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

According to PvP rules

•Roleplayed provoking, taunting, slandering, bullying, offending, or any *action* used towards a player that is of the same lines is opening the door to provoked PVP consent, and is grounds for PVP.

•Roleplayed hostile actions or words warrant PVP. If PVP is not your thing then do not place yourself in a situation that provokes PVP.

•Going into stealth mode or Hiding in Plain Sight right in front of someone can be regarded as being a highly suspicious and hostile act of ill will, and warrants PVP. A way to RP this is upon leaving, with an explanation such as: "I now go into the shadows."

It strikes me that these lines are unecessary and may add to confusion. The first rule (Make it clear you are about to attack, but give an IC out) seems to cover all of these other cases. But by separating them out, it seems that you are saying they are EXCEPTIONS to the first rule. In other words, if someone insults me, then he has automatically consented to PvP, so I can go ahead and tap him back into line with a warmace without further adieu. This opens a dangerous door, because people can declare that they get insulted by the most innocent of comments (My elf gets insulted by the word "Elf" - the proper word is Tel Queissar).

On another note, there seems to be a CLEAR exception to those who shapeshift. According to the rules you can attack on sight if someone is shapeshifted into a fire elemental or something, and if the shifter wants to avoid that, they should shift back. Trouble is, if someone runs up to you, you have no way of knowing they are about to attack. I think there should still be some Pre-PvP roleplay (e.g., *on seeing the fire elemental, I get ready to launch an attack*). the "IC out" would be shifting back to normal form.

I agree entirely that shapeshifters should be emoted as their RP out.
*prepares to cut the wolf's head off*
Fire elementals (all elementals for this matter) are neutral. No reason to KoS them.
And at least you should let them know you don't like being called elf. I'd do a 3 warning thing. First time, let them know you dislike it. Second, tell them the consequences of the third time. Third time, attack.

vetinari wrote: In other words, if someone insults me, then he has automatically consented to PvP, so I can go ahead and tap him back into line with a warmace without further adieu. This opens a dangerous door, because people can declare that they get insulted by the most innocent of comments (My elf gets insulted by the word "Elf" - the proper word is Tel Queissar).

I can see where you are bringing up a possible exploit, but your pc would be fighting alot of people for that unintentional insult. One of my pc's hates the term drow, but to try and PvP anyone/everyone that says it wouldn't work and would cause more negative situations.

Now if it is just and you and someone else out in the forrest, and you are evil, you might want to start emoting signs that you are looking frustrated or insulted and give them a RP out.

But if someone is calling you a knife-eared tree hugging Owlbear lover and doesn't cut their insults or apologizes than I am sure PvP is in order.

We're clarifying (in fact, redoing) all of the PVP rules. But it is a massive project and will take some time.

As it stands, DMs will not allow players to break the spirit of the rules using linguistic technicalities. DMs expect players to follow the spirit of the rules. Failure to do so puts you in violation of the rule.

I have to do this:

"New PvP rules coming soon..."

DrowChyld wrote: "New PvP rules and Crafting coming soon..."

Fixed

Both might actually be true this time, believe it or not.

Ya.

We're pretty awesome.

If I can put in my two cents worth:

The first rule is phrased extremely well, and encompasses 95% of all situations. It essentially says "RP hostility before you attack someone", "Set to hostile" and "give them an RP out if they don't want to fight"

I would say non-demonic/undead summons and familiars should fall into the first rule explicitly. The first rule is very lenient. All you have to do is emote "*spies the dire wolf and draws his sword to slay the beast*". The only change would be that summons and familiars can't be set to hostile.

The three exceptions would be
Undead or Demonic - Shapeshifting or Summons (May be attacked without RP)
Committing Crimes (Opens yourself to the possibility of PvP without RP; "RP out" is limited to surrendering)
Assassinations (As described in the rules)

The three exceptions would be
Undead or Demonic - Shapeshifting or Summons (May be attacked without RP)
Committing Crimes (Opens yourself to the possibility of PvP without RP; "RP out" is limited to surrendering)
Assassinations (As described in the rules)

The major set back with attacking Undead or Demonic summons without RP is you first must set the caster/owner hostile. If the owner is invisible or there is a large group, like say at the auction site it's not that easy to do. Usually as soon as you do that, the creature charges at you anyway, forcing you to defend yourself. To me this feels like a exploit, but the DMs in the past have signed off on it. However, using a range weapon I've ended up killing both summoned companion and the caster before I can take them off hostile. Which anyone can imagine has resulted in quite a few angry tells from disgruntled players.

We need to go back to how it was two years ago which allowed players to independently target summoned creatures without setting the whole entire sever hostile just to gank a kobold running across the bridge.

•Roleplayed provoking, taunting, slandering, bullying, offending, or any *action* used towards a player that is of the same lines is opening the door to provoked PVP consent, and is grounds for PVP.

•Roleplayed hostile actions or words warrant PVP. If PVP is not your thing then do not place yourself in a situation that provokes PVP.

•Going into stealth mode or Hiding in Plain Sight right in front of someone can be regarded as being a highly suspicious and hostile act of ill will, and warrants PVP. A way to RP this is upon leaving, with an explanation such as: "I now go into the shadows."

Regarding the first quoted paragraph, I don't think it's confusing, Vetinari. I think that paragraph only clarifies that RP'd taunting and bullying and stuff can LEAD to PvP. The paragraph says "opening the door" to consent. "Opening the door" does not rise to the same level as actual consent.

The thing is though, I've always considered the words "hostile act" in the rules to mean PvP consent. So to me, the third paragraph about stealthing means that stealthing is consenting to PvP.

Considering this, the second paragraph might be confusing and unnecessary, as Vetinari says. I always thought that RP'd hostile actions were automatic consent to PvP, while RP'd hostile words only "opened to the door" to consent. Grouping them together in the second paragraph might confuse the issue. It's also unclear, then, what "warranting PvP" means. Does it mean "opening the door" or "consent"?

Hope I'm making sense, lol.

Charraj,

Here's my point. ANYTHING can "Open the door" to PvP. All you need is an RP reason for it. Anything from insulting your mother to "being an orc" can open the door to PvP. You just have to follow the other rules (RP hostility, Set to Hostile, allow an RP out).

So there is no need to separate out certain things that merely open the door to PvP - since just about anything can. The only things that need separating out are things that don't require RP first, or things that limit your "RP out" options (for example, normally "fleeing" is an RP out, but if you committed a crime, its not an out - the Fist can chase you down and attack you if you don't surrender).

So, my source of confusion is that BECAUSE they are separated out, it seems to imply that those actions don't follow the same PvP rules. I don't think that is what the DMs intended though.

A lot of very good points are brought up here, on both sides. As I am currently dealing with a PVP issue (between postings here on the forums), I am very aware that the PVP rules need further clarification and adjustment.

The best way to keep yourself in the clear is to ask yourself this: "Is this PVP inspired from the roleplay, will it be productive to the roleplay and, if it's not enjoyable for the other player, will it at least seem reasonable to them?"

That is, in large part, the end goal of PVP rules: to make PVP fair, as pleasant as it can be (one side always loses, after all), and reasonable.

One of the main arguments I have always heard leveled against our PVP rules is that it forces the initiator to give up initiative: if you have to set someone to hostile and make it clear that you are about to attack them, you are not getting off that first spell, or that sneak/death attack, or those first four attacks in the opening round.

Nevertheless, until such a time as we can design better rules that are fair for all players, we will ask that you concede these advantages. If PVP is going to happen, everyone has to be aware, at least on some level, that it is going to happen. The "clarifying" rules are simply elaborating on what constitutes a reasonable catalyst for PVP (insults, spellcasting, et cetera), so that you, as players, can be aware that the PVP rules do not prevent people from PVPing you for certain actions that you, yourself, might consider benign ("we were just trading insults," "I was just buffing to leave," "I was HiPSing because I was going to pull a killer prank it involved cream pies").

I can't give you a firm and heavy ruling on this issue, because the rules are neither firm nor heavy at the moment. They are in a state of flux, as we try to create something better and clearer. The posted rules addendum are more stop-gap -- to prevent some common problems we have been seeing -- than cure-all.

I hope this enlightens, somewhat. I am sorry if it does not.

I agree with the "initiative part".

I remember, about what, two weeks ago? Randall, lvl 30, got beaten by a lvl 16 fighter who didn't took any other classes than fighter. How?

Randall: *Growls in anger, and lifts her sword over her right shoulder, ready to attack* "I'll do what I bloody want to, fool... An' I'll kick yer arse so hard that ye'r gonna fly to the moon!" *She swings her blade on the man's blade, in an attempt to knock him down under the impact*


Fight!

-Other guy starts with a knockdown right after that emote, Randy didn't attack yet!

-Get critted

-Roll really bad things

-Get critted, get her ass beaten.

maybe just remove this lines and add this instead: "remember, dont be a d***"

mute83 wrote:maybe just remove this lines and add this instead: "remember, dont be a d***"

Too ambigious. What may seem normal to you, may be offensive to someone else.