What do you all think of this and see in it? :)

[Face]

Sutch a club is fine and all till some one is not in that club but is in the confrontation.

[Laughingman]

Honestly there is no such thing as fullproof rules. Just look at human history and see 5000 years of tax loopholes. Fighting at the transition and running through the moment you think you were going to lose left me with the intent to just ignore your RP in the future tbh as it was poor form. If you think you can improve the rules to prevent this sort of thing please write it down and maybe post it in the suggestions forum. Maybe send it to the admins. I don't know but good luck with your future pvp and have fun.

[Face]

As if you're not already suspending disbelief for much more ridiculous stuff. Using the transition should end the encounter, unless otherwise agreed between players. With some players using SSDs and others not, hardware becomes a decisive factor in determining the victor of a pvp encounter. It also leads to transition skipping and other scummy behavior. So I'm all for keeping that particular rule in effect.

Oh and don't get me started on the 2 minute long loading screens.

Its not about that rule but about the rule book in general , Most people dont even seem to read it so should we not talk about sutch things and maybe tone that book down a bit?

[Maecius]

The rule, as I understand it, is mostly to allow for people to "retreat" or "run away." It was established because back in the day you'd sometimes see people chasing others over multiple maps -- from Baldur's Gate to Beregost and back again. (And usually it wound up being whoever could load the transitions faster would win the PVP.)

It was all very "cue the Benny Hill music" chase scene-y.

If it's felt the rule should be changed (or rules should be further simplified, and they were parred down once this year already), the DMs can take a look at that. But it was designed to allow people to tactically run away. Fleeing via transition does currently require the retreating party to avoid the "victorious" party for 24 hours, as per established PVP rules.

[Face]

The rule, as I understand it, is mostly to allow for people to "retreat" or "run away." It was established because back in the day you'd sometimes see people chasing others over multiple maps -- from Baldur's Gate to Beregost and back again. (And usually it wound up being whoever could load the transitions faster would win the PVP.)

It was all very "cue the Benny Hill music" chase scene-y.

If it's felt the rule should be changed (or rules should be further simplified, and they were parred down once this year already), the DMs can take a look at that. But it was designed to allow people to tactically run away. Fleeing via transition does currently require the retreating party to avoid the "victorious" party for 24 hours, as per established PVP rules.

I must have missed that then as i only seen a rule get added.
Where you now pick your own rp out.

[Mork]

Ok got to that paragraph.

For the sake of discussion It's not just that party breaking the rules as I'd consider area transitioning when you are chased is use of mechanic to meta game in this case. Using mechanic to assume that:
1: Guards would do nothing seeing magic wolf entering a city.
2: You'd be actually able to escape at all (clicking transition point should not automatically mean it in IC sense. Its the same like logging off.)

So yeah - killing such player after area transition would seem to me pretty normal response.
I'm interested how DMs see such approach.

[The Whistler]

If I had it my way, the only rules in the pvp book would be the following:
1) don't be a (person)
2) have an IC reason for engaging
3) don't transition hop

the end

[Face]

If I had it my way, the only rules in the pvp book would be the following:
1) don't be a (person)
2) have an IC reason for engaging
3) don't transition hop

the end

Just like the good old days

[RagingPeace]

If I had it my way, the only rules in the pvp book would be the following:
1) don't be a (person)
2) have an IC reason for engaging
3) don't transition hop

the end

Just like the good old days

4) remember to set hostile

[Face]

Ok got to that paragraph.

For the sake of discussion It's not just that party breaking the rules as I'd consider area transitioning when you are chased is use of mechanic to meta game in this case. Using mechanic to assume that:
1: Guards would do nothing seeing magic wolf entering a city.
2: You'd be actually able to escape at all (clicking transition point should not automatically mean it in IC sense. Its the same like logging off.)

So yeah - killing such player after area transition would seem to me pretty normal response.
I'm interested how DMs see such approach.

I agree and if i would have bin the DM around there i would have let the guards join in on a good orc trashing but you know...Rules be rules...

[Mork]

Rules probably do not have to be changed here as I see some sense if lets say someone would HIPS, sneak away and then try to transition from chasing party while hidden. Or lets say a mage would use Dimension Door to have enough pace between chasers to transition without being stopped.

It is pretty standard stuff present on all role-playing servers:
You need to stop next to a transition marker and wait for DM to decide if you managed to escape or not. Give mages a chance to cast hold/slow etc, give a luck roll to a characters that are faster than you, win in a grapple checks etc. If no DM is present/escaping character in not hidden/no considerable distance is present from chasing party then transition = metagaming so you can not do it, and if you do then chasing party can pursue as they wish.

Just my humble opinion on how we can make this rule better.

[Omega07]

I personally enjoyed watching that face and pretty awesome interaction between the players.

The concept of the winter wolf storming across a party would be local talk I could imagine for a bit.

Conflict in a fun form!

You got a subscriber on YouTube too

EDIT: It promotes the server too so win/win really, a lot of people out there don't think the alive 3.5 forgotten realms world doesn't exist.

[Argumantive]

Just to put some context, The DM event in question was Focused about looking for someone called "The Golden Wolf".
Moreover, it was stated the target is a PC, as a wolf came up on the party and was hostile, it was percieved to be part of the DM event by me at least (I am playing Gunthar, the warlock).

[7threalm]

one on one pvp it is not much of an issues, but when the hoard mindset takes over sometimes players get over zealous.

pvp conflict with more then 5 players usually ends up in chaos mode*

but in a hypothetical situation was would be the roll to escape?

survivial?

[amber91]

Can someone explain to a newbie why the behavior of Narog is acceptable in terms of the pvp rules?

- You cannot simply attack someone unprovoked. You must show hostility beforehand, giving the other player a chance to calm the situation or leave the area before PVP occurs. This is called an "out."
- Failure to take the "out" can and sometimes will result in PVP. If you continue to taunt the other character, if you cast evil spells, if you summon a fiend, if you enter HIPS mode, if you start battle-buffing, if you begin saying a prayer to the gods of light and justice in the middle of a necro-party, then yes, you have agreed to PVP. You've rejected your out.

Where was the RP Out for each of the characters, like Aurora who was first targeted by the opening attack?

Ereon (another newbie) was the one who blindly "consented to PvP" by responding "Ok" to Narog's tell, and by being incognizant of the rules that Narog seemed so keenly aware of, but Narog opened fire on Aurora...Did she give up her RP Out also?

As someone pointed out, they were on a DM event looking for a "golden wolf", and then comes this growling white wolf on the surface road. They all thought Narog was part of the plot, obviously, based on the way the were acting and trying to interact with with the wolf form.

And then buffing, non-offensively, that counts as consent to pvp?
And so does the spell Sending? (I guess that's what triggers the attack from Narog)

In the meantime, what reason was there for such a character to be wandering the surface roads where mid-level surface adventurers frequently travel? Is it to look for an easy gank, like the failed attempt here, or was there a better IC reason?

Is the meta not strong in this situation? Or am I missing the "right interpretation" of the pvp rules?


Thanks for any clarification!