Bro, do you even Role Play???

Really, Rune? People have been looting battlefields for as long as there have been battlefields. If a person ois carrying gear, it should be available as loot. Anything else is unrealistic.

 

Um what point of mine are you arguing? I'm beginning to think you see red when I'm posting at all.

Sure...then every other realistic thing should be in game....but it's not. It might be realistic, but does it add anything without taking away anything?

 

You're right, I was responding to Ned888. You guys all look alike to me.

 

Another issue I have when people argue against realism is this kind of all or nothing argument. A reasonable amount of realism makes the world you're playing in more believable and more fun to be in.. it's a world you can lose yourself in. But as a game you need to find balance between realism and playability. But because it's a game is not an excuse to ignore it altogether.

This is a role playing game. The world needs to have a certain level of believability and for that you need a certain level of realism. If you want a game that must be entirely unrealistic well.. I guess there's always Tetris.

 

So... the gear factor...
So full loot=bad because no one will use their gear they worked hard to find *boooooring!* people should be able to test out their mightiest weapons without the risk of losing them. Otherwise no mighty weapons are gonna be brought out into the pvp world.

Funny thing is for the most part that was true in felucca in UO, people basically just carried a GM crafted weapon, or regs and other than that were completely naked.. Sometimes... this played right into my advantage. I had a buddy in real life who would hang out with me... in real life. We'd sit next to each other in our real life chairs and play UO. I'd watch him dig treasures and stuff in trammel hed find power weapons and stuff. Then hed throw on a full set of magic armour and a magic weapon, DP the weapon and run to felucca. Im going... "wth?" dude whats the point of that?

He'd whack people left and right. Sure hed lose his best magic weapons once in awhile.. But he was like "twas much funner than spending all their durability on ettins and spawn in trammel."

So yea... if your a gambler you'll run right into PvP mode with all the other naked players and butcher em. Though... your risking much more than them. Which is why its not really an economically smart thing to do. But boy is it quite entertaining. I'd say its worth it. Like a 40k gold value and all (2001 UO era economy). =P

 

Nice little bit of snideness at the end.

Sure, it's a role playing game...I'm not saying no looting at all I'm saying this idea of full loot, which leads to them also wanting simple gear that can be crafted and replaced starts down a slippery slope. So, realism and playability requires full loot or it just doesn't work? I could understand if you couldn't loot anything at all...but you can under their system. But that's not good enough...don't punish anyone breaking the laws with anything that actually resembles a punishment but there must be full loot to make it real.

I don't buy it...you don't get full loot from monsters, hell I can't think of any RPG that gives you everything the monsters use on you for gear...reason being? balance. Chris brought up a lot of good reasons they didn't want the full loot.

 

People can still use their favorite gear that everyone else in OPO PvE will use it for. They just won't use it in OPO Open PvP Full Loot, if that option is available. Why? Because PvP is inherently more risky than PvE, and people are good at estimating risk. If PvE were equally risky, and if mobs took your gear, people wouldn't risk their mightiest weapons in PvE, either.

 

It stops 99% of them from using their best stuff in OPO PvP full loot. But never stopped my buddy in UO. Felucca was full loot pvp, and he'd throw on the vanq weapons and stuff, dp'd. Because he knew that people dont use it there because they dont wanna lose it.
Im not sure.... But im thinking theres got to be at least a few other adrenaline junkies out there who would do something like that.

 

Except all I was replying to was the all or nothing nature of your comment.

 

Any RPG, or did you mean multiplayer RPGs? Skyrim dropped everything.

 

Probably so. I hope they have the opportunity.

 

Excellent. One man player boss content. They should organise raids around you.

God bless you sir. You are a credit to gaming!! If only there were more like you.

Seriously. I mean it.

 

I have seen the mods, they have taken the high ground. Turn back now or prepare to be destroyed.

 

Since I can't threaten a fisher (most likely a fisher won't flag himself for pvp) as a pirate, I can't do roleplay. This is what I have been talking about as freedom. Even though there is a pvp system but with flags, noone in a tavern outside a guardzone would flag himself as pvp so you can gank the place with your gang, only people you will see in the tavern would probably be the knights who flagged themselves as pvp. Or betraying your fellows in a dungeon where a precious monster is killed and you backstab them as a greedy character. This is why we need a Felucca server where you can't switch your pvp state.

 

You dont say? I've been psychotic about this all over the forums for months, dropping my bloodied spaghetti all around, getting banned all the time for being to loud about something Im so passionate about.

It's so horrible when players turn a role playing game with a SOUL into a mindless grinder that needs to be comfortable, non-challenging and dull.

I'm still here not because I particularly like what the team is doing with the game, and absolutely not because the community is good. I'm here because I've already started and I'm eager to see how it all ends. I want to get the masochistic pleasure of seeing another hope turn into an item-grind fest. And then I'll goo look somewhere else, because even tho I've grown during the past years, my great passion for immersing myself into a magical world stays the same.
Kudos to everyone on these forums who thinks like me :-*.

p.s.

*Appears from the shadows*
I am chaotic evil by nature. A killer, an assassin, a beast. I drink the blood of my enemies, I kill with pleasure and without mercy. I am the claws in the darkness that seek to end your life. I worship death and undeath, and worship life in a certain way. When I sink my claws into living flesh I feel more alive. And as I spiral down towards my own imminent finale, I will drag you with me.
I am Templar, an assassin of the temple, a servant of the dark.

 

That type of player learned what they like and do not like in PvP and moved on. The genre doesn't exist any more.

Free shards is a bad example, why, because they are free.

Also, you are using UO as a reference, not a good reference at all, why, because that person you wish to threaten does not exist for long in a game that everyone can have combat skills without sacrificing other skills.

So unless someone is "role playing" an easy target, which they would do by choice, they are not going to be that common. If someone wishes to role player something like this they have the Oracle's blessing.

 

Several heroes is way better than one hero in a mmorpg and this is why.
I have a warrior and a lumberjack. I need wood, so I play on my lumberjack for many hours. I dont have any fighting skills so by playing this toon I add another helpless victim to the open world of the game. I now have to run, hide, beg, talk my way out of dangerous situation. This is good for gameplay, mine and all the other people's on the server.

 

If one or both of us are a Relativists... actually, we could both be Objectivists but then one of us would be wrong.

 

Behavior that lessens the experience for other players is NOT good for gameplay. What some people seem to fail to realize is that not everyone enjoys being attacked without provocation. It ruins their enjoyment and thus they'll remove themselves from that environment.

The only people I ever see arguing for non-consensual PvP.. are those who want easy prey. Granted I don't spend a lot of time in the PvP threads so maybe I've missed a few but this pattern makes me skeptical and I highly doubt RP ever has anything to do with it.

 

The warrior and the lumberjack can be one character. The only reason that it's not possible is the player has not had the time to increase the skills required to do both.

Building a system that pits the long term players against players that have not put the time in is bad. New player retention is the number one killer of all PvP games.

No matter how you want to justify things with role playing you can not design a game mechanic that promotes preying on the lower skilled players. Not if it slows the progress of those players.