Are hard-pk phylacteries a good system?

[xo31 3984]

Hiya. I was just discussing this in the (EX)Lumbridge discord a little, and I wanted to see the general communities thoughts on instant-pk phylacteries for lore creatures. I don't mean Nephilim/Palelord/Paleknight or anything that can just remake their phylactery- I'm talking Wights and Draugars, and the concept of having a phylactery that will instantly render your character permanently unplayable if it's destroyed.

I, personally, think it's a stupid system - it encourages metaplay half of the time (contact your friends to put your phylactery safe and sound with them in their nation/vassal) And is generally anti-rp. While it's cool to have this super-valuable object, I believe it's more valuable than anything should be. What if I want to take a break from the server? What if my computer breaks? Situations completely out of my hands could result in my character being permanently pk'd - and I don't think it's a fun or pro-rp system, and I think there should be other avenues for hindering an evil super evildoer outside of just perma-pking them.

But I want the general server's thoughts. What do you think?

[lemonke 6014]

 

This was on the necromancer re-write written by someone else. We should have more stuff like this. To pretend to be a "normal ghost" or some other entity, only to lead somebody to free you through an interaction and unseal "a big  evil." It would be a cool tool for roleplay, recruiting, and offering a narrative.

[NightcastorKitty 2780]

Not trying to like denounce this or anything. Cause it is a good question that I think actually delves further into someone's take of PKing in general. 

 

I am legit just wondering. If someone doesn't like the PK clauses in the lore. Why are you making a CA for that creature and agreeing to the PK clauses? This is a genuine question here. 

[xo31 3984]

Just now, NightcastorKitty said:

I am legit just wondering. If someone doesn't like the PK clauses in the lore. Why are you making a CA for that creature and agreeing to the PK clauses? This is a genuine question here. 

Some things i agree with you on (Such as Draugar) But for something such as Wight, - Wight is sort of, not FULLY, but almost essential to making a mystic coven. It can be used to grant Truesight and Vivification unto non-mystics and they also have their Invocation abilities. It's very clear that Wight is meant to be used as a group-leader type being.

But even then, sometimes people are willing to take the risk to play an awesome CA they want to play- even if the risk is unneeded. - And I believe it just that, unneeded.

[squakhawk 14040]

if people didn’t want pks they wouldn’t be in lore

if you don’t want a risk of being pkd don’t play the ca

why have pks on the server if people can’t handle them actually being used  

 

Siliti explored a soft pk system which effectively sealed players (Lichdom has this, similarly, albeit it’s much more scarce give their rarity) at the total and complete whim of other siliti, and from the moment of its (player requested) inception, despite ST protest that people Are Not Gonna Like This, they got it and immediately began to complain no other character should have total control over another players character and their playability. “Bad” siliti were put in boxes and told “you can have your character in three months, maybe” which was just so scummy and didn’t add to rp. Shockingly the lore didn’t do well after, though it had a lot of struggles to begin with.

 

 

There before you had shade which had a system that if you tried to paladin dc them they’d get weakened and could only use a lower tier of spells / had less abilities for a day or two. this, given how commonly it happened and all roleplay that ever happens isn’t tracked by st, lead to a lot of people just ignoring it similarly to how easy it is for a coidal mage to just go about their day and cast normally even after doing mana depleting things like enchanting. unless it’s directly caught or suspected we can’t do anything about it.

 

 

PKS, in the lore they’re in, offer a finality and risk associated that is a goal to a certain MA or CA. there’s tons of ways to get pkd (Running out of Klones, having your Soul Tree/Physical body destroyed, Running out of units as an Azdrazi/Getting DC’d, shunting/travelling to another realm and dying or being slain, etc.). There are other ways too that are more auto initiated such as templar last-stand or voidstalker escape to the infinite, but these serve a different purpose as to end a characters story rather than a purpose for villainy / risk for benefits or life.

 

Ultimately it’s something you sign up for when you make the CA/MA/FA as a possibility, and unless we radically change the lore itself and strip it of risk (and following benefits) in exchange for endless purposeless conflict, it’s something agreed upon by players that the lore is a level playing field as it is and should be entrusted to be followed when it’s actually utilized. 

[Cheese 8891]

The same phylactery pk system isn't too similar to tawkin kloning in that you just have to hide it well enough and be select with who has access to it. Like squak and kitty said, it is like . something you have to agree to when reading the lore and applying for the CA. Bad faith happens but that can happen with every feat/magic/CA and you just gotta know the risks and roll with the punches

[bickando 3967]

3 minutes ago, squakhawk said:

if people didn’t want pks they wouldn’t be in lore

if you don’t want a risk of being pkd don’t play the ca

why have pks on the server if people can’t handle them actually being used  

 

Siliti explored a soft pk system which effectively sealed players (Lichdom has this, similarly, albeit it’s much more scarce give their rarity) at the total and complete whim of other siliti, and from the moment of its (player requested) inception, despite ST protest that people Are Not Gonna Like This, they got it and immediately began to complain no other character should have total control over another players character and their playability. “Bad” siliti were put in boxes and told “you can have your character in three months, maybe” which was just so scummy and didn’t add to rp. Shockingly the lore didn’t do well after, though it had a lot of struggles to begin with.

 

 

There before you had shade which had a system that if you tried to paladin dc them they’d get weakened and could only use a lower tier of spells / had less abilities for a day or two. this, given how commonly it happened and all roleplay that ever happens isn’t tracked by st, lead to a lot of people just ignoring it similarly to how easy it is for a coidal mage to just go about their day and cast normally even after doing mana depleting things like enchanting. unless it’s directly caught or suspected we can’t do anything about it.

 

 

PKS, in the lore they’re in, offer a finality and risk associated that is a goal to a certain MA or CA. there’s tons of ways to get pkd (Running out of Klones, having your Soul Tree/Physical body destroyed, Running out of units as an Azdrazi/Getting DC’d, shunting/travelling to another realm and dying or being slain, etc.). There are other ways too that are more auto initiated such as templar last-stand or voidstalker escape to the infinite, but these serve a different purpose as to end a characters story rather than a purpose for villainy / risk for benefits or life.

 

Ultimately it’s something you sign up for when you make the CA/MA/FA as a possibility, and unless we radically change the lore itself and strip it of risk (and following benefits) in exchange for endless purposeless conflict, it’s something agreed upon by players that the lore is a level playing field as it is and should be entrusted to be followed when it’s actually utilized. 

bring back siliti ty vampires r cool

[Benleft 2581]

1 minute ago, bickando said:

bring back siliti ty vampires r cool

Vampire bowl currently in mag. 

[xo31 3984]

2 minutes ago, squakhawk said:

PKS, in the lore they’re in, offer a finality and risk associated that is a goal to a certain MA or CA. there’s tons of ways to get pkd (Running out of Klones, having your Soul Tree/Physical body destroyed, Running out of units as an Azdrazi/Getting DC’d, shunting/travelling to another realm and dying or being slain, etc.). There are other ways too that are more auto initiated such as templar last-stand or voidstalker escape to the infinite, but these serve a different purpose as to end a characters story rather than a purpose for villainy / risk for benefits or life.

 

While I agree with you- as I said, the options you've mentioned for the most part are a completely different idea of what I mean. I agree with the Klone system, the Azdrazi system, as well as the Templar/Voidstalker system. What I disagree with is the instant-pk phylacteries that Wight/Draugar have, where you have no chance of ever coming back.

Pretend I'm not talking about Kloning or Drazi or any of the others besides Wight/Draugar. Those are what I have concern over.

The screenshot that lemonke provided is an interesting idea. Why not have the character become severely weakened for a substantial amount of time? Consequence is good, I agree, but this is not consequence, this is just the end of it all.

[JustMeMorgan 2066]

7 minutes ago, squakhawk said:

Ultimately it’s something you sign up for when you make the CA/MA/FA as a possibility, and unless we radically change the lore itself and strip it of risk (and following benefits) in exchange for endless purposeless conflict, it’s something agreed upon by players that the lore is a level playing field as it is and should be entrusted to be followed when it’s actually utilized. 

 

to quote sqak about this, I was talking about this idea in the gc about pk clauses and I'll say my point again as I think it's a pretty valid one

 

your point suggested that the idea of pk clauses prevents endless purposeless conflict, however my counter argument to that would be that it's only one side that's stuck with a pk clause so ultimately it's only one side that'll die and lose, ergo the purpose of a dark creature is to lose.

 

simple explanation: you can kill the same group of people 50 times and they may never pk, they kill you once and destroy a rock and you pk. a pk clause is something people agree too imo as they see it as the risk for an amazing slice of rp, that being said the drawback is you can face the same group who will torrentially assault you and you will always be on the losing battle due to the example

[Borin 7646]

The more pk'd CA and MA rpers the better

[PrimnyaQuorum 4003]

It feels disingenuous to proclaim klones a good PK system while pretending machine spirits (deity klones) that lack half the redlines are fine. Also it just feels odd to respond to someone starting a discussion “lol erm didn’t you apply for this CA? Why are you discussing it?”

 

I can’t recall the last time I heard of a Azdrazi being PK’d through the immaculate blade or running out of units. Can’t recall someone with all their klones had them hunted down and broken, usually just killed before they had klones to begin with. Liches and darkstalkers are, in my opinion, the problematic revival CA because no matter what you do, they’re coming back in 30mins with 0 debuffs whatsoever. 
 

id same the real problem with PK systems is any nuance in resolution is entirely lacking. What kunuk did was scummy, especially if he asked someone else to break the phylac for him, but were more likely to see a hasty shadowamendent that effects every dragur then we are to see the people responsible get punished and the situation recognized as a individual problem. Mystic and necro lore is old, the idea of metaplay probably did not exist in 2016. Applying modern standards to old lore thats so patchworked you could consider it a ship of thesus is just going to bring problems.

 

PK methods like klone is good - you don’t die on the spot but it’s your “last life” until you make more. Shelf PKs/ whatever wights and Dragurs have going on feels like a relic of old times where everyone was super strong and OP. 

[DrakeHaze. 2524]

Write an amendment to have the PK clause removed/altered while the issue is hot instead of seeking opinions during it. LoTC's history has many cases of PK enforced abuse but understandably these players with PK clauses have accepted the contract to allow it to be enforced upon their character's existence.

Far as I'm aware, most everything creature or otherwise is typically immortal to some capacity anyway and I'm sure the community currently affected most by this current hot issue can come together, get something written up and posted within a day.

If all else fails play league of legends with admins and things usually get fixed :)

[King_Kunuk 3022]

8 minutes ago, PrimnyaQuorum said:

 

id same the real problem with PK systems is any nuance in resolution is entirely lacking. What kunuk did was scummy, especially if he asked someone else to break the phylac for him, but were more likely to see a hasty shadowamendent that effects every dragur then we are to see the people responsible get punished and the situation recognized as a individual problem. 

>I never asked them once oocly. I learned about which character was planned to be res and I did what my treacherous scheming character would do in rp. Others did ooc ask him and I was informed irp and irp the character took advantage of it by offering to help in rp. This includes completely in roleplay plotting with 0 ooc communication involved until after it occurred where I answered questions about character motives

 

Don't inflate ooc with RP schemes to somehow be the same. Stop speaking about this as though you know exactly what happened word for word without actually consulting or asking the other side of this 'conflict' that occured.

[MysticalWeasel 911]

As squaktuah said, there is not such thing as a forced PK. You opt into that when you choose to play such things. Yet I think the more important question is how to make these systems interactable. A system in which someone can be PK'd cause bang bang hammer on vase is a bit weird. Instead a system to encourage cooperation with those within the magic. For instance just mundane destruction of a phylac results in a soft PK of 1-2 weeks. Whilst instead a ritual involving other components such as multiple of a magic party uncovering the link to the mortal realm results in a hard PK. 

 

Then again, I believe in RP interaction above mechanical in the long run. It promotes more dialogue and RP rather then letting someone lock pick into some place and ruining a long term character by sheer luck and enough free time. And I must also comment I was not around during the siliti boxing war, or any magical DC war so I cannot comment onto how practical my approach is.