Shattered Kingdoms

2.5 rounds is significantly more than 1 round, in fact it's a 50%+ difference. That's significant. Is it perfect? That remains to be seen, but I did mention that we may have to add further tweaks. Instead of complaining, it wouldn't do you any harm to acknowledge the effort we're putting in. The way I see it, it's 50% better than it was.



We did not ignore the RP behind charm person at any point. However, a few months back the staff was also at about 1/3 of its current size. Perhaps you'll understand that it is not as simple to monitor everything when there are several other things to be addressed. For the lack of attention, I apologize. Now that we've more administrators, expect to see more IMM involvement.



Mechanicswise, charm person is an offensive spell, yes. However, it is also different than other offensive spells in that it - in itself - does not cause damage to the victim. The spell is supposed to make your victim like you, as opposed to domination, which means that your victim is more or less your pawn, a slave to your will.

I suppose in terms of game code, there isn't any real difference, except that dominate will only land on people of lower level than the caster. Should we further differenciate dominate from charm person? Yes, I think we should, but that's another issue.

You are free to murder your victim when they have been charmed, there has never been a problem with that. Our issue is how you do it. Ordering a person to remove all of their equipment and attack a lawmob is not something a charmed person would do, unless their master was in danger. Why? Because the natural instincts of survival would kick in.

I can't really give you a definition of how to RP out charm person, but I expect you to put a bit more creativity into it than what has recently been demonstrated. If your master orders you to do something that goes against your natural instincts, you probably wouldn't do it, unless your master had a clever plot or scheme in mind.

Limiting the orders a sorceror can give is probably the next step here, but this isn't a quick fix. Please be patient while we're trying to find an ideal solution. If such a thing even exists.

I think more needs to be fleshed out on this subject. The bottom line problem here isn't how much "RP" is behind charm person it's the fact that in it's current form (yes despite the recent change, no offense Mira) the spell is broken for PvP.

While I understand the position of the staff and pantheon, the problem wasn't started with Jimbo/Vaalim. I might not necessarily agree with some of the things i've seen from Vaalim but he is 100% right - so long as the spell is a part of his arsenal, he is well within his right to use it to the fullest of it's potential.

"But with great power comes great responsibility" you might say. That is absolutely correct as well - we (the playerbase) are expected to show restraint and be responsible but how does one define responsible in the case of the ultimate *I win!* spell? I mean, let's be honest. All that "enforcing RP" behind the casting of charm person does is prevent the charmee from being killed for 10 to 20 minutes after they're taken control of.

I know I would personally rather just be killed on the spot so that I can get back to the action if i'm ever put in that situation.

-PLEASE REALISE-
Demanding the victim of charm to RP slavery/domination is way too much. Whoever argue on this, either doesn't play seriously or is plainly a hypocrite.

There are different kind of spells, each with a unique usage:
create water - creates water in a container
create food - creates appropriate food depending on religion
fly - makes you fly
charm person - allows the caster to force someone into:
-Tanking
-Killing
-Holding things
-Casting spells the sorceror doesn't have in his own spellset
-Using skills the sorceror doesn't have in his own skillset
-Using items that would otherwise harm the sorceror and generally offer great convenience.

Charm person does more than enough. It's a single spell, NOT a spellset of it's own. There is no need for it to be an I-WIN spell in PK, let other incantations do something, just for the fun of it.

End all QQ now!!! The easiest, cleanest, rational and balancing solution.

My main question is this: Is any -more- RP necessary with your victims in between charming them and killing them as opposed to killing them via any other means?

From the ruling made about Vaalim in this thread, the answer seems to be "no." He was at war with the people that he charmed and killed without a word, and also unequivocably hates their guts, and from what you've said in this thread that seems to be sufficient.

That brings things full-circle though: There should be RP behind any player killing, but is there some additional RP standard required for Charm Person as compared to any other PvP action? I personally don't see any reasoning for that (mostly due to the fact that it allows for a lot of subjectivism and openings for whining about favoritism in the future).



That said, if Charm is going to remain as powerful as it is (cast time notwithstanding) then it's -always- going to be used to kill people. As such, I see absoutely nothing wrong RP-wise for someone to charm their enemy with the express intent of killing them and not wasting any time in the process. I also think it's not worth trying to enforce any "additional" RP standards upon charmers if they're using the spell under PvP as I can see that being very subjective: You'll just end up catching some people and letting others off, and people are just going to get aggravated.

I would personally be all right if we could at least still communicate wih others. Via mental speaking or such. Without that there is no otherway for the charmed victim to defend him/herself. Regardless of how the way the person casting decideds to kill the other. Personally, I think it was rather inventive to have the person dropped of the side of a building. NowI never had it happen to me, nor did I ever attempt it, however it was a good idea. Also the havin your cabal guardian kill the player. Its funny. But give the other a chance to call for reinforcements or somthing. Make it a fair spell. With mind communication able to be used, then the spell wouldn't be as overpowered as it is now.

Delete Sorcerer as a class and give Etherealform to Necromancers and Polymorph to Warlocks.

Problem solved.

There was not four immortals there to punish you. Three of the four were witnesses and present for reasons that are not important. The fourth was more desirous to understand the situation involved. Threats were levied only to indicate the gravity of the situation at hand, and to inform you we were serious. Could it have been done differently? Sure, but you are focusing too much on the details, and failing to understand the point.



As mentioned already, these logs are reviewed as they are received. If you have witnessed this, please inform us.

What I believe the majority of the playerbase has failed to understand is the desire behind this. Charm person is different than any other "I win" ability in that the charmie is forced to roleplay the situation out. Why should the charmer be exempt? That is not to say that it is not valid, on rare occasions, to "o X remove all; o X kill y", but the general mentality of charmers have taught charmies to refuse to roleplay because their fate is already decided. Is it really so difficult to act responsibly?

Additional RP is required when using the Final Strike spell as well, because if this was not the case, it would be used so much that SK PK would quickly break down...

Hell, you've been one of the main speakers for how Charm Person is overpowered and now when a temporary counter is being attempted, you're leading the crusade against it?

1. Additional RP for Final Strike is stated very clearly within the helpfile. That's all I've asked for charm person as well.

2. I'm not leading a crusade against nerfing charm (I'd prefer it to be removed from PCs period, that'd be the best combination of easy-to-do and balancing). I do want to make the current rules clear, because right now they're not. Sheesh, nothing has even changed about charm in the last nine months except the cast time, how can I lead a crusade against something that isn't happening?



The charmer shouldn't be exempt, but having charm person cast on someone else is not a two-way street: It does not affect the person who's doing the charming. That said, if he was trying to kill you before he charmed you, there stands no reason as to why he wouldn't be trying to kill you after he charmed you. By tossing you into a guard, he -is- roleplaying the situation out in most circumstances.

I fail to see how it's irresponsible to efficiently kill the enemy that you have under your complete control. Charm Person makes the charmee become friendly to the charmer, not the other way around: Why would the charmer even have to fake a friendship? He's got complete control of the charmee's mind. You seem to be implying some subjective rules to the spell of Charm Person that are not mentioned anywhere: Not in the helpfiles, and not in any statements made by Dulrik: And that is exactly what I am trying to fish out here.

If we need to know more than this in order to use the spell without getting in trouble, there is a problem. If the implementor of the MUD envisions his staff enforcing more than the above information, then that implementor has an obligation to make these things transparent to users and enforcers. That is, in fact, a vital part of the implementation process.

If the implementor's directions are being interpreted, those interpretations need to be available to at least the enforcers transparently. The staff is three times the size it was: unity in interpretation is vital lest users become frustrated at 10+ different, potentially subtly conflicting interpretations. Rhetorical question, but: if I asked each member of the staff what they would see as good or poor charm person usage, would they all agree? Would they all punish for the same things? And more importantly, does the user base perceive both consensus and substance in the staff's stance on it?

Personally? I would make these 'high roleplay value' abilities send an echo to enforcers, so that they can quietly be alerted to come potentially watch. When a PC fails a charm person save, send a message to the prayer channel to allow for a due diligence on the part of online staffers. That simple. The logic is the same as speeding cameras: if you know that it is highly likely you are being watched, you are highly likely to watch yourself in kind. Unanticipated, but nonetheless earned, enlightenments and curses for both charmer and victim would change the face of how the spell is used faster than any other change could be implemented.

A gentleman's agreement depends on everyone involved being gentlemen. The forums lead me to believe something a little less vague would make everyone's work and play more enjoyable. Carrots and sticks are both more effective and less work to dole out than cloaks and daggers. Feedback is the smiley-faced step-sister of Punishment. Which would players rather deal with? Which would immstaffers rather be?

That is my opinion.