I think an abusable portion of these 2 suggestions is who would have access to the character being held in thrall.

If someone {'accost' or 'autokill off'}s someone else, perhaps only they should have the ability to finish the kill, or attack that person. I can see an AP's group all stopping, and letting the AP get the final blow. I'm sure some of the best AP's out there would have been Alot more powerful if they were assured the kill every time.

So to sum up. I like, generally, both ideas (Autokill off better), but the abusable attributes would have to be flushed out quite extensively.

-Cassman-

***(ideas for new RP opportunities)
I would more like the similar idea (and much less abuseable) of:

Have a new auto in the auto list... (of autoloot ect...)
Autokill on/off (default on)
With autokill off, At the end of the PK, if the last hit was not overkill by a certian amount, leave the victim incapacitated.

(at a point just above the current unable to say anything - I dissagree with this but thats another story)

At this point, only enableing speach(no yells), and wear/remove/give/drop, the victim may make death bed speaches, beg for mercy, the attacker may give an ultimatium, ect, for a full game hour, then put them at 1 HP. Or, the attacker may dispatch them by attacking again.


I know that may not be incredibly realistic (from a RL view), but imagine the RP of it...

Paladins standing over the defeated foe, either demanding a turn from the dark ways of the victim, or saying a prayer before dispatching them, hoping for an ending of their ways.

Theives (non evil) demanding a certian item, saying no offence bud, just need to feed my family, ect....

Anti-Paladins and the like, demanding that the victim curse / blashpheme thier gods, Or just plain gloat.


Also giving the victim a chance to roleplay more....

"Never! Never will I give up my fight! I will kill gnomes for Floofi till my last breath on Thera!!! End me now you who are unclean in Floofi's eyes!"

"PLEASE!! Anything I will do anything! here, take this and this, and I will tell you the secrets of the Floofi cult!!! just don't kill me!"

And possibly also enable suicide, a bleeding man can only take so much abuse...


This would SO much enhance roleplay, encourage talking between opposing sides, enable conversations that would never otherwise happen.

Adding a bit more dynamic conversation to a PK situation where normally we don't have enough time to do so would be wonderful. Even the all PK types would love it, and bring them more into the fold of RP.

Please don't mention other MUDs, for good or for ill, in a way that can be construed as an advertisement or flame. It's a line we don't want to go near.

As for your point: Yes, we don't implement features just because they work for a different MUD. If I had to pick a short list of reasons why I enjoy CF so much, that would be near the top, personally. Derivative MUDs tend to nosedive- if the features are available somewhere else, and all you're doing is copying instead of innovating, there's little reason to play your MUD- just play the original. It's probably been around longer and had more time to achieve proper balance and a good playerbase.

Copying is faster, but it isn't better.

Also, as a consequence of us doing this for a long time- we are unique, and the things that may be good for other MUDs may not be good for us. Personally, anything remotely resembling what was posted sets off my tingly game balance sense. We don't want a HuggyMUD where all the players hit each other with padded pillows, and no one dies or loses CON or gets their feelings hurt. If we move towards a non-lethal option like this, it'll be very gingerly, and in a limited way. I like the concept, (and we've discussed various ways to do this previously amongst ourselves) but it's difficult to do correctly, and what was posted can be abused in various ways.

To Vulpis: If the idea you've posted is, indeed, lifted detail-by-detail from somewhere else, please don't do that. It's one thing to present a general concept you like, but if the specifics of the above are taken from elsewhere.... we don't want a reputation as scavengers.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

Shooting down the idea from that other mud (and that wasn't advertisement
or a flame, ya need to lighten up, lichy) is fine. I'm saying that my
idea for the "accost" skill IS original, useful, can be balanced in a
short time, and has both an RP and PK value. Look guys, I wouldn't
waste my damned breath here so much if I didn't love the game. I'd
just like to see *something* of mine used. This, particularly, sounds
worthy.

This, particularly, sounds worthy.

I'm glad you agree with yourself, personally i consider it to be horrid.

-opinion

I've made this suggestion about 3 years ago (haven't bothered in a while) but i assumed the orc skill overrun was this ability (but i've yet to see it in use.)

I don't know which "other" mud he refers to but it sounds very similar to the suggestions i repeatedly made on CF forums long ago..

-the cat sat on the mat.

To Vulpis: If the idea you've posted is, indeed, lifted detail-by-detail from somewhere else, please don't do that. It's one thing to present a general concept you like, but if the specifics of the above are taken from elsewhere.... we don't want a reputation as scavengers.


YIPE! I'll go hide!

Um, what other MUD? There are others?

No seriously, I haven't played any other mud in several years (3+).
and even then none of them for more than a few days to see what it was like.

Other than that I have gone to the homepages of MUDs "above" CF in the listing/ranking since you have put that in, and determined (in my opinion) that each one of them is ranked higher due to "easy rewards", ie, an easy non-competitive, I feel good about myself life for characters. After all who would want to spend all that time ranking to "hero" when no one is trying to stop you? Then it would be a worthless prize.

Sorry this became a cause for crazyness!

No it is not lifted from another mud, I dunno what solomon posted, didn't see it. Doubt if I would be familiar with even the name of any other muds that were or were not mentioned, much less what they have implemented.

It was a variation on solomon's idea of talking/demanding during a fight. I can see that a lagging/forcing the fight BEFORE the fight would change things drasticly, so I took the idea to the end of the fight, when the "outcome" was allready decided (keeping game balance/not messing with anything). Therefore, it would not change anything as far as PK.

I still like the idea, or something similar that would be acceptable, there is much too little conversation before/during/after pk, giving explanation as to each of the char's motives. Just kill and carry on... So perhaps someone can think of something else. I just don't want all the RP to be going on in just the shrines, inner cabals, and the Inn. I'll keep my nose out of it. :\

Once again I applogize, didn't mean to offend. Just an idea.
I'm not up on all the inter-MUD relations/rivalries, so I don't know what MUD all ready has something like this.

No problem. I'm not familiar with the MUD in question, but Solomon thought it closely resembled what was there. Hence all my "if"s.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

n/t

Kidding.

I really like his idea.

Mostly because I came up with it myself some time back.

The mercy part that is.

So it's a non-combat lagging skill.

Tell me this doesn't sound ripe for abuse.

I don't see this happening either.

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

>So it's a non-combat lagging skill.

>Tell me this doesn't sound ripe for abuse.

--Well, I figured that would be a problem. I'd consider it more like
blackjack. But, it could only succeed (without initiating combat) if
the victim is unaware. This means their adrenalin must be normal,
and they cannot see the assailant. I guess the lag isn't necessary,
but I wanted something to clear the commands of the victim, in case
they're spamming directions. The intention of the skill is not to
start a fight, but to offer an alternative to a blackjack. Hell, if
it fails, the echo could be that the thief just "misses" his mark,
and the other person will either see him being suspicious or not see
anything at all. So, win or lose, no fights would occur unless the
mark decides to get away (if the thief isn't bluffing).

>I don't see this happening either.

--Are you sure? I really liked this idea.