Response to PvP & Death Deep Dive

I feel that your generalizations are off base. I consider myself a roleplayer who can get attached to their character but I have no problems with this mechanic. I actually find your generalization insulting to characterize someone who likes this mechanic as being a toxic player who just doesn't get how serious this is to the person being mutilated. I am here to say that it definitely doesn't describe me. I get how offensive it is. If I did it to another player especially another roleplayer except my husband I would be doing it for a reason that was important to what I was doing.

Perhaps not everyone takes it as seriously as I do even though I joke about it a lot. I doubt that they will address it with the amount of depth that I think they should and that's unfortunate but I realize that they'll try to do a good job of it in the short time they have to devote to it. I may joke about taking your parts because I know you'd pay the ransom Bowen but only @Umbrae is that big of a jerk (Just Kidding!) I know that you worry that people are going to do that to you and not give it a single thought and that you don't want it happening at all. I just don't agree with you about it. I would rather spend my time improving my Avatar to make sure no one player nor NPC gets my parts than trying to make it impossible for someone to do to anyone. That also was my feeling about PvP. If I don't want to be killed and stripped of everything I owned I'd take steps in the game to minimize that risk. When it all worked out I'd be happier for it. If it didn't work out I'd have something more to work on.

I don't want to depend on mechanics to protect me. I would rather be empowered than kept like a pet. I know that is asking a lot of the team and the community. It is hard to just let people do what they do and it seems to be hard for some people to not take that freedom for granted and limit other players' safety to do what they do. I would rather things fail because I was too trusting than live in a gilded cage. I know that everyone isn't like that but there it is.

Edit:

I understand that. I think that it should be possible but dealt with. I know there are some people that won't care about taboos and things like that but I would really like this to be treated as an opportunity for the game to encourage mindfulness. Ristra just threw an idea out there that if you PK'd someone that did not fight back, you would never see them again because they were dead to you. I liked that idea even though it would have tons of mechanical problems. The thing I like about it is that you could never buy anything from, group with or benefit from anything that person did in the game. I would like that to also work similarly for taboos. I'd like to see some sort of ostracize mechanic for people to be able to truly shun unvirtuous behavior. I can just see poor Lum groaning right now but that is the kind of depth I would like to see.

 

I never said the RPers would by default have a problem with it. I was just trying to point out different perspectives and that RPers usually care more about the characters and thus have more reason to not want to be carved up. There's a difference here between the mechanic and simply not wanting it to happen to you personally. Besides that, in generalizing you have to acknowledge that there are always exceptions to the rule. Being an exception doesn't make the generalization itself completely inaccurate. It just means you yourself are an exception. I suppose I could've been more clear on those points.

I also did not imply people who like the mechanic are toxic. Do not confuse my generalization with a separate argument with someone else. What I said was the non-RPing PvPer typically doesn't care about their character. My comments about the whole "one man's evil" and "it's just pixels" was a direct response to those statements by one person and even that was explaining how I view those arguments themselves and not necessarily saying they themselves are a "toxic" player.. but that kind of thinking can be used to justify that kind of play. Again that was not part of the generalization.

 

The virtues have been Forsaken tho !

I seem to remember the Avatar had no problem carrying around demonic swords or being racist to Gargoyles lol !!

Let's have a poll !!!

 

I love you!

 

Hmm how was the blackrock sword w/ Arcadion wrong to carry in of itself? Was it not compassionate to carry it? hmm not really applicable.. was it unjust to carry it? deceitful? hmm no.. According to LB's code of virtues.. what about having the sword was unvirtuous?

Now since I've opened that can of worms I'll make the argument that carving up a defenseless corpse is decidedly unkind / uncompassionate to the character and possibly a wee unjust. This those are the virtues I'd probably suggest should take the hit for doing such things.

Also at what point was the Avatar racist? Gargoyles were always the ones trying to kill him. It was the Avatar that brought the races together despite the violence towards him.

Don't give me forsaken virtue business. The virtues don't become "less good" because the people say so and the virtue system certainly is not going to reflect that.

 

I think you should be able to gather enough parts, piece them together and animate your creation.

 

If you ever played UO you'd know there are consequences for The Shining-style chopping up of bodies, you lose Karma if the body was that of a good player, no negative effects if it was a red or grey.

The official OSI toolkit might be able to fix this thread...



Body parts were da bomb back in the early UO days, 97,98 you could chop someone's corpse up and get the parts, leg x2, arm x2, head, torso, chop up the torso get a ribcage, heart, liver, chop up the legs & arms & get edible human jerky, chop up the head and you got a skull & a brain, all of these items had the name of the dead player displayed on them, it was an amazing feature, do you think it's a coincidence they are expanding on this in SOTA? Same team members probably voted for this awesome idea back in UO's early days and are voting for it again because it was awesome, I consider UO from 1996 to 2001 to be an actual official Ultima, for those that never played UO during those years you missed out, the years after that the only thing you missed was customized housing and I'm sure you can check that out on a freeshard, but my point is, the spiritual successor to Ultima VIII *was* Ultima Online (From 1996 to 2001), pre-alpha test was in 1996, there's even a freeshard emulating the pre-alpha if anyone wants to check it out. anyway, my point is *a-lot of the ideas from UO will be implemented into SOTA* simply because UO from 1996 to 2001 had a lot to offer and the good things from it need not be ignored, luckily Garriott & Long and probably others that were extensively part of that team are part of this team. Anything after 2001 in UO was un-official as an Ultima in my opinion...

 

i agree with the above and while a mechanic like that would help i guess it is way to hard to implement technically. I just hope they will take in consideration the sensitivities some people might have with chopping up (digital) bodies and flaunt parts them in front of other people. Honestly i didnt get the impression they seriously considered the impact it might have on future players. thats why i wanted to clarify my position

I guess a toggle in the options menu might be a good option? That way people have a choice and you dont limit anyone either way.

 

Because UO did it is not a justification. Unless there is an in-game purpose then body parts brings nothing to gameplay. At best it's morbid proof of bragging rights and macabre decoration for the minority into that stuff.. At worst it's insult to injury, degrading, morally offensive to many and a potential tool for a form of griefing.. especially when someone's name is attached to it. Remove the PC's name and some of those negatives are somewhat lessened.

IF harvesting body parts served some purpose in actual gameplay that was meaningful and came with appropriate consequences then there would be a better argument for it.

I would further argue that NOT having this as a feature would not harm gameplay at all and it's very likely that even the people who want it really wouldn't miss it all that much in the long term. As is it's little more than morbid shock value. I see no reason the devs should spend time on it.

 

Sorry, I could not resist.

Anyway, as cartoony and gamey SotA could be, I'd like a bit of realism and immersion with it. That possibly means not seeing hundreds of copies of some guy's head.

Remember The Name of The Rose?

 

Amazing features for some can be gamebreaking for others.

I know this very well because some of my gaming choices aren't really popular. I enjoy Dwarf Fortress quite a bit, for example, but I'm quite aware that the high complexity and a learning curve that makes EVE's one seem like a pleasant incline are absolute deal-breakers for the vast majority of players.

It's my case with non-consensual player interaction. It's more often than not game-breaking for me. Keep the idea of taking body parts as trophies and I guarantee that I will never flag myself for PvP, never take a PvP mission, whenever the trophy system is active.

 

Any one who does not get trophies
clearly never played old OU , let some fool pvp you a few times , and then you set a trap and kill his ass , and watch just how fast you mount his stuipd head on the porch of your house or gate , for all the scared lemmings to see.

 

Not everybody is like you. Not everyone who gets PKed wants to put the PKer's head on a spike. Having played UO from beta through the first few years.. and as much as I would've liked to have killed a few specific PKers (one especially immature brat comes to mind) I never once had any inclination to put their head on display or do anything else with their remains. I can honestly say the thought never once even crossed my mind.

So the whole "clearly never played old UO" is clearly incorrect. It has nothing to do with the game's you've played or even the experiences you had. It has everything to do with whether you go for that sort of thing or not.

 

I read this and wonder how the PvP community cannot fathom how they have the reputation they complain about...

I know that that not all fall into the same bucket, but stereotypes come from somewhere...

 

I think on both sides don't fathom how their statements come across or how their play style affects the others. Its like how the Jock that bullied you throughout high school walks up to you at your reunion like he was your best friends. We all walk through life with rose colored glasses: the real trick is realizing when to take them off and try to deal with the real world.

 

I don't get where your stereotype comes in. He simply trapped and killed the person griefing him and proudly put his head on a stick.

Why do you continue to insist that posts such as these have any negative connotations? Because the point-of-view is different from your own?

 

If I could collect any kind of trophy, not even PvP specific, I'd want it to be very limited in supply. Not something the average player could get.
A trophy for killing the most wanted criminal I'd take. A trophy for a respawning player that I could stock pile and pass out like party favors I'll pass.

Body part trophies are pointless. Named parts is for gloating and I stand against added mechanics that are too easily turned in to harassment methods.. Body parts used for crafting is an attempt at gore for the sake of gore. They have "blood and gore" settings in many games so people can turn that off.

I'd be fine with the option to disable the gore, if I choose to do so.

 

They had mentioned that body parts might be used for necromancer skills, so the trophies would not be pointless in that case. They might actually be required for some roles.

I think trophies should not be "dropped" like inventory, and instead require a separate loot process specifically for "harvesting" these parts. This would require actual intention to take these trophies and thus make it easier to give a virtue hit for doing it without having that type of gore pushed into the standard loot mechanic. Additionally, they would have another moment of vulnerability as they try to grab the loot AND the body part.

 

That would be using player corpses as a source for resources, not a trophy. No reason for a player's name to be retained in the resource. Which is what I think the major objection is located.

Showing the name only to the owner of a trophy may work but trophiess are for showing to others so it kind of removes the value.

Players used as a resource, I'd be interested in seeing how they control mutual agreement for resource farming purposes.

 

Because the statement is loaded with negative words, and phrases.
"Fool", "Trap", "Stupid", "Lemmings"
The statement is derogatory to his fellow PvP players, rooted in anger and revenge, and apparent glee in all of it... It's not simply What is being said, the the contents of the sub-text and the attitudes and feelings conveyed.

While I accept the fact that some... many even... find this to be entertaining, I've never been able to understand it personally. Hate, Anger, desire for Revenge are things I've always wanted to avoid, and never sought out... especially as a form of entertainment.