|
|
|
Apprentice
 
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 5:47 PM
Posts: 19,
Visits: 147
|
|
honesty (6/28/2006)
I played in the AKAC in Omega. We were pretty careful about info with our killings, we where pretty good at it and covering it up as well. I also survived the 2 player led culls of our group (first by pretending to be one of the attackers, second by pretending to be one of the wizard lots (cant remember the name, sorry) gate guard). As far as I recall the first one cull was driven completely off OCC information, not sure about the other.
While there may well have been some OOC knowledge being used in the first attack on the AKAC, I'd guess that the majority of the people who joined in on it did so because it was a good excuse to get rid of you. I know for a fact that more than one death at Omega was caused by someone IC lying, rather than using OOC knowledge. And mobs are awfully gullible when it comes to someone lying to them.
After all, if I stand up IC and say "The AKAC killed my father!" in the tavern, all I need are a few idiots with swords to believe me, and then the lie starts building its own momentum.
jfs - one of the wizards :-)
|
|
|
|
|
Initiate
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Thursday, June 29, 2006 9:29 PM
Posts: 4,
Visits: 6
|
|
Its bugging me, but what was your group called?  There were IC reasons for people joining in, but I think the impetus for the first attack was provided by OOC knowledge passing through to IC. Well, I know that actually...
|
|
|
|
|
Prodigal
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Friday, October 24, 2008 12:05 AM
Posts: 623,
Visits: 2,511
|
|
fat goth (6/29/2006)
I know as a ref I've told people that if you repeatedly subdue someone you are going to cause them permanent damage - despite it not being explicitly called out in the rules - because its damaging to the spirit of the game. Nothing worse than people standing over a subdued victim and every time he moves, tapping him on the head and calling 'subdue' in a bored voice.
I don't have a problem with the idea that repeatedly subduing someone causes permanent damage, but IMO if that's the effect that you want to achieve then it should be spelled out in the letter of the rules, not just the spirit of them.
WARNING: the information above may have been subjected to dangerously high levels of ignorance.
OOC (and on Pagga): Carrie
|
|
|
|
|
Heroic Knight
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Friday, March 30, 2007 10:27 PM
Posts: 115,
Visits: 143
|
|
| I can't remember, as I was only in them once. It might have been Thorsheim. Anyway, I see this as a major impediment to not only non-violent acts (theft, sabotage, etc) but also to any form of non-standard violence (standard being 'get a load of grunts and chop everything that moves up, then stand around for at least an hours, milling aimlessly, until you're told to go home') Incisive, limited violence such as assassination is usually not as successful as overwhelming force, and I might add that people in overwhelming forces often appear to feel less pressure to count their hits which adds to their invulnerability somewhat...
_________________________________________________________________ The nature of man is the same as the nature of a wolf and the same as the nature of an ox?
|
|
|
|
|
Heroic Knight
Group: System Moderators
Last Login: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 1:05 PM
Posts: 204,
Visits: 503
|
|
| don't necessarily disagree with that but I'm a firm believer in the idea that "less rules" is better than "more" My main point is that I think its a shame that in most systems, its easier and safer, when mugging, to kill someone, than to just beat them up and steal their stuff. Mainly because law enforcement isn't prevalent enough to suggest that killing someone carries a risk of execution, whilst theft merely carries a fine or imprisonment. I understand the "life is cheaper" argument but I think this doesn't go nearly far enough to cover what actually happens. Life has no value at all in much LRP (or as close as dammit) and that is bizarre and distracting to me. Certainly doesn't help with my immersion to see someone kill someone out of hand, not bat an eyelid and then forget about it minutes later. Regardless of the "oh but we've been killing goblins all day so to kill that elf wasn't really much different" argument.
|
|
|
|
|
Prodigal
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Friday, October 24, 2008 12:05 AM
Posts: 623,
Visits: 2,511
|
|
fat goth (6/30/2006)
don't necessarily disagree with that but I'm a firm believer in the idea that "less rules" is better than "more"
In principle I agree with this, but I think it's less important than making sure that everyone knows how the mechanic works in practice- so I think that if the outcome of a rule is subject to ref judgement, you need to warn the players that this is the case.
WARNING: the information above may have been subjected to dangerously high levels of ignorance.
OOC (and on Pagga): Carrie
|
|
|
|
|
Apprentice
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 5:47 PM
Posts: 19,
Visits: 147
|
|
honesty (6/29/2006)
Its bugging me, but what was your group called? There were IC reasons for people joining in, but I think the impetus for the first attack was provided by OOC knowledge passing through to IC. Well, I know that actually... I was in Winter's Peak, which was part of the OTA. Fully accept that you'd know better than I if OOC knowledge was being used, by the way - my point is just that it doesn't always have to be the case.
|
|
|
|