The Players Corner Archive

This isn't one of those ooh pity me stories, cause I could care less if my character gets banned or not, my life doesn't begin and end with gs. I am wondering though, I have been told by a couple differant gms and a sage or two that just being on the boulder is consent to kill, but I was locked out for unconsented pvp.

Now, since I actually did have a reason, I mean he killed my friend after my friend got bound, and he hadn't done anything to him, my question is since I have been told by numerous staff just being on the boulder is consent, was my banning warranted?

Most will probably say yes, I killed someone ooh, but let me tell you, I have killed hundreds of people, no joke hundreds, and not been banned for it.

I have talked to many gms after killing someone, and usually I just explain the situation and they let me off without a warning or anything. Especially on the boulder of all places, I personally just think khaladon has a chip on his shoulder, I was extremely polite and courteous about explaining the situation, and what my understanding was, yet he didn't seem to hear it. I had to say a couple things over and over since he just didn't seem to hear me.

Anyways, it's late/early and I am just rambling. thoughts?

------------------
Man of many opinions

[This message has been edited by Fralcon (edited 08-05-2001).] reg

So you walked in a gray area, it got reported (or the GM simply noticed the action), the GM felt it was a rules violation, and punishment was set. I’m failing to set how this amounts to a chip on Khaladon’s shoulder. Was it because he disagreed with you? Or was is because he failed to capitulate to what you believe the definition of unconsented pvp should be? Either way, if you truly have killed hundreds of PC’s, then this banning can not really come as a surprise.
reg

------------------
Man of many opinions reg

------------------
Man of many opinions reg

Perhaps if you did not use such figures as Jesus Christ in your analogies no one would say something about it. I have always put those posts in the same pile as the ones that invoke the name of Hitler.

And regarding the boulder.

I have found the rules petaining to the boulder to be relatively clear.
IF you desire to be there you are opening yourself up to murky situations, however those situations do not grant you any release from the standard PVP rules if the GM's choose to enforce them.

Basicaly saying that you go there at your own risk. Kind of like those that love to say.....Mountain climb or any other obviously risky sport. The decision is yours and so the responsibility is as well.

Attacking someone who has not attacked you has never been allowed as far as I know. That is nothing new, I know it can be very frustrating, but it is not "funny" or new to anyone in the lands.
reg

Since different GMs interpret the policy differently, you can never know what the real policy is. Someone just walks in, kills someone, and gets killed in a retaliatory manner. I want to know why the person who just killed someone for no reason wasn’t banned? Was it because it was Khaladons character or a friend of Khaladon?

-Pirub reg

One is GM favoritism, which in my opinion is something that was left behind in the past.

The second is GM inconsistency, which plagues GS today with the 100s of GMs who all interpret things in different ways.

I don't believe Khaladon was showing favoritism, he truely is one of the better GMs who recently got hired. I do however believe he was being inconsistent. I witness these inconsistencies plenty of times, how one action can be alright at one time, and the same action warrent a warning/lockout a couple hours later.

GM inconsistency isn't a problem to assign to any specific GM like favoritism would be. Instead I think it's a problem of the whole, perhaps having to do with how GMs are trained.

It would do the game a lot of good if the policy could speficially state what criteria must be met to warrent a PvP warning. This is how the law avoids such inconsistencies. You have the law, you have the elements, and you have the precedents.

"In general, Simutronics will not get involved in any player vs. player conflict which is confined to a small group of players. However, if such conflict overlaps to other players, or causes a generally disruptive influence on GemStone III in general, the participants will be warned."

- Lord Kranar, human Archwizard

[This message has been edited by LordKranar (edited 08-05-2001).] reg

What I am saying is that the rules are very specific as it applies to PvP, and that is, DO NOT DO IT. If you wish to complain about GM interpreting the rules, then complain about those who chose not to punish for PvP. Because based upon the rules, Khaladon would be completely in the right for punishing such acts.

Oh and Fralcon here’s a deal for you, if you stop making ludicrous points, I’ll stop making pointless replies to them.
reg

If the rules are very specific then why one GM does think being on boulder is 'consent' and another doesn't?

If the rules are very specific then why was he allowed to kill hundreds of people before he got banned?

Obviously you can't answer this question because a dolphin is smarter than you.

-Pirub reg

Coming into this situation i was fine with everyone i ahd a problem with morgynn but she and i resolved it with a god. So i came ta watch some duels and oogum jumps out of hidin and kills me he says its for me killin morgynn, but i believe it says somewhere in that policy that you cant get involved in others fights. I come back in hidin and kill him, of course immediately after i get pulled. I get to the consulation lounge and ask why im here, and she says im requesting a lockout fer yer account, without letting me say another word i in a cell, which dont seem very fair to me

and to save postin trouble, No i dont autolog, yes thats the whole story,no i didnt twist the gms words................... reg

http://forum.gsplayers.com/ubb/Forum5/HTML/000003.html

I got a 60 day banning and the other person who did unconsentual PvP didn't even get a warning. I wrote Melissa personally and never got a reply from her. Thanks for nothing once again Melissa.

edge reg

Let me repeat it, if you brain couldn't comprehend the question the first time. Take your time, read it. I believe in you!

1) If the rules are very specific then why one GM does think being on boulder is 'consent' and another doesn't?

2) If the rules are very specific then why was he allowed to kill hundreds of people before he got banned?

-Pirub reg

2) Because he hasn't really killed that many people and is exaggerating to make a point, AND because the flag warning the GMs of his PvP history was missed by the GMs with authority to do anything about it at the time, AND because the GMs who did see it happen either agreed that it was justified and consentual or didn't give a damn or were just plain too busy doing something else to bother with it at the time.

There, how's that?

Roberta
reg

1) If the rules are very specific then why one GM does think being on boulder is 'consent' and another doesn't?

My Opinion) The policy in question is very concise (is there an echo in here?), if a GM decides you have participated in unconsentual PvP, you will be punished. Your question is about what constitutes consent, which is a gray area. Some GMs feel your presence on the boulder constitutes consent, while others feel you need actual permission from the player you plan to engage. So, if you plan to play in the gray area, you had best hope that when you get reported, the GM who responds agrees with your definition of consent. Is that clear enough?

2) If the rules are very specific then why was he allowed to kill hundreds of people before he got banned?

My Opinion) Very few reports, and when a report did occur, a GM responded who agreed with his definition of consent.

Just because you speed every day, and have been able to talk your way out of a few tickets, do not mean that you have been given permission to speed.
reg

Lord Deprav reg

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pirub9:

Obviously you can't answer this question because a dolphin is smarter than you.

-Pirub

---

Dolphins are quite intelligent actually. On hand I'd say that Dolphins are smarter than 30% of adults on this planet. Of course their perception of earth and the things around them are completely difrent than humans. None the less though they are very highly intellegent.
reg

------------------
Man of many opinions reg

Just consider that my "unimportant" words of advice.

I doubt any of you will listen, but don't say I didn't warn you.
reg

By the way, do you know how many times the Bible makes references to people getting their feet stuck in nets? Apparently it was a big concern for God. He warns us about it quite a bit. It must be important, being the Word of God and all. I guess it worked, because mostlly just Dolphins get caught these days and they don't even have feet!

Maybe if they read the Bible they could avoid the whole net thing; although they might wonder what the heck a foot is.

All I know is, I don't have a signle Dolphin customer. What a huge untapped market! Especially if they are, on average, smarter than NOI (who at least can type). Do they have money? Do they even have pockets to put money in? Maybe I should sell them pockets first!

Yeah, first pockets... then internet access!

-- David
reg

Why don't they? Because the majority in charge thinks that only Snerts duel. It's not RPing to kill each other, etc...

So, if you make a spot where so and so signs up on a list. Then they could duel safely while everyone else watches.

Just because you hang out at the boulder, doesn't mean you are bad. That is a horrible generalization....Hrm. I am not one to be talking though...

Someone take over!

edge reg

GemStone Frontier.

It would be another mirror world, like Plat, but there would be absolutely no restriction on PvP and no GM intervention in player conflict. You'd have to be Premium to play, and you can't port current characters in.

When you log in, you'd get a user box that you would have to click every time that says, "I consent to entering the Frontier. I understand that PvP is allowed and social interactions are not monitored or policed by Staff."

You buy a mystery backpack for 4 mil and get a bunch of rocks in it? Too bad, so sad. Don't bother to assist... this is the Frontier.

You walk outside the gate and get killed and looted by Lord BigBadAss? SOL, buddy. Spend a lot more time in rats before you venture out again, and learn to watch your back.

I personally don't think I'd spend a lot of time there, myself. I'm not the type. But you know... it would be awfully interesting to RP a Bandit Warlord or a Godfather type without any constraint.

Think about it.

Ylena
(making an offer you can't refuse)
reg

I was kinda upset when I read that empaths and clerics can just go sit on the boulder and heal without getting locked out.

Buckwheet reg

Anarchy all the way!!!

That would be awesome! I'd be meteor swarming 24/7 all over town! <duck>

- Lord Kranar, human Archwizard reg

And extend it further..

If you get more than "x" official warnings in Prime or Premium, instead of getting locked out, you get sent to Platinum (at $79.95/month of course). Have Platinum be where anything goes, no holds barred, no GM help, no customer service, no merchants, no nuttin. People who violate all those policies don't care enough about RP to worry about petty stuff like events or merchants anyway.

Just let them run rampant and enjoy themselves where no one will bother them with "rules."

No, I am NOT being snide, or sarcastic. I really thought this would be much more appropriate than locking people out. They're still paying customers, GIVE them a place where they can do what they want. Where they can't bother anyone who objects, and where people who don't like their behavior can't bother them.

Roberta
reg

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ylena:
You know what I would love to see?

GemStone Frontier...

...I personally don't think I'd spend a lot of time there, myself. I'm not the type. But you know... it would be awfully interesting to RP a Bandit Warlord or a Godfather type without any constraint.

---

I've seen it proposed on the official boards. I LIKE this idea. You don't even need to put up a seperate server. Put it in the Sea of Fire, Ruin Creek or that island off the northern coast of WL. Little bandit camp the size of Pinefar or Syl-whatever for a town. Bring in some mobs from other towns in case people want to whack a non-PC, and make it so you have to read a sign to get in. Put something there like the ferry on the EN trail that takes a little longer, so people can't just run in and out instantly.

I'd map and paint it myself!

------------------
It's not a .sig, it's a .glock! reg

It would be a little area that if you entered, you just knew you would be lookin' for trouble!

Sounds like the area in the old western movies where all the bandits hid out... I forget the name, "Hole In The Wall", or something like that?

Summer reg

Now if only we could get them to implement it

reg

The powers that be have infected me!

Buckwheet

Who has a medal in the glad games. reg

-- David
reg

1.) You have to travel to get there.

2.) It wouldn't be obvious or easy to see from the roadside.

3.) It would not be in a hunting area.

4.) Empaths and clerics would not be allowed inside and there would be a no-magic "ring" for several rooms around the area in all directions.

5.) No fogging, no familiars, no word of return, no amunet.

6.) Herbs and potions would be sold in limited quantity at a booth in the area.

7.) Absolutely no way to gain experience from PvP.

8.) A HUGE sign announcing the area for what it is, and a disclaimer saying that entering here is tantamount to giving consent.

9.) Reports and assists would be limited to technical emergencies, whiners about cheaters would be out of luck. (However, policy about disruption and unwarranted PvP would still be in effect.)

10.) Roleplaying duels and conflicts would be mandatory.

Aren't you glad I don't make the rules?

--A. reg

------------------
Lord Deprav
Who likes to smash hobbits reg

quote:

---

Aren't you glad I don't make the rules?

--A.

---

Personally I like your rules! I think the Frontier is a great idea. And if you kept the area within the current game, then it would have to have rules. And heaven forbid that some of the duelers should have to ROLEPLAY it out!

Great idea, great rules, now we just need it implemented...

Also, since many of the complaints I have heard about you have come from Duelers, I think it would be rather amusing if you confused the heck out of them by doing something that is directed at serving their needs in the game! <g>

Aerienne

[This message has been edited by Aerienne (edited 08-10-2001).] reg

quote:

---

Originally posted by Aerienne:

Also, since many of the complaints I have heard about you have come from Duelers, I think it would be rather amusing if you confused the heck out of them by doing something that is directed at serving their needs in the game! <g>

Aerienne

---

Actually Aerienne, I'm on pretty good terms with a substantial amount of Boulder duelers... or at least that's what they tell me in the game and in email.

I already do something now that serves their needs to a small degree... I support the use of the Boulder for dueling, since it provides them with an out-of-the-way area to do their thing (unlike dueling in the Kobold Village, Glatoph Arch, Wayside Garrett, Thrak's Inn Party and Trophy Rooms, cul-de-sac, the Crypt, etc.),insuring it has little impact on those players not interested in seeing or being party to such things.

Oh, there are situations on the Boulder that catch our notice, and policy will be enforced as needed, so for right now, it's the best that I do.

--A. reg

quote:

---

Empaths and clerics would not be allowed inside

---

i'd say just a no rez, no heal policy myself. Clerics and empaths duel too...

'lood
not very well, but still...
reg

First, I would like to say I adore the idea of having a place where duelers, OOC players, or anyone who doesnt fit the Model Roleplayer aspect in GS3 could hang out.

Second, I guess I will just respond to GM Andrastes post. I do agree with Rules 1, 2, 7, 8, and 9 for the most part. I would have to argue a bit about the rest though.

Rule # 3: It might be nice to have some sorta hunting area around there, so you could send huge critters to invade and kill us every once in a while or let us "show how awesome and skilled we are." Also, for us to have a hunting area around this "Dueling Land," it would allow us a way to gain lvls without exuding harmful airs around other die hard Role Players. I know some people are sickened by being around some of the "Boulderites." Also puts in some risk in having the duels.. you have unknown variables. Un-foreseen events are nice sometimes.

Rule # 4: Like Kelood said, Clerics and healers should be allowed, and I personally think they should still be able to use their arts, just not gain experience for them at this place. (I like to think of it as an island, perhaps a smaller Teras Isle.) Have an RP'ed reason why they don't gain exp for their arts here.

As to the no-magic rooms, I think this is a great idea.. But I would rather see it more a random thing, or something you could explain. Like Idols placed around the 'Abandoned Isle' in various rooms, cause an anti-magic phenomena. Perhaps they absorb all the magic around them.. Not allowing spells to be cast in a room where they reside, and removing a spell or more every time you enter the room.. (also good to have a way around most of the Idol rooms, so you dont get too annoyed.. but having some unpassable.) Could also put in some sort of quest as to why they are there, and how they absorb magic, some mysterious THING... Could pull in a world wide quest attached to these.. if you ever decided to make some sort of magic-absorbing items. (Highly unlikely seeing as how you like to make it hard for everyone.)

Rule # 5: I'd have to disagree with these, because in an environment as I picture this to be, these spells would be awesome in an Isle wide dueling arena. Making clerics/empaths more dangerous for being able to come directly to you and kill.. Familars to scout... and fogging to make a quick retreat. Amunet to organize group duels..

Rule # 6: I don't think I have stated this, but I will make a point of it now. Almost every alternate place people are coming up with for us duelers is a punishment, or has one involved. I AM SICK OF IT. Why should we be punished for doing something you don't. Should we be able to punish you because you try to RP everything? No. So you should not try and make this a punishment for duelers. It should be an arrangement to give us what we want.. and to keep the rest of the world happy. That last statement will most likely get some arguments, but I couldnt think of another way to word it. Let the healers heal, the clerics ressurrect, and not gain EXP. Let us grow our herbs, forage for herbs, and buy them or potions from a shop. I don't disagree with making the place hard to survive in. That would be the fun of it.. But don't make it a punishment.

Rule # 10: Mandatory? Sheesh, your giving us harsher rules than the rest of GS. Again a punishment for the hated. You know most of the duelers arent the greatest Rpers.. why try and make it mandatory? That just gets them locked out and your whole reason for this place unnecessary. Half the reason people hate duelers is for the non-RP aspect of it. This idea is to get us away from the people who like that ideal. This place would seemingly have a less strict enforcement of roleplaying.

I hinted alot at how I would foresee this "Duelers Land," my 'Abandoned Isle' and would have posted my whole idea had I not forgot a few things when I was interupted. Perhaps I can write it all down and post it if anyone was actually interested.

Like Roberta said, "Just let them run rampant and enjoy themselves where no one will bother them with "rules.""

But, I think if you were going to do this, it would be as much of a project and be time consuming as any other thing you have done. You couldnt just throw in a room with no magic, no healing, no raising, no fun place.. Most of what I see is you trying to give us something less than what we have now at the boulder. It wouldnt work. Everyone would stay at the boulder.. or choose a new place. You would have to make a place they would wish to migrate to, and have fun being there. And, most importantly, stay at the place where dueling is allowed. Something that would last, and we could say "This is awesome." (*Gasp* could such a place ever exist?) I doubt it. GMs wouldnt want to waste time on us.. But perhaps if you let the duelers design it themselves, or appoint a volunteer from the duelers crowd, and then approve or dis-approve what they make, it wouldnt waste much your time. You'd still have to program it... reg

But, how about this...

The Pirates Cove. Enter at your own risk. No laws, no rules. So, when someone takes the boat ride there. Which can get attacked by Pirates!

I agree with it should NOT be a punishment. Maybe limit mass killing spells. Make certain spells uncastable. Like implosion, meteor storm maybe even spike. The instant kill spells.

Toss it around more. Maybe we can get some attention to this idea.

edge reg

-GOD has spoken

-Oh ya, Geosain this one's for you...
::God pulls down his pants and yells, "HEY! GEOSAIN, LOOK OVER HERE!" geosain turns around and god blows a fart in his face:: reg

I believe zanagan is THE only god

and i dont know why yer pullin down yer pants fer other men

reg

you get locked out... you play another account.... so why whine about it...

watch your backs..... thers always a knife in them...its slowly sliding in... just remember back to this date and time..
when your path of hell dives on you...

------------------
Jester reg

quote:

---

Empaths and clerics would not be allowed inside

---

I dunno about the rest of em, but I do know a particular empath who has a bit of aggression to get out, and this sounds like just the solution!

I'd definitely make it a non EXP gaining area all the way around, so as to avoid the various potentials for mechanics abuse, but I'd not block entry altogether.

~Rupa, still thinking.

------------------
"Ever notice that 'What the hell' is always the right decision?"
~~~ Marilyn Monroe. reg

-John

------------------
AIM: XoSPrEEoX
EMail: DJSphinx@eternalbeats.net
---------------------
www.eternalbeats.net
www.eraver.net reg

quote:

---

Originally posted by GMAndraste:
8.) A HUGE sign announcing the area for what it is, and a disclaimer saying that entering here is tantamount to giving consent.

---

Possibly requiring you to approach the entrance twice, thus confirming your consent to enter and participate.

BTW, hiyas Andraste!

Delyorik reg

Mainly because I think it would decrease the excitement/enjoyment of the Glad games.

However, what I do heartily support is Ylena's original suggestion, Frontier 'Server'. Same game, same spells (everything) applies. Including dropped weapons, etc., upon death.

There is obviously a market for this server. I support the server because with a whole new world, as opposed to a whole new area, people would start banding together. Some would be PvP, some would be the Anti's. Some towns/areas would be known as fairly safe, other's not so safe. I'd try that server out in a second.

Simu could even market access to this server as a premium benefit. ;-)

Pockets reg

And need random complete dispellings you can do something rpish i dont really care...grin jes make it a little mer dangerous and lots more stance dancin fer wizards reg

More rooms = More rules.

More spells = More rules.

More monsters = More rules.

More GM's = More rules.

Let's face it. Either way...this game is going to become tighter & tighter in terms of the rules/regulations/terms/conditions/probationary terms/lockouts/warnings, etc.

Heh...kill someone now...risk being banned permanently. Kill someone before...risk being killed by an older sibling.

reg