Post:Why You DON'T PvP Survey - 06/23/2011 - 23:57

Re: Why You DON'T PvP Survey · on 06/23/2011 11:57 PM CDT	3548
<< I believe the point that is being conveyed in this thread is that there exists a desire and a need for a new shift/re-write of the way currently policy works so that there is limited need for a Gamemaster to be involved in the conflict unless it's due to extreme circumstances such as harassment. I think that we can be trusted to manage ourselves without the intervention of a GM for every tumble or fall or disagreement someone makes. The way that the current system is built allows for individuals to abuse policy to their own ends. Those that are refusing to report are making a point; even if someone has been abusing their PVP stance or policy for their own gain while that non-reporting player is the target of such actions, they are saying, "Hey. We don't have to call down a GM to resolve the issue. Why can't you do the same?" It only becomes an issue when it starts to become unfavorable for that player in terms of being involved in GM consults if they react in a way the Guarded player uses to their own advantage by reporting and involving GMs. This is often unfavorable to those with Open profiles.>> <<The gray area involved in a GM's judgement based on the situation is hazardous to a fair and balanced 'ruling' in such cases and simply makes it overly complicated and a burden of time/resources. To begin restricting the involvement of GMs would open up a forced maturity among those players who feel as if the GMs are at their beck and call or that they are capable of using report for their own devices. It would be a more effective and efficient way in dealing with these conflicts and free up valuable time for GMs to do more important things - code or run events, enhancing and improving the game rather than playing Judge and Jury when it's not truly necessary for them to do so. Change is healthy and as often as the players have dealt with a flux of mechanic changes, I think they can handle something such as this too.>> Maintaining Policy (and Policy Enforcement) is a delicate dance and while it might seem "obvious" that the solution is "just X", it's almost always not "just X". I understand why you think this might be the case, but experience has shown otherwise. Changing the Consent and PVP Policy in such a way to force a GM withdrawl from PVP issues will not somehow mysteriously make the people who "don't get it" suddenly "get it", no matter which side of "it" they don't get. It won't make players who aren't mature enough to handle PVP (or worse, dying...or heck, let's face it, even being minorly inconvenienced) suddenly start being able to handle it. It won't make the people who bait others into conflicts in an attempt to get other folks in trouble stop. It definitely won't make the people who go around looking for random people to "gank" suddenly stop doing that. If anything, if we restrict the involvement of the GMs, it will only encourage that last group to go around and do it more often, knowing that GM involvement will be less likely. As folks have pointed out, we're a considerable distance away from the "Be excellent to each other!" paradigm that DR began with, but that hasn't decreased the Conflicts, Assists, and Referrals based around PVP matters. Folks who want to get their jollies griefing other folks will still grief and folks who can't handle someone looking at them funny without feeling the need to call for a grownup will still find things that upset them. If everyone who played DR was mature enough to interact with everyone else and handle that interaction, no matter how far it escalated, without either a) doing something to inconvenience, annoy, or incite someone else, or b) allowing themselves to be inconvenienced, annoyed, or incited by any/every little thing, it would be a completely different situation. However, we're dealing with folks who each have their own personal concepts of what DR is supposed to be and who will take up GM time stressing how we're "doing it wrong" because we're not stopping Player X from doing whatever it is they think is being done wrong, regardless of what the Policy. And then we have the "Well if you don't do what I say, I'll just cancel my account" folks to deal with, on top of all that. I think we're doing an important thing here with this discussion, however, and I hope we keep it going. I think the real solution, at least with PVP, is to work toward convincing folks that being attacked/shot/cast at/killed isn't the end of the world. It's not real. It's not (usually) personal. It's not making you somehow less of a (text-based or even real-life) person. It's a facet of the game that is sometimes appropriate and even sometimes necessary. You'll get over it and maybe learn something from it.
This message was originally posted in Discussions with DragonRealms Staff and Player \ General Discussions, by SIMU-SOLOMON on the play.net forums.