Roleplayers: Would You Take This Option?

[Elizabeth]

Why would they get loot? What purpose would loot have if they never log in?
Does that mean along with crafting they would never get to make swords, guns, or anything?
Wouldn't that make writers like really poor if they can't sell stuff they could make on grid?

>.>

Well no, RPP can be exchanged for cash already. But yeah I hadn't thought all the details through. It was a concept I wanted to ask the community about, to see how many pure roleplayers we have here.

Look, I might have come across as idk just like NOPE NOPE NOPE.
But I just don't see this being advantageous for a lot of reasons. I think it will do more hindering than good for any of those opting out of grid completely. You disagree, but when you talk about being unable to do things like crafting, ritual and such on grid...I guess I have to say..well is that fair to those players? What if they are the only ritualist in a group in their family or faction that are not just rpers, that might need someone to do rituals in a team raid? How can they help in that scenario? How much money won't they make compared to us selling things for hundreds of thousands of dollars compared to a couple hundred bucks every day?

How will they do business scenarios? how will they give weapons to their family members on grid? Things like that?

If this had started out with no grid aspects, then great idea....but since grid is involved...and thats where the money maker is and all the action is...just seems to be unfair to true rpers.

[Pi dArtois]

My first thought is I'd not like the grid to disappear for me completely. I like Pi making guns, selling them, moving around doing ... not much really, but the moving can be fun. I wish I had more time to look at the whole thread, but I'm slammed at Uni (and should be doing other stuffs at the moment).

It certainly gives food for thought. Thoughts I'll have to give in about six hours since this is my biggest lecture day.

[Velveteen]

You once talked about making a hardcore version of path, and that was back before you started watering it down when permanent death/stat loss was still on the table as a possibility.

Perhaps you could revisit that option using the older version, which even without the stat loss or permanent death is still pretty hardcore compared to what we have today, instead of continuing to change the one game into something so completely different.

Death is nigh on impossible unless the player permits. So I don't really understand for further need. Realism was always meant to be a key aspect in path but with every change we seem to step further and further away from that. Murder happens. Altercations happen. And most of those victims arent willing participants either.

Conflict isnt conflict if it is a preplanned and choreographed dance from beginning to end. Its just...a dance.

[Alexandrea]

Realism was always meant to be a key aspect in path but with every change we seem to step further and further away from that. Murder happens. Altercations happen. And most of those victims arent willing participants either.

Conflict isnt conflict if it is a preplanned and choreographed dance from beginning to end. Its just...a dance.

~points up~ What she said. with chips. And salsa. I'd try the Hardcore for sure but idk where The David would find the time, tbh.

[Pi dArtois]

Conflict isnt conflict if it is a preplanned and choreographed dance from beginning to end. Its just...a dance.

Yes, exactly this. Which is what makes RP awesome. It is a beautiful choreographed dance you've invested time and effort into creating. Which is why i think this idea is interesting. I'm not sure about the whole grid thing, but the potential of something the leans more towards collaboration.

That could be a serious win, for the game, and ultimately a grid that could facilitate RP.

[Velveteen]

If people wanted to be collaborative then they certainly would be.

I really dont think it should fall on David's shoulders to force it.

What this is talking about is forcing it onto people and giving them no choice which is what you do to children. I really dont see that this will help the situation given that the situation is created by the individuals not the game itself.

[Pi dArtois]

All I can do is repeat what Josh said.

I don't view enforcing OOC collaboration as harming the grid, PVP, or interaction. If anything, people are more likely, in my experience, to engage in PVP if they have a choice in the matter. The numerous MMORPGS with healthy PVP communities, which have entirely optional PVP are more than enough proof of that.

Path is meant to be roleplay-centric. RP is an interactive hobby, not a reactive hobby. Players talking is how the system should work.

[Velveteen]

Then there really should not have been a grid to start with and a lot of us could have saved a hell a lot of money.

But...

All I can do is repeat what Josh said.

Players talking is how the system should work.[/color]

^ If that isn't happening then that is the fault of the players. Not the game.

[Pi dArtois]

But we have a game with an active owner/developer who codes things to make improvements, and there is nothing wrong with change, if change moves the game towards a more collaborative environment.

That sounds win win to me.

[Velveteen]

So David changing things will mean that you will more likely to collaborate with people that you don't collaborative with now?

Why can't you just do that yourself?