[MUD-Dev] Guilds & Politics [was Affecting the World]

[Matt Chatterley]

On Thu, 11 Dec 1997, Marian Griffith wrote:
> On Tue 09 Dec, Richard Woolcock wrote:
> > Matt Chatterley wrote:
> > > On Tue, 9 Dec 1997, Derrick Jones wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 8 Dec 1997, Vadim Tkachenko wrote:
> 
> I should not respond to this but I will try to clarify one point.

I should probably let it lie too, but I love stirring pots. Besides, as
usual, Marian has dragged the thread back into something nice and civilly
(sp?) discussable. :)
 
> > > This is an interesting point that I will only touch on (since I think it
> > > has been discussed to death for now, of late). Many people dislike
> > > strongly to be killed by another player.
> 
> Yes.

While this was just an 'observation' that I made, I'd like to reclarify in
slightly more detail - Many people dislike actually being killed by
another player. I do! However, I advocate PK under appropriate
circumstances as a good thing. The reason for the discrepancy here is that
i have never been PKed under said 'appropriate circumstances', by which, I
mean a game environment whereby PK is not 'taboo', but rather an accepted
and normal part of the game, as much as the wholesale slaughter of NPCs.
 
> > > The interesting issue is *why*
> > > and I believe it comes down to game context. Usually things that can kill
> > > you are things you expect to hit you, and to hurt you, and which you
> > > voluntarily enter dangerous situations with. The fact that there is a
> > > network connection attached to one, which decided *concious* (rather than
> > > based on automated criteria) to attack and harm you is taken in an
> > > exagerated context
> 
> This is indeed the difference that makes it either something personal
> or a signal  that the other person  does not care at all about you or
> your feelings. Neither alternative is pleasant.

A very valid, and very relevant point of view. Now, if I may postulate an
alternate (or at least, different) situation, or environment. If we take a
game, whereby PK is not such a taboo situation, and for instance, there is
an Assassin guild, which hands out assignments to its members. The members
are NPCs and PCs, and the contracts are for NPCs and PCs. Either may be
assigned to perform their duties upon either.

Now, the PK is not personal, but professional. This however, raises the
second point you have above - the assassin does not, or at least seems to
not care about your feelings when they kill you. It is the knowledge that
they *could* care, but do not, which is offensive, since being killed by
an NPC assassin, which is incapable of such emotional response or
considerations, is *not* taken on a 'personal' level.

The end result is the same - you are just as dead, and you are no worse
off in the *actual* sense either way, but on an emotional level, to some
degree, are you more injured by the PC-wrought death?
 
> > > (is it anymore personal an attack than one from an NPC? I say *no*
> > > since it is NOT personal against you, or at least, ideally is not).
> 
> Ideally perhaps, but many players use pk as a way to hurt other players.
> E.g. to settle disagreements

Very much so. You are also correct to note that I am speaking somewhat
idealistically - this is absolutely true, and I 'fess up to that right off
the bat. A Player using his PC to kill another Players PC to cause some
hurt to them is guilty of what is coming to be known as 'jerk behaviour'
in these circles - but it is not readily preventable, or punishable
(unless it is done repeatedly, in which case I drop it into the
'harrassment' category).
 
> > Interesting...has anyone put in any form of assassin-type mob?  I wonder if
> > this might have a similar affect...imagine a scene like:
> 
> A player can decide to attack you or not to attack. The monster can not
> make that decission.  It is the fact that somebody else decided to harm
> me that makes pk hard to accept. It is personal or I do take it as such

I touched on this above, but to reword what Marian has said - on an
emotional level, this is so. The NPC can decide to attack or not very
readily, even with a semblance of intelligence, BUT in the end, it is a
program, using logic of some fashion to decide if it will attack or not.
It is not a reasoned, or emotional decision. However, this raises a
counter-riposte, in that the dissociation between Player and PC would
suggest that the Player is not making a personal attack, but rather
conveying their PC appropriately, by suitable mechanisms.
 
> [assassination example snipped]
> 
> > I believe this would have a similar affect to PK, for the following 
> > reasons:
> 
> > 1) You were surprised and unprepared for the attack.
> > 2) You were busy talking, and not really interesting in fighting.
> > 3) You were killed by an opponent you couldn't ever hope to beat.
> > Basically, its just not fair.  Like many instances of PK.
> 
> I'm seeing evidence of another subject that should not for the moment
> be resurrected. But no, you focus on the act of combat and not on the
> intentions. 

*chuckle* We have several such subjects. :)

[Snip]

Regards,
	-Matt Chatterley
	ICQ: 5580107
"I shall never believe that God plays dice with the world." -Einstein