This should probably go in random thoughts or something. I was thinking about Deviant Storm's post. And about the balance between someone feeling exhilarated by the danger and beat down by the Man or Noobled.
I think when your pc is a hard ass you should show up prepared to do your worst. But I think you should always, unless a grievous crime has been committed give people an out. Especially for small mistakes. For real infractions, of course not.
Pretty sure I witnessed the scene in question. It was harassment, there was no death or beating involved. Destruction of some food. Not what it seems like people are jumping to, in that someone got pkilled outright for something minor.
How to explain without getting into the whole ic.
No, I wasn't instakilled. Strangely, I could handle that just fine. You move on, you make a new char.
I think it's just that I'm playing in a way I haven't before. And keeping my character alive seems way harder than it ever has before...did they do stuff to the economy again to make it harsher? I had food for a change. Then I did something and someone did something and then I wanted my stuff back and things went to where that just wasn't going to happen. In the most humiliating way it could be played out.
And I snapped and left. And I'm sorry to the other players that I couldn't be more 'professional' or that I couldn't take it.
I'm just going to take that break. Though, yeah...some things just felt like they went too far.
I think in order to be able to be harsh in game, you can't have the same feelings OOCly. In my short time here, I've seen so much of peoples' personalities bleed into the game, and while sometimes it's hard to separate that line, I think we all need to do our best to do such. It's okay to get your heart going and your thoughts racing, but you shouldn't resent, be a douche, whatever, OOCly and bring it in game, unless your character is the exact spitting image of yourself. (Which would prolly be really boring to play.)
I guess I just meant in general. I remember once,a few years ago, getting banished in my first ten minutes of play for a truly minor infraction. My pc, begged and offered a donation and and apologized and was repentant. But I was banished, all my sid taken, no shoes, no food, no water. And it wasn't death, but it lead to death. And I like that the game is harsh, but I hated losing that pc before I got to play her.
Maybe what I failed to say on the first go, not responding specifically any particular incident, but rather to the question in the abstract, is if your going to do something that will substantially affect another pc, in a life altering way, for effect rather than cause, it's good to try to give them a chance, to save themselves. Not a big open yawning exit, but maybe leave that door unlocked.
Also, I didn't respond in DS's thread because I don't so much want to address the situation in particular but rather the idea in general.
I've had 3 characters in a row killed by the same PC. Prior to those three, I had one that was harrassed by the same PC. After that, I had another one that was threatened by the same PC.
Although it was all IC, and all legit, it still stinks. As a result of this sour taste in my mouth, I'm pretty much avoiding playing certain roles, in certain locations. All so I don't have to deal with that one PC. Because I, the player, am just bored with the same old same old from that particular character. It was old after the first two had runins with them. After five, it's just stupid.
How to keep the harsh without going too harsh? There is no way to prevent it. There's only damage control after the fact, and even that isn't foolproof.
Players in trusted roles (high karma, special app, sponsored) can make their area of the game miserable for everyone else. Such players have a responsibility to (a) know what makes a reasonable player miserable and (b) not do that. (Hint: most players are quite willing to deal with the normal IC consequences of their actions.)
But, honestly, most of the Annoying Things Noobles Do aren't good play even if you disregard what they're doing for playability, whether it's a slumming junior noble insisting on bows from everyone in sight or a blue robe teaching the populace how gorgeously unpredictable he is.
I think Brytta makes a really good point.
Truly, I'm not trying to nice up or water down the game. Just looking for ways to keep things exciting while still keeping things playable for the most people the most part of the time.
Mind you when someone's really got it coming, you have to really let it happen. Some people are just not going to be happy till something gets hacked off. And sometimes hacking things off is the right way to go.
Quote from: Barzalene on June 25, 2010, 09:59:23 PM
Maybe what I failed to say on the first go, not responding specifically any particular incident, but rather to the question in the abstract, is if your going to do something that will substantially affect another pc, in a life altering way, for effect rather than cause, it's good to try to give them a chance, to save themselves. Not a big open yawning exit, but maybe leave that door unlocked.
I agree completely.
Also, messing up someone's PC
at random and just because you can is inane and adds nothing to the game.
This thread makes me feel terrible about the two PCs I killed on my first character. :(
For the most part I think things are usually done well. I do remember a time a while back when it seemed like every d-elf pc in the game was out pk'ing every non-elf they encountered outside of the gates. Even right outside the cities. I think I lost like 3-4 consecutive attempts to the same few d-elves and was pretty pissed about it. Nobles and templars in general, some where played better than others but I really have no beef with anything that has ever happened to my pcs or to others that I have witnessed.
I think some random fucking with people is good. As long as they have a chance to survive it intact.
Pretty much what Barzalene said.
It's best to keep a good savage beating/murder ratio.
Pkill only when you've got a good reason too, beat every other problem to a bloody pulp, take a few coins and maybe a nice piece of gear, and leave them to sleep off their unconsciousness.
It's actually really surprising how many people aren't all "RAGE I'LL KILL YOU NEXT TIME I GET THE CHANCE TO!!!" when you just beat the crap out of 'em.
REDACTED.
Quote from: Qzzrbl on June 26, 2010, 12:28:02 AM
It's actually really surprising how many people aren't all "RAGE I'LL KILL YOU NEXT TIME I GET THE CHANCE TO!!!" when you just beat the crap out of 'em.
This doesn't surprise me. If I get my ass kicked, I'm not vowing to try to beat up the guy I just tried to be up who, in turn, beat me up instead. I'm leaving Bad Muthfluffa alone. Chances are, unless you find some way to train harder than the dude does, he will / she will be able to continually whoop your butt if you go at them again.
I've run into similar situations before.
Once upon a time I made a post recommending that players should be able to see the accounts of other players/staff that they are interacting with.
On the surface it sounds crazy. Think about it...if you went around randomly PKing people, would you really want them to know your account name? But that's just the point. If you're the sort of player who really, really wants to keep your account name secret then I think you're probably a part of the problem.
Obviously, some people will point out that if we know which character were associated with which player we would role-play in a biased manner. But I think that pretty much happens anyways -- we role play differently around strangers since we're still busy feeling them out.
So I'm not really saying that having visible account names would be a perfect idea, but at the least I think that creating some measure of accountability would improve things. Again, if you're really freaked out by the very concept, then chances are that you're part of the problem.
Quote from: Lizzie on June 25, 2010, 10:35:23 PM
I've had 3 characters in a row killed by the same PC. Prior to those three, I had one that was harrassed by the same PC. After that, I had another one that was threatened by the same PC.
Although it was all IC, and all legit, it still stinks. As a result of this sour taste in my mouth, I'm pretty much avoiding playing certain roles, in certain locations. All so I don't have to deal with that one PC. Because I, the player, am just bored with the same old same old from that particular character. It was old after the first two had runins with them. After five, it's just stupid.
How to keep the harsh without going too harsh? There is no way to prevent it. There's only damage control after the fact, and even that isn't foolproof.
Quote from: jriley on June 26, 2010, 07:16:50 AM
Again, if you're really freaked out by the very concept, then chances are that you're part of the problem.
There are -plenty- of reasons to want to keep your account name secret....
Besides, it it's a moot suggestion because we already have an avenue for sending player complaints-- especially if it's an unjust/random/stupid pk.
Whatever happened to murder, corruption, and betrayal? This game is supposed to be harsh, it is Zalanthas. Backstab, plot, scheme your way to the top if thats the type of character your playing. On the other hand, if your trying to play someone who is all about being nice to everyone then don't get mad when someone uses this against you. If you ask me, this game has gotten considerably softer over the last few years. Now, I do digress with this but I wanted to put my thoughts out before addressing the actual question.
Start small in all of your encounters, but brutalize often. Doing something minor to each person you are messing with and gradually intensifying it will give the victim ample time to gang up on you with friends, find a way to get on your good side (an underused option), or generally change the behavior that has you targetting them.
As far as the account name suggestion. I don't care if other people know mine, but in all honesty I don't want to know theirs. I want to play with other peoples characters, not with other people. You'd eventually have situations where certain accounts are seen together over and over. In some cases by chance, and this would raise a whole mess in itself. No thanks.
Dan it's all well and good, the murder corruption betrayal thing. And like I said, all the incidences revolving around this other person's PC were legit, and totally IC, and furthermore I doubt they even knew I was the player of all five subsequent characters.
But when ONE character causes that much misery to five characters, each played by the same player, one right after the other, it leaves a really sour taste in one's mouth. I didn't cry foul to the staff, because it wasn't foul play. It was legitimate RP, but I feel some of it was completely unnecessary. Mostly it just seems to me that the PC's player was grasping at straws for something interesting to do, and decided my characters' stories were interesting enough. Which again, I have to emphasize, is legit from my perspective. It just really sucks to be the target time after time. Which is why I no longer play in that area. At all.
Fortunately, the game is big enough, and I've discovered enough fun stuff to do without having to go near that place, that I don't feel like I'm missing anything.
Quote from: Lizzie on June 25, 2010, 10:35:23 PM
I've had 3 characters in a row killed by the same PC. Prior to those three, I had one that was harrassed by the same PC. After that, I had another one that was threatened by the same PC.
Although it was all IC, and all legit, it still stinks. As a result of this sour taste in my mouth, I'm pretty much avoiding playing certain roles, in certain locations. All so I don't have to deal with that one PC. Because I, the player, am just bored with the same old same old from that particular character. It was old after the first two had runins with them. After five, it's just stupid.
I really hope you reported this or filed a player complaint. If you haven't, it's not too late and I think you should. I can't recall going too far with hassling someone, and I certainly wouldn't know if different PCs were played by the same person, but your post has me worried that I'm the offending party and if you didn't file a report I'll never know. It's not IC for your characters to avoid a whole area of the game because of something that happened to a previous, deceased character. If the problem was bad enough that it has these OOC consequences, then it can also deserve an OOC report.
A little OOC consideration can go a long way. Sometimes it can be the difference between providing reasonable IC harshness or unduly ruining another player's experience.
One of my most miserable playing experiences came when I was playing a sponsored role. During one part of that character's life, I had put a good deal of effort into a particular project, over a few RL months. A newer sponsored character showed up on the scene, same clan, and hit the ground running in quickly working to dismantle all my efforts on that project. Soon it was readily apparent he was well aware that this was exactly what he was doing, as part of his own goals. From an IC point of view, it was completely legit. However, it felt so blatantly inconsiderate on the OOC level. In part, this was because this other player was putting substantially more hours into the game at that time, and was working that OOC advantage to the hilt. More importantly, I felt that someone else in a sponsored role should understand how much work can be involved in long-term projects, and shouldn't demolish mine with that degree of careless disregard. I expect harshness, but I also expect a little OOC consideration. I lost a lot of respect for that player, and also lost a lot of incentive to put forward the same level of effort in future projects. Yes, I went on to continue to enjoy that role, but at the expense of certain goals I'd had.
We're all out there building sand castles, and there are better and more interesting ways to be harsh than simply stomping all over others' efforts.
Unless there is some reason that I should know why you're about to kill my pc, please do not tell me. I can always use the request tool to get things figured out if something 'feels' wrong.
Otherwise you're just monologuing about your badassery and the brilliant plan that is to come while you're very, very slolwy lowering me into a vat of sharks with laser beams on their heads (and be sure to shut the door before all is resolved). People need to trust their fellow players or if something feels really wrong, use the request tool, that's what it's there for.
I have only a couple things to say...
- First, there IS a difference between IC harassment and OOC griefing.
- I don't play in Tuluk any more because of 1 character that I assume is still alive in that city.
I think there are a lot of IC things that people with power can do, that they should restrain themselves from doing for IC reasons. vNPC templars and nobles can murder people on a whim or take valuable things from people, sure, and while a PC will get away with this ICly, they won't necessarily get away with it OOCly, where they are accountable to staff and, indirectly, to the player they're victimizing through griefing. Players with power are supposed to know that their powers have OOC limits that end when OOCly, it makes no sense for playability reasons.
Quote from: Lizzie on June 25, 2010, 10:35:23 PM
I've had 3 characters in a row killed by the same PC. Prior to those three, I had one that was harrassed by the same PC. After that, I had another one that was threatened by the same PC.
Although it was all IC, and all legit, it still stinks. As a result of this sour taste in my mouth, I'm pretty much avoiding playing certain roles, in certain locations. All so I don't have to deal with that one PC.
Quote from: spawnloser on June 26, 2010, 02:00:18 PM
- I don't play in Tuluk any more because of 1 character that I assume is still alive in that city.
Although it's probably tempting to get away from troublemaker PCs/players like this, I would suggest using the request tool to fire off a player complaint (provided you haven't done this already) instead of avoiding a location or situation you otherwise like, so that staff know about it and handle it appropriately. It might be too late now, and I doubt you two are the only ones who feel that way, but at least let staff know (and let staff let the player know, or else how can they improve?).
Best part of this game for me is picking yourself back up after you have been knocked down.
I've played my share of dickheads (But you know that Deviant Storm ;P) in game and I have played some down to earth
good guys as well. Some people take this game way too seriously, and let it affect them on an OOC
level.
If something happens to my character that sucks, I am like damn, sucks to be this guy.
Armageddon is meant to be Harsh and Brutal, is that not the Slogan for Arm?
Everything that happens to your character is just part of the storyline and part
of the struggle you must endure to see them live.
Deviant Storm, you said yourself that you weren't instant-ganked, you were after everything
was said and done, still left with your pc. Could have been worse in my opinion.
I myself back when I first started used to get annoyed about some of the things that
happened to my PCs, but after years of playing, I have learned to take anything
that has happened to them with a grain of salt.
The backstabbing, the killing, the harassment is what keeps me coming back for
more and more, After all these years.
Revenge is bitter sweet sometimes, and sometimes when you are not able to get
revenge on this other PC because they are far more superior than you in social rank,
well that sucks balls, but once again. Its part of the world we play in. Just tread lightly
around them, fear them, be obident towards them, and most importantly, do not
fuck up around them.
Most people who are in sponsored roles turn to pkilling as a last resort when there
is no other option to be given. Atleast that is how I play mine. I've played
a few sponsored roles, from nobles to templars, and I could probably count on
one hand how many I have killed. Don't get me wrong, I am a seasoned pkiller,
I am damn good at it, but the bulk of my pkilling has come from unsponsored
run of the mill normal guy.
Im just running on at the mouth, so I think that is all I have to give about this topic.
Once again, Welcome to Armageddon :)
Editted to add: I tend to just harass people in my sponsored roles and just be down right rude.
There's a key difference between "bad things" happening to you in game and a player/character that makes your game time so miserable and annoying that you just want to store or stop logging in. Yes, sometimes these things can be handled ICly. Often not, though. If it starts to become a chore for a player to log in and deal with another player's never-ending power trips and harassment ... the result will only very rarely be something that enriches the game.
Quote from: Thunkkin on June 26, 2010, 03:08:42 PM
There's a key difference between "bad things" happening to you in game and a player/character that makes your game time so miserable and annoying that you just want to store or stop logging in. Yes, sometimes these things can be handled ICly. Often not, though. If it starts to become a chore for a player to log in and deal with another player's never-ending power trips and harassment ... the result will only very rarely be something that enriches the game.
Indeed, is why I spread the harassments out so that it doesn't feel like a never ending process.
I've noticed in my case that it always seems to be a poorly played half-giant.
Nothing like harshing up a good mellow for kicks...
If 5 of your characters were harassed or killed by the same PC all in a row, you have failed to sufficiently change up your characters locations and concepts.
If you get angry because bad things happen to your PC you should consider playing another game.
If you play a PC that constantly kills (almost) everyone they come across, you should reconsider your goals in life.
Recently I had a PC killed for outrageous reasons that had nothing to do with (in-game...) reality. Kind of sucked, but it was also awesome because after nearly 10 years of playing this game I can still get caught by surprise in some kind of crazy plot that I did not foresee in any way, and die. That is why I <3 Armageddon.
The worst experience I had with this in game was making a really weak, kick able character that was sniveling, non-combative, and generally dogged. I mean, I was playing the character as a miserable piece of trash. I had poured a lot of thought and effort into said PC, and perhaps I put too much in, because I was continuously kicked and put down. To the point that I was frustrated OOCly because it felt that it was just other players going on a power trip. I spent a day of RPing with one character to eventually be killed on a whim, a day that I was going to spend doing other things. But to have the characters life I put that much effort in because of some player deciding thats how he's going to have fun really irked me.
I mean yes, I understand I was playing a really weak and whimpering PC, but really, did you have to show your IC and coded power that way? It couldn't be left alone that I was RPing that way to be fresh, instead of just being the next cookie-cutter badass? I mean, I'm capable of making bad asses, and having characters crushed like that makes me want to so that I can just PK people out of the way who are going to act like that.
Left a sour taste in my mouth.
Quote from: Kankman on June 26, 2010, 05:44:35 PM
Nothing like harshing up a good mellow for kicks...
If 5 of your characters were harassed or killed by the same PC all in a row, you have failed to sufficiently change up your characters locations and concepts.
If you get angry because bad things happen to your PC you should consider playing another game.
If you play a PC that constantly kills (almost) everyone they come across, you should reconsider your goals in life.
Recently I had a PC killed for outrageous reasons that had nothing to do with (in-game...) reality. Kind of sucked, but it was also awesome because after nearly 10 years of playing this game I can still get caught by surprise in some kind of crazy plot that I did not foresee in any way, and die. That is why I <3 Armageddon.
If you make assumptions about my characters' locations and concepts, you would be wrong.
QuoteThe worst experience I had with this in game was making a really weak, kick able character that was sniveling, non-combative, and generally dogged. I mean, I was playing the character as a miserable piece of trash. I had poured a lot of thought and effort into said PC, and perhaps I put too much in, because I was continuously kicked and put down. To the point that I was frustrated OOCly because it felt that it was just other players going on a power trip. I spent a day of RPing with one character to eventually be killed on a whim, a day that I was going to spend doing other things. But to have the characters life I put that much effort in because of some player deciding thats how he's going to have fun really irked me.
You know, I've been thinking about this. I think I was too good at this kind of role and thus did sort of bring this sort of situation on myself. I'm going to stay away certain concepts from now on, ones that scream 'victim' and invite being preyed upon. It will probably make the game much more palatable to me.
Not that yours was that kind of character.
Quote from: Cutthroat on June 26, 2010, 02:41:00 PM
I think there are a lot of IC things that people with power can do, that they should restrain themselves from doing for IC reasons. vNPC templars and nobles can murder people on a whim or take valuable things from people, sure, and while a PC will get away with this ICly, they won't necessarily get away with it OOCly, where they are accountable to staff and, indirectly, to the player they're victimizing through griefing. Players with power are supposed to know that their powers have OOC limits that end when OOCly, it makes no sense for playability reasons.
Quote from: Lizzie on June 25, 2010, 10:35:23 PM
I've had 3 characters in a row killed by the same PC. Prior to those three, I had one that was harrassed by the same PC. After that, I had another one that was threatened by the same PC.
Although it was all IC, and all legit, it still stinks. As a result of this sour taste in my mouth, I'm pretty much avoiding playing certain roles, in certain locations. All so I don't have to deal with that one PC.
Quote from: spawnloser on June 26, 2010, 02:00:18 PM
- I don't play in Tuluk any more because of 1 character that I assume is still alive in that city.
Although it's probably tempting to get away from troublemaker PCs/players like this, I would suggest using the request tool to fire off a player complaint (provided you haven't done this already) instead of avoiding a location or situation you otherwise like, so that staff know about it and handle it appropriately. It might be too late now, and I doubt you two are the only ones who feel that way, but at least let staff know (and let staff let the player know, or else how can they improve?).
Although I don't know anything about these situations mentioned, one shouldn't jump to the conclusion that one is acting OOCly, griefing, or being "a troublemaker". Perhaps these players just ended up making pcs that had enough similarity that it put them in the line of fire of the same pc in power because that pc is playing their character consistantly and there are certain aspects of pcs that will make them a target for this pc.
I don't know why my post keeps being brought up and quoted, but the main point of what I said is being ignored.
QuoteAlthough it was all IC, and all legit, it still stinks.
For emphasis:
QuoteAlthough it was all IC, and all legit, it still stinks.
No, I didn't play five similar characters, unless by similar, you mean female. Each spoke differently, three of them weren't even from that place, one rarely went to that place, one loathed having to go to that place but went anyway because it was part of the job. Three were mundane. Two were leadership roles. One was sponsored. One had never even met the person who harrassed her.
Quote from: Thunkkin on June 26, 2010, 03:08:42 PM
There's a key difference between "bad things" happening to you in game and a player/character that makes your game time so miserable and annoying that you just want to store or stop logging in. Yes, sometimes these things can be handled ICly. Often not, though. If it starts to become a chore for a player to log in and deal with another player's never-ending power trips and harassment ... the result will only very rarely be something that enriches the game.
There are two sides to this coin, IMO. Some people get upset and blame those in power -every- time something bad happens to their pcs instead of looking to place the blame where it belongs. Some people think that their pcs -never- deserve it and the other guy/girl is always at fault, picking on them unrealistically, and acting like a dick OOC. Some people you can give every out in the world only to have them continue digging their grave steadily. Honestly, I don't take much stock in these sort of complaints. I'm not gonna be a dick and say that I don't think they are always false and that the player with the pc in the position of power is never wrong, but I think most of the time it's a misperception on the part of people playing the victims and their own attitudes.
To agree with Jhunter.
Say my character is racist against elves, southerns (or notherners), and half-elves.
So I am always racist to all of these. If you make half-elf after half-elf. I am going be racist to you repeatedly.
Though sometimes it does get a bit to much. I've seen times when it seems like things are going to OOC harassment.
I think this is a fine line... since we play in a game full of murder, deception, sex, violence, racism, and people who are 'by birth better then you'.
Quote from: Lizzie on June 26, 2010, 10:15:09 PM
I don't know why my post keeps being brought up and quoted, but the main point of what I said is being ignored.
QuoteAlthough it was all IC, and all legit, it still stinks.
For emphasis:
QuoteAlthough it was all IC, and all legit, it still stinks.
No, I didn't play five similar characters, unless by similar, you mean female. Each spoke differently, three of them weren't even from that place, one rarely went to that place, one loathed having to go to that place but went anyway because it was part of the job. Three were mundane. Two were leadership roles. One was sponsored. One had never even met the person who harrassed her.
I'm not responding only to the original post. There are many others in the thread besides the original post. Just because I am speaking in a general sense after taking in all of the thread it doesn't mean that I am ignoring the original post. I'm talking about things about your personality that maybe were bleeding through into the characters and were rubbing them the wrong way. Perhaps there is the possibility you weren't even aware of it. *shrugs* It was just a suggestion.
Quote from: jhunter on June 26, 2010, 10:09:45 PM
Although I don't know anything about these situations mentioned, one shouldn't jump to the conclusion that one is acting OOCly, griefing, or being "a troublemaker". Perhaps these players just ended up making pcs that had enough similarity that it put them in the line of fire of the same pc in power because that pc is playing their character consistantly and there are certain aspects of pcs that will make them a target for this pc.
Right, and that is my point. Sometimes actions are completely justified, but it's really up to the staff to figure it out if something's possibly in conflict. It is possible to act completely ICly (obviously, that's the point of the game :)) but it is also possible to grief.
Quote from: deviant storm on June 26, 2010, 08:27:44 PM
QuoteThe worst experience I had with this in game was making a really weak, kick able character that was sniveling, non-combative, and generally dogged. I mean, I was playing the character as a miserable piece of trash. I had poured a lot of thought and effort into said PC, and perhaps I put too much in, because I was continuously kicked and put down. To the point that I was frustrated OOCly because it felt that it was just other players going on a power trip. I spent a day of RPing with one character to eventually be killed on a whim, a day that I was going to spend doing other things. But to have the characters life I put that much effort in because of some player deciding thats how he's going to have fun really irked me.
You know, I've been thinking about this. I think I was too good at this kind of role and thus did sort of bring this sort of situation on myself. I'm going to stay away certain concepts from now on, ones that scream 'victim' and invite being preyed upon. It will probably make the game much more palatable to me.
Not that yours was that kind of character.
That's sorta what I was thinking too.
Another part of the problem with harshness is that when your PC becomes a target of someone else's hatred, you feel like the target. I have felt, on several occasions, that Templar B or Red Fang #3 is harassing me as a player more than they are harassing my PC. When I step back and figure out how they were harassing me vice my PC, I finally understand that it isn't personal. It is a game. You win some, you lose some, and then you die.
Quote from: slipshod on June 26, 2010, 10:10:03 AM
It's not IC for your characters to avoid a whole area of the game because of something that happened to a previous, deceased character. If the problem was bad enough that it has these OOC consequences, then it can also deserve an OOC report.
I think that what you meant to say is that it's not "appropriate" to avoid a whole area, etc for OOC motivations.
Also, it sounds like you're not taking the human factor into account with your role-playing. Please remember that even though Arm is a highly-awesome, cutting-edge MMORPG, all of the PC that you are playing with are not figments of your imagination that you are free to abuse wily-niley but that these PC are played by volunteers who enjoy entertaining you and being victimised by you if/when you do so in a manor that brings mirth and amusement to them. While some purists do play this game, most of the players are not purists and we're playing for fun and entertainment. If you're going to harm/abuse our characters, please do so in a way that advances a storyline or provides us with some measure of amusement as well.
Quote from: Delstro on June 27, 2010, 12:46:20 PM
Another part of the problem with harshness is that when your PC becomes a target of someone else's hatred, you feel like the target. I have felt, on several occasions, that Templar B or Red Fang #3 is harassing me as a player more than they are harassing my PC. When I step back and figure out how they were harassing me vice my PC, I finally understand that it isn't personal. It is a game. You win some, you lose some, and then you die.
True and I feel the same way. However for newer and junior players it's important to help them to adapt to the game by abusing their characters in a way that they will find amusing/entertaining.
Has everyone who is playing this game seen the classic film "Cool Hand Luke?" In part this movie is famous because all of the suffering that the title character goes through at the hands of his jailers is entertaining on some level. We emphathise with Luke but we empathise with his jailors as well. By contrast, few players want to have their characters locked in a dark jail cell for three game days because we wore the wrong color silk or forgot to emote bowing to an insignificant noble. Keep it harsh, but keep it fun. Don't forget the human element.
I've seen some players take it much too far. And I would avoid playing with them in game because of it.
This includes karma players that kill off my entire clan, players who harass every member of the opposite sex that they meet, players that use borderline ooc info to attack other players etc.
Quote from: jriley on June 27, 2010, 06:28:01 PM
If you're going to harm/abuse our characters, please do so in a way that advances a storyline or provides us with some measure of amusement as well.
I think this is the most important part.
Quote from: a strange shadow on June 27, 2010, 10:42:18 PM
Quote from: jriley on June 27, 2010, 06:28:01 PM
If you're going to harm/abuse our characters, please do so in a way that advances a storyline or provides us with some measure of amusement as well.
I think this is the most important part.
Sure, but as I said earlier there are some people who will never be pleased with anything negative happening to their pcs at the hands of another pc, no matter what lengths you go through to make it entertaining for all involved. Also, for better or worse, it almost always advances a storyline, whether you like it or not.
I agree with you for the most part. Not taking things personally goes a long way. That said.. without going into details, I can think of a few cases where story lines have been steamrolled over in what seemed like thoughtless whimsy rather than a consideration as to "what would make the most sense, what would further the ongoing plot, and what would make the most interesting story".
The truth of the matter is that a large segment of the playerbase would rather destroy things that others have worked hard to create. It's also much easier, since creation requires going through a labyrinth of hurdles regarding playtimes, staff assistance, and more.
Quote from: a strange shadow on June 28, 2010, 01:34:08 AM
The truth of the matter is that a large segment of the playerbase would rather destroy things that others have worked hard to create. It's also much easier, since creation requires going through a labyrinth of hurdles regarding playtimes, staff assistance, and more.
Also true. Some people give up on creating things themselves for one reason or another and focus on destroying things instead.
A problem I run into is being in a position of power to hire assassins.
In a world like Zalanthas, I always figure that life is cheap. However, the time players OOCly invest in their characters is not. Those are hours, and hours, and hours of time devoted to a character, to a life, to virtual friends, lovers, and enemies, and when the lights go out, the show is over.
So -- How does a PC that has pretty much 'coded power' to hire assassins deal with this OOC consideration?
Personally, I hire the assassin if killing that PC will further some sort of plot that otherwise would be IMPOSSIBLE to pursue otherwise. This may be due to knowledge, to coded power, to alliances or emnity. I can't cookie cutter the situation, but when I have that kind of IG power, I totally weigh the pro's and con's. I like keeping the people my PC hates around for as long as possible.
Quote from: jhunter on June 27, 2010, 10:53:25 PM
Quote from: a strange shadow on June 27, 2010, 10:42:18 PM
Quote from: jriley on June 27, 2010, 06:28:01 PM
If you're going to harm/abuse our characters, please do so in a way that advances a storyline or provides us with some measure of amusement as well.
I think this is the most important part.
Sure, but as I said earlier there are some people who will never be pleased with anything negative happening to their pcs at the hands of another pc, no matter what lengths you go through to make it entertaining for all involved. Also, for better or worse, it almost always advances a storyline, whether you like it or not.
Alas, I disagree. When someone dies, half or more of whatever storyline they're involved with is gone as well. It's hard for a storyline of a character to continue after they die, even if they are one of the most popular, connected, successful PC's of their era. However, if the character in question's death brings about long-lasting change...(Perhaps a Noble being assassinated, leading to an uproar and lynching party that brings a group of criminals to justice.)...Well, that's cool, but not to be expected.
Quote from: Reiloth on June 28, 2010, 04:57:41 AM
I like keeping the people my PC hates around for as long as possible.
Same. It's always good fun and something to scheme on when your pc has a true archnemesis. :)
Man this game really gets to people. The only time I've been offended is when I knew some OOC shit went on to get my character slapped the fuck down. I put alot of time into this game. Freakishly sometimes. I think last week I was on like, 8 hours straight at one point. Maybe I just haven't met the assholes. I'm not sensitive to the game. I'll kill and torture and exploit. I'll always consider the other player on the end at least enjoying the scene, so i will not spam kill you, but shit, we live on a desert planet spiraling towards apocalypse now. People die. Fuck storylines, and plotlines, if they aren't yours. If you're playing out your concept and character to the bone, no harm no foul, no matter who's shit your effing up. Your having fun, making the game a real place. More power to you.
Add: *cough* Response to the last few posts on this thread.
Quote from: Reiloth on June 28, 2010, 05:02:33 AM
Quote from: jhunter on June 27, 2010, 10:53:25 PM
Quote from: a strange shadow on June 27, 2010, 10:42:18 PM
Quote from: jriley on June 27, 2010, 06:28:01 PM
If you're going to harm/abuse our characters, please do so in a way that advances a storyline or provides us with some measure of amusement as well.
I think this is the most important part.
Sure, but as I said earlier there are some people who will never be pleased with anything negative happening to their pcs at the hands of another pc, no matter what lengths you go through to make it entertaining for all involved. Also, for better or worse, it almost always advances a storyline, whether you like it or not.
Alas, I disagree. When someone dies, half or more of whatever storyline they're involved with is gone as well. It's hard for a storyline of a character to continue after they die, even if they are one of the most popular, connected, successful PC's of their era. However, if the character in question's death brings about long-lasting change...(Perhaps a Noble being assassinated, leading to an uproar and lynching party that brings a group of criminals to justice.)...Well, that's cool, but not to be expected.
Sometimes it dies. Sometimes a new one arises. Sometimes the old one modifies. The point he was getting at, was that the game continues, and it becomes a very small issue in the broad scope of things, even if what was being built for was titanic. It's similar to real life that way.
Quote from: Reiloth on June 28, 2010, 05:02:33 AM
Quote from: jhunter on June 27, 2010, 10:53:25 PM
Quote from: a strange shadow on June 27, 2010, 10:42:18 PM
Quote from: jriley on June 27, 2010, 06:28:01 PM
If you're going to harm/abuse our characters, please do so in a way that advances a storyline or provides us with some measure of amusement as well.
I think this is the most important part.
Sure, but as I said earlier there are some people who will never be pleased with anything negative happening to their pcs at the hands of another pc, no matter what lengths you go through to make it entertaining for all involved. Also, for better or worse, it almost always advances a storyline, whether you like it or not.
Alas, I disagree. When someone dies, half or more of whatever storyline they're involved with is gone as well. It's hard for a storyline of a character to continue after they die, even if they are one of the most popular, connected, successful PC's of their era. However, if the character in question's death brings about long-lasting change...(Perhaps a Noble being assassinated, leading to an uproar and lynching party that brings a group of criminals to justice.)...Well, that's cool, but not to be expected.
Every character's personal story comes to an end sometime. It doesn't mean that the story doesn't go on for everyone else. It just means that particular character's part is over. I've had character's deaths spawn new plotlines and further existing ones for others around them.
I don't think anyone harms or abuses others characters in a way that doesn't advance their personal storyline on a regular basis, and doesn't get smacked for it. Who are you to tell me that your character's storyline is more important than mine?
I like the harshness in the game. I wish more of my characters were in PC involved deaths than their
usual sort of deaths (usually involving noobish moments of NPC or environmental lameness). I love it when my characters have reasons to hate or be mean to other characters, and I love it when characters hate or are mean to mine back. Everything advances someone's story, and every good story ends somewhere.
Food for thought: If you're being harsh to the player rather than the character, and make them want to play World of Warcraft instead of Armageddon, you're doing something wrong.
Quote from: Akaramu on June 30, 2010, 10:58:14 AM
Food for thought: If you're being harsh to the player rather than the character, and make them want to play World of Warcraft instead of Armageddon, you're doing something wrong.
Other than going OOC, how can one be harsh to the player and not the character? Seems to me that it's just a matter of perception on the part of the victim.
One randomly made up example:
Punishing the character of a player who can play 3 hours a day, and only during semi-offpeak, because they were not able to finish a task given to them in a timely manner - the ambitious character of the peak time player who is logged in 12 hours a day took care of the task instead, despite it not being their job.
Actually, this is not so randomly made up, I was in such a situation years ago. A 12 hour, peak time player did / figured out / reported everything, and the leader breathed down my character's neck, and treated her like crap because I could not keep up with my exhausted 3 online hours after 10 hour work shifts. It made the clan experience very unenjoyable.
Sometimes, you have to remember you're interacting with people who just want to have a fun experience in their free time.
Pussification
-- George Carlin
Either that was a very odd first post, or a very ironic thing for someone to say while hiding behind an alt account. :D
Quote from: Romy on June 30, 2010, 11:54:03 AM
Pussification
-- George Carlin
Care to explain? I'm not going to judge you by post count, but I do abhor those who have to make up alt accounts because they feel like trolling. And one little quote without any real input to the discussion is just that. Trolling.
Please enlighten us instead. And thank you.
For that sketch reference to be accurate, we'd have to be growing less harsh over time. I'm not entirely convinced we've been doing that.
Quote from: Marauder Moe on June 30, 2010, 12:13:41 PM
Either that was a very odd first post, or a very ironic thing for someone to say while hiding behind an alt account. :D
Just an odd first post. I have only had one character so far, and I lurk.
In response to your latter statement:
"Give a man a mask, and he will tell you the truth."
Quote from: Nyr on June 30, 2010, 01:05:23 PM
For that sketch reference to be accurate, we'd have to be growing less harsh over time. I'm not entirely convinced we've been doing that.
I honestly wouldn't know since I'm new. I just jumped at the chance to quote Carlin. My post wasn't a referendum on your game, so much as homage to my hero.
*fades back into the shadows*
Quote from: Romy on June 30, 2010, 02:21:27 PM
Quote from: Nyr on June 30, 2010, 01:05:23 PM
For that sketch reference to be accurate, we'd have to be growing less harsh over time. I'm not entirely convinced we've been doing that.
I honestly wouldn't know since I'm new. I just jumped at the chance to quote Carlin. My post wasn't a referendum on your game, so much as homage to my hero.
*fades back into the shadows*
Carlin rocks, agreed. But, yeah. Someone could have taken that remark personally. :-\
Thanks for explaining, though. Welcome to Armageddon!
Quote from: deviant storm on June 30, 2010, 02:32:04 PM
Someone could have taken that remark personally. :-\
Yeah, pussies. :P
Quote from: Akaramu on June 30, 2010, 11:21:04 AM
One randomly made up example:
Punishing the character of a player who can play 3 hours a day, and only during semi-offpeak, because they were not able to finish a task given to them in a timely manner - the ambitious character of the peak time player who is logged in 12 hours a day took care of the task instead, despite it not being their job.
Actually, this is not so randomly made up, I was in such a situation years ago. A 12 hour, peak time player did / figured out / reported everything, and the leader breathed down my character's neck, and treated her like crap because I could not keep up with my exhausted 3 online hours after 10 hour work shifts. It made the clan experience very unenjoyable.
Sometimes, you have to remember you're interacting with people who just want to have a fun experience in their free time.
So, wait a minute. You're saying that they should take something OOC into consideration and have it influence how their pc behaves ICly? Otherwise, they're being OOC mean? That doesn't sound right. By acting IC, which is what we are all supposed to be striving to do at all times, they're being mean to you out of character. Sounds like you're putting the other person in a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.
Quote from: jhunter on June 30, 2010, 07:17:39 PM
Quote from: Akaramu on June 30, 2010, 11:21:04 AM
One randomly made up example:
Punishing the character of a player who can play 3 hours a day, and only during semi-offpeak, because they were not able to finish a task given to them in a timely manner - the ambitious character of the peak time player who is logged in 12 hours a day took care of the task instead, despite it not being their job.
Actually, this is not so randomly made up, I was in such a situation years ago. A 12 hour, peak time player did / figured out / reported everything, and the leader breathed down my character's neck, and treated her like crap because I could not keep up with my exhausted 3 online hours after 10 hour work shifts. It made the clan experience very unenjoyable.
Sometimes, you have to remember you're interacting with people who just want to have a fun experience in their free time.
So, wait a minute. You're saying that they should take something OOC into consideration and have it influence how their pc behaves ICly? Otherwise, they're being OOC mean? That doesn't sound right. By acting IC, which is what we are all supposed to be striving to do at all times, they're being mean to you out of character. Sounds like you're putting the other person in a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.
Obviously there has to be some consideration for ooc. This is, after all, only a game. If someone can't devote more than 3 hours a day, I don't see why they should be punished icly. To do otherwise is just taking ic a little too far.
I like to hand out lashings to people who go link dead.
Quote from: WagonsHo on June 30, 2010, 07:33:23 PM
I like to hand out lashings to people who go link dead.
Me too!
And I'm not in a leadership role! I had to buy my own whip and everything!
Quote from: jhunter on June 30, 2010, 07:17:39 PM
So, wait a minute. You're saying that they should take something OOC into consideration and have it influence how their pc behaves ICly? Otherwise, they're being OOC mean? That doesn't sound right. By acting IC, which is what we are all supposed to be striving to do at all times, they're being mean to you out of character. Sounds like you're putting the other person in a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.
Yes, they should. Acting IC should not reach the point where you make people not want to play. There are always different ways of handling things ICly, including options that are OOCly considerate towards other players, even if they suck for the PC. Every other leader I ever had above me, even some fairly bad ones, did not base their like or dislike of an underling on the player's timezone and hours logged in per day. They would treat offline time as time spent on virtual clan duties, not time spent slacking and failing. They also would not give players with limited time impossible to achieve tasks that would force them to either skip work, or else be a failure IC.
Offline time is something completely OOC. If someone is not capable of taking this into consideration, then I don't know what to say. There are other completely OOC aspects about the game that I don't feel should be used against characters, but I won't go into those.
And you know for a fact in this situation that they are 100% aware of how much time you play? You make it sound as if they are monitoring the amount of time you play and using that information as a basis for their decision to punish your pc ICly. To me, that doesn't sound like the case.
Quote from: deviant storm on June 30, 2010, 07:28:50 PM
Quote from: jhunter on June 30, 2010, 07:17:39 PM
Quote from: Akaramu on June 30, 2010, 11:21:04 AM
One randomly made up example:
Punishing the character of a player who can play 3 hours a day, and only during semi-offpeak, because they were not able to finish a task given to them in a timely manner - the ambitious character of the peak time player who is logged in 12 hours a day took care of the task instead, despite it not being their job.
Actually, this is not so randomly made up, I was in such a situation years ago. A 12 hour, peak time player did / figured out / reported everything, and the leader breathed down my character's neck, and treated her like crap because I could not keep up with my exhausted 3 online hours after 10 hour work shifts. It made the clan experience very unenjoyable.
Sometimes, you have to remember you're interacting with people who just want to have a fun experience in their free time.
So, wait a minute. You're saying that they should take something OOC into consideration and have it influence how their pc behaves ICly? Otherwise, they're being OOC mean? That doesn't sound right. By acting IC, which is what we are all supposed to be striving to do at all times, they're being mean to you out of character. Sounds like you're putting the other person in a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.
Obviously there has to be some consideration for ooc. This is, after all, only a game. If someone can't devote more than 3 hours a day, I don't see why they should be punished icly. To do otherwise is just taking ic a little too far.
If they are aware of the amount of the time person has available to play and this is the basis for their decision to punish your pc ICly then yes, that makes them an OOC prick. That doesn't mean those assumptions are correct however.
Yes, they were aware. I posted my playtimes on the clan forums. The leader knew I couldn't play the right hours of the day to meet up with the peak-time PCs I was supposed to talk to (and it was ICly pointed out they are available later in the week), and still threw a hissy fit about it IC.
Anyway, it was just supposed to be an example. Let's return the discussion to broader concerns.
Quote from: Romy on June 30, 2010, 11:54:03 AM
Pussification
-- George Carlin
Heh. You know, that quote you used reminds me of when I play basketball. I always trash talk when I play basetball. It's because I'm so bad at it. I trash talk because occaisionally I can bluff out a stronger player. Yeah, basketball.
Quote from: Akaramu on June 30, 2010, 10:58:14 AM
Food for thought: If you're being harsh to the player rather than the character, and make them want to play World of Warcraft instead of Armageddon, you're doing something wrong.
Seriously. If people really want to make the game harsher, I think they ought to pay more attention to making sure that their fellow players are having a good time. Imagine how harsh the game would be if some of the old-school players would come --BACK-- to Armageddon, having fled to a game that (comparitively) has a more mature player base.
Quote from: Akaramu on June 30, 2010, 07:40:10 PM
Quote from: jhunter on June 30, 2010, 07:17:39 PM
So, wait a minute. You're saying that they should take something OOC into consideration and have it influence how their pc behaves ICly? Otherwise, they're being OOC mean? That doesn't sound right. By acting IC, which is what we are all supposed to be striving to do at all times, they're being mean to you out of character. Sounds like you're putting the other person in a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.
Yes, they should. Acting IC should not reach the point where you make people not want to play. There are always different ways of handling things ICly, including options that are OOCly considerate towards other players, even if they suck for the PC. Every other leader I ever had above me, even some fairly bad ones, did not base their like or dislike of an underling on the player's timezone and hours logged in per day. They would treat offline time as time spent on virtual clan duties, not time spent slacking and failing. They also would not give players with limited time impossible to achieve tasks that would force them to either skip work, or else be a failure IC.
Offline time is something completely OOC. If someone is not capable of taking this into consideration, then I don't know what to say. There are other completely OOC aspects about the game that I don't feel should be used against characters, but I won't go into those.
So Ironic, with all the 'Keep it IC', 'Find out IC', 'Do not spread IC info OOC', so on and so forth, that people still think 'Take OOC feelings that cannot be clearly conveyed into account.'
Quote from: Armaddict on June 30, 2010, 11:47:02 PM
Quote from: Akaramu on June 30, 2010, 07:40:10 PM
Quote from: jhunter on June 30, 2010, 07:17:39 PM
So, wait a minute. You're saying that they should take something OOC into consideration and have it influence how their pc behaves ICly? Otherwise, they're being OOC mean? That doesn't sound right. By acting IC, which is what we are all supposed to be striving to do at all times, they're being mean to you out of character. Sounds like you're putting the other person in a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.
Yes, they should. Acting IC should not reach the point where you make people not want to play. There are always different ways of handling things ICly, including options that are OOCly considerate towards other players, even if they suck for the PC. Every other leader I ever had above me, even some fairly bad ones, did not base their like or dislike of an underling on the player's timezone and hours logged in per day. They would treat offline time as time spent on virtual clan duties, not time spent slacking and failing. They also would not give players with limited time impossible to achieve tasks that would force them to either skip work, or else be a failure IC.
Offline time is something completely OOC. If someone is not capable of taking this into consideration, then I don't know what to say. There are other completely OOC aspects about the game that I don't feel should be used against characters, but I won't go into those.
So Ironic, with all the 'Keep it IC', 'Find out IC', 'Do not spread IC info OOC', so on and so forth, that people still think 'Take OOC feelings that cannot be clearly conveyed into account.'
Yeah, because I pay close attention to the playing times of other people and take into consideration what they might possibly be thinking OOC into account when I'm making decisions for how my character is going to react IC in every little situation. Truthfully, the only time I pay any attention whatsoever to another pcs playing times is when I'm planning an RPT, in the attempt to make it something that -most- of the pcs that would possibly be directly involved can OOCly be a part of. One cannot realistically be expected to take into account every single little aspect of OOC for every other player involved, all of the time in the hopes that someone is not going to think them an asshole because of it.
Straight up, that's kinda fucking bullshit.
If the situation were otherwise, people would be bitching because someone took OOC reasoning into account for -not- giving them opportunities over others. "Oh, well I know that they don't play as much, so I won't give them the opportunity to try and do "this" and I'll give it to someone else who I know plays more."
"FOUL!"
"They're making decisions not to let my pc try and do something purely based off of the amount of time I have to play, that's -unfair-!" "They're being allowed to progress more quickly in the clan compared to me simply because I don't have the time to play as much."
That line of thinking is putting the other player in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation and that's every bit as asshole as what they are being accused of.
Don't take this personally anyone speaking the other side of the coin, but I don't think you are looking at it from both sides. It's gonna happen both for -and- against your character by nature of the game. I've played with you before and I enjoyed playing with you but I think you're being pretty selfish and one-sided about this subject.
Also, to add: There's a big difference between "using it against" characters and the cards simply falling into place that way.
Funny, you weren't a horrible leader when I played below you, jhunter. So I don't think my example applies to you at all.
No one asked to be given opportunities over others despite scarce playing times. No one asked to progress in the clan as quickly as others. In my example, I would have been happy if the leader simply didn't task me at all, and gave all the love to the 12 hours peak time player. I would have loved to be -ignored- by that leader, or given different kinds of tasks. If I keep on failing at something, and someone else does much better, it would be IC to stop giving me those kinds of tasks, right? But being harassed IC for not manageing to pull off things like another player with much more time and peak time access? Come on. It just creates OOC pressure, and makes people not want to play.
I really don't know what you are ranting about, my example has not been an issue since several years, so apparently most leader players agree with me. Yourself included, as I enjoyed playing your underling.
What did the staff say when you told them about the problem Akaramu?
Back on track (and not directed at anyone in particular) - Murder, Corruption, Betrayal, but not to meee! (runs away screaming).
Two things can be true at the same time.
Your pc can be a dick and you can be a considerate player. That doesn't mean you don't find reasons to pick on your minions and make their lives hell. That doesn't mean you don't brutalize them, chop off their heads and have them raped by your half giant guards (I still don't see why staff won't animate them for this!) It does mean you grief them over what they do with the time that they're logged in, or what annoys you about them while they're there, not what annoys you about their not being there.
It means that unless they blew smoke in your face on Caravan Way or pissed on the Statue of Muk or tried to fuck your secret lover, you figure out what price you can be bribed for , or what phrase they can utter to melt your heart and give them a 15-20% chance of walking out on their own two feet with all the body parts they walked in with.
It means that you do exactly what jhunter said, and don't think at all about the player, just think about the pc. But it also means that you bear in mind that it doesn't matter who the player is,but that there is a player attached to that pc.
Quote from: Akaramu on July 01, 2010, 04:21:07 AM
If I keep on failing at something, and someone else does much better, it would be IC to stop giving me those kinds of tasks, right? But being harassed IC for not manageing to pull off things like another player with much more time and peak time access? Come on. It just creates OOC pressure, and makes people not want to play.
If a PC leader is unhappy with the work an underling is doing, they can fire them. If a PC underling is unhappy with the opportunities their PC leader is or is not giving them, they can deal with it IC or store.
I'm not sure how to respond to the OOC time played issue. One can be cognizant of that, but if one does not have the time to do a task involving other PCs or really anything in-game, I'm not sure how this is the leader PC's fault for assigning that person a task they could not complete. There is too much assumption here and too much blame assigned to the part of the leader. Some (if not the majority) of the responsibility must fall onto the shoulders of the employee player. One cannot virtually meet with other clans to get non-virtual results (at least not on a regular basis). One cannot virtually hunt down deals for one's non-virtual PC templar at the non-virtual bazaar.
Hypothetical situation: Player A and Player B both have characters working for noble C in Tuluk. Player A plays about 12 or more hours per day because they have this free time to do so (maybe they're a student and it's summer). Player B plays about 2 to 3 hours per day, because they do not have much more time than that. Noble C plays about 4 to 5 hours per day. All of the players post on the clan forum with their playtimes. Noble C needs some contacts made to other clans and assigns the task to characters A and B. After about a week, character A has made more contacts than character B, but character B has still made a few (though they were the same contacts as character A).
Fast forward about a month or two. Character A has consistently been around and doing IC work with other PCs more often than Character B. Character B has done some work but actually has failed at a few tasks, not getting some of them done at all. Noble C continues to give the same tasks to both characters.
This could be your situation as described so far, but here's what else might be happening behind the scenes:
Player A is happily plugging away at tasks with Character A, doing stuff for Noble C.
Player B is ticked that Noble C keeps giving them the same tasks as player B.
Noble C IS thinking about playtimes: hers. She only has 4-5 hours per day (sometimes less than that, sometimes not on weekends) to be a leader PC and an influence in the game, so she gives the tasks to both of her PC underlings at the same time, hoping one of them gets it done. More often than not, Character A is getting them done. Character B gets punished for not doing tasks every now and then (or maybe often), whatever punishment means.
Even though this situation has not happened to you for years, I would still say that it is your job to figure out what you can and can't do with the time you have online, and seek out roles that suit that. Such a situation as you have described is likely untenable for you as a player and likely annoying for your character. Deal with it IC. If it can't be dealt with, talk to your staff. They may suggest (as I would in such a situation) trying another clan out (if feasible) or storing. Regardless of why one finds their role to be unsatisfying, the burden of dealing with this dissatisfaction falls upon the player, not the player's IC leader.
Back to harshness in general:
Quote from: Nyr on February 04, 2009, 08:33:23 AM
I think it's possible to be a good leader and be a douche.
Yeah, so anyway...as far as harshness in general, so long as it's all IC, it's all good. IMO.
I was going to write an essay about the whole OOC vs IC playtime/leadership/task thing but I think I'll just boil it all down to one short paragraph:
As a player who has played both leadership and underling roles, here's a tip for you to enjoy the game a bit more: Be proactive. Sure Leader SuperJoe could assign you some kick ass task which is virtually impossible for you to complete due to either ooc or ic restrictions, but surely you could as an underling find other plots and goals to complete, or even just simply expand on plots given to you by other people using your own way? I'm sure nobody enjoys being micro managed and as leaders, I'm sure nobody wants to hold the hands of every single one of their underlings.
.......anyway it's late, and I don't usually post on the GDB much so excuse the lack of eloquence in my meager two sids :P
PS: How to make the game harsh without going too harsh..hmmm...hard, it's not easy to achieve that fine balance yet on the other hand, victims need to remember to shed that RL dignity we have. I've seen PCs who are really not affiliated with any powerful ig (GMHs, noble houses, shady clans etc) acting as though they are the Highlord himself when being addressed by people of a higher social rank. Kindness should be scarce, charity even rarer.
Quote from: Nyr on July 01, 2010, 08:37:46 AM
Even though this situation has not happened to you for years, I would still say that it is your job to figure out what you can and can't do with the time you have online, and seek out roles that suit that. Such a situation as you have described is likely untenable for you as a player and likely annoying for your character. Deal with it IC. If it can't be dealt with, talk to your staff. They may suggest (as I would in such a situation) trying another clan out (if feasible) or storing. Regardless of why one finds their role to be unsatisfying, the burden of dealing with this dissatisfaction falls upon the player, not the player's IC leader.
Sometimes playtimes change. People can't play for a few weeks, or get additional work hours for awhile. Should players be punished IC because their work shift changes for 2 months? Or because they were ill? Would it help anyone, especially their leader if they simply did not log in at all for those 2 months? Staying offline should never be the preferable option, in my opinion. Chosing one IC option that causes nothing but frustration over other, also perfectly IC options isn't worth it.
Quote from: Akaramu on July 01, 2010, 10:14:21 AM
Sometimes playtimes change. People can't play for a few weeks, or get additional work hours for awhile. Should players be punished IC because their work shift changes for 2 months? Or because they were ill? Would it help anyone, especially their leader if they simply did not log in at all for those 2 months? Staying offline should never be the preferable option, in my opinion. Chosing one IC option that causes nothing but frustration over other, also perfectly IC options isn't worth it.
To the best of my knowledge a leader's only OOC concern is coordinating play times for RPTs.
If you feel like your character is being abused IC for OOC reasons, you should email logs to your clan staff.
I think this is derailing the thread though...
I've never had an occasion where you had to go deal with IRL stuff for a few weeks and your IG boss griefs on you. If it does happen to you, you should mail a player complaint and let the staff handle it. They get both side of the story, so I say just let them deal with it.
I think that the section that you quoted answers the hypothetical questions below it. I could be misinterpreting your words, though. I'll reverse the order.
Quote from: Akaramu on July 01, 2010, 10:14:21 AM
Sometimes playtimes change. People can't play for a few weeks, or get additional work hours for awhile. Should players be punished IC because their work shift changes for 2 months? Or because they were ill? Would it help anyone, especially their leader if they simply did not log in at all for those 2 months? Staying offline should never be the preferable option, in my opinion. Chosing one IC option that causes nothing but frustration over other, also perfectly IC options isn't worth it.
Quote from: Nyr on July 01, 2010, 08:37:46 AM
I would still say that it is your job to figure out what you can and can't do with the time you have online, and seek out roles that suit that. Such a situation as you have described is likely untenable for you as a player and likely annoying for your character. Deal with it IC. If it can't be dealt with, talk to your staff. They may suggest (as I would in such a situation) trying another clan out (if feasible) or storing. Regardless of why one finds their role to be unsatisfying, the burden of dealing with this dissatisfaction falls upon the player, not the player's IC leader.
Everyone's definition of harshness probably differs. As long as there are clear reasons for someone to do something in-character (and it doesn't go against their documentation), there usually is little to be concerned with, in the long run. As always, you can check with staff.
Quote from: Kankfly on July 01, 2010, 10:24:53 AM
I've never had an occasion where you had to go deal with IRL stuff for a few weeks and your IG boss griefs on you. If it does happen to you, you should mail a player complaint and let the staff handle it. They get both side of the story, so I say just let them deal with it.
Yes, considering how very rare this is, I'm sure almost everyone actually agrees. We have tons of great leader players here - who do much better than I did on my first try.
Sometimes staff is overwhelmed with RL workload as well, but the request tool has improved communication a great deal since 2005.
While I certainly have seen PCs of mine slip in terms of clan/leader favor due to low playtimes, I've never had a leader outright punish a character for it.
My suggestion is to make your situation very clear to your leader(s) through heavy use of virtual duties. Most clans have a lot of virtual work for characters to do offline. If one gets assigned a task that they don't think they'll have the time to complete, just say tell your boss you've been assigned <virtual duties> for the next few weeks and won't have the time. If you've just logged on after a busy day at RL work and just want to relax vicariously through your character too, make it IC. Tell your leader that you just spent all day doing <virtual duties> and really need a drink, but you promise to take care of the task in a few days.
I think most leaders will get the hint and back off when you explain your time restrictions this way.
Hm. I kinda read one part of Akamaru's situation as X leader telling her to find Y person that plays in, say, a Euro or Aussie timezone when it had been posted that she can't play in that timezone. Then she got in trouble IG for it. Which would be dickish of the player if they kept trying to force it on Akamaru's PC when the inability to get it done was pretty much unavoidable because of OOC junk and all that was in the open. I could have read wrong though.
That being said, though, do I think players in a clan should be punished for losing a lot of game time because of OOC developments or time constraints? No, certainly not. Especially if you're communicative about it with leader PCs. After a prolonged amount of time with spotty or absent play, though, a player should evaluate their IG situation and make a decision about whether or not they can actually be a solidly contributing person in a clan they are part of. If not, it's time to find another role for that PC.
For instance, some clans have limited positions for hire, and there's a big trickle-down effect of problems when the players aren't logging in with any kind of regularity after a period of time. It starts to hinder the function of the clan and the active PCs can't help but get disgruntled after a while. For instance, crafter positions-- they're pretty easy to play casually, if you think about it. You can get away with logging on an hour or two every other day, honestly, and still be considered a fairly active contributor if you're making what needs to be made and checking in. You can even take a week or two break when junk comes up and it's not the end of the world, by any means. However, when the breaks start coming more and more, and the limited playtime turns into a total lack of production, guess who's picking up the slack? And because you're filling up that employee slot, they can't even hire more help, even if they're lucky enough to find someone to want to play a crafter. Then the hunters start getting restless because supplies aren't being moved through fast enough. And um. In my experience, restless hunter PCs = very soon to be dead PCs! :P
So IMO, while it's a player's duty as a leader PC to be considerate about stated OOC time constraints, it's also the player's duty as an employee to keep from clogging up the gumworks of a clan.
Quote from: caellyndria on July 01, 2010, 11:11:43 AM
Hm. I kinda read one part of Akamaru's situation as X leader telling her to find Y person that plays in, say, a Euro or Aussie timezone when it had been posted that she can't play in that timezone. Then she got in trouble IG for it. Which would be dickish of the player if they kept trying to force it on Akamaru's PC when the inability to get it done was pretty much unavoidable because of OOC junk and all that was in the open. I could have read wrong though.
That being said, though, do I think players in a clan should be punished for losing a lot of game time because of OOC developments or time constraints? No, certainly not. Especially if you're communicative about it with leader PCs. After a prolonged amount of time with spotty or absent play, though, a player should evaluate their IG situation and make a decision about whether or not they can actually be a solidly contributing person in a clan they are part of. If not, it's time to find another role for that PC.
For instance, some clans have limited positions for hire, and there's a big trickle-down effect of problems when the players aren't logging in with any kind of regularity after a period of time. It starts to hinder the function of the clan and the active PCs can't help but get disgruntled after a while. For instance, crafter positions-- they're pretty easy to play casually, if you think about it. You can get away with logging on an hour or two every other day, honestly, and still be considered a fairly active contributor if you're making what needs to be made and checking in. You can even take a week or two break when junk comes up and it's not the end of the world, by any means. However, when the breaks start coming more and more, and the limited playtime turns into a total lack of production, guess who's picking up the slack? And because you're filling up that employee slot, they can't even hire more help, even if they're lucky enough to find someone to want to play a crafter. Then the hunters start getting restless because supplies aren't being moved through fast enough. And um. In my experience, restless hunter PCs = very soon to be dead PCs! :P
So IMO, while it's a player's duty as a leader PC to be considerate about stated OOC time constraints, it's also the player's duty as an employee to keep from clogging up the gumworks of a clan.
Quoted for truth. Everyone needs to be OOCly considerate and understanding of OOC situations. But if you aren't around IC, something needs to happen ICly about it, especially if you are absent and unable.
Quote from: caellyndria on July 01, 2010, 11:11:43 AM
That being said, though, do I think players in a clan should be punished for losing a lot of game time because of OOC developments or time constraints? No, certainly not.
...
For instance, some clans have limited positions for hire, and there's a big trickle-down effect of problems when the players aren't logging in with any kind of regularity after a period of time.
note: edited for length
Yeah, I agree. Further, I'd say that it should be a lot easier to get no-fault divorces from sponsored game clans if there is a clear OOG conflict between players.
Let's say, for example that the situation above transpires? What is the most likely result? Either the player of the clan officer will manufacture an IG reason to trump out the junior character, or the player of the clan officer will make sure to grief the other player, or else the player of the clan officer will just grit their teeth and put up with this?
But why? We seem to go so far out of our way to avoid admitting the fact that we're a group of adults playing an imaginary game, and that the situation could be adjusted slightly to make
everyone much more happy.
Quote from: Nyr on June 30, 2010, 01:05:23 PM
For that sketch reference to be accurate, we'd have to be growing less harsh over time. I'm not entirely convinced we've been doing that.
I wanted to draw everyone's attention to what Nyr said. I think the game has actually gotten more harsh, fairly consistently, over the past four years.
I would say it's gotten a little less harsh over the last five or six years.
Quote from: jhunter on July 01, 2010, 08:38:22 PM
I would say it's gotten a little less harsh over the last five or six years.
I agree. I used to be scared to be around Templars. Then after a while, I wasn't so scared
any more.
Quote from: Mudder on July 01, 2010, 08:50:19 PM
Quote from: jhunter on July 01, 2010, 08:38:22 PM
I would say it's gotten a little less harsh over the last five or six years.
I agree. I used to be scared to be around Templars. Then after a while, I wasn't so scared
any more.
I used to be scared of southside alleys, but...well, I stopped being quite such a noob. ;)
Nevertheless, Samos and Troicha (and a few other excellent ones, I'm sure) spoiled us.
I think that might be function of experience more than a change in climate.
Quote from: Barzalene on July 01, 2010, 09:25:14 PM
I think that might be function of experience more than a change in climate.
I dunno, I remember when seeing anyone else in the desert meant I was about to be attacked, and not getting attacked was a holy shit moment.
Edited to add: Then again...at that point, trying to be an independent was easier. Water is -expensive- and you need a -lot- of it now. And I remember when you never got thirsty in the city.
Former leader's perspective:
If you're inactive and taking up a spot that someone else can be filling productively, then I am going to be annoyed. If you communicate that you'll be gone for a short period of time (1 month or less,) then that is fine. I understand people have lives. Then again, if your absence is causing myself headaches because I cannot hire enough hunters/crafters/aides to see that my own leader'y obligations are fulfilled... I will definitely fire your ass and hire someone else to fix the problem. Especially since the staff seem to be discouraging (in my experience) leaders from doing the grunt work of running a clan/group/whatever.
Sorry dudes.
Quote from: Armaddict on July 01, 2010, 09:33:39 PMI dunno, I remember when seeing anyone else in the desert meant I was about to be attacked, and not getting attacked was a holy shit moment.
I still have those moments. I had one last night.
My views on this are somewhat... Flexible. There is IG Harsh and then there is OOC harsh. There isn't a limit, for me, on how harsh it can become IG - The harsher, the better. But with OOC harsh, I would view things that would be out-right ridiculous, like basically sentencing a player to death for some very small ICly inconsequential action. To me, the worst that can happen that I would consider harsh is to have your pc killed and/or maimed to the point of being unplayable. Otherwise - bring on the hardship.
The trouble is that everything can be defended, and is eagerly defended by whoever does it. In this game you can do just about anything and simply give the trite old explanation that "it's a harsh world, newb." It sometimes gets to the point where someone is blatantly going balls to the walls, recklessly insane because they know they can always tell the jury that it was perfectly IC because their character is from such and such area, or has some sentence pasted into their background story. You can make a character who instantly attacks every single individual they ever meet without an emote and a sizeable portion of the playerbase will agree that this was somehow reasonable given the circumstances.
It's a phenomenon of being ruthlessly aggressive or assertive for the sake of doing it. The internet is a place where the last remnants of human decency are thrown aside because of total anonymity and a complete lack of consequences, and it has finally made its way fully into this game as well, helped along in no small way by the fact that Armageddon is wallowing in utter stagnation. Whether or not it is even true anymore, the Reborn project brought about a sentiment of "nothing really matters now" and had a profound impact on how the game was played by most of its players. As the completion of the project became less and less likely, at least in any kind of tangible future, this change was not reverted as one might have imagined but rather left to linger and spread even further. The game now operates in a sort of void where noone (except possibly for a privileged few) know what, if anything, is really going on or planned for the distant future. Another year could pass without any appreciable progress, and this makes many play as if each character was their last, or at least as if nothing matters. And if nothing matters to them, surely nothing matters to others, and so who truly cares if I roll up an exceptional strength warrior and actively seek out excuses to PK? Or slap together a quickly-branched mage and forcibly take over an area of the game world to the benefit of nothing whatsoever?
Some of this can, in turn, be blamed on the game world's inherent lack of harshness. Zalanthas is a pretty cardboard facade under which exists very little when it isn't put to life by enterprising players. Said players have become increasingly rare and the motivation for the enterprise increasingly hard to find for above-mentioned reasons. When the world itself pretty much leaves you alone, there's not a lot to unite against or build anything on. This leads to a situation where players have to be behind anything and everything, and it all becomes sort of false. There are no longer NPC raiders really anywhere in the game world, a whole race of universally hostile humanoids have been removed, more and more areas of the game world are being rendered effectively unusable by IC events, and so on. What's left is a game where most anything that can happen has to be orchestrated fully by players, and wholly for the sake of doing it. This sounds lovely on paper, but at the end of the day it becomes hard to find a real reason to do it. Why hire the Byn to protect you on your trip north when you know there's no real risk of bodily harm? Or there might be, but in the form of mindless holes in the ground that provide nothing but decidedly unentertaining frustration, replacing the at least somewhat dynamic threat of NPC raiders, halfling scouts, Blackmoon PCs, or any other actual threat that has been removed from the game one by one.
Look at what has been taken away from the game over the last handful of years, either entirely or as the consequence of some other event. When were experienced players ever truly worried when travelling? When has the Guild last had a meaningful impact on Allanak politics? When has Allanak last had meaningful politics? When did the playerbase as a whole stop caring about magickers, or start caring only about the annoyingly high numbers and increased assertiveness of them? When did anything happen in Luir's Outpost outside of the annual, painfully predictable and unchanging Luirsfest? Wasn't there actual art in Tuluk once? When did players last create a clan from scratch? When was one of the two primary clans for new players removed from the game, forcing them all into the Byn at the expense of that clan's composition and quality, and at the cost of teaching almost all new players that the game could be played with little more than 'kill scrab' in their vocabulary?
The game has slowly but surely turned into atrophy, apathy and stagnation. Too many players don't care anymore. Too few players are proactive, or stop to wonder if their roleplay actually makes sense. The surface of the game has been polished and made prettier, and the code has been patched up in places while the actual fabric becomes increasingly brittle. Most of this, I suspect, is rooted in the fact that there is no visible future to give it all meaning and incentive. This is why so many players frankly don't give a shit anymore, and the game reflects that change.
Quote from: Gunnerblaster on July 02, 2010, 04:04:12 AM
My views on this are somewhat... Flexible. There is IG Harsh and then there is OOC harsh. There isn't a limit, for me, on how harsh it can become IG - The harsher, the better. But with OOC harsh, I would view things that would be out-right ridiculous, like basically sentencing a player to death for some very small ICly inconsequential action. To me, the worst that can happen that I would consider harsh is to have your pc killed and/or maimed to the point of being unplayable. Otherwise - bring on the hardship.
This is what I don't get. If it wasn't overthetop, then it wouldn't be harsh, it would be considered fair punishment.
Quote from: Good Gortok on July 06, 2010, 06:30:01 PM
Many things
Happily, this has not been my experience. (I hate to sound like pollyanna, but this is what I'm seeing) I log in and I find people who have agendas. They love, they hate. They scheme. The run afoul of each other. They find strange and unexpected alliances. They fully inhabit and fill out the skins of their pcs. They are no more or less interesting than they were eight years ago. Some aspects of the world have changed. Some players have moved on. Some new players have moved in. I believe that you are seeing the things you complain of. I'm happy to say that I am not.
Yeah, pretty much the same for me too. I don't really see any glaring problems or people acting as if they "don't care".
I see a lot of what Good Gortok is talking about. I think he stretches things a bit for emphasis but I definitely can relate to his perspective on a lot of it.
Good Gortok brings up another good point. On the internet, whatever you feel, youassume that the other person feels the same way.
When I feel like I am being abused, I feel others are abusing me.
I had a spell where I figured noone cared about anything. It took me a while, but I also kept track of when I felt that way. I often felt that way when I could care less about what was going on around me. When I actively fought that feeling and started to care, I realized that everyone around me had more engaging characters. This could have been them all being forced to come alive by me, or tht they were that way all along. I took the optomisitic route.
You should also!
I don't know the situation that brought about this discussion, but I will say that killing another player should, for the most part, be a last-resort kind of thing. From Templars to 'Rinthis, Elves to sponsored roles. If you are actively going out of your way to kill other players, or if you are using your IC powers/rank as some kind of excuse to kill, you add nothing to the game. Why kill when you can exile, or maim, or do something INTERESTING? Sometimes you can justify killing someone. Obviously if you're out in the wilderness and someone rides up on you with an axe and tries to kill you, defend yourself. But when other options are available, try something different for a change.
I'm not trying to tell anyone how to play, but from a players-to-players point of view, killing each other is fruitless when there are so many other options available.
Quote from: Blackisback on July 09, 2010, 03:48:37 PM
I don't know the situation that brought about this discussion, but I will say that killing another player should, for the most part, be a last-resort kind of thing. From Templars to 'Rinthis, Elves to sponsored roles. If you are actively going out of your way to kill other players, or if you are using your IC powers/rank as some kind of excuse to kill, you add nothing to the game. Why kill when you can exile, or maim, or do something INTERESTING? Sometimes you can justify killing someone. Obviously if you're out in the wilderness and someone rides up on you with an axe and tries to kill you, defend yourself. But when other options are available, try something different for a change.
I'm not trying to tell anyone how to play, but from a players-to-players point of view, killing each other is fruitless when there are so many other options available.
No. This mud is harsh, and at times, it will leave a bad taste in your mouth. Killing another character should always be an IC thing and at all not a last resort. Otherwise, Red Fangs and assassins would never have any fun. (Damn you red fang raiders..)
Quotebut I will say that killing another player should, for the most part, be a last-resort kind of thing. From Templars to 'Rinthis, Elves to sponsored roles. If you are actively going out of your way to kill other players,
Well, as much as I'd like to kill some players, it is against the law in the USA.
Now, as for players charecters, shrug, my PC will kill when it is IC. I give no thought at all to something more "interesting" Because that is not IC.
As a templar, sure, it is. but not for any commoner. The fact is, making an enemy then letting them live is stupid. If you have an enemy and you have a chance to kill them, you should do so. It is not the movies, leaving them live to become stronger and maybe kill your PC just because you have some OOC consideration is silly.
I do, for the most part try to give a reasonably interesting death...assuming it is face to face.
In the end, it's still only a game when the smoke clears and the mantis head appears.
I try not to take it too seriously or too personal, but sometimes I end up with a funny feeling in my gut anyways. But if you think a death was unjust, or the character had no motivation to kill you, the only thing I can is suggest filing a complaint.
Quote from: Mazy on July 09, 2010, 04:25:08 PM
Quote from: Blackisback on July 09, 2010, 03:48:37 PM
I don't know the situation that brought about this discussion, but I will say that killing another player should, for the most part, be a last-resort kind of thing. From Templars to 'Rinthis, Elves to sponsored roles. If you are actively going out of your way to kill other players, or if you are using your IC powers/rank as some kind of excuse to kill, you add nothing to the game. Why kill when you can exile, or maim, or do something INTERESTING? Sometimes you can justify killing someone. Obviously if you're out in the wilderness and someone rides up on you with an axe and tries to kill you, defend yourself. But when other options are available, try something different for a change.
I'm not trying to tell anyone how to play, but from a players-to-players point of view, killing each other is fruitless when there are so many other options available.
No. This mud is harsh, and at times, it will leave a bad taste in your mouth. Killing another character should always be an IC thing and at all not a last resort. Otherwise, Red Fangs and assassins would never have any fun. (Damn you red fang raiders..)
This MUD -is- harsh. However, it is also a game with a community. I don't expect you to play the same way I do, but if I don't have to kill another character, I won't. Out of consideration for the player, and because, in the end, it makes the game more interesting. If you can't find a way around killing someone, then by all means, end them. If you have the option to let them live but choose not to, then you probably aren't as good of a player as you think you are.
Letting an enemy live may be stupid, but not everyone and their mom should have that mindset.
It can be considered OOC to let a player live with a maiming or less as a 'lesson'; just like it can be considered OOC to kill off all your enemies so they don't come back for revenge against your character.
And there's the fact that not everyone is Fang's enemies. Just because Amos doesn't give Fang his pack does not mean Amos is Fang's enemy.
If Fang thinks that, then he's playing like a paranoid sociopath.
Quote from: Gobbleneck on July 09, 2010, 04:58:19 PM
Letting an enemy live may be stupid, but not everyone and their mom should have that mindset.
It can be considered OOC to let a player live with a maiming or less as a 'lesson'; just like it can be considered OOC to kill off all your enemies so they don't come back for revenge against your character.
And there's the fact that not everyone is Fang's enemies. Just because Amos doesn't give Fang his pack does not mean Amos is Fang's enemy.
If Fang thinks that, then he's playing like a paranoid sociopath.
Or he's playing his character right.
Quote from: Mazy on July 09, 2010, 04:53:23 PM
But if you think a death was unjust, or the character had no motivation to kill you, the only thing I can is suggest filing a complaint.
You don't know a character's motivations; they could be anything. They don't need to be inclined to RP out their motivations just to show the player their kill is just.
Filing complaints should never be used against that sort of thing, imo.
Quote from: Malifaxis on July 09, 2010, 05:00:29 PM
Quote from: Gobbleneck on July 09, 2010, 04:58:19 PM
Letting an enemy live may be stupid, but not everyone and their mom should have that mindset.
It can be considered OOC to let a player live with a maiming or less as a 'lesson'; just like it can be considered OOC to kill off all your enemies so they don't come back for revenge against your character.
And there's the fact that not everyone is Fang's enemies. Just because Amos doesn't give Fang his pack does not mean Amos is Fang's enemy.
If Fang thinks that, then he's playing like a paranoid sociopath.
Or he's playing his character right.
Maybe.
I have read Good Gortok's last post and had to take a moment to shrug off the wave of apathy and depression that washed over me.
Otherwise, no. As someone who observes quiet a bit, I can say the game is still vibrant. Filled with people playing their roles, having their goals, their flaws, their ambitious, their victories, defeats, sorrows, and happiness. The huge grand scale plots happen from time to time, but they're like 10% of the actual interest of the game, if that. And even on those there are plenty, if you considered what has so far happened in the past year.
Granted, not everything is full as it used to be. Simply due to constraints of player base. If the leadership of some clan/house is lacking, then it quiets down in that area of the world. In some other area, the leadership is booming, and events happen so fast, it's hard to track and orient. e
While my characters are far from anything villainous, I do tend to model their mode of murder after the archetype. Not in the "dangling-from-a-burning-rope-above-a-pit-of-mutated-scorpions" sense, but more in the "this-is-how-and-why-I'm-going-to-kill-you" sense. Not only does it provide closure to the victim, but it gives my murderer peace of mind.
Quote from: X-D on July 09, 2010, 04:34:01 PM
The fact is, making an enemy then letting them live is stupid.
However, most of us tend to do this in real life. Just saying.
Stupid, but a lot more involving.
Lately, I've been passing on a lot of kills.
They all end up dying anyway.
:-\
Quote from: brytta.leofa on July 10, 2010, 07:19:51 PM
Quote from: X-D on July 09, 2010, 04:34:01 PM
The fact is, making an enemy then letting them live is stupid.
However, most of us tend to do this in real life. Just saying.
Not in Baghdad or Afghanistan. ;)
We aren't typical Zalanthans either.
Quote from: Synthesis on July 10, 2010, 08:10:02 PM
Lately, I've been passing on a lot of kills.
They all end up dying anyway.
:-\
This is what I used to do with pretty much all of my long-lived characters.
The enemies that survived ended up being more tenacious and interesting (and therefore more fun) anyway.
Quote from: Dan on July 10, 2010, 08:28:54 PM
Not in Baghdad or Afghanistan. ;)
We aren't typical Zalanthans either.
No, we aren't. But even the conflict regions of the asia minor have their share of tax-paying, soft-spoken people who keep their heads down and avoid trouble.
And what of the criminals? What of the outlaws? What of the insurgents? Many of them are at the end of the day satisfied to chop off a thief's hand, or to rape somebodies wife, or to appeal for a multi-thousand dinar settlement from a tribal council according to sharia.
Even the baddest of the worst there don't kill everybody that they dislike. A buddy of mine just got back from a year in Baghdhad*, and had to say of the "insurgency" that a lot of the violence is best attributed to "market forces" (meaning organized) crime and so people get killed when there is a business case for them getting killed, not because two people dislike each other.
But before my post gets too bogged down in geopolitics or counter-insurgency theory (COIN), I'd like to point out that some of us are dickheads in game, and some of us are dickheads out of game. When you're a dickhead to other characters, you're contributing to the harsh atmosphere of the game. When you're a dickhead to other PLAYERS, you're just plain being a dickhead. At the least, you can expect people to draw this to your attention. No one is going to laud your efforts if the result is in multiple people having less fun in the game.
I'll try to illustrate some of this with another post (below).
*anybody who has more direct experience living or working in a conflict zone is welcome to comment on this.
Quote from: jriley on July 12, 2010, 09:33:03 PM
Quote from: Dan on July 10, 2010, 08:28:54 PM
Not in Baghdad or Afghanistan. ;)
We aren't typical Zalanthans either.
No, we aren't. But even the conflict regions of the asia minor have their share of tax-paying, soft-spoken people who keep their heads down and avoid trouble.
And what of the criminals? What of the outlaws? What of the insurgents? Many of them are at the end of the day satisfied to chop off a thief's hand, or to rape somebodies wife, or to appeal for a multi-thousand dinar settlement from a tribal council according to sharia.
Even the baddest of the worst there don't kill everybody that they dislike. A buddy of mine just got back from a year in Baghdhad*, and had to say of the "insurgency" that a lot of the violence is best attributed to "market forces" (meaning organized) crime and so people get killed when there is a business case for them getting killed, not because two people dislike each other.
But before my post gets too bogged down in geopolitics or counter-insurgency theory (COIN), I'd like to point out that some of us are dickheads in game, and some of us are dickheads out of game. When you're a dickhead to other characters, you're contributing to the harsh atmosphere of the game. When you're a dickhead to other PLAYERS, you're just plain being a dickhead. At the least, you can expect people to draw this to your attention. No one is going to laud your efforts if the result is in multiple people having less fun in the game.
I'll try to illustrate some of this with another post (below).
*anybody who has more direct experience living or working in a conflict zone is welcome to comment on this.
I did just get back not too long ago, but will refrain from posting my opinion on the subject. Good input though.
As an aside, and a general question to everyone. Do people feel the level of politically motivated 'harshness' to be too high?
Honestly, it depends on which day you ask me.
Most days no. I think we're good.
I would like to see more politics, but I think I'm in the wrong place for that.
QuoteDo people feel the level of politically motivated 'harshness' to be too high?
Any examples that could be provided? Not quite sure what to be looking at, as there's a broad range of situations that come to mind.
I think I'd agree with Barzalene though that we could just use more politics, period. More non-deadly politics rather, and less killing (or permanent maiming) to solve everything.