Nothing was taken out of context. I'm responding to the words on the screen.

The only context here is that there are people here bending over backwards to try to assure to me that the players here are mature and responsible. That they will try to roll with the punches and tell stories with me. While I'm seeing posts that are telling me the opposite.

Quote from: Master Color on Today at 08:23:04 AM

QuoteWhile killing someone is the best way of eliminating their negative influence on my plans for world domination, I will do it.

When I can trust people to get the hint that maybe they should stop pushing their luck, I won't have to kill them.

Knowing this and knowing that this is the attitude of some players: Why the fuck should I put any time into this dead game?

Setting aside that the quote is taken out of context (Tuannon goes on to write "To the point, I applaud the dialogue of more closure around role ending scenarios, it was about fifteen years over due really"), that's rather the point of the PvP guidelines: to ensure the players of those killed in PvP situations don't feel like their time has been wasted, and do feel like the ending of their character's story is satisfying. To achieve that, the guidelines offer a means of pushing that ending out as long as possible by instructing players to find alternative means of conflict resolution and/or escalation before they decide to have their PC murder another.

Quote from: Kavrick on Today at 01:23:57 AMStuff

I don't agree with many of your point.

I understand and appreciate the sentiment but the expectations don't really match with reality of the game.
 
There is also the assumption that 'PK' is the only thing that can 'ruin' a player's experience but a number people do store or suicide when their character has been full looted or has been horribly humiliated. The 'no rape' policy is there for a reason and people have been asking for the ability to take an eye, ear, and probably a left nut for years, lol.

Ultimately, I am okay with the hard swing at the moment because from experience its fairly easy to course correct as needed later with in the game. The PK rules are not 'new', they have existed in principle for a long time but have historically only been enforced for the people staff care about like their sponsored roles. The hope is for that consideration and care will now be extended to everyone, particularly the most vulnerable in our community.

If you play long enough you generally don't care about being killed and many of us do play characters which certainly deserve being hunted and killed.People should still expect to die and sometimes it will suck.

QuoteWhile killing someone is the best way of eliminating their negative influence on my plans for world domination, I will do it.

When I can trust people to get the hint that maybe they should stop pushing their luck, I won't have to kill them.

Knowing this and knowing that this is the attitude of some players: Why the fuck should I put any time into this dead game?

I think Templars are also inheritors of a brutal regime, you kind of have to be brutal to survive being a white robe. Not sure whether it's institutionalized or whatever but previous experience suggests there is a level of urging that used to prevail.

Quote from: EvilRoeSlade on Today at 03:14:13 AMTo be clear, I don't mind someone creating a raider and going on to kill a bunch of people. What I do mind is someone accepting a sponsored role and going on to kill a bunch of people.

I was about to say this. What do you guys mean, when you're talking about PK.
Every player's first concern is their own story. And everyone wants their story to go on. It is easier for a templar to keep their story go on, because they can easily get away with torturing/murdering people. But a raider will have hard time with that, since the victim will have no problem finding some support to take vengeance. Easiest way for the player of the raider is to silence the victim. So, a raider killing someone with just some interaction should be understandable by the victim as well.
On the other hand, Allanaki Templars are known for their short temper. Some could be easy-going on the outside, some could be sociopaths. If you know the temper of a Templar, you can shape your RP accordingly. I find it lame to say I don't want sociopath PCs/NPCs in Zalanthas. I expect harsh environments grow mentally instable people. There will always be such characters in the world.

Edited to add: You cannot label a player a sociopath just because he plays a sociopath PC. Also it is more toxic to call the playerbase of Arm toxic.

While killing someone is the best way of eliminating their negative influence on my plans for world domination, I will do it.

When I can trust people to get the hint that maybe they should stop pushing their luck, I won't have to kill them.

To the point, I applaud the dialogue of more closure around role ending scenarios, it was about fifteen years over due really. I'm not really a fan of a full post death report, but something like 'Amos was paid to kill you' is much better than absolutely nothing, or absolutely nothing and a reference to a helpfile.

I'm standing on business at killing one role off every eight years of game play. There are people who kill more people in one week than I have in my entire 'career'.

Murder. Corruption. Betrayal.

More of a tagline than a motto but that's beside the point. Where has this ideal gotten us? A toxic playerbase, a terrible reputation amongst the greater RP community, unsustainable staff turnover, and a dying MUD.

When you make your world the worst kind of place, is it really any wonder that you're going to attract the worst kind of people to play in it? I don't think so.

To be clear, I don't mind someone creating a raider and going on to kill a bunch of people. What I do mind is someone accepting a sponsored role and going on to kill a bunch of people. Though my experience playing a templar has shown me that in that particular role you can't really avoid killing a bunch of people - there's always another fool that insists on throwing themselves on your blade even when you weren't initially planning to kill them.

I agree with the changes in PK guidelines, but I think we need to go farther and change our entire community from a murder culture to one that embraces alternate punishments.

If reviewing PK logs is too cumbersome then it is because staff lack the correct tools to accomplish such a task efficiently. From my experience on APC I believe this to be the case.

Quote from: Dresan on Today at 12:44:48 AMIf the murderer can give the victim a good scene; that's great, please send them kudos. However, it is unreasonable to always expect a well RPed scene or understand the reason why you died or even fully agree with that reason if you learned it. I do believe that if people are forced to justify themselves to staff then the reason for their death will be a bit more obvious and perhaps be even better RP to the victim whenever possible.

I feel like it's a little far-fetched to say that it's unreasonable to expect a decently RP'd scene in a scene where you're dying. Without even talking about how many hours you lose when you die, Armageddon is an RPI, which stands for either Roleplay Intensive or Roleplay Enforced, I've heard both uses of it. Roleplay to a high standard should always be expected. This isn't me saying that you should get up in-arms about bad RP, but to say it's unreasonable to expect good RP from an RPI is a little bewildering to me.

Quote from: Dresan on Today at 12:44:48 AMFor the record, someone disrespecting a templar is grounds for a gory death, and its the fault the game and the entire community if this is not perfectly clear upon character creation.

Is it justified? Yes. Is it the only option? No. Is it the first option? Debatable.
Honestly any Templar player who goes straight to death penalties to solve issues is just going to shoot themselves in the foot. Nobody is going to want to interact or be around a kill-happy templar. As Dumbstruck said; It should be expected that people avoid sociopathic, murderous characters, both from an ooc and ic perspective.

That aside, I think calling anything which is critiquing PKs and putting on a spotlight on it 'carebear-y' is degenerate in the sense that it does nothing for the conversation. It just feels like a completely unnecessary insult to people who don't feel the same as you. Yes the tagline of Armageddon is 'Murder, Corruption, Betrayal', but Murder is one of three words, if the only way to make a game harsh and unforgiving to you is to send people a mantis head, then I don't know what to tell you.