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
Comments
Don't own a veil. There's no defence of theft in that post - I'm objecting to the more general argument that Achaea should only permit "opt-in" forms of gameplay. If you want to engage with the post I wrote, rather than the post you imagine I wrote - happy to have that conversation.
ETA: Ugh I hate it when your reply scrolls off a page. This is @Morsul in case not obvious.
Also re: the last post, I don't own a veil.
Yes, they are mutually exclusive. I think you're missing my broader point though which is that there are many examples of things that happen in Achaea that are not "opt-in", and that (to my mind) they are generally a list of all the things that make Achaea exceptional and interesting. There was a long list in my post. If you rely on the "opt in" argument then you are, by definition, against all of those things too.
And that seems to me to be fairly patently a bad position.
adopting a heretical positon: you chose to adopt said position. opt-in
placing guards wrong: you can chose not to place them wrong? anyway, I think every city has blank spots; that's just how it was designed. either way. opt-in.
I don't know what you mean by "gods die". I'm presuming you mean that you can't control if your god dies and you lose your order, and if that's the case, you win that point. The story > your feelings.
Looking over this list that you seem proud of....did you even try?
I'm going to add in this bit:
You can turn political schemes around. It's a game of patience and strategy. There is counterplay. Same goes for RP stuff with NPCs, as well as whatever revolutionary stance you choose to take. Same with guards. You can get the upper hand with any of these examples.
Theft? Good luck. Say a fond farewell to hundreds of your dollars being swiped because of an unlucky internet hiccough.
OK, so that's engaging with my actual points which is good.
Now let's talk about what we mean when we say "opt in". In a very basic sense, of course, all activity is "opt in" because you could choose to (a) not log in, or (b) log in and then never touch your keyboard other than to qq after an hour. But that's nonsensical right? It applies then to theft as much as it would to... bashing, say. We have to define the term better or it's useless.
So I'd define "opt in" forms of gameplay as those where the universe of costs and benefits that can happen to you are clear, well understood and accepted before you engage in the activity. Does that definition seem fair to you? If not, please suggest an alternative, useful one.
If you accept that definition then I'd say that almost all of the best parts of Achaea are not "opt in". Because if you are going to engage in the world in a living way, if you're going to roleplay, join an organization, participate in an organization, open yourself up to interactions with others, have a fully formed Achaean character, then all of those activities require opting in. With all of the uncertainties in consequence that that implies.
Yes, you can avoid almost all of that by sitting at Centre Crossing and chatting in a way not that dissimilar to how you would chat to your friends IRL but to my mind then you aren't playing the game. The important parts of Achaea (for me) are not all of the interesting mini-systems but the story of it, and the service of that story. If you're not in the story, then you're not really in the game. And you can't participate in the story without opting in, without accepting that you don't know how it ends, that it might go differently from how you expect, that other people might react in a way that you didn't foresee or you don't like.
You'll notice again, I hope, that none of this is about theft. It's still an objection to the attitude behind the argument that only "opt in" forms of gameplay are good.
This is, what, the fourth iteration of theft that has been tried? Everything has failed: thieves still suffer no consequences. Victims still either lose, or lose hard. There is no hope for a fix to theft. It must be deleted completely.
I mean you are kind of leading with a good specific example right there? If your position is that the destruction of Shallam was not a meaningful consequence for the Shallamese then it's going to be hard for us to have a productive discussion because I don't really know how to engage with that position in a constructive manner.
To be clear: I think you can make good arguments about not including theft (and @Asmodron made many of them), I just don't think the "opt in" argument is one. And the underlying attitude about it is interesting enough to spend some time analyzing (and hopefully discarding).
I'm sorry you lost promo items, I didn't know that. That sucks, and I think you should have had a way to get them back.
@Cooper - looking forward to you weighing in to remind people that the purpose of the thread wasn't to demonstrate the general support level for theft, and that it would be misleading to use the "third" figure now that you've helpfully clarified the intention of the thread.
@Cobault - any argument on "what the playerbase wants" is doomed to fail from lack of info. The actual poll question was unclear, you have no way of knowing if the people who voted were representative of the playerbase, and whether people could be persuaded depending on tweaks to the mechanics.
You have to argue it on its merits or not.
The fact it's so difficult to offer another thing in Achaea where the opt-out is "sit on a guard stack or qq" is the point. It's the only one I know of.
Tide only affected Sapience. I somehow avoided bashing a single tide monster without significantly altering my play, personally.
The deaths of Gods and siege of a city don't affect you much unless you choose to interact with them.
I'm saying they have.
For example, maybe shop maintenance could either be on "low" or "high." One costs more, the other opens up theft as a risk.
Perhaps people who get too much gold via bashing are easier to rob in lieu of the current soft cap, though that'd be tricky as the best bashers also tend to be good at moving very quickly.
@Torinn well put reply on opting in being the minute you log in.
@Illarion made the case I tried to before with much better eloquence. That attitude of opt-in is BS and runs counter to what made Achaea popular for 2+ decades.
I never said theft should personally suit me. I said it's at odds with how the rest of the game works.
If I wanted theft to personally suit me, which I have in another thread, I'd ask for it to be a trade skill so I can do it without class switching.
ETA: phrased more constructively, if there were a compelling reason to upset the status quo, I don't think that's it. Arguably the most important parts of the game, from PK to character development, aren't opt-in in any capacity.
Example: Someone earlier shrugged off Shallam getting destroyed with a hearty "and nothing of value was lost" type comment. Tell that to the people who had been playing there for a decade, a few of whom shed actual tears. I would argue what came after is better overall, but that's because it created more catalysts for roleplay or development, not fewer.
PK is absolutely opt-in, it's against the rules to PK someone for no reason outside of special areas and special events.
Character development is very opt-in.
A lot of people don't care about Shallam's destruction, and you can't force them to. Sorry if you thought otherwise?
Edit: Would you like it more if I said these "opt-in" things were "consequences to player actions" whereas theft is a "consequence to being logged in at all above a certain level"?
You don't do anything to get robbed. There's no shady parts of town that are open-theft, no thieves guilds you can piss off to become a target. Everyone in the game (above a certain level) is always free game, and any mitigation you might do can be defeated by simply losing your connection at the right time.
Also not surprising: dissing people for not playing much, and not actually addressing the actual reasons why people have not been playing.
Keep classy.