Would u still play on BGTSCC if yr Toon had only "X" Lives?

[Miyuki]

If this is a mechanical limitation or something another player can force then no, I would not.

Agree, we just had cases of grieving, where players ran around with their level 30 toons and forced PvP on other players. Leveling quickly up to maximum just to bluntly kill other players, is in my eyes non-rp.
If i would loose one of my lives by that, that would clearly scare me away. Then people just don't have to like my nose, can kill me 3 times and my toon is gone.

If players so to speak "provoke" their death in a quest with a DM, that is something else. If a player does things in RP that provoke a reaction from other players, again and again, i also undrstand they would want to get rid of this "threat".

I personally would like if people would be thaught more respect from death, but it should be less randomly. If perma-death should be made more possible, then with carefully chosen RP-reasons.

How would it affect my RP if there would be more danger of perma-death wit RP-resons?

1) My main toon has alredy respect from death, if it happens in RP. Not due to lags or other ooc accidents while running dungeons or so. She would even more warn people not to run into deadly situations carelessly.
She would swing the moral club about life and death as a healer even more, if there would be more danger that the gods say no someday to a dead adventurer and might not let them return.

2) I would consider to take part in hunting and killing another toon if the player agrees and if there are RP resons to do so. But the way it is now, we all know, even if we kill another player, they can always come back anyway, just with some xp-loss.

[Steve]

Based on the many responses, agreeing with both sides on various points, no Deaths via PvP UNLESS overseen by a DM (just like assassinations, currently).

But BGTSCC needs to bring back Permastrikes, in a big and commonplace way.

Players should be able to request PvP based on CvC reasons, with a DM as judge to the RP, and have the outcome take on weight. This is just one more option for consequence and greater realism. PvP Rules still stand, as are currently (another topic).

But even more important is consequence of CvC RP, or even CvE RP, which puts decisions and actions of the Player behind weighted outcomes!

I just want to say that there is a BIG DIFFERENCE between having unlimited lives, and RPing in a way that you know OOC your toon has unlimited lives. Will any of us be able to RP differently, and truly, without some mechanical limits? I wonder.

But maybe it stands that I like that challenge of consequential RP, much more than others!

[Hoihe]

Hell no on anything mechanical having any long lasting impact.

I like building for flavor, not power. I can survive PvE because of OOC experience.

[Steve]

Hell no on anything mechanical having any long lasting impact.

I like building for flavor, not power. I can survive PvE because of OOC experience.

I like building for flavor as well. I do it on all my builds/Characters.

But that has nothing to do with RP consequences having undeniable weight and affect, on our PCs, thus, on RP.

Correct me if I understand you wrong, Hoihe, but you want to be able to stick your hand in the fire, but not get burned?

[Hoihe]

(do-me) up reputation does more than enough damage and actually allows for more RP.

You die? People forget in a few weeks, even if you're a damn important person.

See case in point: The half-elf councilor of Doron Amar Sywyn. Other than the 2-3 people from back then who still, sporadically play, make no mention of it and he doesn't even have an IC memoribla except for a general dedication to the fallen.

Or Leonia the Pocket Bard. Same deal.

[Steve]

So you're saying that having others remember your Characters, or lasting memory of Characters, is the main reason to play on BGTSCC?

That the reason PCs should not have to carry consequence for their actions, and additionally, we RP in an environment that has challenges and a finite aspect within those challenges and consequences, is because others forget about a PC, once it is retired?

[Hoihe]

Changes done to the server must be done in pursuit of increasing the ability to immerse oneself in the setting and to provide further avenues of roleplay.

Forced retirement and permanent death offer neither. In fact, permanent death in this setting is immersion breaking.

[Steve]

Changes done to the server must be done in pursuit of increasing the ability to immerse oneself in the setting and to provide further avenues of roleplay.

Forced retirement and permanent death offer neither. In fact, permanent death in this setting is immersion breaking.

Where do you get these "must be done" attitudes from? And, what proof do you have that permanent death in this setting—is there an alternate setting to contrast to?—is immersion breaking?

[Hoihe]

Raise dead is a 5th level cleric spell. Even with a level 15 lore limit, every cleric on our server can cast Raise Dead, and even Resurrection.

Raise Dead needs an intact body, Resurrection just part of it at time of death.

That already solves most cases of permanent death. Sure, it requires divine favor, but by the time you're level 15 your actions will have pleased at least one god, if not a whole pantheon. The gods benefit from keeping you alive and furthering their reach in Faerun, even if you don't worship them.

"Well, we can burn the body!" Sure, let me introduce you http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/trueResurrection.htm

Doesn't require anything just a way to identify you. Will never run out of the time limit.

Sure, it's level 17 needed but we have clerics who have ICly in DM events that were recorded casted 9th level spells. Thus, if they cannot suddenly cast a 9th level spell, then it's immersion breaking.

Sure, it costs levels. Levels can be regained. Sure it costs gold, gold can be collected.


The only thing that makes sense in Forgotten Realms is Indefinite Death, barring very rare and very "Piss off every god" types of deaths.

Indefinite Death, unlike Permanent Death, generates roleplay and also provides the killer a temporary boost within which they can do what they want.


Indefinite Death is defined by "To resurrect this character, you need to get X gold, Y item or finish Z campaign." Sure, character might be dead for a month or two, but you get some RP out of it.

I would be alright with Indefinite Death.
Causes of Indefinite Death:

• Soul Trap
• Turned into undead
• Body destroyed, knowledge of death covered up

[chad878262]

This would also likely cause more players to force the RP out with regard to PvP... "Wait, did that Paladin just say he was going elsewhere to the Warlock standing next to a DEMON????" "Why yes, yes he did...guess he must be on his last heart...I mean life."

When I bring suggestions to QC I am always trying to think about what the behavior such a change is trying to encourage. For me, it's usually to encourage people to group up and go adventure together. I see such a change as this as encouraging players to make OOC decisions regarding what they do in game. On the POSITIVE side, it would seem to encourage always trying to find a group of other players to travel with, which I like. However, the types of things I like to implement is more about encouraging groups whereas I feel like this type of mechanic FORCES groups, since without them you are always at risk of losing one of your lives, even with them you need to be really concerned since even if they can rez you, you still got a tick on your death meter.

There are those that play in timezones where they say it is more difficult to find a group, so I suppose they should either find another game/server or be happy standing around in town if there are only ~20 people on and none of them are in the same level range?

I hope it is clear that I am not saying nothing like this has any chance of working. What I am (hopefully) highlighting is that you need to do a lot more work in determining solutions to problems identified in this and other posts that are not a significant drain on resources (i.e. DM's). A short list:

1. How do you handle technical issues (crashes, lag, etc.)?
2. Rule breaking (such as hacker/forced PvP deaths)?
3. Players changing mentalities and simply refusing PvP entirely?
4. Timezone issues where fewer players are online resulting in the need to solo or don't play?

To the best of my knowledge DM issued Perma-strikes didn't go away, it is up to the DM (AND THE PLAYERS) to decide such. At one point with Cranston he was driving a DM Story line that was a part of his background and I requested that any events ran by the DM on that storyline include perma-death possibilities. Unfortunately the plot stalled when I was unable to be in game at the same time as other players that had become a part of the plot and the DM's in game time went way down and eventually he retired his DM title so the plot died in the middle, as often happens. Point is, if you request an event or plot and wait your turn/are patient as the plot plays out you can ask a DM and tell participating players that perma-strikes/permadeath may result. I just don't see how you address the issues that make mechanical perma-death unworkable.

[Steve]

What I see missing here, Hoihe, in your explanations, is any issue with the extreme ease it is to receive/cast/apply Raise or Resurrect spells.

Imagine...BGTSCC without these spells! Interesting!

... it requires divine favor, but by the time you're level 15 your actions will have pleased at least one god, if not a whole pantheon.

Do you mean pleasing a DM here? Because myself, I've never seen a God show any interest in any of my PCs. Even when they were or managed to get to Lvl 30 (lvl 15 IC equivalent...which STILL has not been owned by the DMs, the equivalency issue).

Indefinite Death, unlike Permanent Death, generates roleplay and also provides the killer a temporary boost within which they can do what they want.

Then Infinite Death needs to be more common.

Essentially, what I am saying, is that the lackadaisical attitudes around consequences for "staying alive," will only change if the challenge level changes beforehand. I yearn to see it change in such a way that it allows those that wish to push the boundaries of inter-personal Character RP through conflict have both something to lose—their Life—and something to gain—and "upper hand" against their foe. And, at the same time, those that wish to stick with a more social RP format, may very much isolate themselves from the outside world, and thus, are protected from the reality outside the fortified gates, so to speak.

Kinda like Real Life!!!

---

To the best of my knowledge DM issued Perma-strikes didn't go away, it is up to the DM (AND THE PLAYERS) to decide such.

The whole point of Permastrikes was that if a Player RP'd in such a way that deserved a notch on the Permadeath stick—actions of high risk, actions of stupidity, actions of bad luck (dice gambles, etc.)—then it was a RESULT and non-negotiable.

To suggest that Permastrikes are only applicable if the Player asks for one, is EXACTLY the downfall of challenging RP that I'm outlining here.

Why does a Permastrike mean anything, from a DM in a Campaing, if you, the Player has asked for it? Just give it to your own PC then, as your whim desires. But as Hoihe points out, he would never desire a Permadeath on his Character. So thus, you have opposing RP happening in the same Environment, and that means many Players playing different games, at the same time...which just plainly conflict! And NOT the conflict I'm looking for!!

[chad878262]

The whole point of Permastrikes was that if a Player RP'd in such a way that deserved a notch on the Permadeath stick—actions of high risk, actions of stupidity, actions of bad luck (dice gambles, etc.)—then it was a RESULT and non-negotiable.

To suggest that Permastrikes are only applicable if the Player asks for one, is EXACTLY the downfall of challenging RP that I'm outlining here.

Why does a Permastrike mean anything, from a DM in a Campaing, if you, the Player has asked for it? Just give it to your own PC then, as your whim desires. But as Hoihe points out, he would never desire a Permadeath on his Character. So thus, you have opposing RP happening in the same Environment, and that means many Players playing different games, at the same time...which just plainly conflict! And NOT the conflict I'm looking for!!

In my case it was not a situation where perma-strike(s) were requested. It was a case where I agreed with the DM before hand that any character death that occurred during the plot line/events were 'real deaths' and if no cleric was available/they couldn't get to one/the body had to be left behind than that character was considered truly dead. So it was not a case of asking for a perma-strike as much as it was an agreement ahead of time that if a character died (regardless if it was due to stupidity or any other reason) that consequence was accepted.

[Steve]

Okay Chad, thanks for clarifying. Because in your earlier post, you wrote:

I requested that any events ran by the DM on that storyline include perma-death possibilities.

[Steve]

1. How do you handle technical issues (crashes, lag, etc.)?
2. Rule breaking (such as hacker/forced PvP deaths)?
3. Players changing mentalities and simply refusing PvP entirely?
4. Timezone issues where fewer players are online resulting in the need to solo or don't play?

1. Crashes and Lag do not count towards Permastrikes.
2. Rule breaking doesn't count toward Permastrikes.
3. PvP Rules—as they stand currently—still apply.
4. Timezone issues do not matter in more consequential role-play actions (or even mechanical-based actions).

1. Permastrikes lead to Permadeath. Or retirement, if you wish to see your PC live on, but no longer adventures (i.e., is active). 3 strikes? 5 Strikes? Dedude outlines some alternate form of Permastrikes taking place...what about that?

2. Permastrikes from PvP are only valid or applicable if overseen by a DM. Just like assassination are handled, currently. We all agree to those Rules, right? So why not give PvP battles the same weight?

3. RP conflict also leads to Permastrikes, when overseen by a DM. Both in Character v Character (CvC) instances, as well as in DM event, NPC PC versus NPC instances.

Essentially, what this comes down to is, if the PC wants to do actions against another PC or NPC, there is actual, direct consequence for those actions: success or failure! With success, you gain the upper hand. With failure, your PC accrues a Permastrike.

Will you as the Player continue to risk it all, in your fight for Holy Might or Dastardly Greed? Or will you succumb to the upper hand, and continue to socialize in your protective group? All these aspects are RP defining aspects, based on the simplest principles of gaming, where there is winning by skill and luck and losing by lack of skill and no luck.

Please consider!

[Nemni]

Forcing people to give up their characters or their stories before they themselves are ready to do so, would almost certainly drive people away. I've seen that happen, it sucks.

I do very much agree that we could use stronger penalties for death though, especially at level 30 where it currently costs nothing at all. Perhaps some sort of debuff that wore off with time, which would force people to stop and take the death seriously. The way you were raised would affect the length of the debuff.