Current healing game mechanic is encouraging antisocial behavior

Again, you are making the argument for non consensual gaming. The way you speak is the same way a person speaks when he wants to attack someone. I want to heal you! I want to kill you! These are both wants, and both non consensual. Either you have non consent or you have consent, but you cannot have half. If you heal me I should have the ability to attack you for healing me. Please try to understand my argument.

 

But for people like that there is something called Single Player Online. They would never even see them.
In FlyFF we used to buff up the newbies to level our skills (before they removed that). There was a small community of us and it made getting past the first zone less painful.

And your argument forces me to never be allowed to give my consent.
A PvPer can in fact give consent to be attacked. This is a given part of the game. Healing however does NOT have a method of allowing consent. Where is my consent in this? The coin flips both ways doesn't it? If you don't want heals and I do, I should be allowed to accept healing.

I'd be happy with a toggle, but the point of spewing "consent" this "consent" that is overdone when all you are really saying is "I don't want it so NOBODY can have it"

 

Listen, I am on your side actually, but I want non consent. Basically what you are calling for. There is no in between.

My argument allows a toggle so you cannot say that it never forces you to give consent. You state that healing does not give the opportunity for consent, my argument gives the ability to give consent. THEN after stating that my argument gives no consent you state that even with the toggle (which is my idea) you state that its "overdone". well it has to be overdone. Get rid of the ridiculous consensual game that was promised in the kikstarter and just have non consensual gaming, then you and me will both be happy, well, until I kill you for healing me, and then you will still be on my hit list.

 

Go look at the Death magic tree.

 

There is inbetween. You can consent to heals without consenting to pvp.

I'm fine with a toggle I've said before. But I also can not heal NPCs. Why not? Do I need their consent too?

Death magic drastically reduces the healing that you receive. I've tested this and my heals go from 80 to about 10 on those people. 10 hp isn't going to ruin your build.

 

why bring npc's into this, this is a tangent. So you agree with the toggle though, that is good. I think it would allow both worlds to live harmoniously.

 

Because I also want to heal NPCs. I want to be able to heal the guards fighting the kobolds. Because sometimes I need to talk to the stupid idiot for a quest that is getting mowed down by kobolds and I don't want to wait for him to respawn...
This happened during my courage progression. The quest giver died and I could do nothing but watch and wait for him to respawn.

But to enable this toggle there would need to be a visual aspect which I can use so that I don't waste my time with them. If someone does PvP I know not to help them, as it will flag me and is a waste of my time. So I would want the same for refusal of heals.

 

Both of these examples in the real world,which this game is a game,do apply.
But you really have to be kidding me if you are saying by me killing wolves,gathering ore and wood I have somehow given you consent to heal me. That by somehow engaging skeletons I have given you consent to interject yourself as you see fit. Oh hell no. Even if I am in multiplayer mode,if I am not grouped with with you,you haven't gotten consent by me for anything. It's bad enough if you are in multiplayer and someone thinks you need "help" and runs over killing something.
If I am in a group,consent is not only implied,it's expected. If I am alone,have pulled stuff and I am fighting,the last thing I would want is someone near me that now I have to be concerned about where do I kite to next to keep mobs off them, again no,no ,no.
You are using real life examples of implied consent,because the person is out cold and may be dying. I am not dying,my avatar might be,but I am not. If you want to view that as antisocial,go right ahead. If I am not grouped with you,I do not expect nor want anything from you while I am fighting,period. I fail to see how hard it is to understand this concept,that many people do not want just every Tom,**** and Harry interjecting themselves into their business. If I am in a group with you,fine. If I am not grouped with anyone and doing my own thing, again I am not looking for,nor do I require someone to save me.

 

Then that is another reason why the option should be available to refuse heals much like has been said several times already.
But on the other hand, I would suspect that the average gamer would not scream and yell at me for healing them. Anyone who does I would promptly log as "do not heal" in my notes and let them die next time.

If you've not "given your consent" to be healed why then are you concerned about their well being?

 

We do already have the option "to refuse heals", it's called you are not in my party. Somehow you equate not wanting heals as being being antisocial or not being able to heal anyone at will as encouraging antisocial behavior. What you are suggesting to me is nothing more than wanting to be able to interject yourself whenever you deem necessary. I shouldn't have to select an option box,the developers have an option built in,you are not in my party. Healing rain is one of the most lag causing,sight impeding spell cast in the game. So somehow it should be up to you to save people from dying with that spell? It can cause deaths also. And if someone is using death magic and you heal them, it really causes grief. Things should be left just as they are and no one outside of your party be able to interject themselves,not even having a clue what you are doing or why.

 

Given how incredibly hard it is to get a party, I would still consider that antisocial. Yes.

Healing rain? I can impair your vision whether you are in my party or not. However the spell only appears over the caster now. So that is a pointless argument as I can blind you without your consent either way.
But yes it can cause death. It's really annoying, but I don't need partied with you to use it around you. My illumination spell also does not need your consent.

You say this like I can't interject myself anyways. I can attack your mobs instead if I so desire. I can walk up to you with healing rain, illumination, drop fire ring and meteor and reduce your vision to absolutely nothing and you can't stop me. But healing you is ruining the game for you.

 

you seem to abandon fact for your feelings. I will not respond to you further as it is fruitless to reply to a person with a personal vendetta. Fare thee well stranger!

 

Hmmm well this is no answer that solves anything. People should and will play where they want. The permission I mention would be in the settings to set how you want to play the game. Click accepts heals from others and you get them occasionally if someone tries as they pass by, click no and the person trying to heal gets the notice, this person refuses heals or rezzes. Oh well anyway Any decision made by this game's developers will try to make it a better game for all of us. The answers are not always easy. Besides we are not arguing against it by any means. It has been an ongoing discussion every so often since 2013 at least.

 

I am not saying I would, however the fact remains you can do it.
I was pointing out that you do not get to give consent for every single aspect of the game. What I've mentioned are also quite obvious flaws with those spells. But consent is not required for me to cast those on myself even if it affects your gameplay.
But of course, you're not going to reply to this so why bother putting additional effort into you.

Well for someone who is afraid of people, single player definitely is better. I'd assume they wouldn't want to play surrounded by people.
I would think though that this setting would be enabled to accept healing by default though, as I don't see very many people refusing heals. Of course there is the guy who wants to murder people who heal him.

Having it be a toggle wouldn't be too complex. We have the same thing for PvP don't we? It would just require adding another check mark which says "Do not accept heals from other players" under the "warn me if I enter a PvP zone" check mark.

I'm just struggling to understand how having life would harm a player. Even a death mage could life tap their hp back to where it was and in that instance give them more focus.
Sure their spells get "more powerful", but if it's anything like the counter of "heal more if you've not harmed a target" in the life tree, the difference is not much.

 

Like I said I am not disagreeing with you. I love being able to help other players if I see they need it or want it. It is a matter of how to make it happen. Ask your question at the telethon that is coming up soon and ask for details and plans on this subject. And reminder to anyone don't forget the telethon is coming in a few days.

 

Sadly I'm always at work during the telethons and such and unable to ask questions.
What time is that anyways?

 

https://www.shroudoftheavatar.com/?p=73654
It is July 6 from 3-9 p.m. CT (Central time)- Austin, TX time
There will be a place to ask questions. You don't have to be there and always for anyone don't forget to spend 5 bucks if at all possible, this gets you all awarded telethon items. @Berek can you advise where to put telethon questions for those who will be working. Also Berek can you check into if there can be a way to contribute to the telethon if people are working or not available. That also would be fantastic for in the future. I hate to see people miss out just because they are at work, sleeping, or unavailable for other reasons. IMO it is another way of taking care of development and the community when possible.

 

It's pretty obvious not being able to heal everyone is ruining the game for you. I'm not saying you healing me would ruin the game,I am saying it's not your place to decide when and where to interject yourself into another players game play. I used to pass folks all the time killing mobs,did I help? Heck no, I wasn't invited to nor was I asked to. If I am asked,if I am invited,that is a whole different story. What you are asking for is based on your decision,not other players decision and that is crossing a line into involving yourself in what I am doing without permission. Sorry I will never agree that this should be allowed, if you want to champion the cause go ahead. Because I am 100% against it and don't mind letting it be known.

 

Like PVP accepting beneficial acts from people should generate a toggle. Seems like a perfect solution to allow players in pve environments to accept help without the need to party literally everyone. We can already interacted with you by attacking monsters with or without your consent so unless you are for locking out people from interacting with the monsters around you then you really can't object to people playing healers and wanting the same equal rights as you have. Antisocial definition: not sociable; not wanting the company of others. Clearly there are players here that enjoy being antisocial which is perfectly fine. The toggle would allow you to continue to not engage with people at least for heals you'll have to fight hard for the monster interaction changes unless you are for unequal rights to healers.

 

I don't see why not wanting help killing mobs or getting heals somehow tags you as being antisocial. If I want to run with folks,I have a entire guild more than willing. You are not going to tell me that everyone at some point just wants some time to do their own thing without interaction of others.