News 5 15 - Information on PVP policy (long)

NEWS article 5-15:

Dateline 12/15/2004: INFORMATION ON PVP POLICY (LONG)

In DragonRealms, we try and provide a game that is enjoyable for many different people, with many different playing styles. Sometimes, however, those styles conflict, and so we have to do our best to try and come up with a policy that allows for this.

One of the most common "conflicting style" issues, is Player-vs-Player combat. Some players love PvP, and participate in it constantly with their friends because they enjoy the combat. Other customers strongly dislike it, and avoid it at all costs. Generally, as long as the groups don't bump up against each other, and everyone involved in a PvP situation is consenting, there isn't a problem. Unfortunately, one of the most common problems that we hear over REPORT is, "So-and-so attacked me without consent." Some of these cases are clear-cut abuse: the attacker is counseled about our policy, and where appropriate, warned or barred from the product. Most cases, however, are not so clear-cut, and so we have found it necessary to try and clarify what the exact guidelines are as to when PvP is and is not appropriate.

* First, as long as all players are consenting to what's going on, they can pretty much engage in as much PvP as they want. If they want to say, "I'm attacking you because you raised your eyebrow at me," and the "eyebrow-raiser" is okay with that, then you can beat each other to a pulp and we'll stay out of it.

* In the case where one player is saying, "I didn't consent to the PvP!" then there are 2 things a GM will take into consideration:

1) The Present - There are multiple activities that count as "implied consent to PvP": If the "victim" was =repeatedly= (repeatedly being a keyword) slapping/kicking/biting the attacker or any other form of assault(even non-wounding types), provoking them by calling them names, making threats, etc., then it's a situation that a GameMaster will NOT get involved with.

2) The Past - A GM will review both players logs and look at the following information:

Did the "victim" attack the "attacker" recently? If so, that's generally considered consent. Did the victim graverob something from the attacker within the last week or so? If so, that's consent, but *only* for the character who was graverobbed, not for the other characters on their account and not for their friends. Did the "victim" steal from the "attacker" recently? That is also considered consent.

If it looks like there was any type of consent or even "implied" consent, there will be no action taken by a GM. We generally advise pickpocketers that if they're caught, they should expect that there is going to be retribution. We generally advise people who chose to participate in activities that involve the theft of items from other players that they should expect that there is not only going to be retribution from the victim, but also potential problems with the general population of the Realms.

Other matters of note on this subject:

* If a "victim" has a history of yelling "So-and-so attacked me for no reason" on multiple occasions and a GM can verify the current situation, the "victim" may be given a caution or warning for disruptive behavior.

* Sometimes a GM can ask the "victim" and "attacker" to stay away from each other for a while. The request will be noted in both players' logs and if one player continues to seek out the other, warnings for disruption or harassment can be issued. This is considered a last ditch effort to prevent one or both players from being locked out. Violation of a cease and desist order *will* result in lockout for the violator(s).

* If an attacker seems to have a pattern of getting involved in "questionable" situations, such as multiple attacks where they claim there was implied consent, but it can't be proven, or a GM begins to wonder if the individual is just "playing the system", the GM can ask them to try and avoid any questionable situations for awhile. For example, the player might be told: "In order to get your record cleaned up, for the next 30 days, we'd like you to try and avoid any PvP situations. If you're in a challenge or if someone attacks you, you're allowed to defend yourself. If someone graverobs you, you can handle it however you need to. However, please try to avoid any other 'grey area' situations."

* In extreme cases, when it's obvious a player has a problem with getting into questionable PVP situations, a GM can request that a Senior Staff member review the player for a Guardian Curse. If someone has the Guardian Curse, any time they kill another player they will die themselves and they will not be able to be rejuvenated or resurrected. In order to have the curse lifted, the player must have a completely clean record for the length of time determined by the Senior Staff Member. Any policy violations or questionable activities will result in the Curse duration starting over and potentially being extended.

* Once a consent issue is dealt with, then that event is over. If one person steals from another, and the victim decides to pursue that by attacking the pickpocket, when that combat reaches a conclusion, consent is over. Who wins the combat does not matter, once it has ended, consent is over. Additional attacks either way would be considered a violation and could result in warnings or further penalties.

* Cases involving multiple characters often will be resolved under the "Third-Man-In" rule. For those unfamiliar with this, if two people are involved in a fight and a third party jumps in to help, they would be considered a third man in. What this means is that expansion of PvP incidents is not tolerated, and unless there was a previous consent issue, the third man will be treated more strictly than the original participants.

Frequently, PVP situations will just come down to a judgment call, in which case, the GM can only do their best given the information they have on hand. The ultimate goal is to preserve the integrity of DragonRealms as a fair and fun place for thousands of people to play, while still maintaining good relations with our customers. Keeping as many people as possible happy is the ideal outcome. While we hate to make such a call, if it comes down to a small group of people being unhappy versus a larger group of people being happy, we will err on the side of the majority.

END NEWS ITEM