Baldur's Gate : The Sword Coast Chronicles : NWN2 Persistent World

aaron22 wrote:@ flipside

i really doubt that the FAI is going to be the setting for the open PvP area.

look away for a second? if you are in a specific zone (not the FAI ) where everyone knows its open PvP, and you get mauled because you "looked away" then you will shake your fist at your luck and move on. it is like any other PvP arena. attention will likely be pretty high and fast paced if the zone is populated. looking away? do you "look away" when you solo the balor?

My point was not that it the area will be the FAI, my point was that the FAI has different rules regarding respecting NPCs compared to the rest of the server. And that simple fact has caused a myriad of issues as far as understanding of the PvP rules. Most people i've spoken to regarding it are not aware of changes or what is permitted and what is not. So adding on additional loopholes in the rules is only going to complicate issues more, not make them better.

flipside43 wrote:Except this isn't really about catering to different play styles, this is changing the rules for what appears to be a single map. That was the OP. Rules which were put in place to protect players. People can still enjoy PvP and conflict RP without getting sniped when they look away from the screen. Is the only way PvPers enjoy themselves is when they get to jump people? NWN2 PvP is a joke anyway and all about who hits first and smartest. I recall people have a hard enough time figuring out the rules for PvP at the FAI, how is this suppose to work? It's only going to make things worse with people's understanding of PvP rules, not better.

Ummm players do not need to be protected for one. They need to grow up and play the damn game and learn to fail. You know not win. PvP that needs a call out saloon style every time is BS and defeats some points of certain styles of conflict. If you want less cartoon style evil then you need to allow evil to be evil. I see a lot of personal issues in this statement rather than what is good for the whole. Then also stating that people have a hard enough time figuring out rules? YOu do not honestly believe they are that stupid do you? Maybe it is not them but the rule lawyering that is happening with PvP? There have been PvP games now for over a decade. The issues that BG has are very specific to BG. This is because of the rules, not despite them. There are so many damn rules that people can not keep them all straight and then there is the fact that often at FAI a spawn from a DM will happen but the guards do nothing? Then in a fight they do something but not when there is a real threat? The issue is not the people man it is the way those in charge treat the people through rules and then how they approach the realm with consistency. If you have something happen at FAI as a DM make sure to use the guards too next time because they exist and help people see that they would indeed respond. This all boils down to OOC consequences all the time with PvP and not one bit of IC consequence in its stead. Do not claim RP then ignore it when it is not the style you like! Just my soapbox on that one man. I love you as player and we have many interactions from time to time. Just that one is one I will speak out on. I am sure you and I do not see this the same way and that is okay. Just putting my view out there and if you are offended I am truly sorry if you feel that way.

Fact is an area where it is kill or be killed and be aware is for sure needed and warranted. Not like there are not a thousand ways to avoid places already via Teleport and ship and alternate routes on foot. There is also the idea of a caravan as well being talked about. This area should be considered and even pushed for. If you do not want to get murdered un announced don't go there but there seems to be enough of a push in my mind to really consider it since less push is getting evasion and expose weakness nerfed in some way.....

Planehopper wrote:Why would we reward OOC with things that aren't available through RP? This whole idea runs counter to everything this server has ever been about.

so should we also take out the mob drops( thats a reward for mechanically defeating an ever spawning enemy) and how IC is grinding the same quests over and over? the mistake here is the idea that this is any more OOC than everything else on the game. if you make it OOC then thats on you. same as anything else. one can be taking a DM event OOC if they want. its always on the players to keep the game IC.

Planehopper wrote: You think the requests for power creeping additions, nerfing complaints, class balance issues, equipment balance, and mechanics-over RP are bad now?

power creep is not isolated to any single aspect of the game. nor is it enhanced by one thing over another. its a part of the diverse player base we have. different people having different goals and different means to achieve these goals.

Planehopper wrote: Try making this game about some arena-style ooc bash fests and see where the focus follows.

Why don't we set up a second, separate,server for this? Run a free for all JEGS on a 2nd server. It's a whole new concept being requested here. Give it a whole new server.

its about evolving as a server. not settling with status quo. being stagnant is going backwards. try out new ideas. see if they gain traction. if a new idea fails, analyse the reasons and make judgments based upon those answers. but keep walking forward. that is the only way to get somewhere. standing still will not get you anywhere.

As Maecius has stated, This is only brainstorming at this point. It is nice to hear view points from players before starting a discussion staff side.

My point was not that it the area will be the FAI, my point was that the FAI has different rules regarding respecting NPCs compared to the rest of the server. And that simple fact has caused a myriad of issues as far as understanding of the PvP rules. Most people i've spoken to regarding it are not aware of changes or what is permitted and what is not. So adding on additional loopholes in the rules is only going to complicate issues more, not make them better.

It would as you say be a change to the rules but the change would be in the direction of no rules at all, which are pretty easy to follow and of course only for a single map. There could be a number of warning signs before entering the map explaining the change to the rules. It could also be difficult to get to. Not necessarily because it is surrounded by high level spawns (though that is an option) but because it is well off the beaten track. That should keep new players from wandering in to it accidently. Now yes getting sniped while having a sip of cola or trying to RP is not fun, to most players. But it does create a sense of dread which is fun to a lot of players. A feeling of "I better really focus now because I have no idea what is coming." It is also true that NWN is not balanced for PvP and there are much better games to be getting your kicks from in that regard. Yet we are not talking about those game and despite not being designed for it NwN has a certain charm to it's Pvp. People do enjoy it.

You think the requests for power creeping additions, nerfing complaints, class balance issues, equipment balance, and mechanics-over RP are bad now?

Try making this game about some arena-style ooc bash fests and see where the focus follows.

I really don't think there would be any change at all, in regards to complaints about balance issues.

If this experiment was tried it would of course not be the focus of the game world only a very small addition to it. If that would require only keeping it open at certain times possibly when a DM is on that could also be an option. To me it seems more likely that what Aspect of Sorrow said would become true and the novelty of the area may wear off quickly.

I would like to be proven wrong, but I fear something like this would either turn into a huge headache for everyone, or just become a vacant area that no one enters. If it was done, I would really prefer if it had some IC background so people don't just go there for pvp jollies. An obvious place for an area like this could be between the underdark and the surface. Like an extra dangerous buffer between the two worlds.

This thread has a bit of a "let's turn nwn into Dota/LoL" vibe, and that approach is bound for disaster imo.

agree with creo on all points here.

i would like to add to the AoS and Creo posts about the novelty of it. I agree 100% and this may be a situation where less is more. limited time and occasional opening also plays into the IC/RP side of it.

example: when triel was destroyed, they were the law of the area surrounding them. with that gone the lands around triel have gone lawless until suitable order can be established. limited time lawlessness in that zone. specific and temporary reward given to participants in the capture the flag style PvP warzone. lets say its (x) faction points in your guild/self in elturgard that can be used to help in other DM events or cashed in for gold or whatever.

Bear in mind, there would be nothing OOC about there area. It is simply a specific area or set of areas where PvP rules cease to apply. Maybe this could be applied to the more dangerous places on the server, at that. PCs would then have to be cautious about entering such areas, and if PvP is used to achieve that level of caution, then that is good. Areas I can think of are:

Forest of Wyrms. A forest inhabited by dragons should be something people do not tread lightly in.

Hell. Need I explain why travelling here is dangerous?

The Upperdark. I would say the underdark, but for mechanical reasons (avoiding low levels) the uppderdark is more suitable for this here.

The Dragolich Crypt. Another dangerous place. Inhabitants include several liches, powerful wraiths, and a dragolich.

Take these dangerous places, and lifts the PvP rules in them. People aren't going to lure your character into them just on a dime. These are places where you only take people you trust, and people you know are capable.

One might say that people might just flat out refuse to go to these places for fear of PvP. They can do this, but I have a counter statement for that:

Player 1 wants to PvP Player 2's character. Player 2 hates PvP. Player 1's character (A) goes up to Player 2's character (B). A demands that B relinquish all their clothes, weapons, armor, and gold to A. This is Player 1's RP out to Player 2. Player 2 hates PvP, but their character would never give up all their stuff. Player 2 is then left with the following choices: Break Character or PvP. Player 2 is a good RPer and PvPs. A kills B and takes all their stuff.

I'm sorry if you don't enjoy PvP, but sometimes you will encounter it even in the current system. Either that, or you can be easily forced to break character in order to avoid it. Either way, you'll end up losing something.

PvP is an integral part of RP, in that it allows characters to fight one another. And characters will fight one another. DMs cannot be present 24/7 to deliver fun and so we must make fun ourselves. There is only so much you can do with the AI, and there is an infinite amount of other things to do with another character. And, there is only so much fun you can have with no-conflict link-arms pseudo-campfire RP. Characters are going to bicker, squabble, and even do battle. And when that happens, PvP can occur.

It is true that griefing is selfish. But I find people who break character in order to avoid PvP (the result of character on character conflict) equally selfish, in a more passive way. But, it does also show who can't roll with the consequences of their RP as well. Its easy enough to avoid those people (and let others know who they are so that they can avoid dealing with them as well) but it is still irritating. I would prefer if everyone could deal with PvP, but there are some who just can't (like there are some people who just can't help messing with others).

metaquad4 wrote: It is true that griefing is selfish. But I find people who break character in order to avoid PvP (the result of character on character conflict) equally selfish, in a more passive way.

So some dude rolls up to you in real life with a gun. "Your wallet or your life." He says. You must comply or fight.

Note: If you break character and give him your wallet instead of fighting I will find you to be very selfish. The guy with the gun just wants to PvP.

i dont think that is what meta is saying. the two IC options are give up all your stuff without a fight or fight to try to keep your stuff. the OOC option would be to just walk away and ignore the whole confrontation. yuck!

the rules are applying in this and from the description there may not have been consent to the terms of defeat being all gear/gold. so unsure about the running part if terms of defeat were established.

edit: of course this is what "I" took from his description of events and do not speak for him.

Flasmix wrote:

metaquad4 wrote: It is true that griefing is selfish. But I find people who break character in order to avoid PvP (the result of character on character conflict) equally selfish, in a more passive way.

So some dude rolls up to you in real life with a gun. "Your wallet or your life." He says. You with comply or fight.

Note: If you break character and give him your wallet instead of fighting I will find you to be very selfish. The guy with the gun just wants to PvP.

Lol that's a ridiculously funny comparison that does hit the spot. Not like the robber actually wants you to fight. It's the ooc intention of the guy playing the robber to maybe PvP IC the robber would probably just want the goodies. Unless maybe chaotic evil...

Nice one flas

What's wrong with having a zone for when you die, you lose go or a single item if you can't meet the go requirements? Just make it a wildlands off the normal trails so it's an optional place to go, but a shortcut through zones or something. Again, this would be a great idea for caravans.. you have to walk through a stopped caravan zone and the whole zone is open PvP. If you use the caravan system, you MUST load into the zone no matter what where bandits might be waiting to kill you and real the go rewards. If you get killed or kill them it auto drops some go value and then you can exit the zone to your final selected destination. This would promote both bandit rp/PvP and a quick yet risky system of traveling between zones.

aaron22 wrote:i dont think that is what meta is saying. the two IC options are give up all your stuff without a fight or fight to try to keep your stuff. the OOC option would be to just walk away and ignore the whole confrontation. yuck!

Actually in the example he gave the breaking character part specifically says it's if they give their loot over. There's no mention of ooc walking away.

Player 1 wants to PvP Player 2's character. Player 2 hates PvP. Player 1's character (A) goes up to Player 2's character (B). A demands that B relinquish all their clothes, weapons, armor, and gold to A. This is Player 1's RP out to Player 2. Player 2 hates PvP, but their character would never give up all their stuff. Player 2 is then left with the following choices: Break Character or PvP. Player 2 is a good RPer and PvPs. A kills B and takes all their stuff.

Akroma666 wrote:What's wrong with having a zone for when you die, you lose go or a single item if you can't meet the go requirements?

I would make a naked wizard with zero gold so I can try to snipe items off players with lucky shots then go put the item on storage so I can't lose it

@flasmix

correct. i mistakenly placed breaking character with going OOC. i read and understood it incorrectly.

Flasmix wrote:

metaquad4 wrote: It is true that griefing is selfish. But I find people who break character in order to avoid PvP (the result of character on character conflict) equally selfish, in a more passive way.

So some dude rolls up to you in real life with a gun. "Your wallet or your life." He says. You with comply or fight.

Note: If you break character and give him your wallet instead of fighting I will find you to be very selfish. The guy with the gun just wants to PvP.

Did he give him the wallet or just ignore the wallet giving and pvp conflict all together?

Because I think Meta is speaking about giving up all together.

Flasmix wrote: I would make a naked wizard with zero gold so I can try to snipe items off players with lucky shots then go put the item on storage so I can't lose it

and a bandit is born.