all PVP is surprise attacks. Not lame, but what do we do?

[Krath]

When someone makes a move like that, and botches it, they litereally become public enemy number one because there's just not enough 'villains' to tackle or worry about.

In my Opinion, this here is the crux of the problem. Back in the day we had uber sorcerers of doom, staff avatars or not, Gith, and Tuluk. Most of the big baddies were staff run, which to me was fine. It gave the playerbase something to rally behind and work for, and assassins did get away. There were undead Lich kings, Demons that would posses PCs, all this cool stuff driven by the storytellers/Staff.

Staff made the change some years ago to have plots player driven and started. It seems that once that change was made the amount of villians in game, not player run, diminished greatly. So this only left PCs to be the "big bad guys" and be killed.

Those are my two, maybe three cents. I am not saying it is good or bad, it  just it what it is and seems to me.

[Vex]

If anyone here thinks that I have in any way been a "cowardly" roleplayer then let them speak now.

....

I will just say, you don't know me or my career in this game Vex. I won't dignify your post with more than this, it isn't needed.

I don't know, or care, who you are, who you play, or why you decided to step onto that ledge, with that drama, since I didn't call you out by name.

Why the ellipses? Did you sit there and wait to see, if someone spoke up, before you hit POST?

[rinthrat]

So... you're basically asking for some more rounds of combat, that is similarly inescapable, to replace those OHKs?

[Lotion]

The game needs, for players to be less cowardly human beings. Really, of late, it's getting kind of pathetic.

This just about sums up my very limited experience with pvp.

[Harmless]

If anyone here thinks that I have in any way been a "cowardly" roleplayer then let them speak now.

....

I will just say, you don't know me or my career in this game Vex. I won't dignify your post with more than this, it isn't needed.

I don't know, or care, who you are, who you play, or why you decided to step onto that ledge, with that drama, since I didn't call you out by name.

Why the ellipses? Did you sit there and wait to see, if someone spoke up, before you hit POST?

I am the OP and you are posting that the playerbase is cowardly and pathetic in my thread. I ask that you think of something helpful to say or leave your posts elsewhere.

[Riev]

This personal argument doesn't seem to be solving any issues, perceived or actual, so get it off the boards.

Presumably, you're adults. Act like it, BOTH of you.

[Heade]

If anyone here thinks that I have in any way been a "cowardly" roleplayer then let them speak now.

....

I will just say, you don't know me or my career in this game Vex. I won't dignify your post with more than this, it isn't needed.

I don't know, or care, who you are, who you play, or why you decided to step onto that ledge, with that drama, since I didn't call you out by name.

Why the ellipses? Did you sit there and wait to see, if someone spoke up, before you hit POST?

I am the OP and you are posting that the playerbase is cowardly and pathetic in my thread. I ask that you think of something helpful to say or leave your posts elsewhere.

Harmless, there are a couple points I'd like to make. First, I understand that Vex's post might not have been entirely clear, but I think he was saying that it is the PKers who are often cowardly and pathetic by not really engaging in much RP prior to quickly killing people. But, I could be wrong. As I said, it's not clear.

The second point, though, is that even as the OP, you have no special rights, standing, privileges, or control over the thread. As long as people follow the forum rules, they can say whatever they want no matter how bad you dislike it. The same applies to me and any thread I start, or anyone else, for that matter. And that is a good thing. Forums would be a pretty awful place if each OP was the Highlord of their own thread.

[Delirium]

Hi! This thread has been reported to moderators, so I am popping in here to ask that y'all please keep it civil. You can say it like (you believe) it is and be tactful at the same time!

[WarriorPoet]

This thread wandered, eh? Ya'll wild.

But yeah. PK blows lately, even though I have mostly avoided it all. We should try to tell better stories.

[Rokal]

When someone makes a move like that and botches it, they literally become public enemy number one because there's just not enough 'villains' to tackle or worry about.

In my opinion, this here is the crux of the problem. Back in the day, we had uber sorcerers of doom, staff avatars or not, Gith, and Tuluk. Most of the big baddies were staff run, which to me was fine. It gave the player base something to rally behind and work for, and assassins did getaway. There were undead Lich kings, Demons that would possess PCs, all this cool stuff driven by the storytellers/Staff.

The staff made the change some years ago to have plots player-driven and started. It seems that once that change was made the number of villains in-game, not player-run, diminished greatly. So this only left PCs to be the "big bad guys" and be killed.

Those are my two, maybe three cents. I am not saying it is good or bad, it just is what it is and seems to me.

I agree wholeheartedly here with this observation, and will put my thoughts on this. Prepare for a post, this is based not just on experiences with Armageddon, but my RP experiences as a whole. Arm is not my only source of RP. I haven't even been on arm in a while.
-----

I joined arm after that change was made, and honestly, I wish it never had been. I -want- to see those kinds of plots, I want to see that kind of cool stuff, and arm has so much potential for it, that I feel, as a player, as a roleplayer, and someone who adores creative writing that its ruining arm's potential here.

I get it that player-driven plots that are the focus. I get that, but some people want to see the bigger stuff and be involved in it, and player-driven plots can't really make that sort of thing happen.

It was always in my mind that major, plot-driven plots should drag in players into the plot that then drive that plot forward, the characters the staff, or admin team of said roleplay are the vehicles that the players drive forward.

That way, its a mix of player and staff-driven.

I just wish things were a bit looser in some ways - I get the idea of adhering to docs, adhering to lore.

But there comes a time where adhering to lore and the documents to hard means there's no potential for change. New events within the history of an RP are supposed to update that lore and change the status quo

to me, it feels like, perhaps, players and staff alike have gotten into a mindset of 'this is how things are', and it's grown too rigid. I'm not saying that's how admins or anyone are, but in the time I played arm, it has begun to feel that way. Like a stubborn veteran of a craft refusing to lose their ground on the subject.

Things being more fluid, open, with the change, with interesting things happen is the lifeblood of RP.

I joined arm because of the stories people told me about these high arching plots of evil wizards in a place that has corruptive magic, of dark beings and demons messing with humans and the other races, possessing them or even trying to make deals with them, of lore that feels unreachable in the current spectrum of the game.

The game feels strangled, and limited, and it is honestly one of the reasons I haven't played in a good time. I love armageddon's setting, I love the potential for it as an RP and storytelling medium, but with how it is right now, it is like skipping a rock across a pond, amusing for a little while, but never as awe-inspiring as watching a fireworks show go off.

Ever since my first character, Keyrena, I haven't felt the same level of intrigue in story or anything, part of that might because they aren't my first character, but at the same time it also very much stems from the fact that, for me, I want to Rp in a fantasy world, a harsh, post-apocalyptic one that is arm.

But it very often does not feel like a fantasy world at all, even with the magic in it, its so very subdued.

And in the end, player-driven villainy cannot amount to the capacity of something admin-driven. I'm not saying we should change focuses, but try to combine the two. I KNOW how much work it is to put into working out plot lines as an admin, I've done it myself, on small Rps I've hosted in the past.


in the end, there's simply not enough support for villains to actually do something without getting dogpiled, and this, in turn, creates the mindset of 'i cannot fail, I must do everything in my power to ensure my level of success. I have to backstab, an arrow with poison, and not RP as much as possible when acting or ill get caught and figured out'

it's natural for people to fear that failure when the character they invested perhaps months, or even years of time to could DIE or get outted entirely and everything they set up ruined over a single mistake, even if they get away from that failure alive.

So, ya'll, next time you see a PC trying to be a villain?

Think about how to make the conflict last, and how to make it fun for everyone, instead of how to destroy this villain immediately.
And if you are the villian? This one will be hard, but maybe try it.
Put trust in your fellow players to create good scenes and interesting story. I honestly think the biggest issue here is that no one trusts each other even a little on an OOC  level

Lastly..
I also think, in a game meant to be fantasy, people have come to focus on realism too much

I dunno about you all, but I personally want to play arm for the fantasy.  The potential is there.

Its just untapped, or locked away.

[NinjaFruitSalad]

I don't think I particularly mind "cowardly" fighting, as it is supposed to be a harsh world based upon survival of the fittest, and so of course every person is likely going to do whatever they need to do to ensure their survival. There are probably going to be many cowards in the world, whether just to escape or to live to fight another day.

But I do wish combat might be able to flow slower in those certain circumstances. Right now it just feels like there's not much time to beg for one's life or even blast off one of those cliché one-liners like "Whatever they're paying you, I'll double it!" or "See you in Drov!" Once combat starts, it's usually going to end quickly for one reason or another, and there won't be time to be typing emotes and tells unless everyone disengages. Or if the battle really is so one-sided that one person can afford to just disengage and emote at their foe.

Maybe we could have a kind of wish-sanctioned PvP combat, where combat drastically slows down to allow such commands much more easily, and yet it also restricts and slows down efforts of others to join into the combat and spoil it.  edit: Wait! Would combat that's turn-based and waits for each member to interact be possible?!

The thing about supervillains sounds interesting as well. Maybe as a compromise, we could have one big bad run by staff, who may occasionally get involved and make a scare, but they have evil underlings which are players? Maybe a blend of both worlds!

[mansa]

I always thought the mercy command should be used to prevent all damage that goes past the 0 value.

So, if you backstab someone for 40 hit points of damage, but they were sitting at 23 hit points, it should put them down to 1 hp.

To absolutely stop combat when someone gets to that point.

[Rokal]

I always thought the mercy command should be used to prevent all damage that goes past the 0 value.

So, if you backstab someone for 40 hit points of damage, but they were sitting at 23 hit points, it should put them down to 1 hp.

To absolutely stop combat when someone gets to that point.

Agreed here. Even if its 'realism' to maybe accidentally kill someone, its still not fun from a gameplay perspective.

I'd even elaborate on it to make it so that anyone taken down to 1HP like this is left 'subdued', and cannot fight or m ove for a good bit. IE, incapacitated, but concious, can RP, ect, but they ain fightin.

I think something like that would make RP encounters much better, and it'd maybe even lead to a lot of situations that end in death, not end like such.

[Riev]

Right now it just feels like there's not much time to beg for one's life or even blast off one of those cliché one-liners like "Whatever they're paying you, I'll double it!" or "See you in Drov!" Once combat starts, it's usually going to end quickly for one reason or another

Honestly, this is because if you have time to plea, you have time to flee. One gives you an immediate coded response that can potentially alleviate the situation. One is entirely based on how much attention and care the other person is putting in. Some of us prefer the cold hard logic of coded outcomes. Dying because you failed a flee feels better (somehow) than dying because you failed to convince someone to keep you alive. One feels more personal.

[Tuannon]

I am generally unimpressed when an outcome if PK, but that is not really anyone's fault.

In a perfect world I think flee vs threaten at equal skill should be a 50 / 50 with ties favouring the defender (flee) but you just can't do that with the codebase.

The only solution I can think of is to be mindful that some people prefer the code to save them and some their RP to save them. I think the code is fairer of the two personally as it is you vs defender win or lose.

My opinion is probably biased by some pretty average lock in deaths which I should have put a player complaint in about, but in my usual fashion didn't and just took a break.

[tapas]

As a general rule, pvp in this game is a fucking gongshow. In about 15 years of playing I can't think of a single outcome that I thought was fun for the loser. And most often the loser of pvp lost because they roleplayed in some form or another. They visited the tablelands and got filled with arrows. They went to the tavern looking for interaction or they were on the wrong side of the law because of player choices.

I avoid it. I avoid conflict with other players in general because I do not trust that anyone is going to handle it in a responsible manner. I avoid clans now (unless i have ooc friends to back me up) because I can't trust players not to go full shitter and use the backroom approach.

In general, staff and players need to come up with better outcomes than: "Oops I roleplayed. Shouldn't have done that."

[Night Queen]

ooc friends to back me up) because I can't trust

I thought I should say that as someone with very little experience of PVP in this, reading about this kind of thing is probably what puts off a lot of people playing RP games that have PVP in them - Because of not wanting to spend time dealing with people who do that kind of stuff when there's enough OOC corruption in the real world already...
...Which means less people play the rest of RP, which means less interesting stories for everyone (with clans too even if you don't like to play in them, empty clans mean less things for staff to do and so less chance for new and exciting stuff to happen) - you are hurting yourself when the game needs more people, it's a universal thing that most people tend not to complain and will just leave, all the little things are what makes somewhere worth being, everything matters

With stuff like that it seems like the same everywhere, don't be part of the problem, be the change that you want to see in everyone else, but at the same time make sure people that don't have any thought or empathy for other players are encouraged to, use www.icanprove.de, you could save the temporary download on web.archive.org/save to get a link to report), if you don't do it, someone will do it to you now everyone knows that (the forum probably shouldn't have contact buttons and links, stop encouraging free for all real life meetups, and move chat back to the website with reminders on what's allowed, put the community train back on track)

[Greve]

I always thought the mercy command should be used to prevent all damage that goes past the 0 value.

So, if you backstab someone for 40 hit points of damage, but they were sitting at 23 hit points, it should put them down to 1 hp.

To absolutely stop combat when someone gets to that point.

I'm not sure how this pertains to the topic. Chars aren't killing other chars by accident, they're doing it because it's one of the only things left in this game that make them feel relevant. This is not a discussion about people unintentionally bringing sparring partners below -10 hit points. Mercy doesn't factor into this discussion at all. Noone accidentally backstabs someone below 1hp when they didn't mean to. That's not a thing that happens. Nobody has ever so much as mentioned that.

The issue here is twofold:

1) The only sensible way to engage in PvP is to kill your target before they can type 'flee' or prevent the command from resolving (by, say, paralyzing poison or NPC HG subdue)

2) The current state of the game is such that proactive murder is often the first resort, taking precedence far ahead of things like rivalries and plot development

Mercy works almost perfectly fine. You have to be extremely careless to accidentally kill someone you were trying not to kill. There has never really been a noteworthy problem with that. It happens so rarely that it's a complete non-issue. I feel like your post is a willful deflection of the topic.

In general, staff and players need to come up with better outcomes than: "Oops I roleplayed. Shouldn't have done that."

This should be the #1 order of bussiness for ArmageddonMUD in 2020. It's honestly embarrassing for the genre how things have turned out in this game, where roleplay is often something you're punished for and the lack thereof is never punished at all. This sire of the RPI genre has become a game where you're sometimes best served not roleplaying, and that's pathetic.

[X-D]

I don't agree on your mercy point.

While I understand the staff stance on the subject, like "How can you mercy an arrow or fireball etc?"....I think it is a point where you SHOULD go for the side of unrealistic. I think Mercy should be 100%. I cannot even count the number of times I did not intend to kill, had mercy on but since the method was like magick or ranged, Blammo...one shot dead.

I have even bugged it before.

Look north

Dude foraging

Get paralyzing arrow.

Shoot dude north

Arrow hits dude in the head BEEP

Dammit!

I mean, what is so wrong with it just putting them to -1 if I have mercy on? They still might die. Or I could walk in and kill them.

Keep in mind, I have nothing against one hit kills, I just think that if I have mercy on then it should be one hit morted. I hate killing without giving some sort of scene.

[mansa]

I always thought the mercy command should be used to prevent all damage that goes past the 0 value.

So, if you backstab someone for 40 hit points of damage, but they were sitting at 23 hit points, it should put them down to 1 hp.

To absolutely stop combat when someone gets to that point.

I'm not sure how this pertains to the topic. Chars aren't killing other chars by accident, they're doing it because it's one of the only things left in this game that make them feel relevant. This is not a discussion about people unintentionally bringing sparring partners below -10 hit points. Mercy doesn't factor into this discussion at all. Noone accidentally backstabs someone below 1hp when they didn't mean to. That's not a thing that happens. Nobody has ever so much as mentioned that.

The issue here is twofold:

1) The only sensible way to engage in PvP is to kill your target before they can type 'flee' or prevent the command from resolving (by, say, paralyzing poison or NPC HG subdue)

2) The current state of the game is such that proactive murder is often the first resort, taking precedence far ahead of things like rivalries and plot development

Mercy works almost perfectly fine. You have to be extremely careless to accidentally kill someone you were trying not to kill. There has never really been a noteworthy problem with that. It happens so rarely that it's a complete non-issue. I feel like your post is a willful deflection of the topic.

In general, staff and players need to come up with better outcomes than: "Oops I roleplayed. Shouldn't have done that."

This should be the #1 order of bussiness for ArmageddonMUD in 2020. It's honestly embarrassing for the genre how things have turned out in this game, where roleplay is often something you're punished for and the lack thereof is never punished at all. This sire of the RPI genre has become a game where you're sometimes best served not roleplaying, and that's pathetic.

I believe that if I could, 100% of the time, put a character at 1 hp and display to them using the code that I want them to roleplay rather than killing them, it would change the way I would handle combat.


Imagine a gladiator fight, where the person could interact and plead with the crowds, rather than being prone and unable to speak like the game currently does.

Imagine the only way to actually kill another character, is to type 'murder <character>'.

[Rokal]

I always thought the mercy command should be used to prevent all damage that goes past the 0 value.

So, if you backstab someone for 40 hit points of damage, but they were sitting at 23 hit points, it should put them down to 1 hp.

To absolutely stop combat when someone gets to that point.

I'm not sure how this pertains to the topic. Chars aren't killing other chars by accident, they're doing it because it's one of the only things left in this game that make them feel relevant. This is not a discussion about people unintentionally bringing sparring partners below -10 hit points. Mercy doesn't factor into this discussion at all. Noone accidentally backstabs someone below 1hp when they didn't mean to. That's not a thing that happens. Nobody has ever so much as mentioned that.

The issue here is twofold:

1) The only sensible way to engage in PvP is to kill your target before they can type 'flee' or prevent the command from resolving (by, say, paralyzing poison or NPC HG subdue)

2) The current state of the game is such that proactive murder is often the first resort, taking precedence far ahead of things like rivalries and plot development

Mercy works almost perfectly fine. You have to be extremely careless to accidentally kill someone you were trying not to kill. There has never really been a noteworthy problem with that. It happens so rarely that it's a complete non-issue. I feel like your post is a willful deflection of the topic.

In general, staff and players need to come up with better outcomes than: "Oops I roleplayed. Shouldn't have done that."

This should be the #1 order of bussiness for ArmageddonMUD in 2020. It's honestly embarrassing for the genre how things have turned out in this game, where roleplay is often something you're punished for and the lack thereof is never punished at all. This sire of the RPI genre has become a game where you're sometimes best served not roleplaying, and that's pathetic.

I believe that if I could, 100% of the time, put a character at 1 hp and display to them using the code that I want them to roleplay rather than killing them, it would change the way I would handle combat.


Imagine a gladiator fight, where the person could interact and plead with the crowds, rather than being prone and unable to speak like the game currently does.

Imagine the only way to actually kill another character, is to type 'murder <character>'.

A few muds  do this and it actually works. Some take it further by requiring x amount of hours rped with a character to even perform the command on them. Not saying that would work on arm, but these things have been done and work to encourage RP over killing.

[Night Queen]

It seems like there's two prongs that need different solutions, 1. The people that say they aren't able to trust - which can lead to doing things that actually makes it worse for everyone (above) - get rid of the encouragement of contacting other players from the forums and bring chat back to the site 2. The rules page doesn't mention killing explicitly but instead it's left as a grey area ("Roleplaying is a requirement on Armageddon MUD. This involves assuming the role of a character of your creation, and acting the way your character would") - I've seen mentions before on the forum that it's frowned upon for people to kill for little justification and that staff will step in, but even having seen it talked about it before I can't think of what to put in the search to find those posts again, let alone someone that hasn't read about it before, and no way to search easily through staff posts

Maybe some of these crappy situations maybe could've been better if people had been more forewarned? Maybe something like this, brainstorm something better, or against having something like this? From some of the comments in this thread:

2. If your character is going to attempt to kill another character, roleplay that is not combat alone and a reasonable story justification is expected that is supported by your character's background or past history, whether it be through some level of roleplay with the other character (preferred, this creates a more interesting story for other players, you might also want to think how you would prefer to be treated on the receiving end) or use of the in-character "think" or "feel" commands.

At the moment also there's no mention of think, feel, or biographies in the Intro page for new players on the website, no mention in the Character section or Roleplaying page too!

edit: If you think about it, this also circles back to trust too - the idea of encouraging people to act in the ways that make the best stories and the most fun for everyone - when people don't know each other OOC, it's the perfect situation for realistic roleplay but of course at the same time people instinctively seek some level of trust, and it's impossible to tell who is more likely to follow the OOC rules - so what you want to do is make sure that all new and old players are on the same page and treated the same (from the comments above it seems like old players can be 50:50 too!), so that all players are less likely to behave in a cheesy way or do things for OOC reasons, if it's made clear that whoever does that first would be the one in trouble - make it impossible to not be aware and informed that there will be some kind of enforcement of it, which creates an environment where people are more likely to roleplay better.

[Lotion]

I think "murder" for PCs would definitely be a good thing. At the very least it would prevent sparring accidents when someone OOCly forgets to set their mercy correctly. Also giving things the right names absolutely matters a lot, maybe people who are a bit trigger happy will think twice about the consequences their actions have on people playing the game.

edit: If you think about it, this also circles back to trust too - the idea of encouraging people to act in the ways that make the best stories and the most fun for everyone - when people don't know each other OOC, it's the perfect situation for realistic roleplay but of course at the same time people instinctively seek some level of trust, and it's impossible to tell who is more likely to follow the OOC rules - so what you want to do is make sure that all new and old players are on the same page and treated the same (from the comments above it seems like old players can be 50:50 too!), so that all players are less likely to behave in a cheesy way or do things for OOC reasons, if it's made clear that whoever does that first would be the one in trouble - make it impossible to not be aware and informed that there will be some kind of enforcement of it, which creates an environment where people are more likely to roleplay better.

I see and feel the impact of the inherent lack of trust on how people interact in the MUD every time I play. On a macro level it definitely seems to affect how many players are willing to participate in certain spheres with characters/players they have OOCly learned not to trust if they want try telling a long and interesting story.

[Heade]

I don't necessarily like the "murder" idea, because the effects of that will be carried IC when they probably shouldn't be. As an example, currently, you can OOCly "forget" to have mercy on, and "accidentally" kill someone in a sparring match. And, while you might get some punishment for being reckless from your superior, it would be WAY different if there was an actual murder command you had to use to "accidentally" kill them in that spar.

Just the existence of the murder command would eliminate plausible deniability in situations like that. I wouldn't be opposed to making mercy on work 100% of the time, though. In that way, it still allows the possibility of a player forgetting OOCly, which translates into the game to allow "accidental" deaths in spars and such, whether truly an accident, or a character framing an incident as an accident to get rid of someone.

[Harmless]

Meh to the murder idea or changing mercy functionality also from my end.

Just use bludgeoning weapons with mercy. Once their stun drops to 0 you will stop attacking as far as I know? Or am I wrong there?

It makes more sense that you reliably won't kill someone with a bludgeoning tool anyway.