Player vs. Player Discussion

There are really four proposals here.

1. PvE one-off combats with no consequences.
2. PvE one-off combats with consequences.
3. PvP with no consequences.
4. PvP with consequences.

All of these can be voted on separately, and will probably need different rulesets. As a suggestion, I think 1 & 3 are the easier ones to implement, and you can probably use something along the lines of the Spell of Undying in-game to take care of it. And in-game, it would probably be legal and above-board. Meanwhile, 2 & 4 are probably illegal and underground in-game, and can probably wait on approval until 1 & 3 have been tested for a while without issue.

Sorry, I disagree. No need for so many proposals.

PvE or PvP with no consequences is probably not necessary to discuss further. If there are no consequences (meaning no risk of dying like on an adventure), then definitely no reward should be given. Therefore no need to involve LPF Judges.

Putting on my DM hat, if I am not at least earning DMC, why would I do it instead of running a short adventure with 1-2 encounters? Answer, I would not.

As a player I feel the same way. I like doing encounters, but if there is no XP or GP involved, then I would prefer to keep my character eligible for upcoming adventures recruiting.

Bottom line with those two options, participants can do as Walking Dad suggested. Two players can go start their own thread and do whatever they want, leaving Judges and DMs out of it. Same thing if a DM is willing to run an NPC encounter without rewards, just go do it, no need for Judge approval like an adventure.

The other two issues can be combined for simplicity (pretty much using Systole's idea).I think that is it. While the badge system is interesting, it is a complication that is not necessary.

Other points with bearing on the discussion:
A. If someone challenges your character, you can decline. Simple as that. If you were ticking someone off at the time and then back down when they decided to take offense and challenge you, then you deserve to be a called a coward if that's how you role-played it. Essentially, the fact that the Arena exists doesn't change people's behavior.

B. Since a Judge would have to sanction any PvP encounters, time will pass if tempers are involved. Then, anyone shamelessly bullying will not get approval. As the activity is not actually happening in the DWI, then no need for Grog to bash heads either.

C. If the PvP contest is mismatched in numbers or levels (no reason it has to be 1v1, could be 1v2, 2v2 or whatever), then each side of participants should have an NPC or two assigned to make it more balanced. This will require a DM to be involved and a proposal submission to be approved by a Judge.

D. Why allow this at all? This is the biggest debate issue and it comes down to two simple points for me.
1. Provides an easier to get approved mini-adventure that will give a smaller number of characters something to do. If you can find someone with some free time (but not enough to do an adventure proposal) then you might not have to sit around in the DWI for weeks or months waiting.
2. If players/characters want to role-play conflict IC, there is a way to tell people to put up or shut up without breaking character. Without even the option, there is no threat of consequences for a character's IC behavior.

Fundamentally, I disagree with many of the people that think allowing PvP will cause people to have more conflicts and detract from their enjoyment in LPF. There are two sides to any IC disagreement, and both players are participating if they are posting. In reality, if you talk smack to someone, you deserve what you get. Being able to offend someone IC and not pay the consequences, is essentially a license to insult others and ruin their fun.

I would vote against PvP in this format for two reasons. First, my previously stated opinion that PvP should involve no XP or GP rewards. Second, in no case (IMO) should PvP involve any lasting harm to the characters involved. Why would one do it, then? For purely role playing reasons, to increase one's fame, etc. I like SK's badge idea for this, and so far his would be the only 'system' I'd give a yes vote to.

perrinmiller said:

Fundamentally, I disagree with many of the people that think allowing PvP will cause people to have more conflicts and detract from their enjoyment in LPF. There are two sides to any IC disagreement, and both players are participating if they are posting. In reality, if you talk smack to someone, you deserve what you get. Being able to offend someone IC and not pay the consequences, is essentially a license to insult others and ruin their fun.

Click to expand...

(Emphasis mine).

Is a PvP system with no risk 'realistic'? NO. Is it 'realistic' to have a first level weanie talking smack to a fifth level hero? NO. Would such a silly character deserve what he/she got? YES. However, this would surely lead to the very thing that we originally outlawed PvP to prevent - hard feelings, ongoing grudges between PLAYERS rather than CHARACTERS, and people dropping out of LPF. If there's smack talking going on, ROLE PLAY it. Sorry, pm, but your belief that many of our players aren't willing or capable of that level of make believe interaction argues strongly against the notion that they are capable of handling their character getting their butts handed to them - and we don't need the kind of feelings that would foster here.

SK's proposal would also serve to take care of one character 'talking smack' to another, in every situation where such would be able to be resolved by deadly arena encounters. In neither case would any physical conflict be allowed without both characters agreeing to the fight.


Obviously, I'm only one judge of seven and could very easily be outvoted, but I would definitely vote NO to any PvP proposal that involves any potential for actual harm to the characters involved, and for any system that involves XP or GP reward for PvP activity (I could possibly see allowing them to accumulate TXP and TGP). I'm actually still on the fence in regards to voting yes for PvP activity in any form.

The more I think about it, the more I just don't see the need for arena PvE of any sort (1&2). Without consequences, it's just a training run. With consequences, it's not functionally different from a short 1-2 encounter adventure, like Dockside Diversion. I don't think there's a need for a proposal for the mechanics of it. Maybe for a city feature like the Pit of Blood or whatever the hell I called it, but LPF rules cover the rest of it already.

perrinmiller said:

...

This is a frustrating role-playing situation when a character cannot act in proper character to deal with a situation. Essentially the higher level character has to turn the other cheek.

...

Click to expand...

So it would be better if only higher level characters may insult lower level characters? Because the other way around lies a smack-down? This is maybe realistic, but not something I would like to see.

For the sample situation, NPCs controlled by the judges who enforce some behavior in their hang-out would be more appropriate, IMHO.

Mowgli said:

... but I would definitely vote NO to any PvP proposal that involves any potential for actual harm to the characters involved, and for any system that involves XP or GP reward for PvP activity (I could possibly see allowing them to accumulate TXP and TGP). I'm actually still on the fence in regards to voting yes for PvP activity in any form.

Click to expand...

I'm with you on this and adding my NO.

what about my original proposal for non-lethal arena combat? I mean that was my original thought with regard to pvp, where the combat was not lethal in any way shape or form, unless maybe if both players agreed to lethal combat before hand and got the judges to approve lethal combat in that situation (which I consider unlikely). I still see no reason to prevent the use of non-lethal pvp.

I still see no reason why allow it as official part pf LPF...

Mowgs, I have no problem role-playing it, it was the lack of reciprocation. I am a creative person, so I will find away to deal with it if it happens again.

I would vote no for non-lethal PvP and any combat that doesn't provide rewards.

I am intrigued with SK's idea, but paying for the privilege of participating in something without equal rewards to being on adventure? Not really interested and I probably would not participate as a Judge in that either.

However, developing a vehicle for arena combat of 1-shot encounters (basically treated like mini-adventures) is something I might pursue after I finish up one of the games I am DMing.

Without PvP, it really isn't related to this discussion anymore, but there definitely is a need to have something short to occupy players during significant down time between adventures. I feel really bad that GlassEye, Songdragon, and others had to wait 1-2 months while waiting for DMs to come up with something, but I was not in a position to do much about it.

It looks like my badge proposal is the only one that might get enough traction on compromises to be viable.

But, I am going to be busy with 36 hours of table top games over the next four days, so I will have to flesh this out after Tuesday or Wednesday.

A) "Buy a badge" is just expensive enough so we don't get a flood of 0 xp newbies that want to harass people for fun. It has to be expensive enough to cut into their weapon/armor budget. 50 gp was a good arbitrary number for that. It is negotiable.

B) "I am not wearing a badge" becomes a "go away, you are bothering me" that is effective against higher levels meaning "or I will call the guards" or to lower levels "kid, your bothering me and I am not in the mood to get my boots bloody".

C) Putting on a badge after an (maybe just perceived) insult, is a "playful bickering is over, you wanna fight or are you going to apologize for that?" The offender has his chance then to back down and apologize.
Solves PMs issues.

D) The badge being used in (B) or (C) is enough that all the outside observers knows what is going on and can step in or not appropriately, instead of guessing as to "was that offensive enough to start a brawl?" This solves the "When do judges know to have the guards step in?"

E) Earning 1/day TXP/TGP for losing a fight and 1/3 normal TXP/TGP for winning a fight seems to be a good compromise. It is just enough of a trickle to level someone that is "sparring/training because they are 20 XP short", but no where near enough to be viable as a "I am going to do this all the time" endeavor. Heavy compromise everywhere.

F) Any player can be the referee for a fight. We don't need one of the seven judges to take out time from their overworked schedules to approve or referee a fight. We have a shortage of GMs as it is causing delays and idle characters. No need to burden GMs even more. Considering that initiatives can be rolled with highest winning, and picking a static map to start on, even the referee can be extraneous.

G) Fluff wise, the arena is run by honorable dwarven clerics and is supported by the White Cloaks/city guard. Otherwise, we get into possible bribes and fixed fights issues. And we can't have the city guards throwing people into a "blood pit" over squabbles in a civilized city. (The seedy blood pit idea tends more towards PvP could be anywhere which we don't want.)

H) The dwarven clerics have "just enough juju" that we never get to a actual kill. One or two "Reach Breath of Life" spells qualifies and doesn't require a "never before seen spell". Combatants can also choose to fight with wooden weapons provided by the clerics so as to do non-lethal damage from the start. (Keeps Mowgli happy)

I) One arena thread. If there is already a fight going on, then I suppose we can start a second arena thread. The attempt here is to give an option for PvP, but make it rare due to expense and few rewards.

J) Those that want PvP can strut around town wearing their badges. Those not interested have to do nothing to be left alone. Opt In at it's finest.

-SK

I like this proposal (even without the wooden weapons, given that the clerics keep any combat from becoming lethal and that we allow characters to fully heal between 'adventures').

Still not completely convinced that we need PvP in LPF, but if we're going to have it, this proposal is one I could get behind.