Post PvP Debates: A potential solution

[Young Werther]

Aw really no need to go quoting me. I'm just a pesant around here. Lockonnow is much more quotable i do believe.

[Thorsson]

I didn't start the problem, but hell! Let me just become part of the problem real quick. Brilliant insight, Thorsson (/s). Speaking of that maturity issue. . .

At least I don't want to run around using the C word, which is offensive to many people. One person's maturity is another's C-word it seems...

[Storm Munin]

I blame the game mechanics actually for most of the quirks when it come to PvP.

As for the proposed rules from the OP I think that might work given that the attacker is mature enough to A: actually have a solid reason for PvP B: Do not whine when his/her toon looses.

This does nothing towards PvP baiting however.

Can we add the rule that give DMs the right to delete any toon, right off the bat, that gets caught baiting towards PvP for no apparent reason other than to instigate a PvP situation?

Perhaps a second ruling that anyone that does the above while interupting ongoing multiperson roleplay at the site of the PvP bait gets permabanned.

Edit:
Personally Ive always found the pitfighting events fun, in large parts because while there has been malice towards opponents (and friends) at those IC, there were never malice involved towards other players.
Alas everyone knew what they were getting into and still we had the occasional spout of whines.

/M

[metaquad4]

I didn't start the problem, but hell! Let me just become part of the problem real quick. Brilliant insight, Thorsson (/s). Speaking of that maturity issue. . .

At least I don't want to run around using the C word, which is offensive to many people. One person's maturity is another's C-word it seems...

A) Not everyone has a thin skin and holds to judeo-christian and/or highly PC values. Some of us believe that words get value based on context, rather than based on the words themselves. A word isn't evil or terrible or bad. The context, is what makes it any of those things.
B) Offending people is necessary, in a fair few intellectual pursuits. People were pretty friken offended to hear the earth wasn't flat and didn't revolve around the sun. Being offended is not a terrible thing and, given the right context, can serve to open eyes and widen people's perspective.
C) Redirecting, and trying to make your own immaturity somehow valid is not mature, Thorsson. But, its what you do, judging from your previous forum posts.

finally.

D) Your statement proves you are too immature to not devolve into elementary school antics. You are part of the issue. Stop trying to bait people into arguments and toxify the forums. Leave. We don't need more problems. If you want to argue with me on the subject of your own childish mentality, feel free to PM me. If I feel you are worth some time, I'll respond. If you really want other people to see it, I'll be happy to post it up after.

I blame the game mechanics actually for most of the quirks when it come to PvP.

As for the proposed rules from the OP I think that might work given that the attacker is mature enough to A: actually have a solid reason for PvP B: Do not whine when his/her toon looses.

This does nothing towards PvP baiting however.

Can we add the rule that give DMs the right to delete any toon, right off the bat, that gets caught baiting towards PvP for no apparent reason other than to instigate a PvP situation?

Perhaps a second ruling that anyone that does the above while interupting ongoing multiperson roleplay at the site of the PvP bait gets permabanned.

/M

Banning people is always effective. Or shaming them. However, PvP baiting itself is a very sticky term. For example, if an evil (a-bit insane?) necromancer is running around with a vampire, some might consider that PvP baiting. Since, it nearly forces good characters to act. PvP baiting is one of those cancerous terms that has lost its meaning through continued use, imo. And its a very hard thing to punish someone on, since, nearly anything could be it. We can't read minds, after all.

[thids]

.

[Storm Munin]

You like PvP I respect that, I just wish some PvPers to also respect cooperative roleplay.

Is it that hard to come up with a valid and at the time appropriate reason for PvP perhaps PvP should not be pursued at that moment?

While this is not an ALFA server, nor is it a Quake server.

/M

[arakes99]

My rule of thumb for PvP since the early days has been to ask these questions of myself:

Is there any reason someone involved might not enjoy this?
Do I feel any malice toward the other party?
Will the other party handle this maturely?

If the answer to any of those is ever YES then PvP is out. I don't care how much you'd like to one up someone you don't like, how valuable you feel the IC or OOC outcome of the PvP might be... etc, it all come down to one simple fact.

"The drama isn't worth it"

I haven't been involved in a single sour PvP situation in the last 3 years of playing here since I started thinking this way where even a little RP was involved. I always give people ample time to walk away, to further the RP before the fighting begins and so forth and it's almost always fun.

If you are owning people with death magic before they can even finish typing their final emote or anything of the sort then you are probably not Pvping for the right reasons and you are going to have drama in your life.

If you aren't even willing to contemplate losing a fight, you probably shouldn't be fighting in the first place. Because if your dirty little instakill trick fails, or if it works out like always, someone is going to be pissed more than likely because a PvP match that only lasts one round isn't fun and drama will surely ensue.

Not sure if these statements apply to anyone in this thread, but if you are one rounding PvP matches after very brief RP, you probably shouldn't be here complaining about the drama you created.

(If someone out and out kills you with a spell or arrows without so much as an emote, well there's a reason we have most of the rules we do)

[metaquad4]

You like PvP I respect that, I just wish some PvPers to also respect cooperative roleplay.

Is it that hard to come up with a valid and at the time appropriate reason for PvP perhaps PvP should not be pursued at that moment?

While this is not an ALFA server, nor is it a Quake server.

/M

Most PvP does come with RP. The ones that don't, are OOC PvP. Which happens only with close friends, when noone else is around and we are bored.

PvP is just a tool for RP. It represents a fight between the two characters. It is always valid for RP when it does happen ICly. Cooperation between players is nice. It happens sometimes. And often times, people will whine and kick and scream (which KILLS the spirit of cooperation) and generally be poor sports.

[Flasmix]

I try to avoid PvP whenever I can. I cannot avoid it all the time though. When it's called for, I will step up to the plate and do what needs to be done.

Granted, I play characters who are more of the 'diplomacy first, sword later' type. There is nothing wrong with players who are the other way around as long as the current rules are followed.

I do not think we need to go about making new ones to help those who have PvP butt hurt. We have DMs to help handle any issues that come up. Taking Screenshots will help secure your arguement if you're in the right. Those who cry OOCly the loudest have been disciplined in the past for wasting DM time.

[Storm Munin]

"Jim Bob the barbarian storm into the private meeting in a secure hall of the Duchal Palace barging through the splintering doors eagerly swinging his greatsword around while shouting: - Which one of you killed my mule?!
- It was you, wasnt it!
*points at random person*"

There were never any mule of course nor did Jim bob had had any previous contact with the characters of assembly.
Nor had any contact prior been made to any of the players.
This exact scenario never happened btw(I think).
As far as this scenario would be partially amuzing it would mostly have been disruptive to what was already going on.

There were roleplay in it, so were the PvP valid?

Arakes made some good points I believe.

Edit:
Yes, this kind of scenario have happened in the past. At FAI, ALOT.

[Thorsson]

A) Not everyone has a thin skin and holds to judeo-christian and/or highly PC values. Some of us believe that words get value based on context, rather than based on the words themselves. A word isn't evil or terrible or bad. The context, is what makes it any of those things.
B) Offending people is necessary, in a fair few intellectual pursuits. People were pretty friken offended to hear the earth wasn't flat and didn't revolve around the sun. Being offended is not a terrible thing and, given the right context, can serve to open eyes and widen people's perspective.
C) Redirecting, and trying to make your own immaturity somehow valid is not mature, Thorsson. But, its what you do, judging from your previous forum posts.

finally.

D) Your statement proves you are too immature to not devolve into elementary school antics. You are part of the issue. Stop trying to bait people into arguments and toxify the forums. Leave. We don't need more problems. If you want to argue with me on the subject of your own childish mentality, feel free to PM me. If I feel you are worth some time, I'll respond. If you really want other people to see it, I'll be happy to post it up after.

Don't try to tell me what to do, what to think or how to behave. You would be better to cast out the mote in your own eye first. I don't like people who have their head stuck up their a$$ and I'll continue to poke fun of their po-faced posts.

[Hawke]

Ok... The forums seem to be on the intense side of things in the last few days.

This is the only warning for this thread, and continued personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Please do not add toxicity to the server.

[metaquad4]

"Jim Bob the barbarian storm into the private meeting in a secure hall of the Duchal Palace barging through the splintering doors eagerly swinging his greatsword around while shouting: - Which one of you killed my mule?!
- It was you, wasnt it!
*points at random person*"

There were never any mule of course nor did Jim bob had had any previous contact with the characters of assembly.
Nor had any contact prior been made to any of the players.
This exact scenario never happened btw(I think).
As far as this scenario would be partially amuzing it would mostly have been disruptive to what was already going on.

There were roleplay in it, so were the PvP valid?

Arakes made some good points I believe.

Edit:
Yes, this kind of scenario have happened in the past. At FAI, ALOT.

In a practical sense, he'd probably be ejected by the DM in the area. This isn't just PvP, don't forget. This is also metagaming (guard NPCs). Its not really a good scenario at all for that question.

If it was interrupting a meeting in the woods, between a few people there then sure. PvP is valid, as long as PvP rules are followed. Insanity is valid RP. That'd likely fall into insanity. Or the character might have been charmed. Or they might have actually thought one of them killed his mule (which would probably fall into insanity). And PvP can happen during that.

Any kind of RP in line with rules in valid. Someone might not like another person's RP, but, personal feelings don't make RP valid or invalid. Rules do. Personal feelings are too flimsy and varying to make such a statement based on them. You can't invalidate RP simply by thinking "I don't like it". That is nonsensical.

I mean, technically if you were a DM, you could. But, if the player wasn't breaking any of the server rules then you are probably a bad DM for going around and punishing players based on your personal feelings towards them and their RP.

[DM Echo]

Or, if you are interested in something more creative than just XP as a punishment:

Make a room, with a single NPC. If you are put in this room, you are given a token and cannot leave (even by Mystra, she'd send you back just like the fugue). The NPC asks the person 50 questions, based on the server rules. The person has to answer 45/50 to be able to leave the room. That might also work for the people who do other light offenses! Just a thought, for punishments. (That might not be worth the effort, though.)

..... *opens the toolset and starts scripting again... * Seriously though.. I do like the idea lol... (the "punishment" thing that is.. currently no comment on anything else atm)

[Mac]

"

Jim Bob the barbarian storm into the private meeting in a secure hall of the Duchal Palace barging through the splintering doors eagerly swinging his greatsword around while shouting: - Which one of you killed my mule?!
- It was you, wasnt it!
*points at random person*"

Poor Jim Bob the barbarian everyone is so quick to call him insane, But who know what he and that mule had gone through together. I think this is a pretty darn good PvP scenario. Though I have to agree with metaquad4 if Jim Bob is storming in to the Duchal Palace he is likely about to get a beating from the dukes guards. So unless Jim Bob acknowledged this he would be in violation of meta gaming rules, Not PvP ones.

But what is PvP really? It is character conflict. What some people call PvP baiting I like to think of as creating RP. Outside of the games mechanics PvP should really be called CvC. A conflict between characters does not always have to end in the mechanics of PvP. Which can be very difficult (but not impossible) to mix in with good RP. Yet conflict between players does often result in direct PvP. Is that a bad thing? I don't think so. PvP can and should be fun for both parties involved. Keep in mind losing in PvP can be just as much fun as winning. My best PvP memory is not of a battle I won.

If RP at its best is cooperative story telling, Then where does character conflict fit in? If a group of people are telling a story then the outcome is more or less agreed upon. When an instance of CvC conflicts occurs, You don't know for sure how it is going to turn out. Much like a well run DM event you may lose! There are people who really enjoy that sort of conflict IG with other players and there are others that would rather avoid it. We have to be able to respect our fellow players regardless of which group they fall in to.

I think arakes99 has a very good "when to PvP list." I follow something similar myself.

Is there any reason someone involved might not enjoy this?
Do I feel any malice toward the other party?
Will the other party handle this maturely?

My when to "complain about PvP list" is just as important and even shorter.

Never

By following the above advise. I have had lots of great experiences with PvP here on BG, far more than out weigh the bad ones. If there was only one rule that I would change it would be in regards to the PvP out. It should not be the person that is instigating the PvP that decides the final RP out. It should be the other way around. I know that sucks for a lot of reasons but I think it would alleviate much of the stigma around PvP and any post Debates.