|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:26 am
themightyjello The problem isn't in either of your opinions regarding what is right or wrong or whether people should be catered to or cut off. The fact of the matter is that there is no concrete reason why in-character things should have to be telegraphed in any way. A special attack shouldn't have to be telegraphed any more than a normal one, and even though a jab is relatively light and fast so is a thrust with a bladed weapon but the difference in overall impact on a fight between the two is massive. The major difference, ideologically, falls in that when someone does a fast thrust with a blade they usually tend to be wielding the blade to start with so that there is a visible cue of the danger that a character can react to. Now, this doesn't necessarily have to be the case if you're talking about hidden weapons and trick attacks and things like that... it's an entire facet of a certain playstyle. MECHANICALLY, however, there is an issue that everyone needs to concern themselves with regardless of their stance on the issue and that is this: You cannot, in good conscience, have a sword that bursts into flames when it hits and not mention that fact until after it hits. The reason for this being a simple logistical issue that I will describe as follows: Person A: Swings with sword. Person B: Takes a shallow wound from sword, counterattacks. Person A: "When the sword touches you, it bursts into flames." Person B: Has to make an entirely new post to reflect this new information, making the entire previous post pointless even though Person A didn't actually DO anything. All of the pertinent information for receiving an attack should be in the initial attack. If the sword bursts into flame when it hits, but has no outward indicator that this will happen until it happens... then put it in the post. "If it connected, Person B would find much to his surprise that the weapon burst into flame just as it touched him." This way Person B can respond to the entire attack without having to split a reaction up between 2-3 different posts. If you hide something from the other player OOC, you're effectively telling them "I don't trust you not to metagame, so I'm not going to tell you what will happen if you take this hit until after you take this hit". This should (and I mean should since my last revision to HoH rules is the only ruleset I know about that actually called people out on this) be something people are aware of as being a problem - that people should not be able to wait until after a hit is confirmed and then decide, after the fact, to apply additional on-hit effects. All of that information should be handed out up-front. Mechanically speaking. In-character, you don't know what the ******** is happening until it happens. The difference is that if someone takes a cut from my blade, in the next post, I can say outright with assurance that they just took a poisoned cut. There's no need to tell them there's poison on the edge. Absolutely no reason. Especially with profiles being present. This is fair and legit because there's no way the other player would have known beforehand to begin with unless they saw something or heard something about it prior to the attack. In fact, telling them there's poison on the blade before the attack is simply just asking for being metagamed, because 9 out of 10 times, they will. It's simple as that. I rather not tell them until the attack happens than to tell them before it happens. In fact, all their response post is "I got hit by it." This was easy in chatrooms because the responses were smaller. The rules aren't different here. It's ethically not cool, but it's no more wrong than telling them.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:30 am
I'll keep that in mind.
Next time I'm up against you I'll interrupt the first sentence of your post every post and not read the rest.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:31 am
No different from any other "rp fight" that has happened throughout the history of freeform rping.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:34 am
Vintrict No different from any other "rp fight" that has happened throughout the history of freeform rping. If I may? Kinda redundant since I shall either way. I agree with Vintrict on this one, logically speaking he is right. I DM for dungeons and dragons and alot of information the dm has is not presented untill after the fact so that players do not meta-game. To not state venom is on the blade and mention it after the fact is perfectly fine, as long as that information is present in the profile for the judges to review. This forces the competitor to think critically and respond in an appropriate nature worthy of their character. And vice versa for the other competitor as well.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:34 am
Yeah~! Mutually-assured-neglect five!
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:37 am
Spiritus Immortalis To not state venom is on the blade and mention it after the fact is perfectly fine, as long as that information is present in the profile for the judges to review. The problem is, that's a terrible example. Someone gets cut with a poison blade, you can inform them of this in the next post and keep going for a few more until it actually takes effect. Conversely, you punch someone. They write their response. You answer with "also I used Stunning Fist, so you're incapacitated for 1 round". You have now shat on their effort at bothering to write a post, because it has to be completely done over. It's not countering them. It's not an interrupt. It's a footnote from the previous post that you COULD have put in there but chose not to.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:39 am
I in my earlier ramble post addressed things like a poisoned blade.
It fits into that pentagon of effort, risk, damage (or reward is a better term), resources, and range.
-Effort: Decent. You have to penetrate exposed flesh to make this work, so you need to really bypass the opponent's defenses and range keeping mechanics.
-Risk: High. If your character's centric around poison use and you ******** up applying the poison, your potency just dropped. Furthermore, there's a distinct possibility if things go really wrong of you getting pierced by your own poisonous weapon. That is dangerous.
-Damage: Massive. This can drop someone if not seriously inhibit them.
-Resources: Limited. You only have the one dagger [or a couple] and a limited amount of your poison, which you had to apply before the fight even started.
-Range: Close melee.
Verdict: Balanced and totally fine to be absolutely concealed, barring any external factors we're not going to put into this to keep it simple.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:42 am
themightyjello Spiritus Immortalis To not state venom is on the blade and mention it after the fact is perfectly fine, as long as that information is present in the profile for the judges to review. The problem is, that's a terrible example. Someone gets cut with a poison blade, you can inform them of this in the next post and keep going for a few more until it actually takes effect. Conversely, you punch someone. They write their response. You answer with "also I used Stunning Fist, so you're incapacitated for 1 round". You have now shat on their effort at bothering to write a post, because it has to be completely done over. It's not countering them. It's not an interrupt. It's a footnote from the previous post that you COULD have put in there but chose not to. This is also true and then as such it should be a case by case basis. If the effects of the attack will no take effect immediately then cool, it can wait until the following post but in your example a foot note should be added IN that post for the respond-er to act accordingly. It comes down to the discretion of the situation.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:45 am
I edit my previous phrase.
It honestly comes down to the quality of the roleplayer doing two things.
One: Not meta-gaming and acting only with the information their character would logically possess in the situation.
Two: Playing the character as they are and not changing their role on the fly to adapt to new information.
Both of these factors are hard to do but not impossible. I admit i even falter from time to time but it can be done.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:46 am
themightyjello You have now shat on their effort at bothering to write a post, because it has to be completely done over. It's not countering them. It's not an interrupt. It's a footnote from the previous post that you COULD have put in there but chose not to. You're right. Now they're poisoned. Welcome to what rp fighting truly is. Just because someone wrote a thorough post doesn't mean they're not liable for the effects of what they took. Another reason why writing long posts in rp is ineffective. You chose to write said post in the detail that you did. The attacker shouldn't be penalized for it. As long as you accepted the cut, everything else that comes with it is game. In fact, the scenario where he takes multiple cuts then tells you about the poison after the cuts are done mirrors the realistic application of taking poison. You don't realize it until it's too late. Even then, a lot of poisons aren't felt physically until the person is already affected by them. Some poisons work fast so you never know until it's too late. Then there's the slower poisons that work their way through your system, creating a burning, numbing, cooling, or whatever effect.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:47 am
Lord Haelstrom I in my earlier ramble post addressed things like a poisoned blade. It fits into that pentagon of effort, risk, damage (or reward is a better term), resources, and range. -Effort: Decent. You have to penetrate exposed flesh to make this work, so you need to really bypass the opponent's defenses and range keeping mechanics. -Risk: High. If your character's centric around poison use and you ******** up applying the poison, your potency just dropped. Furthermore, there's a distinct possibility if things go really wrong of you getting pierced by your own poisonous weapon. That is dangerous. -Damage: Massive. This can drop someone if not seriously inhibit them. -Resources: Limited. You only have the one dagger [or a couple] and a limited amount of your poison, which you had to apply before the fight even started. -Range: Close melee. Verdict: Balanced and totally fine to be absolutely concealed, barring any external factors we're not going to put into this to keep it simple. Except, your version of balanced may not be the same for anyone else, nor can you tell them otherwise.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:51 am
The problem in that line of thinking is simply this: Acting that way is the anti-thesis of cooperative roleplay. The only motive for concealing your true intentions is to hide information from the other player that their character would have been immediately aware of after the fact. This is based on the assumption that given the opportunity the other player will cheat and not giving them the chance to prove you wrong. Of course, I wouldn't expect you to understand what I mean by that so this is where our discussion ends.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:52 am
Vintrict Except, your version of balanced may not be the same for anyone else, nor can you tell them otherwise. Yeah I can. I just did. Their choice not to listen. But I've proven the validity of my view on balance based on the fact most of my opponents deem my fights fair and my characters "balanced" where I'm trying to make a balanced character, and my detractors are commonly called out for flaws in their "balance." So it shows there is, quite probably, validity to my viewpoints. Do people have to share them? No. People don't 'have' to do anything. But I'll still advocate it. Not that this has anything to do with the previous argument since I'm actually claiming Ertai's earlier statement is valid regarding poison and subtle attacks, just for different reasons than he elaborated on and why they differ.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:55 am
To be honest it is about give and take, respect amongst players. Even in competitions that shouldn't change.
If someone neglected to mention the blade was poisoned till the next turn I would be pretty pissed off. Not because it would of changed my mind about taking a hit, but because it is just annoying. Since it would be nice to react in full instead of having to do a double take on the 'one' strike.
D.o.t is fine, but that kind of needs to be put in the post with the original attack or at least the one after so that the person who received the poison can play it out accordingly.
You guys are setting a bad example for new comers with that kind of thing. It defeats the purpose of doing this as a fun pastime.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:57 am
Rping is not cooperative roleplay. That's where you're wrong.
The act of freeform rping is the posting of each person in a designated context in an effort to create a fictional interaction in a virtual setting, where each person acts to influence a certain direction by use of their character's creation. Whether it's harmful, helpful, or something as neutral as taking a drink.
This has and is the single basis behind rping. Unfortunately, people like yourself have turned it into something that it is not, while contradicting your ideals of perfect cooperation by still making use of the methods for original peer to peer turn-based rping. Sometimes known as T1. If this was cooperation, you will not have to have judges and OOCly this would not be a competition. In Sigil and everywhere you have rped, you have always followed this single path of rping because everyone does and it's the natural way of playing it out.
You want cooperative rping? Then actually use cooperative rping. Throw away the pride of your characters, let anyone control them, and write yourselves a collaborative story. That is cooperative rping. I've done this type of rping before on another website, and it was an actual writing website where you didn't rp, but you wrote stories with others.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|