Abii
~
Banned
Posts: 273 
|
Post by Abii on Jan 26, 2018 16:27:34 GMT -5
Im just wondering about one thing,
Outlaw is meant to enter town without disguise only be DM permission,
How about killing if an outlaw PC is hunting someone, found him(After veryt long time...Very) in town, and cant strike only cause theres no dm around ?
Any suggestions for outlaws just need to play the rule "DM Permission" ?
|
|
|
|
Post by DM Hawk on Jan 26, 2018 17:59:38 GMT -5
Hi Abii, Please keep in mind that the Outlaw Status Provisions are trying to strike a balance between players being allowed to continue playing criminal characters, upholding FRC's setting with realistic in game consequences, and honoring the golden rule of FRC - have fun but not at the expense of others. frc.proboards.com/thread/26586/outlaw-status-provisionsThere is a strong sentiment among many of our players that criminal PC's should be forced to retire once caught and executed by the Crown for serious crimes. When these characters are allowed to continue committing serious crimes - especially assault and murder and especially publicly in towns - then it seems there are no consequences for these characters once caught. They'll simply come back around and repeat the behavior again in the near future. "Outlaw X is back and murdering people in Greatgaunt again after being caught and executed" Most of our players don't like this and for good reason. It makes little sense in a roleplay environment for this to happen repeatedly by the same criminal, regardless of how many time they are captured and punished. It becomes immersion breaking and erodes the atmosphere we want to uphold on FRC. For many players, especially victims, repetitive inconsequential PVP isn't fun. However, we also want to honor FRC's long standing view that only the player may decide when to retire their characters - for everyone. Of course, players breaking or disregarding rules will find themselves no longer welcome to play on FRC, in which case their characters won't be around anymore as a result of the out of character behavior and discipline that followed. To uphold the setting and curtail the behavior of these characters who have earned the Outlaw title after numerous serious crimes - while also allowing players to decide when to retire their own characters - the Outlaw Provisions were established to find the balance. The DM team may make decisions to adjust these provisions over time and will give consideration to points raised - but be aware that a lot of our players would already like to see the Outlaw characters retired and have had enough of seeing blatant high frequency PVP or other crimes from the same antagonist to the point where it defies the setting. FRC is a roleplay server where logging in is a consent to PVP. However there are server rules which need to be honored by the players and there are in character laws which have consequences when broken which work together to help player character conflict be meaningful and consequences felt when roleplayed out. Our rules, in game laws, and criminal consequences also work together to uphold FRC's golden rule - have fun but not at the expense of others. Let's keep these things in mind when discussing this topic. |
|
|
|
Post by zerohin on Jan 26, 2018 19:04:55 GMT -5
Abii,
If I understand your question correctly, you're asking if it's ok to kill a PC you've actively been hunting for a prolonged period of time. Unfortunately it happens that the PC you found was in a town where, by the rules governing outlaw status, you are not allowed to strike without a DM being present.
I would suggest that, if you were openly strike out of costume, that your character would most likely be caught by someone. It may be another character or an NPC guard or guards that are simply not represented due to the nature of the game.
Simply put, unless you are able to find a way to attack and kill the individual without being detected by anyone present (this includes a large number of unrepresented NPC's), then it may be likely that you succeed in killing your target. However, I would think it unlikely that you would escape yourself. Depending on Abii's response to being apprehended she may either fight and kill a few other NPC guards before being captured, or it may be that she's killed in her attempt to escape.
(IMO this is a way for you to achieve your goal while still submitting to the consequences that would have likely been incurred if a DM had been around. I can't speak for DM's of course or their actions, but it would at least be plausible that Abii may be caught)
Just my two cents,
Zero
|
|
|
|
Post by StabbingNirvana on Jan 26, 2018 20:45:20 GMT -5
But if you could already enter a town while disguised without Dm supervisiom, why don't you just make up a new disguise, kill the guy, and leave? Outlaws are already in town disguised. You'll just have to make up a new fake name and recolor your armor. You could still take credit for the attack by leaving a note saying "Har Har, you fools! It was I, Abii the Once Executed, who has committed this attack while disguised!"
Problem solved, I think?
|
|
|
|
Post by FlyingMidget on Jan 26, 2018 21:15:25 GMT -5
But if you could already enter a town while disguised without Dm supervisiom, why don't you just make up a new disguise, kill the guy, and leave? Outlaws are already in town disguised. You'll just have to make up a new fake name and recolor your armor. You could still take credit for the attack by leaving a note saying "Har Har, you fools! It was I, Abii the Once Executed, who has committed this attack while disguised!" Problem solved, I think? I think that rule is the reason this thread was created, the rule itself comes across much like Hawk said earlier where it was to curtail the whole PvP and major crimes constantly happening in a town with no consequence while still allowing someone to continue playing the character they wish to play so that it doesn't outright kill immersion for others. I imagine a disguise isn't the easiest thing to pull off when you start pulling for your infamous weapon of choice as you try and murder someone and your personalized style of fighting comes out. FM. |
|
|
|
Post by Orchid on Jan 27, 2018 0:14:19 GMT -5
But if you could already enter a town while disguised without Dm supervisiom, why don't you just make up a new disguise, kill the guy, and leave? Outlaws are already in town disguised. You'll just have to make up a new fake name and recolor your armor. You could still take credit for the attack by leaving a note saying "Har Har, you fools! It was I, Abii the Once Executed, who has committed this attack while disguised!" Problem solved, I think? I think that rule is the reason this thread was created, the rule itself comes across much like Hawk said earlier where it was to curtail the whole PvP and major crimes constantly happening in a town with no consequence while still allowing someone to continue playing the character they wish to play so that it doesn't outright kill immersion for others. I imagine a disguise isn't the easiest thing to pull off when you start pulling for your infamous weapon of choice as you try and murder someone and your personalized style of fighting comes out. FM. See, this what bothers me about the mindset of disguises and fake identities most seem to have. You shouldn't just recolor your armor. Any wary observer with half a brain would notice it's just recolored armor. If you're gonna disguise up, make/buy a completely new set of armor that looks entirely different. Use your skills if you can to effect a different voice, and/or methodically change up your speech patterns. Use a different weapon(don't just remodel your existing one that's cheesy and especially if it's magical you really can't do that). I could go on, but if you take enough steps to authentically disguise yourself I see no reason you couldn't murder someone in town. Maybe not Abii per se, but someone with say a GS scroll and/or the ability to teleport sure. I still recall an event some time ago, I had literally a few hours old character steal a plot dagger in full view of several much higher level people, bug out, go and buy new clothes, and successfully bamboozle the lot of them and had such supported the DMs on hand simply because noone heard him speak or saw any part of him due to full body clothing and hood during the theft. Noones saying you can't necessarily, just put more effort into playing a counter methodology. |
|
|
|
Post by FlyingMidget on Jan 27, 2018 0:38:08 GMT -5
I think that rule is the reason this thread was created, the rule itself comes across much like Hawk said earlier where it was to curtail the whole PvP and major crimes constantly happening in a town with no consequence while still allowing someone to continue playing the character they wish to play so that it doesn't outright kill immersion for others. I imagine a disguise isn't the easiest thing to pull off when you start pulling for your infamous weapon of choice as you try and murder someone and your personalized style of fighting comes out. FM. See, this what bothers me about the mindset of disguises and fake identities most seem to have. You shouldn't just recolor your armor. Any wary observer with half a brain would notice it's just recolored armor. If you're gonna disguise up, make/buy a completely new set of armor that looks entirely different. Use your skills if you can to effect a different voice, and/or methodically change up your speech patterns. Use a different weapon(don't just remodel your existing one that's cheesy and especially if it's magical you really can't do that). I could go on, but if you take enough steps to authentically disguise yourself I see no reason you couldn't murder someone in town. Maybe not Abii per se, but someone with say a GS scroll and/or the ability to teleport sure. I still recall an event some time ago, I had literally a few hours old character steal a plot dagger in full view of several much higher level people, bug out, go and buy new clothes, and successfully bamboozle the lot of them and had such supported the DMs on hand simply because noone heard him speak or saw any part of him due to full body clothing and hood during the theft. Noones saying you can't necessarily, just put more effort into playing a counter methodology. I completely agree with you about disguises, the only time I've used one my character even bought a +1 maul from a store to further get away from his standard appearance and weapons. And while I agree to some extent that if you've taken the effort to authentically disguise yourself to murder someone in town, you should probably still try and get a DM to oversee it, but it's not the end of the world. That said, I think the line regarding "The Outlaw may not engage or fight back in PVP until they have moved outside of the city or town, transitioning to at least one area away. " is so that the DM team can allow unsupervised visits to town so long as the outlaw is attempting to remain disguised and the disguise isn't publicly broken or drawing attention to the character in question. Exceptions to such exist when a DM is present of course to play the part of the cities guard and other NPC's and just in general oversee things. (This being what this thread in about, outlaws and PvP in town as far as I understood the intent of the thread) FM. |
|
|
|
Post by Asgardian Grey Hawk on Jan 27, 2018 0:40:49 GMT -5
Just food for thought. I agree criminals should be punished. But if you are forced to retire them. I think then a rule should be in place for anyone who dies in pvp being forced to retire.
|
|
|
|
Post by FlyingMidget on Jan 27, 2018 0:54:03 GMT -5
Just food for thought. I agree criminals should be punished. But if you are forced to retire them. I think then a rule should be in place for anyone who dies in pvp being forced to retire. Are they being forced to retire them? I don't believe they are, consequences should be a part of roleplaying a character if they're caught doing the wrong things and drawing the ire of the powers that be (Purple Dragons, War Wizards, Nobility, etc etc). Weather the allowance to continue to play a character you want to play after being caught numerous times breaking numerous laws and having them outlawed is fun to you or not is truthfully upto the player in question. The option still remains to roleplay them, the actions of that character is what brought upon the outlaw status, the allowance of disguises to enter towns and further rules regarding such assists people playing such a character. In essence, nobody is being forced to retire a character, nor are they being punished for playing the character in question the way they wanted to play them, the outlaw status is just another part of role playing that character, consequences are a part of the world (much like Holance being imprisoned for his own IC actions and Zodika to my knowledge never being imprisoned because of her own IC actions). When it comes to enjoyment for a character, my answer will be the same regardless of if they're an outlaw or not, if they aren't fun to myself, I'll move onto something else I find fun (or take a break from the game and come back when it is fun for me again like I'm doing atm). FM. |
|
|
|
Post by Razgriz on Jan 27, 2018 1:09:41 GMT -5
I'm more of the opinion that being outlaw is a boring experience. This due to the limitations of the game, setting, areas and more.
Is it needed as things are now? You bet!
Is it ideal? Negative.
|
|
|
|
Post by malclave on Jan 27, 2018 1:31:01 GMT -5
Just food for thought. I agree criminals should be punished. But if you are forced to retire them. I think then a rule should be in place for anyone who dies in pvp being forced to retire. I don't think mandatory retirement is even on the table. Even if it was, this would only make sense in the setting if the PVP victor has the means, time, and intent to completely annihilate the corpse, or at least make it so no part of it can be recovered for at least 200 years. |
|
|
|
Post by Orchid on Jan 27, 2018 6:15:15 GMT -5
I also find it amusing that Cormyr's answer to repeat criminals who somehow "survive" executions is to persona non grata them. There are other, fare more permanent things than executing someone that can be used as a deterrent. Not all of them are evil either so perfectly feasible for Cormyrian lawkeeping.
|
|
|
|
Post by Southpaw on Jan 27, 2018 7:59:29 GMT -5
Just food for thought. I agree criminals should be punished. But if you are forced to retire them. I think then a rule should be in place for anyone who dies in pvp being forced to retire. An idea that occurred to me goes something like this. If one PC kills another, and the player whose character was killed permanently retires their character and informs the DM team of this, then that character cannot return from the dead, but that player can mark the killer as “eligible for permadeath.” The player of the dead character would have no assurance the killer will ever be caught, but if they are executed by the crown, the killer would be required to be retired. The idea is that, as Abii alluded to, how is it right for the killer to be retired if the victim is not? Especially when the victim testifies at their own murder trial. If a PC kills multiple PC’s, only one would need to be retired to put the killer on the permalist. If people liked the idea, it could also be extended to revenge PVP. As with anything there would be details to work out, DM review for metagaming, OOC grudge, and to be sure people aren't creating “throw away characters” just to knock PC’s out of the game, among other issues. But even just from the standpoint that one idea might inspire another in someone else, I think it’s worth mentioning. The main idea, though, is that if one player is willing to part with their own character if s/he is killed in the initial PVP with no assurance the killer will be punished, then they could mark the killer as permkillable. |
|
|
|
Post by Asgardian Grey Hawk on Jan 27, 2018 10:36:29 GMT -5
Im all for changing the outlawed pcs faction so all npcs are hostile. Hell even the dms can try and kill them with random encounter of bounty hunters.
|
|
|
|
Post by Asgardian Grey Hawk on Jan 27, 2018 10:38:22 GMT -5
Im just saying forcing one group to retire over others is favortisim period. I hear many a time how people cry about bad guys coming back after executions. But never once mention how silly it is for the victims to repeat respawn like nothing happened.
|
|
|
|
Post by Asgardian Grey Hawk on Jan 27, 2018 10:41:12 GMT -5
I am all for fairness. Should outlaws have it rough and feel the whole server included dms are against them hell yes. Iv done my time on aris. But even the idea of forcing one group to perma and not the victims is ridiculous. Iv heard arguments say well they haved died x amount of time. So have the targets of said criminal. And it is equally ridiculous.
|
|
|
|
Post by Southpaw on Jan 27, 2018 10:42:32 GMT -5
Im just saying forcing one group to retire over others is favortisim period. I hear many a time how people cry about bad guys coming back after executions. But never once mention how silly it is for the victims to repeat respawn like nothing happened. I think that at the very least, a character who is murdered either shouldn't be able to testify at the trial for their own murder, or that their being alive should serve as evidence that it was attempted murder at worst. That's the part that seems cheesy to me. As for acting like it never happened, death amnesia *requires* that they act like nothing happened. That's not the player being cheesy, it's a logical outgrowth of the rules. |
|
|
|
Post by erratic1 on Jan 27, 2018 11:01:28 GMT -5
I'm more of the opinion that being outlaw is a boring experience. This due to the limitations of the game, setting, areas and more. Is it needed as things are now? You bet! Is it ideal? Negative. Have to agree with this, especially when everytime someone rolls up a CE character they seem to think it means go on a bloody rampage once they hit epic levels. This isn't new, henceforth why the rules where put into the server. |
|
|
|
Post by malclave on Jan 27, 2018 11:09:14 GMT -5
An idea that occurred to me goes something like this. If one PC kills another, and the player whose character was killed permanently retires their character and informs the DM team of this, then that character cannot return from the dead, but that player can mark the killer as “eligible for permadeath.” The player of the dead character would have no assurance the killer will ever be caught, but if they are executed by the crown, the killer would be required to be retired. The idea is that, as Abii alluded to, how is it right for the killer to be retired if the victim is not? Especially when the victim testifies at their own murder trial. That, IMO, would be incredibly bad. My introduction to PVP here was in a Greatgaunt rampage. I think I was level 6 at the time. It was the 3rd or 4th character I'd made, but it was not a "throwaway"... it's now my highest level. There's no way I should have been allowed to trade a 6th level character (in which I was still getting my feet wet) to mark an epic for permadeath, no matter how much I dislike PVP. |
|
|
|
Post by malclave on Jan 27, 2018 11:18:59 GMT -5
I think that at the very least, a character who is murdered either shouldn't be able to testify at the trial for their own murder, or that their being alive should serve as evidence that it was attempted murder at worst. That makes sense to me, though the Crown might still treat a repeat offender more harshly. And now I want to go watch Rashomon for some reason. |
|
|
|
Post by Animayhem on Jan 27, 2018 12:02:23 GMT -5
I also find it amusing that Cormyr's answer to repeat criminals who somehow "survive" executions is to persona non grata them. There are other, fare more permanent things than executing someone that can be used as a deterrent. Not all of them are evil either so perfectly feasible for Cormyrian lawkeeping. What would these be? |
|
|
|
Post by Animayhem on Jan 27, 2018 12:21:28 GMT -5
Im all for changing the outlawed pcs faction so all npcs are hostile. Hell even the dms can try and kill them with random encounter of bounty hunters. Token could be placed on the outlaw which would trigger an npc's reaction if they got close to the npc. This would make the outlaw think twice about how to come into a town. Right now an outlaw can come into town disguised and noone says boo. Unless a player actually saw them change then one cannot really say. A newer player comes into town and has no idea. To be honest no matter how rich the bounties are a bounty hunter PC would have to spend a lot of time and effort. Even if they are successful, its wash rinse repeat. Having them targeted with random bounty hunters would add spice to their rp and like their victims they would have no warning. If the outlaw is caught and or killed then the corpse or live captured could be instantly jailed and stripped of everything. This would also enable a trial to start sooner rather than later without having to wait for all the ooc "paperwork" needed to be done by the victims. |
|
|
|
Post by Aoi on Jan 27, 2018 12:23:12 GMT -5
Konbanwa.
I watched the theme Abii and the way all that PvP and punishment is beeing treated for a long time without saying anything but now I will. It's simply enough for me if people discuss to get a permission to break rules.
I only have one thought on the original question. It might sound hard and you can stone me for it. You will see it at the end of this post, but I will explain why I think so, first.
I have my reasons. An outlaw is running around killing people. In RP it doesn't matter if it is pc or NPC. In RP all are people, living people. The outlaw has been executed and simply goes somewhere else to kill people again. Again the outlaw is wanted dead or alive. First, how long does it take until an average intelligent character learns that this is not very intelligent. Second, anytime this is not fun anymore, that is for some players more than annoying. One day you might also be an outlaw everywhere and in trouble with so many people it seems not logical anymore that character still lives.
Not to speak of divine characters like mine and others. Depending on their deity it doesn't feel logical if the good gods don't help against such a danger. It leads to doubt in faith and can destroy the characters and RP of other players. Where are the good gods if such people still get rewarded for their behaviour, with life? Don't answer this question, that is rather something everyone should think about themselves.
Also if it would be allowed to hunt or kill anyone in town if no DM is online no matter where, it would still be ignoring other pc and NPC. Ignoring them is like ignoring RP. And that is in my eyes not the nice way towards other players and the DM.
Long story short. I think the DMs should be less merciful. If an outlaw kills and was punished by execution and kills again ongoingly, there should be a permanent death. If normal consequences are seemingly not enough there should harder consequences. That way other players and their RP should be protected more.
My two cents. Now you can stone me.
Aoi
|
|
|
|
Post by Animayhem on Jan 27, 2018 12:43:39 GMT -5
I think second time around for an outlaw should be Permadead or given the option to retire the character permanently. Either way their character has been written down in the histories.
Some incentives could be allowing them to make a new character at half the level of the old, some gold to get started and maybe be given on piece of gear ,weapon or armor suitable for their level.
Some may argue why, as some may feel Outlaws already get special treatment maybe so but, rewarding the player for making a legendary character seems fair.
The caveat to this would be a one time deal for that player and any of their alternate sign ins. If they make another who becomes eventually like their old, then when that is retired or permadead end of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by FlyingMidget on Jan 27, 2018 13:25:40 GMT -5
I'd just like to note that it's very very very unlikely Perma Death will become a thing that is handed out here (The only one that can permanently kill your character is yourself) except in the case of receiving a perma ban, it's been a fundamental rule of the server for so very long and the reason the outlaw rules were set in place to begin with was as a sort of compromise between the two stances of, "heck no perma death is bad" and "We want stronger consequences for those that piss off an entire countries governing body". Is it needed as things are now? You bet! Is it ideal? Negative. This pretty much sums things up. It could certainly be better, it is definitely needed and it strikes somewhere between what various parties would want, it's a solid compromise though everything can always use a touch of refinement. I'm one of those that are for stronger in character consequences in general, be that longer imprisonments, falling from your divine patrons grace, risking your ability to work the weave and therefore all magic at least for a decent length of time (4+ months recovery?) for destroying things considered actual Artifacts (This is something alot of goodly Priests seem to be fond of). But I understand things are currently at a good point where consequences are at the best they have been in my time here and I accept it's a good position of consequences are at least harsh enough that you really don't want them to happen (as they should be !) but not to the point it's outright removing your ability to play the character in question if you desire to play said character and while one can accept the current minimum consequences enforced upon them if things make sense for the story / character the player can decide to accept a harsher set. I think second time around for an outlaw should be Permadead or given the option to retire the character permanently. Either way their character has been written down in the histories. I could be misremembering, but wasn't a good part of the reason you came to FRC because Marister version 1 was Perma killed without any input on your behalf and you wanted to continue playing him ? I don't know, just find it all abit odd that you're pushing towards perma death from it's current compromise state which preserves such a long lasting rule that appeals to at least a reasonable portion of the player base. FM. |
|
|
|
Post by Animayhem on Jan 27, 2018 13:45:10 GMT -5
FlyingMidget Marister was forced permadead not because he was a criminal or committed a heinous crime. The place he was p'd allowed for players not dm's who were of a certain rank within their faction could place death marks on a player. Three marks and if you die that is it. I had no say it was mostly ooc jealousy which did it. "Elite" players won out. DM was part of that elite group and despite the popularity and pleas from players it fell on deaf ears. An Outlaw is a publicly declared criminal tried and punished and executed. Marister was not. That is a good thing here that decisions such as permadeath et al are not in the hands of players.
|
|
|
|
Post by FlyingMidget on Jan 27, 2018 15:55:44 GMT -5
FlyingMidget Marister was forced permadead not because he was a criminal or committed a heinous crime. The place he was p'd allowed for players not dm's who were of a certain rank within their faction could place death marks on a player. Three marks and if you die that is it. I had no say it was mostly ooc jealousy which did it. "Elite" players won out. DM was part of that elite group and despite the popularity and pleas from players it fell on deaf ears. An Outlaw is a publicly declared criminal tried and punished and executed. Marister was not. That is a good thing here that decisions such as permadeath et al are not in the hands of players. I don't really want to get into the politics of another server, weather they were right or wrong in their own personal approach to handling things like consequences, but here's a question I'd like to pose you then, if perma death was indeed allowed, would you feel mistreated if your own character had done enough to draw the ire of darker elements in Cormyr and had them marked for perma death? Offended the church of Malar with your constant interference with the High Hunt, pissed off Zodika enough that she desired Marister to vanish for good, spoiled numerous jobs of the thieves guild, got between a group of assassins and their mark or somehow put yourself in direct opposition to the Banite guild / Cabal. Another similar question, how would you feel had your character done things to warrant being setup for numerous crimes and judged ICly guilty, would perma death also be something you'd want? The way I see things, consequences are good for the setting, but forcing them on one side but not having consequences for the other side is very bad for the setting as well as the community as it breeds perceived (and possibly real) favoritism for one style over another. I rather wish more characters that receive divine magic were at an actual risk of falling (Good, Evil, Neutral, Lawful, Chaotic, regardless of what class they are if they're going against their patrons dogma it should come with hints, warnings, temporary lose of spells and even worse if such is not enough to correct the behaviour) but the sheer amount of DM overhead to keep an eye on each and every divine class played just isn't really feasible. FM. |
|
|
|
Post by Animayhem on Jan 27, 2018 16:15:04 GMT -5
FlyingMidget Marister was forced permadead not because he was a criminal or committed a heinous crime. The place he was p'd allowed for players not dm's who were of a certain rank within their faction could place death marks on a player. Three marks and if you die that is it. I had no say it was mostly ooc jealousy which did it. "Elite" players won out. DM was part of that elite group and despite the popularity and pleas from players it fell on deaf ears. An Outlaw is a publicly declared criminal tried and punished and executed. Marister was not. That is a good thing here that decisions such as permadeath et al are not in the hands of players. I don't really want to get into the politics of another server, weather they were right or wrong in their own personal approach to handling things like consequences, but here's a question I'd like to pose you then, if perma death was indeed allowed, would you feel mistreated if your own character had done enough to draw the ire of darker elements in Cormyr and had them marked for perma death? Offended the church of Malar with your constant interference with the High Hunt, pissed off Zodika enough that she desired Marister to vanish for good, spoiled numerous jobs of the thieves guild, got between a group of assassins and their mark or somehow put yourself in direct opposition to the Banite guild / Cabal. Another similar question, how would you feel had your character done things to warrant being setup for numerous crimes and judged ICly guilty, would perma death also be something you'd want? FM.
flyingmidget "The way I see things, consequences are good for the setting, but forcing them on one side but not having consequences for the other side is very bad for the setting as well as the community as it breeds perceived (and possibly real) favoritism for one style over another. I rather wish more characters that receive divine magic were at an actual risk of falling (Good, Evil, Neutral, Lawful, Chaotic, regardless of what class they are if they're going against their patrons dogma it should come with hints, warnings, temporary lose of spells and even worse if such is not enough to correct the behaviour) but the sheer amount of DM overhead to keep an eye on each and every divine class played just isn't really feasible." Early on when I arrived, Marister who is divine was involved in an incident which had him lose alignment points which I felt unfair and worked hard to get back. I think since the outlaw was first revised with Darius a compromise could be and many may not like it that abii and darius could be grandfathered in and any new outlaws would face the penalty. The problem is the server although has made some sides still favors killers over victims. |
|
|
|
Post by Munroe on Jan 27, 2018 17:05:38 GMT -5
Im just saying forcing one group to retire over others is favortisim period. I hear many a time how people cry about bad guys coming back after executions. But never once mention how silly it is for the victims to repeat respawn like nothing happened. I think that at the very least, a character who is murdered either shouldn't be able to testify at the trial for their own murder, or that their being alive should serve as evidence that it was attempted murder at worst. That's the part that seems cheesy to me. As for acting like it never happened, death amnesia *requires* that they act like nothing happened. That's not the player being cheesy, it's a logical outgrowth of the rules. While it may be possible for a character to testify at their own trial, they can only testify about what they heard from others, or what happened in hours leading up to their murder, because nobody can be a witness to their own murder. Death-Amnesia means that nobody recalls 30 minutes before their death in PVP. Because the Forgotten Realms is a magical world, it is certainly possible for someone to be alive after their murder. That does not mean that their murder was only attempted. I would not support perma-death as an option. The only times we force a character to retire without being the player being banned is when the player has elected to roleplay pregnancy or the character was created and roleplayed as a child character. Even characters that were built in violation of the character creation rules can usually be restarted with corrected builds. |
|
|
|
Post by Lady Frost on Jan 27, 2018 21:02:21 GMT -5
I think that at the very least, a character who is murdered either shouldn't be able to testify at the trial for their own murder, or that their being alive should serve as evidence that it was attempted murder at worst. That's the part that seems cheesy to me. As for acting like it never happened, death amnesia *requires* that they act like nothing happened. That's not the player being cheesy, it's a logical outgrowth of the rules. While it may be possible for a character to testify at their own trial, they can only testify about what they heard from others, or what happened in hours leading up to their murder, because nobody can be a witness to their own murder. Death-Amnesia means that nobody recalls 30 minutes before their death in PVP. Because the Forgotten Realms is a magical world, it is certainly possible for someone to be alive after their murder. That does not mean that their murder was only attempted. I would not support perma-death as an option. The only times we force a character to retire without being the player being banned is when the player has elected to roleplay pregnancy or the character was created and roleplayed as a child character. Even characters that were built in violation of the character creation rules can usually be restarted with corrected builds. (Underlined) This isn't entirely true. There have been numerous DM plots that state upon choosing to be a part of this event, there is a chance of permadeath or required retirement. I believe A DM is currently holding such an event right now: frc.proboards.com/thread/27893/looking-villainsCharacter's actions are ultimately up to the player and if the player chooses to RP a character in such great opposition of the law of the land that they continue to be executed then maybe retirement is forced after a certain number of executions. It's not a surprise to the player, they've made a conscious choice (just like accepting to play in a DM plot) to have their PC continually violate the law over and over in such extremes that they've been executed multiple times. I don't at all find this unreasonable, no more so than choosing to enter a plot of a DM that expects the same thing. ADDED: Many great assassins of the server have never had multiple executions and I think it's possible to still be a murderer and not be executed if you do it well enough. |
|
