Arelith

Update from LittleWeasel wrote: Update on Skal (for a testrun):

If you have killed 2 or more other characters within 24 hours, the Mayor will refuse to give you further writs.
IC Actions, have IC consequences, and NPCs are taking note and are apprehensive of those who seek their fortune in murdering potential customers.
(note: if you kill no one for 24 hours, the timer resets, and the Mayor will work with you once more)

Background behind this update: Serverwide: 514 PvP incidents between November 1st and 25th (aka 20 / day ).
C&P: 135
Surface: 263
Distant Shores: 116

There are many other ways of playing out conflict, and we'd like people to consider those.

Link here: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=25&p=175221#p175221

Okay, so I'd like to discuss this a bit, as I'm seeing a few problems.

- First and foremost, you say this is a testrun on Skaljard. I assume this means you are planning on taking the same system and applying it across the server as a whole. This will not have the same effect everywhere else as it does on Skaljard. Why? Because everyone on Skaljard is doing writs and leveling. Most people on Surface or UD will only get themselves neck deep in pvp bloodbaths after they've hit epic levels, when you can no longer take writs. The impact will be very very different on the other two servers when compared to the impact on distant shores.

- This system takes absolutely no heed of the context of specific pvp incidents. In short, it penalizes you for winning fights you did not start. This is problematic. For example:

Hypothetical situation wrote:Dude McGuy is walking around and doing some leveling somewhere out on the ice. Out of nowhere, Stabby Knifehands and Thugnugget Cudgelswinger appear, and start trying to shake him down for his copper pieces. Dude McGuy doesn't hand them over, and the two ruffians attack him. By some miracle of heroism and awesome,. Dude McGuy prevails, and Stabby and Thugnugget are left to be picked over by scavengers on the ice.

Dude McGuy gets back to town to turn in his writ and pick up another, when the mayor looks at him with horror and disgust...

"What? You killed those two people who attacked you??! YOU MONSTER!"

And then refuses to give Dude McGuy any more work for the next tenday or so.

- The entire system is justified to us, the players, on some fairly wafty numbers. While you've given us a total number of pvp incidents across the three servers, we're not given the total number of hours played by the entire community across those three servers to determine a pvp-incidents-per-hour-played statistic. Without that, how can one determine what is "too much" pvp?

Further, do we want to determine how much pvp is too much? When judgements like that are made concrete, then we lose a lot of spontaneity in our actions and start tying up our roleplayed behaviour in quantities of one "type" of roleplay over another, or start viewing one playstyle as inherently better or more valid than another. While this is reasonable to an extent (we don't want this to be an arena server, after all), there are certain dangers in that too. Already, there are some who believe that roleplay quality goes up with every line of dialogue typed, and down with every attack roll - An opinion just as wrong as its opposite.

One of the strengths of Arelith's rule set is its ambiguity. ALthough this may seem a weakness in many regards, it allows the DM team to make flexible, context-based assessments of developing situations, and treat cases as they should be treated - On their own merit and as a question of the "spirit of the game".

While it may be true that there is an upturn in pvp incidents, or people resorting to pvp altogether too quickly, surely these things are better resolved with case-by-case interventions, rather than a sweeping system which pays no heed to context.

---------------

Edit: As an amusing side-note, imagine if we started to introduce specific limits on lines of dialogue?

"No, I'm sorry sir, you've said altogether too many words today. If you sit down in a tavern for a chat you'll be attacked by automatically generated Balors. Enjoy your quietude and silent grinding!"

I dislike this as well.

If there are players breaking rules or creating a bad environment, it'd be better to deal with those than have a blanket automated system - one which is easy to grief people with.

While there are loads of ways of playing out conflict, PvP is a legitimate one. Vilifying it will push Arelith to social RP server status once and for all - and Sinfar has way better models.

I agree with this in its entirety.

Maybe Skal needs a “Bad” town like Sencliff, then Skaljard Village goes back to no pvp?

I agree with the OP's observations. I have some thoughts in regards to this statement however.

Aodh Lazuli wrote: Sun Nov 25, 2018 12:50 pm While it may be true that there is an upturn in pvp incidents, or people resorting to pvp altogether too quickly, surely these things are better resolved with case-by-case interventions, rather than a sweeping system which pays no heed to context.

Imagine how many people report their pvp-incidents to the DM's. As far as I've experienced, there is almost never such a thing as "being a good loser" in regards to pvp. People will try to bend the rules to fit their argument to the DM's, as they report you. If there are almost 600 incidents in a month, and say 50% of them gets reported - that's 300 cases of pvp, that the DM's have to resolve in a case-by-case manner. That's a lot.

Szaren wrote: Sun Nov 25, 2018 1:49 pm Imagine how many people report their pvp-incidents to the DM's. As far as I've experienced, there is almost never such a thing as "being a good loser" in regards to pvp. People will try to bend the rules to fit their argument to the DM's, as they report you. If there's almost 600 incidents in a month, and say 50% of them gets reported - that's 300 cases of pvp, that the DM's have to resolve in a case-by-case manner. That's a lot.

I would be hesitant to believe that half of all pvp incidents are reported. I believe your opinion is overly negative. I have seen more ungracious winners than I have poor losers. Of the last five pvp incidents in which I have been involved (two losses, two wins, one inconclusive), all have been at least civil ooc, if not enthusiastic and celebratory.

Right. I agree with you on the point where a system that determines the PvP, is bollocks. This system does not aid those where you are attacked and win. However...

Further, do we want to determine how much pvp is too much?

Yes, it has reached a point where surface is raided 2-3 times a Day, if not by one branch of UD, then another, or Sencliff... At this point
a lot are logging off the server when speedies is going around about raids... A lot are not willing to rp in open areas but inside their houses when raids are happening... a lot refuses to log on when a certain amount of "UD or sencliff" people are on a specific server due to the possibility of a raid.
Some have even begun starting on other servers...
It has become the most talked topic OOC on surface faction discord servers, and its always negative...
Slave RP is getting ignored entirely by most surfacers, except for those being enslaved - and creates OOC drama to the point some even want to stop roleplaying.

The current RP raids for surfacers the past 2 weeks has been 90% quantity and 10% quality... 2-3 times a day is far too much, when the only aftermath actually happening is someone getting imprisoned or clamped because... apparently thats what happens...
It has become almost impossible to sail the seas because of Dreadnaught or Liberator or just common thieves being on the boats.
Some people have heard of (my apologize) 25 pvp incidents so far in this month, and roughly been in atleast one everyday for the first half, started actively avoiding it second half.... Just by walking around on surface.
Some have JUST LOGGED INTO THE SERVER, and was immediately attacked... Before they barely even got to see where they logged in...

Is this reported? Perhaps, I don´t know, but a lot of people are really annoyed by it, including my self, and I am not even in half of the PvP stuff because I log off everytime I hear a speedy about raids.

Meanwhile those who are seeking the PvP claims not a lot of PvP is going on and surfacers are just whining about it?
And I quote... "Because Surfacers only want to do Bendir Housewives RP" - Excuse me, most of us is trying to do events or run plotlines... Which has nothing to do with "Bendir Housewives rp" when there is literally monsters hugging slaves... Then I don´t know what is most "Bendir housewives RP" Hugging slaves or attempting to make a plotline involving 15+ people... That was just as recent as yesterday interrupted because of raids... AGAIN.
Then you have reached a point where PvP is indeed becoming too much, so when you say "Do we want to determine how much PvP is too much"... Damn right you do... Especially when its a lot of times just ends up in someone getting slaves and rest getting skull bashed and basically denied any kind of fun for the next 90 min, only for it to happen again when you finally log on... with someone else...

Now here is the question who attacks first? - In the end when so many are walking surface almost every night... Does it even Snuggle a Bugbear matter. Why are you here so damn much, when you know people are pissed and it will end up in a PvP fight most of the time.

Maybe Skal needs a “Bad” town like Sencliff, then Skaljard Village goes back to no pvp?

- yes please.

TLDR: System is not very good, however there is WAY TO MUCH PvP or senseless raids, even if not on settlements then on boats and just walking on roads... Keep in mind... If it is not you, its someone else, and if its not someone else it someone else again - with almost always same ending...

Aodh Lazuli wrote: Sun Nov 25, 2018 1:57 pm

Szaren wrote: Sun Nov 25, 2018 1:49 pm Imagine how many people report their pvp-incidents to the DM's. As far as I've experienced, there is almost never such a thing as "being a good loser" in regards to pvp. People will try to bend the rules to fit their argument to the DM's, as they report you. If there's almost 600 incidents in a month, and say 50% of them gets reported - that's 300 cases of pvp, that the DM's have to resolve in a case-by-case manner. That's a lot.

I would be hesitant to believe that half of all pvp incidents are reported. I believe your opinion is overly negative. I have seen more ungracious winners than I have poor losers. Of the last five pvp incidents in which I have been involved (two losses, two wins, one inconclusive), all have been at least civil ooc, if not enthusiastic and celebratory.

Would be interesting to get some insight on this. I just cannot see, why they would roll out this update if my point wasn't the case. If they want people to RP conflicts instead of settling them with blood, then why not just make the servers full PvE? Isn't it up to the players ind the end, to decide if their characters want to settle matters in this fashion? Unless there are people on the recieving end, that do not consent to PvP, I fail to see why PvP is bad.

Personally I haven't been in more than 3 or 4 PvP incidents in my time on Arelith, 1 of those times was instigated by me (surfacers in the underdark meeting my priestess of lolth). The rest were instigated by others, who then died and reported me - either for "lack of RP before pvp" or for ressurrecting someone in good spirit, so that they'd not have to sit through a death-debuff. Each time, the DM's have been very understanding and handled things professionally.

Nymann wrote: Sun Nov 25, 2018 2:00 pm Some people have had 25 pvp incidents the past 30 days... Just by walking around on surface.

I will note that the vast and overwhelming majority of my play time is on surface as a good aligned character who spends his life of their time actively searching for badguy incursions. As stated in my previous post, I've had a total of five pvp incidents in the last month or so. One fifth of the number you are reporting here, and that does not seem abnormally low.

I find your statement questionable in its accuracy.

Would be interesting to get some insight on this. I just cannot see, why they would roll out this update if my point wasn't the case. If they want people to RP conflicts instead of settling them with blood, then why not just make the servers full PvE? Isn't it up to the players ind the end, to decide if their characters want to settle matters in this fashion? Unless there are people on the recieving end, that do not consent to PvP, I fail to see why PvP is bad.

PvP is not bad if it is moderate... Even surfacers that is annoyed right now, actually enjoy PvP sometimes... But when it happens 2-3 times daily. Someplayers can only be online for max 5-6 Hours often less... I don´t think they want to log in for PvP everyday.

Personally I like PvP if its moderate and I know a lot others do... But 2-3 times a day is just too much, when there is very little RP behind it....

Nymann wrote: Sun Nov 25, 2018 2:00 pm A lot of things.

I've seen players banned for less.

Aodh Lazuli wrote: Sun Nov 25, 2018 2:15 pm

Nymann wrote: Sun Nov 25, 2018 2:00 pm Some people have had 25 pvp incidents the past 30 days... Just by walking around on surface.

I will not that the vast and overwhelming majority of my play time is on surface as a good aligned character who spends his life of their time actively searching for badguy incursions. As stated in my previous post, I've had a total of five pvp incidents in the last month or so. One fifth of the number you are reporting here, and that does not seem abnormally low.

I find your statement questionable in its accuracy.

I know those players which it happened to, and I´ve been send a screenshot a lot of the times, far more than 5 times... just to state it happened again... Or it was complained about in discord that it happened yet again, on another day. While the player often tries to avoid it... I guess it depends where you are going and what time zone.

If you want to lower pvp numbers outlaw open bounties on people. Saying anyone who kills player A gets this reward not only makes the assassin system worthless but it bypasses the 24hr rule. Since now the person can be jumped multiple times a day by different people. Also make it that neutral areas of places players can't ban other players from or posy kill on sight in. Since these areas are npc controlled. If someone is being cheesy let DM's know and the NPC's can issue an order. But in the UD these are the biggest pvp issues I see.


I think this is good for Skal because frankly people seem to lose their mind there. It's gotten better then it use to be, but Skal always seems like a free for all zone. With some using pvp as a first resort or a way to try and take over.

This is, to an extent, comparable to the XP script some years ago, treating a symptom as opposed to the cause, and potentially crippling a large portion of the player base. In this case, if this was expanded to the other servers, it would essentially eliminate pre-epic PvP, as it gives the player an irritating conumdrum, if they want to give up level progression or to not stay IC.

I've played on and off the last few weeks, with a character that could be described as uncompromising, and not only I didn't have any PvP, I've barely ran into anyone, even during hours of good activity. This isn't an absolute, if other people's reports are true, but if there's such rampant PvP, your eyes should be set on the players behind the PvP, and not the act of it itself. If it's a case of "too many reports for too few DMs", I'm sure there's always more volunteers.

Edit: Moreover, if a large portion of the PvP cases is above epic (and I assume it is), this wouldn't affect them.

I can only chuckle at this and it happend to one of my toons on skal (Defended a fellow that got attacked by some people in town)

The funny part about this is that you are now a murderer and cant take writs for 24 hours.
But the guards dont care...
The npc vendors dont care...

So if this is ic reactions to ones actions is only something i can laugh at as it makes no sense to me that a murderer can walk past the guards of a town with out problems but by the gods dont try to pick up a writ you evil man!


If you want to do something like this perhaps work it out better so that it actualy makes sense in game.

I'm disturbed by the direction this change implies. I'd have rather we recruit a few more DMs to handle PvP events than insert a system to deincentivize it.

It all depends on the system , As it is curently it makes little sense to me personaly.

this change is bad. and i don't mean that because i don't like it, since it doesn't affect me. seriously, you guys probably have the means to see how much pvp i get involved with (spoiler: none of my current characters, ever). i don't think i've even hostiled a player on purpose since 2015, and even then, those instances were self defense.

but this is a VERY bad precedent to set. assuming we are not changing the rules and atmosphere of the server, pvp IS NOT WRONG. i present the wiki to support my argument http://wiki.arelith.com/Player_versus_player_rule , therefore an OoC punishment for engaging in pvp should not be implemented, as it is inconsistent with said server's atmosphere. (yes, it is OoC, assuming it works as written. the mayor has no means of knowing if you killed anyone unless it was in town, and given his job and location, i seriously question his sudden shift to pacifism. it seems stretched, and we should investigate him to see if he's under magical compulsions, drugs, or has suffered several severe head injuries).

Now, realistically, i don't know if we're looking at the "amount of pvp" and ignoring the fact that arelith has never, in history, been this public thanks to steam or we actually do want to change the tone of the server, but if it's the latter, we should be more direct with this, so i'll address it.

as far as the "punishment," the unrelated "you broke the rule that we didn't have, now i'm taking your toy so you learn your lesson," i don't see it as harsh, honestly. i'm not a huge fan of the writs, but it does create some potential problems. while it will surely discourage lower levels pvping, it will give high level -> low level bullying more tools for the lulz ("i'm going to kill you. if you fight back, the mayor won't hire you any more. prepare your bowels for imminent release, nuub"). these cases will need to be solved with dm [re]action, just like the original problem should be, which puts us back at square 1.

i'd like to see why this is a problem, and further why it's a problem that can't be handled by addressing the "problematic" characters, such as the one Nymann mentions, who somehow gets into 25 fights in 30 days by just walking around. clearly, he's got some very offensive footsteps, and i'd like to make a ministry of silly walks comment, but i haven't had my coffee yet.

now, before someone thinks i'm just pooping on the idea... well, i kind of am, but i think this is a bad decision, not that the people who made the decision are bad.

If there is an issue with pirates, or underdarkers raiding, then it sounds like its time for some "Big. Damn. Heroes tm." to step up, and do something about it. Si vis pacem, para bellum.

I also think its a good thing if people are terrified of pirates, or underdarkers, and run and hide when dangerous people are about. I am really happy to hear this is happening. I've always thought both things should inspire a certain measure of dread, or something was wrong.

Gobbo Champion Inc wrote: Sun Nov 25, 2018 3:25 pm If there is an issue with pirates, or underdarkers raiding, then it sounds like its time for some "Big. Damn. Heroes tm." to step up, and do something about it. Si vis pacem, para bellum.

I also think its a good thing if people are terrified of pirates, or underdarkers, and run and hide when dangerous people are about. I am really happy to hear this is happening. I've always thought both things should inspire a certain measure of dread, or something was wrong.

Not scared... OOC annoyed and log offs... "fun hiding" - Basically its not even IC its just OOC logging off and going into private places to AVOID it at all, not because they are scared lol... I think you completely misunderstood the point...

And people are fed up with PvP, so why should the encourage MORE PvP? Lol...

I say lets see if it works, give it a few weeks and then see if it has any use. If pvp stays the same then it clearly needs to be looked at. It might work in skal, but restricting writs I don't think will be a deterent anywhere else.



This isn't a UD or surface thing, I have played both sides and its more of a some people jump into pvp as quickly as possible regardless if they play a surfacer or UD person. Or pvp is the way they get things done such as gaining power etc..

This will do nothing for epic level pcs, which I imagine comprise most of the main figures involved in underdark raiding. Certainly the threats the surface might have trouble dealing with.

It also punishes the winner of the pvp, not the one starting it. So if you are attacked, and defend yourself successfully against two bandit pcs, or low level UD raiders (if its expanded to other servers) you are the one punished. Just using myself as an example, I cannot think of too many pvp encounters in pre-epics on any of my characters where I was the aggressor, not the one being jumped. It seems crazy that I am punished if I die, by loss of xp and gold on my characters person. And loss of script gp/xp if I win against two attackers.

So the talks about this change reached the forums.

1. It feels like this particular change has not been well thought out. Sure , Skal is a PvP hotzone and the go-to place for experimenting with mechanics and probably the safest place to try implementing this new idea, I get that.
But it feels like capping the amount of PC kills to two a day (else you get locked out of doing writs for 24 hours) is just like pulling the breaks on a moving train. If there is too much PvP then maybe there should be other ways of handling it.
For example : Allow players to set up a local government in Skaljard. This has been something that was attempted by players in the past. Multiple times. At least one of them literally ending in the Høvding coming out of his boss-shack and telling everyone to bugger off with their ideas of law and order.
That was the end of that.

2. A very similar example has been brought up above. But let's say a cleric of Kelemvor walks into the Logjam and catches two shady folks with undead summons. Now the same cleric just logged on and wanted to simply stock up on food and drinks before heading off to do writs.
Now, with this recent change, the cleric would be in a pure OOC dilemma. Does he act out on his character, telling those necromancers to lay down their arms and begone with those summons and risk having to PvP two people and getting locked out of writs for 24 hours in case he kills them?
Or does he not RP his character and just buys food and drinks as he wanted and leaves, simply focusing on his gameplay?
The most obvious answer would be a counterquestion. Why is there such a mechanic on a RP server anyways? It limits PvP , yes. But in a bad way, punishing players and making them affect their IC actions due to OOC mechanics.

Now even if we tried to play Devil's advocate and said that the Høvding punishing players would be a legit way to handle this due to him not liking it when the people that are supposed to work around the island kill eachother instead?
This falls apart the second one realizes that this can potentially happen all over Skaljard. Person X can kill two random adventurers in a cave somewhere as part of his psycho serialmurder plot. How the hells would the Høvding know about this?!


My suggestion : Limit the 2-kill limit to Skaljard and it's direct surrounding areas. People murdering eachother somewhere out in the tundra should NOT be caught by this system.


EDIT : Oh and please, for the love of god. Don't consider implementing this change in any other place other than Skaljard. EVER. Let the players govern themselves and let them handle murders, killings, whatever you want to call it.
Noone needs the agents of the Trackless Sea Company metagaming peoples PvP into submission.

Yes, that is another example of what kind of silliness can arise from this. "You killed that poor warlock with his demon companion, and that poor necromancer with his undead out on a daily walk, we will not offer you work, you vile man."

Nymann wrote: Sun Nov 25, 2018 3:29 pm

Gobbo Champion Inc wrote: Sun Nov 25, 2018 3:25 pm If there is an issue with pirates, or underdarkers raiding, then it sounds like its time for some "Big. Damn. Heroes tm." to step up, and do something about it. Si vis pacem, para bellum.

I also think its a good thing if people are terrified of pirates, or underdarkers, and run and hide when dangerous people are about. I am really happy to hear this is happening. I've always thought both things should inspire a certain measure of dread, or something was wrong.

Not scared... OOC annoyed and log offs... "fun hiding" - Basically its not even IC its just OOC logging off and going into private places to AVOID it at all, not because they are scared lol... I think you completely misunderstood the point...

And people are fed up with PvP, so why should the encourage MORE PvP? Lol...

From what i understand this server is build around conflict as its D&D , but we are all free to play how and what we want with in the server lore and rules.

Its up to every one of us to play what we like to play and what is fun for you may not be fun to me and the other way around aswel , nothing wrong with that.