Forgotten Kingdoms Forums

Going to have to disagree with the above. "Killmode stun" isn't an "FK OOC game mechanic", it's our equivalent of.. Well, not killing someone. In tabletop, if someone is dropped to 0 HP, they're alive but unable to take actions. Anything more than that, and they fall unconscious, dying at -10. We work similarly in that regard. Killmode stun, as I've always seen it, drops the victim to -1 HP or more. Further, in tabletop, you can take a penalty to your to-hit bonus (-4) to deal non-lethal damage instead of lethal damage. That's two different ways to do it, at least. For pretty much always, people have been trying to incapacitate eachother rather than accidentally murder them(eg. the police), so I'm not really sure what you mean when you say "stunning" is FK-only.

But the point is, you aren't subduing anything. You're beating them within an inch of their life and staying the killing blow. Undead, and constructs on the other hand, are destroyed when they hit 0 because that's when they "break". They aren't struggling to continue living like something... Alive would, they've taken as much damage as they can and are simply broken now. It makes sense in-universe, it makes sense for tabletop, and IMO it makes sense for the mud as well. As Gwain said, the equivalent of "staying the killing blow" on the undead is to stop attacking it before it's destroyed, killmode nofight.

It does -not- make sense to see an undead creature stunned on the ground, which is the core point here. They can't be stunned. There is no way to beat a zombie until it falls unconscious. It isn't alive, it isn't still breathing, and it doesn't suffer concussions. Hitting it until it stops moving, destroys it.

We've all been there before, but I don't think the minor inconvenience warrants a change, particularly one necessitating a suspension of logic. I think the reasoning should be sound if we move away from SRD.

tl;dr stun is -not- an fk-only concept, it exists in tabletop a few different ways. It's an IC decision not to finish someone off, except in the case of undead, where if you don't want to destroy it, you don't drop it to the point where it's destroyed.

In terms of subdue, it would take significantly more effort to subdue a deader or construct. Something involving pinning it's limbs and hammering nails through it and even then it's iffy.

I could see someone applying to build an item that does this at the end of a fight, or part way through but it sounds complicated and iffy.

Speaking atm as i'm having problems with this exact thing but I enjoy the challenge of coordination. In this particular experience, it turned what was a go kill quest into a far more complex tactical cenario

Thanks Althasizor, I would concur with you, except it becomes clear to me that we have a vastly different understanding of what stun means.

I had always assumed that when something is stunned, the concept of it being stunned was open to interpretation (this was my understanding, carried over from a time when everything was stunnable).

In stun PKs, I'd immediately OOC-aid the stunned target so they can be involved in the RP (even if they were RPing being unconscious). For an undead creature, I think it makes perfect sense that I beat it up so badly that it couldn't move, but was still "alive". Could I not hit it until it almost stops moving? The part about the game rendering it literally unconscious in-game is quite irrelevant anyway, since these undead entities usually aren't sentient.

Perhaps the strongest point raised might simply be that this is too much effort for too few players.

They look pretty stunned to me, Jim. Crits and stuns are not tied together; there are plenty of creatures who can be stunned--as in the effect--and crit, and not stunned by killmode. This change is about gravity vs. ease of play. I lean towards ease of play--especially for groups, out in the world, doing things--far more than the iota of gravity this adds, especially considering the above counter-indicating example. It doesn't make sense to me that one stands and the other does not.

All that being said, this can only be changed by one man, and I doubt it's anywhere on his radar. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

(As an aside, please do not obfuscate mechanics if you are not clear of how they work; it does damage to those who care to learn and those who care to debate.)

Althasizor wrote:In tabletop, if someone is dropped to 0 HP, they're alive but unable to take actions. Anything more than that, and they fall unconscious, dying at -10.

In tabletop, you cannot choose to hold back your damage such that you just drop them to a range of 0 to -9 hp. This all depends on a lucky roll. If you are saying that we should move to this and be done with KILLMODE: Stun, then that's another tangent to the discussion.

Further, in tabletop, you can take a penalty to your to-hit bonus (-4) to deal non-lethal damage instead of lethal damage.

This is a totally different mechanic, and you have to consciously choose to either punch (assuming you are not trained in unarmed combat), or choose to use a non-lethal weapon. You do not just opt to take a -4 penalty for non-lethal damage.

These are two different mechanics in SRD, neither of these support how KILLMODE: Stun currently works on FK.

Yes, undead and constructs amongst other races do not get this region of 0 to -9 hp to be disabled.

To conclude, KILLMODE: Stun on FK is different from the disabled mechanic in SRD and it is different from non-lethal damage in SRD. KILLMODE: Stun is an FK MUD mechanic. Undead and constructs behaving as they should in SRD, but they should be allowed to be KILLMODE: Stun-able for consistency with MUD play. I don't see why we try to chase for (in my opinion) the harder solutions when a simple one is presented.

At this point i think going back and forth purely on mechanics won't prove fruitful.

I think it comes down to really, do enough people support the change. As I've said in above as for myself I don't have strong feelings either way because of my own personal likes or dislikes. If a group finds it's way to kill some strong undead / construct and don't actually manage to get the right person to land the final blow the attempt was still doing more than market squating so was fun.

I can enjoy the ease of play with this because of possibly how many more people would be willing to make the attempt and the challenge of play without this because there are tons of other things to do that don't involve undead or constructs on the mud and the challenge gives these enemies a new dimension.

Llanthyr wrote: In tabletop, you cannot choose to hold back your damage such that you just drop them to a range of 0 to -9 hp. This all depends on a lucky roll. If you are saying that we should move to this and be done with KILLMODE: Stun, then that's another tangent to the discussion.

See below.

Llanthyr wrote:This is a totally different mechanic, and you have to consciously choose to either punch (assuming you are not trained in unarmed combat), or choose to use a non-lethal weapon. You do not just opt to take a -4 penalty for non-lethal damage.

False. As quoted from the SRD,

Nonlethal Damage with a Weapon that Deals Lethal Damage
You can use a melee weapon that deals lethal damage to deal nonlethal damage instead, but you take a -4 penalty on your attack roll.

If your point is that killmode: stun should be made to enforce a -4 to-hit penalty on anyone using it, perhaps that -does- deserve its own topic. Otherwise, it's in practice the same, the equivalent to a tabletop game where you choose your next attack to be nonlethal so as to spare a bloodied enemy. It's worth noting that in tabletop, undead and constructs are -also- not subject to nonlethal damage, further supporting the argument against this.

These are two similar mechanics in tabletop, both of which support how KILLMODE:Stun currently works on FK. Undead and constructs are not subject to either, as in FK.

Regardless, the replies in this thread -are- getting pretty hostile, and constantly posting back with brash declarations trying to shut down opposing points isn't really the point of game suggestions.

My vote would be against this suggestion.

Whatever the SRD says, this mechanic just isn't contributing to a fun experience for me. I've been on connexions with 1-2 second lags for the past year or two, with spikes when a lot of stuff is happening at once (such as in a fight), and having to struggle to change to killmode nofight before accidentally killing a mob is just unwieldy and detrimental to the immersion in gameplay.

It's just silly, going to kill an immensely powerful dracolich and accidentally, someone else kills it and ICly you go,

"Alas, for in blunder, the fell beast hast been slain by another. Let us tarry within the adjacent chamber for an hour split in twain, and surely 'pon the beast's swift replacement shalt the killing blow be dealt by me."

You hear the rustle of rats and shadows flicker on the walls.

"Look over yonder! Another dracolich! Who might've supposed they were so common in this region? Truly this is a real issue."

*battle* "Oops."

"Woe, for it has happened anew! May blessed Tymora smile 'pon us today, and the vile Velsharoon send us another dracolich within the hour, that I may place the killing blow upon it, in the absence of which I will be wholly unqualified to receive an uncommon trinket from my employer."

You hear the rustle of rats and shadows flicker on the walls.

*battle* "Vexation!"

"My friends, the dragon hast been slain, but not by my hand, for our mage's spellcasting finished too late and a really powerful spell that he probably wanted to issue earlier came too late, after the fighter had gotten a solid 5-hit combo and the enemy was really weak. Fret not! We shall tarry anew, for within the tipping of an hourglass, rats shall be the heralds of the approach of another dracolich!"

Et cetera...

Anyway, I guess it's a fun challenge and a chance to generate some serious RP.

Again, I have to stipulate that we're going about this in a very circuitous screaming match via text. In all honesty, yes. The current code for this particular part of the game isn't working to the absolute benefit of the player's experience at playing the game. That wordy circumlocution simply means we need to change the system so that those players who're affected by this particular choice in a negative way, no longer are; Whilst keeping to a system that doesn't make those not affected by this choice in a negative way, become affected negatively.

The simplest solution, while not necessarily the easiest to implement, is to redefine /how/ the game interprets completion of a task by a character. I'm not suggesting rewriting challenging quests to be group only, I'm suggesting adding or changing the quest bit update code on quest specific mobs to include the possibility of tack completion even if they aren't directly slain by the qbit holder.

This isn't as complicated as it sounds:
greet_prog 100~
//players walk into room with mob, it checks each of them for the specific qbit for killing this mob
if quest(#,#,$n) == #
mpmset $I quest 0 1 1 //Sets a qbit on the quest mob
endif
death_prog
//verifies that at least one player in room needs to finish quest and always drops a quest trophy
if quest(0, 1, $i) == 1
mpoload QQ## //Token of some sort to verify death of creature, this token updates qbit on player
//drops token here via [insert code]
mpmset $i quest 0 1 0 //removes mob qbit, can remove if unnecessary
endif

Token //Item can be passed around to players needing the qbit, this is an RP opportunity
get_prog
if quest(#, #, $n) == #
mpmset #n quest # # #
endif

To take this token thing a little further, to avoid abuse, make the quest giver mob ask to see the item. Junk it, and give them a copy that doesn't have the get_prog on it.

This /should/ solve most mob issues when it comes to killing them. Again, send in a note stating the mob and quest via bug/app forum (or whatever is easier) so that the builders can add it to their list of things to do. Done, no race file alterations, no mechanics arguments, no messy rage quitting because player lag issues are no less in their control than a dracolich's ability to supplicate resurrect without favor grinding.

Althasizor wrote: False. As quoted from the SRD,

Nonlethal Damage with a Weapon that Deals Lethal Damage
You can use a melee weapon that deals lethal damage to deal nonlethal damage instead, but you take a -4 penalty on your attack roll.

Good point. I misread that part and I stand corrected.

However, on the same topic of nonlethal damage in the SRD,

When you take nonlethal damage, keep a running total of how much you’ve accumulated. Do not deduct the nonlethal damage number from your current hit points. It is not "real" damage. Instead, when your nonlethal damage equals your current hit points, you’re staggered, and when it exceeds your current hit points, you fall unconscious.

This again does not reflect what we currently have on KILLMODE: Stun. There are three effects here that we are considering when comparing to SRD: "disabled", "staggered", and "unconscious". I would equate "disabled" to a MUD equivalent of "bleeding out", but I do not see that we have an equivalent of "staggered" and "unconscious" since "nonlethal damage" is separate from "actual HP".