>I just hope that it's recognized that things like familiar/locate wards and teleport wards are another form of 'safe room' and they get the same treatment as no violence and no steal rooms at the end of the day.<
These are unlikely to go away, actually. Maybe some will, but many of these are for mechanics purposes and others are for the entirely IC purposes that certain organizations pay big sums of money / use hefty amounts of magic to ensure their privacy.
-Z
DR-ZEYURN
WISECRACKDRAGON
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 12:28 AM UTC
<<5 minuters? No..more like a hour or more depending on how much ya train stuff its about the Exp you have, not the time it take to get get alive again>>
Have you ever been open rolled in celpeze after locking six weapons? I don't feel too bad for you. This fear of someone waltzing in and throwing policy out the window to kill you is incredibly irrational, and the exp loss argument is really grasping for straws.
If you don't want to die, go guarded/closed and leave people alone. Policy provides some REALLY strong incentives not to mess with people you don't have reason to mess with - incentives that make your 'hour or more of exp lost' look like less than nothing.
People who need a safe room to be safe in Dragonrealms are doing it very, very wrong.
"That's how I knew who you were. You were always like "Blah blah blah I'm a Barbarian oh-my-god." -my gf
Have you ever been open rolled in celpeze after locking six weapons? I don't feel too bad for you. This fear of someone waltzing in and throwing policy out the window to kill you is incredibly irrational, and the exp loss argument is really grasping for straws.
If you don't want to die, go guarded/closed and leave people alone. Policy provides some REALLY strong incentives not to mess with people you don't have reason to mess with - incentives that make your 'hour or more of exp lost' look like less than nothing.
People who need a safe room to be safe in Dragonrealms are doing it very, very wrong.
"That's how I knew who you were. You were always like "Blah blah blah I'm a Barbarian oh-my-god." -my gf
SUNHOWLER
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 12:38 AM UTC
<< I think any room that you can think/chatter from should be a room your words can get you killed in. Period. >>
I concur.
Rajao
I concur.
Rajao
JMF90
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 01:02 AM UTC
Chatter is gamewide, and only in plat and TF. I see it as a non-issue.
You lick the dirt and discover that it tastes like dirt.
You lick the dirt and discover that it tastes like dirt.
DRAKEWARLORD
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 01:43 AM UTC
I thought gweth smashers could smash gweths of people in safe rooms?
"Sometimes you guys scare me."--Annwyl
"You people worry me."--GM Abasha
"Hmm..."--Z
"Sometimes you guys scare me."--Annwyl
"You people worry me."--GM Abasha
"Hmm..."--Z
IDONS-BUDDY
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 01:48 AM UTC
They can.
Rev. Reene
<Szrael> Should have just gone for gorbesh again
<Szrael> And released the pirate guild or something
<Szrael> Tote would be an okay pirate
Rev. Reene
<Szrael> Should have just gone for gorbesh again
<Szrael> And released the pirate guild or something
<Szrael> Tote would be an okay pirate
WISECRACKDRAGON
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 02:17 AM UTC
:(
"That's how I knew who you were. You were always like "Blah blah blah I'm a Barbarian oh-my-god." -my gf
"That's how I knew who you were. You were always like "Blah blah blah I'm a Barbarian oh-my-god." -my gf
SUNHOWLER
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 03:23 AM UTC
The only gwethsmasher a barbarian has access to is a quadrello to the face. If some dude I have consent on is shooting his mouth off in a safe room, I would greatly appreciate the option of shutting him up without dragging a third person into it.
Rajao
Rajao
ALDEN
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 05:26 AM UTC
So if you have a house or boat, you will a place to be safe from repercussions, but otherwise most safe rooms should be eliminated?
MRMER
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 07:02 AM UTC
>>some players such as Totenus are logged in 24-7
Because it's CRAZY to drain exp on a boat when you have the equivalent of an Elanthian psychopath after you. Don't worry, I killed your $4500 investment without the need for afk scripting.
"I kept my workshop of filthy creation: my eye-balls were starting from their sockets in attending to the details of my employment...and often did my human nature turn with loathing from my occupation..." - Mary Shelly, Frankenstein
Because it's CRAZY to drain exp on a boat when you have the equivalent of an Elanthian psychopath after you. Don't worry, I killed your $4500 investment without the need for afk scripting.
"I kept my workshop of filthy creation: my eye-balls were starting from their sockets in attending to the details of my employment...and often did my human nature turn with loathing from my occupation..." - Mary Shelly, Frankenstein
BGUY71
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 08:22 AM UTC
Safe rooms are supremely annoying.
At most I see depart spots and maybe some altars as being legit, anything else should be opened up.
At most I see depart spots and maybe some altars as being legit, anything else should be opened up.
NEUTRONIUM
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 11:12 AM UTC
I've never had a problem safe rooms, Of course I could care less about someone running their head on the gweth or in the game. Doesn't hurt me, only ones that cry and complain about it are those or only get their jollies from PvP. I've honestly never understood the strong desires to kill someone character that run so strongly and happen so frequently in this game.
This game has a normal server (Prime), and RP Server (Plat) If you can aford it and a Open PvP Server (Fallen). While this could be the sole answer needed for the various play styles and such, DR's small player base prevents it from being a real option.
I would love to play in Plat but $50+ not an option. And if those who Wanted to PvP Stuck to others who wanted to PvP that would be fine as well but some complain about the profile system and want a game where they can gank anyone at anytime which only ends up fun for them and ruins the game for their bystanders. Then you have the Care Bear types who want to hugs and smooches that want to not be killed by anything except Monsters.
It's hard to balance all this out in prime but has to be balanced. If the other 2 camps have to accept PvP then those PvP players need to respect the rights of the other types of players and take what they have been given. If the game has 1200 rooms and only 100 or even 200 are Safe Rooms why is this a problem for them? The only real problem if any about safe rooms is the fact that some high powered player hates to be put in a situation where they are powerless to do something to someone else. But Turn about is fair play as the saying goes some times. Sometimes things arise in game that need an OOC mechanic to fix it, abused or not it still is needed.
LEYL1
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 11:48 AM UTC
>>I agree. Too many players abuse the boat/house thing. I assume there is extra safety in AFK-scripting on a boat or in a house.
Houses and boats are not 'safe areas' in the sense of what the poll is about, they are just restricted access areas where the owner has significant control over who gains that access. People can and do die in houses and on boats (Hi Sinstra! Hi Szrael!). There are even certain areas of the game that periodically spawn creatures on player owned boats to attack anyone there regardless of the access setting.
Being on a boat or in a house is no different than being in a latched room in any public access space.
>>It's especially worrying when some players such as Totenus are logged in 24-7. I trust there are mechanics to script-check them but I also assume some script-checking is player-initiated and for players with boats and houses, this provides at least a small sanctuary.
Script checks are routinely done on people without any player prompting. I think that there are even alerts that the GMs get after a certain amount of logged in time occurs, tbh.
AFK scripting in houses/boats is very dumb and a great way to have the exp gain turned off there. If anything, I think people in them gaining exp are checked more often, not less. A lot of people do go to their houses/boats to drain, though, for various reasons.
Re: the poll - Safe rooms for depart spots and any place that mechanically causes issues when someone dies there. No steal for banks and the official trader guild selling places - because they hire huge amounts of guards who have the sole job of preventing theft.
Houses and boats are not 'safe areas' in the sense of what the poll is about, they are just restricted access areas where the owner has significant control over who gains that access. People can and do die in houses and on boats (Hi Sinstra! Hi Szrael!). There are even certain areas of the game that periodically spawn creatures on player owned boats to attack anyone there regardless of the access setting.
Being on a boat or in a house is no different than being in a latched room in any public access space.
>>It's especially worrying when some players such as Totenus are logged in 24-7. I trust there are mechanics to script-check them but I also assume some script-checking is player-initiated and for players with boats and houses, this provides at least a small sanctuary.
Script checks are routinely done on people without any player prompting. I think that there are even alerts that the GMs get after a certain amount of logged in time occurs, tbh.
AFK scripting in houses/boats is very dumb and a great way to have the exp gain turned off there. If anything, I think people in them gaining exp are checked more often, not less. A lot of people do go to their houses/boats to drain, though, for various reasons.
Re: the poll - Safe rooms for depart spots and any place that mechanically causes issues when someone dies there. No steal for banks and the official trader guild selling places - because they hire huge amounts of guards who have the sole job of preventing theft.
DRAKEWARLORD
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 02:05 PM UTC
I still think we are talking about several different types of rooms and calling them all safe rooms.
1) Rooms where access is restricted by those inside: boats, houses, inn rooms, semil private rooms, ice fortresses. The degree of control over access does vary some what. Generally people can die here, as far as I understand it. I understand that occasionally mobiles of various types have appeared in these places. Someone else posted some things can spawn on player boats. Sneeky a while back posted a log of being thugged in his home. I've heard reports of the Grey and the hounds in people's houses. I understand people can kill each other's characters in a house.
2) Hunters refuges: Standard mobiles don't spawn in here and won't follow you in. Other than that they are normal rooms. Invasion crittters have been known to appear here as well as other types of mobiles like the hounds, the grey, etc. Characters can kill each other just fine.
3) No violence rooms: I find these confusing because a) it seems to me that they are not always universally no violence. b) some times they are in places that make no sense. c) sometimes they seem to be in places where it would make more sense to have a hunters refuge. d) some times they are totally ooc and you can't even adjust your stance in them before leaving. and so on.
I think most of this disucssion is about type 3, but we have types 1 and 2 mixed in and the same term being used for all three types of rooms and this confuses me.
I can see a need for not allowling violence in places where it's a mech problem until that mech problem is fixed. Oher than that, it makes more sense to me for other mechs to kick in that are a bit more ic and in genre and appropriate to that situation.
For instance, I don't see a town wanting it's civil servant empath to have to deal with dirsruptive customers fighting in what amounts to the ER. I can see many shop keepers being willing to employ people to kick out disruptive customers. I don't see guild leaders wanting people to start killing each other in their office. I don't see the bank guard wanting to let people murder each other in the bank. And so on. I don't see the gods being too favorable with the idea of people killing each other at the depart spot or where they turn in orbs or get them, generally speaking (though some gods might be ok with this...) I can't imagine the grounds keepers at the temple liking people murdering each other in the garden. I can't imagine the rulers wanting people murdering each other in their homes.
But that does not mean that people shoujld not be able to try to do these things, just that there should be logical consequences for doing them.
On the other hand I really don't like applying one standard universally across the board to all rooms of one 'type'. Some sections of town definately are described as dangerous places to be. So, I don't think that the same level of 'protection' should be universal through out town. Bar fights make sense in some bars. Docks are generally dangerous places.
I would expect the degree of security to vary as well from time to time. For instance, if a royal is wandering, I expect the equivalent of the secret service to be out in force and shutting down disruptive influences. I expect night to be more dangerous than day. I expect an audience or an auction would have a fair amount of protection.
I would think that the gm's running events would like to have tools thay can use to set this for each event instead of having to deal with preset rooms with no flexibility at all. After all, people can't walk any more. I can see a gypsy lord or a lord's enforcer or a ship captain wanting to mix it up a bit more. The less set in stone and the more options we have available to make this sort of thing responsive to the game environment, the better. I can see festivals having better security, but I'd rather see that security deal with miscreants than have them set for no violence where ever possible, game mech wise.
We have the tool now of profiles, we can tell who wants to do what pretty much. So many of the reasons for no violence rooms are gone now, with the expection of mech problems. in some rooms. People can't walk now.
I have been hoping that the new justice would give us new tools and make the reasons for the rest of the permanent no-violence rooms go away.
I hope this is not too confusing. I've not had my coffee yet.
I can see a need for making noobs a bit more protected in terms of pvp, invasion critters, and hunting area critters that are way over their head. But that can be a ward off like the stealing ward off and can be lost by certain guild membership or experience level or actions of the noob.
I can see a need for temporary no-violence options for various reasons ranging from player spells to silencing a room. But these are not permanent settings on the room.
"Sometimes you guys scare me."--Annwyl
"You people worry me."--GM Abasha
"Hmm..."--Z
1) Rooms where access is restricted by those inside: boats, houses, inn rooms, semil private rooms, ice fortresses. The degree of control over access does vary some what. Generally people can die here, as far as I understand it. I understand that occasionally mobiles of various types have appeared in these places. Someone else posted some things can spawn on player boats. Sneeky a while back posted a log of being thugged in his home. I've heard reports of the Grey and the hounds in people's houses. I understand people can kill each other's characters in a house.
2) Hunters refuges: Standard mobiles don't spawn in here and won't follow you in. Other than that they are normal rooms. Invasion crittters have been known to appear here as well as other types of mobiles like the hounds, the grey, etc. Characters can kill each other just fine.
3) No violence rooms: I find these confusing because a) it seems to me that they are not always universally no violence. b) some times they are in places that make no sense. c) sometimes they seem to be in places where it would make more sense to have a hunters refuge. d) some times they are totally ooc and you can't even adjust your stance in them before leaving. and so on.
I think most of this disucssion is about type 3, but we have types 1 and 2 mixed in and the same term being used for all three types of rooms and this confuses me.
I can see a need for not allowling violence in places where it's a mech problem until that mech problem is fixed. Oher than that, it makes more sense to me for other mechs to kick in that are a bit more ic and in genre and appropriate to that situation.
For instance, I don't see a town wanting it's civil servant empath to have to deal with dirsruptive customers fighting in what amounts to the ER. I can see many shop keepers being willing to employ people to kick out disruptive customers. I don't see guild leaders wanting people to start killing each other in their office. I don't see the bank guard wanting to let people murder each other in the bank. And so on. I don't see the gods being too favorable with the idea of people killing each other at the depart spot or where they turn in orbs or get them, generally speaking (though some gods might be ok with this...) I can't imagine the grounds keepers at the temple liking people murdering each other in the garden. I can't imagine the rulers wanting people murdering each other in their homes.
But that does not mean that people shoujld not be able to try to do these things, just that there should be logical consequences for doing them.
On the other hand I really don't like applying one standard universally across the board to all rooms of one 'type'. Some sections of town definately are described as dangerous places to be. So, I don't think that the same level of 'protection' should be universal through out town. Bar fights make sense in some bars. Docks are generally dangerous places.
I would expect the degree of security to vary as well from time to time. For instance, if a royal is wandering, I expect the equivalent of the secret service to be out in force and shutting down disruptive influences. I expect night to be more dangerous than day. I expect an audience or an auction would have a fair amount of protection.
I would think that the gm's running events would like to have tools thay can use to set this for each event instead of having to deal with preset rooms with no flexibility at all. After all, people can't walk any more. I can see a gypsy lord or a lord's enforcer or a ship captain wanting to mix it up a bit more. The less set in stone and the more options we have available to make this sort of thing responsive to the game environment, the better. I can see festivals having better security, but I'd rather see that security deal with miscreants than have them set for no violence where ever possible, game mech wise.
We have the tool now of profiles, we can tell who wants to do what pretty much. So many of the reasons for no violence rooms are gone now, with the expection of mech problems. in some rooms. People can't walk now.
I have been hoping that the new justice would give us new tools and make the reasons for the rest of the permanent no-violence rooms go away.
I hope this is not too confusing. I've not had my coffee yet.
I can see a need for making noobs a bit more protected in terms of pvp, invasion critters, and hunting area critters that are way over their head. But that can be a ward off like the stealing ward off and can be lost by certain guild membership or experience level or actions of the noob.
I can see a need for temporary no-violence options for various reasons ranging from player spells to silencing a room. But these are not permanent settings on the room.
"Sometimes you guys scare me."--Annwyl
"You people worry me."--GM Abasha
"Hmm..."--Z
BGUY71
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 03:57 PM UTC
>>The only real problem if any about safe rooms is the fact that some high powered player hates to be put in a situation where they are powerless to do something to someone else.
I do not have a high powered character by any stretch of the imagination and I think safe rooms should go.
The main issue being it holds folks accountable for what kind of character they want to play. I actually had a very recent run in with these mechanics. I tracked down someone who killed me and, among other things, he posted up in TGSE to avoid me taking revenge. It is disingenuous styles of play like this that are detrimental to the game. If that person didn't want me to attempt taking revenge, then they shouldn't have initiated the violence. Unfortunately for him I'm a patient man, but this is the crux of the issue: As long as safe rooms exist there will be people who instigate fights and then hide behind their OOC mechanics.
That little bit is ignoring the fact that safe rooms feel really archaic for where we are now in DR. They make more sense in the context of a significantly higher player base (over double at peak) and a setting where your character could still be walked.
I do not have a high powered character by any stretch of the imagination and I think safe rooms should go.
The main issue being it holds folks accountable for what kind of character they want to play. I actually had a very recent run in with these mechanics. I tracked down someone who killed me and, among other things, he posted up in TGSE to avoid me taking revenge. It is disingenuous styles of play like this that are detrimental to the game. If that person didn't want me to attempt taking revenge, then they shouldn't have initiated the violence. Unfortunately for him I'm a patient man, but this is the crux of the issue: As long as safe rooms exist there will be people who instigate fights and then hide behind their OOC mechanics.
That little bit is ignoring the fact that safe rooms feel really archaic for where we are now in DR. They make more sense in the context of a significantly higher player base (over double at peak) and a setting where your character could still be walked.
TDKULLON1
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 04:28 PM UTC
No safe rooms. Anywhere. If safety is needed find a paladin to toss up BOT.
WISECRACKDRAGON
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 04:30 PM UTC
<<only ones that cry and complain about it are those or only get their jollies from PvP>>
Yes, the people who complain about safe rooms - rooms that prevent CvC - are those who enjoy CvC. Just like those who cry about gwethsmashers, thump, and players who like PvP are the people who DON'T like CvC. I tend to see a LOT more whining from the second group, even though they have plenty of mechanics and policy in place to cater to their playstyle.
<<It's hard to balance all this out in prime but has to be balanced. If the other 2 camps have to accept PvP then those PvP players need to respect the rights of the other types of players and take what they have been given.>>
Consent. Policy. Does. This. What exactly are you doing that makes you need a safe room to avoid CvC when the consequences for unconsented attacks are so harsh? Why won't anyone answer that question?
"That's how I knew who you were. You were always like "Blah blah blah I'm a Barbarian oh-my-god." -my gf
Yes, the people who complain about safe rooms - rooms that prevent CvC - are those who enjoy CvC. Just like those who cry about gwethsmashers, thump, and players who like PvP are the people who DON'T like CvC. I tend to see a LOT more whining from the second group, even though they have plenty of mechanics and policy in place to cater to their playstyle.
<<It's hard to balance all this out in prime but has to be balanced. If the other 2 camps have to accept PvP then those PvP players need to respect the rights of the other types of players and take what they have been given.>>
Consent. Policy. Does. This. What exactly are you doing that makes you need a safe room to avoid CvC when the consequences for unconsented attacks are so harsh? Why won't anyone answer that question?
"That's how I knew who you were. You were always like "Blah blah blah I'm a Barbarian oh-my-god." -my gf
CRITTERDASLT
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 05:06 PM UTC
No safe rooms anywhere, harassment policies will protect depart spots.
MIKEM1
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 05:22 PM UTC
It's amazing how often the player of a high level character who is outraged because he can't hold someone 'accountable' for some insult only recieved after using an even worse one on somebody too weak to harm him. Does anyone ever actually return an insult with ... an insult? Or is everyone always consent farming?
If safe rooms have a redeeming feature, it's that they allow players who's text strings have smaller numbers to speak with the same freedom as those players who's text strings have bigger numbers. Say no to BullyRealms! And stuff.
You suddenly feel nauseous, as if you'd been doing performance art.
If safe rooms have a redeeming feature, it's that they allow players who's text strings have smaller numbers to speak with the same freedom as those players who's text strings have bigger numbers. Say no to BullyRealms! And stuff.
You suddenly feel nauseous, as if you'd been doing performance art.
WISECRACKDRAGON
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 05:54 PM UTC
<<Does anyone ever actually return an insult with ... an insult?>>
Yes.
<<Or is everyone always consent farming?>>
No.
<<It's amazing how often the player of a high level character who is outraged because he can't hold someone 'accountable' for some insult only recieved after using an even worse one on somebody too weak to harm him.>>
Haven't seen it happen, don't doubt that it DOES happen, welcome to RP? It's not always gonna be hugs and rainbows, folks.
<<If safe rooms have a redeeming feature, it's that they allow players who's text strings have smaller numbers to speak with the same freedom as those players who's text strings have bigger numbers.>>
My numbers should always have the freedom to attempt to stomp on any other numbers, regardless of size, assuming I have an IC reason (and consent where necessary).
"That's how I knew who you were. You were always like "Blah blah blah I'm a Barbarian oh-my-god." -my gf
Yes.
<<Or is everyone always consent farming?>>
No.
<<It's amazing how often the player of a high level character who is outraged because he can't hold someone 'accountable' for some insult only recieved after using an even worse one on somebody too weak to harm him.>>
Haven't seen it happen, don't doubt that it DOES happen, welcome to RP? It's not always gonna be hugs and rainbows, folks.
<<If safe rooms have a redeeming feature, it's that they allow players who's text strings have smaller numbers to speak with the same freedom as those players who's text strings have bigger numbers.>>
My numbers should always have the freedom to attempt to stomp on any other numbers, regardless of size, assuming I have an IC reason (and consent where necessary).
"That's how I knew who you were. You were always like "Blah blah blah I'm a Barbarian oh-my-god." -my gf
GRANGERSITE
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 06:35 PM UTC
"My numbers should always have the freedom to attempt to stomp on any other numbers"
And that is why we should have some safe rooms. Your desire to turn the game into a "stomp" at your whim should not necessarily impact me if I do not wish to play the game that way. "Policy" is a bandaid after the fact; preventing the incident in the first place is better. Also, policy obviously has little deterence value to you, since you are willing to pay the price no matter what just to do it your way.
The realms is big enough to accommodate both of us. So stomp all you like in some towns, but be better mannered in others.
And that is why we should have some safe rooms. Your desire to turn the game into a "stomp" at your whim should not necessarily impact me if I do not wish to play the game that way. "Policy" is a bandaid after the fact; preventing the incident in the first place is better. Also, policy obviously has little deterence value to you, since you are willing to pay the price no matter what just to do it your way.
The realms is big enough to accommodate both of us. So stomp all you like in some towns, but be better mannered in others.
GRIM45
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 06:40 PM UTC
>> "Policy" is a bandaid after the fact; preventing the incident in the first place is better. Also, policy obviously has little deterence value to you, since you are willing to pay the price no matter what just to do it your way.
Actually policy is not after the fact. LO is after the fact.
See if this clarifies things:
Policy is to Warnings/Lockouts as Laws are to...
TG, TG, GL, et al.
Also: Moo.
Actually policy is not after the fact. LO is after the fact.
See if this clarifies things:
Policy is to Warnings/Lockouts as Laws are to...
TG, TG, GL, et al.
Also: Moo.
WISECRACKDRAGON
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 07:28 PM UTC
Good job misquoting - you do realize the statement lost its meaning when you cut off the part about having an IC reason and consent right?
<< Your desire to turn the game into a "stomp" at your whim should not necessarily impact me if I do not wish to play the game that way.>>
Don't piss people off and they won't mess with you. If you choose to RP with a violent character you might just find yourself in a violent situation - imagine that.
<<"Policy" is a bandaid after the fact; preventing the incident in the first place is better.>>
No, not really. Policy is a strong enough deterrent, we've been over this. But if you insist on making people want to kill your text, policy and safe room mechanics aren't gonna save you, and that's a GOOD THING.
<<Also, policy obviously has little deterence value to you, since you are willing to pay the price no matter what just to do it your way.>>
The above quote indicates that you have no clue who you're talking to or what unconsented PvP policy is, which explains why you're among the whopping two posters who oppose the removal of all these random safe rooms.
"That's how I knew who you were. You were always like "Blah blah blah I'm a Barbarian oh-my-god." -my gf
<< Your desire to turn the game into a "stomp" at your whim should not necessarily impact me if I do not wish to play the game that way.>>
Don't piss people off and they won't mess with you. If you choose to RP with a violent character you might just find yourself in a violent situation - imagine that.
<<"Policy" is a bandaid after the fact; preventing the incident in the first place is better.>>
No, not really. Policy is a strong enough deterrent, we've been over this. But if you insist on making people want to kill your text, policy and safe room mechanics aren't gonna save you, and that's a GOOD THING.
<<Also, policy obviously has little deterence value to you, since you are willing to pay the price no matter what just to do it your way.>>
The above quote indicates that you have no clue who you're talking to or what unconsented PvP policy is, which explains why you're among the whopping two posters who oppose the removal of all these random safe rooms.
"That's how I knew who you were. You were always like "Blah blah blah I'm a Barbarian oh-my-god." -my gf
GRANGERSITE
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 07:58 PM UTC
"Don't piss people off and they won't mess with you. If you choose to RP with a violent character you might just find yourself in a violent situation - imagine that."
Or maybe there is rarely a reason to be a violent character in the first place. On top of that, so much of so-called RP that I have actualy seen is nothing more than simple venting of rudeness with no in-game benefit to it other that personal gratification. This is a family game; we do not allow certain clearly inappropriate conduct here. Safe rooms are nothing more than an modest extension of that.
"Actually policy is not after the fact. LO is after the fact."
That is correct. I was using "policy" genericly to include both the law and the enforcementof the law since the commentary I was disagreeing with seemed to do the same.
"Good job misquoting - you do realize the statement lost its meaning when you cut off the part about having an IC reason and consent right?"
Actually, it was not a misquote at all. I took the gist of your statement and stipped off the often implausible excuse of ICness. It appeared certain from your post that you really just want to the right stomp as you see fit. What constitues "consent" is so highly debated and shaded in the minds of the "users" that again, let's lay bare the real reasons to rude behavior: personal venting, ego, etc. As I said, I have no problem if you want to be that way. Just do it in a "Dodge City" that decent folks can avoid, or, at the very least, give a portion of the realms over to peaceful co-existence.
You may, on occasion, have some real complaint against a snert or grave robber. At the same time, there are those that abuse consent to draw out a conflict for the sake of being a bully. Judicious placement of safe rooms are a fair compromise to deal with both situations.
"The above quote indicates that you have no clue who you're talking to "
No, I do not, nor need I. You are not the character found in the realms. You are a player expressing the view of a player, as am I. Your character's view is not relevant here. We are commenting on playability issues, not the rights, actions, or abilities of our characters.
Or maybe there is rarely a reason to be a violent character in the first place. On top of that, so much of so-called RP that I have actualy seen is nothing more than simple venting of rudeness with no in-game benefit to it other that personal gratification. This is a family game; we do not allow certain clearly inappropriate conduct here. Safe rooms are nothing more than an modest extension of that.
"Actually policy is not after the fact. LO is after the fact."
That is correct. I was using "policy" genericly to include both the law and the enforcementof the law since the commentary I was disagreeing with seemed to do the same.
"Good job misquoting - you do realize the statement lost its meaning when you cut off the part about having an IC reason and consent right?"
Actually, it was not a misquote at all. I took the gist of your statement and stipped off the often implausible excuse of ICness. It appeared certain from your post that you really just want to the right stomp as you see fit. What constitues "consent" is so highly debated and shaded in the minds of the "users" that again, let's lay bare the real reasons to rude behavior: personal venting, ego, etc. As I said, I have no problem if you want to be that way. Just do it in a "Dodge City" that decent folks can avoid, or, at the very least, give a portion of the realms over to peaceful co-existence.
You may, on occasion, have some real complaint against a snert or grave robber. At the same time, there are those that abuse consent to draw out a conflict for the sake of being a bully. Judicious placement of safe rooms are a fair compromise to deal with both situations.
"The above quote indicates that you have no clue who you're talking to "
No, I do not, nor need I. You are not the character found in the realms. You are a player expressing the view of a player, as am I. Your character's view is not relevant here. We are commenting on playability issues, not the rights, actions, or abilities of our characters.
DOWDN
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 08:15 PM UTC
I'm confused why so many people seem to think safe rooms should be "no gweth".
We have gweth smashers now, and most people seem to have no problem using them... I'm aware that barbarians can't use them, but how is that any different from a low level character not being get back at a higher level character that killed them? Hire someone else to do it.
Of course safe rooms shouldn't be immune from gweth smashing.
We have gweth smashers now, and most people seem to have no problem using them... I'm aware that barbarians can't use them, but how is that any different from a low level character not being get back at a higher level character that killed them? Hire someone else to do it.
Of course safe rooms shouldn't be immune from gweth smashing.
IDONS-BUDDY
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 08:25 PM UTC
>> If the other 2 camps have to accept PvP then those PvP players need to respect the rights of the other types of players and take what they have been given.
Okay... why won't you answer anyone's question regarding why consent policy is not sufficient for this?
Or what precisely are you doing to people that is pissing them off so much that you feel like you need safe rooms all the time?
>> No safe rooms anywhere, harassment policies will protect depart spots.
Harassment policy actually does not stop someone from gravecamping you.
>> Of course safe rooms shouldn't be immune from gweth smashing.
And they aren't. Neither are homes and boats, contrary to some opinions.
Rev. Reene
<Szrael> Should have just gone for gorbesh again
<Szrael> And released the pirate guild or something
<Szrael> Tote would be an okay pirate
Okay... why won't you answer anyone's question regarding why consent policy is not sufficient for this?
Or what precisely are you doing to people that is pissing them off so much that you feel like you need safe rooms all the time?
>> No safe rooms anywhere, harassment policies will protect depart spots.
Harassment policy actually does not stop someone from gravecamping you.
>> Of course safe rooms shouldn't be immune from gweth smashing.
And they aren't. Neither are homes and boats, contrary to some opinions.
Rev. Reene
<Szrael> Should have just gone for gorbesh again
<Szrael> And released the pirate guild or something
<Szrael> Tote would be an okay pirate
WISECRACKDRAGON
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 09:04 PM UTC
<<GRANGERSITE>>
Rather than hit each irrational point in your post I'll just ask a few questions. Please help me better understand your side of the issue:
Why is consent policy (which can easily result in temporary or permanent lockout of a character) not a good enough deterrent for you?
What has inspired this overwhelming fear you have of bullies? You realize that most people don't have these problems, right?
Can you provide better support for your argument than "sometimes people don't want to fight", seeing as how it's incredibly easy to avoid conflict and therefore fighting without hiding behind outdated and jarringly OOC mechanics?
Most importantly, are you Vanmar's player?
"That's how I knew who you were. You were always like "Blah blah blah I'm a Barbarian oh-my-god." -my gf
Rather than hit each irrational point in your post I'll just ask a few questions. Please help me better understand your side of the issue:
Why is consent policy (which can easily result in temporary or permanent lockout of a character) not a good enough deterrent for you?
What has inspired this overwhelming fear you have of bullies? You realize that most people don't have these problems, right?
Can you provide better support for your argument than "sometimes people don't want to fight", seeing as how it's incredibly easy to avoid conflict and therefore fighting without hiding behind outdated and jarringly OOC mechanics?
Most importantly, are you Vanmar's player?
"That's how I knew who you were. You were always like "Blah blah blah I'm a Barbarian oh-my-god." -my gf
GRANTJ47
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 09:48 PM UTC
The problem I'm seeing is that it seems that the strong gets to pick on the weak more now without the weak getting anything. No safe rooms, so anyone bigger than you gets to do and say what they want and you are out of luck. We are now SnertRealms?
If you are going to make it that you cannot hide in a safe room, you need to make it that one cannot hide behind their stats and skills. Some form of hiring or champion system needs to be involved.
If you are going to make it that you cannot hide in a safe room, you need to make it that one cannot hide behind their stats and skills. Some form of hiring or champion system needs to be involved.
GRIM45
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 09:51 PM UTC
>>The problem I'm seeing is that it seems that the strong gets to pick on the weak more now without the weak getting anything. No safe rooms, so anyone bigger than you gets to do and say what they want and you are out of luck.
Not quite sure how you see this. Don't want to get into a fight with a larger circled character? Watch your mouth/actions.
>>We are now SnertRealms?
Automatic loss of any points.
>>you need to make it that one cannot hide behind their stats and skills.
:psyduck:
TG, TG, GL, et al.
Also: Moo.
Not quite sure how you see this. Don't want to get into a fight with a larger circled character? Watch your mouth/actions.
>>We are now SnertRealms?
Automatic loss of any points.
>>you need to make it that one cannot hide behind their stats and skills.
:psyduck:
TG, TG, GL, et al.
Also: Moo.
GRANTJ47
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 09:56 PM UTC
>>Don't want to get into a fight with a larger circled character? Watch your mouth/actions.
>>:psyduck:
Sorry, not complete nerd so no idea what :psyduck: is. The problems is that larger circled characters can start something and you have to sit there like a 5th grader taking it from a 8th grader. If the 8th grader wants to start something, then the 5th grader should be able to get a 10th grader to help. The 8th grader should have to watch his mouth and actions too.
>>:psyduck:
Sorry, not complete nerd so no idea what :psyduck: is. The problems is that larger circled characters can start something and you have to sit there like a 5th grader taking it from a 8th grader. If the 8th grader wants to start something, then the 5th grader should be able to get a 10th grader to help. The 8th grader should have to watch his mouth and actions too.
GRIM45
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 10:03 PM UTC
>>Sorry, not complete nerd so no idea what :psyduck: is.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=psyduck
>>The problems is that larger circled characters can start something and you have to sit there like a 5th grader taking it from a 8th grader.
And...?
>>If the 8th grader wants to start something, then the 5th grader should be able to get a 10th grader to help. The 8th grader should have to watch his mouth and actions too.
Welcome to:
1. Policy for Closed/Guarded characters
2. Anyone you can find for Open characters.
Also I find it ironic you are using grade school grades in your analogy.
TG, TG, GL, et al.
Also: Moo.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=psyduck
>>The problems is that larger circled characters can start something and you have to sit there like a 5th grader taking it from a 8th grader.
And...?
>>If the 8th grader wants to start something, then the 5th grader should be able to get a 10th grader to help. The 8th grader should have to watch his mouth and actions too.
Welcome to:
1. Policy for Closed/Guarded characters
2. Anyone you can find for Open characters.
Also I find it ironic you are using grade school grades in your analogy.
TG, TG, GL, et al.
Also: Moo.
ROB19700
WISECRACKDRAGON
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 10:07 PM UTC
<<GRANTJ47>>
Wow. Incredibly skewed perspective there.
<<If you are going to make it that you cannot hide in a safe room, you need to make it that one cannot hide behind their stats and skills.>>
We didn't start with those stats and skills, we earned them, and we're only safe from people who didn't bother to earn their own. How is that in any way related to the safe room mechanic?
<<The problems is that larger circled characters can start something and you have to sit there like a 5th grader taking it from a 8th grader.>>
How do safe rooms help with this situation? You realize that if you give someone consent in a safe room they can still act on it once you stop hiding there, right?
"That's how I knew who you were. You were always like "Blah blah blah I'm a Barbarian oh-my-god." -my gf
Wow. Incredibly skewed perspective there.
<<If you are going to make it that you cannot hide in a safe room, you need to make it that one cannot hide behind their stats and skills.>>
We didn't start with those stats and skills, we earned them, and we're only safe from people who didn't bother to earn their own. How is that in any way related to the safe room mechanic?
<<The problems is that larger circled characters can start something and you have to sit there like a 5th grader taking it from a 8th grader.>>
How do safe rooms help with this situation? You realize that if you give someone consent in a safe room they can still act on it once you stop hiding there, right?
"That's how I knew who you were. You were always like "Blah blah blah I'm a Barbarian oh-my-god." -my gf
LORD-RAHL
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 10:10 PM UTC
Wow I'd never seen lmgtfy.com before.
That's awesome.
SEND[Abasha] It warms my heart to see three people die for a cupcake.
That's awesome.
SEND[Abasha] It warms my heart to see three people die for a cupcake.
GRIM45
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 10:15 PM UTC
>>Wow I'd never seen lmgtfy.com before.
I really do love it. It's my favorite response to people claiming ignorance of anything.
TG, TG, GL, et al.
Also: Moo.
I really do love it. It's my favorite response to people claiming ignorance of anything.
TG, TG, GL, et al.
Also: Moo.
GRANTJ47
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 10:44 PM UTC
>>And...?
Okay you don't see a problem with larger characters attacking a smaller characters??
>>Welcome to:
>>1. Policy for Closed/Guarded characters
>>2. Anyone you can find for Open characters.
>>Also I find it ironic you are using grade school grades in your analogy.
Umm, so you don't see a problem in the policy. If you are going to attack lesser players then you get to stay guarded? I cannot hire someone to kill you? You think that is good policy??? You attack someone weaker than you, yet stay guarded and kill the little guys you taunt. What I'm saying is that if you taunt and go after someone you need to realize the consquences of your actions. If that is letting the guy hire someone or making you open then so be it. Let it be that you are now set to open for a time fine. But sitting back and doing as you want, nope. (Sorry if not making that clear but football and beer are more important at the time).
And you can look up ironic on google and see how you used it wrong.
>>we're only safe from people who didn't bother to earn their own.
Let me redefine what I mean. You attack someone, you are attackable. You steal from someone, you are attackable. You break someone's gweth, you are attackable. I'd like to see insults added, but to hard for attackable. It does not matter if first strike or retaliation, you are attackable. And by attackable I mean profile set open. If these changes are not a part of the safe rooms mechanics, then I think they are wrong and should not be made.
Okay you don't see a problem with larger characters attacking a smaller characters??
>>Welcome to:
>>1. Policy for Closed/Guarded characters
>>2. Anyone you can find for Open characters.
>>Also I find it ironic you are using grade school grades in your analogy.
Umm, so you don't see a problem in the policy. If you are going to attack lesser players then you get to stay guarded? I cannot hire someone to kill you? You think that is good policy??? You attack someone weaker than you, yet stay guarded and kill the little guys you taunt. What I'm saying is that if you taunt and go after someone you need to realize the consquences of your actions. If that is letting the guy hire someone or making you open then so be it. Let it be that you are now set to open for a time fine. But sitting back and doing as you want, nope. (Sorry if not making that clear but football and beer are more important at the time).
And you can look up ironic on google and see how you used it wrong.
>>we're only safe from people who didn't bother to earn their own.
Let me redefine what I mean. You attack someone, you are attackable. You steal from someone, you are attackable. You break someone's gweth, you are attackable. I'd like to see insults added, but to hard for attackable. It does not matter if first strike or retaliation, you are attackable. And by attackable I mean profile set open. If these changes are not a part of the safe rooms mechanics, then I think they are wrong and should not be made.
LORD-RAHL
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 10:46 PM UTC
Let me save your rant some time...
1) They're already planning to put in a solution to non Open people starting fights. Details aren't out yet.
2) If someone repeatedly abuses profile and people complain, GMs will force them into Open status for awhile.
SEND[Abasha] It warms my heart to see three people die for a cupcake.
1) They're already planning to put in a solution to non Open people starting fights. Details aren't out yet.
2) If someone repeatedly abuses profile and people complain, GMs will force them into Open status for awhile.
SEND[Abasha] It warms my heart to see three people die for a cupcake.
IDONS-BUDDY
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 10:47 PM UTC
>> Okay you don't see a problem with larger characters attacking a smaller characters??
I see no problem with someone being forced to own what they say and do.
In the case of people ganking open lowbies (which yes does happen) there is a solution on the horizon for this in the form of first strikes forcing people to be open for awhile.
Rev. Reene
<Szrael> Should have just gone for gorbesh again
<Szrael> And released the pirate guild or something
<Szrael> Tote would be an okay pirate
I see no problem with someone being forced to own what they say and do.
In the case of people ganking open lowbies (which yes does happen) there is a solution on the horizon for this in the form of first strikes forcing people to be open for awhile.
Rev. Reene
<Szrael> Should have just gone for gorbesh again
<Szrael> And released the pirate guild or something
<Szrael> Tote would be an okay pirate
GRIM45
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 10:54 PM UTC
>>Okay you don't see a problem with larger characters attacking a smaller characters??
I do. It's just policy takes care of these things. I don't see a problem with larger characters baiting those not possessing the necessary intelligence to keep their own yap shut.
>>Umm, so you don't see a problem in the policy. If you are going to attack lesser players then you get to stay guarded? I cannot hire someone to kill you? You think that is good policy??? You attack someone weaker than you, yet stay guarded and kill the little guys you taunt. What I'm saying is that if you taunt and go after someone you need to realize the consquences of your actions. If that is letting the guy hire someone or making you open then so be it. Let it be that you are now set to open for a time fine. But sitting back and doing as you want, nope. (Sorry if not making that clear but football and beer are more important at the time).
No I don't see a problem.
If someone who is guarded or closed is attacking you, feel free to assist/report. Likely they will be forced open to match their profile with their actual play style. It has happened before, it will undoubtedly happen again.
>>And you can look up ironic on google and see how you used it wrong.
Look up dramatic irony.
TG, TG, GL, et al.
Also: Moo.
I do. It's just policy takes care of these things. I don't see a problem with larger characters baiting those not possessing the necessary intelligence to keep their own yap shut.
>>Umm, so you don't see a problem in the policy. If you are going to attack lesser players then you get to stay guarded? I cannot hire someone to kill you? You think that is good policy??? You attack someone weaker than you, yet stay guarded and kill the little guys you taunt. What I'm saying is that if you taunt and go after someone you need to realize the consquences of your actions. If that is letting the guy hire someone or making you open then so be it. Let it be that you are now set to open for a time fine. But sitting back and doing as you want, nope. (Sorry if not making that clear but football and beer are more important at the time).
No I don't see a problem.
If someone who is guarded or closed is attacking you, feel free to assist/report. Likely they will be forced open to match their profile with their actual play style. It has happened before, it will undoubtedly happen again.
>>And you can look up ironic on google and see how you used it wrong.
Look up dramatic irony.
TG, TG, GL, et al.
Also: Moo.
GRANTJ47
Re: Safe Rooms and You
01/16/2010 11:02 PM UTC
>>In the case of people ganking open lowbies (which yes does happen) there is a solution on the horizon for this in the form of first strikes forcing people to be open for awhile.
Okay. Maybe I'm not making myself clear. This is part of the changing safe rooms, not on the horizon. Changes in safe rooms need to be tied into changes in profile. No safe rooms, no safe attacking. One change should not be made without the other.
Okay. Maybe I'm not making myself clear. This is part of the changing safe rooms, not on the horizon. Changes in safe rooms need to be tied into changes in profile. No safe rooms, no safe attacking. One change should not be made without the other.