|
Rule 8
Feb 6, 2009 19:11:45 GMT -5
Post by all_distorted on Feb 6, 2009 19:11:45 GMT -5
No, it is lethal damage. The fact that the "meta" results are 60 seconds downtime and 24hr no contact are inmaterial. Perhaps it's understood that the "killing" blow is held, but it is lethal damage none-the-less. This might depend on the players involved. For example, the attacker doesn't really have intention to kill the one he's attacking, but instead wants just to knock the seven bells out of them. And let's say that the option of RPing it out didn't work for some reason and PvP started. And the fight most likely won't end until one of the opponents is down. Because even if one of them stops attacking, the other might still continue. If the attacker with no initial intent to kill his/her opponent comes out the winner he/she might then ask if it would be alright to RP this situation as not killing but just knocking unconcious. If the one who was defeated agrees, then I think it should be fine to treat it as non-lethal. Of course in this situation the defeated one would remember all what happened (in contrast to the assassination scenarios), however, this could also be agreed between the players. Cooperation is the key here I, for one, favour such scenarios as I try to treat death seriously. I mean, just how many times exactly can one die? ;D Anyways, that's an idea how PvP might not neccesarily mean death. Sorry, if it's a bit off-topic >.>
|
|
|
Rule 8
Feb 6, 2009 19:36:21 GMT -5
Post by Zealote on Feb 6, 2009 19:36:21 GMT -5
Not off-topic. You think like most of the RPers here.
|
|
mrdeadman
Senior Member
I'll thank you to keep your reality out of my fantasy.
Posts: 308
|
Rule 8
Feb 6, 2009 19:37:55 GMT -5
Post by mrdeadman on Feb 6, 2009 19:37:55 GMT -5
But mrdeadman, what you describe is explicitly against rule #8: "If your [sic] going to get into Player vs Player for ANY reason, be it racism, threats, ANY sort of conflict, offer them an OOC out of the situation, its ok to warn them that the next conflict is unavoidable, we dont want to limit RP but consideration should be used." (emphasis mine). Personally, I think that the only regulation needed on PvP given that there are no punishments for losing should be that you can't fight the same character twice in a RL day. I think IC warnings should be enough, and so do obviously most players who have posted here, but that's against the rules as they are now. If I misinterpreted the rule, perhaps it could be rewritten to be more clear. Hnefi, what does this say??? To head off any more assumption on your part, I also didn't say that I would immediately start said thrashing. In previous posts I have said you will be set to hostile first. We'll call that warning one and should be taken as, you are heading down a dangerous road, continue at your own peril. I will RP the situation further after that and vocalize that the road you are taking is a dangerous path. I am not above diplomacy. After trying to talk whoever out of continuing their actions said thrashing will commence. Plenty of warning. Plenty of chance to drop the bad idea and walk away. So again, after all that, if I beat you down, like I said, you have ZERO right to call foul. If I am setting to hostile and then further discussing it RP to give further indication that it is the wrong choice for you to make... sounds like I'm giving plenty of "outs" according to the rule. As I have said before, I have been involved in only one PvP situation on this server in the several months I've been here. Obviously, I go around looking for PvP all the time.
|
|