Eating Our Friends RG talked about this...

Shoot! Does this mean we won't see you in game?? I'd dislike that

 

Well, it turns out the "opt out" is paying the ransom instead of letting your killer take a body part.

 

Only until this stupid contract expires in another year and I get my DSL back. Fortunately with launch date pushed back until March that means my limited online time in-game will only be for the first 3 or 4 months.

 

Precisely the point I was making about an opt out flag for cannibalism.. but coming from your side it sounds like you're admitting that the vast majority of players would opt out. In other words.. they don't want it. So if that's what you really think about a cannibal specific opt out function you might want to rethink your position. (And also answers the question why not well enough).

As for the other arguments. It doesn't harm the player.. should be free to be evil and like arguments that have been made. You could make the same arguments in favor of **** or any number of things that simple would never go into the game and none of us here I'm sure would ever advocate. After all it's not any worse than murder or cannibalism.

My point here being that those arguments and ones like them are not reason enough to put something in-game. The challenge you need to tackle is what is the actual benefit to gameplay?

It's not food. We can already harvest, field dress, cook and eat plenty of food without cannibalism.. so there's really no added gameplay there.

It's not crafting that's been proposed. Against that's harvesting and decorating. You go through the same process with other crafting so there's no actual added gameplay there either.

Reagents for necromantic spells was an interesting idea but again.. all spells necromantic or otherwise require reagents which has to be obtained somehow. So again there's no actual added gameplay there.

Speaking in terms of pure gameplay mechanics.. what does cannibalism provide that's actually new?

We can spin our wheels until the cows come home and never agree on how it's justified Indeed that's all we've been doing for the last couple of days. And most of the pro-cannibal folks I've seen since kickstarter have only tried to justify. Well they did it here.. they did it there.. UO had it before they removed it.. we need evil options, freedom, RP and immersion etc etc.. and all sorts of arguments that could be used to justify literally anything.

The only place you're going to make any headway is actually talking about real ideas on how to make it work. Where are the problems? How do you solve them? etc

 

Wow, Opinions and speculation based on assumed statistics and morality. How about we let people play their game and let each individual speak for themselves. Thinking this and assuming that has no bearing in a factual statement.

A leading paragraph where you assume that she is saying the vast majority would opt out, and henceforth does not work. Nice play on words but also not accurate.

How does it "harm" the player? You get killed by players in game all the time. I suppose you could argue which is worse: being killed or being eaten after you where killed, which one should concern you more? You will have the ability to opt out.

Ok, it is your opinion that these arguments are not reason enough to put in game. We believe there is a benefit to the game play. That is not your opinion and its OK to have that.
So not much has to be Implemented for the harvesting part, that should be a bonus right?

It is indeed some crafting that is proposed, with cooking and alchemy. The harvesting of body parts is already in game and you can opt out if you choose, they might just add a few more body parts to the list.

with the gameplay mechanics question. Not much, so it will take very little game resources to implement besides adding a few recipe's and a few more body parts as drops. If they wanted to go further into it they could add the diseases that a cannibal gets from eating human flesh. That would be a later debate if they wanted to add a little more code for that.
Yep, we do need options to play the villian. As you have noticed most everyone wants to be a good or neutral character in game. (according to one poll in the forums here) Why not give the good people a chance to destroy something so vile and evil that they are mad with passion to rid it from Novia! Yes yes UO got rid of it, but as so many people have pointed out, this is not UO or UO2.
You speak of us spinning our wheels, but it indeed just some defending the idea, and some trying to think up every straw man argument that they can possibly continue their quest for a higher morality. A judgement of others play style. I can appreciate your arguments, but its can be likened to a Christian speaking to an Atheist. One persons religion is not anther's.
I would gladly talk more about how to make progress on this idea. I really would like to get back on topic now because you are right it is just going around in circles.

 

That kind of thinking cuts both ways.

 

Sorry I was editing the post when you replied.

 

Going back to an earlier point from @smack. I do like the idea of a cannibal fighting skill hehe. Something like a Ravenous attack, Flesh Rending Swipe, or infectious bite. Hehe, it would be hilarious on the battlefield

 

muhahahahahahahah

 

If this gets implemented, I would really like to see some kind of visual representation of this 'lifestyle' choice. The more human you eat the more messed up and evil your avatar looks.

I'd actually like this for the whole good/evil karma system, but in particular I'd like this to visually display for cannibals. Blotchy skin; hair falling out in clumps, fingernails and teeth elongating, losing lots of weight, hunched posture....

Once you get some of these features, you'd have the natural weaponry to use in a fighting style. Everyone would know what you were doing though....

Maybe you could eventually evolve/devolve into some kind of ghoul.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Exactly! I would love for this to be implemented. I love this Idea!

 

"Enter the Heart of the Monster... I Did a Terrible Thing"

BTW, the very nice ~Time Lord~ character will not be a cannibal...just FYI but another may *tries to look innocent*

"The Monster in the Master Cannibal"
I have spoken of this before within our group, (crossbowsoda I'm leaning more to this becoming a final outcome within your great ideas in diseases).

The Time of Feeding Frenzy;
In this idea, this is where, if the cannibal player does not find, afford or wish to escape the horrible diseases of his eating habits, then his game could become one of the most challenging of all gaming challenges. Fore, in the final outcome of his/her disease their apatite could begin to grow and need more and more cannibal consumption to live. Yet, if he/she can continue to consume more, then their strength could rise above normal human's abilities, with the more that they eat. Yet the more that they eat, then the more they need to eat to stay alive. But, even after death, the cannibal would also still be facing the decease they had before the onset of the feeding frenzy time. Such a perk for such a consequence would balance and set a rhythm to their cannibal ways, both on the up side, as well as the down. Fore, if any cannibal reaches the time of feeding frenzy, then if they are not fed or eat the increasing amount they need, then they become more weak than the average human.

Looking into what the cannibal can be, or afford we as game players to have in a more challenging way of play, we can then view the cannibal with much more affection to it's game play to better enhance our game into an...
"Ever Deeper Ultima"
~Time Lord~

 

Heh, Ned, dude... I'm really not trying to be a jerk when I say this but like...

practically all of the concerns you've mentioned so far are already in the cannibalism document.

Like 90%, maybe 99%. xD

You gotta actually read it man!!

 

While there is no basis for that IRL, except going mad through the consumption prions in human meat, at least we're getting creative now. I don't think physically labeling cannibalism is the right thing to do, but hey, I'm game for some other ways. Perhaps some amount of human meat has a percentage of prions -- or whatever other lore-based thing we want to apply here in this magical world -- can have a negative effect. I would temper that with some balance in providing a positive effect based on some other lore too.

I mean, why not have physical effects on other aspects of the game, like PvP and PKing, so we can easily spot murderers? How about miners that go down into dungeons, their faces and skin are changed in color, so it's easier to see who the resource gatherers are in game to gank

 

Well yes consumption would possibly make you go mad, so you might forget about sanitation and personal grooming habits, leading to lice, pocks, boils and such

 

Yeah, it's unfortunate that it seems some aren't bothering to read the material that's being presented to try and make it work in the game. To move discussions forward you gotta at least read the arguments for/against to have the complete view.

The no added gameplay value argument is getting old because there's a lot of great ideas in this thread and others. Like for one, I'd love to find a house like this while exploring the woods.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedlec_Ossuary

 

and you just might! muhahahahahha *Plans are in the works*

 

This is the plan! Muhahahaha!

 

Ohh, right!

You're asking me to pinpoint a single feature in a game of innumerable features, and then somehow evidence that the entire game was noticeably improved by this one, single feature.

That is inane to the point of trolling. Let's look at this quote again:

Okay, let's replace the words, 'that feature' with...

'soulstones.'

"My question was whether or not WoW was improved by soulstones. Your answer was basically.. well people do it. A functioning mechanic is not proof of "improved gameplay".

Does that sound ridiculous? It should, because it is ridiculous. How is that quantifiable? How is the inverse quantifiable?

The fact that people use a mechanic consistently tells me... oh... hmm... maybe they like it... and.. if they like it... maybe they enjoy using it... and if they enjoy using it... then...

(picks his nose)

it improves their gameplay?

In other words, I've got the feeling that because you failed to back up the belief that games are hurt by cannibalism with evidence, you're now turning the burden of proof on me.

The fact that players use a feature regularly isn't proof of its usefulness to you? Then you can't be satisfied.

Oh, cool. Another example of you choosing to reconcile your problem with other players instead as a problem with mechanics and/or story elements... yeah, this isn't a tired argument of yours...

Huh... here I am thinking that a roleplaying game like this is designed to encourage roleplaying & storytelling.

Gameplay and tools? Sir, might I direct you to our cannibalism document which lays out tools for gameplay & will hopefully include possible story elements, crafting recipes, etc.?

To get access to specialized crafting, to harvest specific illegal reagents that are hard-to-buy or otherwise unavailable, to gain short-term buffs and/or long-term debuffs, possibly join NPC factions/organizations, etc. To participate in events that leave the player with a tangible feeling of identity, the same way that any other player would be able to?

Come on, man.

We've been over this... I suppose that you still haven't read the document though.

Bowen, this is what I pointed out at the inception of our idea -- you are ignoring parts of the argument that are of no benefit to you as an effort to legitimize your own position. You're not even adequately addressing them.

You'd like to chalk our idea up as baseless and gratuitous, when it could become a legitimate practice for those who want to play as criminals, murderers, or other unsavory types.

Could they roleplay instead? Yes: anyone could roleplay anything instead of using given tools.

Yet, why should anyone be so limited? The point's invalid.

In any case, the benefits and drawbacks are laid out in the same manner as the other instruments of roleplay.

According to you, yeah.

As a source of food, human remains could provide short-term buffs at the exchange of a karma/fame hit, risk of state action, and the risk of a long-term debilitating (and I mean debilitating) debuff which could eventually result with cannibals' corpses made fully lootable. Eventually, all of this compounds into what becomes an addiction to human meat: an addiction so fierce that normal foods no longer sate the consumer.

But, that's just eating human remains as food, which is largely wasteful in a grand scheme.

Using remains for crafting, well! You could--

Oh, uhh.. yeah.. I guess we never suggested that in our document.. that it could be used in crafting (alchemy, furnishing, knick-knacks, armor, weapons, etc.).. for a later document.. uhh..

(checks document, sees crafting opportunity listed)

Yeah... no added gameplay.. right..

sorry, Retro! Turns out that you never actually did what you actually did. Weird world, man.

Luckily, we can still use these extra human parts that were meant for crafting as --

Oh.. uhh.. yeah.. there's no added gameplay despite super-powered & sought-after necromantic reagents being an added feature.. damn.. Bowen's right again..

Granted the exception that it's a totally new idea?

(scratches head)

Well, aside from the newness of every idea in the document, nothing I guess!

Not that anything that we say matters to you, of course.

If you'd like to talk about an 'opt-out,' then fine. We can talk about an opt-out.

I'd prefer not to have one for players who have consented to PvP. For players who don't PvP, I'm fine with an opt-out. The catch? No free rides. They don't get to participate in any aspect of this proposal, questing aside.

Still, I'm caught in-between: if players can't opt out of being at least partially looted as a result of dying during PvP, then why should they be able to opt out of this? Looting & harvesting: they're fundamentally the same thing.

 

I wonder if the core concern over the objection of cannibalism is the conceit that humans are not like other animals?