Be ruthless...

[Kiaring]

...but think about why you FD another player before you do it.

The recent events motivated me to write this. I am not pointing fingers. I am not saying a single player was responsible. If you know the particular event I'm referring to, you'll know it was a mess pretty much from the start; it spiralled (in my opinion) out of control without anyone being able to do much of anything to prevent it.

Now pretty much all the people involved have to show for it is a bunch of burned-out faction characters and dead PCs who could be enjoying an amazing rivalry.

Sorry, just had to get that off my chest. I don't want to start a huge discussion, this was really not because of the usual team red/team blue mentality, nor was it because the people involved are irresponsible, discourteous players OOC. I enjoy playing with everyone involved, but I really just feel like we (all of us) let things get out of hand when we could have thought about what we were doing a little more.

So maybe next time we'll think about it. We, as players get to re-roll new characters and live to play the next day. Our characters just, well, die, so maybe there's a good place to start looking for a reason to dial down all the STOP KILLING EACH OTHER IN THE RUINS.

Two cents.

[Paha]

Rather I dare say, just like I say I do not like non-app goblins and kobolds and what not for this reason, stop playing without any unreal fear of consequences that you think you can avoid because of OOC factors, or think that will ensure if you kill or do not kill another.

No doubt rather many tend to play their character with no fear of death because they know they can just start another concept. Now, one that doesn't fear of losing is always a danger to one that attempts to play and survive, and I find it odd how quite many out there are scared, but in moment of boredom throw all aside to either win big only to lose next day with same problem, or to die with a bang by taking as many as they can along.

Make efforts to value playing before destroying.

[tropic]

While this post is most likely borne of frustration, it's still probably just a really good rule of thumb to think twice before you /c subdual full. If you find yourself typing that, take a deep breath and ask yourself "Is this fun?"

[Cerberus]

I just want people to make up my mind as to the FD during a pitch battle thing. To me it makes more sense to keep things balanced to actually do the FD (strategy over numbers could win). It makes it so there is no mistakes or glitches and quite honestly in war who is going to be doing subdual damage and not fearing for their life. My thing though is, way back when the Mithralsouls and Montezzi's went at it I was told in no uncertain terms that you do NOT go FD. Then just recently (in the melee in question I believe) Amber, who I always put on subdual when I logged in with her (as she hated violence) gets in her first PvP and gets FD'd. So quite honestly all I would like to know (being I was told a long time ago not to) can we or cant we FD in these situations without DM repercussion? Like I said it makes more OOC sense to me but I also fully get the more fun IG/IC aspect so I dont care either way but would like to hear an official ruling.

[Nightshadow]

Not an official ruling... But if you're gunning for someone, and want them dead, no questions asked, just FD them and skip the SD part, but only do this when they're at near death and you're attacking them, walking into PvP with FD on is just going to wind up with critical AoO's killing the wrong people that really shouldn't die.

SD everyone if you have the chance, though sometimes in close, chaotic battles you just don't have that option if you want to win. Still try to make it fun, though, and from what I know there was warning (at least, for everyone but Wane I think) that the next time there was fighting heads would be flying.

Just my opinion.

[lolmagics]

SD everyone if you have the chance, though sometimes in close, chaotic battles you just don't have that option if you want to win.
Just my opinion.

You'll find conflict to be more rich and entertaining all around when it's not thought of as winning or losing.

Now pretty much all the people involved have to show for it is a bunch of burned-out faction characters and dead PCs who could be enjoying an amazing rivalry.

I'm not sure what you are trying to imply here. I wasn't involved with the incident you're speaking of but do know about what happened. All three factions still have solid numbers and there is a lot of conflict still going. They can build new rivalries and create more conflict just as before.

The recent conflict has been pretty amazing overall and the PvP has also been mostly solid along with it. Eventually someone will take casualties and things will slow down, but that doesn't mean it should end. New characters can hop right in for whatever side of the conflict they want and use what was already created to help in moving their own story along.

[Nightshadow]

I'm just one of those people who do want to win the PvP fights... Unfortunately I suck at PvP so 75% of the time when I get in PvP I'm the guy being full looted at the end of it, begging for my hard-earned stuff back, only to be beaten down some more and have more stuff taken, which ends in me retiring my character because suddenly I'm a level 7 fighter who can't do any of the quests to get supplies back and I'm too weak to go on any of the higher level quests without being utterly useless and not getting any loot.

Not fun for me, so I won't put any extra effort into making it fun for other people who put me in that situation when the tables are turned, though I will be OOC courteous of people who are the same to me, and do my best to make it fun for them.

[Kiaring]

I disagree, lolmagics. The Stygians seemed to take quite a blow from the event; interesting characters on both sides of the conflict died before they had the chance to truly shine. I'm not saying it doesn't make sense. I'm not saying it was poorly done. I just think that if all those involved had taken the time to think about it a little, things would have turned out for the better.


EDIT: Just so it's clear, the 'event' in question includes all the fallout that was generated from it; when you kill a character, especially when you do so without thinking, you only make it easier for the people on the other side to turn on FD without a thought.

[Drakill Tannan]

Pink stygian people. Think of the Pink Styigian. That is fun. FD is not. Ever since my PvP incident as i joined EFU, i send a tell to the player i am about to FD asking him if he is ok with that, and if he/she isn't, i don't.

I understand how diferent it is in mass PvP. However, you could all have stayed down, then take prisioners and do something creative with them. Esnalve them. Scar their faces and let them walk humiliated back home. Convert them to whatever evil diety you worship. etc.

[Yalta]

Don't be wimps when you lose and don't be jerks when you win.

[tropic]

FWIW, The Stygians' numbers are not good right now: LiS and I are both taking some time off from our Armada PCs. So there's a single active Stygian (I'll help when I can).

I'm not blaming anyone. It was our side that pulled the trigger on the FD first anyway.

The moral of the story is: go app for a Stygian, people! It's a super fun faction and for the moment you should be able to get recommendations really easily.

The Docks is overcrowded anyway. ;)

[Divine Intervention]

Whilst I agree with the sentiment of don't just rampantly FD I do not think we need to feel overly guilty about killing someone.  Most pvp deaths are interesting and well deserved.

[Decimate_The_Weak]

I think the simple rule should be: Let conflict build, once conflict is built - it's OK.
 
I don't mean calling someone a twat, or a jimmydean, I mean weeks of conflict - I'm talking someone that was a thorn in your side. You want to make the game interesting for everyone.
 
I can't speak for everyone, but when I speak for myself, I think the most enjoying part of the game is rivalry, and going into battle knowing you'll lose something - maybe everything - but it was well played out, and deserved.

[Luke Danger]

If it makes sense for your character and it won't be a cheapshot, go ahead and FD in my oppinion. Elaborated: If it's a major battle like a war, FD is legit to make sure that the other team suffers costs beyond just supplies. a Res costs more then healing pots/herbs.

However, if it's a random mugging, that's FAR less justified. If it's a dwarf against a gob, well, try to have some decency, especially if you have the chance. (for example, a pre-mortem one-liner while you switch to FD is always a good option, let them say their last word, and give them as good an end as you can.)

All in all, I think the best policy in regards to FD: If you go to war with your sword set to Full Damage, expect to die at the hands of one set on Full Damage. And easily sooner then you think.

[Kiaring]

This really isn't a discussion about what we've come to call OOC Courtesy in FD'ing. This is meant to discuss, in a general sense, the act of killing another PC as the means to achieve an objective.

In a recent FD PVP event, the character who killed mine accomplished very little other than having half the server chase and eventually kill him for it. My PC, on the other hand, participated in the killing of another PC who had been subdued after winning a duel to the death and indicating he would, in fact, not kill his opponent. Miscommunication led our side to FD him; I don't mean to discuss why it was done, simply that if we had taken more time, IC, to sort that out, maybe it would not have happened at all. The events that followed were all justifiable from the point of this particular death. I cannot blame the PC responsible for the actual deed either, because he had a history with the dead character, but also because he was given orders from superiors, and he thought, ICly, that the best way to follow these orders was to FD the PC.

Notice I don't mean to argue each particular death in terms of its 'IC merit' or the 'courtesy' employed. I'm merely contending that, of the six or so PCs directly involved, five are dead; one for reasons unrelated. The one who is alive actually did die during the event. What did this accomplish to any of the people involved - the actual characters, not the players? When you put yourself in your character's shoes, and I mean, truly put yourself in your character's shoes, you don't proceed with an act like this unless you are absolutely certain you wish to die for it. While our characters lead very different lives, certainly far more dangerous than our own, their instinct of self-preservation is a defining drive to nearly all characters, and certainly all characters present.

 The following is food for thought. It is not meant as an accusation of anyone in particular:


 

• When you are 'bored' with your PC, and you willingly walk into an extremely dangerous situation which causes others to kill you, consider that you, being done with the PC have little care in the matter after it's said and done. Other people, however, will have to deal with the severe IC consequences of having killed you.
   
• When your side suffers an FD casualty during PVP conflict, no matter how things turn out (whether you win or lose this particular engagement) remember that the argument of well, the other side used lethal force is a double-edged sword, and that it is rare you will kill a PC and all his supporters in a single encounter. By this logic, opposing sides should never stop murdering each other.
   
• What stops this murderous drive in all of us is what we call OOC courtesy, but needs to be (in my opinion) a sense of roleplaying your character - his fears, ambitions, desires and ultimately what you plan to do with him.

It seems a bit hard to propose that we take these things into consideration during a messy, large PVP event like this. The moment we start thinking like our characters, just for a few seconds (it is only a game after all), with little or no chance of return after we die, OOC courtesy and IC self-preservation instinct become two sides of the same coin. The unfolding of this in the gameworld is (again, my opinion) what we have come to call meaningful conflict.