Do we want more consequences/realism in game?

[Zanniej]

Why do you ask?
I've seen it posted more and more often, in different ways. Death doesn't mean enough, actions don't have enough impact, etc. I'm interested in finding out what people think about this.

What exactly is the question?
Would you be interested in actions having more consequences?

Disclaimer: This is in no way intended to actually bring any change. I just want to know what the general opinion on this matter is. There are no wrong opinions, just different ones.

EDIT: I've removed most of my own thoughts on the subject (after receiving a heads up on how it might come across). I don't want to steer this topic in a certain direction. I just used what I read most recently as an example, but this topic might benefit more from leaving that open.

Another edit: Also very interested in hearing why people don't want any change.

[Rhifox]

Death while Adventuring:
Current consequences are mostly fine, what makes it cheap is how easily resurrection is available to non-divine-casters. We've already had a thread on this.

Random chance to get a permastrike from deaths is an interesting idea, kudos to dedude in the other thread for the suggestion.


Death while PvPing:
Needs real consequences. Exp hit at the very least, chance for permastrike, etc. Be easy on it though because low-RP pvp-only seekers can exploit it to cause grief and ruin what could be a good thing. One thing the server I previously played on did is have characters drop all gold they are carrying on them when they die (while also including banks where you can deposit your money to encourage people to only carry what they need). Might be something to consider.

RP out rules absolutely need to go. An out ALWAYS exists (fleeing, giving into the demands, negotiating something, etc) without needing any rule blatantly saying it. Having the rules dictate it means that people will use it to rules-lawyer instead of concentrating on the RP.


OOC Drama:
Will always happen anytime there is conflict, pvp or no pvp, consequence or no consequences. Don't worry about it.


Overall: Yes please. Make sure it happens with DM events too. Characters making dumb mistakes should face consequences for them, instead of being handed a victorious event anyway.

[Aspect of Sorrow]

I've always favored EVE Online's approach.

There's a way for prevention of permanent death but costly.

Security is heightened closer toward major nodes, or cities and towns in this case where deterrence of permanent death occurs.

In the more riskier areas, death is near unavoidable.

That said, additional OOC drama isn't necessary, and something like this gives an immediate license to kill for those pining for it. Lore will be broken due to ego, and additional DM oversight becomes almost necessary. Rolling out a change probably could start with how PvE and resurrection/raise dead functions occur before working up PvP mechanics into it.

This is something better suited for an opt-in feature on a new character, where risk and reward comes into play.

[Steve]

Subject: Raising the Dead

Don't over think this idea.

Exactly.

Here is my humble suggestion: get rid of common Death.

Death would only apply via DM Events. Therefore, Death would become a meaningful result of actions that usually have some context, above and beyond the simple game aspect of the Server, i.e.: lootz-grindz repetition play that sometimes results in a "death" that has a) no meaning, b) is only an inconvenience to the Player (whom often had made a stupid OOC choice to subject their toon to a situation beyond the CR of the PC, thus making the "death" more an embarrassment than something related to in-character role-play).

Thus, reaching 0 Hit Points results in a knockout/coma like situation, for the PC. Essentially, incapacitated and unable to self-revive. All Cleric-based healing/raise/resurrection spells are essentially demoted to Healing Spells, Reviving Spells.

The next step to know is whether this can even be scripted? Mobs usually stop attacking a PC once it reaches negative HP. Not always, however. Yet, if it is possible to turn off going to the Fugue at -10 HP, then maybe it is possible to rid us of Common Death.

Now, in DM Events, if your Character "dies" or reaches 0 HP, they have the chance of an IC "raising" by a Cleric or Divine-based scroll, but it will cost the full Gold + Diamond or whatever it should in PnP. Or, the DM will say that the 0-to-Negative HP is a result of bad IC decisions, and the PC is dead in terms of a Permastrike ( mygodIhopethiswouldhappen!!!).

On the balance reward vs. risk side of things, if PCs in DM Events manage to avoid reaching 0 HP or manage to RP the healing/raising aspect of the REASON for Divine Characters, then, the DM is able to better reward the PCs/Players for "doing a good job."

Thus, Players are actually given initiative to play with Death-As-Meaningful in situation where it is most pertinent—DM Events—but left to ignore "death" during the common Lootz-Grinds affair, which many do and is actually ENJOYABLE for many (and those "many" also have limited time to waste on RPing death anyway...so let's throw them a bone, eh?).

Can I get a witness?!?

[chad878262]

I've always favored EVE Online's approach.

There's a way for prevention of permanent death but costly.

Security is heightened closer toward major nodes, or cities and towns in this case where deterrence of permanent death occurs.

In the more riskier areas, death is near unavoidable.

That said, additional OOC drama isn't necessary, and something like this gives an immediate license to kill for those pining for it. Lore will be broken due to ego, and additional DM oversight becomes almost necessary. Rolling out a change probably could start with how PvE and resurrection/raise dead functions occur before working up PvP mechanics into it.

This is something better suited for an opt-in feature on a new character, where risk and reward comes into play.

I like the idea of permanent death, with a costly way to avoid it. I would maybe add as Rhifox put in to leave PvE death as it is, but have different rules for DM events and PvP which include perma-death as a possible outcome (not the only possible outcome). Would be nice if a PC killed in an event or PvP actually had to be resurrected through RP, like was done with Nomsters character a while back. I bet players would be more hesitant to PvP in a secluded area where it was unlikely anyone friendly would ever happen upon their corpse should they lose.

Interesting idea's, in any case. I personally wouldn't mind seeing such a change and, if anything think it would improve the RP quality on the server. Not that it's bad, just in regard to realistic meetings... When an adventurer happens upon a group of 3 or 4 at a bridge, he should be on high guard, not smiling a greeting and sauntering up as if meeting old college buddies.

[dedude]

Most definitely YES!

But I'm equally interested in hearing the arguments from those that voted no.

[Asmodea]

Quick two cents: I think CvC and PvP is fine as it is. Any attempt to force people to accept the consequences of other players is a huge headache. I think this is shown by how PCs even accepting consequences of DMs is often tepid water at best. As it stands there is little to no long lasting negative or positive RP impacts other than those we impose on ourselves or work out in detail between two parties.

I do find it strange everyone seems to want negative consequences more readily than positive ones though! I may make a longer post later as well. This is just my first quick knee jerk response.

[Nemni]

I do not think permastrikes towards death is a good idea. In nwn1 I played on a server with very harsh penalties for dying. The result was that everyone played like cowards, which some might see as a good thing, but I find boring. Worse though was that when people did eventually die they very often quit the game for they could not stand to lose years worth of effort in their characters.

I'm all for making death mean a little more though. In PvE perhaps by reducing the drop rate of raise dead scrolls. In PvP perhaps by giving the looser player a strong debuff, that prevents them from fighting (but not RPing), for maybe as long as a week depending on level.

[Valefort]

Most definitely no.

I don't want important consequences/realism being forced on me as I can do it myself if I find them justified. Such a change would give PvP a lot more importance than it has now, being at the quasi-mercy of PvPers would lead to more powerbuilding, less long lived characters, more OOC shenaningans and drama.

[Deathgrowl]

Higher consequences? Yes. But only under DM oversight.

I tried to argue for this while I was on the DM team (with unfortunately little support or indeed interest...). I suggested we run a test where the players know that the plot and events have high consequences but also high rewards. That is important. If the potential fall is great, the potential climb must also be. Otherwise you're just wasting time as people won't feel the risk is worth it.

So yes. High consequences. But not in every-day adventuring/grinding. Maybe if the XP and loot gain was much higher, but that doesn't seem like a good solution. Also consider the lag deaths and, with relevance to the state of the server, crash deaths. We'd just be making the server more frustrating for people.

[Calodan]

Higher consequences? Yes. But only under DM oversight.

I tried to argue for this while I was on the DM team (with unfortunately little support or indeed interest...). I suggested we run a test where the players know that the plot and events have high consequences but also high rewards. That is important. If the potential fall is great, the potential climb must also be. Otherwise you're just wasting time as people won't feel the risk is worth it.

So yes. High consequences. But not in every-day adventuring/grinding. Maybe if the XP and loot gain was much higher, but that doesn't seem like a good solution. Also consider the lag deaths and, with relevance to the state of the server, crash deaths. We'd just be making the server more frustrating for people.

There is so much to consider yes. Lag being subjective too. Not everyone will experience lag at the same time either depending on their connection. Right now I have a DSL that is slow and I experience lag in every DM event. When I had a Broadband 150 Mb/s line I would never experience lag in fact I was able to take out many DM mobs before the DM came back after their lag.....So it depends really.

[Invoker]

I don't want important consequences/realism being forced on me as I can do it myself if I find them justified. Such a change would give PvP a lot more importance than it has now, being at the quasi-mercy of PvPers would lead to more powerbuilding, less long lived characters, more OOC shenaningans and drama.

I completely agree. That's why I wrote:

In my experience, those afraid of losing are seldom gracious winners.

The problem with the PvP rules is the "Winner decides all" clause.

The outcome (a believable, rich, interesting outcome for BOTH sides) should be decided together, OOC friends among friends.

That clause is the root of all evils, not consequences per se.

So yes. High consequences. But not in every-day adventuring/grinding. Maybe if the XP and loot gain was much higher, but that doesn't seem like a good solution. Also consider the lag deaths and, with relevance to the state of the server, crash deaths. We'd just be making the server more frustrating for people.

Couldn't agree more. Broken game is broken .

That's why it cannot be incorporated by a script, and deaths caused by evident technical issues (ie: server crashes, welcome to the Fugue when it gets back up) should be flat out ignored.

@Calodan: the DM client is rather heavy and clunky. It's not unusual for a DM to have problems reacting, because of sheer lag, rather impractical interface and flat out idiotic/broken AI.

[aaron22]

Subject: Raising the Dead

Don't over think this idea.

Exactly.

Here is my humble suggestion: get rid of common Death.

Death would only apply via DM Events. Therefore, Death would become a meaningful result of actions that usually have some context, above and beyond the simple game aspect of the Server, i.e.: lootz-grindz repetition play that sometimes results in a "death" that has a) no meaning, b) is only an inconvenience to the Player (whom often had made a stupid OOC choice to subject their toon to a situation beyond the CR of the PC, thus making the "death" more an embarrassment than something related to in-character role-play).

Thus, reaching 0 Hit Points results in a knockout/coma like situation, for the PC. Essentially, incapacitated and unable to self-revive. All Cleric-based healing/raise/resurrection spells are essentially demoted to Healing Spells, Reviving Spells.

The next step to know is whether this can even be scripted? Mobs usually stop attacking a PC once it reaches negative HP. Not always, however. Yet, if it is possible to turn off going to the Fugue at -10 HP, then maybe it is possible to rid us of Common Death.

Now, in DM Events, if your Character "dies" or reaches 0 HP, they have the chance of an IC "raising" by a Cleric or Divine-based scroll, but it will cost the full Gold + Diamond or whatever it should in PnP. Or, the DM will say that the 0-to-Negative HP is a result of bad IC decisions, and the PC is dead in terms of a Permastrike ( mygodIhopethiswouldhappen!!!).

On the balance reward vs. risk side of things, if PCs in DM Events manage to avoid reaching 0 HP or manage to RP the healing/raising aspect of the REASON for Divine Characters, then, the DM is able to better reward the PCs/Players for "doing a good job."

Thus, Players are actually given initiative to play with Death-As-Meaningful in situation where it is most pertinent—DM Events—but left to ignore "death" during the common Lootz-Grinds affair, which many do and is actually ENJOYABLE for many (and those "many" also have limited time to waste on RPing death anyway...so let's throw them a bone, eh?).

Can I get a witness?!?

this would be acceptable if there was a toggle, because sometimes i treat just player run events/adventures with the same magnitude as i do DM run events. other than that. it would be acceptable.

[JCVD1]

Yes.

Double XP rates, double RP XP gains.

Permadeath=75% RcR if the player was being dumb during an event.
100%(event over lvl 20) if after an assassination

Assassinations under DM supervision = Permadeath
Assassinations failed attempts= Permadeath for the assassin.
Public execution=permadeath.
guildhall failed infilrations= permadeath

Death has meaning, the time you spent grinding/looting isn't lost. It forces you to make a new character and RP more.

[Ariella]

DMs can already hand out greater punishmemts in pve. Pvp is not balanced in nwn2 and often ends in drama. Having less pvp rules and greater punishment will only further encourage powerbuilds over rp builds and a lot more work for the limited DM team. Its not practical in the current server setup.