Well, I think at this point we have all established:

1. An objective system would be tricky because the concept of "grief" is not defined to specific acts but rather the "spirit" of said acts. It could be done somewhat with stricter PK rules (for example, I suggested that after you have say 10 suspects, the next time you gain a suspect, that suspect automatically has avenger status).

2. A subjective system would work. The pros being that it allows an option to handle grief in its various forms. The cons being that it would take a lot of admin time.

=====================================================

My personal concern was that it be primarily restricted to PK or other actions that directly target players (ie. stealing) versus quests where no player is harmed (ie. Gorgogs). I don't like the idea of being told: "This your third time trying to release the Gorgogs in a 48 hour period. Cease or be peaced."

Viravain and others have said that this would be used only in extreme situations, but things do change and a "quick fix" is hard to turn down especially if there is some external pressure such as players ranting on CT, etc.

Narsrim, I don't even need to post your list, everyone knows it. Including the divine apparently, since they used you as prime example as well.

And..

-poke Iridiel-

Every of my posts has been giving feedback on the anti-grief system, I'm just using Narsrim as a standard.

You're bashing at Nasrim because you know he'll answer you and you two can continue your endless argument.

Wich might be a way to get a better post count wich would mean you two are cooperating...

I guess she used them as prime example as they're not going to yell up, feel distressed by the notion or mail support about Estarra being mean. After all, they're called griefers in almost every thread.

Back to topic people! If this goes through then you can leave it up to the Administration anyway to define who a 'griefer' is.

That said a lot of organisations took a lot of bashing at times. Not only Glomdoring but Celest (!) and Serenwilde too.. and occasionally Magnagora. Quit it, get back to topic and keep your hatred for each other IC.

/hijack

So yeah.. in overall I'd say let's try it. Else, nothing would get done at all no?

If you want to know what I think...

Get it? Hahahahahahah. Anyway.

I say, no. Don't add this. And get rid of karma. The horse is not only out of the barn, three generations of its foals have spread across the world building armed encampments to make sure no one can ever put them into barns ever again.

The biggest thing that separates Lusternia from other IRE games is not the history, not Avechna, not the superb admin team, not the quality of world building, not the pace of development. It's not power feats, player-driven economy, or any of the things listed on the website. It is this:

* Players are strongly encouraged to be part of, and loyal to, an organization with an agenda.
* Players are strongly discouraged from having peaceful interactions with members of other organizations. Many will never even meet any.
* All organizations are locked in conflict with all others, eternal, intractable conflict that cannot be resolved diplomatically save for very short periods, very rarely.

Lusternia is the conflict game. And everything about it encourages an "us and them" mentality that eventually turns into a mean-spiritedness towards everyone else, which very quickly and pervasively seeps into player attitudes, not just character attitudes. Remember back when the game was new and there was a sense that we were all here enjoying a great game together? Did you ever wonder where that went? If you are wondering why the game seemed so much more fun back in the first few months, maybe that was it. Did you know that in most places, the idea of a player wishing another player (not character, player) had drowned in a tragic catastrophe, so the first player could get exp more easily, is as alien as nine-dimensional geometry? The telling point here isn't that Lusternian players don't adequately police attitudes like that amongst their own, it's that they even have to think about it in the first place.

It's too late to try to change this. It's woven more fundamentally into the design of Lusternia than is any single other thing about the world. Changing this would essentially be destroying Lusternia and making another Lusternia in its place, the Lusternia from the mirror universe, the Lusternia without the goatee.

But while there'd certainly be people who'd like that Lusternia, there are already things like it out there. No matter what "it" is, if you build it, they will come... because whatever you build, there's someone out there somewhere that wants that. What Lusternia is, there's a market for, so good on Lusternia for giving those folks what they want. And frankly, it serves everyone else, by keeping those people out of everywhere else.

Embrace it. Don't water it down. This is what Lusternia is, and it's silly at this point to ask whether it should have been something else.

Well, Gwylifar, it's not that conflict was designed into the game, it's the fact that elements of the player base don't use discretion about the levels of conflict.

That's why I suggested a help file. If people can "meta-think" combat stats, etc, they can also "meta-think" temperance and discression. It's a simple matter of knowing how much is too much. As far as the psychology of the players, that can occur in ANY MUD, no matter how idealistic. It's not the fault of Lusternia.

Conflict is a part of the game and an attraction, but they have been doing a lot to add culture and other aspects to encourage the game system. The fact that we have several non-combatants speaks wonders. I'm not sure why you are not satisfied, but I think making subtle digs towards the game designers isn't helping.

You will note in this thread (perhaps another) that players are "stealing" scholars from newbies in an attempt to raise culture scores so they can become the best library, etc. Even to damn library system has conflict in it! How can you possibly say it wasn't designed into the game?

The primary point of the culture score is to get people to write books. Scholars are a side-effect, and is probably the only "conflict-way" about the system.

My point was simply that even libraries have conflict woven into it in some shape or form.

*edit* I'm not saying I'd rather have it without scholars. I'm a i-like-conflict kinda guy... but I disagree with the notion that conflict isn't designed into things.

Again, as I said before - everything in Lusternia seems to devolve into armed conflict. I wish the Divine(s) of each city/commune would force people, for now, to cut back on this. This may help make the game more enjoyable for everyone.

And then we would have another thread on boredoom and excess of Divine intervention.

Also, how can they RP this?
(Commune) Lisaera says: Guys, I went to have tea with Fain and Shikari and we decided you all stop quarreling and solve the villages by playing chess.

My opinion:

No to another system, especially that it won't help in all cases anyway, there are just issues which can't be resolved by mechanics and administration will always have to step in once in a while (like Viravain said, it doesn't happen so often so it shouldn't be such a burden for them).

Court idea sounds neat, but it's usually OOC matter that need to be resolved. "Griefing" is about players, not characters. So it probably has to end with admin reprimend/punishment.

Maybe quests could use some looking into, if one or two persons can force a big part of an entire organization to watch after stuff all the time, that's not nice.

Griefing/commonsense helpfile with guidelines for what will be considered unappropriate - yes.

And finally one more thing - I believe an official army system would help to separate fighters from non-fighters more clearly. That way, while an army official being killed by 6 enemies in a row in various places during an hour would not be an issue, someone peaceful being slain that way could. That's more of a digression though.

That's incredibly depressing when you look at it that way.

woot!

Yes Munsia. Chess. It doesn't involve you throwing the pieces at your opponent face, while threatening him with a cudgel and yellign "I am a rabid squirrel fear meee!!"

Of course... That would be fun to see... mmmmm....

Not only can't I agree with you, I can't figure out how you could really believe that. Are you sure you're logging onto the right MUD?

Well, I gotta say I think Gwylifar's big post is absolutely right.

But I still think Estarra's original idea would work, as long as it's nothing drastic, just a divine telling mortals to back off when they're going too far.

You're misreading me.



I didn't say conflict wasn't designed into the game.

I said it was, I said the conflict design of the game is not the problem. It's when the players take it over the levels intended by the designers, and don't use "Fair Play" tactics that make sense in any game to adopt, is when it goes wrong.

Honestly, that's why I suggested the help file because people something think "Roleplay" is the most important aspect of the game. It is very important, but it is still superceeded by the fact that this is a game that should be fun for all. This can't be a game where one side will win "the war" against another--anybody who seriously believes that one side will be able to defeat the other side is kidding themselves. It's designed for conflict, but not for conquest.

So, at least on a subconcious level, one has to remember that. You can reconcile this with RP if you do it right. Battles can be fought, raids can be conducted, but you have to balance that out with a modicum of good sportsmanship and temperance. If that ruins some people's RP immersion, I'm sorry, but that's as necessary as having things like freezing the souls of logged off people or not letting novices do PK stuff right away.

I think stealing scholars from novices is incredibly poor sportsmanship, and something I consider to be personally the hallmark of a mediocre/weak player that they have resorted to picking on novices and stealing their hard work, but I don't think it falls under griefing. Stealing anything from novices is pretty low, regardless of their being Magnagoran/Celestian/etc., but it doesn't quite cross that threshold into the large-scale griefing that this thread is (supposed to be) talking about.

Do not mistake Sylphas with me. I'm a dog