Isntinuse, I think you meant me, not Melan.


Also, I didn't mean you don't lose EXP if you die....that's obvious you should. What I meant is, the player who killed you should not GAIN any.

Hmm... Just leave the no exp gain from pk.

There has been no RP in combat in any logs I have seen - there is just (script triggered) responses to the current situation. You are describing reactions to the game mechanics not RP.

The point would be to make fights mean nothing (in an ooc context) when fighting those that do not wish combat.

Maybe some kind of full experience duelling / challenge system could be setup for those that wish to advance through player combat?

*making up as he goes along*

That'll not work, guarantee. Whats the point of fighting, using up herbs/vials, to gain nothing?

Precisely.

Now, why should there be a gain?

1. If you kill a cow, you gain experience, why shouldn't you gain experience if you kill a player? Is it not the same thing as a cow?

2. No one would pk, there'd be absolutely no point in fighting what-so-ever.

3. I'd leave Lusternia.

4. I'm sure more people would leave Lusternia, IRE and its games are known for its fighting, you are taking it away.

I am talking about game mechanics, because this is a game. People play because they have fun -playing- the -game-. People who just want pure RP with no game elements would be better served by a yahoo chat room, MUSH, or some other free-form roleplaying.

That isn't what Lusternia is.

No exp gain for killing people would work perfectly, in my opinion. If you fight merely for exp, you have no reason to be doing so. If you're fighting for a real reason, it shouldn't make a difference to you whether or not you gain exp.

IRE games don't put much stock in levels in anyway. It's not like in WoW or something, where if fight someone more than a few levels above me, I'm never going to win. Here, past a certain point, levels are meaningless. I can kill people without a clue whether they're a Titan or some newb, and someone fresh out of Newton can kick my ass if they're good.

The only times I've ever killed outside the arena, I gave absolutely no thought as to whether my herbs and vials and power were being wasted on meaningless combat, or to how much exp I'd get. Kill for RP, not for exp or any other material reason.

Yes, some people want to bash, own shops, become politicians, do quests, lots of things. They don't want to be attacked when they are walking up a highway for being from a city or walking through someones demense. I agree that exp from PK shouldn't be blocked in general, but only from those who are on the Prime in non-pk type areas (the afore mentioned). If you commit an aggressive act against someone or something (i.e. defiling), then you are free game with the rest of the PK'ers. Institute something that prevents people from running out of villages to avoid big fights after they pk someone. Anything! Leaving it as is will only let the problem snowball until many of the good RP'ers have left and you have on the fighters remaining.

For this skill proposed by Estarra, I like the idea, but it does need a few tweaks to prevent abuse. The idea in general is good though, they can give up the ability to be PK'd, but in response they won't be able to respond to city problems or whatnot unless they take it down. Maybe even tweak it so they can't even enter enemy territory (village or city) so they don't taunt those folks while under grace.

1. I'll acknowledge this on the basis of keeping things consistent, and to prevent this from turning into a discussion of exp based system.

2. I believe we were trying to reduce the amount of pk, so this to me suggests that it would have the desired effect. No?

3 & 4. Granted, that would be bad (presuming you're not one the of players that are going around randomly killing people).

OK. So my perception of your argument is:
...that this would stop pk, rather than reduce it as desired. Maybe a balance is required. So is still seems to me that this would be worth pursuing. Maybe just (further?) lowering exp gain.

No exp gain on prime or areas the killed person is enemied to, I can understand, no exp gain from pk at all?

Bad idea.

How many of your skills are for roleplay or bashing?
How many of the artifacts are for roleplay or bashing?

Now, how many of them are made for PK?

Credits are bought by people who want to pk, getting rid of exp gain from pk basically makes pk pointless and a waste of credits. You may as well just learn from levelling and kill with those.

Good point. I was just thinking of prime - don't have any experience of the other planes. If as has been suggested these are for pk then it would be right to have full exp gain in these areas.

I think here you are mistaken.

I played this once great mud called Orone. (its failure had everything to do with the ego of programers and nothing to do with the playerbase or the game.. anyway)

They removed the gain of xp from killing other players, and even for a time removed the xp loss from being killed by players (this was replaced by a lowering of stats, and the introduction of spirit revivals). The result of this, was that players killed eachother -more- often. Why?

Now instead of people getting upset that lots of hard work was lost when they died, politics and other RP aspects of the game flourished, and you killed people because you wanted to shut them up, and send them packing for a few minutes (i.e the death sequence) or you wanted to make a point that nobody was safe from your insane flying daggers, and bolas! (muahaha) There was also little guilt in killing people, and all the thrill of combat.

I just hope the divine manage to keep a clear head throughout this nonsense .

Death is a kinda wishy-washy concept here, so let's look at the real-life rules regarding injuring another human being.

All governments agree that there's something twisted in smashing someone's kneecap because he looked at you wrong. Now, the Syrian government doesn't care one whit about a Canadian who decides that Russians look better on the ground, and thus broke some legs. As soon as that same Canadian mistakes a Syrian for a Russian, though, Syria cares. Canada probably doesn't care all that much that some Syrian got hurt, but Canada really wouldn't want to protect the thug, since that opens the door to Syria letting its thugs beat up Canadians. Thus, in the interest of protecting Canadians at large, that one Canadian is going to get the shaft from Canada itself, either by turning him over to Syria for some hardcore Islamic justice/abuse, or throwing the man in prison for as long as he would be if he decided to hit another Canadian.

Now, here's my (feeble) translation of the above into Lusternian:

Cities can protect their own citizens by simply extending some measure of protection to the other cities in exchange for reciprocation. Powerblocking is the first thing that comes to mind. You can pretty efficiently curb a fighter if he doesn't have access to power. (K, so there's still Astral and Powerplex Jewels, but the basic intent is there.) Powerblocking Ceres won't do good things for Celest, but Celest would probably be willing to do it if they knew that it would protect their innocent novices.

oooh look, a good point.

Won't happen, won't work. If you powerblock them, they are no longer available for defence. They may even leave the city and go rogue, or find another city that won't limit them. Your analogy doesn't work because the people in it are civilians of countries that want to be peaceful. We are talking about, essentially, soldiers of cities who want to destroy each other.

The trouble isn't the minority screwing it up - the trouble is the minority screwing it up whilst their city claims it has nothing to /do/ with the city. Some responsibility needs to be taken and enforced. Its interesting to watch players and organisations in both Achaea and Lusternia /actively trying to avoid taking responsibility/ for their actions.

If you'd like some OOC method of enforcing a lack of prime-PK, make the prime-PK negatively reflect on the /city/. Make people take responsibility for their actions. As an example: imagine if prime PK outside of quest/village areas (under whatever restrictions exist at the moment) result in a power /loss/ in your city. If a group of Magnagorans go to kill some Serenwilders then the city loses power for each person who participates in each death (eg - 4 people attacking one person, Magnagora loses power for each of the 4 who attacked.) People will then be forced to balance their PK trigger happyness with their ability to raise power for their city.

Hmm, interesting idea. And maybe rogues would drain power from all nexuses.

Sorry, Dag, had to delete your post as it somehow got corrupted.

Hmmm, what did you do??

WHA???????