be controlled with a toggle. (not always you want this to happen, right?)

[Vox]

It has been mentioned either here, or somewhere else before, but the real cool thing would be a new reaction skill.

skill react_combat:

If attacked while unarmed, the skilled defender gets a chance to reach to their weapon (closest worn on the belt) and draw it. Being observant (watching the target) and agile improves your chances.

success should be based on a formula including attackers agility, sneak/hide status, offense, etc. and defenders agility, watch, defense, etc.

and should be controlled with a toggle. (not always you want this to happen, right?)

This is fucking brilliant. +1

[BrainySmurf]

The gruff Byn Sergeant says, in Sirihish, "We're going to be training your reactions from now on, recruits. Which means I'm going to jump one of you at random at every meal."

[Feco]

It has been mentioned either here, or somewhere else before, but the real cool thing would be a new reaction skill.

skill react_combat:

If attacked while unarmed, the skilled defender gets a chance to reach to their weapon (closest worn on the belt) and draw it. Being observant (watching the target) and agile improves your chances.

success should be based on a formula including attackers agility, sneak/hide status, offense, etc. and defenders agility, watch, defense, etc.

and should be controlled with a toggle. (not always you want this to happen, right?)

+1

But maybe we call it quick draw, or combat reflexes.

[Delirium]

It has been mentioned either here, or somewhere else before, but the real cool thing would be a new reaction skill.

skill react_combat:

If attacked while unarmed, the skilled defender gets a chance to reach to their weapon (closest worn on the belt) and draw it. Being observant (watching the target) and agile improves your chances.

success should be based on a formula including attackers agility, sneak/hide status, offense, etc. and defenders agility, watch, defense, etc.

and should be controlled with a toggle. (not always you want this to happen, right?)

+1

But maybe we call it quick draw, or combat reflexes.

The gruff Byn Sergeant says, in Sirihish, "We're going to be training your reactions from now on, recruits. Which means I'm going to jump one of you at random at every meal."

I love everything about this.

[BrainySmurf]

I like it. Though the only drawback is it needs to have a nosave toggle flag or you're going to end up stabbing people a lot during rough circle or if you emoted equipping your sparring weapon but forgot to actually pick it up and the command defaults to the pair of heramide and terradin laced knives on your belt.

[Rumor]

I like it. Though the only drawback is it needs to have a nosave toggle flag or you're going to end up stabbing people a lot during rough circle or if you emoted equipping your sparring weapon but forgot to actually pick it up and the command defaults to the pair of heramide and terradin laced knives on your belt.

The toggle is suggested in the post.

[BrainySmurf]

Sure is.

[Harmless]

Buff watch. If you are watching someone, you get an echo if they type >kill, you are facing them and if standing, you back away as they approach, and or to position yourself in combat to be in a favorable situation for that first strike -- perhaps just giving a one-time bonus to dodge for the first round of attacks, or maybe codedly delaying the kill and giving you a few seconds to try to outright flee or draw a weapon. If you aren't watching them, no delay / no bonus to that first dodge.

Why do I care so much about this? Because a change like this will improve roleplay.

Think about it; if I knew that codedly a character could instantly kill me, why would I want to interact with them if there is even a chance that they would want to? If I instead knew I at least had a chance at escaping alive, I would hear what they had to say.

Therefore if approached by a raider, who wished to "parley", I would consider hearing or even complying with demands instead of being tempted to straight up run. If in the Gaj with a rinthi or dwarf I would have drinks at the bar if there was just one person I was worried about becoming abruptly murderous. It wouldn't help me if there were hidden assassins around, and so be it, that is what assassins train to do.

Here are ways one should still be able to get an insta-attack in say a raiding situation:

A.) Target is subdued or sitting and cannot back away
B.) Target is watching someone else or scanning
C.) Buff ranged weapons such as crossbows or bows with the "aim" command, where you have the ability to "fire" after aiming for an instantaneous release of the projectile
D.) Combat skills already mentioned, such as Bash which closes the distance too quickly for opponent to back away
E.) Stealthy engagement such as backstab or sap, which have a timer pre-delay but no echo


Sorry, not gonna drop how much I still think this insta-kill and one-hit reel lock BS drains RP possibilities for weak PCs interacting with dangerous ones. Not asking for an echo chamber but any idea in this thread could potentially help roleplay without asking us to do non-IC things like stand and hold a weapon at all times or ask us to take life and death risks just to get a little interaction.

[ShaLeah]

Why the hell would we want to make ArmageddonMUD safer?

This.
Kill should be an instant fight or flight adrenaline rush. I'm against any change in this code.

[Harmless]

I'll up the ante on my "aim" idea, to prove further that the point of my idea is not to "make armageddon safer" (which is ridiculous) but to improve roleplay and further make this game into a roleplay-intensive environment. See the full content of all my damn posts on this thread to see why I am getting at this, and no, this is not just a knee-jerk response to a griefer, I have had beefs with how >kill works for a long time and wished that aggression was more nuanced for a long time now, such as when I have been raided in the past.

Revised "aim" command:

With an optional toggle (nosave_aim), you will automatically fire and initiate combat if the character tries to flee or leave the room, immediately initiating combat with them.

(Conversely if the victim does flee/leave before aiming has completed, their chance to dodge will be better, to balance it out, but they will still be shot at).

In addition, the aiming person don't have much of a delay after firing the shot, so they can put away the ranged weapon and draw another melee one once combat has started.

Just remember, the ammo may be laced with poison.

Now, once a victim is "aimed" at, they really should think twice before avoiding RP; they know that a simple release of the bowstring or trigger of the crossbow will likely get them shot, so they are basically forced to roleplay with their raider.

Again, the whole purpose of all my ideas is to get people to want to interact with each other and bridge hostility, as opposed to there being a universal ability to one-hit stun/KO/reel lock someone. Aiming will not trigger the victim to want to just run off, because they know it'd risk consequences.


Alternative idea: One can broaden the "aim" command to a "holdup" command; it'd work with any weapon, ranged or melee; you point your weapon and close distance with them, or aim at them, whichever. As soon as this is typed, they cannot leave the area, flee or walk/run in any direction, or else they will be attacked, a la "kill." However, because the attack hasn't happened yet, it allows the victim to beg for mercy, roleplay their frustration, maybe call for help, whatever, or for the raider/aggressor to list their grievances or make their demands, i.e., ROLEPLAY.

I'd be fine with adding holdup, or aim, or hostage, or whatever you want to name this command, and just leaving >kill as is; it at least gives raiders and aggressors an option for a way to "lock in" their intent to harm a victim, but still give them the option to roleplay before the archaic combat code kicks in.

>disengage would cancel any intent to aim, or hold-up a victim and release them from the hostage situation.

Holdup/aim should not trigger crim-code, but clearly, aiming/holding someone up puts the attacker at some risk of being crimcoded if the victim tries to flee. the auto-attack could be toggled on or off as above. Also, maybe aiming/holding someone up can even give a slight BONUS to the first attack, in exchange for the downside that the victim received warning of the hostile intent. Therefore >kill is a little less advantageous compared to getting your weapon ready for a brutal first strike.

[Nao]

Alternative idea: One can broaden the "aim" command to a "holdup" command; it'd work with any weapon, ranged or melee; you point your weapon and close distance with them, or aim at them, whichever. As soon as this is typed, they cannot leave the area, flee or walk/run in any direction, or else they will be attacked, a la "kill." However, because the attack hasn't happened yet, it allows the victim to beg for mercy, roleplay their frustration, maybe call for help, whatever, or for the raider/aggressor to list their grievances or make their demands, i.e., ROLEPLAY.

I'd be fine with adding holdup, or aim, or hostage, or whatever you want to name this command, and just leaving >kill as is; it at least gives raiders and aggressors an option for a way to "lock in" their intent to harm a victim, but still give them the option to roleplay before the archaic combat code kicks in.

>disengage would cancel any intent to aim, or hold-up a victim and release them from the hostage situation.

Holdup/aim should not trigger crim-code, but clearly, aiming/holding someone up puts the attacker at some risk of being crimcoded if the victim tries to flee. the auto-attack could be toggled on or off as above. Also, maybe aiming/holding someone up can even give a slight BONUS to the first attack, in exchange for the downside that the victim received warning of the hostile intent. Therefore >kill is a little less advantageous compared to getting your weapon ready for a brutal first strike.

Part of what you're describing is in game with the threaten command, with the major difference that it doesn't guarantee an attack. I think it has a 35% chance of attack without the skill, more with the skill. I agree it would be cool to have this also work with ranged weapons, though.

[ShaLeah]

PK is infuriating sometimes. You spend x amount of time fleshing out a character only to have its life snuffed out like the insignificant peasant it is in the grand scheme of things. We want to know why. We want Oscar worthy performances. We want real world realism and fairness in a fantasy world that is ANYTHING but.  We want the code to force the player to act a certain way.
Ah, nirvana,  why do you forsake me?

PK, to me,  is one of those areas where that blood starts pumping,  that heart is pounding and those hands are shaking.  It makes for an intense time.  OP says it's not to make the world safer.  Doesn't matter if that's not their intent,  it IS what will happen.  Period. 

Code that forces someone into a stay of execution will do ONE thing I reeeeaaaallllly don't agree with and that's Waying, if I don't want people knowing it was me,  I'm not gonna let that happen.  Sorry,  Amos, not happenin'.

You can't force someone to roleplay how you think is worthy of a death scene.

I'm going to leave this here.


For the record? I'd be totally fine if a kill stall code was accompanied by an inability to use the Way.

[Brytta Léofa]

I'm a big fan of threaten and chase even though I haven't used them.

Threaten could be made to work with ranged weapons as well as melee, such that a successful threaten check (with bow+arrow/crossbow/sling/blowgun wielded) would cause you to shoot with reduced delay.

[Harmless]

I knew about chase but somehow didn't realize we had threaten. Maybe it needs some added features to further encourage its use. Maybe it needs to give a bonus to that first attack like I said, so that people don't keep feeling compelled to just type >kill. Maybe I should stop posting in this thread.

Btw. I know that this whole thread SEEMS like I recently lost a character because people like Shaleah and Vox keep posting these long winded condolences, arm is harsh, etc etc posts. Well, tough shit, my PC is alive and well. I am trying to improve PvP related RP here and nothing else.

[Miradus]

If you're not immune to crimcode and in the rinth, don't even try to use threaten.

It will trigger on weird things like pulling something from a backpack or standing up, and then you've got Seal Team Six Half-Giants rappelling in on you from the rooftops.

As a villainous villain, the only way to stay safe both IC and OOC is to ambush your victim and have them dead or unconscious. And it had better be quicker than they can type "look short/tall".

I once sapped a person unconscious while watching east on Caravan Way. THUMP, down they went in one hit. Stunned.

I'm busy pulling off their pack and like 20 seconds later I see:

Very Far to the east: A handsome studly man runs in from the east.
Far to the east: A handsome studly man runs in from the east.
East: A handsome studly man runs in from the east.
A handsome studly man has arrived from the east.
A handsome studly man says, "Get away from her now!"

A lot of these suggestions do not make it easier to protect our villainous behavior IC from the OOC cliques. And let's not pretend for one damn minute that they don't exist, aren't active, and aren't protected from on-high.

[Delirium]

If you spend time thinking about how OOC stuff is infringing on the game as a player you're gonna have a bad time.

You might as well give your sanity a break and just take everything as IC as possible. Not only will you have more fun, it will make the gameworld feel more seamless. Something seems weird? PLAY OUT THAT IT IS WEIRD. There are many possible reasons why various unlikely events or identifications might happen, some of them supernatural but totally in character.

Even griefers can be taken IC - yes, send in a player complaint if you think they're abusing the game, but as far as the IC ramifications, well, how many times have you heard the news IRL where someone was shot over seemingly minor things? Or someone just tripped on the stairs and killed themselves? At least we don't have a .0001% chance of just randomly dying while we're walking down the street because we got run over by a wagon.

If there are obvious OOC breaches of conduct, send in a player complaint.

[Miradus]

I couldn't agree more with that.

We play the game we've got, not the game we want.  Can't stop everything, so you just have to deal with what is.