Inherent risk in using kill items and spells

[Rumi]

There has been a lot of concern recently over regular killing of players, mostly resulting in discussion of resurrection practices.

Is it feasible that we could increase the risk of killing? One idea I have is make a kill attempt a roll of the dice. A good roll results in success, a bad roll results in failure, and there should also be a chance for the killer to die. Imagine I try to kill Seigheart with a stone dagger and he fights back and I perish by my own weapon.

Another possibility would be to incorporate spells or items that could cause the same effect. Seigheart tries to kill me but I have cast a mirror enchantment which causes his kill spell to target himself. This could possibly even be added to mirror ritual spell as an added effect.

Possibly I could have an item in my inventory that improves my chance of reversing a kill spell.

It seems that an inherent risk of death would make me think twice before attempting to kill someone else.

Your thoughts?

(Thanks for being my dummy, Seigheart)

[DARK DEMON]

[quote name='Rumi' timestamp='1346514707' post='121330']
Seigheart tries to kill me but I have cast a mirror enchantment which causes his kill spell to target himself.
[/quote]

Then maybe other spells like silvertongue/toadpeak or weaken should also be "mirrored" back to the caster if the initial target has mirror ritual. It would certainly make RP more exciting to say the very least

[BFH]

[quote]This could possibly even be added to mirror ritual spell as an added effect.[/quote]

Mirror Ritual is too common, and kill items/spells aren't. What I want to say, is that in case a spell would have such effect it should not be a common one.

~B

[Grido]

I'd say maybe 1/6 chance of dying when using a killing item, to die yourself, probably better to be less likely though.

Also, there'd be a poss bug if the person tried to kill themselves, particularly if you incorporated any spells into the mix

[DARK DEMON]

Silvertongue and Weaken are common enough to be deflected with mirror ritual aren't they?

[Mya Celestia]

[color=#008080][font=lucida sans unicode,lucida grande,sans-serif]Having a backfire risk would make things more interesting that's for sure especially with spells. If the spell is new to the person, there could be a greater risk of backfire. I like the idea of there being a chance to that the item fails, too. If the roll for the item is something like a 1d20, the item user getting a 1 would mean they failed and got themselves killed in the process.[/font][/color]

[Ivorak]

[quote name='Rumi' timestamp='1346514707' post='121330']
Is it feasible that we could increase the risk of killing? One idea I have is make a kill attempt a roll of the dice. A good roll results in success, a bad roll results in failure, and there should also be a chance for the killer to die. Imagine I try to kill Seigheart with a stone dagger and he fights back and I perish by my own weapon.
[/quote]

I like this idea, because of the reason you gave. However, if the risk off backfire is because of resistance (and it should be; it would be ridiculous if a dagger just exploded randomly or whatnot) then would this apply when the player the killing item is used on is idle?

[Eon]

If we're going to throw a resistance factor in there, would I be invincible considering 99 percent of MD couldn't put up much resistance at all against my character? Would I kill 100 percent of the time?

[Laphers]

I like the idea of kill items having a chance of failing but then again I also supported the idea of spellstones being able to fail, especially if the user doesn't have the spell to charge them in the first place.

Perhaps we need to have the discussion about creating stats that affect magic use. Or perhaps finding a balance type of stat (Mechanical - Magical) so that higher mechanical stats (physical combat/movement stats) you will naturally have weaker magical stats.

[No one]

Considering the new "ability" enhancement to be taken into consideration that with "herbalism" skill you can end up gathering 2 herbs instead on one, maybe you can enhance this killing devices [b]with[/b] the [b]"killing" skill [/b]that [b]you can to kill 2 for the price of 1[/b].


Now, that we had our fun, let get to the point: why should you get a resistance ?
Are there ppl getting killed by hundreds or even by dozen? Are those items / spell so free and widely spread that all MD is in danger of getting killed ?

As I remember, the items & spells have been given to specific ppl with specific limits. Anyone crossing its limit is punishable.

Also, currently the resurrection process is so easy that getting dead might be simply an adventure just as MP6 seems to be with no pain and no real commitment.

No, I vote against the resistance.
I am even against the easy resurrection system that has been used recently.

I do hope that the system will improve and things will get harder (to resurrect and play while dead) so that ppl will respect this condition.

[Burns]

Moved a large chunk of this thread to http://magicduel.invisionzone.com/topic/12519-the-value-of-life-in-md.
This is about a new idea, should spell/kill stuff thingies have a chance to not work. The other is about how to handle death and killers after they occured. Please don't mix them up too much.

[Ackshan Bemunah]

The risk could be some sort of sympathetic operator...Like, suppose death involves some sort of feeling of being forced out of the realm. Depending on things resembling an ability to connect with, to convince others (say, mind power level, within mp6 number of protectees, transposition principle. Maybe some citizenships associated with the more individualist characteristics (say, Golemus and Necrovion) could provide a penalty...there would be a chance to pull a person with you out of the realm. A similar or perhaps opposite tendency might apply when trying to revive one person or the other from a pair that died.