Table of Contents

writing on pkok so i can complain when we find out it sucks

The discussion board Topics

Posted by Blackthorne on 09/09

After reading the Lt this week and saw that Ea has begun to code pkok I figure that i should say my peace so i can complain later incase it sucks.

So heres how id like to see pkok done. Ok lets say a Jack wants to enable he reads a help file on enabling where it explains to him that he has 3 options. OPTION 1: would be PkokNONE, where just like now they dont have to do anything and they wont be able to pkill at all with the exeption of tourneys. OPTION 2: PkokSOME will be an option where if he so chooses he can duel people who are PkokSOME and PkokALL, DUELING being the keyword he re. WHERE BOTH PEOPLE AGREE TO THE DUEL. An example to this would be Jac k wants to duel Jill, Jill is PkokSome and so is Jack, both of them under some kind of config option allow them to duel just each other. They both would be able to attack each other untill one of them dies, at that point the PkokSOME would reset. If Jack and Jill wanted to duel again they would have to start the process all over. The same thing can go if a PkokSOME wanted to duel a PkillALL, since the PkokALL would be able duel anyone who is PkokALL without asking, only the PkokSOME would have to config option and let the PkokAll be able to duel him or her. Once again once the duel was finished between the PkokSOME and PkokALL the option would reset and if the PkokSOME wanted to duel the PkokALL they would repeat the same process.

OPTION 3 is obvious, just like those enabled today they can duel anyone who is PkokALL without asking. If they want to duel a PkokSOME theyll just have to ask.

Well these are my thoughts, jumbled as they may be they need more work. I think you should still have to ask an imm to enabled you for pkokSOME or PkokALL, maybe an option can be given to those people who want to upgrade to pkillALL from PKoksome or vise versa. This can be done with re demtion points, retirement option should still be open.

Please write appends and such so we can have a healthy flow of ideas.

Blackthorne De' Dannan'

From: LadyAce Wednesday, September 08, 04:17PM

Most of what you outline is part of the plan for pkok, actually. But as for writing an opinion before giving you the right to say it sucks when we're done...well...everyone can have an opinion, regardless of when they state it :) And I'm sorry if the LT was misleading, work on pkok has been going on for some time now. I know that it was made available in a limited form for imm testing, some weeks ago.


From: Blackthorne Wednesday, September 08, 04:23PM

the rest of this goes to ladyaces append, im not saying it's going to suck i simply meant that i dont want to be one of those people who dont write any ideas on the boards, then an immortal goes and codes something and then that person complains without having given any opinions at all

From: LadyAce Wednesday, September 08, 09:58PM

What I think we really need is something in between the "pre-emptive" commentary and the "too late" commentary -- when the idea is presented to the players, in a Q & A or on a board or in an LT or all of the above, that's a great time to make comments. Trying to discuss it in advance is frustrating to all of us, and trying to change it too much after it's gone in, is equally difficult.

In general, pkok will work similar to befriend -- in parallel to many of the thoughts outlined in your original post. What we don't have worked out is the gory situation-based details that people are bringing up as objections -- the 'what if someone is grouped with a healer and the healer isn't pkok and helps them fight?' -- to which I might answer "that'd be interference, talk to an admin" or I might answer "healing in a fight will automatically pkok them" or I might answer "they won't be able to heal until (X) ticks go by after the fight" or I might answer "nothing, you'll just have to remember that the person you were fighting, doesn't play fair, and unpkok them as soon as possible.

I might respond with any of those answers to the query, but I would only be guessing -- because that's the part that hasn't been decided.

If you have situation-based issues like this, I encourage you to list them, to make sure that we consider them in the policies. Right now, what I see is "pkok sucks because what if someone does x and y and z?" because my only response will be "we haven't decided what will happen if those things all happen, but we'll surely address it in policy."



WWW Discussion Board