PvP in the keep

k9mouse · Post by **k9mouse** » Fri Jul 06, 2007 10:05 pm

thank you for talking with me, instead like some other peep .... after reading many posts, some people who want chaos of the wild west they are also graping for power... i will stop there, before i say to much... if we are going to put allot of power in a player's hand, the other player should have the right to select their leader... even on a prite ship, a captain is only a captain, because the crew let him be one.... if he is a bad leader, they will throw him into the sea (or worst)
===
or
===
we can skip this whole mess and let the screen shots and dm do their job... (or the hunters) it worked in the past, it should work tomorrow also.....

Caesius · Post by **Caesius** » Fri Jul 06, 2007 10:32 pm

Of course, there is nothing to stop the democratically motivated players from uniting and enforcing their own security. Mind you, the double edged aspects of indiscriminate anti-pvp and anti-magic wards can become a check against the possibly reckless inertia of simple mob rule. Sadly the keep has also also become an inconvenient neutral ground and sanctuary where even the most despicable and cowardly folk can breath easily... for at least a while...

Should such groups of people wish, they could choose to gather outside the keep where they are free to fight anyone who might try to impose on their own liberties. This is the purpose of guilds. Each one has an interest in protecting their membership and their allies.

The choice for players is this: Do you prefer your independance and are prepared to deal with the predators yourself out there? Or will you join/start a club where you can work together towards mutual security and growth and deal with any or all the complications that may arise from the hierarchies that will come of it?

viobane · Post by **viobane** » Fri Jul 06, 2007 10:40 pm

k9mouse wrote:
viobane wrote:. Heck, you might as well say that players should vote on the next DM! It's not a popularity contest.
are we going to talk or are you going to try to flame me
~cooks a hot dog on your flame~
now can we get back to our talk

not all players are dumb, they know a few good people also.....

Not a flame, K9. I'm just suggesting that your idea to be inclusive of everyone in determining who to give these proposed wands to is unrealistic and would get so mired in argument and debate that it's not feasible. I'm trying to appeal to your logic

That wasn't a flame, either, BTW.

k9mouse · Post by **k9mouse** » Fri Jul 06, 2007 11:13 pm

i know, some one else used your quote to flame me (not you).... i over edit the quote, i am sorry.. i have edited my old post with the full quote now....

Wing--Zero · Post by **Wing--Zero** » Sat Jul 07, 2007 1:09 am

k9mouse wrote:i know, some one else used your quote to flame me (not you).... i over edit the quote, i am sorry.. i have edited my old post with the full quote now....

Ive honestly just read the messages on this fourm and I have yet to see any flameing. all I see is everyone makeing good points on something disagree on. What I did to Queen Naga that day I was mad at a few people was a flame. I have yet to hear anyone call you a name or anything were all just makeing points over a debate.

Roland Deschain · Post by **Roland Deschain** » Sat Jul 07, 2007 2:52 am

K9 I wasnt flaming yoiu so check yourself. and what does "they know a few good people too" mean ?

Roland Deschain · Post by **Roland Deschain** » Sat Jul 07, 2007 2:57 am

Also this debate went off-topic some time ago the discussion shifted to the wands and i would like to bring it back on topic.

PvP in the keep yes or no and why or why not. Read my first posts and tell me how we can prevent other from abusing the keep as aplace to hide from justice

BaskingDemon · Post by **BaskingDemon** » Sat Jul 07, 2007 3:04 am

Queen Naga II wrote:Looks like the amnesty Driller gave is coming to the end for a few of those previously banned.

I have mentioned this before, rather than going to make the keep all PvP. Allow some trusted players to have a boot/temp ban wand for when there are no DM's available.

These wands are like the DM wand/token for booting players until the next reset or longer as desired. Only to used by players that have proved over the years to Driller and his team they will act responsible with them.

Use of the wand will be recorded on the server log along with details of who was booted, the trusted players can then send in supporting screen shots so the whole thing can be monitored. Thus perma bans only still done by Driller and his admin team.

An obscene idea.

I for one would leave in a flash and not return if such folly were ever to be implemented (not that I think it will).

It's bad enough that we have dm's who can in effect arbitrarily ban someone if they deem their play to be a bit too nasty, without also having a posse of gung-ho goody two shoes players going around playing sherrif with ban wands.

I had a character banned once for calling someone sugarbritches.... yes sugarbritches if you can believe that. Well I guess my stubborn refusal to play my crude, bad tempered foul mouthed dwarf rogue any other way than crude, foul mouthed and rogueish might have had something to do with it. The conversation with the dm after my highly insulting sugarbritches remark to a player was interesting. I never swore, I kept my cool and explained the character of my dwarf, also refusing to compromise his low down dirty ways. The result was I was banned. No warning, no second opinion or consultation, just an on the spot ban because mr dm diddn't like someone not cowing down to him, doing as they were told and diluting their bad boys character (sugarbritches).

Anyway, the said dm had a rather... embarrasing fall from grace so that's that. What i'm saying is that bans should only be used as a last resort, when the offending player is totally and utterly out of line, refuses to acknowledge any rules and is behaving in an idiotic non r/p way that is disrupting everyones play. Players with ban wands... I dread to think.

Oh and the above is no way indicative of my attitude towards the current dms, who I have had no problems with (yet) at all. I am sure they are generally reasonable, patient and understanding of different players game ethics and character diversity.

But bad apples happen, and there was no way that day my dwarf character deserved a ban, absolutely no way. I actually think it was more to do with the fact that I calmly but forcibly argued my case to him than it was about any original offence. And I think it sucks that any one (non driller) person has that power.

p.s. I would quite like to make a robbing bastard of a highwayman. You know the Dick Turpin style (without the horse). Kind of" stand and deliver, your money or your life" bandit... except it would be more like "stand and deliver, your money or... well first you have to agree to let me kill you,,, then when I do, I raise you back... ok?"

Queen Naga II · Post by **Queen Naga II** » Sat Jul 07, 2007 3:17 am

IN reference to Wing-zero comment ...

And the flame has been forgotten and we have got on with life in game and on this forum too.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anyway back to the wands debate....

K9 I hear your concerns about player abuse with these proposed wands in hands of others. It does boil down to the fact that Driller and the DM's have people they know and trust. If a player does abuse that trust in misuse of the wand then as others have said it can and will be taken away.

But more than that they will in their misuse take away that trust that was placed in them in the first place. This makes it very much a double edged sword and would force people to act responsible as well.

Having the trust to be given the wand would give one a sense of purpose and pride too, I would not deny that. But then to misuse and lose that wand and the trust imparted on one would be quite devastating as well to the individual.

The key would here is "responsibility". It simply would not work on a player vote as to who gets a wand, even if this suggestion is taken up. What if the players voted for someone that Driller did not trust ?

Jr_DM or such title I think is not a good idea either, though a wand may be given to a player may be an indication that it is possible some day said player may be offered a DM position. Even so I would not like that to be said to me it would just say that such a player has the trust of Driller and his team nothing more nothing less.

As I said earlier in the thread, I have experience of this and seen it work very effectively at keeping the idiots and jerks away.

As too the length of the temp ban this wand implies I do think next reset is enough myself but perhaps to the reset beyond that. Otherwise some idiot may be back in less than a few minutes if it happens right before a reset. A day woould be good particular for the abusive elements out there that we really don't want in BSK, but I'd leave the parameters to Driller's discretion if this suggestion ever gets implemented.

Qui Chang · Post by **Qui Chang** » Sat Jul 07, 2007 3:39 am

Maybe if the pvp is allowed again we can just do something a little simpler to help those who don't to be involved in pvp. Maybe they could carry around a white flag. like a truce flag? no scripting involved. Just another thought.

Ghost4life · Post by **Ghost4life** » Sat Jul 07, 2007 3:46 am

my comment from earlier was nearly completely skipped over.... the hunters are NOT what I was suggesting, they do not have the authority over the members of the keep. What I was suggesting was that there be a sect of people that have complete authority over ALL that enter into the keep. in the same way that police officers have authority over us. I know I know no one WANTS to think they can be told what to do, everyone wants to take matters into their own hands, but what if? what if we had a group of people that had the ability to PvP inside the keep? not every man for them self. Because that would be utterly ridiculous, if the wards were removed from the keep I would not RP in the keep, it would be a terrible place to relax and have a drink, or whatever. The keep is meant as a neutral zone, a sanctuary to get away from all the killing. Now I understand that people abuse the keep's NO PvP setting, which brings me back to the sheriffs. is it just a bad idea?

wdpepsiman · Post by **wdpepsiman** » Sat Jul 07, 2007 6:57 am

Let me just say this..... I was there when the Keep was pvp and now that it is non-pvp. When it was pvp yes there were a few ass hats running around that got quickly vanquised by other players because there were consequences. If the players could not handle it a DM was present to handle the situation very quickly. I have seen a lot of rp lead to pvp in the Keep and it was outstanding. I was a noob back then and did not know anything about NWN or Blackstone Keep so i was curious as to what was being said and what was going on as a bystander and wanted to know more. Well the lesson to be learned was that i got killed for being in the way (lol) and it was unintenitional i suppose but it was always fun back then because you never knew what was going to happen in the Keep itself and it was not always rowdy during that time. Yes some fights did occur but mostly everyone took them to the Hamlet or Skara Brea and settled their disputes there. I suppose the point i am trying to make is that it made for a fun time because you were always on the lookout for some action. Now i can hear those who say it is ruining my rp with all this comotion going on. I understand what you are saying that you want a place where you can rp in a quite setting without being harrased by fights and such. Well how in the world do you supposed that happened back in the day when the Keep was pvp. I will tell you rp was more plentiful back then than it is now and there are plenty of places no one goes that you can rp . Let's take for instance Bordermarch Tavern, the Tavern in the Oasis and or your respective Temple, the Keep is not the only place o have some rp and now that the Den is open i would have to say there would be an opportunity to have some rp and before you say it, find someone willing to sponsor your membership to the Den

Well anyways my thoughts for pvp in the keep i say yes bring it back and make BSK the way it was intended to be instead of making every damn thing so politically correct and let the players do what they do and the DM's do what they are supposed to do and that is.....run events rp or action and monitor and handle problems not let a script do it for them .

Caesius · Post by **Caesius** » Sat Jul 07, 2007 9:14 am

Ghost4life wrote:what if we had a group of people that had the ability to PvP inside the keep?

PvP settings are a hardcoded function of the game so I don't think that there is any scripting that can differentiate between PCs inside the wards. Kind of an all-or-nothing affair. The spell ward might be more adjustable however. Of course if PvP were to be enabled but magic was still suppressed for all the players except for the keep's designated enforcers, that leaves spell casters at the mercy of melee builds in the keep and dependent upon the protection of the enforcers.

Dan8145 · Post by **Dan8145** » Sat Jul 07, 2007 9:23 am

I say yes to PvP in the keep...long may the chaos reign

LordofUndeath · Post by **LordofUndeath** » Sat Jul 07, 2007 9:39 am

My beef against PvP in the keep is the fact that thieves will run amok and pick pockets till the end times!