Modification to PvP Consent

[Fateful Encounter]

It seems this discussion has run its course. Closing unless the rest of the staff want to add further thoughts.

[jarlexel]

that was not my intent

[Fuzziebunny]

Ok, I will TRY to explain this again. There is what my character (aka: Chime) thinks ICly, and there is what Fuzziebunny thinks OOCly. Most of the time.... They are not the same thing. Look, I get you are excited but please do not make IC stuff OOC.

[jarlexel]

Well done it a long time ago and it was a lot of fun, my first plot ever actually. Triad players agreed, Black Hand agreed, Helmites Agreed, But Chime and Bram said it was a horrible ideal, a political nightmare but shes not legion anymore and he's hardly on so they no longer have a say in it, Yeah will give it another GO ! ! ! in RP

To everyone else Blah Blah Blah Blah, Hashart was all for it, so was Olivia and her husband and Faulcon De'Ombre aka PC faction leaders!

[Doubtful]

To fix all of this, I really think it is quite easy actually. Now don't laugh please, but why not make 2nd wind inn a non pvp place, just like any city, You can even do it ICLY with a grounds of Combat treaty to protect the innocent people. Both sides can go there under a flag of truce. Can be there buffed however you want, for anything the staff wants to throw at you.

As an OOC and implimented ruling from the staff this is a terrible idea. Anything that limits RP options and choices tends to be inherently bad. It'd also mean that any breaches instantly become and OOC matter and the staff end up having to deal with more complaints of "Waaah! Tommy pushed me miss, and he pulled Beckies's hair".

However, done as an ICly produced and player driven concept it could add more RP options and lots of fun, given the stances of the main two factions there are plenty of IC reasons for such a truce to take place.

If you like the idea, RP it, push it ICly with your faction, meet with the other faction and hammer out the terms of the neutral ground treaty. Work with your faction and friends to enforce the treaty! Suffer the backlash, reap the rewards, play the role and have some fun with it if it all goes wrong...

In short - As a staff ruling it's terrible, as a player and/or faction goal it's intelligent and fun. Go start on it.

[toupz]

I have to agree with Thaelis

[thaelis]

There is a huge huge difference between 'casting in someone's presence' and showing up buffed.

There are not many rest spots, and you can't remove your buffs voluntarily. You literally cannot avoid walking through the 2nd Wind buffed. If every time you walked through there you were fair game for a PvP hit it would create mayhem.

Bottom line, you can avoid casting in someone's presence. It will never happen unless you intentionally want it to happen. Meeting someone whilst you are buffed happens 10-20 times per day. Making it consent for PvP would be a nightmare.

Edit: Also, what bipolar said. A Wizard without buffs is ridiculously vulnerable, like AC 13 vulnerable.

[jarlexel]

You know so many times a known member of the Black Hand will be at the inn or a Triad. We don't want to be dicks and engage in pvp, Often we find our ourselves trying to find a IC reason not to be hostel and it gets kinda silly because there is not one, or we get ooc and ignore the triad walking by or Banite or pretend we don't know they are the enemy ect ect.

[bipolar bear]

.... an interesting discussion indeed...

honestly though what high ranking , or well respected mage / priest would not be protecting him self.. and seriously though... buffs with hours per level where ment to be up almost full time... why eles have them with that duration.

some one would be less likely to attack a well know high level wizard simply because he dosnt see any of his wards. it would be silly to think they would not be protecting themselves.


as it stands now... almost anyone can get the drop on any wizard they see that isn't buffed.

[Memnoch1962]

I think that since Sundren is a Role Play server that we should all really just try that. If your character comes upon another character with several "shiney buffs" about them, then some decent RP can be done to determine why they are buffed.

Another solution is to not walk around with a ton of combat buffs up if you are just going to a local tavern or to the Second Wind. Making an area a no PVP area in my opinion is not a good solution. It takes control of the situation away from the players. Players should have the option to engage PVP where they choose if there is a good RP reason.

I'd also like to see the visual buffs be removed, but I think that has been covered before and I think the reason that cant be done is because they are hard coded. Now I'm not 100% sure of that. I would solve a great many things though.

Of all the suggestions I saw here, Fuzziebunny's seemed like the best choice. Normal buffs are one thing but combat buffs are entirely different. An example would be this. If Dante Swift and Wilfrid Noth are having a heated discussion at the Second Wind about the merits of their respective religions and then suddenly Wilfrid shouts "Torm has commanded that I put down all evil." He draws his sword and advances, the Dante is well within his rights to attack. The flip side would be that if Dante said "Torm is of no concern to me." then casts stoneskin, mirror image and other clearly defensive buffs. Wilfrid is well within his rights to draw his sword and shove it through Dante's guts.

But you will notice that there was some RP that happened before any hostility took place.

There are exceptions to every rule. Assassins wouldn't normally give their mark any warning. It would be something like sneak up unseen, hostile their mark and attack.

Like all of the rest of you here, I am just trying to have fun. So lets not be dicks about PVP.

[greypawn]

-Players do not have the right of refusal on PvP.

Pretty sure as long as you have a role play reason to attack you're cool. Feeling threatened by a buffed up known enemy would be one, no?

[gamestarmike]

There has literally been nothing wrong with the rule. What has already been set in place has been evident enough for players before the questions were raised. Problems have only occurred outside of the rules and common player etiquette. Putting every hypothetical in contrast doesn't change the rules implementation and success for the years its been in effect. The few bad apples are just that, bad apples. There will be no utopia for rules, rules are always imperfect, just don't be the player that openly tries to defy/abuse/subvert the commonly understood and agreed lines of rp to follow during approaching pvp situations. We could all keep listing "what if!'s" till our fingers started to bleed or we could just continue as things have been, continue following the rules as they have been put forth.

Instead of this pointless debate, we should be focusing on the most important issue of all:
'Who is best girl?'

[bipolar bear]

my personal 2 cents... id love to see the visual FX removed.. one should always be terrified of pestering a wizard of high status.. not knowing what protection he has going or dosnt.. it might make skills like diplomats , bluffers, and intimidating more useful in the RP leading up to said PvP. plus... I just don't like seeing American gladiator style glowing hamster balls running all over the place.. but that is just a personal perspective.


not knowing what spells are up, may make someone think twice before just out right attacking someone.

[jarlexel]

To fix all of this, I really think it is quite easy actually. Now don't laugh please, but why not make 2nd wind inn a non pvp place, just like any city, You can even do it ICLY with a grounds of Combat treaty to protect the innocent people. Both sides can go there under a flag of truce. Can be there buffed however you want, for anything the staff wants to throw at you.

Imposing factions can get nose to nose and argue all they want, that stuff is fun, but if they want to take it to combat? then take it down the road.

A rule would have to be made of sorts of course and fine tuned. Lets say someone wants to harass someone to hell and back, thinking there safe because of the treaty, law whatever you want to call it, Safe from the Hero drawling his sword and cutting that harrasser in half. A duel can be challenged and even done there at the inn . . .maybe and if the duel is refused then the challenged need to carry their ass and not come back for a few days. again needs to be fine tuned.

Ok, not done yet! Lets say someone is exposed, outed for being a imposing faction, then most of there RP is gone down the drain and there twiddling their thumbs alone in there tower, while all others are RPing and having fun, well this treaty would fix that as well.

My two cents

[Requiem]

Warriors can choose to wear their armor, or walk around in clothes. Mages should be able to choose to wear their defensive attire (spells) or not too. Being prepared against harm is not equal to being on the offense. A soldier wearing a kevlar vest because he knows he might be shot at is very different from a soldier waving his weapon around.

I find NWN2 greatly favors melee types in the transition from RP to combat. People normally stand around talking at reasonably small distances, so when someone decides to close that gap and start hitting you it can be problematic to get some spells off, even with quickened spells. Between actually pushing the button to cast, going through the animation, and the spell landing I have found myself knocked down and summarily beaten. As a player who often plays wizards in P&P, the inability to cast from prone or 5-foot shift to get some breathing room becomes a real drag. But that's a different can of worms.

I see no issue to maintaining that beginning to cast defensive spells should be considered hostile, especially to characters with no spellcraft. If someone is waving his hands around and chanting and you don't know if he is casting stoneskin or fireball, I say err on the side of stabbing said caster before he blows you up. I do see issue with automatically assuming any caster trying to protect himself or herself when traveling gives fair cause to assume hostile intent and engage in PvP. If that were a rule I would argue that for fairness, warriors must always travel in their underwear and monks must always carry heavy sacks to be encumbered and lose their monkly powers.