First, let me apologize for my lack of communication
around this issue. I realize that both destructive crossplay
and pkill interference are critical issues, and I don't have
a solution as of yet, but I want to give you some idea why
it's taking so long, as well as some of the ramifications of
the decisions that get made around these issues, particularly
around destructive crossplay.
I recognize that destructive crossplay is just that -- destructive.
It hampers RP, and has a significant negative impact on both
the pkillers and non-pkillers at LegendMud. With the status of
pkill in general right now, any decision made by the immortal
staff right now is more than just a rule, it's s precident-setting
decision and needs to be made with careful deliberation and
forethought. I wanted to take a second to share some of the
related thought processes that are going on with you. Please
don't read any conclusions into this explination, we, as a
whole, haven't reached any ourselves, in a lot of ways we're
still deliberating.
Before I, personally, make any rules, they need to very clearly
satisfy three criteria. Any rule needs to be necessary, clear
and followable, and able to be consistantly and fairly enforced.
Ths can be a bit of a challenge.
First off -- necessary. In destructive crossplay, the vast majority
of very prominant cases involve pkill, I think everyone would agree
with that. We have, in most senses, given all pkillers a significant
array of tools with which to protect themselves. If, in real life, you
had a way to prevent other people from hurting you, and you
CHOSE to allow them to hurt you, (which, in essence you are doing
when you accept someone) would you still have room to complain
when they do? While I recognize both the fun and excitement of
being 'accept all', does a person who chooses to be so accept a
certain amount of the responsibility for what happens to them when
they don't take advantage of the tools available to them?
Secondly, clarity. Neither the player base nor the immortal staff
appreciates vague rules. They leave room for perceived favoritism,
wiggle-room on the part of wrongdoers, and a whole host of other
problems. By way of example. Pkiller1 attacks PkillerA and beats
the snot out of them. PkillerA rents out, and logs in PkillerB to
attack Pkiller1 by way of revenge. Obviously this isn't good...
it's going to be detrimantal to the spirit of the challenge, the
fun of pkill and whatnot. However.. if PkillerB and Pkiller1 have a
history, how do I make a rule that reflects when it IS okay for
PkillerB to attack Pkiller1? 10 minutes? 5 minutes? 20 ticks?
How, in a situation that is going to be different each time, do I
write a rule that players can follow and immortals can enforce?
Additionally, how much of destructive crossplay is worth
following up on? If I refuse to sell something to someone who
killed my pkiller yesterday, is that destructive crossplay that should
warrant immortal intervention? These are all parts of things that
need to be sorted out.
Finally, fairly and consistantly enforced --
Unforuntately, the immortal mind-meld isn't a part of the immortal
toolset. We lack the ability, in nearly every case, to determine
motives. If someone gets mad at my mortal because I killed a mob
they needed for a quest, and I, later that day, have Esteban logged
in and they kill me repeatedly, can an immortal assume that they
were related? Any player with 1/10 of a clue is going to say "Um,
I'm from London and my character hates people from Lima so I
had to kill him," and the immortal's hands are pretty tied. Even if a
log is provided, there's nothing sacred or reliable about one player's
log. While we like to trust them, there's nothing that stops anyone
with a text editor from adding the line "Zandy tells you, 'I just set my
mort's hitpoints to 10,000 -- buhahahaha'" and having it be completely
indestinguishable from a real tell. Cases of destructive crossplay,
nearly 100% of the time, are going to come down to one player's
word against another, and leave an immortal with no real method
by which to track down what really occurs. An immortal is forced,
at that point, to rely on trust and familiarity, neither of which are
fair or impartial from my point of view.
So, there's where we are. A big part of me wants destructive
crossplay to stop, but I'm really debating whether a poorly
enforced (by nature of the rule and situation, NOT by nature
of the immortal staff) rule will do more harm than simply
adopting a policy of telling people "you have the tools to keep
PkillerB from being able to attack you, you use them to
protect yourself."
Like I said, not a conclusion here at all, I mostly wanted to
communicate where things are and why I'm dragging my
feet. Feel free to reply, I'm not specifically soliciting feedback,
but I will read whatever you add.
-Zandy
From: Milamber
Monday, June 11 2001, 12:03PM
I can help you with one thing there.
Under old pk could not happen story
"Pkiller1 attacks PkillerA and beats the snot out of them.
PkillerA rents out, and logs in PkillerB to attack Pkiller1 by way of
revenge...".
If you will bring old pk back this cant happen again and it is
solved.
-Milamber
From: Fear
Monday, June 11 2001, 12:12PM
-sigh- those tools do nothing when you don't know it's coming.
Hell, I'm all for making it a one pk'er mud again, under pkok.
it just makes more sense, it's easier to deal with, and causes
many less problems. There obviously will never -BE- a clear,
enforcable rule here, so why continue?
-Fear
From: Fynn
Tuesday, June 12 2001, 04:31AM
I don't think xplay involving PK is destructive, simply because
anyone who allowed themselves to be susceptible knew all
the risks and benefits of having done so.
If you are accept all, you acknowledge that anyone, ANYONE can
attack you at ANY given time. That includes char1 char2 and char3
even if they belong to the same player. If they have half the
sense, they'll simply fight til they can and bail when they can't.
Then remember the chars in question and hunt them down later.
However xplay that does not involve PK isn't something anyone
asked for, especially when it comes to verbal harassment or fighting
words over public channels. I personally get annoyed by anyone
who simply say "pkers suck" or "pk sucks." They xplay in that every
single one of their chars have a bias against pkers and pk in
general. Also in what is disguised as a heated debate, ppl get
away with remarks that should not be directed against ppl ...
Things would be a lot easier if it was simply illegal to complain
about PKers when you are not Accept All. Those that are Accept All
should be taken away of their PKenabled status if they complain
about pk.
Life as a pker would be much easier without non-enabled chars annoying
enabled chars at every turn.
From: Chocorua
Tuesday, June 12 2001, 10:11AM
I am pretty sure that you won't see it made illegal to
voice your opinion on a subject.
That said let me make sure its not taken to far.
1) from time to time people's opinions get out of hand and will
be asked to move to a conference.
2) sometimes people's "opinions" will cross the line from opinion
to harassment in personal insults and the way they are stated.
3) Anytime an immortals asks you to take a conversation somewherelse
its best to just do it, and if you disagree talk to an admin, head or imp
about it later. nothing comes from arguing publically about it.
Again the statement "pk Sucks" isn't gonna get anyone in trouble
or I would be in some serious trouble. I have been saying it for years.
Chocorua
From: Fynn
Wednesday, June 13 2001, 08:08AM
What I see is that there are people who simply can't stand
others with a different opinion, or ppl who get a different
sort of playing value out of this mud, especially when it comes
to pk.
I haven't seen many that complain about those who don't PK,
only about those that PK in a certain manner or those that PK at
all.
At any rate, I find it somewhat moot since all the tools necessary
to prevent any sort of harassment is in place -- gag, reject, channelgag
etc. If we could only add say and emotes to that list, we'd live
in a perfect world of ignoring those we don't want to deal with.
I simply miss the 'atmosphere' we once had, but then again I think
that was only possible since the playerbase was much younger in terms
of years spent on Legend. Too many people here have seen too many things
and a great deal of them 'have been there and done that,' including
being helpful, being actively involved, etc.
And I don't want to blame anyone for not actively searching out other
venues of fun within this mud. But given a situation like this, new
areas and eq alone won't rekindle the kind of interest or spirit of
adventure... at least for me.
So here I am, waiting for a change radical enough to make this mud
feel like 'new,' not just 'balanced,' or as what it mostly feels like,
'player downgrade.' I'm hoping that skill trees will be in before
too long.
From: Akai_Hayate
Wednesday, June 13 2001, 04:44PM
Hahahahhaha Thou it was prolly a joke, I think it should be illegal
to complain about pk when your not in it :P constructive criticism
would be cool sure, but gondar saying "pk sucks" 24/7 cause his first
pkiller got multied, bah, we don't need any of that crap, we get enough
heat from whiners about sl jumping as is...
-bob
From: Fook
Friday, June 15 2001, 12:41AM
I believe one of the OldPk rules about crossplay
was that you could not log out of your non-pk
alt and log into your PK alt if you noticed
someone come online, or to check for pkers.
Also, I think it's probably a safe bet that
whatever the wait is for healing a PKer you don't have accepted
is the same wait that should be applied to borderline
crossplay.
