Joined: 04 May 2007 Location: Olympic Villiage 2010
Can a DM please answer this question:
I get this a lot in South Cordor, where one of my badguys will have stopped someone to try to talk them into buying life insurance or convince them there's a street tax.
Sometimes a character reacts by insulting my character, or others with me, then walking or running away. Sometimes it's nothing bad, like "I can see this part of the city's going to the dogs," in which case I usually just let them walk and move on to something else.
Other times it's a heavily charged insult, followed by walking or running away. I can't recall any in particular insult of this nature right now but you can imagine. In those cases I'll attack them as soon as the insult sinks into my character, which takes a few seconds.
So the question is whether being sufficiently insulted, followed by an apparent attempt to end that particular RP there, on that note, by fleeing, is a good enough reason to start swinging.
It should be added that my character is in the Black Flag, and South Cordor is the Flag's stomping ground, so we feel a greater need not to be disrespected, while we're playing on the home court. In any other area I'd pretty much let an insult slide, and I do. I try my best to let characters know that they're on Black Flag turf before anything like this happens, so they can hopefully not gamble with their lives by insulting dangerous gangsters where they live. Thanks.
Joined: 11 Feb 2008 Location: Are you ready to be a true Role Player?
Wow, some thread going. I known a few that do flee and try to say something IC and still get shot, hacked, and slashed even if they are running without doing any fighting back.
I even had my drow, talk, no weapons drawn heading through a known short cut and still was being harrassed. She walked off and was assulted with spells. Lucky for Drow spell resistance! She just kept walking, ignoring him.
While another was running to catch up to her for hunting (would not accept port to leader). He was then attacked and defended himself. All the while a DM using possessing a Guard came over. Which my character was stated several times, she was not heading to that city but going around to the pass. She was attacked again.. although none of the spells effected her. But her partner died, just as the DM guard stepped in to halt the attacker/defender, who was over-reacting. In the end, was turned away from where she was heading, draging the ''person'' (RP, he was an unknown at the time). Letting the head bounce off twigs and through the water streams.
Yes, left out names for curtesy. I was annoyed by the over-reacting RP, and is now on a list of those who will pay the price.
All in all, when someone is walking away or standing with no weapons or spells being casted.. Then should not end the PvP. Then would be attack just go off in a huff and cussing away under their breath.. while the other go their direction.
In addition, is there no longer any Combat Honor of not attacking an unarmed person? yes, I do consider magical staffs as a weapon.
In response to d-finity, I basically figured if you choose the walk away option it is a conform option. You dont walk away, stop before the no pvp zone and throw a few insults, then continue. You just walk away.
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 Location: Land of the Scorching Sun, Empowered by Global Warming
I read all the replies so far, and this is what I have to say about a few:
Zante wrote:
Agree with above. As this sounds, casting see invisibility so you can see who you are talking to is reason enough to start pvp. Might be according to rules, but is it really necessary? (...)
It is. Not everyone has spellcraft and is able to identify what's being cast. I am quite sure that on an already tense situation between.. say.. a mage and a tank, as soon as the thank sees the mage gesturing he will attack because he has ~no way~ of knowing what's being cast. For all the tank knows, it could be that dreaded spell that kills them in a heartbeat.
When I am on an already tense situation, if I am the only person there and I am going to cast a spell like True Seeing, I emote casting the spell before casting:
"Lifts his hand and starts gesturing in front of his eyes while whispering a spell" [[True Seeing, but feel free to understand it as hostile or not]]"
And then I cast the spell.
However, what irks me, and prevents me from doing the above, and what happened a few times with me already, is when there is more than two people (the two people being you and your opponent). Not everyone will give you time to emote your way and sometimes you end up being dragged in a conflict that only a few other characters wanted.
I hate PvP with a passion when it is with players I don't know, because of that. They will hardly give you time to emote anything, because to them, their IC reason to that PvP was already RPed, and (censor) you and your wish to attempt to emote a escape.
On the other hand...
Communication.
Kilrauko wrote:
(...)Where in ooc communication way; "Player a; "I would not like pvp, is it alright that my char falls on knees from fear of you and as he does in the motion touches the amulet on his neck while seemingly raising his hands in the air, at the same time activating invis." Player b; "is forced by server rules to allow this escape without pvp, insert some whiny comment here" Player a) uses amulet of invis player b) yells shouts to his comrades to find the cowardly dog before that escapes
See the difference? For tanks every seemingly move for casting should be taken as attempt to cast stop, if they let that first casting pass, they're giving it to caster to decide what happens in the conflict. The pro-casting and non-straight-out-pvp people should remember that if you do your emotes/other via typing, you wont face "sudden" pvp.
And then, the obvious:
Uberuce wrote:
Didi wrote:
Quite often you encounter people whilst you're in a hunting zone. In some of these zones, if you're not buffed and the critters respawn, you're dead.
Favourite Machine Gun; if your best friend starts assembling a machine gun in front of you, you just say "Hullo Fred, I see you're putting ol' Mary together?" If it's some stranger who meets you in the street and starts putting barrels and tripods together, you shoot him first. If, however, you are out in the sticks and there's a stampede of buffalo thundering towards you, you'd let him get on with it. I certainly don't kill people for buffing when there's a respawn.
Zante wrote:
As this sounds, casting see invisibility so you can see who you are talking to is reason enough to start pvp. Might be according to rules, but is it really necessary?
It's the Favourite Machine Gun thing again. See Invis is kinda the equivalent of turning on the lights in a dark room, as opposed to something like Haste or Bardsong, which is like feeding the ammo belt in. Unless things are already very tense it's okay. If they are...
Layil wrote:
I said ONE spell or item use. Possibly an invisibility or Greater Sanctuary or whatever in an attempt to get away. Or perhaps a neutral spell or use such as See Invisibility. In cases such as this is it really necessary to kill someone as soon as they do it?
....in Mortal Enemy RP when someone does anything engine-y I've already dropped the Knockdown before I know what the effect is; my trigger is hand movement animations and/or chanting SFX. The timescale on PvP is that tight. If you're not into it I guess you'd not know how fatal delay is. Fights are won and lost in the first six seconds.
I've already said at least twice what the 100% foolproof method of avoiding PvP is: walk away. You don't need to activate, read, drink or cast anything to escape. Just walk away with your mouth shut and your hands still. For Flaggers/Bloodfangs/etc you emote or actually hand the cash over and then walk away. For the stumps or treehuggers patrolling Brog or the Grove, you show them your face, either by real dehelming or an emote, then walk away. For a Pally or Kellie or treehugger, you unsummon your undead, then walk away.
If it is your decision to play a character for whom complying and walking away is a not RPly valid course of action, you're going to have OOC conflicts. I think it's unreasonable to ask people to do have their characters stop being true to themselves and become inexplicably forgiving and naive for your benefit.
Also of note: Warzones.
If someone went to Iraq without an army's uniform and was carrying a gun, would you believe that that person only wanted to talk?
Not an example based on realism, although that is a RL situation. I merely cited that example because.. it's something obvious.
EDIT: Typos. -.-
_________________ BlackDahlya
Once Upon A Time Played Adr'ael Ken'rahel, Auron Teken’ath, Aurora Mesodias, 'Daniel' Daoskinaxarijikkym, Eilin'ira, Helena Rios, Layla Faircurrent, May'Une Do'Ndar, Mellinda Tellus, Michael of Cliffside, Rizzen of Twilight, Valkirya d'Claddath
I dont think that the vast majority of drow have any problem with being treated with hostility on the surface. I just think that there's often very little rp other than "Youre a drow and we hate drow."
We've been told and told and told again that "being evil is not a good enough excuse for PvP", but now, with these new rules it seems that being evil is enough reason for anyone to initiate hostile rp towards us, usually ending in PvP after a few brief emotes. I think the drow are kinda feeling a bit tied, that we dont feel able to go up to the surface and be an evil raiding group without DM supervision, but we often encounter groups of good guys who are, it seems, quite entitled to start on us without provocation.
Maybe if it could be clarified that now that we are more "kill on sight, with a touch of preceeding rp and an escape route", that we can do the same with rivvil scum, and that the emphasis for good meeting evil is to expect and deal with PvP, we'd be in a more realistic and happier place.
Party chat to metagame encounters is sort of a silly thing. Do people even do that these days? Haven't they already gotten their ass handed to them by the DMs for doing it? Can anyone who does it in this manner even survive under constant surveillance?
Nah, it's all Tells, folks. And the only fool-proof way to get rid of metagaming encounters is to remove the portal to leader. Has it been done yet? If not, it should be. :D
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 Location: Land of the Scorching Sun, Empowered by Global Warming
Uberuce wrote:
Didi wrote:
. I just think that there's often very little rp other than "Youre a drow and we hate drow."
As Wyjyn said, that really ought to be enough. See also: dwarf meets duergar; Druid/Kellie meets necromancer.
The PvP rules actually stop people from acting in an RPly valid manner, but they also stop griefing, so it's a worthwhile sacrifice.
Then the parties involved better be sure that before they know the party is an enemy, there ~has~ to be RP to allow that kind of identification.
If what Ruce is saying is true, though, I foresee people reading the name tags and from there trying to bring that knowledge IC to validate their PvP.
Which.. kind of happens already.
It's really disheartening to know that.
_________________ BlackDahlya
Once Upon A Time Played Adr'ael Ken'rahel, Auron Teken’ath, Aurora Mesodias, 'Daniel' Daoskinaxarijikkym, Eilin'ira, Helena Rios, Layla Faircurrent, May'Une Do'Ndar, Mellinda Tellus, Michael of Cliffside, Rizzen of Twilight, Valkirya d'Claddath
Joined: 29 Jan 2008 Location: in the factories and mills, in the shipyards and mines
BlackDahlya wrote:
Then the parties involved better be sure that before they know the party is an enemy, there ~has~ to be RP to allow that kind of identification.
If what Ruce is saying is true, though, I foresee people reading the name tags and from there trying to bring that knowledge IC to validate their PvP.
Which.. kind of happens already.
It's really disheartening to know that.
Yep agreed, its opening the floodgates in a way for people to abuse the system. Not just for drow, or dwarves, for the whole server.
The whole idea of rp before the jam session is amazing, one of the things that keeps me in amia. I love a good exchange between two parties, and enjoy the outcome whether its win or lose. And a decent portion of people will follow this custom, but a good portion could not as well.
I've only once ever had my nametag metagamed.. other than that, any time Elvis has Surface-traveled, it's been pretty legit. Half of the trick is being a smart drow.
If you're an obvious Lolthite walkin' 'round, you deserve to be instantly PWNed.
Well, if I would happen to run into a group of EVIL drows, still waiting that to happen.. I dont mind if my char gets slaughtered, but what I do hate is that evil drows always, when I have been victim, ends up tortuning the victim or slicing ears, cutting hair or fingers off.. something like that. And honestly I just dont like the tortuning part, but these encounters were a loooong time ago so..
But if you evil drows are in surface and you see my chars, which are mostly elfs, your free to kill or fight them but I want some rp before you just attack, or if it is a ambush well made then just kill me but please leave the tortuning part away, if you still do that. Just leave the char rot on the ground if possible or just say *Some tortuning was made/Some marks were made on her corpse*
And btw I would like to see more raid parties coming to the surface.. seen none so far. Best of luck with getting raids done
There use to be a lot more, not sure why they stopped.
_________________ Dwagin [Duh-wa-GIN] N. - 1a. Small and cute thingum, particularly fond of four legged scaled creatures of the metalic and chromatic varieties.
The metagaming of nametags is something I never started seeing untill I joined a faction. Now, all of a sudden, everyone and their mother knows that Eir's a Shadowflame, even though it's been kept between the Shadowflame families, and basicly no one else.
I doubt, however, that it's been intentional. It's probably started as accidental metagaming, and that's not something I'm going to freak out over... Sure, it sucks, it makes Eir's RP a lot more limited in some ways. On the other hand, it provides both myself -and- my character, Eir, a whole array of new challenges.
It's worse with race, however, especially for a drow. They'll get killed up on the surface, just as any surfacer would down below, and rightfully so. It can ruin a lot of fun for the players involved, though, so try to look past the nametags.
_________________ Profiles: DakoDako & ElWacko
Characters: Currently trying my best to stick to Beridoc Brushgale
Maybe if it could be clarified that now that we are more "kill on sight, with a touch of preceeding rp and an escape route", that we can do the same with rivvil scum, and that the emphasis for good meeting evil is to expect and deal with PvP, we'd be in a more realistic and happier place.
I don't think any dwarf in the Hammer would be against this attitude from the drow. OK, that's only my opinion, but I can't see the others objecting. The Hammer all wear identifiable badges. The Hammer have been running a pretty tough anti-drow line around Brog. It makes perfect rp sense with what's been happening for any drow war party encountering a dwarf up there with a Hammer badge to be trigger happy if they want.
You may find that the odd non-aligned dwarf caught in the cross-fire won't be too happy about it, but that's what the rp escape is all about. - besides it's easy to see if they're carrying the Hammer badge or not - just read the name tag
On a personal note, I very rarely do pvp...even with my stumpie. I usually prefer to find an out either for myself or the other and I make that clear in OOC tells. However, in the case of the drow around Brog, I'm happy to lay down and die for the cause, if that's what the orders are.
_________________ Low status stumpies read stumpymoose.com
Dahlya and Didi: you're arguing as if I said the exact opposite of what I wrote. I like the rules precisely because they make it impossible to force PvP on unwilling people.
The problem lies with monster-race PCs.
Monster-race PCs, anti-griefing PvP rules and plausible canonical FR roleplay can't all fit onto a server filled with player-race PCs.
While I personally could live with gloves-off PvP rules, I'm aware that I'm more PvP-happy than most, and I'd not like to hand the headaches to the DMs. Also, even I'm not always in the mood for PvP, so I like the fact I can log on with any of my Neutral characters with no loyalties and very little pride and therefore be guaranteed to weasel out of any fight. So...nay to a change in the rules.
Amia loses canon first, which I think is a shame. If you're to keep canon, then you need to choose between monster PCs, player-race PCs and anti-griefing rules. I'd rather lose the monster PCs first.
I really don't understand why you chaps and chapesses do it; all the lore you've got to work on says be a baby-eating nightmare but you're constrained by Amia's rules to acting like a watered down nursery-school parody of the race. Furthermore, almost everyone you meet is obliged to act implausibly in your presence.
I put the blame for Amia's RP-lite tag firmly at the feet of those who play monster races and don't ask to be KoS.
Well, based on the fact there is another two page and counting thread on this topic, the new rules don't seem to be as clearly delineated as some think they are. I honestly don't think there can be a straightforward set of rules outlining what is acceptable circumstances for pvp. PvP is too nebulous a situation to say this is acceptable and this isn't.
Obviously, there are situations where PvP is clearly not acceptable. Obviously, there are situations where it is. I believe for the most part PvP situations are well delineated by the encounter in question. All the above mentioned extenuating circumstances do not need to be discussed to death trying to come up with an answer to every relative situation. Common sense is the rule. Use it, people.
Also, if people are running away from you in a random PvP encounter, not speaking about planned assassinations or capture scenarios, let them run away. Please do not chase them down. Obviously the character in question is trying to flee, let them do so. This is one thing I've noticed at times with large mobs of characters together.
_________________ "Ain't it like most people, I'm no different, love to talk on things we don't know about." The Avett Brothers
Joined: 06 Jan 2008 Location: ANU, behind the coffee mug (+10 GMT)
soriano_ wrote:
Well, based on the fact there is another two page and counting thread on this topic, the new rules don't seem to be as clearly delineated as some think they are. I honestly don't think there can be a straightforward set of rules outlining what is acceptable circumstances for pvp. PvP is too nebulous a situation to say this is acceptable and this isn't.
Obviously, there are situations where PvP is clearly not acceptable. ....
I believe most of those posts are either clarifications for specific scenarios or whining about things that have happened, rather than an actual complaint about the rule itself.
The rules seem simple enough in themselves, though.
_________________ 2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player
And I would like to say to the drow players and whom think everyone acts coldly towards drow. I dont I would love to see more evil drows.
Today I saw a group, and got into a small miss understaing in it.. but we Rp:ied and then I Oocly said that what they did was stupid, well to one of the players and luckily we did speak it clear in OOC.
To Drows and any other evil players. If you happen to meet my char in patrol. Please rp a while it really isent much asked and try to find rp solution out of PvP if it is heading that way. I as well try to give you ways to get outside of it so you can keep on with your hunting and even if I tell you leave. Just go behind a corner and give me time to move on with my patrol and the area is all yours.
All it takes is a little while of your time to Rp your way out
My char doesnt figure things out most likely.. if you were lying, she doesnt have reason to assume you are lying.
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 Location: Land of the Scorching Sun, Empowered by Global Warming
Uberuce wrote:
Dahlya and Didi: you're arguing as if I said the exact opposite of what I wrote. I like the rules precisely because they make it impossible to force PvP on unwilling people.
The problem lies with monster-race PCs.
Monster-race PCs, anti-griefing PvP rules and plausible canonical FR roleplay can't all fit onto a server filled with player-race PCs.
While I personally could live with gloves-off PvP rules, I'm aware that I'm more PvP-happy than most, and I'd not like to hand the headaches to the DMs. Also, even I'm not always in the mood for PvP, so I like the fact I can log on with any of my Neutral characters with no loyalties and very little pride and therefore be guaranteed to weasel out of any fight. So...nay to a change in the rules.
Amia loses canon first, which I think is a shame. If you're to keep canon, then you need to choose between monster PCs, player-race PCs and anti-griefing rules. I'd rather lose the monster PCs first.
I really don't understand why you chaps and chapesses do it; all the lore you've got to work on says be a baby-eating nightmare but you're constrained by Amia's rules to acting like a watered down nursery-school parody of the race. Furthermore, almost everyone you meet is obliged to act implausibly in your presence.
I put the blame for Amia's RP-lite tag firmly at the feet of those who play monster races and don't ask to be KoS.
Pardon my english, then. I may have misinterpreted and I thought you meant exactly what I wrote. >.<
_________________ BlackDahlya
Once Upon A Time Played Adr'ael Ken'rahel, Auron Teken’ath, Aurora Mesodias, 'Daniel' Daoskinaxarijikkym, Eilin'ira, Helena Rios, Layla Faircurrent, May'Une Do'Ndar, Mellinda Tellus, Michael of Cliffside, Rizzen of Twilight, Valkirya d'Claddath
Also, if people are running away from you in a random PvP encounter, not speaking about planned assassinations or capture scenarios, let them run away. Please do not chase them down. Obviously the character in question is trying to flee
Sure, but why are they trying to flee, ICLy? For example a Kellie or Druid group sees someone wander round the corner, he clocks them and then scarpers without a word. It's a pretty good bet they're an undead-fiddler who doesn't want to get burnt alive or fed to the pets.
There's good and bad OOC reasons for wanting out of a fight that ICly you really should be getting into.
Often it can be as simple as needing to log off in a few minutes.
Another is the simple fact that a lot of random PvP encounters are just boring. Talk smack, no-one backs down, fight, body disposal, back on your way. Yawn. When each side is across a power gap of twenty levels and/or PvP buildbeef, it's even mroe dull. A lot of the time I'm sighing in despair at the monitor for the lowbie to take the out so I can get on with what I was doing.
The bad reason is that the player wants to be a totally bad mo'fo necromancer, but other players can only react to that when it suits him. I don't think that is an attitude that should be accomodated.
The whole hard-core, stick to cannon scenario for a reason to PvP doesn't fly with me. As you said yourself, Ruce, Amia is rp-lite so saying well it's rply correct to offer a "smackdown" holds no weight. This is not a hardcore rp server so pvping without proper rp leading up to the confrontation is ridiculous. If the rp warrants it, PvP all one wants. I do not have a problem with this.
Pertaining to the example about individuals wanting PvP when it suits them, this holds no legitimacy in my eyes either. PvPing this type of individual isn't going to teach them anything. The player in question is not going to understand why s/he is getting PvPed. What you are proposing is a vigilante policing of the rules whereby said individual fulfills their desire for such. For this type of scenario, explain to the person in question what the problem is and if that doesn't work, ignore them. If they are not reasonable enough to understand what is wrong with this scenario, imo, they are not worth my time.
EDIT: As for the running away scenario, the one you mentioned has rp legitimacy, I was referring to random encounters where "mob mentality" takes over.
_________________ "Ain't it like most people, I'm no different, love to talk on things we don't know about." The Avett Brothers
I put the blame for Amia's RP-lite tag firmly at the feet of those who play monster races and don't ask to be KoS.
I expect and intend for any and whatever hatered my monstrous race to inspire.
I expect Rras to get given crap, for instance. Totally do.
_________________ Dwagin [Duh-wa-GIN] N. - 1a. Small and cute thingum, particularly fond of four legged scaled creatures of the metalic and chromatic varieties.
The bad reason is that the player wants to be a totally bad mo'fo necromancer, but other players can only react to that when it suits him. I don't think that is an attitude that should be accomodated.
I seriously could not agree more. If playing a monster race, I would literally expect to have to sit at my computer for 5 minutes doing slow breathing exercises before logging on. Because I would want to know that as soon as I enter Amia, I am in for an incredibly unpredictable and highly aggressive time. I wouldn't expect to be able to walk to the fast food hut without having to hide behind trees as people walk by.
But again, I think a lot of monster races are played for stats and bonuses and nothing more. If you gave all monster PCs the choice to keep all stats but have a human skin, I think over 50% would jump at the opportunity.
_________________ Direct Connect spamming champion two years running.
"The pointer fingers are insured"
The bad reason is that the player wants to be a totally bad mo'fo necromancer, but other players can only react to that when it suits him. I don't think that is an attitude that should be accomodated.
I seriously could not agree more. If playing a monster race, I would literally expect to have to sit at my computer for 5 minutes doing slow breathing exercises before logging on. Because I would want to know that as soon as I enter Amia, I am in for an incredibly unpredictable and highly aggressive time. I wouldn't expect to be able to walk to the fast food hut without having to hide behind trees as people walk by.
But again, I think a lot of monster races are played for stats and bonuses and nothing more. If you gave all monster PCs the choice to keep all stats but have a human skin, I think over 50% would jump at the opportunity.
Why the hell would we want to do that? Hey, Id take a 10 level penalty if I had to to play drow, and I think most of the regular players would do too. When you have people with 6 characters, and theyre all drow, doesnt that tell you that they kinda like the race, not the stats?
As for the "evil characters should expect grief", its starting to annoy me. Evil characters must expect grief for being evil, but god forbid they actually ARE evil, or precipitate PvP, as then they get jumped on. We're at the point now, I think, where if you look purely at actions, paladins are more aggressive than drow, good starts more fights than evil. Am I alone in thinking this is all screwed up?
Like I say, weve been told and told and told again that being evil is not a good enough reason to start PvP and weve learned to shackle our characters evil natures. Now I see more and more violence against evil races, with pretty minimal rp, I think we should start being a bit more actual evil.
Just an example, how many people in the past 6 months have spoken about making a character which is a "drow hunter". Yet at the same time, we drow are still living under the old mindset, where to press agression on surfacers is one step away from a ban. Just imagine how people would feel if someone made a "hin killer", whose entire intention was to go round murdering short folk (punting them over steep cliffs and the like). I just think, if we're fair game to goodly types, goodly types need to know theyre all fair game to us now.
Gloves off is fine, but both sides need to have heard the news.
Good-aligned characters have an equal chance of running into trouble as evil characters do. Even though more people play good/neutral-aligned characters than they do evil, it still doesn't rule out the chance that they would run into a highly agressive and unpredictable situation just like an evil character would.
however, 'good' and 'evil' are based on one's perception, but that's another can of worms for another thread.
Except, Arissa, when evil people run into good people, they think, "Oh, we'd best not start something which will lead to PvP just because we're evil, because that has been outlawed for years under the server rules", whereas when the opposite happens, the good guys think, "Yay, evil, time to kick some ass!"
Clearly, I exagerrate, but not by so much as all that, from my own experience.
From what I see, good is more evil than evil at the moment.
[edit] Im not saying good has to change, its obeying server rules. I'm just saying, evil has to wake up to the new world, and good has to know what its woken up.
Well that goes again with some people not knowing how to play alignments/classes correctly, but that's better saved for another thread. But I digress...
Joined: 29 Jan 2008 Location: in the factories and mills, in the shipyards and mines
Didi wrote:
[edit] Im not saying good has to change, its obeying server rules. I'm just saying, evil has to wake up to the new world, and good has to know what its woken up.
i have to agree here. When i first started playing on amia back in February, drow would go out an run into pvp on a daily basis. Of course this brought up the many threads that complained about it.
BAsicly what i see here is we should expect this again? So when i go out and people want to fight which my drow wont back down be it 1 or 100 and pvp happens on a bigger scale than it does now, should we expect complaints left and right from people who might play a non-monster race? should the goblins? duergar? demons? etc?
I really don't understand why you chaps and chapesses do it; all the lore you've got to work on says be a baby-eating nightmare but you're constrained by Amia's rules to acting like a watered down nursery-school parody of the race. Furthermore, almost everyone you meet is obliged to act implausibly in your presence.
We do it b/c we're cooler than you, Uce. Nah, you make a good point, but it's just enjoyable to be secretive and shmevul sometimes. Yes I think a lot of us know that we aren't playing "canon" drow because of rules and OOC considerations and such.. and b/c most Surfacers can pwn drow pretty well.. but I think it's almost as fun to attempt to play a canon drow with all the restrictions that can keep you from doing so. I find an immense amount of fun in making up IC reasons for the rules..
like.. when Elvis and Lird'une once got PWNz0red on the Surface b/c Han Solo's Lird'une is a total idiot.. and the man who slaughtered us just left b/c he didn't want to deal with drow.. and so Elvis and Lird, they suddenly came back to life.. wanting to chase after the dude, but since it's against the rules to go after someone who just PWNz0red you, we had to think up another drow-like situation that would keep them from finding him, or more..
I also find fun in getting KoS, as long as it's done with a flavor of fun.. what I don't understand.. is why so many drow go up on the Surface sooo often. (Some go up every day.) I never did get that.. But that's just me
To level, Estara, that's why drow go to the surface for the most part. To be perfectly honest, if the server was big enough to have an Underdark as large as the surface I wouldn't involve my pc in any type of surface activity.
_________________ "Ain't it like most people, I'm no different, love to talk on things we don't know about." The Avett Brothers
Last edited by soriano_ on Fri, Sep 26 2008, 20:08 PM, edited 1 time in total.
Joined: 06 Jan 2008 Location: ANU, behind the coffee mug (+10 GMT)
soriano_ wrote:
To level, Estara, that's why drow go to the surface for the most part. To be perfectly honest, if the server was big enough to have an Underdark as large as the surface I wouldn't involve my pc in any type of surface activity.
I think a lot of drow would be happy in the Underdark ... and when that happens with the server split, it would likely become more 'relaistic' interaction between the races RP wise.
_________________ 2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player
No way, all this interaction is good. Good and evil SHOULD fight. Its good that the gloves are off a bit. I like the whole, suck it up, realism. I just think its a shocking change to how it has been.
No way, all this interaction is good. Good and evil SHOULD fight. Its good that the gloves are off a bit. I like the whole, suck it up, realism. I just think its a shocking change to how it has been.
Bingo. Drow are meant to be militristic, in the sense that they should be fighting non-llothites. Almost every fanfiction, book or bit of lore I have read concerning the drow seems to involve them at war with some enemy.
Joined: 11 Feb 2008 Location: Are you ready to be a true Role Player?
There not going to be much of an Underdark expension other than what already existing. They are moving the underdark over Amia B, yes and few dungeons etc.. and removing from the Amia A. Not going to be much changes
In addition, drow are not always foolish enough to fight solo especially when they are out numbered
Oh, yes, Nareffy, well.. that might be why I don't do Surface-walking as much, then.. considering Elvis still has yet to go Epicz0rz
And yes we drow are at war with everyone, but we enjoy fighting amongst ourselves almost as much as we enjoy fighting with you So.. I mean.. if you're far away, and Elvis won't get anything from it, I can have just as much shmevul fun stabbing Veh'dra. I mean.. *coughs* I would never do that.
To be honest I find this whole new rule thing fantastic. Then again, I'll pick fights when it suits me. Talk when it doesn't. I love though how I popped by to Nesek, playing a BIGASS FREAKSPIDER MONSTER, and then spoke to them for half an hour, easy peasy.
I fully expect to be KoS'd but usually people's curiousity gets the better of them, at least in order to exchange a few lines in conversation with me. Vornie is Evil to the core, but she knows when to hide, when to flee, and when to tell sweet sweet lies... (Ultrinnan? An underground kingdom of rainbows and unicorns...)
You've got to be reeeeal vicious these days, in how you think. If you're not being brutalist, then you're not going to be able to handle it.
I do agree with one thing though. You seeing a mob, and running immediately is a bad move. If they haven't seen you, walk not run. If they have seen you, make light chatter about the weather, the frost giants, the number of limbs you possess and then before they can say 'RAGH DIIIEEEEE' You just say 'Well good seeing you, I'll be off now!' and walk it. If they then go for you.. well the phrase, utter tosser, comes to mind.
_________________
Man, this account is over 10 years old. Where do I get my old man beard?
I do agree with one thing though. You seeing a mob, and running immediately is a bad move. If they haven't seen you, walk not run. If they have seen you, make light chatter about the weather, the frost giants, the number of limbs you possess and then before they can say 'RAGH DIIIEEEEE' You just say 'Well good seeing you, I'll be off now!' and walk it. If they then go for you.. well the phrase, utter tosser, comes to mind.
or Act Evil in a silly way: Spikes, black leather, a red glowing whip and comments like: "I'm evil, yes, I steal candy from kids and shove old people stairs down." "Of course I'm evil, look at my spikes!" or, my favourite, "Look at me, I'm so evil I **** demons!"
They definitely won't pick up on that...
_________________ "Most assume that all the followers of Lathander are great morning people. They're very wrong." "I think we are the only group where AD&D stands for Attention Deficit Disorder."
Didi and Arissa: You are both so right, good seems to be the new 'evil'. A paladin should at least try and convert you to the 'true' path shouldn't they? It would seem that Baneites are going door to door with 'bibles' while the good guys get cliquey and aggressive.
I again site the risk of collateral damage case; why would a LG Paladin or cleric or whatever risk massive death spells going off and killing innocents?
OK, so another character told me I broke the rules of PVP last night and treatened to report me. {Edited for specifics, PM a DM if you'd like an answer to this}
Thanks
Last edited by VwV on Fri, Jan 22 2010, 17:49 PM, edited 1 time in total.
PM's to a DM is better suited for that kind of question. Anyhoo: before you start a spell on someone, set hostile. If you do not set hostile, and start buffing the other player can stomp you IC. All this requires valid PvP reason and a provided IC out though.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum
FAQ
Search
Login
although none of the spells effected her. But her partner died, just as the DM guard stepped in to halt the attacker/defender, who was over-reacting. In the end, was turned away from where she was heading, draging the ''person'' (RP, he was an unknown at the time). Letting the head bounce off twigs and through the water streams.
but please leave the tortuning part away, if you still do that. Just leave the char rot on the ground if possible or just say *Some tortuning was made/Some marks were made on her corpse*
especially when they are out numbered
