Idea on Capture RP

[professiondude]

I don't mean to try to change the rules or anything but perhaps we can discuss the topic of : Capture RP and dying in captivity.

I do believe the current max time you have to serve as a captive is 72 hours?
I was wondering how would you all react if I were to suggest we were to change the rule of Memory & death while in captivity.

As of now I believe if you are killed that you only lose the previous 24 hours of memory.
In captivity I find it a bit odd that if you are kept 72 hours and then are executed that you would technically allow yourself to remember the past 48 hours and recall who captured you, when, where and so on so forth.

My suggestion to the server is to change it if you are captured, that you should be forced to forget the Engagement, Captivity (even if kept 72 hours to your consent) as that would only make sense to me.

What do you think?


((If you don't want to read the little block of text above, Suggested rule change idea is:
If you allow yourself to be taken captive and are executed, you forget all of the memories of the fight and the captivity.))

[Flasmix]

As long as it's within limits.

[metaquad4]

Wouldn't that render the captivity relatively pointless, since it offers no chance of RP as a result of the capture. Might as well just say "no capturing" at that point, since only one side gets any meaningful RP while one side gets a Vrass day that means nothing to their character since they forget everything afterwards.

It would make such RP interactions very one-sided, which isn't good sportsmanship at all. If you don't want to risk holding a captive, don't take captives.

[kleomenes]

Or execute within 24 hours (This happened to Ameris for example)

[DeepFriedMoose]

Alternately, we could push back the 24-hour amnesia to something like 2-3 hours. This would make capture RP more meaningful (by allowing a character to take more of that RP with them), and take a lot of burden off remembering what your character needs to forget (basically just the session in which the character was killed, for the most part). It also keeps assassinations meaningful, since they tend to be hit-and-run; observe the target for a while, make your move, and then get the hell out.

I'm just spit-balling here. Thoughts?

[Israe]

I think ooc agreements should be made

[Young Werther]

http://dnd.arkalseif.info/spells/book-o ... rape--165/

But always ask for consent first.

[DeepFriedMoose]

I think ooc agreements should be made

Personally, I think that this should be the default -- that, if an ooc arrangement is made, that should trump the 72- hour rule.

It does get tricky, though -- there's always the thought of coercion ("Well, if I don't agree to be captured for more than 72-hours, they'll just kill my character...").

[electric mayhem]

And on the memory side, its an interesting point.
I get the feeling from what i've read in the various FR books that priests and magi have the ability to actually 'talk' with the dead. Not to mention bring those back from the dead magically so as to inform investigators of their murder whom murdered them.

So one wonders why do we even bother with a 'memory loss' in roleplaying a temporary death in NWN2 Roleplay.

And the only thought that I could think of was to give DMs room to enforce a rule around having characters 'die', resurrect, run back to the same dungeon, using the same knowledge etc and keep moving on. As from my experience in this server and others, Dying/Respawn/Return are somewhat frowned upon if not against the rules. I'm not entirely sure how it improves the server gameplay, beyond maybe preventing someones from spamming a dungeon *shrugs*.
It happens anyway.

My apologies for the somewhat side direction, but the topic of memory loss aforementioned above was something that hasn't sat well with me for a long time.

[DeepFriedMoose]

It was my understanding that the amnesia rule is mostly to prevent blood feuds.

"That vithing orc killed me -- I'll get him!"

That sort of thing. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[Glowfire]

It was my understanding that the amnesia rule is mostly to prevent blood feuds.

"That vithing orc killed me -- I'll get him!"

That sort of thing. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Yep, this is the reason.


When it comes to PvP-amnesia - if any part is unhappy about it, it can always be discussed then and there. Having a baseline server ruling is good to fall back to when parties can't come to an agreement OOC.

[Winterborne]

As long as it's within limits.

/thread

[Tsidkenu]

I am actually of the camp that would expressly send a tell to a potential PvP victim of mine (and there have not been many of those in my time on this server) that they were permitted to recall all memories of the event, albeit on the condition of a properly roleplayed Resurrection spell, including 10,000gp worth in diamonds as cost.

But this is an issue on this server: PCs are immortal (esp. when it comes to PvP). Raise Dead/Resurrection scrolls are a dime a dozen and most characters who die will be ressed by their allies and be back running around within 10 mins of their death, including sometimes going back to where they were just pvped to pick another fight.

Only each player can decide, "You know, I'm gunna roleplay this death as something significant that the party rogue can't just cheese a UMD res and save me. No, you're gunna have to take me to a cleric of my god! Until then, I'm dead!"

Same can be said of capture/death RP. The system is only the way it is because of past abuses, and this was the best idea to attempt to curb it, unfortunately.

[kleomenes]

I think ooc agreements should be made

Personally, I think that this should be the default -- that, if an ooc arrangement is made, that should trump the 72- hour rule.

It does get tricky, though -- there's always the thought of coercion ("Well, if I don't agree to be captured for more than 72-hours, they'll just kill my character...").

Unfortunately that is precisely the issue in my experience. People get lobbied to "agree" things they aren't comfortable with - including mature content - with the stick of being called a "bad roleplayer" for not agreeing.

The other issue is of course that the current rules are quite restrictive to those who can and would be able to handle conflict RP maturely, within server content guidelines and with rewarding and lasting RP impact.

[ZestyDragon]

The other issue is of course that the current rules are quite restrictive to those who can and would be able to handle conflict RP maturely, within server content guidelines and with rewarding and lasting RP impact.

Are they though? If you communicate there is nothing stopping an OOC agreement. I doubt any DM is going to complain if the players agree. As far as the 72 hour rule and mind wipe are concerned anyway.