This is my first thread and first post. I gave a moment of thought to where I should slot this, but, in the end, I decided it would fit here. If it scrolls downward into the Abyss, I suppose that is fate.
I have not yet paid for my Early Enrollment, but I plan to. I would like to shake some things up a bit before I do, so...
The Sandbox. This game is listed as a sandbox, no? A dnd sandbox to boot. I have heard the developers are going to take a strong stance on grief and other exploiting mechanics. So, I pose this:
In my limited sandbox experience, I have seen much discussion about what can be done, by 'the devs/mods/whatever', without stepping on the toes of said sandbox. Of course, there are those who would say, "If you are a negative force in the world, not adhering to the rules of the world and generally ruining the experience of others, you don't get rights, but I would like to go further than that.
Since this is a dnd game, for this metaphor I would like to refer to the world/devs/mods as the DM. How much DM activity will we see in this sandbox? As there is weather, I don't feel DM interference goes against the idea of the sandbox, after all, the player will still choose how to respond. How much 'in game' action will the devs take?
I was discussing this with a friend (in regards to this game); I believe the next level of sandbox-ism is not merely banning and balance changes, but actual intervention by the "DM." That is, to keep one thing from getting too powerful.
Imagine if there was one group that was oppressing the whole world. Not to say that the DM would have their fortress be destroyed by meteors, but what about offering some form of NPC assistance, a group of high level monsters, that decide to attack them. Then, the players who supported them could help defend them, and the players who wanted to see them lose the power could launch an attack of their own while they were busy. Not that it would equal one outcome, but just give the lessers a chance.
Is this going to be a totally hands off sandbox (I've seen them go pretty sour pretty fast), or are there going to be things like I listed? Does the community frown upon things like that? Because I am sure the initial response is NO, but when you think about it, it actually seems interesting for both the player and the lifespan of the game.
Goblin Squad Member
|
There are indications that 'DM intervention' is on the table. Alpha backers can be endowed with the ability to 'play' monsters where that ability is desired by the developer. We don't know how often this capability will be, when it is implemented it will certainly be tightly controlled, and it might be something that happens only rarely, under special conditions. But it appears to be a possible system capability being built into the game.
That said I believe that such 'deus ex machina' interventions are considered anathematic by the developer. They would prefer our 'meaningful human interactions' were via normal player agency. I believe the intent is that the 'monster-play' capability they are setting the game up to have is more event oriented, a way to tell a more dynamic story creatively rather than reactively.
I'm not sure that it would be a sound decision to place the ability to trigger 'deus ex machina' events into the hands of those whose interests are evidently contrary to 'the good of the game'. Rewarding asocial or anticommunal behavior with spectacular or interesting consequences seems counterproductive.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd rather DM intervention presented us with situations that create interesting interactions between us, rather than to somehow "guide" the game to an undefined "optimum". I'll take earthquakes, plagues and invasions just fine as long as they are not used to "regulate" the game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If one group some how manages to dominate the world through legitimate means, I'd have an issue of GMs stepping in and plaguing them with artificial mishaps to undermine what they have built.
If one group somehow manages to dominate the game and causes the culture to significantly degenerate to something toxic, Goblinworks damned well better step in and do something before it gets to the point where Ryan feels the only solution is to shut down the servers.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I have only played a few sandbox territory games. In those, and the ones that I have heard of, no single group has ever managed much more than 50% sovereignty. They were never able to maintain it for a long period, in any of those cases. I don't know if that was from subtle GM manipulation or loss of momentum or a combination.
I see little reason to believe that GW will not design things to be similar for PfO. It is the conqueror's job to try, but is too difficult to keep together. Usually by design.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If one group some how manages to dominate the world through legitimate means, I'd have an issue of GMs stepping in and plaguing them with artificial mishaps to undermine what they have built.If one group somehow manages to dominate the game and causes the culture to significantly degenerate to something toxic, Goblinworks damned well better step in and do something before it gets to the point where Ryan feels the only solution is to shut down the servers.
You don't recognize bluster when you see it?
Goblin Works is a business and it's business is to make money. If PFO is turning a substantial profit, there will be no shutting it down because of any feeling that it is not what was intended as part of his vision.
I have seen plenty of Lead Project Designers or CEOs go, while the product lives on. This is particularly true in the MMO industry.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm fine with the devs stepping in as referees in the game. They can take a dramatic approach to "refereeing" and assume an Iconic persona to deliver inscrutable over-rules or a cataclysmic "the gods are angry" deus ex machina manner.
Golarion should be unlike our own world afterall... ;)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If one group somehow manages to dominate the game and causes the culture to significantly degenerate to something toxic, Goblinworks damned well better step in and do something before it gets to the point where Ryan feels the only solution is to shut down the servers.You don't recognize bluster when you see it?
I assume you're saying that this statement from Ryan is bluster.
I just don't know how much more plainly I can state this. I'd rather shut down the game and quit than run a simplistic murder simulator for the enjoyment of a tiny fraction of sociopaths.
That's fine if you want to pretend that.
But if you'll take a closer look at my quote - the part that you bolded - you'll see I didn't say "before it gets to the point where Ryan shuts down the servers".
It's all moot, though, because a game that would make Ryan want to shut down the servers won't be commercially successful.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It's all moot, though, because a game that would make Ryan want to shut down the servers won't be commercially successful.
False, there are plenty of examples of commercially successful MMOs or other Multiplayers based games that are successful and would still meet Ryan's definition of a murder sim. His definition is even more lenient than some others on these forums as well.
All I'm trying to say is, that was a ridiculous statement for Ryan to make back then, and it is even more ridiculous to take it seriously now.
The only culture that matters is the consumer culture. Are there enough paying customers to cover the expenses of running the servers and turning a profit for GW / Paizo?
I have no doubts that PFO will not become a murder simulator. But, if it did as a result of player community desire, then it would still be a commercial success.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
First off I have seen the idea gm intervention work well, in the first semi massive player game I ever played, a mud called Legends of Terris. The GM's were gods, they enforced the rules that were not possible to hard wire into the game, added alot to roleplay, and and some of the plots going on in the game. They also mediated disputes that got out of hand. While that mud was not pvp, it however had alot of nasty things you could do to people. The "gods" were in general a positive influence, though at times biased force in the game. They allowed for the rules to be loose and yet could step in if things got to out of hand. I would love to see PF online try something along those lines. Their will always be ways to bend/break the rules intent while still keeping with in the letter of them. From reading the boards their seems to be groups of people intent on doing just that, and consider it just part of the game. While with in limits that is fine, when it gets out of hand I think there should be someone to step in. Trying to make rules that have no exploits is not possible and will just end up making the game to restricting while not actually succeeding at their intent. Anyway it likely not a workable idea but one can hope.
PS I was one of the people who used exploits, nasty tactics, ect, and was call before the gods various times, 95% of the time it was justified, I had various in game punishments, and only once was banded for a short while. So it not like i do not understand people wishing to find ways to work around the system intent, it just if it goes to far it make the game no fun for anyone.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There are indications that 'DM intervention' is on the table. Alpha backers can be endowed with the ability to 'play' monsters where that ability is desired by the developer. We don't know how often this capability will be, when it is implemented it will certainly be tightly controlled, and it might be something that happens only rarely, under special conditions. But it appears to be a possible system capability being built into the game.
That said I believe that such 'deus ex machina' interventions are considered anathematic by the developer. They would prefer our 'meaningful human interactions' were via normal player agency. I believe the intent is that the 'monster-play' capability they are setting the game up to have is more event oriented, a way to tell a more dynamic story creatively rather than reactively.
I'm not sure that it would be a sound decision to place the ability to trigger 'deus ex machina' events into the hands of those whose interests are evidently contrary to 'the good of the game'. Rewarding asocial or anticommunal behavior with spectacular or interesting consequences seems counterproductive.
Certainly asocial behavior that constitutes griefing ought to trigger the LR (Layered Response). But I don't think of PFO as a 'commune' either.
Ah, discussion. Nice.
I think I was being careless when I likened it to one faction taking over the world. It was a sweeping example. I meant more of, as said, if 'bad dudes' became prevalent and changed the nature of the game to the point where it was no longer fun to play for imaginative players.
I don't want to see meteors crushing people or "the gods" damning them. But I think that a little push here and there would be good. Sometimes, I feel that's the only way to fix a problem and might ultimately be better than banning someone.
I mean, I feel that random godlvl events would be awesome. A third dimension is always welcome, for me, because I would play a sandbox for the unpredictability.
The mention of the phrase murder sim saddens me. Are we to assume, then, if this game becomes commercially successful because it somehow holds the secret ingredient that all murder-simmers love... that it would be left that way? Doesn't that kind of reflect badly on the devs?
I heard that they are going to allow for player input, but I guess I was idealistic in thinking MOAR MURDAR would not be what was suggested.
And I still stand by my idea of siccing an event on a powerful group to see how the community reacts. Those things, in my opinion, when used wisely will actually strengthen the community because it causes everyone in the game to take note of what is happening and make a decision. Do I help? Do I use this opportunity to get back at them? Or do I just watch because I'm scared?
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think its likely that we'll intervene regularly in the game to avoid allowing it to enter any number of degenerate conditions. I hope that by the time we get to Open Enrollment the systems of the game will be robust enough that such intervention will become rare, then legendary.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If one group some how manages to dominate the world through legitimate means, I'd have an issue of GMs stepping in and plaguing them with artificial mishaps to undermine what they have built.If one group somehow manages to dominate the game and causes the culture to significantly degenerate to something toxic, Goblinworks damned well better step in and do something before it gets to the point where Ryan feels the only solution is to shut down the servers.You don't recognize bluster when you see it?
Goblin Works is a business and it's business is to make money. If PFO is turning a substantial profit, there will be no shutting it down because of any feeling that it is not what was intended as part of his vision.
I have seen plenty of Lead Project Designers or CEOs go, while the product lives on. This is particularly true in the MMO industry.
You emphasized the wrong part. I would expect the proper response would be to close whatever loophole allowed one group to become dominant enough to degenerate game-wide culture.
Even a Nation that controls more than half of the Hexes might not be dominant enough to inform overall culture, especially if they aren't uniform in their own culture.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But I don't think of PFO as a 'commune' either.I take it you also don't communicate well since it would be communistic, right?
Better dead than Red! Actually I was a member of ISO long ago. I hope there are social democracies in-game but I have a feeling it ain't gonna happen.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I use a perhaps archaic language system that allows the use of root words modified by prefixes and suffixes. For me 'communal' isn't about a commune any more than 'communication' or 'community' is about Communism.
Blame my study of Attic Greek. Language is a fascinating lumberyard.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The mention of the phrase murder sim saddens me. Are we to assume, then, if this game becomes commercially successful because it somehow holds the secret ingredient that all murder-simmers love... that it would be left that way? Doesn't that kind of reflect badly on the devs?I heard that they are going to allow for player input, but I guess I was idealistic in thinking MOAR MURDAR would not be what was suggested.
From what I have seen here on the forums, no one wants a murder sim. Even the most diehard PVPers among us want the PVP to be meaningful and don't want griefers running freely about. The devs have also indicated they don't want PFO to be a murder sim, so I would expect that they will adjust systems to address any proliferation of toxic behavior.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Certainly asocial behavior that constitutes griefing ought to trigger the LR (Layered Response). But I don't think of PFO as a 'commune' either.There are indications that 'DM intervention' is on the table. Alpha backers can be endowed with the ability to 'play' monsters where that ability is desired by the developer. We don't know how often this capability will be, when it is implemented it will certainly be tightly controlled, and it might be something that happens only rarely, under special conditions. But it appears to be a possible system capability being built into the game.
That said I believe that such 'deus ex machina' interventions are considered anathematic by the developer. They would prefer our 'meaningful human interactions' were via normal player agency. I believe the intent is that the 'monster-play' capability they are setting the game up to have is more event oriented, a way to tell a more dynamic story creatively rather than reactively.
I'm not sure that it would be a sound decision to place the ability to trigger 'deus ex machina' events into the hands of those whose interests are evidently contrary to 'the good of the game'. Rewarding asocial or anticommunal behavior with spectacular or interesting consequences seems counterproductive.
What is the Layered Response?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What is the Layered Response?
Ryan Dancey (Goblinworks Blog: Gypsies, Tramps, and Thieves)
That link goes to the post where Ryan laid out the Layered Approach.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What is the Layered Response?Ryan Dancey (Goblinworks Blog: Gypsies, Tramps, and Thieves)
That link goes to the post where Ryan laid out the Layered Approach.
I especially take the last of the defenses at heart:
Death Isn't that Big a Deal: In a theme park game, you typically wear the very best armor and use the very best weapon you can afford/acquire. In a sandbox game, that's the wrong way to play. You should never leave a safe area with more than a faction of your character's net worth; maybe 10% is a good number. You should expect to die often and to lose what you're carrying. So you don't put your character's assets at risk to one or two setbacks. You get killed, you respawn, you re-equip, and then you choose what to do next. You might decide not to go back to wherever you got killed and instead go somewhere else. A trip through the dead book should not be seen as a requirement to go back and get whacked again. As the man said, doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is one of the definitions of insanity. :)
I am going to make sure I will have a very well stocked bankinventory, so that I can take a loss. I wonder how common it will be that people will try to go back to their corpse to see if there is anything left on it. In early EQ it already could be a huge hassle, I can't imagine how it will be in PFO. It just does not seem a viable option, also because there may not be anything left anyway.
Come to think of it, that may actually be a good thing: if the system would only allow the killer to take 25% of the items, so 50% would be left on your corpse, people would be much more inclined to want to retrieve their lost stuff. This could add more anguish to the whole situation which would be seriously aggravated if they would be killed a second time (if they did not think to take allies this time).
Realizing that a death means you probably lost all your non-threaded stuff anyway, means you are free from the burden of a corpse-retrieval, and just should put the episode behind you, so you can make new plans. Hopefully you will be a bit the wiser too. I guess this is both a learning and acclimatisation proces as to how people view their possessions in this game.
Do not get too attached to your more mundane stuff (your best stuff will be threaded), always make sure you are stocked up, and if you plan to have unthreaded valuables on you at some point (harvesting a motherlode), bring friends!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There is a potential downside unless it is well considered: the game will not know whether you are heading back to loot your corpse or not.
Soon we would survey the fields of the dead everywhere, as far as the eye can see. Corpses, stacked to the lower branches of small trees, everywhere.
A necromancer would chortle with glee.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There is a potential downside unless it is well considered: the game will not know whether you are heading back to loot your corpse or not.
Soon we would survey the fields of the dead everywhere, as far as the eye can see. Corpses, stacked to the lower branches of small trees, everywhere.
A necromancer would chortle with glee.
Don't most games that give you the ability to return and loot your corpse have a timer? I was under the impression you had 15 to 30 mins to get back to loot it before it was despawned. Outside of a really big battle, I can't imagine there would be a lot of bodies anywhere for more than a really short amount of time.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...a death means you probably lost all your non-threaded stuff anyway...
It's been a while, but there was once a thread with many folks saying they planned to equip only the most-useless 2-copper junk other than their threaded items. It'll be interesting to watch developments to see how well that strategy can hold out.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
Don't most games that give you the ability to return and loot your corpse have a timer? I was under the impression you had 15 to 30 mins to get back to loot it before it was despawned. Outside of a really big battle, I can't imagine there would be a lot of bodies anywhere for more than a really short amount of time.There is a potential downside unless it is well considered: the game will not know whether you are heading back to loot your corpse or not.
Soon we would survey the fields of the dead everywhere, as far as the eye can see. Corpses, stacked to the lower branches of small trees, everywhere.
A necromancer would chortle with glee.
And once the battle is over, the victors would loot the corpses of the fallen. I assume that they would despawn when looted.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I assume that they would despawn when looted.Rushed for time, so no quote, but haven't we heard that corpses will remain for a time allowing one to try to return to one's own corpse to get whatever wasn't looted or destroyed?
Yes they have said the corpse will last for a short time. I would add, it is never ever advisable to return to your corpse, unless it is an attempt to seek revenge.
Any of your loot that was worth your life would have already been looted. Returning to the scene of your last loss, only to lose again, will just encourage corpse camping.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I assume that they would despawn when looted.Rushed for time, so no quote, but haven't we heard that corpses will remain for a time allowing one to try to return to one's own corpse to get whatever wasn't looted or destroyed?Yes they have said the corpse will last for a short time. I would add, it is never ever advisable to return to your corpse, unless it is an attempt to seek revenge.
Any of your loot that was worth your life would have already been looted. Returning to the scene of your last loss, only to lose again, will just encourage corpse camping.
PvE may be an exception to this in a lightly populated hex...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
PvE may be an exception to this in a lightly populated hex...If it becomes standard practice for players to return to their corpses, it will become standard practice for their corpses to be camped. If I were to do such a thing, I would sit by the corpse and wait for the owner to show up. If he or she should show up, I immediately loot from the corpse and get the thief / criminal flag. Then hope the player is foolish enough or underpowered / outnumbered enough to attack.
What I certainly might do is set up a blind right on top of your corpse, and attack the second you enter or SAD you.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
PvE may be an exception to this in a lightly populated hex...
If it becomes standard practice for players to return to their corpses, it will become standard practice for their corpses to be camped. If I were to do such a thing, I would sit by the corpse and wait for the owner to show up. If he or she should show up, I immediately loot from the corpse and get the thief / criminal flag. Then hope the player is foolish enough or underpowered / outnumbered enough to attack.What I certainly might do is set up a blind right on top of your corpse, and attack the second you enter or SAD you.
That is why I used the lightly populated qualifier. If the hex is moderately or heavily populated I would expect the corpse to be outright looted or camped as bait.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I have a differing viewpoint; I'm not particularly concerned about anyone camping corpses.
A lot of PvP in PFO will be about terrain. It might be about harvesting something in an area, and we know harvesting depletes the hex. So 'camping' near where you killed some harvester keeps that person and other from harvesting/depleting the hex. It might be about keeping a road open (or closed); killing someone in your quest to keep the road open then camping nearby sounds like a reasonable way to keep your section of road open.
I expect to be a low status player, and I expect that when I get killed I'll be told by my company or settlement leadership whether I return to what I was doing or if I go someplace else. For all I know, my leadership is organizing a bandit sweep and they want me to return 2 or 3 times so some greedy corpse-camper remains in a given place. I don't expect they'll tell me anything except to return and keep harvesting.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Urman
We are talking about different things. I was strictly speaking if returning to a corpse to recover what might have been left behind. Believe it or not, I have sen this a number if times in several MMOs.
What you are speaking of is returning to a resource node or some other location, where your corpse just happens to be as well.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I have a differing viewpoint; I'm not particularly concerned about anyone camping corpses.
A lot of PvP in PFO will be about terrain. It might be about harvesting something in an area, and we know harvesting depletes the hex. So 'camping' near where you killed some harvester keeps that person and other from harvesting/depleting the hex. It might be about keeping a road open (or closed); killing someone in your quest to keep the road open then camping nearby sounds like a reasonable way to keep your section of road open.
I expect to be a low status player, and I expect that when I get killed I'll be told by my company or settlement leadership whether I return to what I was doing or if I go someplace else. For all I know, my leadership is organizing a bandit sweep and they want me to return 2 or 3 times so some greedy corpse-camper remains in a given place. I don't expect they'll tell me anything except to return and keep harvesting.
Few reasons are sportsmanlike. Defending/controlling/prohibiting passage are all fine. Leaving a dirty sock in the corpse to lure a newb back is pretty low. It's just how I feel.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Urman
We are talking about different things. I was strictly speaking if returning to a corpse to recover what might have been left behind. Believe it or not, I have sen this a number if times in several MMOs.
What you are speaking of is returning to a resource node or some other location, where your corpse just happens to be as well.
Exactly. They are different things. At least in my understanding. Not that I am saying there is not agency in the player that goes back to see if there are leftovers. Just that real corpse camping is only for proving that you can kill/gank the same person(s) that you did 10 minutes before.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
@Urman
We are talking about different things. I was strictly speaking if returning to a corpse to recover what might have been left behind. Believe it or not, I have sen this a number if times in several MMOs.
What you are speaking of is returning to a resource node or some other location, where your corpse just happens to be as well.
Once you have been killed, your corpse becomes a resource node. Anyone camping it has to defend it against all comers, not just you.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That's a good point/question: after the initial looting is done, do any subsequent looters get the thief (Criminal) flag, or is the corpse open game? Do we know how long before it can be freely looted, if it's not initially looted?
Hopefully this is something linked to settlement laws and a free for all in wilderness hexes. Though that would be a little odd given how the bandit/criminal flag works for wilderness hexes.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Does anyone know the decay time one a corpse has been looted?
Some Good Reason for Your Little Black Backpack is, I think, the latest word on this. It doesn't specify how long your corpse lasts in the world, but it does state that after 5 minutes anyone may loot it without getting flagged.
It's also interesting that the blog explicitly says "Defeated players are likewise more encouraged to return to their corpses..." Something really rubs me the wrong way about Bluddwolf's warnings about never returning to your corpse because it encourages corpse-campers, and that Bluddwolf himself is the kind of player who gets off on corpse-camping. (Though, no doubt, he's only doing it to help the pour souls learn how to play a PvP game)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Something really rubs me the wrong way about Bluddwolf's warnings about never returning to your corpse because it encourages corpse-campers, and that Bluddwolf himself is the kind of player who gets off on corpse-camping. (Though, no doubt, he's only doing it to help the pour souls learn how to play a PvP game)
Perhaps it rubs you the wrong way because it makes no sense for me to warn about something, that I intend to trap you or others with.
Maybe you should take it for what it was meant for, a genuine warning for those who know little of the tricks and traps of PvP based MMOs.
Although I hope that the River Kingdoms (PFO) will be a dangerous, and treacherous place to tread, I want new players to understand that upfront.
On a final note, I did not say I would corpse camp. I said "if I were to corpse camp, this is how I would do it." I'm sure someone will take it out of context, maybe a year from now and try to smear me a griefer.... Lol!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Even if encumbrance is a problem for looters, I do not expect much to be left on a corpse, also because the most valuable items(crafting ingredients) will be looted anyway. So unless you have friends very nearby the corpse, I would advise against running back to your corpse.
In my opinion, the whole burden of having to run back to your corpse should be taken away. Especially in a game like PFO it seems like an option that only causes distress and possibly more aggravation.
I guess it all depends on how "special" items will be and how hard it is to replace them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Tyncale - with threaded items staying with your respawned character, there is no burden/requirement/reason to run back to a corpse. Players should accept that anything worthwhile has been lost; either destroyed in death, taken by the killer, or taken by someone 5 minutes after the killer. If something needs to be recovered from the body, the player can do a /tell to the killer and arrange a trade. (Or descend on the killer with buddies to arrange a trade of a different sort.)
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
Something really rubs me the wrong way about Bluddwolf's warnings about never returning to your corpse because it encourages corpse-campers, and that Bluddwolf himself is the kind of player who gets off on corpse-camping. (Though, no doubt, he's only doing it to help the pour souls learn how to play a PvP game)Perhaps it rubs you the wrong way because it makes no sense for me to warn about something, that I intend to trap you or others with.
Maybe you should take it for what it was meant for, a genuine warning for those who know little of the tricks and traps of PvP based MMOs.
Although I hope that the River Kingdoms (PFO) will be a dangerous, and treacherous place to tread, I want new players to understand that upfront.
On a final note, I did not say I would corpse camp. I said "if I were to corpse camp, this is how I would do it." I'm sure someone will take it out of context, maybe a year from now and try to smear me a griefer.... Lol!
If it becomes standard practice for players to return to their corpses, it will become standard practice for their corpses to be camped. If I were to do such a thing, I would sit by the corpse and wait for the owner to show up. If he or she should show up, I immediately loot from the corpse and get the thief / criminal flag. Then hope the player is foolish enough or underpowered / outnumbered enough to attack.
What I certainly might do is set up a blind right on top of your corpse, and attack the second you enter or SAD you.
I guess setting up a blind on top of a corpse isn't "corpse camping"?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There will always be some level of "corpse camping", even if it is really barricading a common thoroughfare or trade route waiting for the next mark. The bodies of your kills should be a warning to those who come next (if they are looking to avoid conflict themselves), or a potential attractant to bandit-hunters. I could see leaving the "body" of a dead PC (from PvP) in the area even after it is completely looted for an hour or so.