Table of Contents

no title, but guess what it's about

The discussion board Topics

Posted by Darkheart on 09/06

After reading people's posts and doing marginal thinking, I have come to the following proposition for the purpose of allowing more people to enjoy PK without harming the current PK community too much.

Using the current (well, from a non-coder's perspective) befriend and clan system, PK will now have 3 facets. The current PK, the current non-pk, and the new selective PK.

Selective PK will, however, only happen within one 'clan,' unless two separate selective PK clans will 'befriend' each other for the purpose of tiny plots and other RP-related events.

Each selective PK clan will be managed just like the current clans, in terms of joining, establishing, abandoning, pledging, and outcasting. For sure each clan will have a type of PK in mind among players.

This means, clan "arena" will be comprised of people who will only duel each other (no jumps) whereas clan (selective pk clans, both) "freeforall" will mimic the current pksystem, except restricted only to its members.

If a player doesn't like the selective pk clan they have joined, they can simply 'abandon,' becoming no-pk. Also, if a char within a selective pk-clan is acting 'out of bounds,' the GM of that clan can cast the violator out.

Since each clans have their channels, they are given, effectively, a pk-channel. Of course, no separate channel for the pk-all folks are needed, as they are not usually the whiners and crybabies that pollute regular channels. Just some cutesy arrogance here and there :p

What this means, is that people interested in RP'ing can pk by joining a clan that suits their needs. What this does not mean is that chars will be allowed to phase in and out of pk without any kind of responsibility.

The way I forsee it, by having players join an RP clan in order to even selectively PK will not totally eliminate the 'responsibility' part that comes with pk. You would have to be admitted to the clan, then prove yourself acceptable in order to continue selective pk. Also, such pker could not interfere with the pkall folks, allowing players to have more than one char that can participate in some form of pk while still holding onto, if only technically, to the one-pker per player rule.

The benefit of being pk-all will be that when selective pk clans befriend full-pk clans, they'll have to 'pay' in terms of experience, and that those that are only selectively enabled will lose the full mobkill death xp upon getting pk'd. We should probably also lower the regular pkall pk loss.

All in all, this is the best i can think of atm that does not irk me in terms of people being less responsible for their actions, while allowing an avenue for those that seriously want to include and feel that PK could augment their RP, without having to commit too much in it.

Darkheart Harkzael

From: Sandra Saturday, September 04, 06:01AM

I really don't see how this would augment anyone's rp. :/ I mean, you're forcing them to be in a clan, forcing that clan to -have- to war with another entire clan, or they can only fight each other. That's pretty limiting, wouldn't you say? Or am I reading it wrong?


From: Darkheart Saturday, September 04, 06:21AM

The 'clan' here would be one that limits only the aspect of pk-style, not something such as how they decide to portray their characters.

It is quite limiting with the current 15 max (which I understand can be removed, err, somewhat easily) but setting that aside, those rp'ers would basically be joining clans that promote their pk needs.

For example, clan A would have, in its mission statement or purpose "RPers who wish to pk only upon consent." Those that like that style of pk will 'join' that clan and behave under that purpose -- however, members are not restricted to a 'style' of rp.

Another clan B could have "RPers who wish to pk simulating the pkall." And that clan will have players who want to simulate pkall while getting to choose their members, by putting in the rules "no multi, no pack, no loot."

The reason I want these separate "clans" is that I would hate to have selective pkers gain access to the pkall chars, which would require the current clanning process and will be governed under the current rules. The benefit of pkall, as i stated above, will be the diff in xploss, inability to check 'roster' to see who else is clanned, and the freedom from rules that are set by pk-select clans to augment their lack of responsibility.

Yes, the "duel-only" clan may get HUUUUUGE, and some of the others may die out eventually, but at least it won't alter the current set too much. The current pk community will be left alone (and given a chance to tone down to pk-select) while we introduce new areas where others can pk in.

The final reason behind this is that it may lessen some admin problems by giving and splitting some decisions to players that are involved. An alternative of the pledge command could be coded to oust certain members from the clan (say 5 'pledges' to outcast somebody) which would, of course, be judged and dictated by those in the same clan. The same set of trouble with the current pk scene in the pkall area may remain, but with whiners and such filtered out and lost to selective pk, i'd imagine it'd be much more quiet and enjoyable.

Oh yah, roster command may have to get split into roster all and roster online :p

Hope this clears SOME stuff up.


From: Craven Saturday, September 04, 03:02PM

No offense DH, but I'm not even reading your posts anymore. They are just to damn complicated. Too many rules and regulations for me to keep up with. I'm sure their fine ideas, but I ain't readin em. Bring me the simpler ones!


From: Brew Saturday, September 04, 05:28PM

Amen Craven

After reading all this babble about PKok, I'm probably not going to read a anymore posts, I'm just going to wait for it to come out

Count me in on any testing dates, though :)

From: TheThing Saturday, September 04, 10:23PM

Amen and Hallelujah! Brew and Craven

DH, you have great ideas, and a LOT of them, but your posts are each very long. My eyes are tired from 3 days of catching up. Let's see what the Immortals come up with, please?

From: Ton Saturday, September 04, 11:17PM

Post away DH, I like this idea and you've had some other fine ones. Though a little complicated I think this idea is one of the better ones I have seen regarding pkok, and it really isn't that difficult to follow.

If you don't like long posts, don't read them. But generally the longer the post, the less crap the person puts up on the board. (because they actually seem to be constructive and care about what they are saying)


From: Skar Sunday, September 05, 10:50AM

-offers Jean as Exhibit A- -duck-

From: Stain Monday, September 06, 08:11AM

I don't want to shoot this thing down before I know anything about it, but after reading many, many, many, many posts/appends from imms/players, I have to say that while I don't like it DH's idea here is the most well thought out and best I have seen concerning pkok so far. Like I say, I don't know much about this thing, but I don't like ANYTHING I have heard about it. Having more than 1 pker would be nice, but is no way at all worth the losses.

As I understand it, the basic idea is that you can toggle on/off any chars ability to attack/retaliate at any time -minus the 10 tic timer or whatever, but really, how much good has that done with phousing, huh?- and assault them at will. Unless, of course, they toggle you off.. hmmm, lemme give an example, will illustrate better what I am trying -and failing- to say.

1 char decides to pkok_all and another decides to be selective. Let's say that under this new system, Craven -pkokall, skilled, aggressive- is jumped at low, hp's by TheThing -selective pker, not nearly as skilled,generally passive- and after his 10 tics or whatever, TheThing toggles Craven off. As I have heard it so far, this would be perfectly legal and nothing could -excuse me, would- be done about it. After this I see 1 of 3 things happening-

1. Craven continues to pkokall, and TheThing could, in theory, continue to legaly abuse the new system. How does that benefit the mud?

2. Craven makes a/several selective pk char and kills TheThing repeatedly. Some change for the better, huh? or

3. Craven toggles off TheThing and the pk playerbase deteriorates a little more. How is this helpful to pk/the mud in general?

I used these 2 char names as an example -no offense, blah, blah- to illistrate how this new pk system -again, from what I have heard about it from both morts/immorts- would either cause the same ammount of drama as the current system, or completely seperate the mud into many differant communitys, something I thought the Imms didn't want to see happen. I have heard so many people say 'there should be more rp in pk' and 'the rpers and pkers becoming more segregated is what's wrong with pkill', it's been said on open channels, on this discussion board -laugh- and still deviding the mud even more is the best idea we have?!?? In an earlier post/append someone said 'in the last 3 years pk has started on a downward spiral' or something to that effect, and that kinda stuck out in my mind since I started mudding here about 3 years ago. Wasn't that about the time the xp scale was changed? Plenty other changes have been put in, since, and pk continues to decline, the pk playerbase getting smaller. Am I the only one noticing the paralelle timeline between pk taking a nosedive and all these changes to the game itself?

PHousing sounded like fun, but when you look back, it really did cripple the already wounded pk system. Before that change at least how I remember it, there was more rp and bloodshed -really, isn't that the bottome line in PlayerKilling?- and less boredom and random attacks just to occupy someone burnt out on mobkill. I'm not saying that specific change was what pushed pkill over the edge, but super doors that catered to those who didn't want to kill other players, the whole point of enabling, didn't do anything good for us. What people need to remember is that pkill is about killing other chars. You should only enable to enhance your rp if your rp includes killing other chars.

My point is that Pkok looks like another change designed to please players who shouldn't have enabled in the first place. IF YOU DON"T WANT TO FIGHT A SUPER VILLAN, DON"T ACT LIKE SUPERMAN!!!!

From: Skar Monday, September 06, 09:37AM

Stain, what you're forgetting is that if somebody is abusing whatever timer is implemented, or any other aspect of the system, people have the option of forbidding them from attacking using the 'nopkok' feature (or whatever it happens to be called).

If you attack me when I've just died, and toggle off my attacks before I can retaliate, I'm not going to give you a second chance to screw me over. I'll cut you out and you'll cease to exist for me as far as pk is concerned.

This allows people to pkokall and whittle off the people who they don't want to play with for whatever reason. This same system allows people to pkok with only one person and selectively add new opponents as they become comfortable. Both approaches will allow players to define a pool of opponents that is right for them. Abusive players will be cut out, or never even added to people's pk lists.

As far as I'm concerned, if I'm pkokall you have one chance to play fair with me. You're not getting a second chance without some assurance that you're going to be sporting.

From: Stain Monday, September 06, 10:24AM

I also listed the option to toggle off the char who abuses the system, and the effect. Do you really think that seperating the mud into differant 'pools' will do anything at all to help the atmosphere? It's already been said, but there won't be a 300+ playerbase anymore. You may as well make up seperate muds for seperate skill levels.

From: Skar Monday, September 06, 11:16AM

Ah. I see it now. Forgive me, I missed the reference earlier. However, I disagree that when you deny someone the privilege of attacking you the "pk playerbase deteriorates a little more." The only effect is on you and the person you've cut out. Nobody else. As far as you're concerned, the pk pool you're playing with hasn't gotten worse, it's gotten -better- because louts that abuse the privilege of attacking you don't get to play with you anymore.

And that's what pk will be under the pkok system -- a privilege. A privilege that you can deny to anybody as soon as they cross the line. If nobody will pk with you, then you'll have to take a step back and ask yourself why that is. PK has never been a right, but pkok puts the control in the hands of the players and lets them manage their own "pk playerbase."


WWW Discussion Board