Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
- 6.2K All Categories
- 3.1K Everything Achaea
- 1.5K North of Thera
- 26 Archives of the Terraformer
- 257 The Matsuhama Arena
- 885 The Golden Dais of Creation
- 299 The Scarlattan Theatre
- 149 The Blank Canvas
- 2K Getting Help
- 412 General Questions
- 258 Quick Class Questions
- 1.3K Tech Support
- 313 Client Help
- 486 Curing Systems and Scripts
- 841 Off-Topic
- 255 The Wander Inn
- 586 The Universal Membrane
- 298 Class Discussions
- 298 Individual Class Sections
- 20 Alchemist
- 9 Apostate
- 30 Blademaster
- 9 Depthswalker
- 14 Druid
- 4 Infernal
- 20 Jester
- 19 Magi
- 34 Monk
- 11 Occultist
- 8 Paladin
- 7 Priest
- 29 Runewarden
- 18 Sentinel
- 26 Serpent
- 20 Shaman
- 9 Sylvan
PK-ready flag
Not my idea. Pulled it over from another thread, it's an in-game flag on your character that says you're happy to engage in PK. Would allow people who don't want to play a Thief/Assassin/Champion to draw acts of random aggression, having opted out of Issuing for such.
Tvistor: If that was a troll, it was masterful.
I take my hat off to you.
4
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
And using mark for this purpose worked previously. Now, however, staying mark requires you to actually "accept" and try to complete contracts, which not everybody is interested in. Being a mark now requires a particular IC stance and cannot be used as a primarily OOC flag anymore.
I liked playing a mark who had extremely narrow moral criteria under which he would accept a contract (so narrow, in fact, that I never accepted a contract at all). The new mark system however, doesn't allow for such personal moral distinctions. Either your character is willing to kill whoever he is asked to kill, or he can't stay a mark, and thus also can't keep the "PK flag".
→My Mudlet Scripts
Just copy/pasting a relevant exchange from the thread that spawned this. I think (as usual) that @Iocun's response here is very, very good.
"IC Reason" can still be a vague thing though and usually requires a personal conflict of sorts. More general reasons like "I'm Mhaldorian, I'm an evil bastard" or "I hate grooks", don't count for normal PK.
Aside from that, there's not just the question of what's allowed by the game's rules. Most players are mature enough to have some personal restraint and don't just kill people just because they're technically allowed to - but they would gladly kill the same people if they knew on an OOC level that they don't mind being attacked.
Yeah, new mark system doesn't fill this role at all anymore. I have less interest in fulfilling contracts than I do in issuing over PK, but with the new mark system you only have the choice of opting out of one of those activities.
Yeah, I think the logic is good here. We'll add this at some point. If people want to make themselves open PK, it just creates more interaction for everyone who might want to attack that person. All for it.
Doesn't infamy already kinda work for this? If you want to be open PK for a while just brazier like 10 people you know aren't in your area, or I'll give you my script that braziers everyone on QW
It would if there was an easier opt-in for infamy. Just need some sort of alley where you can kick puppies to show you are a bad person?
Cheers @Sarapis. When you/whoever does get around to adding it in, pls make sure it's similar to joining/quitting the mark, and make it clear to all involved that you can't issue for PK while open PK. Some people (naming no names, natch) still have a tendency to join the mark, get killed, and start chucking around issues and screaming harassment.
The whole point of this is to have an OOC PK flag for people who don't wish to play a "bad person" though!
→My Mudlet Scripts
Sylvance said:
I don't think so. If you're flagged as ready to PK and someone attacks you, you then have legitimate reason to attack them in retaliation, regardless of whether or not they're flagged. By attacking you, they're declaring that fact.
There are advantages and disadvantages either way, but I think I'd prefer it to allow anyone to attack me, since that's a more generally-applicable thing to advertise ("I don't mind being attacked" over "I don't mind being attacked but only by people who are similarly open to attack").
Entire reason I went mark to start with.
Also for the record I used the Rivalry system back in Shallam to deal with some of the more constant ashtani raiders.
Also in thought it would be kind of nice to open your self up to pk against certain factions besides just being fully open to pk.
For instance, Say your Ashtan border raiding Targossas, You want to open up that your there to fight. so you turn your pvp flag on, Five seconds later a naga Backstab team hits you for being flagged for pk.
But then again everyone likes a Naga Backstab gank.
i think pk-flag is a cop-out thing to add. one would or should add rp-element to it that make one an open session. (i know mark system exist for that.. or was...). Sketchily(i don't know it is an adjective word), ideally, one transform into supernatural with secondary identity(not your primary name) given by other denizen that named you your own unique name. with that said race you are open pk to certain faction or so on. It just one of idea that make you pk-flag enabled indirectly. It better than turn on and everybody see you with something like this "[PK]Valaria, the thousand-time dying noob." This is somewhat similar to guide system, where mortal can become guide(as julet, romeo, or other) to assist the newbies. You gonna give someone something good reason that make them worthy of slaying.
My two cents and somewhat cheap.
Being Infamous however, which is an easy status to earn and maintain, can.
As long as it has enough restrictions on enabling/disabling I don't see many options for abuse. (The getting mass ganked on turning it on like what happens/happened to new mark members does not count as abuse)
I think as long as there are clear rules regarding using the flag, similar to how Mark worked previously, it would be a really good idea. Make the rules strict and definitive, no nonsense.
1. Flagging yourself as Open PK means you cannot issue others for PK-related conflicts.
2. Flagging yourself as Open PK forfeits your right to use the Mark system for any reason.
-Defined separately, as issuing for harassment/etc, as has been stated, is obviously still a thing for Open PK targets. Issues are admin-overseen, contracts are not, hence the separate situations.
3. Upon flagging yourself as Open PK, you gain a line in HONORS indicating you have flagged yourself as such.
4. Upon flagging yourself as Open PK, you cannot remove the flag for one IC year.
5. Upon removing your flag, you remain Open PK flagged for 24 hours. Duration remaining reflected in your HONORS line.
-This is to prevent turning off the flag prior to being attacked or immediately following some organizational conflict to attempt to prevent retaliation from their fighters.
6. Those who are Open PK flagged can be attacked by anyone for any reason at any time.
I think that should cover pretty much every situation. Covers joining and quitting, and 'rules' while flagged. The countdown in HONORS would mean no 'surprise' de-flags.
Cascades of quicksilver light streak across the firmament as the celestial voice of Ourania intones, "Oh Jarrod..."
Kresslack said:
Sort of, but infamy currently has four drawbacks for a function like this:
- Currently, there's no way to gain infamy that doesn't involve IC acts of sorts. You can't become infamous by entering some command. You have to do aggressive things in some form.
- Infamy doesn't make you open PK to everyone, just marks and other infamous people.
- Infamy also doesn't signify willingness to be attacked, merely that you're allowed to be attacked. People who are infamous may be unwillingly infamous and may still dislike being attacked.
- As a more minor point, there's the connotations of the "infamy" term/concept in itself, which moves it again in the "IC bad guy" direction. It's simply not laid out to be an opt-in thing, but rather a way to add more potential consequences to playing a "bully".
Those points might not be total deal breakers on their own, but in combination, they make infamy not quite suited for this purpose.
→My Mudlet Scripts
Perhaps some of them are EEEEEEEEVIL puppies.
@Jarrod sorry if is is a stupid question, but I don't PK: Why does your list of rules include that the flagged individual cannot use the Mark system? Flagging yourself as PK willing shouldn't close any entirely IC methods of retaliation. The flag isn't saying 'Please attack me', but 'I won't issue over being attacked'.
If you're opening yourself up to combat, allowing Mark hiring just starts a really dumb perpetuation of a circle of conflict. Removing the ability to hire means that you won't have someone baiting contracts either, go sit somewhere flagged, get attacked, run, hire, go back, get attacked, run hire, etc.
Cascades of quicksilver light streak across the firmament as the celestial voice of Ourania intones, "Oh Jarrod..."
You would not have a valid reason to hire against someone if you were constantly open PK by your own choosing (flagging yourself). It benefits from a hard-coded implementation so as to prevent abuse, accidental or otherwise.
Come join the Achaea discord!
@Jarrod something like "She/He has issued a open combat to all of Sapience for the next X months."
This happens quite a bit already, I can only imagine if there was a PK flag.
This idea hurts nothing, so go for it, but it isn't the solution people really want or need.
If anything, I think the idea of "flags" are cheesy excuses for lack of effort from both the playerbase and the admin. I don't mean to offend anyone by that, I'm just saying that Achaea has always addressed this type of thing with an in-character response. Originally, people wanted a PK-flag, and the mark system was invented, which provided character depth, as well as provided a good, logical reason to attack one another ("I'm attacking you because you are a well-known assassin who kills my citymates"). "Flags" are something I'm used to seeing in crappy second-rate MUDs, and aren't something that belongs in Achaea.
The playerbase begged for mark to change, and it did. Now it seems the same people are asking for it to essentially be changed back, except with a new name and without any in-character justification or depth. ("I am attacking you because your PK flag is on.")
The fact is, it's 100% unnecessary. The PK rules already permit for completely unregulated PK in situations where it is mutually accepted that a fight is reasonable. A simple tell, indemnification, rivalry, or a long list of in-character provocations can provide a legitimate reason to attack a character. If you don't have cause to attack someone, and they have provided you no such exception, then frankly, you shouldn't attack them.
Additionally, users of this system would get ganked, constantly. The only people in the game I see using it are the members of Ashtan's earring network, and just like mark used to be, it would only serve as an honors line suggesting that you are tough. I have to assume, for example, that @Jarrod, a character famous for never fighting anybody, would immediately enable his PVP flag, which would mean absolutely nothing in reality, but would be touted as being "badass" or some equivalent. Meanwhile, the 20-30 active PKers in Targossas wouldn't touch it, because they'd get 6v1 phase/earring/3x Kai-choked on guards all day until they QQ'd or sat on a ship until they were eligible to quit.
This whole thing just seems like an excuse for people to not roleplay or communicate with other players. If you want to attack someone, and they are ok with it, then they won't issue you. If you want to 6v1 gank someone, and they are NOT ok with it, they shouldn't have to quit mark/PK flag to force you to be reasonable. The whole thing comes down to people being decent and respecting other players' wishes.
Lastly, harassment is harassment. Mark/ PK-flag status has absolutely nothing to do with harassment. There is an aptly named help file for this subject, but in general, harassment means that someone is bothering you on an OOC level, usually through some other medium. You should never "lose your right to issue" just because you want to participate in PK. Anyone who suggests that this is somehow mandatory for PK to work properly is probably a griefer who is tired of the rules holding their desire to gank people of the opposing faction with impunity.
It isn't an attack. I was just trying to reference a good example that everyone would know about. I don't think Jarrod would disagree that he is rarely on the receiving end of a surprise attack.
Pack your shit and get up outta here. You just failed.
https://ada-young.appspot.com/pastebin/d2525277
I know I've placed myself under self-imposed forum ban. But the troll is here, so this thread is on its way out the door anyway.