Proposal: OOC Rules for Ingame Wars

[Garett Gwenour]

Rules
1) Each member of the opposing force is given 3 lives in official battles. A life is getting clouded and being brought back by the cross. Once they use up all 3 lives they must play their character too injured to fight in the war. (this is assuming the war ends before rule 2 is implemented).

2) A member whom has lost all 3 lives within the war gains a new life (heals from their wound) if they war drags out 3 real life weeks longer.

3) Leaders of forces have 5 lives. Simply, leaders are singled out and "gangbanged" and so they need more lives if they hope to be able to take part of any ingame war.

4) Absolutely NO Gm help in a war whatsoever, no pushed skills, no free items, no divine signs. These cannot be tolerated by any side, and if offered everyone must rebuke them as a GM trying to steer IC directions through their massive OOC powers.

5) No ooc whining when you lose in a war. Simple.

6) Handle losing/winning graciously, roleplay through it and be a rolemodel for newer players on how to handle losing/winning.


---
These are the rules i believe each war must have. I would have proposed an ooc appointment for battles. but I know from experience this will result in friends contacting their msn friends whom do not play illarion any longer and asking/telling them they are needed to log on their warrior ingame to help them win a battle. This is simply ooc abuse in my eyes and results in those whom will go inactive when the war is over to inherit a city that will inturn prove inactively run.

thank you

[Poots]

cool.

[Hu'greu]

Good idea, but what if a God want to help out a side in a war. Surely then can a GM.

Of course they would have to be high preist or somthing for an God to even think about helping

[Garett Gwenour]

No, never has a god helped the peoples of gobiath fight any of the ridiculous challenges they have faced in the past. It is stupid to think a god would help in a mortal only war.

[Alytys Lamar]

I agree with the OOC point´-- its bad RP

But forget not Illarion is a magic world, a world full of magic.
The gods cannot be simply banished.

Otherwise Illarion dilapidates to a war game ----

[Drogla]

No, never has a god helped the peoples of gobiath fight any of the ridiculous challenges they have faced in the past. It is stupid to think a god would help in a mortal only war.

Divine inervention is often found when least expected and most needed

Shouldnt be totaly banned. The GMs themselves fighting and what not, yea...thats a no; items, on the other hand, should be OK, given a limit though

[Misjbar]

Created by the Elder Gods to guard and guide the races of Illarion, the Younger Ones are still heavily involved in life itself. But since the Elder Ones more or less retreated from Illarion, seldom to be seen, they started to take sides in the struggle between the powers on Illarion. Instead of leading the different races and ensuring their peacefull coexistence, they themself take part in the struggle, fighting for influence and power.

Perhaps a point to consider.

[Nitram]

1) Each member [...]
2) A member whom has [...]
3) Leaders of forces have 5 lives. Simply,[...]

A pretty good idea. But it only works if EVERYONE gets along with it.

4) Absolutely NO Gm help in a war

okay.

whatsoever, no pushed skills, no free items,

okay.

no divine signs.

no. I think this is okay, as far as no side gets a advantage from it. Some funny lights here and there are okay in my opinion.
The flaming anvil is such a sign too. I doubt that it has a real influence to the war.

5) No ooc whining when you lose in a war. Simple.
6) Handle losing/winning graciously, roleplay through it and be a rolemodel for newer players on how to handle losing/winning.

Amen.


All in all, i think these rules are fine. We will ask the other gms and devs to make them official and readable on the homepage.

Nitram

[Kevin Lightdot]

I agree with all of them, but as Nitram said. Do you think everyone would keep to the 3 lives thing?

[Korm Kormsen]

would it be possible, to mark the soldiers of the forces?

in my opinion that would give two avantages:
1) no old friends to come back just for battle.
2) less civilians killed by error.

korm

[Nitram]

would it be possible, to mark the soldiers of the forces?

No

1) no old friends to come back just for battle.

I doubt that this can work.
"Oh, it was impossible for me to be around. But now i'm back and active forever and stuff"

2) less civilians killed by error.

Effect of war, called colateral damage
If we add a rule to forbid this, all the fear of war is away. Bad idea in my opinion.

Nitram

[Aristeaus]

Only problem with these rules is that you destroy the concept off roleplay and make it more concentrated upon powergamming.

Everyone would have to powergame unless they wanted to be ruled and told what to do in all instances by the powergamers.

[Kevin Lightdot]

Righto, but almost everyone powergames anyway. >.<

[Aristeaus]

Probably Kevin, but it shouldnt be a requirment.

[Alkuurg]

The general idea of trying to regulate ingame wars is good, yet some points i'd like to make:

This idea supports pking. Currently there is someone ingame (Who I wont name) who runs into town, kills one of Galthran's followers and simply runs away again without a single #me, which seems abit pointless. If these rules were implemented, you'd just have more of this, turning this RPing game into nothing more then a points game. 3 strikes are you're out? A war should be (As everything else) Played out with good rp, a leader should know when they've lost and RP it as such, without the need for some gm to be shouting at them "You've died 5 times!". When forcing ooc someone to do something ic, it never ends happy (Prison escapes and such. You'd notice alot less thieves would escape if the player didn't mind being caught), This will most likely end with another war, when the loser has managed to build a bigger force.

Another point on the pking aspect, the other day we marched to Silverbrand, We RPed the usual: "Grr, stupid knight man grr" and had a little fun, yet if this system was introduced we would have simply gone in and pked a few of their warriors. This negates the whole RPing aspect of the game. You need to have a balance between the technical sides of Illarion and the Roleplaying sides, the more the system takes over, the less people will Roleplay. These war rules do nothing but promote ctrl click play, which is going against the theme of Illarion.

It would also be difficult to count each kill, would unrelated kills count as a point? When would they start to be counted, as soon as war is declared? Some forces wouldn't declare war, and prefer to weaken the enemy with small bandit raids, would these kills count? What would stop the injured character from fighting?

I also see nothing wrong with the divine signs, if a god is angered, a god is angered, you should simply RP around it. However I do agree with you about the pushed stats and such.

-Al

[Kevin Lightdot]

It already is if you want your char to be good at something.

[Aristeaus]

As Alky writes i agree 100%

I can already see the flame threads with people posting thier screenshots after pk'ing someone to proove that they have lost a life :p

And the hit squads running into town while a character is trying to roleplay and getting scragged :p

Runescape here we come! Let me grab my powergamming gloves and scamming boots!

[Retlak]

I like the ideas Sam, but how are we meant to rp undead being.. injured? Animated forces and all. If we want to exclude the rp and accept these rules on these terms then this is fine with me however.

And WHO is the leader in wars? to get some clearence across. For instance we could have Arameh leading his sword into battle, then he gets 5 lives.

What about alliences? are there rules for this?

[Errian Abêth]

No, never has a god helped the peoples of gobiath fight any of the ridiculous challenges they have faced in the past. It is stupid to think a god would help in a mortal only war.

Erm, no? Gods almost helped every time in every big quest. The real heros of this world are gods, the rest are servants.

If these rules are really taken it would make the game quite static. I see your points though and understand them, completely. The same problems you have now every town guard had in the past.
Since characters can not really die in this game they, of course, have the opportunity to come back after a while. Relating this on war on Gobiath one might say "people should know when they are beaten", but who in the world knows that.

Illarion is just not made for conquering by players ... I don't remember it ever really worked.

[Nerian Finera]

No, never has a god helped the peoples of gobiath fight any of the ridiculous challenges they have faced in the past. It is stupid to think a god would help in a mortal only war.

weeelll...that's not right...where would nerian have his heal ability from, then?

and what should a priest do, but calling the gods...

[Misjbar]

Only problem with these rules is that you destroy the concept off roleplay and make it more concentrated upon powergamming.

Everyone would have to powergame unless they wanted to be ruled and told what to do in all instances by the powergamers.

Amen. This is the ONLY argument against this proposal. Unless something is done about the need to powergame, I would be happy to enclose this suggestion in both my arms, and protect it with claws from whomever came close. =3

[Estralis Seborian]

Some people take this game too serious...

In the good old days, the POs of the leaders arranged fights, put much effort on the RP and sometimes, even the result was determined beforehand.

I doubt such rules are a step into the right direction. My rule #1 for such conflicts: Illarion is a game. Games are supposed to make fun. If somebody has no fun, something went wrong. No 3x kill-bs. Play together, not against each other!

[Keikan Hiru]

I only flew over this topic without reading much of the replies, I just wanted to add:

I'll never enforce these rules.

[Thurbert~]

These rules will turn Illarion into a Tibia clone.

As soon as there's a war the characters of one faction cannot play anymore at times, the other faction is online in larger numbers for they'd be clouded on sight.

Wars would be all about who gets the most people online at the same time to bash the others.

[Korm Kormsen]

Effect of war, called colateral damage

i hate "Eier legende Wollmilchsäue". (eggs laying wool-milk-pigs)

so my main char learned just farming and baking.
he killed a total of one pig (Tr-B)
and one sceleton (hellbriar)

but, specially, if this new rules will be implemented, he will have to learn, to defend himself effectively.

and i think other peacefull chars have to become militant as well.

(what a pity!)

korm

[Arameh]

You didnt get it Korm, it would just put some fear in the non-fighting characters, if this happened non-fighters woulnt just watch wars standing and doing nothing like if it was a game of football, they would be maybe more scared and go away from fights like they should.

[Errian Abêth]

@Arameh: I think that is given with the high skill loss when dieing. If a civilian runs into an army, it's his fault.

In the good old days, the POs of the leaders arranged fights, put much effort on the RP and sometimes, even the result was determined beforehand.

I doubt such rules are a step into the right direction. My rule #1 for such conflicts: Illarion is a game. Games are supposed to make fun. If somebody has no fun, something went wrong. No 3x kill-bs. Play together, not against each other!

Very true, amen.

[Garett Gwenour]

Here is the draft revised, I tend to ignore those whom generally complain about everything already that wrote about why they didn't like it. I don't really profit from it considering Stephen is holding by a thread for various reason. LOL i never thought the uber good people would side with the uber bad Stephen MUST be that bad. Anyways, here is the revised eddition sent to me by a good mate of mine.

1) Each soldier or combatant is allowed three resurrections/deaths from battle during the course of a campaign. The duration of a campaign being 2 weeks or less as dictated by events in game. A death is incurred if you are sent to the cross while attacking a town or base of operations of the opposing faction.
”I would seriously suggest that GMs support this and If logs prove the rule was violated a penalty of a character being removed from game for duration of –campaign- is imposed.

2) A member whom has lost all 3 lives within the campaign is presumed to spiritual or physically weak to fight for the 2 week or IG duration of the campaign and may not act in defense of there base/home of offence upon there enemies.

3) Leaders of forces even after suffering three deaths may appear on the field of battle and employ shields or armors but will reframe from using offensive spells or weapons.

((leaders get owned you will never get the rules to fly or have people suddenly changing leader to keep there PWNER in play))


4) The out come of a war will be dictated by player action or inaction as well as skill, it is therefore agreed gms shall not intervene by use of pushed characters, upping of skills or providing free resources.

5) Roleplay does not encourage winning or losing and even losing one home and possessions can present a diverse and interesting role play experience. By honoring these guide lines there should be no need for ooc complaint about engagements in game

6) everyone who plays this game does so for fun when one obtains station of command or leadership that will always be a result of love and dedication for the game. By that token be communicative with your opposition and attempt to facilitate fun for all. If losing materials or position in game would drive you to ooc anger perhaps leading or even conflict is not a role suited to your style of rp.

Of course in a game where time zones and real life are a factor certain considerations must be made, not only to remain unbiased to all but also to take into consideration the world of illarion.

Combat outside of town so long as due role-play is shown is always acceptable and is not subject to any rules regarding numbers.

Sieges how ever should proceed by contacting a ruler/leader via PM, MSN or forum. A siege must be declared and a date set preferably with in 72 hours of announcement. If the leader is not available it is hoped one of the prominent players of the faction will respond. Once a day is agreed a time shall be set, a siege may occur anytime with in a three hour window.
So if a siege is agreed for 7pm gmt on Tuesday attackers may appear any time up until 10pm gmt.
My best warrior is away for a week, my potions are finished or we only have three active players is not sufficient reason to deny a siege.
By the same token do not wait for your rival to take a weeks vacation and call siege purposefully in his absence.

I would suggest any more than three players entering town with intention to kill players should be treated as a siege. This avoids the unfortunate occurrence of a few skilled players pking a crafters meeting just because the warriors are not online.
One could even suggest that with out siege no more than three characters may be sent to the cross before attackers must retreat.
It is not unbelievable role play that the guards have been altered or reinforcements are coming just because there are only 8 players on line does not mean Gobiath only has 8 inhabitants.
This really does curb pking, they can of course kill or engage any one who follows them seeking a fight.

[Keikan Hiru]

More of these rules = more of ooc bitching.

[Poots]

hard to enforce.