PC vs. PC: FIGHT! Love it or hate it?

[Seattle_Jim]

A place to discuss the good, the bad, and ugly of PC vs. PC. A place to to discuss everyone's valid opinions- This thread is should not be used to dircetly convince others to your side of the table on this topic or attack others opinions on the subject. Share what you like or dislike about it, but don't expect to change anyone's views. Let people read what you have to say and draw their own conculsions.

Off-topic: I attempted to split this from the NERO Society thread and it all just- vanished. Proof that I am not a morning person and I should not attmept to be helpful when I wake up this early. If I can find the missing threads I will repost them or at worst restore them to the old thread.

Actually at worst is not finding them and they are lost in the ether forever.... bye bye sad missing posts. <-- proof I need more sleep.

/Off-topic.

Discuss!

 

[Kauss]

ok, PC vs PC for good background and plot reasons (like definite actions, political maneuvering, agreed OOC conflict (aka the players want to make a story out of it), well made villain characters, that sort of thing. All good.

PC vs PC to beat down the weak characters/players, to just be a jerk, to support a weak idea of being a villain ("well I am just playing my characters and he always steals from the pages), for ooc reasons, for just the goods/money (Unless your background supports it, we have a LOT of characters who are officially noble and good but who will rob fellow players one way or another in a second even though it seems to go against the noble and good), and that sort of thing, all bad

For the most part, any PC vs PC conflict you should be willing to do against a NPC if they fit the bill as well. Gregor as an example, has a mad on about necromancers. Now some PCs will only act like this vs PC or VS NPCs but gregor has the mad on about all the necromancers, so its not (in my view) a PC vs PC conflict, its a PC working with a character trait that a PC happens to be showing right now.

In general Good PC vs PC conflict is ok, its not my cup of tea, but I am good with it. I prefer PC vs plot, but then I have done a LOT of PC vs PC in my years of gamming and don?t need a huge amount more.
Bad PC vs PC, in my view, annoys players who came to game to "game" and often makes the "weak" characters/players leave (what I mean, is some players just aren?t as good as others in combat, no matter what the card says. Or they have some restriction making them weak like being a page, often these people are the target of PC vs PC because the attacking player knows the defending player will do badly, cant defend him/herself. )

An example. As you know, Brian (Polare) and I (Kauss) play ambassadors. And we often get along publicly, since we have different groups we work with. But from time to time (and I presume Brian knows and may have worked with this) we are dealing with a group we both have ties with, or neither do, and then the game of "best" ambassador starts. Now it?s all fairly mild, and we could do more or less, however it?s (In my view) good PC vs PC because it?s very IC, and rather balanced.

 

[Anonymous]

Does your character know the difference between a PC or NPC? Just play your character regardless of who the player of the other character is and how long they've been playing them or how much they paid to play or whatever type of garb they have. Using OOG info, such as who is an NPC or PC, is metagaming. And while from a dramitist point of view it can be used positivly to ensure good RP and story, if you just play your character you will be causeing good RP and story. Of course, that only stands true if you have an interesting character. But that is a topic for a different thread.

 

[Ashe]

Does your character know the difference between a PC or NPC? Just play your character regardless of who the player of the other character is and how long they've been playing them or how much they paid to play or whatever type of garb they have. Using OOG info, such as who is an NPC or PC, is metagaming. And while from a dramitist point of view it can be used positivly to ensure good RP and story, if you just play your character you will be causeing good RP and story. Of course, that only stands true if you have an interesting character. But that is a topic for a different thread.

I agree with Brett very much on this point; PC, NPC, whatever, everyone is at an event theoretically to play. To treat some based on an awareness of their OOC situation is metagaming (if used to 'your' character's advantage).

 

[Sarah]

Does your character know the difference between a PC or NPC? Just play your character regardless of who the player of the other character is and how long they've been playing them or how much they paid to play or whatever type of garb they have. Using OOG info, such as who is an NPC or PC, is metagaming. And while from a dramitist point of view it can be used positivly to ensure good RP and story, if you just play your character you will be causeing good RP and story. Of course, that only stands true if you have an interesting character. But that is a topic for a different thread.

On the other hand, this kind of logic can also lead to a lot of negative feelings between players, as well as personal feelings or actually occurances of player bashing (waylaying and stealing everything from the pages because it's what your character DOES falls in the BAD category, btw.)

There's a fine line between "what is fun for me" and "what is best for everyone involved." Not always will playing something that is fun for you be fun for someone else. And that's where the problems start...

 

[Anonymous]

On the other hand, this kind of logic can also lead to a lot of negative feelings between players, as well as personal feelings or actually occurances of player bashing (waylaying and stealing everything from the pages because it's what your character DOES falls in the BAD category, btw.)

There's a fine line between "what is fun for me" and "what is best for everyone involved." Not always will playing something that is fun for you be fun for someone else. And that's where the problems start...

Which all falls into the seperate topic of playing an interesting character I would opine.

 

[Anonymous]

On the other hand, this kind of logic can also lead to a lot of negative feelings between players, as well as personal feelings or actually occurances of player bashing (waylaying and stealing everything from the pages because it's what your character DOES falls in the BAD category, btw.)

There's a fine line between "what is fun for me" and "what is best for everyone involved." Not always will playing something that is fun for you be fun for someone else. And that's where the problems start...

now there is a flaw in your statement. I like going off by myself and looking for trouble occasionally which falls under the catagory of "what is fun for me" how ever, any time a new player or character comes in game they are given a very simple, what should be sugjestion, ends up bein a command, "Don't go off alone" nine times out of ten if E-random new person goes off alone because nothing is happening and just so happens to die and get resurected, the most common punishment is no help, for example healing aid in battle and such. Trying to find what is fun for me becomes not fun for me because I am not sticking to keeping everyone involved. now if you look at it in a different way, E-random new person stays in town with others, crazy NPC played by jim has uber creature killing treasure looting mod, that new person, who could have had fun on there own, will most likely be told to stay behind because people would have to waist healing on them and they would most likely just die. I think that if your going to go by "whats fun for me" then make sure it is going to involve more than just you and one other person. A good example was jarax blowing up the front half of the earth guild, the "whats fun for me" PC vs PC conflict then involved more people, Jarax attacked someone, people got to conspire and figure out it was him, then someone got to think up a brilliant plan to kill him. I worked out well. I think there is different typs of PC vs PC conflict and people need to be aware of what type they are starting.

 

[Sarah]

I believe there have been some instances recently of plot trying to help the lower players connect with each other so that *they* can go out and do stuff together without the big guns tromping all over it.

I'm not saying PC vs PC conflict can't be fun for all involved. What I am saying is that the players have a certain responsibility to ensure that fun is being had by those involved. If someone is extremely uncomfortable with a situation or just getting too overloaded by it, then you have the responsibility to stop, reevaluate the situation (ask them if they're actually ok, etc), and then go from there.

Too many people get caught up in their characters and the moment and what not and forget that this is supposed to be a GAME and the point of a game is for people to have FUN.

 

[Kasuni]

the point of a game is for people to have FUN.

I agree with this a lot =D The reason I play NERO is to have fun, and I'm assuming that a lot of other people play for the same reason.

I know medigaming isn't supposed to be good, but there's a time in which you should probably use it a little bit.
If your character is a big powerful phycho murderer and has fun by killing random people... and then your character sees someone walking alone on a path and thinks: VICTIM. What if it's a paige who is on their first event? I think that unless you have a VERY valid reason for killing them aside from the fact that your character has fun murdering, you shouldn't do it. NERO should be fun for everyone! You've got to look out for the other people, and try to make it fun for them too!

I've found it pretty easy to find IG reasons that you'd talk to new PCs... even something as simple as your character finding them interesting, which in a lot of cases, is very much true.


But anyway, on PC-PC conflict... I like it! It makes things more interesting a lot of the time! And interesting things make events more fun for me. PC-PC conflict is even more drastic than NPC-PC conflict... since you see the other PCs a lot more commonly than the NPC characters.

I don't think you should look for conflict by doing things that are against what your character would do, but if you happen to come across it or see an opportunity to create conflict that would be fun... go for it!

Agreeing again with the previous quote, the point of NERO is to have fun! If PC-PC conflict is fun for you, try to make some. If it's not, try to avoid it! It's hard to always have conflict or always have no conflict.

~Emily

 

[Egor]

You know what would be uber sweet. If there was an arena we could go fight in. Like a Fable style one where you fight creatures and stuff. Althought I would miss the roaring crowd. Also with unlimited healing on the side. Of course during wartime it's probably not a good idea to have. But it would be sweeeeet. :laugh:

 

[Kauss]

You know what would be uber sweet. If there was an arena we could go fight in. Like a Fable style one where you fight creatures and stuff. Althought I would miss the roaring crowd. Also with unlimited healing on the side. Of course during wartime it's probably not a good idea to have. But it would be sweeeeet. :laugh:

Actallly... before I started running gamedays I/Kauss was going to start an IG arena for diffrent types of "fighters" (aka caster vs caster, weapon vs weapon,freestyle, restricted/unrestricted) and it would be pretty easy to do, something that would grow IG untill it might even be doable during an event. It was going to be run like a modday, so tho no unlimited healing, it would have more than enuf lifes (as for healing other than lifesaving, healers would be provided as long as you have the cash.) PCs and NPCs pay to enter, and winners getting a Pot+ any donations local groups might add (Kauss getting some as well )

As I said, if there is a huge intrest in it, I can still do it but..since I would be doing it as Kauss, I would need a plot/staff member there as well for some things. The nice thing is, they could be a fairly junor member so it might also be a good way to some plot experance (and some NPCs getting some one on one combat under there belt.)

 

[Anonymous]

Rereading through this it appears that what people dislike most about "player vs. player" is when player(s) a bash on player(s) b for little to no reason. For clarity I would suggest calling that "Player bashing" and not "player vs. player".

To simplify conversations I would suggest that "player vs. player" be used as a term to indicate drama/conflict perpetuated between paying players.

"Player bashing" could be a term when a player (not a character) is just behaving poorly to another (or multiple) players.

Though I suppose it would be more apropo to call it "character bashing" and "character vs. character" instead of using the metagame term of "player".

 

[Kauss]

Rereading through this it appears that what people dislike most about "player vs. player" is when player(s) a bash on player(s) b for little to no reason. For clarity I would suggest calling that "Player bashing" and not "player vs. player".

To simplify conversations I would suggest that "player vs. player" be used as a term to indicate drama/conflict perpetuated between paying players.

"Player bashing" could be a term when a player (not a character) is just behaving poorly to another (or multiple) players.

Though I suppose it would be more apropo to call it "character bashing" and "character vs. character" instead of using the metagame term of "player".

The problem is, player bashing is a thin line. Anyone with half a brain can make the excuse of "This is how my charicter is" And sometimes its true. Other times its just a thin excuse, but since they can kinda back it up, its hard to much about it.

 

[Ashe]

Rereading through this it appears that what people dislike most about "player vs. player" is when player(s) a bash on player(s) b for little to no reason. For clarity I would suggest calling that "Player bashing" and not "player vs. player".

To simplify conversations I would suggest that "player vs. player" be used as a term to indicate drama/conflict perpetuated between paying players.

"Player bashing" could be a term when a player (not a character) is just behaving poorly to another (or multiple) players.

Though I suppose it would be more apropo to call it "character bashing" and "character vs. character" instead of using the metagame term of "player".

Thank you Brett - I would agree with you very much regarding your terms and conditions which you are applying to the terms. Player vs. Player (PvP) means (to me at least) that you have characters who are engaged in conflict. It does not mean that Player A is going to kill player B. Likewise PvP does not necessary mean that it is always one on one. Usually PvP situations are group based in that two or more groups are butting heads in a dynamic manner. Classic PvP Situations are always organic and because of this 'organic' quality, usually of more importance to the those involved as the situation has occurred ingame, rather then through a contrivance of plot for instance. I support PvP. I don't support Player Bashing.

 

[Ashe]

The problem is, player bashing is a thin line. Anyone with half a brain can make the excuse of "This is how my charicter is" And sometimes its true. Other times its just a thin excuse, but since they can kinda back it up, its hard to much about it.

Kauss. I'm rather confused by your statement. How does what your saying pertain to PvP which is the nature of this thread? This thread is suppose to be about PvP. It seems to me that Brett's statements were clarifications, terms, the offering of tools to help us discuss the subject of PvP. Your statement in and of itself seems off topic as exampled by your begining line 'The problem is, player bashing is...'

Perhaps a separate thread should be started to discuss player-bashing?

 

[Anonymous]

The problem is, player bashing is a thin line. Anyone with half a brain can make the excuse of "This is how my charicter is" And sometimes its true. Other times its just a thin excuse, but since they can kinda back it up, its hard to much about it.

Can a jackass really hide for that long? Peer pressure is a wonderful tool that isn't often used enough. If somebody is acting like a jerk call them on it. Tell them you don't appreciate it. If enough people stand up and call it out the person will either quite player bashing or leave the game. Either way it's to the benefit of the game.

However, back to the topic of player vs. player, I don't think the chance for a bad apple should negate the whole thing. It's akin to saying that we shouldn't have rules because somebody could cheat. If you pare enough away on the off chance somebody could abuse it you'll eventually find yourself with nothing.

That said, it's been my experience that a player who would engage in player bashing will do so whether or not the game in question actively supports player vs. player conflict.

Back even farther on topic of why I support player vs. player, I recall a time back in NERO Northwest. Some people from Cali came up and if plot was not directly engaging them they sat around and complained. Their environment I came to find out was totally against player vs. player conflict. I would have hated to be their Plot staff, completely responsible for providing minute by minute entertainment for a bunch of consumers.

 

[Sarah]

I think what Phil is trying to say is that there's a fine line between the two, and that it's often very easy to blur that line so much so that others feel powerless to do anything about it.

 

[Kauss]

Kauss. I'm rather confused by your statement. How does what your saying pertain to PvP which is the nature of this thread? This thread is suppose to be about PvP. It seems to me that Brett's statements were clarifications, terms, the offering of tools to help us discuss the subject of PvP. Your statement in and of itself seems off topic as exampled by your begining line 'The problem is, player bashing is...'

Perhaps a separate thread should be started to discuss player-bashing?

Let me rephrase, what I mean is that pc vs pc is often mixed in with player bashing becouse of the thin line between the two. So while player bashing deserves its own catagory, it is (In my view) part of the pc vs pc nature of things.
In a perfict world pc vs pc would be a very diffrent catagory than player bashing, but as it stands it is under the umbrella of PC vs PC issues (In my view of course )

 

[Kauss]

Can a jackass really hide for that long? Peer pressure is a wonderful tool that isn't often used enough. If somebody is acting like a jerk call them on it. Tell them you don't appreciate it. If enough people stand up and call it out the person will either quite player bashing or leave the game. Either way it's to the benefit of the game.

However, back to the topic of player vs. player, I don't think the chance for a bad apple should negate the whole thing. It's akin to saying that we shouldn't have rules because somebody could cheat. If you pare enough away on the off chance somebody could abuse it you'll eventually find yourself with nothing.

That said, it's been my experience that a player who would engage in player bashing will do so whether or not the game in question actively supports player vs. player conflict.

Back even farther on topic of why I support player vs. player, I recall a time back in NERO Northwest. Some people from Cali came up and if plot was not directly engaging them they sat around and complained. Their environment I came to find out was totally against player vs. player conflict. I would have hated to be their Plot staff, completely responsible for providing minute by minute entertainment for a bunch of consumers.

Sounds like a lot of table top games, tho I agree its hard to even try to do something like that unless the NPC/plot ratio is very high per player.

And true, I have seen problem players double hook and become problem NPCs.

Tho from an earlyer topic, I do think its more charicter vs charicter that I support and PC vs PC I do not support.

That said, what are the diffrences people see bettween PC vs PC and charicter VS charicter?

 

[Kauss]

I think what Phil is trying to say is that there's a fine line between the two, and that it's often very easy to blur that line so much so that others feel powerless to do anything about it.

Close but not quite, mostly I am saying that (In my view) player bashing is a sub catagory of PC vs PC conflict (a bad sub catagory but.. stull a sub catagory)