Concerning Character Deaths

[Wuvvums]

Now I'm not against character deaths and I know sometimes they're justified if someone's been antagonistic or outright stupid, but lately it seems that people are very quick to resolve IC issues with an OOC character warning.

While this is all fine and dandy, and in most cases justified, I don't see why people should be so quick to kill off their antagonists. Wouldn't it be neat to have a recurring villain, rival, or just person that plain gets to your character? If we keep this up antagonist might just become an endangered species!

I've been thinking about this ever since the discussion of good vs. evil, and it's quite obvious that whenever conflict does arise some people are very quick to try and put it down and be the hero. While it may be fun what happens after the target of interest is slain? Wouldn't it be much more interesting to reconcile OOCly a way for the baddie to escape?

Next time before killing a character it might be nice to talk things out OOCly and figure what could happen if said character makes it out alive.

[Thoradin]

*Hugs Wuvvums*


Thank you for protecting me... I've had to hide in the shadows for the right time to begin to be evil again. Thank you.

[Clovis]

I can agree with this. But sometimes, it just makes more sense for certain characters to resolve these issues with violence. The kind of violence involving people dying. Character Warnings should always be taken seriously by players.

That being said, I do get a 'little' peeved by the excessive use of character warnings in neutral cities, or worse, faction cities. More so if the people shouting said warnings don't notice that those very same warnings apply to them as well....

You are surrounded by guards folks. Always.

[Wuvvums]

That's what I mean. Yesterday I saw a situation like this.

X was in a city. X had previously killed Y's friend. Y accosts X and tells him to take it outside. X refuses and tries to keep to his own agenda. X gets stalked later on. Character warning.


And I do think character warnings and deaths should happen when they are appropriate but I also like conflict to be drawn out, if you get what I'm saying.

[PiesOfNub]

I'm all up for discussing character warnings/deaths/holycrapwhereismyarm, however, one must consider that we ARE living in the World of WarCraft. It's expected that there will be fights. Although, that said, fighting != character death. I think people really should consider the consequences BEFORE causing conflict or the likes. If someone causing conflict complains about receiving a character warning, that's some pretty shoddy Roleplaying. /2cents

[Wuvvums]

As mentioned I don't think character death should be avoided at all costs. In my case I'm more talking about how quickly a character should be killed. From an OOC standpoint if you kill off a person as soon as you want them dead then it doesn't leave as much room for plot and storyline than say letting them recur a few times before meeting their eventual death. It might not be feasible but I have let a few villains off the hook because of this OOC reason.

[Abishua]

That's what I mean. Yesterday I saw a situation like this.

X was in a city. X had previously killed Y's friend. Y accosts X and tells him to take it outside. X refuses and tries to keep to his own agenda. X gets stalked later on. Character warning.


And I do think character warnings and deaths should happen when they are appropriate but I also like conflict to be drawn out, if you get what I'm saying.

This story seems familiar. It's actually -much- more interesting than just stalked later on.

I did go out there on my own terms, hence why I was preparing my sword with a couple choice runes. -Never- fight on fair ground. Sadly that didn't work when she called for help and got a flock of groupies to run to her aid.

As for being drawn out, I'm not dead (as of yet), and my actual death has been re-focused into me becoming Dael's ghoul. Should be a very exciting and open up for some fun and unique rp situations, in my opinion.

I agree that death shouldn't be quick, and running straight to be the 'good guys' and kill the 'bad guys', but I think that action should be quick and fluid, and to roll with what happens.

Just my two copper. (totally not made of wood <.<)

[aroes]

I agree with Wuvvums, it is nice to have a recurring villian that just gets to your character. Aroes had one in the form of a rather nasty orc, we never did a char death warning but maiming was indeed possible, so I'd say that if you don't want to die look into something like the loss of an eye, hand, foot, even an entire arm or leg. It adds an interesting disability to your character that can lead to different rp.

[Darkneon]

Character Warnings are common courtesy. On some servers, you don't get the luxury of knowing when somebody has the intent kill your character, and ideally that option should be entirely up to you. There's just as many reasons to let a character live and there is to kill one. Though, the latter seems to be a more popular and realistic option.

However, I believe you should only issue a character warning when you yourself are willing to let your character die. CotH advocates fairness, and continuing with the intent of killing another person's character when you yourself are not willing to let your character die is just poor taste.

I do appreciate the post, Wuvvums. Exploring and applying alternatives to Character Death is always essential to becoming a good role player. Character Death being the only option is a misconception reinforced by the common phrase: This is World of Warcraft, not World of Peacecraft. Rules, however, state that all types of role play are acceptable when all players involved are comfortable with it. This includes "Peacecraft". Some people are just not comfortable with their characters dieing, and providing alternatives is never an option to be overlooked.

One reason, is exactly the one you mentioned. Reoccurring villains fuel plot and story-lines, and everyone involved knows that someone may have to die in the end. Why not take advantage of this?

Of course, I'm not saying Character Deaths shouldn't always be applied. They have just as much potential to stimulate story-lines as letting villains live do. Furthermore, sometimes situations are too narrow to allow room for wiggle, and this is something us players have to take into consideration when we role play antagonists.

It's merely when egos get in the way and everyone wants to claim glory by killing the bad guy that it stops being fun and starts becoming redundant and disappointing.

[Abishua]

I agree with Wuvvums, it is nice to have a recurring villian that just gets to your character. Aroes had one in the form of a rather nasty orc, we never did a char death warning but maiming was indeed possible, loss of limbs should be something to look at.

Well, you can have characters who do that but don't actually fight you. Raelsynn is a constant boon to Monide, and it got him chucked out of Rachet for snapping and stabbing him. It's not that he's evil (overtly), it's that he's an absolutely VILE character which you love to hate.
Edit; ninja posted, ignore the bottom part.

[Dotsy]

It's mostly about making it fun for the people involved OOCly. I think characters having conflicts with each other is great, but it's almost like a rule to know that there is someone behind every character who is probably not the same as that character. Character warnings are a good thing, but I think instead of issuing warnings, players should tell each other how they would each like it to end OOCly. The players involved could rationally find a compromise. Each would get what they want OOCly, and their characters still get into the said fight with minimal drama that way. As always though, there's always situations where death is unavoidable still: like walking into a capital city of the opposing faction. It's an idea I've had for a long while now. :/

[dastmo]

The server rules say that all participants must be comfortable with the RP that is being done with/to their characters. So, unless you are outnumbered or you have looked for a conflict like this, then I'd say that you can always refuse to accept the character warning, isn't that so?

EDIT: By 'looking for conflict' I mean, sticking your character's nose in the wrong places and acting like the world is yours, treating other characters like they are your servants, etc... the usual things that can tick off someone just enough to kill someone else.

[Ometh]

However, I believe you should only issue a character warning when you yourself are willing to let your character die. CotH advocates fairness, and continuing with the intent of killing another person's character when you yourself are not willing to let your character die is just poor taste.

I am of this opinion period.
If I receive a character warning, it's like that person raising a PvP Flag to me. The threat of death looms over you if it looms over me. If they aren't willing to let their character die as well, their actions to/against my character are void.

[BountyHunter]

My brief two cents:

Maiming is more interesting then Death, Maim more often.

[Shane]

...Sadly that didn't work when she called for help and got a flock of groupies to run to her aid...

Awww man, its happened innumerable times with me, people calling up their friends to intervene in a fight just sucks. More than getting ganked, I am more pissed me off by seeing half a dozen people "suddenly" arriving at the site of the battle.