Is randoming killing without a reason or a RP reason? If it's without a RP reason, isn't every admin randoming when he slays me for being too swaggy?
Yet another one........
- Thread starter Raging Womble
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
UnlivedPro
Squire
Indeed, they random ! 
Caesarcomeback
Veteran
Is that power gaming? And RP a bad guy is not like that
:3
Erk
Knight
Whereas I have defended for a long time maps with a purpose, I still think that rules matter a lot. Thanks to all the contributors to the discussion.
It appears to me that the "no-rules-but-randoming" server seems to gather support. I have yet to see anyone arguing for anything else.
Perhaps a word from the servers that currently have other kind of rule sets would be appropriate. After all, this discussion can end up being yet another useless thread if they chose to ignore it.
A reminder of the suggestion that I wrote (and that has been suggested in similar terms in the past):
[list type=decimal]
[*]No randoming: It is not allowed to kill someone for no good reason. Being subject to punching, kicking, insulting, stealing, taxing and trolling are valid reasons to kill someone.
[*]No rules regarding wars: No need to declare from castle, nor make it public in global. No reason needed to declare a war. Given safe spawn points are provided, no obligation to respect surrendering soldiers.
[*]Assassinations / bounties: Do not need to be contracted in local. Any reason that would allow you to kill someone is a valid reason for an assassination / bounty contract. I would specify a given contract form to facilitate log search.
[*]Robberies: Anyone can commit a robbery. You may be robbed up to 20% of your gold and you may be demanded any item you possess. Refusing to cooperate in a robbery provides the bandit a reason to kill (includes asking for help, not stopping on demand, not revealing the amount of gold, wasting time, playing dumb, faking sudden afk, etc.). [The gold limit is intended to avoid people robbing just to have an excuse to kill. ]
[*]New life rule: Any reason to kill disappears with death. Veiled attempts to "pay back" will be harshly punished.
[*] Raids: Subject to admin approval.
[/list]
It appears to me that the "no-rules-but-randoming" server seems to gather support. I have yet to see anyone arguing for anything else.
Perhaps a word from the servers that currently have other kind of rule sets would be appropriate. After all, this discussion can end up being yet another useless thread if they chose to ignore it.
A reminder of the suggestion that I wrote (and that has been suggested in similar terms in the past):
[list type=decimal]
[*]No randoming: It is not allowed to kill someone for no good reason. Being subject to punching, kicking, insulting, stealing, taxing and trolling are valid reasons to kill someone.
[*]No rules regarding wars: No need to declare from castle, nor make it public in global. No reason needed to declare a war. Given safe spawn points are provided, no obligation to respect surrendering soldiers.
[*]Assassinations / bounties: Do not need to be contracted in local. Any reason that would allow you to kill someone is a valid reason for an assassination / bounty contract. I would specify a given contract form to facilitate log search.
[*]Robberies: Anyone can commit a robbery. You may be robbed up to 20% of your gold and you may be demanded any item you possess. Refusing to cooperate in a robbery provides the bandit a reason to kill (includes asking for help, not stopping on demand, not revealing the amount of gold, wasting time, playing dumb, faking sudden afk, etc.). [The gold limit is intended to avoid people robbing just to have an excuse to kill. ]
[*]New life rule: Any reason to kill disappears with death. Veiled attempts to "pay back" will be harshly punished.
[*] Raids: Subject to admin approval.
[/list]
Erk
Knight
I would agree with you if it wasn't for the fact that the rules regarding wars have been around for so long that people assume that they still hold. In fact, I have the strong suspicion that people do NOT read the rules of new servers. They go by what they remember from others, I guess that hoping that it will be somehow similar.I have to confess, I have stopped reading the rules of any server I play. I do not random so the most that happens to me is that I get a warning now and then.
So since I would like the rule set to be clear, it needs to be dumb
Furthermore, I think that if this rule set was to be implemented, there should be a separate one for admins reminding them of the obvious. That metagaming is no longer punished, that RP is no longer required, etc.I think that some admins do not read very carefully their own rules, or at least keep up with the changes, since they rely on their experience in PW...
The most annoying thing is when people come on a server an derpherp that you need to announce wars, when the rules don't say it. Then you get banned 
Oh yeah I haven't read rules on any server in years 
It's too easy to talk your way out of a ban, and even if you do get "permanently banned" (like I have multiple times on various servers) they just unban you in a week or so.
Seems like the players actually try to enforce the rules more than the admins with the constant whining in global chat "you can't do that!!! ban ban ban"
It's too easy to talk your way out of a ban, and even if you do get "permanently banned" (like I have multiple times on various servers) they just unban you in a week or so.
Seems like the players actually try to enforce the rules more than the admins with the constant whining in global chat "you can't do that!!! ban ban ban"
Well of course I got unbanned, it's just really ****ed up when even the admins don't know their rules. I think I have been banned from every server I played on without actually breaking the rules.
Does anyone read the rules?
Ohh yea, plaerys taking matter in their own hands Another ban story: Robbed a guy, killed him. Went to town, he attackes me. His next 5 respawns he attacks me, and whines in global that I robbed and killed him. I then spawn kill him once, becuase I was low on health form his arrow. Some players saw it and said that I spawnkilled him 7 times already, so they attacked. Right when I killed them admin came online and 8 people whined that I randomed them.
Does anyone read the rules?
Ohh yea, plaerys taking matter in their own hands
Another ban story: Robbed a guy, killed him. Went to town, he attackes me. His next 5 respawns he attacks me, and whines in global that I robbed and killed him. I then spawn kill him once, becuase I was low on health form his arrow. Some players saw it and said that I spawnkilled him 7 times already, so they attacked. Right when I killed them admin came online and 8 people whined that I randomed them. 
S0mebody
Sergeant at Arms
So in essence:
1. Valid RP reasons only for killing.
2. Robberies capped @ 20%.
3. New life rule - you die you forget your past no revenge killing.
4. Raids only on Admin approval.
We could add a fifth - Do not damage the game environment - which is essentially the above four rules.
Each in turn:
#1. There will be lengthy debates regarding what is 'valid RP' - 'I'm a psychopath that is my RP and I like killing people' or something along those lines.
#2. I see this as problematic as it will require maths and a LOT of admin input due to quibbles over the actual worth of a victim, it can be hateful to see some poor sod lose 30 - 60 minutes of graft to someone else who has the good fortune, or foresight, to be a fighting class, heavily armoured and carrying a bloody great big weapon. But what is more 'realistic'? A robber with a conscience?
#3. Probably one of the only enforceable rules with near 100% success on detection, this helps prevents a TDM style server.
#4. The only other enforceable rule in proposed set.
#5. People tend to need structure and the parameters that provides so they can seek succour from the establishment (the admin staff in this context) and a vague and open to interpretation rule such as 'Do not damage the game environment' would probably be counter productive.
What is the objective here?
If it is to free up admin time so they are able to attempt to educate the player base then, arguably, this would be possible with less reports as a result.
More crucially though, is what do the majority of players actually want from a ruleset?
I think mostly it is for rules to uphold their own perception of 'fair'. There are different types of player of course, those that simply want to absorb themselves into the mechanics of the Mod, the crafting/grafting bit and interacting with other like minded, or near like minded, players engaging in what they imagine would be realistic interplay for the time period, and those that wish to demonstrate their prowess in the melee or archer skills, and others who fit somewhere in between.
Map design can influence how well the rules are applied or enforced, but by and large they will not negate any rule breaking. They may offer sufficient stimulus for the majority to happily co-exist and accidentally not infringe rules. And co-existence - if the players were more co-operative (unlikely) then they could be more self governing, dealing with miscreants who 'damage the game environment' by hounding them to the point they give up and go antagonise on another server.
1. Valid RP reasons only for killing.
2. Robberies capped @ 20%.
3. New life rule - you die you forget your past no revenge killing.
4. Raids only on Admin approval.
We could add a fifth - Do not damage the game environment - which is essentially the above four rules.
Each in turn:
#1. There will be lengthy debates regarding what is 'valid RP' - 'I'm a psychopath that is my RP and I like killing people' or something along those lines.
#2. I see this as problematic as it will require maths and a LOT of admin input due to quibbles over the actual worth of a victim, it can be hateful to see some poor sod lose 30 - 60 minutes of graft to someone else who has the good fortune, or foresight, to be a fighting class, heavily armoured and carrying a bloody great big weapon. But what is more 'realistic'? A robber with a conscience?
#3. Probably one of the only enforceable rules with near 100% success on detection, this helps prevents a TDM style server.
#4. The only other enforceable rule in proposed set.
#5. People tend to need structure and the parameters that provides so they can seek succour from the establishment (the admin staff in this context) and a vague and open to interpretation rule such as 'Do not damage the game environment' would probably be counter productive.
What is the objective here?
If it is to free up admin time so they are able to attempt to educate the player base then, arguably, this would be possible with less reports as a result.
More crucially though, is what do the majority of players actually want from a ruleset?
I think mostly it is for rules to uphold their own perception of 'fair'. There are different types of player of course, those that simply want to absorb themselves into the mechanics of the Mod, the crafting/grafting bit and interacting with other like minded, or near like minded, players engaging in what they imagine would be realistic interplay for the time period, and those that wish to demonstrate their prowess in the melee or archer skills, and others who fit somewhere in between.
Map design can influence how well the rules are applied or enforced, but by and large they will not negate any rule breaking. They may offer sufficient stimulus for the majority to happily co-exist and accidentally not infringe rules. And co-existence - if the players were more co-operative (unlikely) then they could be more self governing, dealing with miscreants who 'damage the game environment' by hounding them to the point they give up and go antagonise on another server.
Back in the day on the old RCC we didn't really have any hardline rules at all. The whole "teaching the playerbase" causes issues because the actual randomers that need to be gotten rid of aren't, whereas people who legitimately don't know get their time wasted and learn to hate admins.
It's far better to simply ban people who need to be banned, and ignore their whining for fairness on the forum like we used to do in the "good old days".
It's far better to simply ban people who need to be banned, and ignore their whining for fairness on the forum like we used to do in the "good old days".
Erk
Knight
Thanks S0mebody for the reply.
1. I think that nowadays everyone understands what constitutes randoming. Of course, the serial killer case is randoming. Common sense is sufficient to assess the vast majority of cases. I don't think there is much debate around that. In any case, it is in every single rule set, so I would hardly point it out as a flaw of this one.
2. I chose 20% given that it is simple to compute, take 0 zero out and multiply by 2. That should be easy for anyone. The worth of a victim is the amount of gold he/she carries. Failing to reveal it will happen only once. Once you got killed for it, I am sure you will check how to do it. Hence why is this rule problematic? Robberies will happen, the only aim would be to avoid disguised randoming.
But aside of the actual wording of the rules, would nexus support something similar to this?
1. I think that nowadays everyone understands what constitutes randoming. Of course, the serial killer case is randoming. Common sense is sufficient to assess the vast majority of cases. I don't think there is much debate around that. In any case, it is in every single rule set, so I would hardly point it out as a flaw of this one.
2. I chose 20% given that it is simple to compute, take 0 zero out and multiply by 2. That should be easy for anyone. The worth of a victim is the amount of gold he/she carries. Failing to reveal it will happen only once. Once you got killed for it, I am sure you will check how to do it. Hence why is this rule problematic? Robberies will happen, the only aim would be to avoid disguised randoming.
But aside of the actual wording of the rules, would nexus support something similar to this?
Le Hi
Sergeant at Arms
I would still suggest a lax ruleset, focused more on simple common sense and stricter punishments. If the admins know that this player has been playing for a while and knows his/her way around but still breaks the rules, a simple explanation given to him by the admin then a nice ban would be more effective rather than spending time to investigate then just end up giving a warning.
I agree with the Rulesets given by both Erk and S0mebody, but I suggest a little change in the New Life Rule. I sense a No Revenge Rule (This includes trolling, annoying, and other stupid things people do to their attackers once they've been killed.) would be more applicable in PW as people do not forget their past life/lives and such.
I agree with the Rulesets given by both Erk and S0mebody, but I suggest a little change in the New Life Rule. I sense a No Revenge Rule (This includes trolling, annoying, and other stupid things people do to their attackers once they've been killed.) would be more applicable in PW as people do not forget their past life/lives and such.
Erk
Knight
Thank you for contributing to this debate. I personally PMed the server owners of all the servers I could locate and forwarded them our suggestions, in addition to pointing them out this discussion.
Only 2 of them answered, S0mebody - Nexus - (you can see his reply here) and The_Man_Who_Laughs - Revolution RP - , who replied in PM.
Of the two, only S0mebody is considering with the rest of his team using the rules suggested.
Conclusion: Server owners acquire their own servers to run them the way they like, hence tend to disregard suggestions that contradict their own views. Most debates in here are pointless, as people has been repeatedly telling me. I suspect that server owners do not listen to the few voices here because they know that the vast majority of the player base of the mod does not read this either.
As for me, I will return to the ranks of the veterans that can't be bothered to attempt to propose anything and sardonically laugh at those who are naive enough to try. ( )
Only 2 of them answered, S0mebody - Nexus - (you can see his reply here) and The_Man_Who_Laughs - Revolution RP - , who replied in PM.
Of the two, only S0mebody is considering with the rest of his team using the rules suggested.
Conclusion: Server owners acquire their own servers to run them the way they like, hence tend to disregard suggestions that contradict their own views. Most debates in here are pointless, as people has been repeatedly telling me. I suspect that server owners do not listen to the few voices here because they know that the vast majority of the player base of the mod does not read this either.
As for me, I will return to the ranks of the veterans that can't be bothered to attempt to propose anything and sardonically laugh at those who are naive enough to try. (
)Erk said:Thank you for contributing to this debate. I personally PMed the server owners of all the servers I could locate and forwarded them our suggestions, in addition to pointing them out this discussion.
Only 2 of them answered, S0mebody - Nexus - (you can see his reply here) and The_Man_Who_Laughs - Revolution RP - , who replied in PM.
Of the two, only S0mebody is considering with the rest of his team using the rules suggested.
Conclusion: Server owners acquire their own servers to run them the way they like, hence tend to disregard suggestions that contradict their own views. Most debates in here are pointless, as people has been repeatedly telling me. I suspect that server owners do not listen to the few voices here because they know that the vast majority of the player base of the mod does not read this either.
As for me, I will return to the ranks of the veterans that can't be bothered to attempt to propose anything and sardonically laugh at those who are naive enough to try. (
Simply because they've not responded it doesn't mean they haven't acknowledged it and taken it in to consideration.
