Fewer PvP Rules if Not on Killmode Kill?

[Harroghty]

Having recently received the first PvP related complaint in a very long time, I want to open up a discussion about the PvP rules. PvP complaints have gone down dramatically with the current rules (causation or coincidence, I can't say).

The OOC comments were implemented as a way to force players to communicate OOC prior to a combat and ensure that there was some mutual understanding. That is, no matter how much of a jerk the PCs may be, players should be civil OOC because we're all here to have fun. The requirements for roleplay prior to combat accomplish the same; they basically are meant to prevent someone from just wandering around attacking everyone they meet.

Still, I was sitting on an airplane the other day and my mind wandered to the idea of killmode stun. Why do we care if the fight is in killmode stun? Our pride might sting at our PC's loss, but wouldn't fewer restrictions on PvP in killmodes less than kill give us more freedom to RP? Couldn't we then just worry about those few bad actors who might abuse that freedom?

Vote. Feel free to weigh in with reply posts, too.

[Mele]

I am of the "Why do we care at all ever" mind. Your PC's death is not permanent, even were it kill not stun. If you're sitting at a table playing dnd you surely don't have to tell your buddy you're going to attack them to ensure their feelings won't be hurt.

Further, when someone is being rude IC and harassing your PC and you osay about PK and they flat out refuse, and/or run off and/or logoff that is absolute awful form and one of the most frustrating things. IC actions IC consequences and these ones are not permanent.

TLDR, I have never been on team osay before any killmode PK so I voted yes.

[Lirith]

I voted for removing the requirement when on killmode stun. I do think that in the majority of cases there should be background to the PvP, but I don't necessarily think that there must be lengthy RP prior to any PK situation if the history between PCs is there, and I also think that in those cases where there is history, osay is definitely not needed.

Killmode stun really has no inconvenience for a character, so I don't see any problem with that being allowed with looser rules.

I'd like to think that most of us are considerate enough that we can enjoy PvP without being asses about it, and that if there was a PC who suddenly went around killing at random (on killmode kill), that we as PCs could manage to deal with that IC.

[Lorelie]

I think the rules can use some loosening up. But I also think that if we loosen the rules we need to make punishment for breaking the rules extra heavy. If someone complains about a PvP and the Imms feel the complaint has merit then the punishment should not just be a stern talking to, it should be something that pinches enough to remind people that this is an RP MUD.

[Dapher]

Personally, I enjoy a good PVP, but it generally is not a good one when one party is not interested. For instance, people travelling on the road wearing fine mail armor and wielding weapons from the training temple probably are not ready or interested in a PK situation. Though, I generally indulge it is not something I find the least bit enjoyable. I have a hard time supporting a a change that can easily lead to bullying and deter people from wanting to work on lvl 10 characters because they do not want to travel the roads.

[Althasizor]

I'm on team yes for removing the OOC requirement, it's always seemed like a very clunky part of engagement to me. I've been vocal about this before, but the wording in particular gives some players the sense that they should have to consent before they can be PKed even if what they're doing in character would warrant it. I don't think we have many bad players running around looking for a kill, anyway. On the RP requirement side of things, I think as long as the characters have RPed previously, or there's been RP leading up to the PVP itself, that should count. (GuyA enrages GuyB earlier in the week then runs away, GuyB should feel free to smack GuyA around next time he sees him - Besides the IC repercussions, anyway.)

I'd be in favour of these changes if we were talking about killmode kill, too. We have a generally nice playerbase that doesn't leave people dead for extended periods of time regardless, so it and stun are almost always interchangeable.

[Aislynn]

I definitely see a potential problem in removing the OOC check.

I'll be clear; I don't mind the PvP being somewhat forced, but we all have real lives as well. If I was 10 mins away from logging out and somebody forced RP on me, I'd be pissed whether or not I won.

Having more fluid PvP is a great idea, but there needs to always be some sort of OOC communication beforehand to ensure it's not terribly inconvenient from a real life perspective.

If we're willing to trust people with weaker OOC rules, we should just as readily be willing to trust that our players will agree to PvP if it makes sense and isn't 5 mins away from their log time.

[Harroghty]

Are we concerned about people being not nice IC? 1/3 of our alignments are evil and those characters probably will start fights (as evils have for years). From my perspective, if someone picks an unfair fight IC (on stun) then that is something to handle IC. If someone consistently attacks someone, showing up via gate or hanging out outside a favorite training area, that becomes an issue that might need some OOC involvement (it's now harassment).

I do not think that lowering the bar to begin combat will make this any more or less of a problem.

[Dapher]

To be fair, my argument is indeed one that addresses a very small percentage of PVP encounters. In fact, it has only happened to me 3 times (that I can think of) in all the years I have played. I still hold reservations about it, and Aislynn does bring up a valid point. Being a that a lot of us have families, and busy RL situations, we need to keep in mind that some people do not have time to play out an RP of that magnitude all the time.

[Areia]

Thinking back on my PvP experiences, and after rewriting this post several times since this morning, I think I've settled on a painful truth. You can police harassers IC, even punish them OOC very harshly as an imm with the intent to make super sure your point gets across, but that stuff is necessarily reactive. If someone wants to be a jackass, they're going to be a jackass whether we have an osay rule or an RP rule or whatever other rule that disallows jackassery, and no one can immediately stop them from harming their victim most of the time.

That's not to say that punishment for being a jackass shouldn't be harsh, just that there's probably little use in trying to dissuade jackasses from being jackasses in the first place. The only people who have abided by the PvP rules since they were updated have been the sort of people who never needed them at all, and the one or two guys who went around them when it was ridiculous to do so clearly could not have cared less for other peoples' enjoyment one way or the other. The best medicine I've found for that sort of person is just to beat the crap out of their PC (or get someone to do it for you) often enough that they get bored and go jackass it up elsewhere. Ahem, I mean, submit a complaint--that's probably the better thing to do. I just really hate submitting complaints.

So in short, I suppose I see no need for a rule that only really adds an extra, and most often unnecessary, step for thoughtful and law-abiding players. If it were a hardcoded rule that physically disabled PvP without a flag or under a certain level, it would be different. Worst case, we find out that people can't handle not being babied and reinstate the osay rule across the board. Best case, more fluid and reactive RP for the RPers.

*N.B.: My talk of good/bad/jackass/law-abiding refers to the RL players. Playing a jerk IC is totally fine, just be jerk enough that people love to hate you, rather than plain hate you.

[Algon]

PVP is not really a part of the game that I enjoy. I have been playing here for something like 16 years and I have never PKd anyone...on purpose at least. But I agree, if on stuf...what does it matter? As Mele said, even on Killmode kill it doesn't mean much other than OOC feelings. Death has absolutely no sting in our world, which is a good thing, but it does make for things like PVP all about RP and less about "Oh no, my character is gone forever!" So I am all for loosening the rules on it, but like Lorelie said, if we do that, those who do break the few rules we do have need severe punishment.

[Harroghty]

RE: the RL point.

How would this change of rules affect that? Today if I roll up and begin RPing with you, you can say "Hey, I am about to log out."

If there were not OSAY requirement, you could do the same thing. In the unlikely event that someone with whom you had ongoing RP ambushed you (again, on stun), it would probably not delay you any longer except for the mandatory wait time after combat to quit. You could still say, "Let's pick this up later," whether your PC won or lost because, it being on stun, you haven't lost anything. You aren't worried about your PC's corpse, your PC's belongings, etc.

[Aislynn]

@Harroghty

I see your point with that! As I can only speak for myself, though, I can only give my opinion and feelings on the matter were that to happen to me. That being, I'd be pretty irritated if I at least didn't get a chance to say, "Hey, I'm cool with this RP, but I'm super distracted atm/need to log soon/oh shoot, there's a serious thing IRL happening right now". A response to that might be "Well, don't play a MUD if you have stuff going on.", but we don't always know when things might happen.

There's also a matter of choice, I suppose? You accept certain rules and risks when you play the game, just based on the nature of the game itself, but what about a character that's meant for RP, or a player that simply doesn't want to PvP? As long as they're not flip-flopping when they feel they have an advantage, shouldn't it be alright for people to duck out of a situation they weren't looking for? It's a fantasy we're sharing, after all, and I imagine some really would be bothered by sudden and brutal PvP.

[Lirith]

I don’t see that any change in the rules would prevent the usual means of escape. If a PC wants to run now, they have that option and if they happened to be ambushed under any new rules and didn’t want to stand and fight, they could also make an escape.

I don’t personally think changing a few of the specifics about PK would mean much of a change in practice with what we see now. The rules would still be in place regarding property, corpses etc.

[Rhytania]

I think we are a small enough community to self regulate and lifting the OOC requirements could be given a shot.

[Harroghty]

Aislynn, I wanted to clarify that it's fine if people don't want to PvP, but that decision needs to be effected IC.

The rules now do not allow one to simply say, OOC, that they don't want to PvP and go on about their way. You can now and always communicate OOC that you don't want to do it, but it needs to be worked out IC. You can't RP a fearless warrior and just decline all PvP OOC, for example. There have been plenty of PCs who are not really PvP combatants, but that's worked out IC.

The OOC requirement was enacted only to force people to talk before PvP and clear up misunderstandings which led to complaints.

[Hrosskell]

TL;DR: I voted to loosen the rules. For my reasoning, see below.


Personally, I think that PvP should be open season with very few constraints--namely, the protection of new players and the prevention of harassment, and this is how I voted. If you're a seasoned FK veteran, you should know your responsibility to the game's world and the environment you're in.

Most of the old school players I know operate on codes that are no longer written: You don't murder in broad daylight/in cities, attack the weak and defenseless (there are NPCs for that), or plot and pile on without SERIOUS chance of angering the Gods and/or the almighty armies of the places you're around. You also don't hunt someone down without a serious grievance -- and even then, you need to let it go once you've made your point (whether that single pursuit ends in a kill, escape, or something inbetween). You don't break the other rules of the game -- meta-knowledge, multiplay, etc. Very importantly, you have to have the capacity to LOSE.

The best players in the history of this game--to me--were unequivocal losers: the paladin Aran's primary arc was his rivalry with Rhiel, and Aran lost all but one of those fights. Rhiel, just as memorable, lost to nearly everyone else. Gwain -- a contemptuous, cantankerous, widely respected and infamously dangerous neutral -- is a historical loser, and the modern day's best villain, Cabadath, has yet to land an astounding W in PvP terms, but the consequences of their conflicts are real and lasting. These people won't go down as bastions of PvP, but as true roleplayers, and I believe that should be the aim.

I think the aforementioned responsibility and aim really boil down to sportsmanship. I have seen players of villains and heroes alike exemplify this, and I have seen many players (including myself, and even those mentioned above) fail. In those instances, the premise fails -- it only exists in a world where the players have a mutual respect for a code, if not each other. I don't know if FK is in that kind of place anymore even outside of a PvP environment -- the steps it would take to get there are the scope of another discussion altogether. Still, I vote for the change I want to be, and think this could work with a community committed to understanding (and a firm authority to enforce) a relatively simple code of player conduct.

[Gwain]

I'd be more partial to a command along the lines of OOC: I need to leave for RL reasons but if you can msg me or send me an otell we can pick up later if you still want to:/apologies and thanks: char: GWAIN 6/5/19 02:34
A command like that with a log creates some social contract that both parties can work to solve. Maybe combine it with the qlog so you can fulfill your beefs as time goes by.

One thing though, if that person leaves, I expect the rp to reset itself, I'm not going to enjoy logging back in and being drawn into a fight with no rp beforehand, thats bad form and any new battle should always start with an intent to rp. If we can type and manage to enjoy a game made up of tiny text we can take the time to prolong our interactions before killing each other.

[Areia]

I realize the PvP helpfile has not changed, but I thought it worth asking regardless. Are we giving a go at dropping osay and consent on stun and below, or are they still required for all PvP anywhere?

[Tarven]

I'm way late to this discussion and don't really have a stake in the race, but I will bring up my experience with PK on this MUD:

Manadhon vs Nerian.

That rivalry went on for weeks. The two were constantly at each other's throats, and a wide variety of other PCs became involved in their plot. It was all very RP and very IC. Or at least mostly. There was some OOC stuff that happened that actually ultimately led to my leaving the MUD.

One thing I worry about Killmode stun would be stunning someone in an area with aggressive mobiles, and then letting them finish the job. I saw someone in this thread say that dying had no sting on FK, but unless things have changed drastically (which is very likely, given the time frame since I've been gone) I would argue that's not entirely accurate, especially to newer players. If you're unfaithed, dying -sucks-. Or at least used to.

Even if you are faithed, if your corpse is on the ground with all your gear, I'd say that has some sting for many characters.

Anyway, as far as Manadhon and Nerian's rivalry went, the two were pretty much KoS to each other. It was understood that each wanted blood, and both took many grievous wounds over the course of the weeks. Though, yeah, Manadhon took a lot more . Still, it would have entirely disrupted and taken the fun out of their rivalry if they'd had to stop and osay "Hey there ol' chap, ready to die?" every time they got into it.

On the other hand, had Nerian's player not had the OOC reaction to an IC consequence he did that led to the aforementioned OOC stuff happening, I might have stuck around on that character longer. So, who's to say what's better?