AMIA ARCHIVE • View topic

Hi, all!

In my opinion, Amia PC interaction rules too restrictive, too mama-bearish baby-caring. Because of this world became too bland, too tasteless, too politcorrect, too sleepy (and unreal... I someday have chat with drow player, complaining on "tight corner for evil-aligned PC"). So, I ask DM team, is it acceptable to have rules laxed in terms
of "Offer and Acceptance" agreement for given (my) PC? (Of course, I will not breach any of those rules by firsthand)

Thus, I offer lax of given set of rules, and if and only if other party accepts it (e.g., attacks my PC without proper protocol adherence, or so), all involved players are subjects of lax and must not ever complain about this situation of rules breach.

And, such actions will be (video) recoreded to future reference, just in case.

As example, my PC once encountered party of goblinkin. AFAIU, outcome of this encounter should not be "some chit-chat and good-bye", given in mind relations between elves and goblins. (frankly, I was ready to my PC be obliterated and looted)

So, I propose:

Lax of Rules
http://www.amiaworld.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=55956&p=918579#p918579

This is "Offer and Acceptance" of the bidirectional lax of rules between involved PCs and players. involved and affected PCs must accept all IC consequences of their actions, now and forever.

PvP rules affected : 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15.

Winner : may loot corpse(s) -- anything (if all) of posessions.

Loser : accepting those terms must not complain (anyway, it was your own decision), and must adhere any and all consequences, both IC and OOC.

in the rules

Quote:

Parties may agree to a "mutual aggression" pact, where it is agreed that hostilities may commence whenever these parties interact. This must be supported by previous role-play, and is generally done when two factions (such as drow houses) have on going IC disputes that end in hostilities. It is the responsibility of the faction leaders to make sure everyone involved knows about the situation. Should this be the case, please inform the DMs about this in advance so that they know what is going on.

just use whats already there.

Something like this was done before and worked quite well, albiet wasn't supported properly and lost it's way on the forums. Perhaps a Waiving based thread could be stickied in an area for ease of access?

http://www.amiaworld.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=49569&hilit=waiver

I believe this has come up before. Pretty sure the DM stance was: Players cannot change the rules without DM acceptance. I may be wrong, but I do think this is what came of it.

Waiver always too iffy to really work, simply because finding the information (which may be stale) is just too time consuming.

Would work better if there was a rest menu option, or something, if that's what people want.

Other than that, I noticed what the OP was talking about around 2012~. :cry:

Never really got better, but I figure things just move on.

It really is time consuming. I'll never make the thirty seconds of my life back I spent looking for a collection of the waivers.

The irony is that there is another thread with the same information, IIRC, no need to be snide. Here: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=49569

Keep in mind that any time you must validate information from the game outside of the game, it breaks immersion, creates uneasy silences, and whatever else you want to add to that list.

Either way, there's no fun in looking on a forum where something was posted on a day, where someone can just say 'it was outdated', or maybe they don't even remember. That's just entering a clusterfuck, which is exactly was the intent of the first post and the situation everyone is trying to avoid.

Just my 2 cents.

The DMs stated in one of those two threads that they would not enforce it at all. If Player A and Player B agree to it on the forums and then PvP happens and Player B reports Player A to the DMs, the DMs will use the server rules to punish as seen fit. It levels the playing field that way, and I can understand that stance.

Not saying something couldn't be done to enact this process but that's what the (old) team had said.

Naivatkal wrote:

The DMs stated in one of those two threads that they would not enforce it at all. If Player A and Player B agree to it on the forums and then PvP happens and Player B reports Player A to the DMs, the DMs will use the server rules to punish as seen fit. It levels the playing field that way, and I can understand that stance.

Not saying something couldn't be done to enact this process but that's what the (old) team had said.

For my part, today, if two people (or any number of people) take part in any sort of mutual aggression agreement, and it happens, and a member of that agreement complains over terms that were previously agreed upon, I'm going to tell them tough luck - that particular PvP encounter is upheld in its entirety, but that they are now immediately stricken from their previous agreement. I probably wouldn't take future agreements from them very seriously, either.

It may not be Da Rulez, but if you're going to make a good faith gentleman's agreement with other players on the server, have that agreement documented and declared, and then renege on the terms of that agreement when push comes to shove, I'm going to, as a DM, uphold the terms of that gentleman's agreement - assuming no egregious server rules were broken in the process that I would typically need to ban for. I will then free you from that agreement since it was one you made voluntarily, and that's entirely within your rights to do so, but I'll make a bunch of frowny faces and be a little disappointed.

ps: whup my pc's asses anytime you think they need an asswhupping, no outs needed, no 24 hour rule, all i really care is that you make reasonable attempt to make me glow red first but shit i know it doesn't go down that way sometimes.

Same here for that last bit. I don't need an "out" as long as it makes sense.

Tormak, that is why I love you. I get why it was ruled that way before, but if we're all adults (and there's a record of the agreement) then crying foul is just a dick move. I'd like to see something like this made solid; I might not partake in it but I like seeing the flexibility.

Well... Let's look on given situation:

Question is: will be I (as my PC) and he (as his PC) free from any administrative consequences? (warning, punishment, ban, and so on)

Reasons (main) of this OARL:

think you're overcomplicating it a lot.

My suggestion is to follow the Server rules, and make sure ooc, everyone on both sides of any PvP are cool with what's going down, and how.

Kudak, imho, it is too slow, too ordered, too expected, too safe, too dry -- no surprise, no challenge, no action, no fun.
Nevertheless, I understand you point.

p.s. almost forget! OARL will deepen interplayer mutual cooperation -- under it terms, it is more profitable to be in group (more influentional, preferable) to made PC's life more safe (IC wise). i.e., under OARL, a member of a powerfull group is less likely to be abused, then a loner and drifter (esp. if group is very active and very protective). And this gives more ways to RP, too.

Hmm, well, most of the PvP I've been involved in has been rather fast, unorderly, certainly unexpected, not at all safe, and generally wet (there's lotsa blood!) -- A surprise (because unexpected), almost always a challenge, filled with action, and usually fun. It's only not fun when Server rules are broken, and when there is no RP involved. Now, I have been notified by DMs, two or three times about possible assassination attempts on my character's life within 'X' amount of time, so there was a certain expectation of little RP before the 'hit' was made. "Expected!" you cry, and yes, there was a measure of anticipation, but I did not know when, where, or by whom the 'hit' would come from, so I changed nothing about my character's routine. The anticipation in itself was fun, and honestly, the DM notifications ruined nothing for me, I mean think about it, people are murdered, but important people are assassinated. I felt important! The gist of all this nonsense, is that you can have fun and challenging PvP, where both sides feel like they had rewarding RP when the dust settles, and all within the rules too!

I was going to avoid posting in this thread, but I have to agree with Kudark. When done properly, the server rules provide for all the elements desired in good rp: Story progression, character development, and interesting dialogue.. to name just a few.

One thing to keep in mind, and where the server rules become very important, is that different players desire different experiences and have different definitions to describe 'fun'. Once we start narrowing this spectrum, the server suffers as a whole.

Other than that, my main problem with the lax rules would be having to go afk to deal with a irl problem(which I cannot control) and returning to find my pc has been murdered. The reason provided? It was done to satisfy a definition of 'fun' that does not match my own...

[edit] If it's not broke, don't fix it.

rules are mostly pretty good.

everyone should keep in mind that, as per the rules, if you're in a situation where pvp might break out, resting or warding, potting or anything, means you lose any right to a warning' you had and you can get jumped.

only real pvp rule i don't like, but don't know how to properly address, is the whole 'but npc's are around so im going to say/do whatever i want and you cant fight me' shtick that some people play into. such as standing next to guards and casting "harmless" spells like disjunction, then claiming they are immune to retaliation in ooc text due to npc guards being around blah blah disjoint isn't hostile "keep it in character."

shits dumb. there needs to be a 'talk shit get hit' exception to the NPC rule.

Not a dm and all, but I'm fairly certain that casting stuff like disjunction is a pvp-act, so the person doing this without going through the proper steps would have violated the rules themselves.

Commie wrote:

rules are mostly pretty good.

everyone should keep in mind that, as per the rules, if you're in a situation where pvp might break out, resting or warding, potting or anything, means you lose any right to a warning' you had and you can get jumped.

only real pvp rule i don't like, but don't know how to properly address, is the whole 'but npc's are around so im going to say/do whatever i want and you cant fight me' shtick that some people play into. such as standing next to guards and casting "harmless" spells like disjunction, then claiming they are immune to retaliation in ooc text due to npc guards being around blah blah disjoint isn't hostile "keep it in character."

shits dumb. there needs to be a 'talk shit get hit' exception to the NPC rule.

Consider the following scenario: Two pc's begin a heated exchange in the L'obsul bazaar. Insults are traded, one participant loses their mind and draws a weapon. Blood is spilt.... but there is no victor and neither combatant ever remembers the encounter.. while they spend the rest of their miserable lives breaking rock in a deep mine. It would seem, the illithids and Zau'tar are partial to trade and do not like disturbances to commerce. Jail? It is more profitable to sell you into slavery. The lesson? Those who are over prideful from 'words' do a dis-service to themselves. ...Or, it's best not to react in front of witnesses.

In some cases, L'obsul is a much safer place than Cordor...

[edit] It also occurs to me that this same scenario could be prevented by following the server's current rules for pvp. One player would have been afforded the opportunity to point out the grave peril for all those involved to another player ignorant of the consequences ... through a moment of ooc discussion.

Tarnus wrote:

Not a dm and all, but I'm fairly certain that casting stuff like disjunction is a pvp-act, so the person doing this without going through the proper steps would have violated the rules themselves.

yeah thats why i put quotes around it.

Well, I will state it again: acceptance of PvP rules lax from DM team is voluntary on per PC basis and not meant to be enforced on everybody. (you may consider it as anti-waiver)

angst360 wrote:

One thing to keep in mind, and where the server rules become very important, is that different players desire different experiences and have different definitions to describe 'fun'. Once we start narrowing this spectrum, the server suffers as a whole.

Where I asked to narrow? I asked to widen spectrum. As myself, I am bored with this restrictive ruleset, but it is only my opinion and nothing more.
Again, If someone do not want lax, they should not initiate lax-covered actions against lax-proposing PC.

angst360 wrote:

Other than that, my main problem with the lax rules would be having to go afk to deal with a irl problem(which I cannot control) and returning to find my pc has been murdered. The reason provided? It was done to satisfy a definition of 'fun' that does not match my own...

You do not have to participate in it unless you actively taken part in it before against given set of PCs.

btw, Kudak, I read your comment, but I do not agree with you. We are looking on same things from different angles (and it is normal).

I wish/hope there was a better rule system and people were more open to change. I understand many people don't like PvP, but from the (admittedly) limited experience I've had in the last 3-4 years playing, I have PvP'd a grand total of zero times, if you don't include griefing.

hang out with me some, you'll get your fill real quick.

Honestly, beat Gerald any time. Just be sure I'm not afk and hostile me for a reasonable amount beforehand and don't metagame any npcs and I'm down for whatever.

Especially if you know I'm into some stuff you'd actively oppose. I'd include a clause about stealth but if I didn't take detection skills then I'm the one at fault. And amia has made it so that hyper stealth based characters are valuable again with the changes to polymorph.

But I cannot stress enough that you should hostile me in advance before you do.

also i take back what i said. after getting jumped while standing in a room full of npc's, and having to sit there standing over dead bodies for 20 odd minutes waiting for a dm to be free to sort it out, im no longer willing to participate in 'anytime anywhere' pvp.

"Offer and Acceptance" lax of PvP rules

Who is online