Cannibalism Game Mechanics, pt. 1 of 2

Is that perhaps due to the minority simply eating the majority, and leaving no one left to complain ?

 

Will you people quit posting huge stuff to reply to at the end of the page please?

Addressing a point and moving on to the next is hardly changing one's position. My position on all points hasn't changed in the slightest. Just because there's an additional argument to be made doesn't mean the old one is abandoned or somehow no longer relevant. It just means the subject has moved on.
Have I changed the angle at which I've come at the issue? Sure. Does it mean my opinion has changed? No. It only means there's are multiple ways of addressing the issues.

I occasionally clarify my position in an apparently vain hope that you guys better understand what the main points of contention are. Which you've apparently missed.

You really think it won't matter cause the victim doesn't see it occur? Are we stupid now? Out of sight out of mind? We'll know this happens in PvP. So we'll know it's happening to us sooner or later. So rather than let us opt out the solution is to just not show us and assume we won't find out?

You're now claiming I'm the only person opposed. Did you not see the other people posting in the other thread? You guys underestimate the numbers I think. Maybe I do? But you know.. there aren't a lot of people willing to engage in topics like this. There's only a handful of you guys out of everything saying "yeah this is cool". I'm not so convinced you're in the majority either.

So harvesting parts makes you PvP enabled? Aren't you already PvP enabled if there's a PC's corpse at your feet? If it takes so much time to do.. aren't people going to realize your doing it? The offender isn't caught by the PC's ghost are they?

I really don't see the threat of being reported as a deterrent. If people fear being caught and earning a reputation they probably wouldn't be on the evil side of PvP to begin with. Rather I suspect people would use this to intentionally built up a bounty. Recall how people in UO used the system just to get the title "Dread Lord" over their head. If there's status to be had, the system will be abused to achieve it.

Hmm.. I can honestly say I've no idea what tea bagging is but I'm pretty sure it's not going in game. So please don't explain it. I do understand it's not a nice thing to do.

As for player behavior.. why give players tools you know they will abuse? You can't control player behavior.. that doesn't mean you give them things you know will promote unwanted behaviors. You can't just wash your hands from that and say "I can't control what they do".

Running a tabletop game did you players even abuse each other? Did they kill each other off and cook them up? Did you even tell them that was an option? I wager more RPing groups care about their fellow player's enjoyment of the game. You don't get a lot of that online.

(In case your wondering.. A: my browser won't let me quote, edit... and copy/paste always puts stuff at the top.. B: no I'm not switching browsers over this one issue).

 

I was going to utter my opinion, but a lifetime of trying to learn not to get involved with controversial subjects like this caused me to bite my tongue. It hurt real bad and now I am a bleeding cannibal too.

 

I on the other hand haven't quite learned that lesson. Thankfully I still have a tongue not to bite. As it is.. I think most people would rather just stay out of it as things tend to get heated and often they find the topic itself distasteful and something to be avoided.

Therefore, when I see something like this come up I'm just a bit compelled to take the bullet.

Now here's a thought.. want to really actually avoid the "humiliation factor"? Truly? Really? Harvest from NPCs only. From the RP standpoint there isn't any difference. Just as evil and avoids potential conflicts with other systems.. like say.. how death is handled. (Which we still don't know much about and could potentially render the whole topic obsolete anyway).

Am I changing my position? No I still think it's a bad idea.. but it would be more palatable. Less to complain about.

 

Well, I worked my way through the old thread to see for myself how the community views this.

Bowen, you're right: you're not the only person who is opposed to this feature.

Going off the numbers from that post, here's what I found:

Did not state their position: 2 (maybe it was 3).
Opposed to cannibalism: 7 (worth noting: two of these specifically expressed grief over names on body parts, gore, etc... none of which are present anymore)
For cannibalism: 34.

It was a quick scan. My numbers may be a bit off. Either way, the teeth count on our side tallies pretty high...

I mean, let's talk World of Warcraft (guh, it's come to this). Undead can cannibalize all corpses, PvP or not. There is no penalty for doing this, and they are using the other player's body to get health back. I have not seen anyone complain about that, and they are actually forced to watch until they release their spirit & teleport back to the healer to be resurrected. This is no different, except that the stakes for the cannibal are considerably higher.

No, you're not already PvP enabled... both of you could be PvP disabled, that person could die, and you could take advantage of the situation ('the temptation of evil!'). Will players automatically do that? Impose a long PvP-eligible time, and I highly doubt it.

The ghost thing is a good point. I hadn't considered that. It's good that you brought it up. I guess I figured that the standard action (assuming we keep ghosting) is to run and find a healer. It never occurred to me that someone may be so vindictive that they let their corpse rot just so others can't mingle with it. That's something I'll be thinking about.

As of right now, I'd assume: no. Ghosts can't report players to authorities. They've traditionally been totally speechless & powerless, so yeah, I suppose I'd keep up with that tradition.

You do realize that you've defined "deterrent" with that point, right?

"I really don't see the threat of being reported as a deterrent. If people fear being caught... they probably wouldn't commit to that playstyle."

Yeah, dude, that's what makes it a deterrent to so many...

Still: The idea isn't to keep player X from doing Y. The idea is to set up so many potential consequences (ie., being reported and being chased by PC & NPC bounty hunters) that they have to watch their backs if they plan on do it. Players have to think, "Is this worth it?" A lot is at risk if they decide, "Hmm sure."

Again, this whole "ugghh they're abusing the system!" thing seems like malarkey when you stretch it out like this. The ghost thing, I'll give you: that could be a legitimate form of abuse.

With that said, what constitutes abuse, exactly?

Abuse is people using a game mechanic that enforces negative karmic modifiers to get negative karmic modifiers? It sounds like it's working as intended. How about this: people who go out and slay evil NPCs and/or PCs gain positive karma, so really, everyone walking around with "Lord" over their head is actually just abusing the system. The inverse doesn't make sense, does it?

"They're not roleplaying while doing it" -- is this the problem? I agree, it's annoying when people break the setting like that. Yet, there's no way to actually enforce roleplaying other than the ignore feature. So, what do we do about every other system in the game that will apparently be "abused" by the people who aren't roleplaying while using it?

Teabagging: originally, you'd repeatedly crouch over a corpse's face to make it look like you were defaming that person. Over time, however, teabagging grew to dancing, bowing, handstands, whatever. Basically, substitute "teabagging" for "taunting."

Bowen, a couple things on this point:

Should we remove otherwise safe game animations because people could possibly perform them over another player's corpse, thereby defaming them with this pointless act? No? Let me guess: you think we should ban that player, maybe suspend them for harassment. Okay, that's fine. I'd wonder how you'd actually prove it after the fact, but I'll leave that up to you.

Here's another thing:

Let's assume that you get back to your corpse and a player is standing right next to it. I mean, just standing there, minding their business. This player, like all players, had ample time to defame your corpse in any number of ways, didn't they? But, you didn't see them do it. You can assume they did. Yet, there's no way for you to know. So, are you upset? Is your experience ruined because of this? I mean, they're only standing there... how do you know that they've done anything at all? They could have even been guarding your corpse out of kindness.

So, again, what does it matter? Any time you die, people can do whatever they want to your corpse and there is nothing that you can do about it.

In a game with this kind of mechanic, you could die and get cannibalized and not even know it.
In a game without it, you could die, and people could surround your corpses with fish, laugh about it with their friends, pick them up and leave, and you'd be none the wiser.
You could die and people could use your corpse as an RP prop, move on, and you wouldn't know.

Don't forget that there will be NPC cannibals as well who will want to eat you.

Character animations? Global chat channels? How about this one: the option to speak? Lots of players abuse speech.

So, yeah, I can just wash my hands. You're beating a moot point to death.

You: "People will act how they act."
Me: "Ok, here's some controls. btw your problem is with people, not the mechanic..."
You: "BUT PEOPLE WILL ACT HOW THEY ACT!!!!"

Well, this is irrelevant. My players saw more to "enjoying the game" than "oh gosh I hope I don't get offended let's kill all the monsters and be nice to eachother all the time."

In some campaigns, yeah, they actually attacked eachother, because I set the quest up to challenge their archetypes. They routinely stole from & undermined eachother. At one point, an NPC relation was becoming so pivotal that to one player had to stop just short of killing another because the two outcomes were so different.

And you know what? They weren't even friends in the beginning.

To them, it was just a game. Those two joke about it to this day.

There are more light-hearted people out there who would just laugh at something like this than you think.

Hey, man, it might come to that. I don't know how much of a cookie cutter they want to make this game into. Having watched a lot of LB's stuff (including the Mostly Harmless podcast that spurred this), it genuinely seems like he wants to make a great game with minimal soft edges & handholding.

If the devs feel it's appropriate to align themselves to your sentiment, then oh well. Maybe they'll decide to limit cannibalism to NPCs, maybe they decide to do that and add that PCs in PvP zones can cannibalize. *shrug*

At the end of that day, I'll still feel pretty proud about this accomplishment - as should everyone else who's helped along the way.

 

Bowen Bloodgood <---<<< Lucky to have his mind on this subject Bowen Bloodgood + Kudos



Now I will point out some options I have to many of the points of interest within the subject matters that I have read here;

(issues from my notes)
Players shouting, "Human Meat for Sale"
Meat ID
Civil Cannibal
Opting Out
Assumption of Minority or Majority
More Reasons to Fear Death
Stinking Breath and Laughing

I am very harsh when it comes to the subject of the Cannibal, harsh in their lifestyle as well as in favor of their harsh nature upon us;

"What is Blood Thirsty?"
Everyone that eats meat is not blood thirsty. Yet to this point I will point to what criminals that have gone this path have done; They have done so increasingly and therefore eventually meet their doom by way of their audacity and increasing need to fill the ever increasing black hole inside themselves.
My suggestion is that our Cannibals be vicious and very powerful on their way up an ever growing need to eat more and more and by doing so become even more powerful with every bite. <---<<< Fear into a game that has none.
Yet with such a system, the Cannibal will reach a level where they can no longer sustain the amount of human flesh that is needed to keep their super human strength up. This creates the most vicious player in the game and most feared. But when that amount to maintain such power become too much for the Cannibal to eat, then comes their demise into a game of survival. They must try and find a cure costing Lollapalooza of $$$$$$ to cure and return them to a place where they may start over again with no left over effects from their previous behavior. These $$$$$ should be the control point by which can control those who play the Cannibal style of game. This also insures that it would be a very odd thing for any Cannibal to have amassed such a horde of $$$$$ to afford the later treatment.
I would also like to point out that this limits by far, the amount of human meat for sale by any Cannibal. If Necromancers come into our game, we will be seeing enough of Regs from Humans which should be separate from the Cannibals eating platter as non-consumable.
Human flesh "and all flesh products of all types" should have a limit to their freshness or ability to be eaten. Jerky even only lasts so long and provides little nourishment by comparison to fresh meat.
Being a Cannibal should not be looked at as a sustainable life in any easy way and lucky to be able to afford it's regeneration into a healthy human.
"Powerful more than any on the way up, and pitiful and difficult to cure or sustain on their way down".

Cannibals should be the most feared PvP in our game! Yet when another player meets a Cannibal, they will not know whether they are strong and coming up, or weak and faltering on their way down.

With such measures or implementation as described, I disagree with anyone that says they can ID what the Cannibal is eating (all flesh looks the same) yet their breath should stink and thus be shunned by all in town or normal NPCs and they should have un-controllable laughter (no matter how much they have eaten) at a certain season of the year. I also do not agree that they should be flagged as criminals, I believe they should be flagged as PvP.

If such measures of (+) & (-) are implemented, the Cannibal chr should become the toughest way to play SotA because of it's demise which should be very, very, very difficult to come back from.

That's a challenge, both ways and solves any excess meat!
Truly Blood Thirsty Anyone? It's sure not a profit then...
We also cannot assume anyone here speaks for any majority or minority in any opinion or offering.
~Time Lord~

 

"Enter The Tribe and the Darkest of the Dark"
Such a system as I have described above also lends favor to "Ritual as well as Tribe".

"Now Let Me Talk About a Total Evil and Totally Powerful Tribal Leader."

Lets say there come a Tribe (not a guild) that feeds "One" and how powerful the "One" can get before their demise.
If you eat human flesh or harvest human flesh as food and are a member of a Guild you should be automatically de-guilded by game mechanics. the only player that can harvest human meat for food is a Cannibal.

A "Tribe" is not a guild and has no favors that guilds get, because they are only a group of people. yet this is a group of people that are feeding a "One". Eventually, the "One" has the same problem that all Cannibals do by the above formula... they must eat more and more and by doing so become more powerful until they head back down. That is why I see the increasing amount of food an expansion by ratio. eat 1, need 1+1/4, 1+3/4, 2+ 1/2 and so on ever compounding in increments.

Be eaten by him and thus the groups ultimate doom
Can You Guess His Name?
~Time Lord~

 

@Time Lord:



Looks like you and Mr. Byrne may have something in common!

 

NEVER "teabag" a CANNIBAL!!! Not without a SAFE WORD!!! Take it from E'li Fox!!!

 

On the ghost thing.. nothing to do with being vindictive. Most players have a way of communicating with friends and guild mates and may often wait to see if someone they know can come rez them rather than running off.

System abuse: When the player uses game mechanics in a manner which is not intended. Particularly for what they feel is their own gain. Is how I would define it. The problem in the context of this discussion is as the deterrents seem more likely to encourage the behavior.

For the record I skipped over the tea bagging explanations. I said I didn't want to know. That was not an invitation to explain.

Hmm.. abusing global chat.. player speech etc. Nice.. unfortunately those things are necessary for ALL players. You wouldn't have much of a game if players couldn't communicate. Cannibalism? Hardly would even be missed if at all. Not a necessary component for the story or gameplay in general and encourages offensive behavior towards other players. All those things you mention are completely benign. Sure they can be abused but they don't actively encourage any kind of behavior one way or another. That's a big difference here.

You although this argument is very similar to unrestricted PvP vs consensual PvP in that the former you can't opt out. The existence of PvP doesn't necessarily encourage you to be good or evil. It may encourage you to fight with some kind of perks but it's up to the player. Ok so you may say it's up to the player whether or not to cannibalize.. you think you've put a lot of effort into consequences and such.. BUT.. there is no good cannibal. You're encouraging it by giving body parts market value. It would be done to other players who take offense.

So what if they can't see it? Don't you think.. they everyone who is aware of this feature knows.. if you die around someone you're not familiar with.. and it's going to happen plenty of times.. eventually.. sooner or later someone's going to use your corpse for profit? Especially when you even add this in for non-PvPers.. any opportunist can come along.. will come along and put you on the market. We don't need to see it. It'll be common knowledge.

You can't stop players from being jerks. So the game doesn't provide features that encourage it. You can report harassment. You can't do diddly about someone desecrating your corpse with built in game feature... and this isn't WoW. It's not UO.. it's not Skyrim etc etc etc..

Here's food for thought maybe you hadn't considered. Some of these ideas go against Portalarium's current thinking. Ultimately they're the ones you have to convince. This whole debate is really for their benefit. Now consider this.. their current thinking is that they want body part trophies.. but they recognize people may not want to be harvested so Starr suggested we could use the ransom system to opt out of that.

There's the key point.. they're currently planning to allow us to opt out of being trophies. Never mind being cannibalized. We can stop people cold by paying ransom (or perhaps another mechanism someone comes up with).

Another consideration.. the loot system. They're currently only allowing minimum loot and there are rules as to who it goes to. Meaning if harvesting body parts is a reality.. there will be rules as to who can do it (ie the person who killed you). It can't be just anyone. I guess if you put in a timer so that harvesting rights expire but how long is the PC going to stay dead? Timer seems rather moot.

If Portalarium is allowing us to opt out of even being looted.. how likely is it that any ol' evil Joe Cannibal is going to be able to walk along and be able to sit down for a picnic without even having looting rights?

 

Which deterrents attract 'the behavior,' specifically?

Getting kuru and having to do a quest to get rid of it before the game becomes unplayable? Being ostracized from lawful-/good-aligned cities (where your house might be located)? Getting ganked? Turning into a Wendigo and potentially losing everything in your inventory (including what you harvested)? More than likely not being able to purchase from vendors?

Some of these may be too severe, having read them...

From earlier:
"Let's assume that you get back to your corpse and a player is standing right next to it. I mean, just standing there, minding their business. This player, like all players, had ample time to defame your corpse in any number of ways, didn't they? But, you didn't see them do it. You can assume they did, though at this time they don't seem to be doing anything at all. There's no way for you to know what happened. So, now, are you upset by the notion that they may have done something? Is your gaming experience ruined because of this? It probably would be if you'd seen them... but you didn't. Still, they're standing there, right next to your corpse. I mean, they're only standing there... They could have put a chair over your corpse and sat a bit. Maybe they were guarding your corpse out of kindness. There is no way for you to tell. Does this same point of view not apply to the current cannibalism build?

So, again, what does any of that matter? Any time you die, people can do whatever they want to your corpse and there is nothing that you can do about it.

In a game with this kind of mechanic, you could die and get cannibalized and not even know it.
In a game without it, you could die, and people could surround your corpses with fish, laugh about it with their friends, pick them up and leave, and you'd be none the wiser.
You could die and people could use your corpse as an RP prop, move on, and you wouldn't know.

Don't forget that there will be NPC cannibals as well who will want to eat you. What if you see one of them doing it?"

That sounds fine to me. I'll happily charge a victim twice or five times the rate that I'd get for that body part.

If this is what they mean by 'opt out,' that's fine.

The way this system's been built, their head wouldn't even have their name on it.. but meh.

Looting? Who says you're being looted? Keep your gear, man - when you die, your body becomes like any other resource found in the wild.

You have no use for the parts being harvested, so why involve looting rights?

I don't mind the thought of a timer - seems realistic.

 

Karma hits mainly.. attracting bounty hunters for PvP in some cases. Some of those other deterrents people will just work around. Losing inventory is what guild mates and friends are for. Not to mention moving one's house is also an option. If people want to play that way they'll find a way.

Whether or not you can do anything realistically about what happens to your corpse isn't the point. That some people are offended and don't want to be torn apart and eaten is.. and if you die enough times you know the odds are.. it WILL happen. That's a turn off and this is a game.

Going back to your story about your RP group. You said the two guys had to stop from killing each other. You were kinda making my point right there. If one of them had died that kind of would've been a bad thing don't you think. At the hands of one of the other players. Somewhat ruins the experience doesn't it?

The longer this has gone on the worst it's gotten from my perspective. We started with PvP only and people suggesting ways those who don't want to be involved can opt out. Then it went to PvP only and they can't opt out.. to it doesn't even have to be PvP and they can't opt out. Meaning the only way to be sure you avoid it is A: never die. B: Never play multiplayer.

It doesn't matter if you can't see it. It DOES matter that players have no control to that extreme. This is not a survival horror game. Every time this has come up people have said they would avoid PvP to avoid cannibalism if that's what it took.. (all different people I might add.. you're like the 3rd or 4th person to bring it up over the last year). How much or little they see is irrelevant when they KNOW it's going to happen regardless.

We're not talking NPCs.. we're not talking undead.. every single time someone comes up with example where oh it's in this TV show.. it's in this game.. every one of those cases so far it's undead or other NPCs. This we're talking about here.. is PC human vs PC human. There's no convenient excuse like being an undead NPC. If it comes down to it you can always avoid those by simply not going where they are.

Incidentally.. with the ransom system.. you don't get to choose how much the ransom is. Precisely so people can't deliberately ransom high. Personally I think ransom is severely flawed and won't last but for the sake of the argument it illustrates that Portalarium wants to allow people the option to opt out of situations that have an adverse effect on their enjoyment of the game. They're not going to go for anyone and their mother not even involved in the PC's death being able to cannibalize any PC corpse they happen to come across without allowed the victim a means to opt out.

 

My definition of "Teabagging" is quite different my friend.

 

So... if I understand this correctly, you wouldn't think twice about being a burden on your guild mates and friends because they're merely your bank?

Given that option, you'd routinely or semi-routinely play in a way that has you mooching stuff from your peers because your decisions result in you being ganked and looted constantly?

That... wouldn't deter you?

Maybe Portalarium will let them opt out if they feel it's an issue. They can pay a ransom for something that is literally of no value to them - their choice.

I highly doubt that very many people feel that way, feel that strongly, but I could be wrong.

On average, for how many hours do you think an adult will play the game per day? Two, maybe three at most?

So, all in all, it can happen to them two times in a single session of play at most... Something tells me that they'll remember the hours of fun and not the fraction-of-a-second where they may have seen a cannibal.

It would've been a bad thing. Yes, terrible. A complete failure of a tabletop session.

Had the one killed the other, that poor, poor gamer would have had to have... opened a folder in his tablet... and... actually... (weeping) PICKED ONE OF HIS MANY PRE-ROLLED CHARACTER SHEETS... AND MET UP IN TOOOWN!

(collapses to the floor, sobbing)

Again, the guys and gals within this group don't need to feel superior to have fun. They just have fun.

None of this is even relevant, though.

3rd or 4th? I mean.. 34 people were interested in the last thread.

The "every time" thing isn't compelling me...

In the last thread, that all-or-nothing sentiment seemed to come from people who had intended to avoid pvp anyway.

Hey, let the victim pay the ransom. It's total nonsense, but whatever.

 

Well that's kind of a twisted way to look at it. Guild mates and friends are usually people who approve of your play style. People who are willing to help you usually don't consider it a burden.

What you seem to be overlooking here.. is your typical PK guild or any PvP guild pretty much rarely often operate in groups and simply getting 'ganked' all the time is not a deterrent in the slightest when you expect to die a lot regardless. You PvP a lot.. you die a lot. Being made a target because of cannibalism is redundant and according to current looting plans.. full loot is not an option. You're not just going to lose your inventory from getting killed a lot unless we someone convince them that full loot is acceptable in PvP.

Now.. assuming full loot is acceptable.. the PvP community will adjust. Though I hate to say it as I'm fond of reminding people that SotA should be its own game.. but UO anyone? People are fond of evoking UO's name when it comes to stuff like this.

So no.. if I was a PvPer losing my entire inventory wouldn't deter me. I myself have in the past advocated for full loot (within reason.. ie quest items, house keys etc) for PvP. Having ordinary stuff magically bound to your body makes no sense to me if you can loot at all. Anyway.. different topic for another thread.

The point of referencing the DMing stuff.. is the difference between tabletop and online. We obviously have very different DMing experiences. The RPers I know were very invested in their characters. They spent a lot of time developing them and they and the DMs I worked with valued everyone's enjoyment of the experience. We had limits that everyone respected. You can very easily ruin someone's experience by forcing them into undesired situations. PvP was always consensual for example.. but we all knew that if you bad mouthed the bad guy.. you were engaging in PvP and could get smacked down. (I had one character who paid that price on more than one occasion.. but hell she asked for it). But no one would just randomly come around and gank you while you were half dead in the middle of a fight.

If your player didn't care if some template character died well.. I guess I won't be appealing to your table top experience. I don't know anyone I'm aware of that just picked a random template.

What you're trying to set up is a system where no one has the choice to opt in or out of regardless.. and by creating a market you're promoting people to engage in the system for profit. You get this larger MMO sized community a lot of people either don't care about your experience or they just don't think about it. But it still effects those who do care.

Regarding the "all or nothing" from people. These are people who've said they would have at least tried PvP.. but won't if a system like what your proposing went in.. (which is also counter to Portalarium who wants to encourage people to PvP) but that was before you indicated that you're not even giving them that much. They get killed by a dragon or something any ol' person can still eat them? Sell their bones. All or nothing suddenly becomes single player only.

 

If I don't eat someone soon, bad things are gunna happen.

 

So.. if one bad thing doesn't happen.. then another bad thing is going to happen?

 

FTFY: If one good thing doesn't happen, bad things are going to happen.

 

Back to an older point. Eating people is not necessary. The game won't suffer without it and it won't gain much (if anything) with it.