Path of the Vampire forum

Doc wrote:Thank you Alexandrea mun.

So if the grid becomes obsolete, will there the possibility of getting the money back for karma spent on in grid items only like lairs, buildings, portals?

And by obsolete, if everyone opts no grid.. its like we threw away money.

The only way the grid would become obsolete is if half (or more) of the players opted not to use the grid at all. That's never going to happen. In fact, looking at the stats and speaking to hardcore roleplayers, nobody would use this system lol.

Doc wrote:David should test it. Allow people to create an rp char only. No grid. Rp in a locked section of the forum that only they have access to, and see if it is supported.

If think if it's overwhelmingly voted down it's probably not worth trying it. I'd probably include more features for roleplayers, such as random loot, but other than that I'd keep the grid as a vital part of the game. At least for the most part.

I’ve been on forums where the whole premise of having stats and earning experience, money, and power came at the discretion of the Storytellers, or, DMs (Dungeon Masters – taken from Dungeons and Dragons). I probably stayed about a month, tops, because they were as inspiring as a ham sandwich.

The story might have been great and the system might very well have been easy to pick up, but it was too much limitation. I felt judged every time my character blinked and it was not a fun feeling.

Path has something special because the grid allows you to have a semblance of solace. You can go on the grid and make up your own mind about what your character does and how they develop without everyone watching, and judging, your every move. And the grid is also useful because it holds everyone to the same rules without the bias of personal favour.

I am a prolific writer. I have always thought of Path being a Roleplaying community first and a game second. You may not see me on the forums all the time writing, but, I am usually here and I’m definitely more concerned with making great stories than anything else.

I am far too weary at this point in time to agree to a system that removes the option of the grid. I guess I’m also not sure what the point would be to remove the option alone. If 50% of the community ignore the grid and 50% focus on the grid, then aren’t you effectively splitting Path in two?

If that were to happen, I would seriously question the staff. Where would their allegiance be if we had two versions of Path operating independently of the other?

Maybe I am just short-sighted, but, to me it’s a simple case of all or nothing. Either everyone uses the grid, or no one uses it. Allowing players to opt-out of a system that holds everyone to the same standards doesn’t seem particularly kosher to me.

Atabei Narcisse wrote:Well, I just think we wouldn't have had the grigori vs city war. Which everyone in this thread thus far was part of.
Other events and wars too. I mean everyone remembers those wars-they are in our history and everyone had fun then.
I remember laughing and the war going on past that one event.
-shrugs-

IC war and OOC collaboration are not mutually exclusive. If anything, OOC collaboration might have seen that several of the players from that time period continued to play the game, thus allowing for more of those types of wars.

Ultimately, people want to know that their IC actions, no matter how other characters react to them, won't be vilified OOC, because then it becomes a matter of feeling like the community is against you.

However, the accessibility of PVP is a bit off topic here. The main point of this thread is aimed towards gauging interest in a purely RP version of Path. For what it's worth, I don't think that system would work either, and the votes here support that. I see it turning out much the way neutrality and battlecloak did in RBC.

Myk wrote:I’ve been on forums where the whole premise of having stats and earning experience, money, and power came at the discretion of the Storytellers, or, DMs (Dungeon Masters – taken from Dungeons and Dragons). I probably stayed about a month, tops, because they were as inspiring as a ham sandwich.

The story might have been great and the system might very well have been easy to pick up, but it was too much limitation. I felt judged every time my character blinked and it was not a fun feeling.

Path has something special because the grid allows you to have a semblance of solace. You can go on the grid and make up your own mind about what your character does and how they develop without everyone watching, and judging, your every move. And the grid is also useful because it holds everyone to the same rules without the bias of personal favour.

I am a prolific writer. I have always thought of Path being a Roleplaying community first and a game second. You may not see me on the forums all the time writing, but, I am usually here and I’m definitely more concerned with making great stories than anything else.

I am far too weary at this point in time to agree to a system that removes the option of the grid. I guess I’m also not sure what the point would be to remove the option alone. If 50% of the community ignore the grid and 50% focus on the grid, then aren’t you effectively splitting Path in two?

If that were to happen, I would seriously question the staff. Where would their allegiance be if we had two versions of Path operating independently of the other?

Maybe I am just short-sighted, but, to me it’s a simple case of all or nothing. Either everyone uses the grid, or no one uses it. Allowing players to opt-out of a system that holds everyone to the same standards doesn’t seem particularly kosher to me.

^ this.

And it is about pvp and its accessibility? That does go into the whole taking the grid option away and just being rp only? Or am I over thinking things like fighting/stats/lairs/etc,etc in terms of how unique things are in grid vs just rp only?

Myk wrote:I’ve been on forums where the whole premise of having stats and earning experience, money, and power came at the discretion of the Storytellers, or, DMs (Dungeon Masters – taken from Dungeons and Dragons). I probably stayed about a month, tops, because they were as inspiring as a ham sandwich.

The story might have been great and the system might very well have been easy to pick up, but it was too much limitation. I felt judged every time my character blinked and it was not a fun feeling.

Path has something special because the grid allows you to have a semblance of solace. You can go on the grid and make up your own mind about what your character does and how they develop without everyone watching, and judging, your every move. And the grid is also useful because it holds everyone to the same rules without the bias of personal favour.

I am a prolific writer. I have always thought of Path being a Roleplaying community first and a game second. You may not see me on the forums all the time writing, but, I am usually here and I’m definitely more concerned with making great stories than anything else.

I am far too weary at this point in time to agree to a system that removes the option of the grid. I guess I’m also not sure what the point would be to remove the option alone. If 50% of the community ignore the grid and 50% focus on the grid, then aren’t you effectively splitting Path in two?

If that were to happen, I would seriously question the staff. Where would their allegiance be if we had two versions of Path operating independently of the other?

Maybe I am just short-sighted, but, to me it’s a simple case of all or nothing. Either everyone uses the grid, or no one uses it. Allowing players to opt-out of a system that holds everyone to the same standards doesn’t seem particularly kosher to me.

You make some excellent points, on many levels. I think I'll probably have to come up with a system that does hold all players to the same standards as much as possible, while still keeping everything fun for those who don't want to PVP.

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?

>.>

Atabei Narcisse wrote: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.

Mooncalf wrote: You make some excellent points, on many levels. I think I'll probably have to come up with a system that does hold all players to the same standards as much as possible, while still keeping everything fun for those who don't want to PVP.

PVP is pretty much non-existent.

It is more skirmish someone not on line. Done. To me that doesn't fall into PVP because it is one sided. It is more Player vs. Character.

Ty no longer hunts violators.

Ty protects their territory, but as long as characters don't loiter in public areas or sewers controlled by Ty or they pay up.. the PVC wont happen.

So I am really curious, based on the replies thus far, are there really that many players that hate PVP...?

For me, the grid is more boring now that there is a four hit rule. It's like why bother.

IF you do come up with a way to keep the players that hate pvp locked out, can we have the old way of PVP back?

Doc wrote: PVP is pretty much non-existent.

It is more skirmish someone not on line. Done. To me that doesn't fall into PVP because it is one sided. It is more Player vs. Character.

Yep you're completely right. It is one-sided. I dislike the PVP options in Path, and that's why I've been mulling over ways to make it better, for quite a while now. Skirmishing has never been a system that I like, because of the reasons stated among others. Battles to the death (and NPC battles) aren't as interactive as I'd like them to be, so I'm disatisfied with that too. Territorial fighting is the only system I'm mostly satisfied with (it could do with some improvements, and true ranged shooting), but even that doesn't YET allow for on-the-fly PVP (1 vs 1 PVP, or group vs group PVP).

But that's all part of the issue, and I have some ideas on how to fix all of that. Basically, I'll be making it so that the game has 1 single battle system for all fights (unless you count PVE quick results, which will remain for those in a hurry). I'm not counting skirmishing in this, because it's not really a battle system, it's just an in-game action. However, skirmishing will also be tweaked a bit again. Which leads me to...

IF you do come up with a way to keep the players that hate pvp locked out, can we have the old way of PVP back?

I'm not going to be locking anyone out of the grid. Even the original idea in question on this poll wasn't to suggest that was ever an option.

The old PVP won't return, no. Because, as you pointed out, that system is more like "skirmish somebody not online", and done. But the lockouts system might be lifted. The changes I have partially-planned simplify all of the systems and quirks and issues and things that confuse newbies, and I believe will improve the roleplay aspect of the game, as well as introducing new options for factions. I'm not going to lie, some people will be pissed off at the changes, but I'm not at all happy with Path's battle systems, and I haven't been for a while.