[Your View] Recent Defender Default change: Feedback

[Harri 4815]

1 minute ago, Ambduscias said:

 

I had a GM genuinely ignore it when I brought it up last time, saying that refers only to PVP.

 

That does only refer to PvP, I am 99% sure of that. And if not, then that rule should not say that.

[Ambduscias 1028]

Just now, Harrison said:

That does only refer to PvP, I am 99% sure of that. And if not, then that rule should not say that.

 

abcabcabcabc

Honestly making that apply to RP would solve 95% of my problems with RP fighting. 

[Harri 4815]

Just now, Ambduscias said:

Honestly making that apply to RP would solve 95% of my problems with RP fighting. 

 

It probably could. I just hate restricting what people can or can't do in role-play, but then again if it solves all our issues people can bite the bullet. It's an idea that has been thrown around a bit, actually.

[Thornz 549]

guess again

@ambduscias

Under combat rules it states "Nobody may join mid-combat. Only those involved at the start may fight."

[Ambduscias 1028]

Just now, McThornz said:

guess again

@ambduscias

Under combat rules it states "Nobody may join mid-combat. Only those involved at the start may fight."

 

 

refer to the earlier post, was specifically instructed by GMs that it's only used for PVP

[monkeypoacher 8055]

raiding should just be removed altogether, along with the constantly fluctuating rules that nobody seems to agree on

 

if you have no reason to attack a settlement that isn't "I want to steal gear, or kill a bunch of people for no reason" the people in that settlement should be able to tell you to **** off. otherwise raid limits aren't really necessary, and get in the way of interesting rp

[Ambduscias 1028]

1 minute ago, char-char~ said:

raiding should just be removed altogether, along with the constantly fluctuating rules that nobody seems

 

if you have no reason to attack a settlement that isn't "I want to steal gear, or kill a bunch of people for no reason" the people in that settlement should be able to tell you to **** off. otherwise raid limits aren't really necessary, and get in the way of interesting rp

 

 

do you play an elf? i think you play an elf.

 

"conflict which results in negative outcomes for my characters are inherently bad."

[𝕾𝖙𝖆𝖗𝖌𝖚𝖘𝖍 2451]

Just now, char-char~ said:

raiding should just be removed altogether, along with the constantly fluctuating rules that nobody seems

 

if you have no reason to attack a settlement that isn't "I want to steal gear, or kill a bunch of people for no reason" the people in that settlement should be able to tell you to **** off. otherwise raid limits aren't really that important or necessary, and get in the way of interesting rp

 

abc

 

Removal of Raiding would literally be like saying "lets not have war in Lord of the Craft anymore, and do nothing but tavern role-play."

 

I think it's irritating that so many variables are being put in place to prevent/prohibit raiding or make it easier on the players who don't go out of their way to raid others in the first place, when raiding on the server or in real life has never been easy on anybody.

[LatzMomo 2088]

This rule is pretty aids. I already said my piece on DPM's thread, but I'll repeat it here. I have problems reading already, but when you have 9 sweaty keyboard warriors all emoting in rapid succession, it's really hard to keep up, and it's not fun at all either. There's not going to be many fun 9 man RP fights on this server. This rule change was very inconsiderate to people with problems reading, and it should have never gone through.

[_pr0fit 3084]

Just now, Gob said:

This rule is pretty aids. I already said my piece on DPM's thread, but I'll repeat it here. I have problems reading already, but when you have 9 sweaty keyboard warriors all emoting in rapid succession, it's really hard to keep up, and it's not fun at all either. There's not going to be many fun 9 man RP fights on this server. This rule change was very inconsiderate to people with problems reading, and it should have never gone through.

 

 

tfw the staff are attacking players with mental disabilities but don't care

Spoiler

:^)                                                                                                                                                                                           luv ya

 

[monkeypoacher 8055]

7 hours ago, Ambduscias said:

 

do you play an elf? i think you play an elf.

 

"conflict which results in negative outcomes for my characters are inherently bad."

 

 

"haha if you don't like your rp being interrupted by a bunch of screeching children trying to get better minecraft swords, then treating you like dogshit when you don't give them exactly they want with no resistance, you must just hate conflict rp!!! silly elf. lol"

 

the reason rp on this server is so insipid is because of the pvp subculture that shits on roleplay and generates pointless conflict. I guarantee you that if you removed pvp from the server outright there would be more conflict; Anthos pre-pvp default being my reasoning. 

 

7 hours ago, Humanistic said:

 

Removal of Raiding would literally be like saying "lets not have war in Lord of the Craft anymore, and do nothing but tavern role-play."

 

I think it's irritating that so many variables are being put in place to prevent/prohibit raiding or make it easier on the players who don't go out of their way to raid others in the first place, when raiding on the server or in real life has never been easy on anybody.

 

 

teehee I guess it's fitting my name is tavern_roleplay, isn't it?

 

I think you're very wrong. Remove lawless raiding and/or bandit roleplay, and you don't need a stupid four-man cap on every potentially hostile encounter. People are more free to roleplay fights, riots, and wartime chevauchée. It would make everything a lot more interesting.

[Unknown User 316]

Defender default is the best mechanism for combat I've seen so far on this server. PVP default was just horrible; made me leave the server for a few years. 

[OzYmandi 647]

2 hours ago, Harrison said:

 

• We are currently working on solving Metagaming on the server.
•  

 

 

You don't do that.

You simply don't.

There's always a Discord or a Skype group.

It's an irreversible thing that's present and will always be present on the server. The only possible way is forbidding Skype groups and that's impossible itself, since there's no way knowing who's having that or who created that other group.

 

It's simply, plainly and, unfortunately, impossible.

[WuHanXianShi14 0]

2 hours ago, char-char~ said:

raiding should just be removed altogether, along with the constantly fluctuating rules that nobody seems to agree on

 

if you have no reason to attack a settlement that isn't "I want to steal gear, or kill a bunch of people for no reason" the people in that settlement should be able to tell you to **** off. otherwise raid limits aren't really necessary, and get in the way of interesting rp

 

This wouldnt be a bad idea. If you attack a settlement you need a specific/immediate RP reason beyond a broad 'i like to steal/kill/dont like X group'.

 

Although, in general, I think people shouldn't be allowed to raid at all if their intent is to call PVP as soon as possible. Should be required to attempt to RP it out first. If youre not willing to RP with the people you are forcing to spend their time interacting w/ you then honestly I dunno what to say.

 

So all in all its a good change. If you dont like RP fighting then attack the places you know wont ask you to RP fight. 99% of raids are motiveless and done out of OOC boredom/thrill anyways.

[Sky 0]

2 hours ago, Harrison said:

It probably could. I just hate restricting what people can or can't do in role-play, but then again if it solves all our issues people can bite the bullet. It's an idea that has been thrown around a bit, actually.

 

It may be an idea tossed around but that's straight idiotic, by that logic three people could initiate combat on a singular person in the middle of a city and said person's friends, or the city's guard, would magically be unable to assist because of the rule- It makes no sense that a character would stumble across a life-long friend being assaulted and just walk on by without a care in the world because 'for some reason I cannot get involved'.