Jump to content

(Zl-eye-f)-nea

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,481

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    51

 Content Type 

Posts posted by (Zl-eye-f)-nea

  5. The Caretakers

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    I was really hoping for a Harvey Keitel from Pulp Fiction bent on this alliance tbh...but alas..no such luck I see.

    That being said, Im not that fond of any of the current ideas, but I'm interested to know...apart from on this forum, have any of you started to form groups who like and are dedicated to the ideals you are presenting here?

    Z

  10. Roleplay: Ifs, Ands, And Buts...

    in General Forum

    Posted

    [b][i]Aeo:
    ...i dunno... you really made me re-think what i said,reconsider my opinion... [/i][/b]

    :) I think you just made my day.

    [b][i]Aeo:
    Yet i do not think RP should be based on game stats. at most on age - activity days - (assuming older means smarter :| )[/i][/b]

    Well I'm not one for assuming older means smarter, and I have to say in some ways I agree with you about the game stats role play thing, in other ways I agree with what others have said. I'm a little bit on the fence about that issue in honesty. If we take for example MRD, we all treat him as strong because we know he is very good at creature battles and can wipe the floor with a lot of people - we naturally do that in our role play (at least thats what I see for the most part) so that is based on game mechanics BUT, by the same token, I'm not sure a character with weak creature battling skills couldn't smash someone up RP wise. What if I have no creatures for you to fight and I have high VE (if i work on the game mechanics idea) well then...my character still has all his health to run around and leap about etc etc. And then there is the fact that if someone has 0 VE they should be dead...but nobody dies. So even the mechanics dont support the mechanics in some ways.

    I don't know, its a confusing issue for me. I try to work with both ideas personally: use game mechanics where you can because it makes it all the more realistic, and where you can't I'll react depending on how good the RP comes across to me.

    Some people don't like the RP fighting in game because we have a creature battle system, but...you can't fly through the air and dodge and ..well...have a story to go with it that way...and...well for me, that's far more fun - but unfortunately god-modding can get in the way of the fun of it, and all sorts of stuff and...Im going to start rambling now so I'll stop ;)

    Z

  11. Roleplay: Ifs, Ands, And Buts...

    in General Forum

    Posted

    Get ready for a long one...

    [b][i]Aeo:
    Would you make a list of your weaknesses in your pages? I lied, as part of the RP. DUHH!! you would hide your weaknesses as well. actually i don't think i've ever seen a list of weak spots in ANY PLAYER PAGE.[/i][/b]
    In general Role Play games, your character description (in MD, that’s your papers for the most part) is there so that people playing with you are aware of what they see visually and potentially what they are or are not able to interact with in regards to you. That doesn’t mean you make a list of weaknesses you are correct. However, it does mean that your story should at the very least allude to them. Especially if you are playing something irregular that people won’t be able to draw conclusions from, because they arn’t inside your brain to see what you feel is obvious. Your papers are not your RP, so writing lies in them, in my opinion, is a terrible thing to do. Your papers/description are/is there for ooc informational purposes in order for those playing with you to be more well informed. If you don’t want someone to know something, then of course don’t put it there. Anything visual should be there because their character could see it anyway, other than that, it’s down to how well you interact with others in game as to whether you can pull something off or not.

    [b][i]Aeo:
    and no, RP shouldn't be based off game mechanics. it will simply spawn some gods into this world and trillions of weaklings crawling around.that would utterly squash the creativity of new players and make them leave the game before they even get a taste of it

    Udgard:
    It's a bit hard with stats and trying to *hit* people that *dodge*, but I found my way around that and just cast a frog spell if necessary. They can't *resisted the spell with magical dragon scale armor* when they're clearly saying *ribbit*

    Burns:
    There are limits imposed by the game such as illusions[/i][/b] - (not a quote, but my summary of a post)

    This isn’t like any other live text based role play game. It isn’t a free world, there is a world built around you. That’s the confusing thing. You are born into Magic Duel as whatever age you choose, but no matter what age you are, you are still a new born. At least that’s how I see it. You worry about spawning gods....but you have no issue with god-modding...seems odd to me. Ud demonstrates the game mechanics in play there, so does Burns, I would have thought that that would be an adequate explanation no?

    [b][i]Aeo:
    you can't just make a program that stops you from saying *kills Mur*[/i][/b]
    No one suggested that. They just suggested that that was a very dull thing to do, and I’ll explain my view on that at the end of this post.

    [b][i]Aeo:
    Godmodders will always be here.[/i][/b]
    As long as you are happy for people to act in a certain way, they will. I could say...thieves will always be around, but I doubt that would stop you from installing an alarm system in your house. So you are correct, they will always be around , but I fail to see your point?

    [b][i]Aeo:
    Oh, and Udgard, asuming you were a new player, would you play this game for a year and a half, striving everyday to rise your stats, getting beaten up by older players, just to be allowed to say *attempts to kick X or Y*?!
    and then to be answered *dodges*!?[/i][/b]
    Have you considered why role play should be an attempt and not an act? As you said earlier, not all your information is likely in your papers. Only you truly know the limits and strengths of a well thought out character. As such, only you could say how they would or would not react, what they could or could not dodge. I could not just walk up to your character and hit him, for all I know your character might have the ability to dodge me very easily. I can go to hit you, I can try to hit you, but then you say whether I do or not. I give you that freedom and trust. I give you the freedom to show me what and who your character is, and in turn you give me the same respect and freedom. As a result we build both a knowledge of one another’s character and also a respect for each other’s actions. Sometimes I realise I will get hit, because you write the RP in a clear enough way, and I know my character well enough. It’s a story we build after all. One argument I hear often is “everyone wants to win though”, of course, and if you understand that properly, then sometimes you will allow yourself to get hit, sometimes you will lose. That’s called mutual respect. Of course sometimes enforced action will happen, more often than not when it is a friendly gesture, because the point is for everyone to feel involved, understood, and respected, and of course for the story to progress and build. The latter is a bit of a complicated one, but I think I've explained what I mean.

    [b][i]Tarq
    roleplaying should consider what a character cannot do as much as what s/he can do.[/i][/b]
    Couldn’t agree more.

    [b][i]Aeo:
    you are trying to manipulate us, by using your influence in this game and what you have best here. Not like anything's wrong with that, but it's just the most annoying, self centered thing I can think of.

    the more you try to deny or forbid something, the more everybody will try to do it[/i][/b]

    It’s not about trying to deny or forbid you. It’s about making interaction just that, and not some grab for power or to demonstrate the girth, or lack of, in a certain area of your anatomy. It’s about making role play viable. When you say “you” are trying to manipulate “us”, could you clarify precisely what it is you mean by that?

    [b][i]Jester
    I don't play MD to fight. I play MD to interact with friends[/i][/b]
    This is the main thing really isn’t it. People role play... to play. If you choose to god-mod and you meet another god-modder then...no one will ever win or lose, there will be no story just a big bash up with very little of any interest for anyone else involved. Role play gets cut short so quickly because someone decides to just walk in somewhere, hack everyone to death, and walk out again. Is it really such a surprise then that people either ignore that sort of thing or argue with the person who did it? The god-modder has just walked into a piece of game play they don’t understand and have no part in (yet), then decide to obliterate it, ruining the game for everyone involved instead of adding to it. It is the same on a one on one basis too. Coming up to me and saying you chop Bob down accomplishes nothing, it doesn’t move the game forward, it doesn’t seem realistic and it doesn’t make me want to play with you. How about creeping along against the wall trying so Z doesn’t see you? Then Z might or might not see you. If he doesn’t see you, creep some more, then get to Bob, then get your axe out, run your thumb across it...do you see where I’m going with this? You elongate your actions, you make the game, you create the story, you make people want to play. For me, Burns (yes, shock horror, Burns, supposedly a grinder) is a very good example of someone who does this extremely well.

    Anyway, that's my two cents as you guys like to say.

    Z

  13. The Caretakers

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    Thats a much better offering Leu. However, you have 10 seats ...and it looks as if this alliance is more like...a collaboration of the heads of a town council and all it's various facets - do you see what I mean? Almost like...an alliance comprised of the heads of a series of small guilds. Some of the ideas there are quite nice though individually imo.

    Z

  16. Recent Events

    in General Forum

    Posted

    I don't ever recall hiding away or anything of the sort. I get a lot of abuse from players in honesty, players who say that because I state an opinion or explain how something is supposed to be or how I consider it might be better be done, say that I'm "in my rpc tower judging them". Yet when there is an issue, we are the ones you come to to try to resolve it for you or we are the ones who take all the flack for fighting your issue for you. (not you dst, the general you). So I can understand if some people don't really feel like stepping out there and stating something if all they will get is "stupid rpc, like you know anything, you're just a player with a badge, shut up."


    Standing down as RPC isnt necessarily giving up, they still have influence and a voice as a player as much as anyone else. In fact its rather a grand statement from one perspective, don't you think?

    Z

  20. Roleplay: Ifs, Ands, And Buts...

    in General Forum

    Posted

    I want to know what you, the general players, consider to be good or bad role play. I don't consider this to be totally subjective as a topic either might I add, in some respects quite the opposite.

    I will take one example. Someone decided to call me a small minded idiot recently over the issue of role play. I won't name the person for you, but the reason was that I consider turning into a giant black blob via one line of text, then eating the entirity of Bob in another line of text, then spitting him out in the next line of text - godmodding in it's most obvious form (quite apart from being lazy in the extreme) and he doesn't think that is modding at all.

    So im interested in what the current population of MD feel about RP at the moment.

    Z

  24. Organised Debate With Z

    in Quest Archive

    Posted

    I asked Mur 2 questions they are as follows with his responses:


    .Zleiphneir. (ID:77300)

    Is evolution, survival of the fittest/best disguised etc, actually a demonstration of the process of extinction of any and all of an entire species and not the opposite as it claims?

    Mur: round 2 / debate


    --------------------------


    .Zleiphneir. (ID:77300)

    Do we use objects, or do objects use us?

    Mur: if we were to be used by objects it would mean we would be only reacting to inevitable and we obviouly are not, o i think we are using objects now the opposite. But maybe i do not understand the quetion?




    Im happy to debate either as the second has indeed a more complex level to it than Mur's answer....or the question...shows. However, the questions are in fact linked to one another in some ways so I might be able to merge them.

    If you fancy it, I'll be at the Path of Lonliness at 12pm server time (thats 10pm UK time...or it should be cuz thats when i'll be there) tonight 08.08.09 and I'll do one tomorrow night also if necessary or if we need to split the questions. Short notice yes...but anyone who knows me knows you can come debate with me anytime anyway, so if you fancy it and cant make it, just hop up to the path and start talking to me sometime.

    Z

×
×
  • Create New...