Victor the Veteran's page

@ Bluddwolf

Right, I get that. Thanks for pointing that out though, it's a valid point. It would just be nice if there is a way to test drive the interface and train the fingers a bit before facing serious consequences in a mix up with the experienced players.

I actually really like that idea of being told what factors might have influenced your death. I wonder if that is possible to communicate in some kind of "killmail".

In general, this is what I see happening.

Day One of Early Enrollment, people are going to log in and go looking for fights. It's going to be a pretty bloody, pretty messy free-for all. We are thinking about ways to influence that start

As a newbie player to MMO I identify with the concerns raised by the other newcomers regarding getting offed by malicious players while just trying to learn the ropes. I think the idea of informing players about the contributing factors to their death would go a considerable way in new player retention. I don't necessarily mind dying a few times in the process of learning (other than merely learning that other people are mean). In regard to the messy free for all on day one and the ongoing effect from continuous new player enrollments one concern I have is that there were a considerable number of goodies given out as part of the kickstarters and presumably not all of the items can be protected. It would be great if Thornkeep had a practice arena or some such where players could try out individual PvP combats without risking lives or possessions while learning how to move/equip/buff etc. This is something you could do to "influence that start" so that people didn't have to hunt each other to get their experience.

This has been discussed in a few threads. The general consensus seems to be that subduing fights would require a whole new combat coding set.

If not now, when? A brand new game system would seem to be the best opportunity for such new development and it's early days yet. Some good ideas here.

Cheers!

There seems to be an emphasis on flags and statuses revolving around managing how, when and with what consequences players can kill each other without much thought to enabling less extreme alternatives. For example, if you don't want to part with your goods when faced with a bandit's demands he is then allowed to kill you and this is somehow more permissible than other ways of killing you...huh?

Even if you aren't powerful enough to overwhelm the bandit and he still kills you, would he not risk being injured in the fight? Is there a mechanic for this? Is the offer window in the form of a barter? i.e. the bandit offers to let you go in exchange for your goods, you counter offer half your goods or is it all or nothing? What's to stop a bandit from demanding more than you have, in which case you'd have to refuse by default and they would still gain the benefit of the bandit flag allowing them to kill you.

Does a paladin or enforcer have the option of catching and incarcerating you (e.g. for a period during which perhaps you don't gain xp) as opposed to simply gaining special incentives to kill you? This seems a bit simplistic the idea of follow the rules or we'll provide incentives for other people to kill you. I mean there are crimes and there are petty crimes. The mark of an evil settlement might be not that they allow crimes to go unpunished but rather that punishments do not fit the crime (death for stealing to eat). By the same token a good settlement should not condone capital punishment under most circumstances so incentives to attack and kill petty criminals doesn't really make all that much sense IMO. Thoughts?

heh heh heh.

I would just like the designers to remember that there are those of us out there (like myself) that have never played an MMO before but are genuinely interested in this game and it's potential. I'd like to enjoy the game without being overwhelmed by experienced MMO players with hooks into all the exploitative tricks they've picked up in other games. In short, I'd not be impressed by paying money for a game in which I get jumped and stripped of all my equipment at every turn while I'm finding my feet - and that shouldn't mean I have to be confined to an uninteresting safe zone (effectively robbing me of the opportunity to explore the world I paid for) to play. Having said that I appears that the designers are taking such things into due consideration and I can only hope that this community as it grows will be populated by kindred spirits with ample tolerance and good will.

Goblin wizzahd! (if allowed) Mainly an adventurer, crafting as a side pursuit.

Just catching up on the blog...there was mention of the possibility of people selling insurance way back. I'm thinking there should be a formal outline for an Insurance contract which specifies that if someone defaults on another type of contract (obvious example would be a transportation contract where something like a wandering monster or brigands prevents the shipment from making it's destination) then the third party assumes the risk in exchange for a fee. Possibly players could have an option of paying a lesser amount of coin as insurance on a contract in lieu of substantial goods in escrow and characters could have a risk rating either directly affecting their insurance rates or visible to potential insurers who could offer insurance at competitive rates.

Things that come to mind...

Unlimited resources at my disposal (or if not at my disposal, at the disposal of the most enlightened, living human, over the age of 18 on the planet).

Control over all world governments and religious leaders (or at least veto powers!)

The ability to cancel anyone else's wishes that I don't like !!!

Some great ideas already posted here. I'll add Larry Elmore (SnarfQuest) and David A. Trampier (Wormy).

I recently discovered that an old friend of mine still uses his original character name (from my very first campaign) as his main email id. I've been DMing a long time and we have all had a lot of characters over the years. It's funny though, how we never see to forget our very first. I suppose we were just impressionable back then. It seemed appropriate to use mine here.

vv