|
Post by adzling on Jan 19, 2009 12:27:46 GMT -5
On Assassinations as means of advancement within drow RP.
In drow society one of the most common means of advancement is assassination of your rival, either through direct action, poisoning, hiring of an assassin or leading them to their deaths through guile and subterfuge. Assassination is also important for the advancement/ stopping of plot lines and threads.
This is obviously impossible to enact on a PW without perma-death without some guidelines and rules. This is my attempt at them, please feel free to comment and make suggestions.
1). The assassin (not nec. assassin class! just someone who wants to kill someone else) notifies a DM about his target, why he wishes to kill him and what he hopes to gain from it. This could be advancement in rank (i.e. taking the target's position in a guild), stopping their current plot or advancing the assassin's own plot. The DM and the assassin negotiate what the outcomes could be. If the assassin succeeds this should result in some benefit to them and removal of the target from the RP thread/plot for minimum one RL month. In addition the target should have no recollection of the incident, have no knowledge they have been assassinated and change their RP to reflect this. If the assassin loses he should similarly be restricted from attempting another assassination on the target for 1 RL month and be excluded from RPing the plot/thread any further.
2). The Dm asks the target if they consent to unnotified PvP at any time from unknown personage. If they agree the DM tells the assassin and off they go. The assassin has 2 RL weeks to succeed with as many attempts as he can get away with, of course it's highly likely he'll get more than one attempt. Once the target knows who is after him he'll likely change his security position re: the assassin, or possibly assassinate the assassin! If the assassin does not succeed within two RL weeks the DM terms it a failure and the assassin must conform to the losing conditions set forth by the DM at the initial negotiation. Failure always means AT MINIMUM no further attempts at assassinating the target for 1 RL month AND no further involvement in the plot thread/storyline. If the target does not agree to unnotified PvP they are deemed to have lost and the assassin receives the winning conditions as previously agreed upon. A losing target may not retaliate for 1 RL month.
3). Additional rules should apply such as an attacker must be no more than 3 levels higher than the target (to prevent abusers and keep it fairish), of course an ambitious drow could be as far below in level the attacker as he wishes. If the attacker is more than 3 levels above the target then he must hire a lower-level assassin to deal with the the target (and inform the DM). This makes some sense from an IC perspective as a drow arch-mage would never lower himself to kill an apprentice himself, he would get another apprentice to do it.
This could easily be tracked with an assassination thread in the DM forums so the dms know whats going on and what the dates are regarding last assassination attempts etc (the dms just look it up on the forums, "oh you tried to kill raenir 2 weeks ago you cant try again for another 2 weeks").
all thoughts comments please!
thanks!
|
|
|
Post by broham2 on Jan 19, 2009 13:24:59 GMT -5
I see the point of this, but that sort of limits the RP of Assassins of a certain level, doesn't it? In drow culture specifically, if Player A is higher level than player B... they are together alone in the UD and Player B needs to be removed... Player A is hosed?
I like the concept but I just think this kind of hurts higher level assassins.
|
|
|
Post by adzling on Jan 19, 2009 13:29:09 GMT -5
i agree however some way of balancing must be found to restrict the high levels griefing the low levels by constantly killing them to remove them from plot threads.
so while it may be somewhat restricting it could be helpful.
it's also nice because it brings lower levels INTO the rp plots as opposed to excluding them (you have to hire a lower leveller to hit another lower leveller).
it's worth noting that this rule would not restrict a high-leveller from killing a low-leveller for any other reason (i.e. he disrespects the high leveller or otherwise gets in his way or annoys him). It would only be a restriction regarding dm sanctioned assassinations involving plots.
casual violence would remain the unaltered.
good point though. would like to hear what others (especially dms) think.
|
|
simplistic
Member
XFire: BaronOfWar (ItalianDDog)
Posts: 45
|
Post by simplistic on Jan 19, 2009 21:56:48 GMT -5
Excellent read once again Adzling. You certainly are helping to push the UD in a direction that greatly benefits the immersion factor there. Great work!
|
|
|
Post by hnefi on Jan 20, 2009 10:29:01 GMT -5
I think those rules would be a good start at general assassination rules (here defined as plot-related murder of another PC) on the server. One thing I'd like to see clarified is exactly when an assassin loses. Is it when he dies by the hand of his target? When he makes an attempt, fails, and runs away? Something else?
I'd suggest these basic rules for when one or the other side wins/loses, with modifications being made as seen fit in each individual plot: The assassin wins when one or more of the following happens: *The target dies as a direct result of the actions of the assassin. *The target "surrenders" by leaving the plot. The assassin loses when one or more of the following happens: *The assassin dies as a direct result of the actions of the target. *The assassin makes a failed attempt to carry out the assassination and is identified while doing so, with witnesses that survive to tell the tale.
If the target surrenders, it might be RP'ed as leaving BG for a while, or locking oneself in ones mansion, or whatever is appropriate.
If the assassin fails and is identified, he will most likely be hunted by whatever law enforcement exists and therefore no longer in a position to carry out the hit. There might even be a bounty on him, creating a new plot where bounty hunters might try to assassinate or capture him while the assassin is locked out of the plot that caused the failed attempt to begin with. This is one of the dangers any would-be murderer should be willing to accept.
If the assassin succeeds and is identified, he may reach his goals in the original plot but will still suffer the penalty for being identified; becoming wanted. Again, that's a risk assassins should have to take.
|
|
|
Post by adzling on Jan 20, 2009 11:15:45 GMT -5
good points hnefi, would like to hear what the dms think too. cheers
|
|
|
Post by DM Cephas on Jan 20, 2009 15:56:38 GMT -5
This isn't offical ruling (yet at least) but are some thoughts on the matter... On Assassinations as means of advancement within drow RP. In drow society one of the most common means of advancement is assassination of your rival, either through direct action, poisoning, hiring of an assassin or leading them to their deaths through guile and subterfuge. Assassination is also important for the advancement/ stopping of plot lines and threads. This is obviously impossible to enact on a PW without perma-death without some guidelines and rules. This is my attempt at them, please feel free to comment and make suggestions. 1). The assassin (not nec. assassin class! just someone who wants to kill someone else) notifies a DM about his target, why he wishes to kill him and what he hopes to gain from it. This could be advancement in rank (i.e. taking the target's position in a guild), stopping their current plot or advancing the assassin's own plot. The DM and the assassin negotiate what the outcomes could be. If the assassin succeeds this should result in some benefit to them and removal of the target from the RP thread/plot for minimum one RL month. In addition the target should have no recollection of the incident, have no knowledge they have been assassinated and change their RP to reflect this. If the assassin loses he should similarly be restricted from attempting another assassination on the target for 1 RL month and be excluded from RPing the plot/thread any further. One RL month is probably a bit harsh and I can see people complaining to no end about it. If the advancement of rank or something similar is the objective, perhaps consider putting this in the respective guild's bylaws. That way, people joining the guild will effectively be agreeing to it by joining. The consequences of a failed attempt should probably be guild specific and listed out as well. If this becomes an inter-guild assassination attempt (i.e. one guild leader tries to have another guild leader assassinated --- taken from power), this will have to be agreed upon between the two parties just like in PvP consent. Open guild war should probably be done the same way. If not, the conflict will become more about winning than providing a richer RP experience. Remember that PC's can be mortal enemies but we should strive to be friends as players. If it is a DM event plotline, just coordinate with the DM running it and the rules will be dictated then. I know the above sounds artificial, but the lack of perma-death forces us to do this. I'm not complaining about the lack of perma-death however because it in turn helps avoid hurt feelings and actual player anger and feelings or revenge. This is just a game right? 2). The Dm asks the target if they consent to unnotified PvP at any time from unknown personage. If they agree the DM tells the assassin and off they go. The assassin has 2 RL weeks to succeed with as many attempts as he can get away with, of course it's highly likely he'll get more than one attempt. Once the target knows who is after him he'll likely change his security position re: the assassin, or possibly assassinate the assassin! If the assassin does not succeed within two RL weeks the DM terms it a failure and the assassin must conform to the losing conditions set forth by the DM at the initial negotiation. Failure always means AT MINIMUM no further attempts at assassinating the target for 1 RL month AND no further involvement in the plot thread/storyline. If the target does not agree to unnotified PvP they are deemed to have lost and the assassin receives the winning conditions as previously agreed upon. A losing target may not retaliate for 1 RL month. As above, this should be a guild bylaw. Take the Nature Guild for instance. A challenge can be made to usurp a member of his rank (Survival of the Fittest) but a rule in there says that it has to voted upon and the challenged has 2 weeks to accept or rescind his rank. 3). Additional rules should apply such as an attacker must be no more than 3 levels higher than the target (to prevent abusers and keep it fairish), of course an ambitious drow could be as far below in level the attacker as he wishes. If the attacker is more than 3 levels above the target then he must hire a lower-level assassin to deal with the the target (and inform the DM). This makes some sense from an IC perspective as a drow arch-mage would never lower himself to kill an apprentice himself, he would get another apprentice to do it. Should be guild bylaw or inter-guild agreement as recommended above. But a 3 level limit above the target is reasonable.
|
|
|
Post by adzling on Jan 20, 2009 16:10:27 GMT -5
thanks for the feedback cephas
these kind of ground rules are actually just as pertinent to non-guild happenings as guild stuff. there are all kinds of reasons someone may attempt to kill someone in the UD.
i was hoping to setup some kind of baseline of accepted practice on this as on my old server there was none resulting in stuff like: Player A: "I strike at your heart Player B so that you can not report what you have seen to your superiors and thwart my plans for world domination". Player A kills Player B. Player B: *gets up* "hah! i am immortal! you can not stop me i will tell the world of your plans!" Player A: (no rules to cover such plot-based assassinations version) *groan* Player A: (rules to cover plot-based assassinations version) READ THE RULES YOU DOLT! As far as this plot-thread is concerned you are dead for 1 RL month.
and remember the toon is only dead for this plot thread, they can do whatever they like and rp however they wish regarding everything else.
thoughts? does that help clarify the issue? reduce the "out of plot" time from 1 RL month to 2 RL weeks?
|
|
|
Post by DM Cephas on Jan 20, 2009 16:33:58 GMT -5
If you're talking "simple" PvP...
The general rule of thumb is that when a player that "dies" in PvP battle, he or she does not remember the events of that real life day. In other words, if a witness to an event of that day is killed, he or she forgets what happened and will not remember anything about the attacker. Consider it a consequence of being revived. If the player continues to report it anyway, DM's can choose to delete such threads and ask everyone to ignore that piece of "tainted" information.
Now, if you're trying to take the player to be out of action for a whole plotline, that might be tougher to mitigate. If it's a DM event, the DM can choose to remove the PC out of it but it's no guarantee. If it's a player generated plot line, it's even tougher. Remember that Resurrection spells do exist and it doesn't take a month to bring someone back into play. In other words, you'll have to be quick in removing the threat knowledge because once that information has sunk in (more than a RL day), then you can no longer "erase" it.
Am I answering your question?
|
|
|
Post by adzling on Jan 20, 2009 17:32:20 GMT -5
kind of.
i understand what you're saying about lack of memory regarding PvP death, and I understand what you are saying regarding the possibility of a raise and agree this makes sense.
this assassination ruleset would not apply to casual violence (i.e pkilling due to some random dispute). it's more about putting in place a mechanic that allows two players who are working toward opposite ends in a RP plot to use assassination as a way of winning a plot or removing an opposing PC from interfering in the plot (as perma-death does not exist). So if you are assassinated in some tunnel and the assassin dispose of the body via burning or acid or dumping in a river this kind of ruleset would apply as a raise would not be possible IC. this could be a dm'd plot, or it could be a player-driven plot.
ground rules for this kind of thing are important per my previous comment.
in all instances a dm ruling would supersede the ground rules if the dm deems it nec. (i.e. he may not want someone just hauling off and killing a PC important to his plot, so it wouldnt apply).
does this make sense?
|
|
|
Post by DM haunted on Jan 21, 2009 9:18:46 GMT -5
I like these ideas,good job...Though a little tweaking is necessary but good ideas all in all.
|
|
|
Post by DM Cephas on Jan 21, 2009 11:03:39 GMT -5
kind of. i understand what you're saying about lack of memory regarding PvP death, and I understand what you are saying regarding the possibility of a raise and agree this makes sense. this assassination ruleset would not apply to casual violence (i.e pkilling due to some random dispute). it's more about putting in place a mechanic that allows two players who are working toward opposite ends in a RP plot to use assassination as a way of winning a plot or removing an opposing PC from interfering in the plot (as perma-death does not exist). So if you are assassinated in some tunnel and the assassin dispose of the body via burning or acid or dumping in a river this kind of ruleset would apply as a raise would not be possible IC. this could be a dm'd plot, or it could be a player-driven plot. ground rules for this kind of thing are important per my previous comment. in all instances a dm ruling would supersede the ground rules if the dm deems it nec. (i.e. he may not want someone just hauling off and killing a PC important to his plot, so it wouldnt apply). does this make sense? I believe I understand what you're saying and I may have to put this back into the "simple PvP" rules. Due to the lack of perma-death, it is asked of the player base to avoid perma-death type actions (such as throwing one's body in a pool of acid). It is much easier to RP assuming you killed someone (but didn't) or killing the person who is later resurrected. You may have to just have gentlemen's agreement that the other person is locked up or out of the way for a designated period of time if it's a player-driven plot. Alternatively, you could get a DM involved and but then it would become a DM-driven or DM-related event and would fall under those rules. Besides, if a ground rule is established and the other player doesn't agree, a DM needs to get involved anyway. I have a feeling that we may be missing each other on this point but it's a little difficult since we're talking in general plot lines. When it boils down to it, it depends on the situation and plotline. I'm wary of trying to establish rules because it has the potential of being an administrative nightmare with people trying to kill each other off. Player plot lines also have the potential of getting messy when opposing members don't agree with each other. Even if the player 1 and the DM agree on the outcome first (as per your guideline step 1), if player 2 does not agree to it, the event becomes moot. Forcing the event (either the PvP or the outcome) will result in complaints in game and in forum from player 2. In other words, I may have to fall back on the event having to be a gentleman's agreement. PvP death forgetfulness is easy to deal with but the more complicated rulings may become to burdensome. Take Iceshard's assassin for instance. That's his "way of life" and he relies primarily on the "PvP death forgetfulness" and "no Metagaming" rules and he pulls off his assassinations and plotlines. Anyway, I hope I'm making sense. I'm just taking a break from writing a paper so I may be rambling. Other DM's can feel free to chime in, but this is my personal take on it.
|
|
|
Post by adzling on Jan 21, 2009 11:34:34 GMT -5
yar this is getting a little circular ceph.
let me attempt to state the situation as succinctly as possible:
1). When players' toons are working towards plot goals in opposition to one another (player A "rule the world", player B "stop player A") there should be a method for one or another player to prevail.
2). Absent a specific DM mechanism (i.e. collect this book, summon that balor etc) the option of direct assassination should be open to the players.
3). In order for this to work in a world without perma-death there must be some basic ground rules (mediated by a DM) for determining what happens if one player kills the other.
4). My suggestions for dealing with this involve removing the toon that was killed from the plot thread for a predetermined time. That toon may no longer interact with nor affect that plot thread. This allows players to plot and plan against one another without constantly fighting the same battle over and over again as their opponent continually raises themself. The killed toon can still be raised OOC and go on interacting with the world and doing other stuff RP wise they just have to remove themself from the plot thread in question. As far as the plot thread is concerned they are no longer involved.
Does this make it a little clearer?
thanks
|
|
|
Post by DM Cephas on Jan 21, 2009 12:35:39 GMT -5
yar this is getting a little circular ceph. let me attempt to state the situation as succinctly as possible: 1). When players' toons are working towards plot goals in opposition to one another (player A "rule the world", player B "stop player A") there should be a method for one or another player to prevail. 2). Absent a specific DM mechanism (i.e. collect this book, summon that balor etc) the option of direct assassination should be open to the players. 3). In order for this to work in a world without perma-death there must be some basic ground rules (mediated by a DM) for determining what happens if one player kills the other. 4). My suggestions for dealing with this involve removing the toon that was killed from the plot thread for a predetermined time. That toon may no longer interact with nor affect that plot thread. This allows players to plot and plan against one another without constantly fighting the same battle over and over again as their opponent continually raises themself. The killed toon can still be raised OOC and go on interacting with the world and doing other stuff RP wise they just have to remove themself from the plot thread in question. As far as the plot thread is concerned they are no longer involved. Does this make it a little clearer? thanks I believe so, yes. What I'm trying to convey is that point #1 needs to be agreed upon as player-to-player agreements or as a DM event. Point #2 is an option under normal PvP death rules. Anything more complicated than that needs to go to my response to Point #1. Point #3 is covered in my points #1 and #2. I feel like I understand what you are trying to achieve for Point #4 but we simply can't BECAUSE of the fact that a person can be raised. If you think about it, it's harder to RP because (in one example), a person "assassinated" to overthrow a guild leader will be walking around and we are suggesting that the other guildsmen can't interact with the "assassinated" guild leader? And then a month later, he's the guild leader again? Yes, there are other scenarios in which this may work but it will have to be situationally dependent as I mentioned. A server rule will be either be too complicated or too vague to address each scenario. Hopefully I'm able to relay my opinions well. Sorry if it's short and possibly curt. I'm gonna be late for something.
|
|
|
Post by adzling on Jan 21, 2009 18:24:53 GMT -5
ok ceph i think we're understanding one another the issue is neatly summed up in your quote below.
"I feel like I understand what you are trying to achieve for Point #4 but we simply can't BECAUSE of the fact that a person can be raised. If you think about it, it's harder to RP because (in one example), a person "assassinated" to overthrow a guild leader will be walking around and we are suggesting that the other guildsmen can't interact with the "assassinated" guild leader? And then a month later, he's the guild leader again? Yes, there are other scenarios in which this may work but it will have to be situationally dependent as I mentioned. A server rule will be either be too complicated or too vague to address each scenario."
I posit that given the fact that ALL players can never die assassination by a RP-plot-antagonist should remove them from the plot even though due to game mechanics it cannot actually kill them permanently. This is the price you pay for losing, you may not lose your life but you lose the ability to affect the plot that spawned your successful antagonist.
In your example the ex-guild master can do whatever he wishes RP wise (including interacting with other guild members) he just may not engage in an assassination attempt (or RP plot) to regain his lost position within one RL month. You could easily introduce a rule that you may not attempt to remove a guild leader more than once in a year or whatever to reduce turnover if it becomes an issue. This could result in certain institutions replacing or swapping their heads fairly often and imho that's fine from a drow perspective. Drow covet power more than anything else.
Agreed that this would have to be tailored for each situation however i think it would be possible to set a baseline.
Below is my attempt at setting a general principle on how to deal with such things..
The overarching principle is: given that absent perma-death no-one can ever die on this server players must accept that if you are killed in pursuit of a RP plot by an antagonist you lose your ability to pursue the plot. Where possible DM consultation should happen in advance. This is to stop people getting up the next day and doing the same thing all over again ad infinitum. Dm exceptions to this general principle are to be expected.
|
|