Should Ichbin Perma Die!?

[CrimsonTears]

I'm not taking either side here, but I just find the logic a little odd when you think that just because someone is flamingly evil they deserve a perma-death when dead...

....and you think the righteous paladin that hacks his way deep into the necromancer's lair only to fall at the end... rightfully deserves another go at life? Same crap, different toilet.

Nope. Not at all. One deals with attacking NPCs, which won't have their fun messed with if they are killed. The other involves PCs whose fun is the goal of the server Do evil people have a right for fun? Sure, as long as it doesn't messes with what the majority considers "fun".

[Sathayorn]

Bah, killing is killing, period. It should be dealt with the same way in character. Though...

"and you think the righteous paladin that hacks his way deep into the necromancer's lair only to fall at the end... rightfully deserves another go at life? Same crap, different toilet"

If this was a PVP situation, would that seem fair? If there was an evil necromancer killing people so he could raise them as skeletons, weither they be npcs or not, and a paladin were to kill the necromancer... Would anyone say "that paladin isn't nice, that paladin should be permakilled, he's an ass" If he didn't ask permission from the evil necromancer to kill him?

This is a serious roleplaying server right? That being said, just because it is a serious roleplaying server does not mean people have to take it so seriously. PVP complaints are for MMOPGG's (Massive Multiplayer Online Power Gamer Games) Like World of Warcraft or Everquest. I find it rather refreshing to be killed because I pissed someone off, instead of "because I spawned them". It does not ruin fun, really, if there is an actual reason, but everyone seems to hate "evil". What about Genocide? Hmm? Is that not evil? Saying "No, theyre goblins, they are diseased and all must die"... This is not a good deed.

PVP causes people to work together, because, honestly, its not as likely you will be killed when in a group of people roleplaying rather than when you are killing goblins alone. PVP also helps groups of people drift apart, conflicts are really required so that not every single person on the server is working together all of the time. One of the greatest things about one of the servers I played on back in NWN was the fact one of the players had a grudge against me, even though his hatred for me was kinda OOC, he always had an in character reason, and then it caused people to get involved. Lawful Evil against Chaotic Good, Knight against Warriormage, and that was just one of the many people over the years I had conflicts with that lasted months, Why? Because the two of us were mature enough to enjoy it. It wasnt just a "I see him, *draws blade and attacks*" There was plotting involved, on both sides.

Though, I am strongly opposed to killing someone without a good in character reason, unless they are mature enough to handle being killed. One instance per player killed should be overlooked, and the player, if it ruined his or her fun, should inform the murderrer in a tell that they did not enjoy that. Problem, in most cases afterwards, is solved. Assuming someone is mature enough to deal with *gasps* five minutes out of their day lost does seem to be excessive with online games however.

Just a thought, People seem to be taking this entire thing too seriously, in the end of the day, no one was harmed, nobodies mind was destroyed... These are not memories that are repressed to retain sanity. Working your concerns about PVP with the people who kill you is probably the best option I could think of. If you really don't want someone to kill you in PVP, make a note of it in your characters description box "Please ask my permission before engaging in PVP" or something along the lines of "Ask before you kill me" and so on.

So, as I've been told, you have to really have an immediate occurence happen to kill someone without telling them first(They insult you, spit in your face, and you really never liked their race to begin with), but the question is, if you tell someone that you're going to kill them, and they don't want to die, should you have to break roleplay to save feelings?

[skyde]

I was the victim for that. If it's when I think, I didn't mind. I got warning beforehand. What's the deal?

I personally got zero warning beforehand. All I saw was talking to you and boom... I am dying and groaning. And the roleplaying excuse "I am collecting bodyparts" he mentioned later in shoutbox is well...idiotic. He could as easily collect those bodyparts from bandits and whatnot if he needs to fulfill his sexual fantasies...

This is what I saw (picture taken later):

[skyde]

Just a thought, People seem to be taking this entire thing too seriously, in the end of the day, no one was harmed, nobodies mind was destroyed... These are not memories that are repressed to retain sanity. Working your concerns about PVP with the people who kill you is probably the best option I could think of. If you really don't want someone to kill you in PVP, make a note of it in your characters description box "Please ask my permission before engaging in PVP" or something along the lines of "Ask before you kill me" and so on.

Well according to the rules. It should be the other way around. You should add something like "I can be attacked without permission." Or... with a little tongue in cheek "Please kill me."

Quote from the rules:
"I want people to know they have a possibility of being attacked -before- they are attacked. If you attack someone THEN rp or warn, you broke the rules, clear and simple."

[Sathayorn]

Well according to the rules. It should be the other way around. You should add something like "I can be attacked without permission." Or... with a little tongue in cheek "Please kill me."

Quote from the rules:
"I want people to know they have a possibility of being attacked -before- they are attacked. If you attack someone THEN rp or warn, you broke the rules, clear and simple."

You misunderstand, Killing someone because they spit in your face, insulted you, and you generally hate their race abides by that rule there.

It's the people who don't want to be killed even after proper roleplay is done that need to have something in their description, now, my next question is... Turning on hostility during a convo, does this count as a warning, if done atleast 10 seconds before combat?

[Sathayorn]

I personally got zero warning beforehand. All I saw was talking to you and boom... I am dying and groaning. And the roleplaying excuse "I am collecting bodyparts" he mentioned later in shoutbox is well...idiotic. He could as easily collect those bodyparts from bandits and whatnot if he needs to fulfill his sexual fantasies...

You're a dwarf, bandits are all human, Maybe he wanted dwarven bodyparts? Sick, twisted individual but hey, if everyone was perfect, what kind of sick world would this be?

Though, the fact the person who started this topic is asking if people think he should be permakilled... This goes to show maturity on his part, less than would be expected of someone his age, but atleast some. Weither he gets permakilled or not, I really don't care, though, people have to start thinking about how big of a deal they're making over nothing.

Yes, jumping out of nowhere, without any sort of warning, and killing someone whom you don't know is willing to lose 5 minutes of their "precious time" is bad, I agree. Saying "I'm going to kill you" Really makes me feel kinda unwelcome though... Sounds like a threat to me, where killing me in game, funny. Would "You may very well perish soon" be an acceptable tell to send someone?

Chaotic Evil alone is not a reason to randomly kill someone, However, Neutral evil is, Neutral evils do evil for the sake of doing evil. Killing someone without reason is evil, so a neutral evil needs no reason to kill someone. LG is not the "goodest" alignment, CE is not the "evillest" alignment. Not going to get into the alignment thing here but there is obnviously a misunderstanding somewhere on this thread, where people think that CE = ultimately evil, when it is really "Chaotic and Evil" opposed to NE = "Evil with no room for honor or chaos".

Should murderrers be permakilled? Eventually, let them have a killing streak, let the evils have a little fun, atleast let them get caught in character though. Lasting evils should be a little more... Careful. The problem with this however is the lack of henchmen a player can have without a DM babysitting them. If every evil schemes all the time, nothing gets done because no one wants to lose their character, when the goodies likely will never have a chance of such, causing the evils to fall way behind in levels, be outnumberred 5 to 1 by the goodies, and have armies of good soldiers on the heroes side.

Personally I would like to see something happen to band the evils together so that they may plot, create an evil organization, and not feel they have to kill lowbie goodies to show that "hey, I'm evil!"

I just get reminded of that southpark episode every time I hear of a PVP complaint, you know the one "Make love, not Warcraft".

[Raksha]

Personally I would like to see something happen to band the evils together so that they may plot, create an evil organization, and not feel they have to kill lowbie goodies to show that "hey, I'm evil!"

Pssst! Come to the Enclave!

We have cookies!

[skyde]

You're a dwarf, bandits are all human, Maybe he wanted dwarven bodyparts? Sick, twisted individual but hey, if everyone was perfect, what kind of sick world would this be?

I understand he was actually collecting human bodyparts. I wasn't even dead yet. So that part of your argument doesn't hold true.

And frankly I disagree with your assessment of the motivation for this post. I tend to think that this post (however valid discussion it has started) is simply an attempt at attention whoring (rather succesful at that).

Losing the precious time is not really an issue in my particular case, as I actually did not loose any time (I recovered from bleeding and some adventurers happened to give some nice first aid). For me it was the zero roleplay, munchkin attack that I had zero chance to survive. Added to this was the potential idiocy to push new players from the server. I don't see how this adds to the "general enjoyment" of the server.

[Fobic]

Isnt the more important part of this about if rules should apply to all of us, just a few or non of us.
As I see it, rules apply to all or non. The rules say "-ALL- PVP must have a reason. And to expand upon this, all PVP must have a warning IC or OOC."

I could not care less if Ichbin perma dies or not. I think they penalty should be either towards the player or the player and the character.
If a player does not abide by the rules ban him for a few week, then a few months and then perma ban.

My point being, it's not the character that break OOC rules, it's the player.

[Garfaldo]

Bah, killing is killing, period. It should be dealt with the same way in character. Though...

"and you think the righteous paladin that hacks his way deep into the necromancer's lair only to fall at the end... rightfully deserves another go at life? Same crap, different toilet"

If this was a PVP situation, would that seem fair? If there was an evil necromancer killing people so he could raise them as skeletons, weither they be npcs or not, and a paladin were to kill the necromancer... Would anyone say "that paladin isn't nice, that paladin should be permakilled, he's an ass" If he didn't ask permission from the evil necromancer to kill him?

You're missing my point, and judging from your argument I think we actually agree with each other. I was saying that I didn't understand why evil characters at the mercy of good deserve a perma death, but good characters at the mercy of evil don't.

[CrimsonTears]

Chaotic Evil alone is not a reason to randomly kill someone, However, Neutral evil is, Neutral evils do evil for the sake of doing evil. Killing someone without reason is evil, so a neutral evil needs no reason to kill someone. LG is not the "goodest" alignment, CE is not the "evillest" alignment. Not going to get into the alignment thing here but there is obnviously a misunderstanding somewhere on this thread, where people think that CE = ultimately evil, when it is really "Chaotic and Evil" opposed to NE = "Evil with no room for honor or chaos".

Your assesment of neutral evil is funny If people just read what an alignment is instead of trying to insert personal input, understanding alignments would be so much easier Neutral evil has nothing to do with "doing evil for evil's sake". A neutral evil person could fit into doing that, as much as a lawful evil (who would simply do it while considering order and possibly thinking good is what brings chaos to the world) or chaotic evil (who would do it just because they like it and think evil is the only way to be the fittest to survive).

Neutral evil is simply a disregard for both order and chaos, the ultimate care being him/herself, his/her own well being, quality of life and goals, without care about what it takes to get all that. The goals can be go Dr. Evil and rule the world with the giant laser and the fallic spaceship, be evil "cuz eev1l pwnz!!1! I rlzzz wehn i kilz juu!" or simply live a quiet life in the city. The baker who never gives a spare piece of bread to the hungry and keeps his prices up even when there is povetry around, knowing his bakery is the only one in town so people have to pay his price, easily might be neutral evil, just like the assassin who kills for money out of greed and no care for the lives of others.

Anyways On topic, the main thing is simply one: the fun of the majority. Evil in essence is a kind of fun that focus on one's own at the expense of others. Player vs player struggle can be fun at times. But it has to be something that makes sense and consequences must be considered. If some good character starts going zealot on evil ones, hunting them and attacking them out of revenge, to kill instead of bringing them to some kind of justice, like Maia for exemple, they might start turning evil themselves and get liable for being ganged on by people who disagree with "judge-jury-executor" attitudes It's easier to happen with evil people? Well, of course, they are the ones who usually constantly do something that has bad consequences, no? It's just natural.

[Ethereal Edge]

To clear this up, how many people in real life run around killing for the sake of killing? No one, everyone has motive and justification, even the insane, which is hardly an excuse in roleplay. It's not our fault that your experience with evil has been largely based off of anime and poorly written movies.

[Eldran_Haart]

big discussion going on here :P

Personally, I don't like the "I am teh evilz I must smack everyone" roles, but i Love the scheming, plotting ones. Playing Claron, I wouldn't OOCly mind being stabbed in the neck by an assassin without warning, Claron's a knightly good guy, and it'd be weird if someone with evil alignment would just go "mah, let im".
And which assassin in their right mind would go "Hey, you die!" before stabbing someone.
As I also explained to GM Jun (this may have been a bad idea ^_^) I don't mind if bad things happen to my character, both good and bad things build character.
..Unless they plan to saw off my arm or something, then, kindly ask permission OOC first ^_^

[Anks]

big discussion going on here :P

Personally, I don't like the "I am teh evilz I must smack everyone" roles, but i Love the scheming, plotting ones. Playing Claron, I wouldn't OOCly mind being stabbed in the neck by an assassin without warning, Claron's a knightly good guy, and it'd be weird if someone with evil alignment would just go "mah, let im".
And which assassin in their right mind would go "Hey, you die!" before stabbing someone.
As I also explained to GM Jun (this may have been a bad idea ^_^) I don't mind if bad things happen to my character, both good and bad things build character.
..Unless they plan to saw off my arm or something, then, kindly ask permission OOC first ^_^

I agree with that happening claron but what i have heard about ichbin is that he cast a spell on you and when hes about to die he starts saying it was an ooc accident.

[Paerin]

You lose absolutely nothing from a PVP death, so I cannot for the life of me understand why it's such a big deal. If someone kills you without provocation then make some friends and kill them back. If your not interested in revenge then stay in town, it's a dangerous world out there.

What happens if I am an evil Ranger and your in m forest. Then I send you a tell and say "I'm going to attack you ok?". And you send back "No, I don't like PVP". as you continue to forage in my forest. By the rules of the server am I permitted to attack you anyway? If so, how is this different than simply attacking in the first place? In both situations the person has no desire to participate.

Furthermore, who is to say that I can't bring you to unconsciousness and go into a monologue. Then revive you with a threat to never return. I would be playing my part of an evil possessive ranger, and your on my land. You don't like it? Get a bigger group that I can't overpower and hunt me down, or avoid my claimed area.

If you die one time to learn your lesson thats life. Next time you know.

The only way I personally see thes PVP rules being valid is if I camp a transition point and continually grief the person. I've executed my personal decision to not play here for a while, because all the whining drives me nuts. No matter what you do, it offends someone else. Too bad I say, there are 100's of other players out there to take my spot when I quit. Stop trying to make everyone happy and, and stop trying to make the server suit you. If your playstyle doesn't mesh with the rules in place, play someplace else.