Indiscriminate wanton murdering deterrent

[dafels]

You should read the developer's thoughts about PvP and probably delete this thread afterwards sir

[terechgracz]

In the words of Marcus Aurelius, 'The best revenge is to be unlike him who performed the injury.' J&L, it's time to ask yourselves some deeper, philosophical questions. Do you truly want this game to grow and foster a community of reason and diplomacy, or do you want a world where chaos reigns and players mindlessly kill one another without consequence? Jesus taught us to 'turn the other cheek,' to strive for peace, yet what we see here is a system that allows players to destroy without restraint. The game has become a playground for those who seek power through violence rather than understanding. Right now, the structure allows PKers to act without fear of judgment, much like Heraclitus said, 'Character is destiny.' Their unchecked actions are shaping the fate of the game. Most players are ill-prepared to deal with such adversaries. Seneca the Younger once said, 'It is a rough road that leads to the heights of greatness,' but the road we walk now is more of a slaughterhouse than a path to greatness. There's no balance, no sense of justice for those who wish to play with honor and integrity. Musonius Rufus, a Stoic teacher, believed in the virtue of self-control, and I ask: Where is the self-control in this world where murder is met with nothing but a slap on the wrist? Even in this game, actions should have consequences. If a player chooses the path of violence, they must bear the weight of that choice. As Jesus taught us, 'Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God.' There is a need for deterrents, a system that punishes recklessness and rewards wisdom. Take, for example, the concept of a harsher debuff for murderers—an idea to make murder not just an easy option but a difficult one. In the words of Seneca the Elder, 'The first step toward a better life is repentance.' For those who choose to kill, let their repentance come through struggle. Imagine a murderer unable to hearth-teleport for the entire duration of their scent. They would be forced to walk, constantly looking over their shoulder, with the knowledge that other players could track them down. This wouldn’t just be an in-game penalty, it would be a reflection of real-world consequences where crime brings.

[terechgracz]

wtf

[Nocturnal-Rainbows]

You should read the developer's thoughts about PvP and probably delete this thread afterwards sir

Nah I'll pass on deleting the thread.
But I will add a TL;DR here since it was quite a wordy post.

When you commit a murder, you get what is basically a longer lasting Redhanded debuff that lasts for the full length of time that a Murder scent lingers which is roughly 10 days. This takes away the murderer's ability to hearth teleport for that duration which is both a dangerous and annoying negative to have attached to your character. A good initial deterrent.

Then you make it so that he above debuff can stack if the murderer kills again within those 10 days of having that debuff and the only purpose that stack has is related to Nidbanes which are currently worthless. Have it so when a Nidbane is summoned against the murderer using a murder scent, a check is made and depending on how many stacks that murderer has another Nidbane will be summoned. For example, 4 stacks would send 4 Nidbanes. The stacks naturally drop off over time. This will make people think twice about killing so many people in a short span of time without any fear of retaliation.

I've yet to hear a single reason as to why either of these ideas are bad. Neither of them can be abused. If you get tricked into killing an alt as somebody brought up earlier in the thread, the Nidbane change I suggested literally does the exact same thing it does now, one Nidbane would be able to be sent to them. The longer lasting Murder debuff preventing them from hearthing for 10 days is dangerous and irritating but it's not the end of the world.

My TL;DR still ended up being quite lengthy... for fuck sake...

[terechgracz]

You should read the developer's thoughts about PvP and probably delete this thread afterwards sir

Nah I'll pass on deleting the thread.
But I will add a TL;DR here since it was quite a wordy post.

When you commit a murder, you get what is basically a longer lasting Redhanded debuff that lasts for the full length of time that a Murder scent lingers which is roughly 10 days. This takes away the murderer's ability to hearth teleport for that duration which is both a dangerous and annoying negative to have attached to your character. A good initial deterrent.

Then you make it so that he above debuff can stack if the murderer kills again within those 10 days of having that debuff and the only purpose that stack has is related to Nidbanes which are currently worthless. Have it so when a Nidbane is summoned against the murderer using a murder scent, a check is made and depending on how many stacks that murderer has another Nidbane will be summoned. For example, 4 stacks would send 4 Nidbanes. The stacks naturally drop off over time. This will make people think twice about killing so many people in a short span of time without any fear of retaliation.

I've yet to hear a single reason as to why either of these ideas are bad. Neither of them can be abused. If you get tricked into killing an alt as somebody brought up earlier in the thread, the Nidbane change I suggested literally does the exact same thing it does now, one Nidbane would be able to be sent to them. The longer lasting Murder debuff preventing them from hearthing for 10 days is dangerous and irritating but it's not the end of the world.

My TL;DR still ended up being quite lengthy... for fuck sake...

I'm pasting TLDR version of developers note about PVP

The essence of our game is rooted in the idea of power dynamics. When players engage in PvP, it creates a hierarchy where the strong dominate the weak. This mirrors the political reality that Machiavelli illustrated: the world is shaped by those who are willing to seize power and control. To remove this dynamic is to undermine the very foundation upon which competitive gaming is built. Fear and respect for strength foster an environment where players must constantly adapt and improve, ensuring a lively and engaging gameplay experience. Embracing the struggle for power reflects a fundamental truth of existence. The conflict faced by players serves as a catalyst for personal growth and self-overcoming. Nietzsche believed in the will to power as the driving force of life, and our game channels this principle by encouraging players to assert their dominance through skill and strategy. The thrill of competition invigorates the community, making each encounter not just a battle, but a testament to the strength of the individual. In this realm, survival of the fittest reigns supreme, pushing everyone to evolve or be left behind. Individualism lies at the heart of our design philosophy. Every player is encouraged to carve their own path and express their uniqueness. The choice to engage in PvP represents a form of self-assertion, resonating with the ideas of Stirner, who emphasized the importance of individual desire over collective morality. By allowing players to engage freely in conflict, we celebrate their personal autonomy and their right to pursue their goals without external limitations. This game serves as a canvas for self-exploration, where one's power can be showcased and tested against others. In a world driven by ambition, the strong will inevitably rise above the weak. This mirrors the sentiments of Rand, who championed the virtue of selfishness. The players who seek to dominate are merely acting in their rational self-interest, striving to achieve their objectives. By allowing PvP, we endorse a reality where ambition is rewarded and mediocrity is challenged. Players learn that to succeed, they must embrace competition, pushing the boundaries of their capabilities in a quest for supremacy. Hobbes’ depiction of life in a state of nature resonates within the game. It is a microcosm of his belief that life can be ‘nasty, brutish, and short.’ Players must navigate the unpredictable and often dangerous world we’ve created. This fosters an exhilarating atmosphere where conflict is not only inevitable but necessary for survival. The fear of being overrun by stronger players compels others to strategize and form alliances, reinforcing social interactions that mimic the intricate web of human relationships outside the game. Schopenhauer’s philosophy reminds us that conflict and suffering are inherent aspects of life. In our game, PvP serves as a vehicle for players to confront their fears and confront the harsh realities of their choices. Rather than shying away from violence, players are encouraged to embrace it, understanding that every battle fought contributes to their growth. This shared struggle for survival and power binds the community together, as everyone grapples with the same existential challenges. There’s an undeniable allure in transgression, as emphasized by the Marquis de Sade. Our game offers players the freedom to explore their darker impulses within a controlled environment. Engaging in PvP allows individuals to break societal norms, confronting the boundaries of morality. By embracing this chaotic element, players can unleash their inner desires and experience the thrill of unrestrained competition. The rhetoric of conflict is also an essential tool for discourse, as demonstrated by Gorgias. In our game, every battle is not just about physical confrontation; it’s a dialogue between players. Each clash reveals strengths, weaknesses, and strategies, offering a rich tapestry of interactions that go beyond simple violence. PvP fosters a deeper understanding of the mechanics of the game and the motivations behind each player’s actions, transforming combat into a form of art. Even the cynicism of Diogenes of Sinope highlights the importance of authenticity in our game. Players are encouraged to be true to themselves, shedding pretense in favor of raw power and skill. PvP serves as a stage where authenticity shines, as players engage in the real battles of strength and intellect. By facing one another in combat, they cast aside the masks of civility, revealing their true natures. Foucault’s exploration of power relations provides a backdrop for understanding the dynamics of PvP. The game allows players to navigate and challenge the established order, where power is fluid and constantly shifting. Engaging in combat disrupts the status quo, creating opportunities for players to assert themselves and redefine their roles within the community. PvP is not just an act of aggression; it’s a means of negotiating power and establishing one's place in a complex hierarchy. Marx’s perspective on class struggle reminds us that conflict drives change. In our game, players experience the reality of competing classes—the skilled versus the unskilled, the powerful versus the powerless. This constant tension enriches the narrative, urging players to rally against oppression or rise above their circumstances. The essence of our game lies in this struggle, where players are both the architects of their destinies and the victims of fate. The pursuit of pleasure, as Epicurus suggested, can also be found in the thrill of PvP. There’s undeniable joy in mastering the art of combat, in tasting victory after a hard-fought battle. The game provides an avenue for players to indulge in their desires for competition and excitement, making each encounter a source of pleasure and satisfaction. By engaging in conflict, players experience the highs and lows of battle, leading to a fulfilling gaming experience. The philosophy of Thrasymachus champions the idea that justice is the advantage of the stronger. In our game, this principle is not only embraced but celebrated. Those who excel in PvP create the rules of engagement, establishing their own version of justice that reflects their capabilities. This promotes an understanding that might makes right, and encourages players to hone their skills to secure their place at the top. Zhuangzi’s teachings on spontaneity resonate deeply within the realm of PvP. Allowing players to engage in combat without constraints cultivates a natural flow of gameplay, where spontaneity reigns supreme. The chaos of battle mirrors the unpredictability of life, and this organic element creates a more immersive experience. Players learn to adapt and respond to the challenges presented by others, resulting in a dynamic and engaging environment. History shows us that civilizations often rise and fall, as Spengler suggested. Our game reflects this cyclical nature of power and conflict. Each PvP encounter is a microcosm of broader historical struggles, illustrating how power dynamics shift and evolve. By allowing PvP, we create a living narrative that engages players in the timeless dance of dominance and submission, mirroring the rise and fall of empires throughout history. Žižek’s provocative ideas encourage us to confront the uncomfortable truths of our nature. PvP allows players to engage with their primal instincts, to revel in the raw energy of competition. This not only provides an outlet for aggression but challenges players to confront their own ethical boundaries. In doing so, they discover the duality of human nature—capable of both creation and destruction. Herbert Spencer’s concept of survival of the fittest underscores the reality of competition. In our game, only those who adapt and evolve will thrive. PvP becomes a training ground for honing skills, where players learn to navigate the harsh realities of their environment. Embracing conflict ensures that the strong are rewarded, while the weak are motivated to rise up, creating a vibrant ecosystem of players constantly striving for improvement. Althusser’s theories on ideology remind us that every player enters the game with their own set of beliefs and values. PvP challenges these ideologies, forcing players to confront their assumptions about power, morality, and community. Engaging in combat helps to redefine the players’ understanding of what it means to succeed, encouraging a critical reflection on their place within the game. Lastly, the teachings of Strauss emphasize the importance of elite governance and the role of the strong in shaping society. In our game, those who excel in PvP naturally become the leaders, guiding the community and establishing norms. By fostering a culture that celebrates strength and competition, we create a vibrant and dynamic environment that encourages players to rise to greatness while keeping the weaker elements in check.

[Nocturnal-Rainbows]

I'm pasting TLDR version of developers note about PVP

What part of my proposed change goes against the devs philosophy on PvP though? I think it lines up quite nicely with their vision.
Maybe some tweaks can be made here and there but for the most part the only people who are 'punished' are serial killers who have huge kill counts (and let's face it, those kill counts are so high because they're just boating around and killing anybody).
I think this change would give a little leeway to shitters because you'd have to weigh up if the negatives are worth the supposed positives.

I can't see this change stopping people from killing people who look like they're worth robbing, or factions killing each other, or dealing with some annoying hermit/noob who decided to set up next to your factions swamp and refuses to move. It won't even stop noobs from getting killed every time but it will cause the would be killer to think twice, which I don't see why that's an issue.
All it does is put some weight on the decision to outright murder everyone you see, and the effects are only temporary and only really get bad if you're doing nothing but spending your days boating around and killing noobs.

[HasseKebab]

When you commit a murder, you get what is basically a longer lasting Redhanded debuff that lasts for the full length of time that a Murder scent lingers which is roughly 10 days. This takes away the murderer's ability to hearth teleport for that duration which is both a dangerous and annoying negative to have attached to your character. A good initial deterrent.

Just go play Salem The Game instead of bringing idiotic ideas over from that game to here

[terechgracz]

I'm pasting TLDR version of developers note about PVP

What part of my proposed change goes against the devs philosophy on PvP though? I think it lines up quite nicely with their vision.
Maybe some tweaks can be made here and there but for the most part the only people who are 'punished' are serial killers who have huge kill counts (and let's face it, those kill counts are so high because they're just boating around and killing anybody).
I think this change would give a little leeway to shitters because you'd have to weigh up if the negatives are worth the supposed positives.

I can't see this change stopping people from killing people who look like they're worth robbing, or factions killing each other, or dealing with some annoying hermit/noob who decided to set up next to your factions swamp and refuses to move. It won't even stop noobs from getting killed every time but it will cause the would be killer to think twice, which I don't see why that's an issue.
All it does is put some weight on the decision to outright murder everyone you see, and the effects are only temporary and only really get bad if you're doing nothing but spending your days boating around and killing noobs.

First read my slop as i got warn for it (???)

[Nocturnal-Rainbows]

Just go play Salem The Game instead of bringing idiotic ideas over from that game to here

Not an argument.

[vatas]

Maybe an implementation of some sort of moral system could work. If you attack/kill people your moral will decrease and make your name a shade of red. The more you kill, the more red your name will become. Upon a certain treshhold you are considered evil to the gods and other people are free to kill you without moral retribution. You can regain moral by for example making offerings to the gods. This way pk'ing and pvp is still available but the mass slaughter of randoms is a bit more consequential. You can give villages the option to allow red players inside their 'walls' to create safe zones for them.

Let's imagine that is implemented. What will you do if I were to appear near your village and send out expendable alts doing anything they can to annoy you? Killing the alts would make the game label you as a sprucecap killer. Meanwhile the real "wanton murderers" do their eveil deeds by KO -> bash boat, which technically isn't murder.