So my understanding is that this forum uses mostly (if not solely) emote-based fights. I'm here to suggest another way...
Fight using your in-game abilities! If someone dies, that person is considered "knocked out," unless agreed upon before-hand that the loser of the fight dies. During larger battles or raids, people that die are allowed to come back once during the fight, but if one dies twice, then again they are considered "knocked out." This combat system would allow for large and small conflicts to be dealt with in a more visually appealing manner, and theoretically would make sense in-character. After all, there IS a declared war between the Alliance and Horde (according to what I understand); attacks on towns wouldn't/shouldn't be
that infrequent, correct?
I don't particularly like the roll system, but am okay with the trust system (reminds me more of forum-roleplaying than anything). This would supplement those systems, not replace them, only being used when all involved were alright with it.
Comments, questions, concerns?
There are two problems with this system:
- This system of combat relies on player-versus-player prowess, which can skew the results in a way that wouldn't necessarily be level; and
- The emulator we utilize does not have all player abilities working properly. This can impair the ability to compete in player-versus-player combat since an ability that could level the playing field or provide an important role in combat may not work properly.
I'm particularly fond of this combat myself, but I recognize that others do not like it and that there are factors that impede its effectiveness on this server.
Edit: Like you, I don't like roll-based combat (except for player-versus-environment settings, like conventional table-top roleplaying scenarios) and favor trust combat! We appear to have a lot in common.
1) level? What does that have to do with anything?*'**
2) is there a list of such abilities? Might be useful to have on hand when doing PvE type stuff. =P
*a combat system in which all characters have equal chances of hitting and missing seems unrealistic, and character prowess should play into fights. A master at swordplay should easily be able to best a novice, and that is part of the reason I dislike the "roll" system. For D&D its fine, rolling, but that's because it is easy to use and the rules come with stuff that emulates such skill. Simple rolls however, does not.
**a combat system in which things are level isn't exactly found in the "trust" system, is it? If a character is better prepared, better skilled, and/or using tactics that give them an edge, it isn't level, is it? So.... neh?***
***if you disagree... talk to me! =D
The only problem, in fact, is that Peons with the best possible level (50) will stand no chance against any of the Grunts with approved character profiles. And level must not be a factor in RP.
There are many roll systems that are extremely well balanced (usually used for events, guilds, etc, etc), and, honestly, I like roll systems better than trust. Trust fights leave a gap for godmoding (yet, I haven't met a CotHer that does it in a trust fight yet).
The point was... leave in-game mechanics fight for PvP/PvE servers! We need no visual manner of fights - we have imagination. And this is what RP is all about, right?
EDIT: I just saw your post. First you talk about fighting with in-game mechanics and abilities. They are impacted by the level of the character... unless I misunderstood what you mean.
My response to the peons not being able to face the grunts....
"This would supplement those systems, not replace them, only being used when all involved were alright with it."
~OP
And for your second point... I'll happily be your first godmodder! =D
We'll go face each other, and then I'll take control of your character and make it skip down the golden brick road to see the Wizard, the Wonderful Wizard of Silvermoon.
Well, once you start RPing, you could just suggest to use in-game mechanics to the people you RP with.
And about the godmoding, I only do trust fights with people I have RP'd with, so I highly doubt it is possible. :P
I feel my suggestion would be best taken on as a more official thing, at the very least so that if I do suggest it, I don't have to explain it every time. ;-;
Plus, others might like to try out the idea without my being there.
When I say level, Yau, I mean in such a way that factors other than skill in player-versus-player combat determines the outcome of a fight. Roll combat can take into account the discrepancies between someone skilled in combat and someone who has just picked up a sword; player-versus-player combat cannot since it inherently relies on a number of other factors (gear and that on a server where most of us wear statless copies of gear; ability to play one's class well; and talents and abilities that may not be working properly or as intended). Throw a handful of players into a scenario where they can fight using actual player abilities and you're no longer taking into account those other factors that you've outlined.
However, when you introduce trust- or roll-based combat systems, you can account for those. You can either choose to allow the more skilled character have the advantage or numerically introduce that skill by rolling with bonuses (the skilled character may have twenty added to his roll or the inexperienced character can only roll out of fifty).
Edit: It appears that you're arguing against yourself. You want to rely on player-versus-player combat, but you also want to take into account the characters' abilities, training, and experience; I can't see that coming into play with the option that you've offered.
I see your point about arguing against myself Piro. Allow me to elaborate; RP combat that take into account character ability is best RP combat. However, the game gives us a way to fight, and it is showy. Thus why not use it? I've barely roleplayed in WoW, but the one time we got into a fight, we fought use the game battle system. Because we knew beforehand how it should turn out, it turned out exactly that way; we directed the battle so it took into account character abilities. I understand that a place where abilities might not work correctly isn't the best for "lets fight, player vs player," but with OoC understanding of what works and what doesn't, and making sure that people fight the way they should given their character nonsense (forgive the phrase), it should turn out well... or at least, it did.
Well, there's one other factor that hasn't been mentioned. Despite its name, Conquest of the Horde isn't split into two factions. We have introduced a system that allows both factions to converse with one another, be grouped with one another, be guilded with one another, and generally allows them to go beyond the limitations introduced by Blizzard in its efforts to maintain a two-faction system. This means that, frequently, opposition doesn't necessarily come from the opposing faction but instead from members of the same faction. So while combat can occur between individuals of the same faction or two groups, each comprised of members of the opposing factions, this doesn't allow for combat that can occur within members of the same faction.
Of course, this doesn't mean that when/if your introduction is approved that you can't apply player-versus-player combat into your roleplay. There's nothing that prevents you from doing so, other than your partners' willingness or unwillingness to do so.
Duels. =)
The fight I was in IC was between a human warlock and a human priest. =D
(04-13-2012, 11:07 PM)Piroska Wrote: [ -> ]So while combat can occur between individuals of the same faction or two groups, each comprised of members of the opposing factions, this doesn't allow for combat that can occur within members of the same faction.
Emphasis added. Per my post, I did make mention of individuals of the same faction fighting against one another. However, this does not allow for the large-scale battles that you mentioned in your original suggestion. Unless the larger battle is handled one-on-one in what would probably be an exceedingly tedious manner.
Unless people are stupider than I give them credit for, it wouldn't be -that- tedious. In fact, it might be a bit more realistic/epic, having just those two locked in combat against each other in the midst of random destruction. A bitter duel between allies in the midst of conflict, a battle between two hard warriors determined to best the other, etc.
I apologize; perhaps I was imprecise. I was mentioning the use of the duel system as a substitute for large-scale battles between members of the same faction. If you had two raids comprised of a single in-game faction, trying to simulate combat between them wouldn't be feasible using the duel system unless each individual was paired with another, encouraged to duel, and then moved onto the next.
Aah, yes, I see what you mean.
My response again is: supplement! My suggestion isn't intended to replace anything, only to be an understood option. =)