I just feel for the poor GM who has to suffer reading all of this the past week.

Abison/Rystien

>>Martincoty77: This is incorrect and we already have a case study of several years in opens avoiding guarded people when it comes to PvP for 'fear' of a warning. The same will certainly hold true of a policy player that is guarded - I mean, they are a 'policy player'. I would literally stop almost all of it in its tracks because of the 'what if they report' factor.

Right now, open players can report people for not playing in a way that accurately reflects their PvP stances (for example, if a guarded player goes around "picking on little opens"). They generally don't report, however, because open players tend to abhor reporting. If the rules were changed so that closed/guarded players needed consent to attack open players, would open players start reporting people who attacked them without consent? If not, how does an "open vs. open" system change the current situation?

The majority of players are choosing the stance that most accurately reflects their intentions and play-style. It's just a few bad apples that spoil the barrel, resulting in this discussion every few years.

The more I think about it, the more it seems that the best way to fight policy players is to have the GMs impose warnings (with the same penalties as PvP warnings) on people who report PvP that results from in-game conflicts that they started or chose to escalate. In other words, the "loser" of the report gets the penalty. That would make players think twice about abusing the report system. Creating a disincentive to report would also have the side effect of allowing GMs to spend less time "watching people as playground monitors."


>>Martincoty77: What if you just take the experience penalty away from death? Would that make open, better?

If I didn't lose earned ranks with death (I'm not talking about field experience), that would make death a lot less annoying to me. However, it doesn't sound like GMs are willing to add a DEPART MEMORIES option or NPC Clerics that can cast Rejuvenation on the dead.)

---

Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall rank!

Vote for DragonRealms on Top MUD Sites: http://www.topmudsites.com/vote-DragonRealms.html

>Then I guess you need to figure out another way to have your character respond than red-visioned violence. You're backing yourself into a corner.

Oh I don't interact on a PvP level with Closed/Guarded unless I know I have the consent I need. Seen too many people burned, and have had it happen to me to have any faith in, if you RP it out i'm open to PvP.

I'm not interested in playing Russian Roulette in the consult room if it comes to that.

A much better alternative is to fix the policy and/or stances.

>>Thing is, GMs, don't treat guarded as "I'm up for PvP sometimes", they treat it as, if you don't have clear consent here take a warning.

Or just can ask if they're interested in to PvPing, which is what Guarded implies - that they're sometimes up to it, so ask.

Worst case scenario: the person says no. At this point, you and everyone else knows this person isn't interested in PvP and just interested in being annoying and/or egging you into a policy battle. You can comfortably disengage and ignore the person.

I know it's not always the best solution, but honestly I outright ignore people who annoy me in the game as if they just don't exist. Is it the situation I'd want to begin with? Of course not. But it works wonderfully, keeps me grounded, and I don't need to worry about awkward situations or game/entertainment-based frustration.

---

Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.

>>the ISSUE is the people that do not. the ones that bait and kill and then whine because they got back what they gave, regardless of the RP involved. They are not the majority, but there are enough of them that it causes a problem and makes people stop and think before interacting with some one. they are the people that create situations where the gms are forced to intervene and warnings are given because no matter how big of a jerk they are, they are guarded and they can hide neatly behind that stance.

The same could generally be said for the select people who tend to take advantage of Open as well. I don't think anyone is arguing that the only people who cause problems in the game are the hyper aggressive selects in Open who feel it turns the world into PK-central if they so desire.

I just don't believe the solution is to remove guarded. I would rather GMs better police the people who abuse the system and play policy instead. I don't really think this is a new kind of request, though. I'm pretty sure in the decade+ I've played, no matter how actively, there have always been wishes for GMs to better acknowledge/label people who play the game just to be annoying. The issue is that people tend to waver on what counts as annoying, or what counts as something worth policing.

>>i have to pick if i want to deal with the few people that will inevitably harass me and participate in RP (which i really enjoy) or if i want to hide and miss out on stuff.

I didn't say hide. I said just ignore the idiots. There are always going to be idiots. In turn, if the idiots harass you, feel free to report them and have the GMs focus on the actual problem, them.

Then again, if the issue is that people who are Guarded are unfairly attacking people who are Open and hiding behind policy when it backfires on them, why not just go Guarded? You, your friends, and most people who interact with you will most likely have an understand of how you, the player, treat Guarded. Because they know you, they know you won't report them if they essentially treat your stance as Open. At the same time, if an idiot policy player comes around, you can turn the tables on them and highlight that you're Guarded, you want nothing to do with them, and they should go away.

Or, hell, just take advantage of WARN INTERACT. They're being annoying, they're being dumb, you don't want to deal with them, yes? So make it official, and if they keep bugging you, report about it.

>>ultimately this conversation is not about you, it does apply to your experiences and the outcome will not affect you.

Anything that influences how PvP policy functions has an outcome that influences me if/when I am doing things in Prime.

---

Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.

TEVESHSZAT I feel like your kinda changing the subject for no reason.

Why would you be against guarded people being forced to treat everyone, including opens, as guarded? Can you bring up an argument against that or do you agree with that?

Also closed people have to treat everyone as closed. Whats the problem? Explain that to me. Lets drop the guarded stance needs to go away for a second.

If guarded people have to view opens as guarded, that will solve a lot of this. DON'T SAY OPENS WON'T report, that is not the point, the threat that they can and might is deterrent enough. I

---

Don't forget to vote for dragonrealms:

http://www.topmudsites.com/vote-DragonRealms.html

>>It doesn't have to, but it should be an option available.

It is, sometimes.

Just not always, because someone might not be interested in fighting you.

---

Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.

>>It should always be an option available if someone decides to get into a verbal altercation with another

I agree!

In fact, it looks like Solomon does, too.

Per his statement almost three years ago.

A Guarded/Closed person cannot taunt, incite, bully, harass, or in any other manner "egg on" a conflict with an Open person (or anyone else, for that matter) and then turn around and say, "You can't touch me, I'm Guarded/Closed and I don't want to fight. Haha!"

http://elanthipedia.org/w/index.php/Post:Why_You_DON%27T_PvP_Survey_-_06/22/2011_-_23:49

>>or decide to engage attack lowbie open but needs to have their hand held when it's another open at level.

It matters, was that lowbie egging the person on? Was it a random, unwarranted attack? If the latter, then the issue is not guarded, but the player. The player is clearly acting in an Open manner. Once again, per Solomon almost three years ago.

<<Since were dealing in hypothetical how about the part where a Guarded player ganks said open player a couple of times without any interaction? Edgee did this a couple nights ago and his behavior was brought to attention, yet he still plays under a guarded profile. I'm just saying.>>

That's not Guarded. That's Open.

http://elanthipedia.org/w/index.php/Post:Why_You_DON%27T_PvP_Survey_-_06/23/2011_-_18:27

>>game mechanics are set in place to coddle those that wish to run their smart mouth or muddle the system

Similarly, game mechanics are set in place to protect those from players who wish to shoot everyone in the face.

>>Given that this game is not in "present time", antics like that would commonly find themselves without a mouth to be smart with.

Unless you're the ruling class, or working on behalf of the ruling class, that's you're probably making a powergrab you don't actually have the ability to fulfill.

>>So I'm not saying it always needs to result that way, however it should not be something that's removed from the equation without fear of having a GM come down with a stupid warning.

Similar to how you can't assassinate the Baron and take over Therengia with an iron fist, despite it being something that could theoretically happen, just chalk up your inability to kill every player who wrongs you as a limitation that you need to creatively roleplay around.

>>Furthermore, not everyone is interested in listening to your smart mouth (general sense of "your"), but we're forced to listen to that. Whether it's in the same room, or gweth, or what have you. It's called RP.

Or you can just ignore them as part of your roleplay. Or just to make your life less stressful.

---

Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.

>>He obviously either has no control over the current game environment or has no idea what goes on then. really you quoting that is completely LOL

I'm glad you asked!

Per another one of his statements three years ago:

<<That is totally obvious, but however, the real question that needs addressing is why is it guarded players can specifically play like they are open unless it is situations that they want to avoid.>>

Because GMs are not magical mindreaders and can't see everything that happens in the game every time it happens.

If we aren't made aware of a problem or potential problem, then it's going to remain a problem.

<<In this case, Edgee (who is guarded) hid behind his profile (guarded) took out two players who were open and way beneath his circle. These type of situations are often overlooked, because an Open player hardly goes off gripping about it.>>

Right, so how can GMs be expected to know anyone is hiding behind a Profile Stance unless we're told?

http://elanthipedia.org/w/index.php/Post:Why_You_DON%27T_PvP_Survey_-_06/23/2011_-_22:24

I'll go on a limb and assume that most players who feel player X is using a Guarded stance as a cudgel and acting in an Open manner rarely talk to GMs about it until after they fight and/or kill the player who then reported about it.

---

Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.

This thread is done.


Annwyl
Message Board Supervisor

If you've questions or comments, take it to e-mail by writing me at DR-Annwyl@play.net.