I think we've all learned an important lesson in the past week: Nothing makes Thad mad faster than PvP. I thought I'd start a post to speak to that and then begin a discussion on how PvP might be integrated in a controlled manner.
Here are my thoughts for what they're worth. Boring as it may sound to some, we really did set out to build a game where everyone can just get along and have fun. Nick and I have worked our asses off for three years in pursuit of that goal. Yes, it's restrictive in some ways. You may not be able to play out reactions you feel are realistic, and some character concepts are simply out of the realm of possibility.
However, I've learned two immutable facts. First and foremost, that a hardline separation between in-play and out-of-play is artificial at best. When things happen to people's characters, they don't like it, especially when it's another player doing it. Forcing that separation is difficult for some and impossible for others. I agree that it would be ideal, but it's just not realistic, and making it a hard requirement does nothing but alienate the people who have trouble with it. More disturbingly, however, it quickly becomes an excuse for stronger PCs to bully and ridicule weak ones, both in and out of play. Needless to say, I don't agree with it.
Secondly, I've learned that, for the game to be fun for people who don't want PvP, PvP can't exist at all. If it exists to any degree, the folks who don't want it are inevitably pulled in. Either they refuse and get trampled, or else they engage in PvP to defend themselves, in which case they're being forced to play in a way that isn't any fun to them. It's a lose-lose situation for those people.
It was for these reasons that we made Orn a low-to-no PvP game, a place where people, like myself and many of you, could LARP without having to worry about such things. Make no mistake: Players who hate PvP are the game's target demographic.
Now, I'll go out on a limb here and admit something many of you may find surprising: I don't like karma. I never have. It's a clumsy system at best, and little more than a means to an end. I've known from day one that the only way to have a PvP-free game was to have a game full of people who genuinely don't want PvP. Karma's just a deterrent to tip the player population in favor of that end, since naturally folks who don't like karma are less likely to play and folks who love it are more likely to. Believe me when I say Nick and I have wracked our brains for the past year trying to come up with something better, but so far, we haven't been able to.
Despite this, there is still a desire for PvP content, even among some folks who don't like it most of the time. Hell, even I played a PvP druid on WoW once. And a lot of people have expressed that to me in different ways over the past year. The trouble becomes how to cater to that desire without the aforementioned result where the folks who don't want it are drawn in involuntarily. Much as it may seem otherwise, I, in fact, do like everyone here and want everyone to have fun (yes, that means you guys, too, Rob and Matt). There'd be no point to be a game designer who doesn't want folks to have fun. It's just that I'm unwilling to sacrifice one of the game's core values to allow all kinds of fun, because I know that, even if they don't speak up, things like this are ruining the play experience of the game's target audience.
So I submit this challenge to the wisdom of crowds. Those of you who want PvP can have it if you can think of a way for it to work without those of us who don't being forced into it. The design philosophy at work here isn't up for discussion; the game is still firmly targeted at folks who don't want PvP, and their enjoyment is my primary concern. That part will never change. However, the system that supports it is on the table. I'm even willing to nix karma if a better solution is presented. Please share your thoughts.
I really like the idea of occasional tournaments with karma or other consequences put off the table for the deaths involved. That way people who for absolutely no reason even in a controlled environment can still react to the tournaments as if they're a barbaric pasttime. But those of us who would like to see "Hmm, in a fight between Rasiri and Thalenir, who would win?" Or "Can I beat so-and-so?" still have an outlet.
One other thing that some places do are "sparring" tournaments where people are paired and fight to three clean strikes with no damage called and healing needed (I'm assuming the above fighting would be for damage with healers standing by to fix people)
There's also a good stress reliever called a "circle fight" that's zero damage and sort of like a child's game. A group of people with weapons of their choice (all shortswords encouraged) stand in a circle. You may not hit anyone immediately on your left or right. And after a set number of hits you're "out" and the circle shrinks. Additionally anyone who drifts into the center of the circle trying to cheese a shot in becomes a free target for everyone. Obviously once you get down to three it's just an x-touch free for all, but especially in the beginning it's a nice fun game for a large group of players with a mild pvp aspect but again, no real damage or healing
It might be interesting if there were a system to challenge people with titles such as sheriff, mayor, champion, or town guardian in order to acquire these titles which will come into play within the mods and other in-game play.
This could be accomplished by a tournament or a straight-up challenge. All abilities would apply and hit point counters would be required.
Perhaps even dividing classes into different titles would encourage wizard v. wizard battles or fighter v. fighter. This might also play into class paths such as "Way of the Sword" or just being the most powerful wizard of all time. Of course, plot could bring in characters from other shards to challenge those in our town somewhat like dojos.
The only thing that this will create is a hierarchy which I'm sure a lot of people will be against.
Well, I have thought long and hard what to post in this section. We have all just seen how disruptive a seemingly harmless PvP act can be. Unfortunatly I think Astrums first idea on what this act was ment to do is the best and only option. I know Thad you might not like this or want to hear it, but you cannot have all these fringe classes and creatures living happily in harmony with eachother. As much as I hate to admit it even the paladin class cannot exist in a non PvP enviroment. The very essence of the class is the fact they stand for what they believe in with unerring and extreem conviction, just like the very essence of a warlock is to be either constantly at war with his inner demonic powers or letting them fly freely causing chaos and harm to all those around him. Same thing goes for races, noone under any circumstances would allow an undead, or a werecreature to live among them because of their extreem preditory nature and innate lack of control over it. Especially since we are trying to create a more roleplaying type game. This is not WoW where roleplaying doesn't matter, just how well you can tank, heal or DPS.
Now I know I have told some that recent events didn't bother me much, but the more I think about it the more I realize how much time and money I spent on making Dreygor, and now he is pretty much unplayable. With costume, and cost of playing it took a year and a half and over $400 to get that piece of paper where he is. I know everyone states "its just a game" but in PnP making a character cost nothing but pencil lead and a piece of paper, here people take years lvling and lots of actual money playing, so it becomes a little more personal. Now I don't want to sound like a whinner, I am just trying to put this in perspective to people just why Thad and Nick strive so hard to not allow this stuff to happen.
To go further into the matter some people will say, "well if you play the character this way", unfortunatly noone likes to be told just how they have to play thier character, especially when they have an Idea on how they want them to be. This can be more irritating and downright discouraging then being put into a PvP sitution you don't want into. Again the only answer is to stray away from the extreems that would cause the tension in the first place. Stiers will attest to the fact that he is forced to play a certain way otherwise his character would be unplayable as well, and noone should be forced to play anyway other then the way they want to.
In conclusion I would like to say I bear no Ill will to anyone for anything that has occured, and I hope we all continue having as much fun as we can playing a game we enjoy.
Believe it or not, Tom, that was a conclusion I had strongly considered. BJ can attest to this. We had a long discussion in chat the other day that dark character types might not be feasible. Ripper's a bit of an experiment in that. We took a cute, innocent, non-threatening character and made her dark. It didn't change her personality or make her evil in any way; it just gave her a label. If that had rendered her unplayable, based solely on the fact that she's dark and not on her character's actions, then there would simply be no way to introduce any dark PCs, including things like werebeasts, warlocks, or goblins. Paladins weren't something I had considered, but you make a very valid point.
Naturally, I don't want that to be the case. I'd rather everyone play and let play, turning a blind eye to it or at least toning down their reactions so the other player can play the character they're after. But the prospect that it might not be possible in a non-PvP environment was definitely being considered in the midst of this all.
The only real response I have is, which sort game would everyone prefer? A game with some "shades of gray" PCs that are dark but not evil, with a lot more variety and opportunity for roleplaying? Or a game with nothing but strictly kosher PCs, where everything is black and white and dark character types are only ever encountered as villains? I'm obviously in favor of the former; it's more dynamic, makes for more compelling storylines, and allows people who want to play dark character types the opportunity to do so. The only drawback is that it requires a certain, shall we say, metagame courtesy to the dark characters, an adjustment of play style that allows them to be playable even when character concepts wouldn't otherwise allow for it.
Honestly, we're looking at restricting play style either way. Either the ordinary PCs are restricted in reacting too strongly against dark PCs, or the dark PCs are forced to play ordinary PCs. Like I told BJ, if everyone sees in black and white, there can be no room for shades of gray. In the same token, if we allow shades of gray, nobody can see in black and white.
It's an interesting dilemma, and I'm open to opinions on how to deal with it going forward. For the record, Jenn does actually want to play Ripper the vampire, and I'm glad she's getting the opportunity, hard fought though it may have turned out. Next year, I have a feeling we might see goblin and werebeast PCs as well. And I'd love for those folks to get a chance to play what's fun to them, but not if it gets them killed on sight. Everyone's thoughts on how best to do that are welcome.
I feel rippers comments to the council were very convincing both in and out of play. What I feel it really comes down to is what point of restricts the PC's more. With the shades of gray POV we have a vast range of player types but thats what the PC's need to be gray not black like the warlock we had in town last year. with the black and white POV will have almost no chance of any pvp because everyone will be good nothing specail. I personaly like the idea of the gray and see how it goes if it doesnt work out we can always move to a black and white POV later on but if we start that way then we'll never be able to come back.
so, as not to bog everyone down with a wall of text, I've posted a small little psychological PVP manifesto and rationale here: http://www.ornlarp.com/blog/developers-blog-pvp-manifesto
I'll continue my thoughts as I have more time in regards to a solution, but understanding the mindset is equally as valuable in finding an appropriate solution.
I believe that tournaments would be a great idea, with some cool treasure as a reward for the end. Have counters to keep it fair. You could do a free for all where all class types could enter, as well as restricted ones for specific guilds, classes (mage duel is one I would really like to see), as well as a level-limited category (So my low level dwarf doesnt have to beat a 10th level character and have his feelings hurt lol). I think some of this could be done with minimal plot involvement if the heads of guilds spearheaded this. The rewards could be all that plot has to do to make this happen. (I am not being greedy, it is simply the way it was done back when they were doing tournaments.) Also having some sort of Gladiator ring could be pretty cool too, allowing plot to playtest monsters and characters to fight without worrying about dying.
As to PvP, I believe that the law system, if done extensively could replace Karma. If we truly want an immersive environment, then shades of gray is the way to go. I believe that perhaps what we are all talking about is a mechanic of alignment (developers groan here). I know that an alignment mechanic would be cumbersome, heck it is in pen and paper, but that is what I think a lot of this discussion is about, I am simply putting that moniker on it to describe it.
Now back to Laws. I think Laws are what describe what is an isn't evil. It is for this reason that evil or illegal acts are done in secrecy. If you are caught, you get punished accordingly. Think of two different types of criminals, a crazy killer and a crooked politician. The crazy dude goes postal at work and is usually gunned down or given the death penalty (which would make him chaotic). The politician could be more dangerous by far, in that he manipulates the laws to his own end, thereby affecting far more people over a longer period of time.
To go with what Dreygor said, I agree that it gets personal when your character is limited to what he can and cannot do, which can hurt immersion as well. You invest time and money and do not want to be told how to play your character. However, if you play a PC that is going to go postal and go on a killing spree, you should expect to have to re make a character when the law finally catches up to you. If you want to play that way you should expect and accept the repercussions of your actions. The other thing to consider is whether or not the whole town would even know your characters' motives and desires. (Who knows Taklinn may actually be an evil bastard who is secretly plotting against town). If Atasach becomes a werewolf, how would we know until he transformed in front of us or he told us that was the case. The level of flexibility is going to directly correllate with how concrete our laws and ability to implement those laws will be. Thats my rant, I will leave you all to your own devices now lol.
Hello dears. My opinion on it is pretty short unlike Bumble the Grumble Dwarf up there. I like the idea of tournaments. Being the only "archer", I'd be happy to strap a target on the person who posted above me and have at it with a packet festival. :o) In all seriousness now, I do think that's a fun idea. Done with no damage and no healing needed. Mages Duel is also a fun idea. Just because that sounds fun. If two characters are having a minor conflict in the game, it would sort be the same as a "bar fight"; you may get hurt a little, but no one's going to die. Also, I think if incoming newbies see that there is a way to settle things "by swords or spells" with other characters in game, it adds a good chance of them coming back. Done differently than what I've heard about some other LARPS, I think this could actually be an effective tool. I agree with Dreygor's point about not being able to play his pallie to the fullest extent. Just my thoughts. We all know I'm a super happy person to begin with and I mainly like to beat up my husband. Which you all seem to enjoy as well. I'm all for anything that allow it. If Taklinn doesn't love Glimmer soon, I'd like the opportunity to show him what I've got. :o)
Just a couple of developer comments to keep the discussion going.
Tournaments are approved. They're fundamentally harmless, fun, and completely voluntary. If two people want to have a gladiatorial bout or a duel to the death and agree to it willingly, I see no problem with removing karma, flagging, or what have you from the equation. That it isn't obligatory is the biggest selling point for me.
Laws as a sole solution have been tried. I have seen this in other games as well as our first season and it simply doesn't work. All that ends up happening is that the PvPers become sneakier about carrying out PvP, or else find a way to corrupt the laws in their favor. Either way, they end up getting away with it and leaving nothing to protect the folks who don't want to play that way. Don't get me wrong; they're a good supplement when done well, just like the arena, but only a hard system of game rules has the necessary power to ensure PvP doesn't overwhelm the game. That was the reason we adopted karma in the first place.
Well, I've heard this from other people and it makes sense to me- This is the first time we've made laws. We haven't been to law school, it's obviously going to be flawed. All we can do is improve upon them. Now that it is set in stone that anyone or anything can be a citizen, it becomes clearer still how to charge people. I think that the laws will work fine once we work the kinks out of them.
Of coure they're going to be flawed at first, that's why we build on them.
I understand that the laws are going to take quite a bit of time to fine tune. It is a natural progression of the town's ability to govern itself. You dont know if you have a flawed law unless it is broken by someone after all. I think what my last ramble was more towards would be that just saying something is against the law won't stop someone from doing it; A harsh punishment will. If we are forced to execute someone for murder, perhaps that death does require a stone pull, or even more than one stone pull. I don't really like this mechanic much, but it would definately make you think twice about arbitrarily PvP someone (I view it like the laws of other countries that have harsh penalties like caning for minor offenses or chopping off a hand for stealing). I dont really think people will like that ( heck I dont really like it), but it may be harsh enough to solve the problem.
I think Stiers is a perfect example of what someone will do to play an evil PC. Going around with one arm wasn't fun, but it was pretty darned effective. If there were even harsher punishments out there, things may have been different. I think that to help solve the problem there needs to be a strong deterrent against the activity; though I am not sure mechanically how to make that happen....
And I look forward to a tournament lol.
I can imagine a few options. Contrary to the popular belief, I did not want pvp. I imagined that since there was no event for some time that it would be obvious that this had to be settled through purely role-playing. However it is clear that others did not see this and for this I am to blame. I should have put more thought into the matter. My intentions were to make one of two things happen.
One: Make it impossible to play certain character types and avoid the problem.
--Ripper showed me that this isn't the solution because that closes desirable classes to people, I suppose I assumed she'd been made that against her will much like Stier's paladin shift and I was attempting to get rid of that. I hoped it would shock the town into finding a cure but I see now it was what Ripper wanted and for that I apologize.
Two: Connected to the results of the first, I hoped that in exchange for a personal death I could get people to support Ripper and thus allow her class to thrive. Unexpectedly she opened the doorway to ANY class, so congratulations to her for taking that initiative. I did not want another goblins incident. That class is now practically unplayable and that is not what I want at all. They added a comedic aspect to the game and then got snuffed out.
I thought either path would solve the problem and I would let role-playing decide which one town wanted most rather than trying to pick for myself. I'm pleased with the results and would not take back my actions because I don't think talk would have solved anything. I'm grateful for Jen's understanding in this matter. She's done an excellent job of keeping in game and out of game seperate. I would have been more than willing to lose a stone for this and she even called that off. So again, thank you. I hope there are no hard-feelings one way or the other.
As for pvp. These are just quick thoughts that can be trashed or expanded on.
A pvp tournament occasionally, perhaps for stakes. To keep any possibility of cheating or accusations of cheating out perhaps a hit keeper for each contestant.
Consented pvp in which characters can choose whether they are alright with pvp action being taken against them by other pvp-allowing characters. This is a sketchy idea at best but just brainstorming to start things off.
That's all I have for now, enough to get things rolling hopefully.