Inactive Users and Death

[Erroneous 0]

I was gonna post this in the Death's and Account's topic but figured it merit it's own discussion not to get cluttered with the other discussion.

Should we consider users to be "dead" if they have not posted on the RP after X amount of time?

[Sieg 0]

I think that would depend on the amount of time we would agree upon. Though I do think if a user is inactive long enough we could count their character as among the dead and if they ever return, have them create a different character perhaps? If it's ever decided if we'll allow that too.

[Crim 0]

It all depends on where they go inactive. if they do it in a field post and they are surrounded by monsters then safe to assume that yes they are dead.. However, if they are in town/own house. They could be relaxing and trying to "Run away" from the reality they are stuck in the game.

[Nevina 0]

I don't want to force people to die due to inactivity. Just say they decided to live in a town and go fishing all day long or something, like what Crim mentioned. That way if the person ever feels like returning, they won't feel hurt that their character up and died without their control or say in the matter, and it'd encourage them to return.

[Sieg 0]

Well Crim also mentioned that it would depend on where they were located. If you go in active in a field or wherever there are monsters, odds are you're dead anyway. If we end up allowing more than one character per account we'd not exactly be putting people out.

[Mythee 0]

What if characters went inactive/vacationed/toiled away from the frontlines for so long that everyone's level became too advanced for them to catch up? Then maybe upon their return, their levels could be raised the same way as newly joining characters if the system Nevi suggested was to be implemented (still giving them some catching up to do on the other characters, but not cripplingly so.) This would also encourage players that AFKed/were absent to return to the game, since they'll have the fun of distributing some skill points and stats around. In addition to their old character not being dead (unless they choose it? Should optional deaths exist? O: )

@Sieg: I like the idea of people having their characters gracefully exit from a risky scene before they AFK, so cool thought thar. Won't have to come up with "how da heck did they survive dat" later. Also avoids the issue of people going AFK for the sole reason of evading death? xD

[Nevina 0]

But people might be rather attached to their character, I just don't feel comfortable killing off someone they may have put a lot of thought, emotional attachment, and time into without their say in it. I think if someone disappears irl, regardless of their afk position, their in-game the character wouldn't be stupid enough to sit around waiting for death. So automatically moving them to a town seems more logical.

[Sieg 0]

@Mythee: You'd still have to come up with a "how da heck did they survive dat" because if they go inactive during a battle, as suggested, and magically re-appear in a town it's like "Wtf?" Granted I know there were teleporting items and such, but if you're in active right as a monster is about to land a killing blow, you'd still have to explain it. I think having a character in that situation die off is easier.

@Nevina: People are always going to be attached to a character or throw a fit when something happens to them that they don't like. Like I said to Mythee, if a character is about to get hit or be killed by a monster or another player for instance, and go in active, maybe they can avoid the monster, but do you really think that other player would find it fair that their opponent went AFK and didn't come back and was just transported to another town? That argument you two are making works both ways. If you set it up so that the player is automatically transported out of any given situation you're upsetting another set of people entirely. No one's ever going to be pleased.

[Crim 0]

eventually im sure we all are going to lose a character or two. So save your good names for later.. The real challenge will be, what if you have two different topics going at the same time. IF you die in one, you have to explain it some how in the other topics. or just close it with a GM and state player died in another field.

[Mythee 0]

I dunno man, I wouldn't be upset about other people's characters surviving, and nobody's really playing the monsters with such a degree of attachment. However, you're totally right about sometimes things being inevitable. I guess that's why players have to be careful and not get in over their heads. Be well-prepared and all that.

As for AFK deaths, I think Nevi's right about the bad feels. If it's possible to catch the player before they go AWOL and try to encourage them to exit a weird scene logically, that'd be nice, but if that isn't possible it would still be pretty awful for their character to be killed off in their absence and without their involvement. :C I mean, if my character died I'd at least want it to be an epic heroic death, to take even their final moments away from my RP funsies would hurt! XD If in SAO boss rooms and hidden rooms you can't teleport out of still exist, but someone still goes AFK in it, maybe the GMs could try to push things in a direction that avoids people dying, like we do in D&D? Say a hidden trapdoor appears, or give people a drop reward if they go rescue the afk'ed character...? >.<

@Crim: I can see how that could go awry. Maybe people should only be in one danger zone RP at a time. You could have a billion safe zone (no PvP or monsters) RPs but only one dungeonfloorthing run at a time or summat.

[Nevina 0]

If you die in one thread, I don't see why the player can't finish up the rp in another if it was still going. That other thread is a scene in itself that happens at a different time and place and closes when the scene ends.

I agree that deaths should have some kind of meaningful impact. What were their last thoughts? How did they die? What does this mean to others? What did others think when they saw the death? Rather than, "Hey dude you should come play with us again. btw your chara is dead lol."

[Sieg 0]

No offense to anyone that goes AFK during a fight for a long period of time, I'm not looking to protect their feelings. You have to remember that you also need to look at the feelings of the people that are still here to play the game. You may not catch bad feelings over letting someone leave to go back to town, but you can't speak for everyone that will eventually join us here. I just don't think it fair that you look to protect the feelings of a user who left who you don't know if they're coming back or not at the risk of the feelings of the user that is still here. Remember it's the active users that should be looked out for because they're the ones that are playing the game and make up the community of your site.

And while I agree that a death should have meaning it's as I said, you should look out for the players who are still active before you look out for those who aren't.

[Nevina 0]

@Mythee: You'd still have to come up with a "how da heck did they survive dat" because if they go inactive during a battle, as suggested, and magically re-appear in a town it's like "Wtf?" Granted I know there were teleporting items and such, but if you're in active right as a monster is about to land a killing blow, you'd still have to explain it. I think having a character in that situation die off is easier.

@Nevina: People are always going to be attached to a character or throw a fit when something happens to them that they don't like. Like I said to Mythee, if a character is about to get hit or be killed by a monster or another player for instance, and go in active, maybe they can avoid the monster, but do you really think that other player would find it fair that their opponent went AFK and didn't come back and was just transported to another town? That argument you two are making works both ways. If you set it up so that the player is automatically transported out of any given situation you're upsetting another set of people entirely. No one's ever going to be pleased.

Whoops, missed reading this post. I don't think death would be so easy as a random monster or player because players have control of monsters and will be talking with players outside of the rp if they end up doing PvP.

Punishing inactive players for the sake of active players seems needlessly strict. If someone goes inactive, then the remaining active person can move on to someone else.

Edit: Also we probably wouldn't just move them to a town by posting it. I mean for when they return and need to start over, we can say they're starting from a town.

[Mythee 0]

If a good, active player has to take time off due to IRL stuff, I don't see any reason why we wouldn't want to encourage them to return so as to enjoy their company again- especially since this isn't at the expense of the players still playing continuously. I can't think of any disadvantage to anyone, absence or not- so it would seem that protecting the feelings of players that can't be as active would not be at the expense of anyone elses. They would still be reaping the rewards of their activity, regardless of what happens to others! Maybe there's something I missed somewhere, if that is not the case. xD;;

[Sieg 0]

Granted, it does seem needlessly strict seeing as actual MMOs have an idle function, HOWEVER, since in SAO you can't leave the game there is no idle function and I think it unfair that a player get transported to a town if they don't use the appropriate item. If they're in the middle of something and know they have to leave for a long time or can't get on for a long period of time either they don't start that something or they tell the other person and leave the decision of what happens up to that person. If that person wants to move on then they can, if they want to kill that person are you going to seriously step in and go "sorry you can't because they're inactive we moved them to a town" just to protect that inactive person's feelings? Sounds to me like needless way of saving face, you shouldn't worry what the inactive member thinks or feels, worry about protecting how that active person thinks and feels. If you tell people "if you go idle in an area that's not a town and are gone for x-amount of time, your character will be considered dead, or if you leave during a PvP that other player has the option to let you live or kill you off" it'll make people think twice about going to a field and then leaving if their character means that much to them you wouldn't even have to worry about them leaving in the first place.

Telling someone "If you idle and are gone for x-amount of time we'll let you be transported back to town" it's just telling them to do whatever they want to do and to break the physics of the game you're trying to emulate. So yes I may sound needlessly strict, but you've got to look at what you're trying to make a role play out of.

If a good, active player has to take time off due to IRL stuff, I don't see any reason why we wouldn't want to encourage them to return so as to enjoy their company again- especially since this isn't at the expense of the players still playing continuously. I can't think of any disadvantage to anyone, absence or not- so it would seem that protecting the feelings of players that can't be as active would not be at the expense of anyone elses. They would still be reaping the rewards of their activity, regardless of what happens to others! Maybe there's something I missed somewhere, if that is not the case. xD;;

The point of this discussion orignally was to determine a time set on which that "good, active player" who takes time off would have before being killed off. So if that "good, active player" takes time off and returns before the set time I don't see why they'd have to worry. It's those who don't that would have an issue.

[Mythee 0]

Suppose a good, active player takes an entire six months-year off, their return (though with some catching up to do) could be the basis of a plot element. Plus, if it's someone that was fun to RP with I'd totes be happy to have them back. Going back to a previous suggestion, if they even clearly state something like "my character wanted to live the good life fishing and whatnot for a year" so they'd have no reason to die, it's a case where the death wouldn't make any sense. It would be a little forced. xD;

As for leaving a PvP, yeah, I hadn't considered that some players may be trying to kill other people's players. So I did miss something. Derp. It would probably be for the best if there was an automatic loss time in PvP, but leaving the player open to be rescued if they themselves do not reply in time. Liek... if you have to post your reply by 2 weeks in a PvP, other players that don't want that player to die could jump in to help during that time. I'm assuming that situations where you risk being unexpectedly killed by another player would only happen in public RPs, so interference would be within the rules. What do you think?

[Sieg 0]

If a good active player takes an entire six months- year off they're not good or active in my opinion. However going on that basis, if they do, they should idle their player in a town rather than out in a field during a fight or something, so they don't risk death. Wouldn't that make more sense than having them transported to town?

If players want to involve themselves in other people's fights then they can, I just don't think we should save in inactive players by transporting them to towns.

[Nevina 0]

A player can choose who they rp with ahead of time, so they can avoid pkers for the most part. I don't see why people can't plot out what they want to happen for their private rp thread before starting said rp. If I knew I was going to start a PvP, I would plan ahead of time with the other player on who wins and go from there.

Inactivity is usually due to life butting in, not as a way to avoid being killed. I'm sure there'd be a lot of instances where they go inactive even when not in battle at all.

If I was the active player about to kill someone and they went inactive, then I probably would just move on. It happens. If you want to build your character as a PKer, then you could do a solo rp and have your character kill some random person in that solo rp and show the mentality behind it all. Or in the plotting threads, if you want your character to kill someone active rather than a random chara you made up for development, you can ask for a volunteer to be killed even, 'cause maybe someone out there does want a tragic pk death.

I have more points to add, but I'm out of time and gotta run to work x.x And two new posts came up while I was typing this so I haven't addressed them points yet XD;

[Crim 0]

Well, Let me get to the point of this thread... The time a member has to post IF they are in a field should be 1 month if its SP, 2 weeks OP and the PP Group gets to vote if they think the player has been gone to long, simple example is nothing shorter then 2 weeks, same with the PP, though im sure the PP will be more understanding then the OP.

If a member goes inactive in a Town or a House, they are safe but will have to work there way back up to a higher level. Levels will not be handed out like candy in my opinion. Been watching more of the Anime, Fields still will have monsters at lower floors but they are not as common.

I'm not being harsh, but realistic. I know i wouldn't be to happy if a member left for a while and then came back just to be only 10 levels below me. Some people might take advantage of this grace.

Also this is an MMO based around death, the fear of death and the fact that you could die if you screw up. Giving to many hand-me-outs will ruin the fun of the RP and take away the good nature in which the RP is based on.

Edit: @Nevina Planning out RP is great but planning out who will win is no fun at all.Eventually it will come down to one person will win over the other, its just a matter of how its done. Though if you can get someone to let them be killed by you, then good on you. If its me, I promise i wont let you win without a fight and possibly an argument over it ;)

[Namine 0]

Honestly I understand you want to protect someone's feelings about their character, but in the end if you AFK in a field you're going to get seen by a PKer or a monster eventually and you will die. It's like when Kirito and Asuna were taking turns napping to watch each other's bodies. In a town you're safe unless you duel, in a field you're dead unless someone's protecting you. If someone's afk for a long time gives ample notice they can arrange something like that until they're able to return (within reason). If they just drop depending on where they are, they're either dead, or safe in town. Simple, it's how the game actually works and I think if we're basing a lot of our stuff on SAO for the time being we should pretty much follow the game's structure as close as we can. I sympathize with your love for your character, but the game's rules doesn't allow us to be sympathetic to your cause. People want to play this game, they have to realize that this is how it works. If you love your character so much make your second character act exactly like your first one or bring them back when we switch to AFO.

That's the way I think it should go down.

Dueling and PVP shouldn't be predetermined. There should be a system in place that can easily tell an outcome of a duel or pvp fight.