Previous
I fundamentally disagree with the idea that training is entirely ooc. The examples you gave (dancing with 4 of something endlessly, sitting in a specific spot to braid) certainly stretch the idea of what might make plausible sense, but people who are trying to improve themselves at something do repetitive tasks for the sake of practice all the time.
As someone who is both a pretty active roleplayer as well as someone who enjoys training and character progression from a mechanics perspective, I can definitively say that the two are not mutually exclusive at all. If you find that they are, perhaps you (and this is a general you, not directed at anyone in particular) should explore other options. The great thing about roleplay is it is extremely dynamic and flexible. With the vastness of the world of DR, surely just about anyone can find an efficient way to train that makes IC sense.
- Starlear -
ORBITAL303
STILVA
Re: Policy Note
10/16/2013 08:25 PM CDT
>ATK or AFK scripting does not effect roleplaying at all. What I do think effects roleplaying is expecting everything to happen how you plan it out in your mind, harassing or excluding certain charater types because their RP doesn't fit your style, calling others brands of RP 'snerty' or labeling them 'griefers' because again some people just expect absolutely everything to happen within some set lines.
Latter part of that statement goes hand in hand with the former, actually.
A very large number of players in DR try to be "evil" by relying on killing people whenever a disagreement arises. ATK/AFK scripting fuels this very, very boring fire, since they're often overly obsessed with winning / being "right", and the other people who don't want to get murdered nonstop then resort to more of the same tactic.
It effects role playing in the worst kind of way. Far too many people are terrified of being wrong and if it's someone they can't kill, let alone fight, they very often don't even try to RP. This is also why quite a few characters get sold, sometimes repeatedly, because scripting 800+ combats only to realize that the brunt of high level RP is just tyrium axe sissyfights. It sends a good number of people wanting to salvage as much of their time/money as they can.
Latter part of that statement goes hand in hand with the former, actually.
A very large number of players in DR try to be "evil" by relying on killing people whenever a disagreement arises. ATK/AFK scripting fuels this very, very boring fire, since they're often overly obsessed with winning / being "right", and the other people who don't want to get murdered nonstop then resort to more of the same tactic.
It effects role playing in the worst kind of way. Far too many people are terrified of being wrong and if it's someone they can't kill, let alone fight, they very often don't even try to RP. This is also why quite a few characters get sold, sometimes repeatedly, because scripting 800+ combats only to realize that the brunt of high level RP is just tyrium axe sissyfights. It sends a good number of people wanting to salvage as much of their time/money as they can.
MICHAELP2002
Re: Policy Note
10/17/2013 11:50 AM CDT
Ive said before, that I wouldnt mind a way to allow people that want to afk script to cross over into a TF like realm, or even make a whole new instance that would allow body transfer without taking money/gear back and forth. This would let them script to their hearts content, while leaving the main instance free of afk scripting, would prevent afk hunting from damaging the economy too much(minus more people being able to hunt higher stuff), and hopefully if someone is in the main realm they are there to interact.
Many don't like the idea though.
DARKEVILWHATEVER
Re: Policy Note
10/17/2013 12:05 PM CDT
Werd.
I feel like there was a time when most people RPed your average joe, normal basically good people. They focused on family units, provincial politics, the healing areas, and hunting. They fell in love in and out of game and then divorced accordingly.
Then there were a few extremes. There were some that, as a rule, played extremely high honor characters, the good roleplayers even RPed self-righteousness as a fault. That was fun because they were totally over the top, and good at it (Tev/Pureblade). And there were those who played bad guys - but really only a few played badguys. There were a lot of people who didnt RP at all - these were not bad guys, these were folks who liked having fun in the cemetary, etc. If you got mouthy and gave consent, they shot you.
Although I haven't been in game much recently, I do/did notice that there are LOTS OF BADGUYS NOW. Instead of being a game full of goodie goodie Mary Sues, it is a game full of annoying evilish Mary Stus.
The badguy RP is poor. Very few make the genre special. Where are the high level characters that are actually evil weaselly cowards? Where are the the evil characters that play cat and mouse with little characters, never letting on that they are big? Where are the evil characters that only attack big characters - losing more often than not, but showing real heart in the processes? Why don't we see more characters speak more than they attack? Is pulling a trigger that much easier than saying words? Where are the badguys that want attention so badly they convince everyone that they play a badguy the right way and get a pat on the back??
RIGHT HERE KEEID! TYPING THIS POST AHAHAHAHAIODHDIOHIOJDJ
bai
I feel like there was a time when most people RPed your average joe, normal basically good people. They focused on family units, provincial politics, the healing areas, and hunting. They fell in love in and out of game and then divorced accordingly.
Then there were a few extremes. There were some that, as a rule, played extremely high honor characters, the good roleplayers even RPed self-righteousness as a fault. That was fun because they were totally over the top, and good at it (Tev/Pureblade). And there were those who played bad guys - but really only a few played badguys. There were a lot of people who didnt RP at all - these were not bad guys, these were folks who liked having fun in the cemetary, etc. If you got mouthy and gave consent, they shot you.
Although I haven't been in game much recently, I do/did notice that there are LOTS OF BADGUYS NOW. Instead of being a game full of goodie goodie Mary Sues, it is a game full of annoying evilish Mary Stus.
The badguy RP is poor. Very few make the genre special. Where are the high level characters that are actually evil weaselly cowards? Where are the the evil characters that play cat and mouse with little characters, never letting on that they are big? Where are the evil characters that only attack big characters - losing more often than not, but showing real heart in the processes? Why don't we see more characters speak more than they attack? Is pulling a trigger that much easier than saying words? Where are the badguys that want attention so badly they convince everyone that they play a badguy the right way and get a pat on the back??
RIGHT HERE KEEID! TYPING THIS POST AHAHAHAHAIODHDIOHIOJDJ
bai
KHIOL
Re: Policy Note
10/17/2013 05:55 PM CDT
>A very large number of players in DR try to be "evil" by relying on killing people whenever a disagreement arises.
Your consensus is based on what? I have a small group of people who play characters that would be considered 'evil' by DR standards and none of them are 150+, most of them don't go looking to pick any fights and RP very well. So I don't feel like that opinion has any clout.
>It effects role playing in the worst kind of way. Far too many people are terrified of being wrong and if it's someone they can't kill, let alone fight, they very often don't even try to RP.
Thats not scriptings fault a character who ATK trained for years on years would have the same issues once they got big. The issue your talking about lies SOLELY on the player behind the character. If they shy from something because of skill or an enevitable outcome thats on them. You can't blame scripting or skills in the slightest.
>ATK/AFK scripting fuels this very, very boring fire, since they're often overly obsessed with winning / being "right"
Thats the player not the game, once again.
>the other people who don't want to get murdered nonstop then resort to more of the same tactic.
This is once again a players choice as well, I haven't seen much camping on either side of the fence in game in quite a while to be honest. In the past it happened on team good, team bad, and team fence rider.
I think blaming scripting for these kind of issues is just addressing the wrong problem.
You feel a brief sense of unease, as if somehow, somewhere, you'd run afoul of the law.
Your consensus is based on what? I have a small group of people who play characters that would be considered 'evil' by DR standards and none of them are 150+, most of them don't go looking to pick any fights and RP very well. So I don't feel like that opinion has any clout.
>It effects role playing in the worst kind of way. Far too many people are terrified of being wrong and if it's someone they can't kill, let alone fight, they very often don't even try to RP.
Thats not scriptings fault a character who ATK trained for years on years would have the same issues once they got big. The issue your talking about lies SOLELY on the player behind the character. If they shy from something because of skill or an enevitable outcome thats on them. You can't blame scripting or skills in the slightest.
>ATK/AFK scripting fuels this very, very boring fire, since they're often overly obsessed with winning / being "right"
Thats the player not the game, once again.
>the other people who don't want to get murdered nonstop then resort to more of the same tactic.
This is once again a players choice as well, I haven't seen much camping on either side of the fence in game in quite a while to be honest. In the past it happened on team good, team bad, and team fence rider.
I think blaming scripting for these kind of issues is just addressing the wrong problem.
You feel a brief sense of unease, as if somehow, somewhere, you'd run afoul of the law.
ROBERTDH
Re: Policy Note
10/17/2013 07:14 PM CDT
>A very large number of players in DR try to be "evil" by relying on killing people whenever a disagreement arises.
I don't think that has anything to do with players trying to be evil, it's exactly how lots of people play "good," too.
I don't think that has anything to do with players trying to be evil, it's exactly how lots of people play "good," too.
DISCOTEQ21
Re: Policy Note
10/17/2013 10:34 PM CDT
<<
I don't think that has anything to do with players trying to be evil, it's exactly how lots of people play "good," too.>>
I think we should have an RP learning night, like a spar night, except hosted by cat people dressed up in fancy costumes sipping brandy and smoking long pipes pinky out.
I don't think that has anything to do with players trying to be evil, it's exactly how lots of people play "good," too.>>
I think we should have an RP learning night, like a spar night, except hosted by cat people dressed up in fancy costumes sipping brandy and smoking long pipes pinky out.
STILVA
Re: Policy Note
10/18/2013 05:56 AM CDT
>Your consensus is based on what? I have a small group of people who play characters that would be considered 'evil' by DR standards and none of them are 150+, most of them don't go looking to pick any fights and RP very well. So I don't feel like that opinion has any clout.
DR's standards of villainy are a bit shallow. Most people blatantly take one side, with zero attempt of being a mole, or laying out schemes, or betraying people. The majority of player-villains are very simply vagrants and thugs that, while a nuisance, "Don't look at us wrong or we'll cut you" is closer to being a petty criminal. Not villainous, and certainly not supervillainous. Anyone who is vague about their standing is usually frowned upon as bad RP when quite ironically they could be lying through their teeth to one or both sides, which would make them potentially more evil than most of the self-proclaimed evil characters running around.
I know it's a preference thing, but honestly, when was the last time someone was established as (soandso kind of person) then ICly did something so nefarious, people actually wouldn't believe it? "Madigan did WHAT to the Baron's soup?!" - A true villain, even a minor one, would do things people would wish they were there for, look up logs for, or check elanthipedia to get insight on the background of it. No one is going to cry if they missed out on the daily fist fight outside the Crossing infirmary.
There are a few bad guys that grabbed my attention at times, you've been one of them on a few occasions. And really, if everyone who wanted to be a bad guy tried like you and the others, the game would be a hell of a lot more flavorful.
>Thats not scriptings fault a character who ATK trained for years on years would have the same issues once they got big. The issue your talking about lies SOLELY on the player behind the character. If they shy from something because of skill or an enevitable outcome thats on them. You can't blame scripting or skills in the slightest.
Took my quote in poor context.
Most "villains" in DR, currently, rely on being evil via being able to overpower someone. If they're unable to fight someone then they often don't even interact with them because there is no way of them showcasing that they're "evil". If it's someone they can't defeat they often don't interact because it isn't evil to lose, or something.
That's not PVP shyness, it's people not wanting their role to be invalidated because they have no other way to keep their label. Scripting isn't entirely at fault, either, but it does worsen the problem. Making getting stronger easier means people will aim for "that" kind of evil more, since people accept it as evil. Working into any kind of depth for villainy is too much work to some, especially compared to the minimal effort of typing .train and loading up a season of House.
>The badguy RP is poor. Very few make the genre special. Where are the high level characters that are actually evil weaselly cowards? Where are the the evil characters that play cat and mouse with little characters, never letting on that they are big? Where are the evil characters that only attack big characters - losing more often than not, but showing real heart in the processes? Why don't we see more characters speak more than they attack? Is pulling a trigger that much easier than saying words? Where are the badguys that want attention so badly they convince everyone that they play a badguy the right way and get a pat on the back??
Lasciel did this at times, no idea what happened to them though. They got some nomination (and won?) for it back in 2011 if I recall. My memory is bad so might be entirely wrong year. I've seen some potential from people at times, but unfortunately it's usually cut short by other "villains" or purge/jail and their motivation gets derailed.
>I don't think that has anything to do with players trying to be evil, it's exactly how lots of people play "good," too.
True enough, and that being said...if there's no distinguishable difference between the two, they're doing something pretty badly. :<
tl;dr is go.
DR's standards of villainy are a bit shallow. Most people blatantly take one side, with zero attempt of being a mole, or laying out schemes, or betraying people. The majority of player-villains are very simply vagrants and thugs that, while a nuisance, "Don't look at us wrong or we'll cut you" is closer to being a petty criminal. Not villainous, and certainly not supervillainous. Anyone who is vague about their standing is usually frowned upon as bad RP when quite ironically they could be lying through their teeth to one or both sides, which would make them potentially more evil than most of the self-proclaimed evil characters running around.
I know it's a preference thing, but honestly, when was the last time someone was established as (soandso kind of person) then ICly did something so nefarious, people actually wouldn't believe it? "Madigan did WHAT to the Baron's soup?!" - A true villain, even a minor one, would do things people would wish they were there for, look up logs for, or check elanthipedia to get insight on the background of it. No one is going to cry if they missed out on the daily fist fight outside the Crossing infirmary.
There are a few bad guys that grabbed my attention at times, you've been one of them on a few occasions. And really, if everyone who wanted to be a bad guy tried like you and the others, the game would be a hell of a lot more flavorful.
>Thats not scriptings fault a character who ATK trained for years on years would have the same issues once they got big. The issue your talking about lies SOLELY on the player behind the character. If they shy from something because of skill or an enevitable outcome thats on them. You can't blame scripting or skills in the slightest.
Took my quote in poor context.
Most "villains" in DR, currently, rely on being evil via being able to overpower someone. If they're unable to fight someone then they often don't even interact with them because there is no way of them showcasing that they're "evil". If it's someone they can't defeat they often don't interact because it isn't evil to lose, or something.
That's not PVP shyness, it's people not wanting their role to be invalidated because they have no other way to keep their label. Scripting isn't entirely at fault, either, but it does worsen the problem. Making getting stronger easier means people will aim for "that" kind of evil more, since people accept it as evil. Working into any kind of depth for villainy is too much work to some, especially compared to the minimal effort of typing .train and loading up a season of House.
>The badguy RP is poor. Very few make the genre special. Where are the high level characters that are actually evil weaselly cowards? Where are the the evil characters that play cat and mouse with little characters, never letting on that they are big? Where are the evil characters that only attack big characters - losing more often than not, but showing real heart in the processes? Why don't we see more characters speak more than they attack? Is pulling a trigger that much easier than saying words? Where are the badguys that want attention so badly they convince everyone that they play a badguy the right way and get a pat on the back??
Lasciel did this at times, no idea what happened to them though. They got some nomination (and won?) for it back in 2011 if I recall. My memory is bad so might be entirely wrong year. I've seen some potential from people at times, but unfortunately it's usually cut short by other "villains" or purge/jail and their motivation gets derailed.
>I don't think that has anything to do with players trying to be evil, it's exactly how lots of people play "good," too.
True enough, and that being said...if there's no distinguishable difference between the two, they're doing something pretty badly. :<
tl;dr is go.
ASHAMAN1
Re: Policy Note
10/18/2013 07:15 AM CDT
>>>Thats not scriptings fault a character who ATK trained for years on years would have the same issues once they got big. The issue your talking about lies SOLELY on the player behind the character. If they shy from something because of skill or an enevitable outcome thats on them. You can't blame scripting or skills in the slightest.
>Took my quote in poor context.
>Most "villains" in DR, currently, rely on being evil via being able to overpower someone. If they're unable to fight someone then they often don't even interact with them because there is no way of them showcasing that they're "evil". If it's someone they can't defeat they often don't interact because it isn't evil to lose, or something.
If the threat of getting killed stops you from following the course of your role play, you're doing it wrong. Taken into another context, that would be like flipping your lid because the invasion monster/GMPC stomped you when you're supposed to be the ERMEGURD HERO!!!11!1one. I respect folks like Khiol who take a shot in the dark at a holy guy who's easily 50 circles ahead KNOWING the inevitable outcome, and runs with it anyways.
Samsaren
>Took my quote in poor context.
>Most "villains" in DR, currently, rely on being evil via being able to overpower someone. If they're unable to fight someone then they often don't even interact with them because there is no way of them showcasing that they're "evil". If it's someone they can't defeat they often don't interact because it isn't evil to lose, or something.
If the threat of getting killed stops you from following the course of your role play, you're doing it wrong. Taken into another context, that would be like flipping your lid because the invasion monster/GMPC stomped you when you're supposed to be the ERMEGURD HERO!!!11!1one. I respect folks like Khiol who take a shot in the dark at a holy guy who's easily 50 circles ahead KNOWING the inevitable outcome, and runs with it anyways.
Samsaren
JUNKY1
Re: Policy Note
10/18/2013 12:34 PM CDT
As much as I dislike Khiol..... HE IS SPOT ON! Why cant scripters script and rpr's rp? It is after all 15$ a month regardless. If scripters don't have the right to do what they enjoy like rpr's do, then lets cut that subscription rate to 2.95!
AMISH
Re: Policy Note
10/18/2013 01:51 PM CDT
Thanks for posting Sanguious, I think many feel that staff generally do not care if you are busted for afk scripting or not. Its nice to see someone take the time and vested interest to atleast get feedback from the community.
SHADOW7988
Re: Policy Note
10/18/2013 02:07 PM CDT
I'd like to throw out, that the GMs have stated that they don't go out looking for the abuser because they like finding them, or like dishing out punishment to them. Most of the posts I've seen show sentiment that they hate doing it, but its a large problem that AFK scripting creates and I'm glad their looking at matters that may help people find ways to find some fun or what not so they don't get into that.
---
"I think anything that forces you to do something no sane adventurer would do just in order to train is ridiculous."
DR-SOCHARIS
---
Victory Over Lyras, on the 397th year and 156 days since the Victory of Lanival the Redeemer.
---
"I think anything that forces you to do something no sane adventurer would do just in order to train is ridiculous."
DR-SOCHARIS
---
Victory Over Lyras, on the 397th year and 156 days since the Victory of Lanival the Redeemer.
ISHARON
Re: Policy Note
10/18/2013 03:57 PM CDT
>>Stilva: Working into any kind of depth for villainy is too much work to some, especially compared to the minimal effort of typing .train and loading up a season of House.
http://www.howtogeek.com/geekers/up/sshot4f07447e46648.jpg
Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall rank!
Vote for DragonRealms on Top MUD Sites: http://www.topmudsites.com/vote-DragonRealms.html
http://www.howtogeek.com/geekers/up/sshot4f07447e46648.jpg
Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall rank!
Vote for DragonRealms on Top MUD Sites: http://www.topmudsites.com/vote-DragonRealms.html
DISCOTEQ21
Re: Policy Note
10/18/2013 07:55 PM CDT
<<<As much as I dislike Khiol..... HE IS SPOT ON! Why cant scripters script and rpr's rp? It is after all 15$ a month regardless. If scripters don't have the right to do what they enjoy like rpr's do, then lets cut that subscription rate to 2.95!
>>
If only it were so simple, imagine heal bots and moonie bots and a host of other things and if AFK were truly made legal, I'd give the game six months.
TEVESHSZAT
Re: Policy Note
10/18/2013 08:49 PM CDT
DR not really fostering/creating/having a culture where players are willing to pull punches for the sake of RP is a whole issue separate from anything on scripting policy.
In the end, there's no advantage/fun/reward/etc to losing. Look at our quests, for example. When is there a setup where losing is a valid option? When you lose, you get less/no stuff at the end. DR, as a culture, expects 100% success in order to get the treat at the end of the journey. I think it's understandable that the same mindset ends up creeping into the game itself.
I don't have any solutions, but I do think the "you ALWAYS have to win" mindset is something deeply ingrained into the game's culture itself.
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
In the end, there's no advantage/fun/reward/etc to losing. Look at our quests, for example. When is there a setup where losing is a valid option? When you lose, you get less/no stuff at the end. DR, as a culture, expects 100% success in order to get the treat at the end of the journey. I think it's understandable that the same mindset ends up creeping into the game itself.
I don't have any solutions, but I do think the "you ALWAYS have to win" mindset is something deeply ingrained into the game's culture itself.
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
SHADOW7988
Re: Policy Note
10/18/2013 10:54 PM CDT
>I don't have any solutions, but I do think the "you ALWAYS have to win" mindset is something deeply ingrained into the game's culture itself.
I think this is deeply ingrained into a significant amount of Americans, Gamers, or Fantasy fans.
Not that it helps with trying to solve this stuff. Though I do like things like the Keep getting rezzed, if we loss on non epic level things (end of the world stuff), then I believe we'll be better off as a community to take our lumps.
Personally this is way I'd like for reverse invasions, where we attack, and get repulsed, whoops we didn't organize well enough, Alrett won the battle this time (and you can replace that with any of the big guys out there).
I mean when the battle is only fought in Zoluren or Theren Keep or Shard, essentially the various capitals of the Provinces (or at least the major player hubs), if we don't win, then there goes a part of the world to game in.
Just a few of my thoughts.
---
"I think anything that forces you to do something no sane adventurer would do just in order to train is ridiculous."
DR-SOCHARIS
---
Victory Over Lyras, on the 397th year and 156 days since the Victory of Lanival the Redeemer.
I think this is deeply ingrained into a significant amount of Americans, Gamers, or Fantasy fans.
Not that it helps with trying to solve this stuff. Though I do like things like the Keep getting rezzed, if we loss on non epic level things (end of the world stuff), then I believe we'll be better off as a community to take our lumps.
Personally this is way I'd like for reverse invasions, where we attack, and get repulsed, whoops we didn't organize well enough, Alrett won the battle this time (and you can replace that with any of the big guys out there).
I mean when the battle is only fought in Zoluren or Theren Keep or Shard, essentially the various capitals of the Provinces (or at least the major player hubs), if we don't win, then there goes a part of the world to game in.
Just a few of my thoughts.
---
"I think anything that forces you to do something no sane adventurer would do just in order to train is ridiculous."
DR-SOCHARIS
---
Victory Over Lyras, on the 397th year and 156 days since the Victory of Lanival the Redeemer.
JARAGONA
Re: Policy Note
10/19/2013 07:34 AM CDT
The best way to resolve these issues is to remove everyone's ability to talk, use abrasive actionable verbs (kick, punch, etc), ability to engage one another in any form of combat, all wealth from the game, experience gain, and board posting rights. I think the game would be much more enjoyable this way, and we could all be friends.
"If swords ever cross, the Barbarian shall be the one left standing." - Guild Leader Agonar
"If swords ever cross, the Barbarian shall be the one left standing." - Guild Leader Agonar
TFPALADIN
Re: Policy Note
10/19/2013 07:48 PM CDT
I used to love the good ole' days, script at night, RP during the day.
DISCOTEQ21
Re: Policy Note
10/19/2013 10:50 PM CDT
<<I used to love the good ole' days, script at night, RP during the day.>>
Oh the times they are a changin'. Too be fair I remember the original Gurt AFK scripting bow and leathers In blood wolves 24/7, and I'd steal the bundles he's drop all day long.(Yeah there was a time you couldn't move 30 skills at once).
Games changed, I've changed. We've all changed.
GRANTJ47
Re: Policy Note
10/20/2013 05:00 PM CDT
>>If the threat of getting killed stops you from following the course of your role play, you're doing it wrong.
No, you are doing it right. Most evil people are cowards. You don't rob the heavily armored store, you rob the easy target. You don't go murder the elite marine group, you go after the crowded theater. If you are the mastermind with money, you convince morons to blow up planes while you live in a great house with 3 wives. True evil is not stupid, its smart and tries not to die.
Abison/Rystien
No, you are doing it right. Most evil people are cowards. You don't rob the heavily armored store, you rob the easy target. You don't go murder the elite marine group, you go after the crowded theater. If you are the mastermind with money, you convince morons to blow up planes while you live in a great house with 3 wives. True evil is not stupid, its smart and tries not to die.
Abison/Rystien
LUNARIMP
Re: Policy Note
10/25/2013 08:54 AM CDT
>No, you are doing it right. Most evil people are cowards. You don't rob the heavily armored store, you rob the easy target. You don't go murder the elite marine group, you go after the crowded theater. If you are the mastermind with money, you convince morons to blow up planes while you live in a great house with 3 wives. True evil is not stupid, its smart and tries not to die.
While true in our world where you don't get the option to select continue and come back to life, this can be philosophically different in a world where death can mean something so different. This is especially true when it comes to Necromancers. Sure your character is supposed to live knowing that each time you die you have a chance to be gone forever, but you put faith in the Gods to reward you for earning their favor by sacrificing to them; but when you are the one who wills your body back to life, does death mean the same to you as it does everyone else?
I'm not saying that it can't or isn't the same as you said, just that it also could be different.
While true in our world where you don't get the option to select continue and come back to life, this can be philosophically different in a world where death can mean something so different. This is especially true when it comes to Necromancers. Sure your character is supposed to live knowing that each time you die you have a chance to be gone forever, but you put faith in the Gods to reward you for earning their favor by sacrificing to them; but when you are the one who wills your body back to life, does death mean the same to you as it does everyone else?
I'm not saying that it can't or isn't the same as you said, just that it also could be different.
DARKEVILWHATEVER
Re: Policy Note
10/29/2013 11:58 AM CDT
<<In the end, there's no advantage/fun/reward/etc to losing...I don't have any solutions, but I do think the "you ALWAYS have to win" mindset is something deeply ingrained into the game's culture itself.>>
Of course this is true, but I have a completely different opinion that im sure is not only unpopular, but an itsy bitsy few can even relate to it: losing on purpose is cool.
If you're the little guy in a given conflict, fight to the limits of your endurance. If you're bigger than your adversary, and your adversary isn't clearly an irl ass, a LOT is gained by thinking out of the box - and sometimes that includes not always being the victor. A lot is gained.
If someone can't relate to that, if it just makes zero sense to someone, if that someone can't imagine a single benefit from that approach to the game, they can move their name into the category called "the common masses" and continue having their unwavering need to WIN WIN WIN. IMO winning is child's play. Losing from time-to-time is cool.
Of course this is true, but I have a completely different opinion that im sure is not only unpopular, but an itsy bitsy few can even relate to it: losing on purpose is cool.
If you're the little guy in a given conflict, fight to the limits of your endurance. If you're bigger than your adversary, and your adversary isn't clearly an irl ass, a LOT is gained by thinking out of the box - and sometimes that includes not always being the victor. A lot is gained.
If someone can't relate to that, if it just makes zero sense to someone, if that someone can't imagine a single benefit from that approach to the game, they can move their name into the category called "the common masses" and continue having their unwavering need to WIN WIN WIN. IMO winning is child's play. Losing from time-to-time is cool.
