Kafuuka

[quote name='Aysun' date='01 July 2010 - 07:21 AM' timestamp='1277961692' post='63078'] And who said anything about killing for good? [/quote] Three people have alluded to it in this thread already. I personally don't think resurrection should be easy; look at how hard people worked to cure a wounded Tree yesterday. I've always considered MD a 'low magic' setting: magic exists but it doesn't grow on trees, readily available for everybody. You need to work hard to get a WP and get a spell which is very limited in duration and/or power. (magic in the sense of doing awesome supernatural feats, preferably while holding a staff or a wand and having lightning gathering around it) [quote] The way I understood it was that Darigan pissed somebody off (this someone being Pample), and a plan was formed to get back at him by killing Mya. That's not meta gaming, that's just premeditated murder and strategy. Meta gaming would be asking permission of the victim to kill them outside of MD, as 'metagaming' is defined as, "a broad term usually used to define any strategy, action or method used in a game which transcends a prescribed ruleset, uses external factors to affect the game, or goes beyond the supposed limits or environment set by the game. Another definition refers to the game universe outside of the game itself. In simple terms, using out-of-game information, or resources, to affect one's in-game decisions." Nothing in this murder plot was external- it was all planned within MD, using MD items in the prescribed manner. Therefore, it cannot be considered metagaming, but all the suggestions made here in protest of, for example, temporarily killing someone in game *would* be considered metagaming. Therefore, it was all completely within game boundaries to do what was done. [quote] I was the one who chose Mya as the victim and I was the one who chose not to ask for her permission. She was the most interesting person to have killed; she is not boring and flat, she is well loved, a prominent member of Loreroot and grown up and strong enough to deal with something of this nature. I never assumed she would be ok with it, it just happened to work out that she was gracious enough to play along, and for that I do thank her. I chose the moment on purpose, first because it was the wedding night and second, because it was close to the torch competition beginning. I knew she would be revived on the 8th, regardless of what happened. So, her death was never permanent and I told her what she had to do to come alive again. [/quote][/quote] The way I read that is deciding the victim first and coming up with a 'casus cruori' afterwards. Since it is for a quest, I do not have a problem with this method per se. However, if you claim it is good roleplay because it uses game mechanics, I will deny that. Good roleplay by definition requires sticking to your character concept. If being annoyed by a character was the motive, i think multiple murders should have occured; 't would've been more consistent that way. [quote] With regards to using peoples' character pages as a reference, since Ancient Lore is so frowned upon, I really don't understand how some people get away with creating fantastical histories for themselves as some sort of background of their time before MD. This is just my personal opinion, but to me life in MD seems to be this: oblivion, and then you enter MD. How you can be a goddess/fire demon dragon water half vampire sprite imp/thing before you come into being in MD is really beyond me since it just seems like another way of creating 'ancient lore' that isn't really there or relevant. So, as far as character background goes, I think considering their existence -solely- in MD is what should be taken into consideration and not any fairytale someone might attach to themselves. [/quote] I don't think restricting people to what races exist in MD would change much. It wouldn't restrict people to playing humans and someone playing a drachorn should then win every fight with a human character; at least that's what I think most people would bet on when pitting human vs drachorn. A character is also so much more than a race and a list of powers. Afaik most characters are adults. Whether they grew up in MD, which is five years old, or in another realm, or just sprung to life as an adult (from a very tall cabbage, mayhaps a tomato plant?), you'll have to come up with some fiction. How does your adult cabbage know language? What did the wilderwind character do in it's childhood? Did it get kicked out of the nest so it could learn to fly? As for that matter, I never understood how people could be half demon, half dragon and half human... that's three halves! And it sounds biologically implausible and a painful pregnancy.

[quote name='Aysun' date='30 June 2010 - 02:26 PM' timestamp='1277900763' post='63023'] Magic Duel is not an exceptionally dark place. Although Mur claims that one of the keys to MD is balance, I would beg to argue that light certainly trumps dark here. Part of the reason for this, I think, is the great amount of people who feel able to step outside of the game world and shout unfair when something happens that they don't like. There are more daisies and sunshine and so a majority don't seem to like rolling with the occasional punch when it comes. That these punches [i]are[/i] occasional no doubt means that they will be more headline news here compared to other games where killing and revival are quite common.[/quote] Most people play a neutral or a good aligned character, hence there is an imbalance towards light. It is tricky to play an evil character for several reasons. Everybody can be an annoying person, but a likable evil person? Furthermore even this time the killed character got revived. Doing evil deeds isn't that simple if your victims are certain to find out and come back to haunt you. [quote]Since someone brought up also that there should've been more role play to it[/quote] If you read the reasons why Mya was chosen to be killed... they first decided who to murder and then sought for a reason why the culprit would want to do it. That is meta gaming. Granted, a little meta gaming might be necessary to prevent stagnation, yet the main question of this thread is what is acceptable and what kind of precedent do we want to set? Should even a saint be allowed to murder just because it makes things interesting? [quote]how much more RP can you get than using an actual, tangible game item? Also, unless you use the blue text to *ties up <person> and gags them so that they cannot move* you'll be spending all day with your foe going *attempts to tie up <person>* and you responding with *struggles free* back and forth and back and forth because without some amount of 'unfairness' brought on by absolute moves, someone will always manage to use a deus ex machina to escape in some fashion, thus getting no one anywhere and that is not productive to the story or to RP.[/quote] If you're going to rely on mechanics, you can't do much. The creature battles only allow you to KO somebody, you cannot loot their corpse. People only stay dead for a few weeks tops... If you're relying on sparkly blue text, you'll have to obey self imposed restrictions. If you read someone's papers you can guess how much restrictions they placed upon their character. If there are none, you have the choice between ignoring that (awful) character, or to stay on their good side because they're too strong. Or you could go for the rule of coolness or even toss a coin to decide whether a grappling attempt on your character worked. Certainly if the other person is assuming using a two headed coin and you are not, you're bound to loose a toss eventually, but this is like all game theory problems: if both sides stay stubborn, everybody - including you - loses.

[quote name='Shadow(mcvities)' date='27 June 2010 - 07:18 PM' timestamp='1277659082' post='62765'] Oh well I added that if they wished to be added then they can post here or pm me And no cutler, I just added people that I could think of from the top of my head. If it's a quest that you made, then go ahead and ask for your name to be added ^^ [/quote] Which is a good way to bias your poll towards the people who were included at the beginning. Forum polls already are a statistical nightmare, but it's good to see people still find innovative ways to make it worse.

5 SC Is there a deadline for this auction?

The only thing that'd convince me to bother getting enough xp to move to mp5 would be a shot at getting past mp5, which is advertised as 'the ultimate fighting level'. Limiting creature usage is a good way to dumb down and hence limit preparation during pre mp5 of new people; it won't bother me but I don't see how it will do any good to the new people. Limiting spells which can be used for fighting but are not limited to it, hardly makes sense: it is the ultimate fighting level, not the ultimate spell casting or general coolness level. Frankly, why should people even be pushed to become mp5? I am not a threat to balance on mp4, nor is mp5 the sudden balance maker. There's three dozen threads on how mp5 is unfair towards noobs to prove me mp5 is not balanced. You either like fighting and progress naturally to mp5 or you have nothing to offer to mp5. Furthermore, the people who are into bullying and powergaming, are going to be annoying on any level; either they succeed or they complain.

[quote name='(Zl-eye-f)-nea' date='19 June 2010 - 01:16 PM' timestamp='1276946215' post='62240'] Some people don't like discussion and debate because they don't like conflict. I am sitting here, attempting, to help you avoid future conflicts of a certain kind. A substantial number of people have been offended by the lack of consideration given via the process of killing via an item that is currently mechanically possible - that much should now be obvious. The response, on the whole from the other side has been "I don't care, it's possible, it's allowed, so I'll do it." [/quote] I love debating, but what are we to add to this? Certainly everybody knows that "not caring" isn't a viable answer. MD has this premise called 'actions have consequences'. Granted, it often takes two years to notice them, but Mur circumvents this by not believing time is linear. One day there'll be other items with other powerful effects or maybe there'll be a trial or maybe people will just stop liking, trading, talking and sparring with you because nobody likes someone who doesn't behave responsible while having great power (except narcissists). "It's allowed so I'll do it" Usually we tend to split people into RP and fighters, yet this statement doesn't allow that. The item was used for role play if I understood it right. We have some people who believe in game mechanics and we have some who don't; I think I've argued against mechanics as absolute on various occasions and I'll do so again. Game mechanics dictates you CAN do some things, by now way does this imply you SHOULD do them. There's even contradictory rules 'if you think something is an exploit or a bug you should report it' and 'people creating items which are inappropriate will have their ability removed'. They don't explicitly address the using of powerful items, yet it does show we're supposed to behave responsible. If you don't believe me, then look at the first paragraph again... And then there's the whole roleplay thing: role play implies placing restrictions upon yourself. If you play an evil character, you're not supposed to do nice things; if you play a nice and/or sane/thinking character, you shan't kill someone just because you CAN. The only reason I can imagine Kafuuka killing someone is if they'd eaten all his cookies, set fire to all the granaries and sowed salt into the farms.. and frankly, they'd deserve worse than death for that. I hardly doubt half of the role players have a proper excuse to kill someone's character, and I doubt even more they'd be able to foresee the consequences if the other party goes along with their role play, regardless of motive.

[quote name='Grido' date='12 June 2010 - 03:01 PM' timestamp='1276347708' post='61737'] VE can get reduced, Win count can't.... [/quote] Easy to fix: subtract the number of losses. Afaik those are counted per profile and not per creature, but would it be a problem to look at the player wins-losses instead of the creatures?

I haven't tried it, but "A Traveler's soul" has my vote. It actually occurs within the game instead of on the forum. It doesn't require a camera either. Not that I mind the 'take a picture of ...' type, but without a scanner or a digital camera those quests are impossible and hence get a low score from me. The only problem with the traveler quest is that by the time I read about it, a dozen of people had solved it. This is a problem for almost any objective quest actually; the only ones who don't have it are the ones that take weeks before even a single person manages to solve it.

Separating: apart from being more work, there will always be some way to justify a certain function on both an item and on a clickable. I refute the idea that items would lose value this way. The way I see it, scripts on clickies are primarily for quests and thus available to every player, regardless of who wrote it. Once an item is scripted and given to someone, only that person has access to it. Value is determined by supply and demand. Since supply is ridiculously larger for clickables than for items, there's no need to impose differences in demand (determined by what it can do) in order to make items more valuable than clickies. Items also have limits imposed by common sense: if you had to assign attack and defense stats to a sword and a shield, usually you would give the sword more attack and the shield more defense. Of course you could bash with a shield and parry with a sword, everything is justifiable, but a sword would be more efficient for attacking nonetheless. Clickies have similar limits: if your quest is about darkness, giving people extra syntropy principle points as a reward is not the obvious choice. Once again I see no need to impose code restrictions to enforce a difference, when the common interpretation of how something should be used will do the job. Abuse: there is a limit to how often one player can give a WP to another player. Similarly there can be made restrictions to how often one script can give a permanent stat boost to a certain player. It could be limited in frequency, in quantity, in distribution (quantity towards player X versus total quantity given), by type... The only problem is if it is per script instead of per editor. Duplicating scripts can't be that hard, and some people might be restricted if it is by editor. eg. Cutler's puzzle arcade has been online at the same time his astral plane was, if he wanted both to be rewarded with, say +10 luck, and a newbie would finish both quests at roughly the same time, they could be flagged as 'too frequently receiving boons from Cutler'.

[quote name='Kyphis the Bard' date='04 June 2010 - 02:27 AM' timestamp='1275611263' post='60927'] By "to late" I don't mean it is impossible. Look at the other things I said. What I mean was that the damage had already been done in terms of grinding (its been around for what, a year and a half now?), and far to many people know how to do it for it to be possible to prevent them from useing this form of training in small groups (say, two people) without Mur himself intervening. Sure, it is possible to prevent the GGG from existing. But any method you could use WILL only harm the WHOLE of MD. The only viable solution is to make it un-worthwhile to the majority of people who use it: Grinders. There are lots of ways of going about that, however so far in this topic I have not seen any other suggestions. It's all very well to point out a problem, but if you can't suggest a solution that isn't worse, what good do you do? [/quote] If the damage has already been done we need to allow it be repeated, augmented? Too many people know how to set up a new GGG? There's announcements on the mood panels that not enough people are at the GGG for it to work as good as some of its users would like. Splitting into smaller groups will decrease the appeal to such people. Some will then leave, making the groups even smaller etc. Seems like in the past twelve hours people addressed the alternatives question already, less work for me.

[quote name='Kyphis the Bard' date='04 June 2010 - 12:40 AM' timestamp='1275604842' post='60917'] Because it has been around for so long, it is already too late to remove it. [/quote] The dojo was around for months at least and it died to. I'm not an expert on the dojo subject, but what it looked like to me is that several people were doing a lot of work for the dojo and eventually this became a burden carried by too few people. The success of the GGG mainly depends on how many people are enforcing the GGG rules and to what lengths they will go. I don't think there's that many of them and I doubt they'll be convinced through a forum topic. If anything these recurring threads rally support to the GGG and issue caution to it's captains... but to say that it is impossible to remove it, that almost sounds like a challenge.

[quote name='Udgard' date='31 May 2010 - 06:10 AM' timestamp='1275279037' post='60662'] [i][center]Everything that has a beginning, has an end.[/center][/i] If the cube was made, than at one time is shall be unmade. [/quote] Counterexample: N, the natural numbers have a beginning but no end. The cubes were made and will probably be 'unmade' but if such an event happens after your characters' death, then to your character that cube will have always been there.

The laws of nature are quite different from what you list! The first one is 'every object in motion tends to stay in motion.' Seriously though, the laws you listed are anything but inherited by anyone. At the very base people are selfish, the existence of altruism is only justified, in evolution, in that helping people who will in turn help you when needed proved superior to living solitary. Obviously this isn't really altruistic since you aren't helping people for free, but for the promise of future aid. However the price isn't well specified and the balance, at the end of ones lifetime, may be a lot different from zero. Somehow from our genetic predisposition towards reciprocal altruism, cultural extensions evolved and some people give a lot more than they receive. Still, if we were to cooperate more irl, then we would be able to produce more efficient and all benefit from this. The best example for this is war: being united against one enemy, countries will suddenly increase in productivity. If you want to study these kinds of laws of nature, you should look into game theory, Darwinism and philosophy. On to MD, I think anyone playing a knight-like character, should have/simulate similar morals. Your putting to vote isn't the 'right' thing per se, but is the right thing by your own standards, as such it should please you. Unless I'm completely wrong about humanity, many people on many occasions will have asked Mur for favors, even if they (should) know that begging and whining will only result in Mur giving less things to everybody and them in particular. As for reciprocal altruism, GGG, worshipping, the dojo, 'giving away bursts' all are good examples. A while ago there was also a gift giving thread where anybody who gave a gift also got one back. On the other hand I did give away pass papers without a reward (except for being able to boast about it and having a good laugh seeing people confused when they get something for free and wonder what will balance this sudden karma influx). D&D alignments are tricky. For instance I have certain values I'd like to uphold, among which freedom for everybody. That would make me lawful good. However I have a distaste for orthodox methods. That would make me chaotic good. Is consistently never using orthodox methods even chaotic? Let's say I want to be chaotic in my chaotic behavior, then half of the time i should behave lawful, but I should also only adhere to this thought half of the time etc etc.

[quote name='dst' date='27 May 2010 - 05:14 PM' timestamp='1274973290' post='60453'] What if my own thing is to mess with your RP? Isn't that considered RP also? After all...you are the one saying we should have no boundaries [/quote] There are different ways to mess with someone's roleplay. If you're using whatever bug of loophole you can find to annoy the other party or if you resort to bunnying or godmodding then that is not roleplay. However if your character is the personification of annoying and you can play such a character well, then it is obviously roleplaying. I doubt many people are able to pull it off though. Most will dislike their character being unpopular and as the embodiment of annoyance it will by definition be disliked by all characters (except the mentally challenged). You might not like it, but you and your character are/were nice to others on multiple occasions. [quote name='Burns' date='27 May 2010 - 11:43 PM' timestamp='1274996612' post='60484'] There are also very few people who have the time, and brain capacity, to play two different accounts well. Those are the only alts worth being supported. The others... waste serverspace. And annoy me, personally, to no end. You also have to be careful with your opinions, MD is an RPG. We are NOT ourselves when we log in, we play a character. Some very smart people are capable of creating more than 1 character for the same game. A lot more tried and failed, but the potential failure shouldn't ban them from the try imo. They give up some time anyways^^ [/quote] I agree, time and skill aren't widely available. Too many people still think that their character is them and any insult addressed at their character, will be taken personally. Any information they get on the forum, but their character couldn't possibly know, will be used by their character. Even the most basic things like a new characters' name is automatically known to the player by looking at the chat, yet irl people don't walk around with name tags on them do they? Imagine your character has an evil alignment, does something 'wrong' to another character and suddenly a dozen other characters who were in separate corners of MD are awake and running towards you to rectify your 'evil deeds'. Everybody understands power by numbers and if I learn that someone has created a fresh new alt and announces it as such, my first thought will be 'I hope they aren't going to be telepathically linked through meta gaming'. This is also why I would urge people to keep their alts from meeting each other or having them be at odds if they meet frequently. As you can imagine, family is the worst possible relationship between alts. For family it is natural that they share many secrets, yet keep some of their own too. I wouldn't even think of trying to remember which alt knows what without using a notebook. As for babies... if you like logging in and typing 'whaaah whaaah *soils diaper*' every ten minutes... just don't expect my character to stay at that scene.

Approval: when there's only two options there's no problem. If you're suggesting people should only list two possible choices, I doubt many will listen. Cumulative: suppose several choices are close to eachother, more like nuances than actual differences, and one choice is an extreme which has nothing in common with the other choices. The ones voting for the extreme will put all points on it, while the ones voting moderately will spread points because they don't want to put all eggs in one basket. Note that if everyone who reads this argument decides to never spread their points, the system is defeated as well. Ranking: the same as cumulative but forcing people to stick to one type of spread. An obvious problem is if there's no second choice you consider worthy. There's one method you haven't mentioned: elimination. People list all choices in order of preference. First you count all the choices which are ranked 1. If there's no majority, you look for the choice which has the least votes and then remove it from everybody's list. You shift all votes ranked below that choice to the left and recount the votes which are now ranked n°1. This quickly gets rid of extreme opinions. To illustrate it with your example ballots: [quote name='awiiya' date='26 May 2010 - 07:38 PM' timestamp='1274895506' post='60413'] Let's give a hypothetical system. Say we have a common system of voting, were majority rules, and each person gets one vote towards a choice. We have four choices: A, B, C, D. We have three 8 people: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8. Here are the preferences for the choices, if each person ranked the choices: 1 - A, C, D, B 2 - D, C, B, A 3 - B, C, A, D 4 - A, C, D, B 5 - D, C, A, B 6 - D, C, A, B 7 - C, B, A, D 8 - C, A, B, D [/quote] Step 1. The first choices are a d b a d d c c => no majority, b is least popular => remove b, shift left New ballots: 1 a, c, d 2 d, c, a 3 c, a, d 4 a, c, d 5 d, c, a 6 d, c, a 7 c, a, d 8 c, a, d Step 2. New first choices are a d c a d d c c => no majority, a is least popular => remove a, shift left 1 c, d 2 d, c 3 c, d 4 c, d 5 d, c 6 d, c 7 c, d 8 c, d Step 3. 5 c vs 3 d => c wins Alternatively you could look at the last rank and remove what is most voted for in that rank. In this case the result would be the same, which is good. It would also not kick out the choice that is everybody's number 2 but nobody's number 1 (ie the best compromise). Although you'd assume with large numbers that wouldn't occur. Or you could do both, and check for agreement, but then the process is semi-automated; if there's no agreement you'll need to decide manually (and be biased of course).

[quote name='Totenkopf' date='25 May 2010 - 12:49 PM' timestamp='1274784575' post='60357'] wow that's fast..then we definitely had no chance, on may 11th i think we were still stuck at page 6 anyway, congratz again guys, and many thanks to yoshi and nico for providing this very fun and addictive quest [/quote] Indeed, we finished 15th or 16th of May and thought we were doing well...

As for filesize, the ubuntu live cd is only 700 mb as well, although knoppix might take less time to boot and you only need a command line version of linux anyway, so you should be able to find something a lot smaller than that. I haven't got a clue as to why you would try using a windows install cd to solve a linux problem... who knows maybe there still are distro's that fit unto a floppy and can mount your filesystem. Which did you use? ext3? Also, next time you install linux and plan to do experiments on it without backing up configuration files, you might want to put your home directory on a different disk.

By access I meant mounting the file system, not changing the partition table... that's as useful as having physical access to your harddisk and throwing it out of the window. Using a live cd should allow you to mount the file system and to read and write files on it (regardless of chmod and owner settings even, unless you encrypted your harddisk, physical access to a computer still compromises security 100%). Linux actually keeps a lot of backups of important files for you, unless you override the default settings. Furthermore a lot of configuration files are automatically generated so even if you loose them the system survives. Yet it is better to look for a back up, manually undo what you did to break it or read the manual pages on how to write a new config file. Alternatively you could try to log in remotely, although the options for that aren't standard and they require that booting succeeds fairly well.. and you need a second computer and internet etc... live cd should be less demanding imo.

[quote name='I am Bored' date='22 May 2010 - 08:57 PM' timestamp='1274554627' post='60209'] Ok, recently I have installed Ubuntu as a second opporating system, and have been able to easily boot both ubuntu and windows, but at one point i set ubuntu to display a splash screen at startup, however this didn't work right and it actually just made it show 8 copies of the boot up screen on the top of the screen, now this wouldn't be a problem (because it still booted just fine at that point) but it shows a letter as a single color pixel, with every 4th one being blank (no matter what should have been there) and recently it wouldn't start, and when i hit f1(to get it to show me the command line) and hit enter, it will just show single line over and over as if it was an error, now normally this wouldn't be a problem, but of course i can't read what the error is, or if it is even an error, so what i need to do is change ubuntu's startup options from windows (which does boot) does anyone know how i would go about doing this? [/quote] Err, did you not make any back-up files which you can use to restore your system? And even if you didn't most of the time there exists a previous version with an extra ~ at the end. If you cannot access your linux partition from windows (why would you ever grant windows access to it anyway?) just use a live cd to boot. Also, I guess the people over at the ubuntu forum would be able to help better than me.

[quote name='Firsanthalas' date='18 May 2010 - 11:42 AM' timestamp='1274175750' post='59963'] Fourthly It's not feasible to think that we can track down and keep all of the previously used avatars. You would also have to decide what avatars were precious and what ones weren't. And it also defeats the purpose of the avatars being made available again in the first place. [/quote] It's most likely a doomed endeavor yet it isn't a crime. (nor is selling and/or using them as you already said.) If people stay polite and don't go all 'I am honoring more legends than you' I don't think there's any problem, except some players going broke i guess...

[quote name='Juni0r' date='17 May 2010 - 10:16 PM' timestamp='1274127396' post='59942'] imo its just that those are RPC Avatar or even if they werent those people made a history with their avatars and personally i see it as an injustice... [/quote] It's not like Esmerelda is the one who put them in the shop again. If you really want to stick to those ideals, buy them and don't use them. In fact I'll throw in a coin to support that cause. (and yes i am aware this [u]seems[/u] ironic when compared to my position on items)

Anyone else consider it funny that some think a name is too important to change, while others argue it is not important enough to change? As others have said, I doubt it is easily exploitable. Even cheating to a WP, if such does happen (let's not go there in this thread), requires you to know - suck up to - people that have WP to spare. Which should take enough time for several people to know enough about you to notice your 'disappearance' and be suspicious of that new guy with 100+ AD that looks faintly familiar but absolutely nobody ever saw before. @dst: why are you against people wasting WP on silly things? Consider it natural selection.

Because it's a mathematician or a physicist, they always use assumptions like 'this is normally distributed' or 'air friction is irrelevant' or 'everybody thinks in a logical fashion'. That's why i said a TRUE mathematician... but I suppose you'd have to be one to think it funny.

[quote name='Nex' date='05 May 2010 - 07:02 PM' timestamp='1273078971' post='59450'] as for the guesses: there have been a couple of very optimistic guessers going for 2 - 18 (mathematicans/ physicists?), most guessed in the 20 - 30's, surprisingly many guessed in the mid 40 - 60's and a few even went for impossible numbers to mess with our math [/quote] A true mathematician should've guessed zero. It's the only number that is correct if everybody voted logically.

If you're advertising the quest as difficult, of course I have to try (and fail).