Page 1 of 6
PVP and how it adds to the Game
Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 1:28 pm
by Dredge
Now, after looking over the rules, it truly looks as if a certain type of PVP is being aimed for and a specific type is produced.
With all the political classes, assassins and interrogators, the game seems primed for political intrigue. By making a character and gaining in character loyalties to player created factions, these factions may clash both secretly and openly for political dominance. That sounds awesome, a lot like the good parts of Vampire type LARPs, except you get to fight- bonus.
How PVP seems to work out most of the time: I am evil, I kill other people because I'm evil, and I think I need your stuff. Eventually, I might be killed for my evil ways. Unlike a real life serial killer, I don't have a pattern. Unlike real life terrorist, I don't have a motive. Unlike a real life thief, I don't steal because its all I know or because I'm too lazy or greedy for my own good (BTW, I would love to see a thief who is trying to support a habit).
Anyhow, I would like to know how PVP and PK have added to the game, perhaps with specific examples.
I'd also like to know how the experiment was supposed to go, as well as the tweaks that have been mentioned that would have made this better.
Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 3:36 pm
by Eli
A GM from another larp and I discussed this very topic for approximately 10 hours straight until we could hardly speak any more. The end result: there is no answer.
If you’re anti PvP you will NEVER agree with Pking
If you’re Pro-PvP you will never agree with NO-Pking
From your post I am going to guess that you are Anti-PK.
Pking exists for more reasons that they are just a jock and I want to prove it by killing others characters. Sometimes you just don’t like the guy, and you don’t want to have to figure out a way to get around their political position. Or there is this one character who you just cannot seem to figure out how to get rid of, despite your best efforts, and ruining them with politics.
Besides, having Vamped for years I know there are PK’s in that game, despite it being a political game.
But this isn’t Vamp, this is a post apocalyptic world, where people walk off alone at night by themselves, with no fear. Are you any less dead if an NPC eats your corpse than a PC? Would it be ok if the PK was an eater for the dead? Does a pc have to know someone before they kill them?
Here is a game changing example of a Pking since you asked:
Session one: Town controlled by a loyal Silverthorn Solider. He awaits his kings inevitable return… Others don’t want him in charge. So they lure him away alone on “patrol” and take him out once they are out of town. Entire game changed after that.
Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 3:48 pm
by dier_cire
Eli wrote:Here is a game changing example of a Pking since you asked:
Session one: Town controlled by a loyal Silverthorn Solider. He awaits his kings inevitable return… Others don’t want him in charge. So they lure him away alone on “patrol” and take him out once they are out of town. Entire game changed after that.
What changed after that? I still made oodles of cash running the inn...
Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 3:57 pm
by Peace420
LOL nice one SoCo and he asked for an escort and then accepted an escort from a guy he had left behind in battle, a guy that he had demeaned on a few occasions and a guy that was a serial killer, although that one he couldn't have known and noone still can prove that I did it! Ried you did the same thing? Funny how we both made oodles of loot and ran the Inn after that.
Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 3:57 pm
by Amagus
'Course, the Entire Game prior to that incident consisted of only four or five hours.
I think it did simplify the political game considerably, shrinking it from three main factions to two.
And only in death does Atrum confess.
Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 4:01 pm
by Dredge
The all or none principle sounds kind of like crap to me, ten hours or not. I do not exist on a continuum of only one way. I said earlier that PVP is always bad, and later wondered how it could be cool. When my mind was made up on how it can be cool, I realized it rests very much on the individual PK'er, which is why it can slide so easily into suckville.
I can see PVP producing cool results, because in some games it does all the time. Vampire has PK, I'm well aware, but the style tends to be PK with a purpose. I really just hate the "I must prove my evil/manhood by killing everybody".
This system is built with so much political power for a boffer LARP that it makes me smile, knowing how very political it can be. If I was killed because I proved an obstacle in a political power scheme, I would have the kind of normal damn new character syndrome, but I wouldn't be angry at the player. If the player was doing it more because he just wants to be evil... it feels immature.
More later.
Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 4:02 pm
by Eli
Hey, they just asked for an example.. I gave one...
And we all knew he was a killer...
Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 4:07 pm
by Amagus
I'm personnally not fond of PKing primarily for the reasons all ready given. But an aspect I love about it is it's mere possibility. It provides a far more real sensation of consequence. Be careful of who you make your friend and who you make your enemy - your very life may hang in the balance.
Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 4:10 pm
by Dredge
I'll give you that Amagus. It does make friendships more important.
Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 4:25 pm
by Peace420
I guess thats my point Dredge, sometimes people's characters do kill just because they're character likes it and I don't see anything wrong with that as long as it isn't the norm for the game and that person doesn't whine when they are ganked in return. And they aren't making the same kill for no reason character over and over. I had that same convo probably with that same person that SoCo did I still haven't heard a good reason to disallow it, although I can understand why it may not be what some people prefer to do I guess I just don't understand the mentality that because I don't like it noone should do it. I used to hate playing goodie 2 shoes characters when I tabletopped, or even mostly good characters because I do that everyday. But I didn't begrudge the fact that alot of people want to play good guys. I can'y understand people that come to LARP but never leave the Inn, never go on a plot andnever get involved in anything but to each his own.
Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 4:27 pm
by GM_Chris
We developed a system on interdependancy to stop people from randomly PK'ing each other. This does not mean you wont have a person come in and just stck jock PK people, but that is life. It makes life interesting. I think the players need to treat teh world as a dark scary place where there are bad people. I think the players need to be killing or perma imprisoning evil PC's.
It is complicated and I can say for years and years we have not had much PvP in the game. I think that will continue to be the norm.
If it makes people feel better then treat pentag's group as a bunch of NPC's and then there was no PvP this event.
Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 4:56 pm
by Peace420
Well Fesko, the truth is that in 4 years NOONE has ever flat out asked Atrum if he had any part in that, if they would have he would have told them yes he did.
Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 5:18 pm
by Dredge
Well lets say this gets a little worse, since we seem to be endorsing the playing of a sociopathic nightmare. So... we allow that. Random killing is cool. So, why not a serial rapist necrophiliac?
"Well, those are really nasty and horrible. Can't promote that. Its sick, horrible, and will ruin peoples time."
"But we can promote medieval Columbine?"
"Of course. Thats sick horrible and ruins peoples time in a way I approve."
Its not that I can't see PVP being good. Its just that I can see so much more bad being produced from it when its done without restrictions. I'm unsure of how to best restrict it though.
Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 5:23 pm
by Kale
Dredge wrote:So, why not a serial rapist necrophiliac?
You have totally ruined the surprise I had in store for Donovan's corpse...
...and then again, if I remember right, a PC (on the "good guys side") -DID- began doing that this event to another PC.
But then, along the lines of what you are saying...shouldn't we be moving into a total democracy and shouldn't you all have been negotiating a treaty when the "bad pc's" began asking for it? What if the "bad pc's" were to get the UN involved? I mean, if we can't kill PCs, then we shouldn't be going around killing NPCs either, because NPCs aren't really any different than PCs.
Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 5:31 pm
by Dredge
No difference? Sweet, I'm playing the Beast's brother Fred. Or maybe Infinity Lad. Are Kryptonian's available yet?