Subdual - How to make it an Arelith Acceptable Reality

[Apokriphos]

Honestly, I see this is a fantastic alternative to dying outright. It means there's a chance RP before being outright killed, and it'll give the users of this spell a chance to offer their opponents a monologue or one-liner, etc. for some dramatic effect.
If needed, granting temporary immunity to daze (similar to the KD immunity) might work out?

Hopefully it'll allow more of a chance to interact more with those who fight, on an RP perspective anyway.

Better than sitting in the fugue and wondering if you're going to get raised for prisoner RP after suddenly getting a SoD dropped on you, losing any gold you had, and worst of all, not giving the villains (or heroes) the satisfaction of a little one-liner or some banter during combat.

Seeing this response had me thinking of this approved suggestion.

viewtopic.php?f=51&t=26363&p=210551&hil ... al#p210551

It has been discussed here as well: viewtopic.php?f=37&t=27220&p=215115&hil ... al#p215115

I believe a chance for conversation between parties post hostility really would help to further flesh out the world in which we play. Pvp often has a tendency to end up in OOC grief between parties even if the roleplay was ideal. However, there are mechanical consequences in Arelith to typing/speaking (an easy free action in pnp) instead of swinging a sword or casting a spell.

If we were to make this a reality, what sort of limits would it need? I would think that affected characters should get an option to die and skip the gloating. Perhaps regeneration and pray should be disabled post subdual. What, if anything else - besides listed in the previous thread, should be added to make it work for us?

[Griefmaker]

I am still in the camp that all PvP should be "subdual" and that a character with 0 or -10 HP is unable to perform actions, though could still "speak" so there can be RP. And when a character is at this stage, another character has to consciously perform another hostile action to actually "kill" the character.

[MissEvelyn]

I am still in the camp that all PvP should be "subdual" and that a character with 0 or -10 HP is unable to perform actions, though could still "speak" so there can be RP. And when a character is at this stage, another character has to consciously perform another hostile action to actually "kill" the character.

+1. I'm in agreement with this. It would definitely help foster a better RP environment, versus the aggressive kill-bashing we often see happening in the name of preservation.

[Volograd]

I am still in the camp that all PvP should be "subdual" and that a character with 0 or -10 HP is unable to perform actions, though could still "speak" so there can be RP. And when a character is at this stage, another character has to consciously perform another hostile action to actually "kill" the character.

I no longer play due to lack of a 64-bit OS, but i will return one day and I would absolutely love something like this.

My builds are terrible, my PVP is worse, and I’m just not likely to win a fight, but this would negate all of that stress and give us non-combat players a chance to enjoy conflict and combat without the disappointment of missing out on what could be some tremendous role play.

[Eira]

This absolutely would be great. We need more use of subdual. I specifically made one of my characters to avoid killing people through using subdual because I hate the whole thing of corpses and bashing for every single conflict.

I have also had rp cut short multiple times due to someone else going straight to the killbash of a victim I was intending to rp with more (with flesh to stone or other more rp hold spells).

It can be really frustrating, especially when you know the victim is down to play actual helpless victim rather than a corpse.

[Void]

I would rather not see any of this and think the mechanics are good as they are.

If the target got killed by sufficient amount of damage, there is no chance of talking, because they're splattered around the area. So any "talk from near death after getting hit by maximized IGMS and blown up by fireball" will look very very silly.

If they end up in "near death area" like it happens now before getting fugued, sure. They can talk before they bleed out. If you don't want them to accidentally die, subdual as it is right now is already available.

[Shadowy Reality]

Years and years ago I suggested any hit or spell (including death spells) that would kill a PC to instead put them at 0.

It was not a popular suggestion back then, mostly because people thought it would be abused. The most mentioned scenario was that during group PvP these people would be healed back when they should actually be dead.

[Morgy]

I agree with the need for less fugue visits in PvP and more 'deathbed' roleplay. I really think this would bring a closer link between pvp and RP.

Perhaps open up subdual to more weapons/certain magics, but increase the penalties to AB/Damage?

"Take them alive!" requires more care and skill than falling on an opponent with fierce blows or peppering them with arrows, after all.

[Void]

I agree with the need for less fugue visits in PvP and more 'deathbed' roleplay. I really think this would bring a closer link between pvp and RP.

Perhaps open up subdual to more weapons/certain magics, but increase the penalties to AB/Damage?

"Take them alive!" requires more care and skill than falling on an opponent with fierce blows or peppering them with arrows, after all.

Magic already has things like Bigby Grasping Hand (7th circle).

[Morgy]

I agree with the need for less fugue visits in PvP and more 'deathbed' roleplay. I really think this would bring a closer link between pvp and RP.

Perhaps open up subdual to more weapons/certain magics, but increase the penalties to AB/Damage?

"Take them alive!" requires more care and skill than falling on an opponent with fierce blows or peppering them with arrows, after all.

Magic already has things like Bigby Grasping Hand (7th circle).

I'm familiar with that. I'm referring to damage spells. A very skilled mage might be able to temper their evocations to -almost- kill, rather than simply applying the same burst of power to all targets.

[Void]

I agree with the need for less fugue visits in PvP and more 'deathbed' roleplay. I really think this would bring a closer link between pvp and RP.

Perhaps open up subdual to more weapons/certain magics, but increase the penalties to AB/Damage?

"Take them alive!" requires more care and skill than falling on an opponent with fierce blows or peppering them with arrows, after all.

Magic already has things like Bigby Grasping Hand (7th circle).

I'm familiar with that. I'm referring to damage spells. A very skilled mage might be able to temper their evocations to -almost- kill, rather than simply applying the same burst of power to all targets.

Hmm.....

Harm?

Harm: Deals 10*CL points of damage. Will not reduce health below 1 HP.

I do not think an evoker would easily be able to "almost kill" a target, because that requires incredible degree of insight in target's strength and health condition, and this is not something an evoker would normally have. It's basically not a matter of limiting damage but learning how much damage is necessary. You can't see target's hitpoints, so you can't know how much force you need to apply in order to not send them into afterlife. Additionally, spells are prepared in advance, so if all you have left is maximized scintillating sphere, that's bad news for the target.

However, it would make sense to have a necromantic or clerical spell which would make target "dying" but not "dead" on success. Because necromancers deal with death, and because clerics possess keen insight. Preferably single target magic with melee touch and a save.

That would be reasonable and would make sense.

Non-lethal fireballs, on other hand, wouldn't make sense.

[Morgy]

Magic already has things like Bigby Grasping Hand (7th circle).

I'm familiar with that. I'm referring to damage spells. A very skilled mage might be able to temper their evocations to -almost- kill, rather than simply applying the same burst of power to all targets.

Hmm.....

Harm?

Harm: Deals 10*CL points of damage. Will not reduce health below 1 HP.

I do not think an evoker would easily be able to "almost kill" a target, because that requires incredible degree of insight in target's strength and health condition, and this is not something an evoker would normally have. It's basically not a matter of limiting damage but learning how much damage is necessary. You can't see target's hitpoints, so you can't know how much force you need to apply in order to not send them into afterlife. Additionally, spells are prepared in advance, so if all you have left is maximized scintillating sphere, that's bad news for the target.

However, it would make sense to have a necromantic or clerical spell which would make target "dying" but not "dead" on success. Because necromancers deal with death, and because clerics possess keen insight. Preferably single target magic with melee touch and a save.

That would be reasonable and would make sense.

Non-lethal fireballs, on other hand, wouldn't make sense.

For sure it would need to be restricted to certain spells.. But aiming to blast an opponent of his feet say, or aiming for a particular section of your enemy with a 'ray' type spell might be more realistic than say, K'O'ing with an ice storm.

On top of this all such spells should have a fairly high risk of accidentally killing even without intent to do so.

[Void]

For sure it would need to be restricted to certain spells.. But aiming to blast an opponent of his feet say,

Rocket Jump! For the opponent and everybody in 6.67 meter radius

or aiming for a particular section of your enemy with a 'ray' type spell

And they don't need that limb in particular anyway!

No offense intended. Just having a bit of fun.

You actually sorta can already do that, but it is very difficult. Basically you'd need to hold target in place and then LGMS (10d6), Magic missile (5d4 + 5) and electric jolt(1d3) them to negative numbers, depending on how beefy they look.

Another interesting option is healer with Lifeline ability:
http://wiki.arelith.com/Cleric#Healer

Lifeline: Healers can cast Raise Dead or Resurrection on a living target to apply a Lifeline to that target for the duration of 1 turn. If the affected creature reaches -10 hitpoints during the effect, they fall to the ground unconscious instead of dying, and are raised or resurrected a round later.

RAW dnd 3.5 also has this:

Conjuration (Healing)
Level: Cleric 2, Paladin 2,
Components: V, S, DF,
Casting Time: 1 swift action
Area: 50-ft.-radius burst centered on you
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Will negates (harmless); see text
Spell Resistance: Yes (harmless)

Filled with compassion and concern, you draw upon your deity's power. A burst of golden energy springs forth, spreading from you. Those still alive around you seem less bloody and in less pain.

This spell, designed to work on the battlefield, allows you to stabilize the dying all around you. A burst of positive energy spreads out from you, healing 1 point of damage to all living creatures in the affected area, whether allied or not. This spell deals 1 point of damage to undead creatures, which are allowed a Will saving throw to negate the effect.

So I think if you want magical knockout those are possible directiosn to consider when implementing it. Alteration of HARM, perhaps alteration of Lifeline(or just creative use), or some sort of "stabilize" spell.

Not really seeing a non-lethal evoker though. Aside from disabling spells they already have which can immobilize opponents.

[Morgy]

It's probably not something that would be implemented.. as you say.. I'm just hoping to find ways to make pvp less of an ender of a RP scenario. The whole 'res' for interrogation etc I always find a little cringe compared to a half-decent capture!

[Scar]

Thinking on this a little bit, and what I want to be able to bring out mechanically.

Limiting -subdual to blunt weapons makes it impossible for anyone who has specialised into edged weapons to take advantage of this mechanic. This means that if I don't want to kill someone, I can't use the -subdual mechanic to ensure that a fight doesn't end in a death.

I use PvP as an absolute last resort, when other avenues to resolve a conflict haven't occured. I can count the number of times on one hand that I have used !, I entirely tend to react to the situation.

As someone who's main build who uses an Edged Weapon, it's a shame that if my options are exhausted, I'm left with my mechanics options... Which is critical hits and slashing damage.

Why can't I use my pommel to knock them out at the end? I'm meant to be a master of a saber? Why do the mechanics of the game leave me with the only option of killing a person.

I feel like limiting it to blunt weapons only limits our mechanical options for specialist builds.

[DangerDolphin]

Would like to see subdual be the default, and built in alignment shifts for good aligned characters murdering other good player characters tbh.

[Void]

Why can't I use my pommel to knock them out at the end?

Uh, for example, because your critical hit is literally you slashing through your opponent in particularly gruesome way, hitting vital spots, shocking them with pain, slicing pieces off them here and there and creating horrible wounds.

You won't be really able to do that with a pommel.

The blunt parts of your saber will not cause critical hits and you may even damage your weapon instead. Situation with something like rapier is going to be even worse.

Why not carry a reserve weapon for subdual?

Would like to see subdual be the default, and built in alignment shifts for good aligned characters murdering other good player characters tbh.

Automated alignment shifts in any direction are a horrible idea, especially in combat. That's because a script cannot evaluate character's reasoning. Your suggestion also allows to metagame somebody's alignment.

[DangerDolphin]

Would like to see subdual be the default, and built in alignment shifts for good aligned characters murdering other good player characters tbh.

Automated alignment shifts in any direction are a horrible idea, especially in combat. That's because a script cannot evaluate character's reasoning. Your suggestion also allows to metagame somebody's alignment.

Was thinking on the basis of someone being subdued in combat, and then after combat has ended you can choose to finish them off.

Agreed on the alignment metagaming, but we already have monks with glowing eyes broadcasting that, blackguards, paladins etc.

[Void]

Was thinking on the basis of someone being subdued in combat, and then after combat has ended you can choose to finish them off.

That is not necessarily an evil thing to do. Can be very very neutral. Motivation matters. See Book of Vile darkiness and their 2-page analyzis of paladin Zophas (page 6).

Agreed on the alignment metagaming, but we already have monks with glowing eyes broadcasting that, blackguards, paladins etc.

This is very different and represents IC information and not metagaming. Additionally it can be misleading.

[Shrouded Wanderer]

Honestly I cannot see how anyone at all has any problem with making subdual the default.

I think the issue is that sometimes its glitchy?

[Void]

Honestly I cannot see how anyone at all has any problem with making subdual the default.

Subdual penalizes you with -4 to attack rolls.
This is something that is going to cause a LOT of fun especially at early levels and especially for newbies.

Additionally (if it is on by default) it godmods your character in behaving in specific way. This is not as bad as -4 to attack, but leaves bad aftertaste.

A reasonable option would be to have a character setting which configures whether you want -subdual by default or not, but it is unclear if the game can even differentiate between pvp and monster combat (what if there's mix of both?).

But it absolutely shouldn't be on by default.

[Shrouded Wanderer]

Honestly I cannot see how anyone at all has any problem with making subdual the default.

Subdual penalizes you with -4 to attack rolls.
This is something that is going to cause a LOT of fun especially at early levels and especially for newbies.

Additionally (if it is on by default) it godmods your character in behaving in specific way. This is not as bad as -4 to attack, but leaves bad aftertaste.

A reasonable option would be to have a character setting which configures whether you want -subdual by default or not, but it is unclear if the game can even differentiate between pvp and monster combat (what if there's mix of both?).

But it absolutely shouldn't be on by default.

I guess I was assuming if it was added to call characters by default there would be no AB penalty.

Is there exactly a reason why there is a current AB penalty anyway? It seems counter-intuitive.


Additionally, what is the reason why you think it shouldnt be the default, assuming no AB penalty. If you had the option to turn it off, after the fact, as you do now to turn it on, what harm does it do to have it on be default?

[Void]

I guess I was assuming if it was added to call characters by default there would be no AB penalty.

Is there exactly a reason why there is a current AB penalty anyway? It seems counter-intuitive.

It is PnP rules. Not murdering with a lethal weapon is hard, hence penalty.
However, PnP allows it for ALL weapons, and PnP has non-lethal weapons. For non lethal weapons, dealing lethal damage comes with penalty. Because killing somebody with a slipper is as hard as not killing someone with a sword.
https://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/injuryandDeath.htm
I suppose in the end it is up to dev team to decide what to do and whether pnp approach (all weapons) makes more sense than arelith appraoch (only blunt weapons).

I see arelith approach as reasonable.

I have hard time imagining non-lethal damage with a rapier, for example. What are you going to do, whip the enemy with it?

Additionally, what is the reason why you think it shouldnt be the default, assuming no AB penalty. If you had the option to turn it off, after the fact, as you do now to turn it on, what harm does it do to have it on be default?

It godmods my character into behaving the way I did not intend.
Also it shoudl have AB penalty.

Arelith approach where death from player is the same as death from npc to me makes more sense to me than mechanicaly insisting that every player not only super special because they can respawn, but also super special because there's extra safety net from accidentally dying at hand of another.

Too much hand-holding.

[Shrouded Wanderer]

I guess I was assuming if it was added to call characters by default there would be no AB penalty.

Is there exactly a reason why there is a current AB penalty anyway? It seems counter-intuitive.

It is PnP rules. Not murdering with a lethal weapon is hard, hence penalty.
However, PnP allows it for ALL weapons, and PnP has non-lethal weapons. For non lethal weapons, dealing lethal damage comes with penalty. Because killing somebody with a slipper is as hard as not killing someone with a sword.
https://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/injuryandDeath.htm
I suppose in the end it is up to dev team to decide what to do and whether pnp approach (all weapons) makes more sense than arelith appraoch (only blunt weapons).

I see arelith approach as reasonable.

I have hard time imagining non-lethal damage with a rapier, for example. What are you going to do, whip the enemy with it?

Additionally, what is the reason why you think it shouldnt be the default, assuming no AB penalty. If you had the option to turn it off, after the fact, as you do now to turn it on, what harm does it do to have it on be default?

It godmods my character into behaving the way I did not intend.
Also it shoudl have AB penalty.

Arelith approach where death from player is the same as death from npc to me makes more sense to me than mechanicaly insisting that every player not only super special because they can respawn, but also super special because there's extra safety net from accidentally dying at hand of another.

Too much hand-holding.

Im confused, So... Could you expand on how it godmods a PC character, and how it ruins any sort of intention of adding additional RP value to default, lets say Hypothetically, zero AB penalty Subdual in order to have PCs RP with each other after a PvP event has occured?

The way I see it, Its not a hand hold, but a tool to allow more RP after a PvP conflict event has happened. Rather than Killing someone, then bashing their corpse.

Godmodding doesnt even enter the equation if you are able to enable lethal mode. Godmodding implies you are unable to do anything else except subdual.

[Void]

Im confused, So... Could you expand on how it godmods a PC character, and how it ruins any sort of intention of adding additional RP value to default, lets say Hypothetically, zero AB penalty Subdual in order to have PCs RP with each other after a PvP event has occured?

Anyone who wants extra RP can already do that now, -subdual is already available, along with lassos. What I see it as forcing a bias towards good alignment actions as a default.

The likely scenario will be that I'll want anyone that comes at my character to die, with very lethal damage. I'll definitely forget to set this setting at some point then I'll be suddenly presented with situation where the game forced decision onto me, the one I didn't take and wouldn't take.

Godmodding doesnt even enter the equation if you are able to enable lethal mode. Godmodding implies you are unable to do anything else except subdual.

Godmoding means a decision is made for me. And not that I can change it.

The way I see it, Its not a hand hold, but a tool to allow more RP after a PvP conflict event has happened. Rather than Killing someone, then bashing their corpse.

It is a hand hold, because it forces good aligned action as a default. Right now the other players are treated no differnet from npc opponents, and I think this is quite reasonable. I also do not recall anyone ever requesting non-lethal damage for monsters, for some reason.

What's more, not killing someone should be hard. If you want to save their life or redeem them, or catch them alive and then torture, this absolutely should be more difficult. Removing that difficulty is hand holding and looking for easy ways. At least that's how I see it.