A conundrum of PVP on a RP server

[monkeywithstick]

However, Rp and PvP are not and never have been oppositional, they are complimentary, even, if not especially, when they do result in a story not playing out as expected or at all.

I disagree. IMO, your example doesn't provide an argument for PvP being RP. It provides an argument for PvP furthering narratives or stories. Which is what I've also said.

But I think this entire thing started because the OP didn't really feel like they were roleplaying. In that case the PvP happened, but the roleplay seemingly did not.

I do not see a counterpoint and this leads me to suspect you have misunderstood. If you clarify I'd be happy to answer but I don't want to build you a straw man.

I'm not going to comment on whether a specific PvP instance that I wasn't present for was sufficiently RPed or not.

[BoredGM]

The counterpoint is I believe this.

You were arguing:

1.) PvP = RP, or rather "PvP and RP are complementary"

I contradicted by saying:

1.) The original poster had PvP with another person. They don't feel as if they RPed. What do you say to that?

In another post I had another example you can address if you like.

2.) When you click on an enemy in Neverwinter Nights and eventually one of you falls to the ground from the weapons, the system did not by default roleplay. If you think it has, how and why?

[monkeywithstick]

Roleplay is the sum actions of a character, which can include wordlessly hitting someone with a sword. This is far easier to do and make fun for all concerned in a LRP context.

This does not however constitute "Interactive roleplay must be offered before PvP" for server rules, nor do I, in Arelith terms encourage it: you may recall I mentioned concessions.

[BoredGM]

Okay. Thank you for clarifying.

Do you think what happened with the OP is to be encouraged or not?

[monkeywithstick]

Okay. Thank you for clarifying.

Do you think what happened with the OP is to be encouraged or not?

I will answer the third instance of this question from you by quoting the first two times I replied to it or a derivative therof:

I'm not going to comment on whether a specific PvP instance that I wasn't present for was sufficiently RPed or not.

This does not however constitute "Interactive roleplay must be offered before PvP" for server rules, nor do I, in Arelith terms encourage it: you may recall I mentioned concessions.

[BoredGM]

Pretend you are present and this occurs. A level 30 quickly slays a level 10, wordlessly. Then they both go about their business afterward. Wordlessly.

What RP happened? Should that be encouraged or not?

[JustMonika]

Pretend you are present and this occurs. A level 30 quickly slays a level 10, wordlessly. Then they both go about their business afterward. Wordlessly.

What RP happened? Should that be encouraged or not?

What happened was a violation of the server rules, and as a result is irrelevent to the discussion at hand. There's no point debating something that's already a rulebreak.

Being wordless is also discouraged as per the RPR system, though not the rulebreak at hand [In the afformentioned example. Like our resident stick armed progentior, I can't comment on a situation I was not part of. Nor should we on the forums.]

[BoredGM]

But doesn't my example fall under the definition of PvP?

[The GrumpyCat]

Pretend you are present and this occurs. A level 30 quickly slays a level 10, wordlessly. Then they both go about their business afterward. Wordlessly.

What RP happened? Should that be encouraged or not?

Then you go:
"Oh my god! That guy murdered that other guy! Let's..."
*Get the Guard!
*Raise the body!
*Hire the killer! He's obviously strong so he can help me murder my enemies!

Roleplay may not have happened between the two parties... and certainly the situation itself is a rules break and should never occur or be encouraged! But roleplay can, and perhaps should, happen in the world around them.

I'm a big proponent of that when life gives you lemons, make lemonaid. When bad things happen - Yeah of course, report them sure. But also make the best of them. Make roleplay out of it. Find fun ways to draw it out. Ect.

Practically everything that happens in game is In Character. Just becaues the people in this example didn't do any roleplay themselves, doesn't make the situation less valid.

[BoredGM]

Which of course means that the PvP was not the RP. So therefore, PvP is not equal to RP.

[monkeywithstick]

Which of course means that the PvP was not the RP. So therefore, PvP is not equal to RP.

Only if you accept that it was not also RP. Which is fallacious.
Your hypothetical case does not meet the server ruling for "interactive RP before PvP" that is not the same thing, please cease treating it as such, your performative ignorance is rather tiresome.

[BoredGM]

I don't think it was fallacious. It was not I that said RP didn't happen between the two when they were in PvP. It was Grumpy.
You can assume that I am trying perform ignorance and be impolite, but I am not. You can make your own judgement on that.
So it seems now the argument is that only the PvP you are talking about is RP?

[Nitro]

The particular strawman you have set up:

Pretend you are present and this occurs. A level 30 quickly slays a level 10, wordlessly. Then they both go about their business afterward. Wordlessly.

What RP happened? Should that be encouraged or not?

Is PvP, and also against the rules which state that all PvP have to be interactively roleplayed before it is engaged. So no, that should not be encouraged because it's against the rules.

PvP can be a part of RP just as much or little as typing a paragraph can. Someone standing at a wall typing a paragraph to themselves aren't roleplaying any more than someone doing wordless PvP. One is more destructive than the other (and breaks the rules) sure, but neither are interactive roleplay.

But PvP as a result of roleplay, someone getting threatened and not backing down. Mutual enemies duking it out. A paladin chasing down a foul necromancer who set loose a blight on the crops. All of these are roleplay and PvP, one doesn't even have to make a distinction between the two because the conflict (PvP) is central to the story told between the characters. Does it have to be a PvP conflict? No of course not, it's just another tool available for the roleplayers to further the story.

[BoredGM]

Mutual enemies duking it out. A paladin chasing down a foul necromancer who set loose a blight on the crops. All of these are roleplay and PvP, one doesn't even have to make a distinction between the two because the conflict (PvP) is central to the story told between the characters. Does it have to be a PvP conflict? No of course not, it's just another tool available for the roleplayers to further the story.

Of the examples I've quoted, how are they different from the example I've provided?

[monkeywithstick]

Mutual enemies duking it out. A paladin chasing down a foul necromancer who set loose a blight on the crops. All of these are roleplay and PvP, one doesn't even have to make a distinction between the two because the conflict (PvP) is central to the story told between the characters. Does it have to be a PvP conflict? No of course not, it's just another tool available for the roleplayers to further the story.

Of the examples I've quoted, how are they different from the example I've provided?

They differ in RP quality.

The server is WYSIWYG. You may argue your hypothetical wordless murder is poor quality RP. I'd agree it's quite likely it is, I would certainly report that myself.
It is however an action of a character, in an in-character space ergo it is still RP. Unless, perhaps it was done for OOC reasons, which would again be a rulesbreach - even then the event still occurs in game, there would be a blood splatter, resources would need to be expended to clean that, or the corpse may be found, given the witnesses cannot be guaranteed to be present, in an in character, and roleplay perspective - the character still died.

[BoredGM]

Okay. How do they differ in RP quality?
As far as I can see, what happened here is you replaced the words "level 30" & "level 10" with the words "mutual enemies" or "paladin" & "necromancer".

Other words, I just think this happened.
A level 30 (paladin) quickly slays a level 10 (necromancer), wordlessly. Then they both go about their business afterward. Wordlessly.

Going to take a break for a while.

[Nobs]

Whats this about again?

[Nitro]

Okay. How do they differ in RP quality?
As far as I can see, what happened here is you replaced the words "level 30" & "level 10" with the words "mutual enemies" or "paladin" & "necromancer".

Other words, I just think this happened.
A level 30 (paladin) quickly slays a level 10 (necromancer), wordlessly. Then they both go about their business afterward. Wordlessly.

Going to take a break for a while.

Is PvP, and also against the rules which state that all PvP have to be interactively roleplayed before it is engaged. So no, that should not be encouraged because it's against the rules.

Any argument that you build based on something that's actively not allowed on this server is going to be seen as fallacious because it shouldn't happen, and if it does happen it can be reported to the DM's and dealt with.

If a level 30 paladin hunts a level 10 necromancer and PvP is the outcome after they have interacted, then that PvP is part of the roleplay.

[BoredGM]

Okay. When the level 30 paladin reaches the level 10 necromancer and smites him quickly, how did the 2 players roleplay? What part of that do you consider to be roleplaying?

[Aelryn Bloodmoon]

Okay. When the level 30 paladin reaches the level 10 necromancer and smites him quickly, how did the 2 players roleplay? What part of that do you consider to be roleplaying?

Let's replace the word RP with the word "narrative." In little red riding hood, there's a narrative, and after little red riding hood RP's with the big bad wolf, and notices what big eyes and teeth he has, the big bad wolf eats little red riding hood. This is narrative, it flows, and it makes sense- a consequence of the wolf's discovery is that he must drop the act and eat (PvP) little red riding hood.

This is interactive narrative, or RP, in a scene where little red riding hood and the big bad wolf are two separate characters written by two separate authors. The PvP is the culmination of the conflict- and while you aren't dialoguing five screen long emotes during said PvP, a picture is worth a thousand words- the big bad wolf leapt up, chased big red riding hood through the house, out the door, tackled her to the ground, and gobbled her up. Because the medium becomes point and click and stops being typing, doesn't change the fact that this is a logical flow of conflict that involves RP.

And later on, drawing his axe and advancing menacingly on TBBW is also hostile RP that fits the narrative. When the woodsman splits TBBW open like a melon because he sees LRRH's bloody cloak, that is also a product and culmination of a conflict RP, even though no words are spoken.

To claim that PvP cannot be a part of RP is to turn an intentionally blind eye to narrative consequence - you are essentially claiming that because you stop typing, actions cease to make narrative sense, but that's a statement that is clearly false unless you refuse to see how violent conflict escalation is a clear part of a high fantasy narrative.

PvP can happen without RP. To claim that PvP is always without or against RP is something so demonstrably false that I feel you must have personal feelings about this subject that make you prefer not to acknowledge PvP's (or the narrative consequence of hostile RP, if you don't like those letters) existence at all- and that's not the server environment Arelith caters to.

You are doomed to disappointment if this is the case, IMO.

[BoredGM]

So is PvP = RP because it is an interactive sequence of events now the argument? I just wanted to be clear.

[monkeywithstick]

PvP is RP.
The alternative would require that nothing that doesn't get written in bubbletext counts.
Things that are IC decisions that may be reacted to:
Putting on a disguise
Drawing a weapon
Hitting someone with a weapon
Sneaking
Not talking

Is there a discernible IC difference between the following actions in game:
Walking up to someone
Running up to someone
Running up to someone with a weapon drawn
Sneaking up to someone.

If your answer is no, then I'm afraid I can't help you.
If your answer is yes, then despite the lack of text, you have roleplayed. People do this all the time, likely without thinking about it. In many cases the bubble text is helpful and provides better quality RP. But actually, character decisions do not need the emote in every case to be valid or even reactable.

This doesn't meet the requirement for interactive rp in pvp. In much the same way, walking up to someone
wordlessly and repeatedly emoting stabbing them to death is still a rules breach because it wasn't really meeting the interactive part of the rule.

It is also entirely irrelevant for the purposes of this argument and serves only to continue a bad faith thread derailment.

[BoredGM]

You know monkey, you can continue to call me bad faith in whatever way you want. I was simply asking questions and hearing everyone's arguments toward the conclusion that PVP = RP. Because I disagree.
I don't really care if the proposed example is legal in game. What I care about is does it fit within the constraints laid out in everyone's arguments for how the RP could exist in PvP?
My intention for doing so is to make better quality RP. If you don't believe me, I can't control it. But I'm just going to ignore whenever you call me bad faith from now on, okay? Afterward, everyone else can make their own judgements.

But to continue this line of reasoning from you...
So are you saying that RP = PVP because there is a discernible IC difference between actions in game? I just wanted to make the arguments clear.

[monkeywithstick]

I am saying PvP is RP because PvP is an IC action/decision made by the character.

As I have made abundantly clear already.

[Aelryn Bloodmoon]

What's being said is that all actions that take place, with or without text, are RP, because they happen in character on the stage of Arelith. If it happens on screen, the world "sees" it. This is why, for example, there are rules about notifications of raids on settlements, to accommodate that DM presence is necessary to simulate the world's reaction.

There is an interactive requirement before PvP takes place. This is a separate rule that relates to the issue in the OP, but not to the discussion at hand.

Whether the thing that happens on screen is two hours of dialogue or three minutes of a massive, zone-wide brawl, that's RP, because imagine how much that can influence the characters involved, the characters who witnessed it, and the stories the characters who were involved and saw it can tell to other characters later, possibly even using the combat log itself to help narrate the flow of the fight with appropriate blunders and epic skill.

Again - everything that happens on-screen is IC. What You See Is What You Get.

You're welcome to disagree with this premise, but it's this exact premise that brought me to Arelith along with a recommendation from a player I'd played on other servers with - I believe as long as such premises are held to in good faith that it's one of the most beneficial things for Arelith's atmosphere. I wanted an immersive experience, and it delivered.