[Delerak]

Originally Posted by LoD There is certainly more to a permadeath and non-permadeath environment than it simply being a feature choice. Color or No Color is a feature choice. First Person or Third Person is a feature choice. Warrior or Blademaster is a feature choice. Permadeath and Non-Permadeath are system choices, and they can result in an entirely different experience for the player. Try to ignore Delerak when arguing these points, but it's not quite as cut and dry as you make it.

Ignore me? You can try but you'll fail.

Originally Posted by LoD Delerak aside, I don't know that very many people are making this claim. RP can exist in both systems, but there's a group of people that want an experience that mimics or attempts to mimic a realistic experience where there is not any kind of afterlife, reincarnation, or ressurection possible. A system where death is final in all senses of the word. This isn't a decision that affects how "good" someone's RP is, but how the system will differ toward the player's actions and general attitude toward facets of the game.

I never said roleplay can't exist on other muds, simply that muds with permadeath and the (18) other features included will have better roleplaying in general. A mud that only has permadeath and no other RPI featuresets? No I don't think so.

Originally Posted by LoD Well developed books, games, and movie worlds incorporating non-permanent death systems does not change the fact that the system is different from a permanent death system. It isn't a feature, it's a global condition by which many aspects of one's character development, character decision making process, and IC reaction to encounters are altered.

Yes, exactly.. the rest of your post is the same thing I've been saying.

[Delerak]

Hey guys I'm an elitist by the way.

Also: here's a link to a discussion 3 years ago at Mudlab.

[mudlab.org]mudlab.org :: View topic - Dumb question: Just what is a RPI?

[Threshold]

Originally Posted by LoD Well developed books, games, and movie worlds incorporating non-permanent death systems does not change the fact that the system is different from a permanent death system. It isn't a feature, it's a global condition by which many aspects of one's character development, character decision making process, and IC reaction to encounters are altered.

It is still just a feature though. It is a significant feature, but it is still just a feature. There are many other features that have a far more significant impact on the game.

But the point is, the direction you go with this feature choice does not inherently make a game better or worse for RP. It does not create more or less "issues staying IC." Perma or non-perma death is not the determining factor.

Originally Posted by LoD Let's say that you were walking home one day and someone stopped you and asked you to bet $20 on whether you could beat him in arm wrestling, double or nothing. Now, let's say that instead of winning $40, they said that they would kill you if you lost. Would that affect how hard you tried? Would it affect how you approached the match?

I understand the point you are making, but I think this is a somewhat absurd example. I simply would not gamble my life on an arm wrestling match, and I really wouldn't enjoy a game that forced me to do so. I would find that extremely unbelievable, and I think believability is a more important goal than "realism." Realism is usually a poor goal for game design.

Furthermore, it isn't even a good analogy for permadeath games. The fact that you are allowed to create new characters means it really isn't at all like real life. You know at all times that you can simply make a new character. In my experience playing permadeath muds, people end up being friends with the same people a lot of the time even after making a new character. So the permanent "death" is really little more than a speed bump. In no time at all, they are pretty much doing the same thing they were doing before the death, which is not very different from a pendeath game.

If you want to use analogies that compare situations in permadeath games to dying in real life, you would have to make a game that once you die you are never allowed to play it again. Otherwise, it is totally invalid to try and compare permadeath to real life death.

Originally Posted by LoD The real question, in my mind, revolves around consequence. How could two players share the same experience if the consequences to their actions are not the same? If both players were made to run a distance of 100 meters in under 10 seconds, and one player was told if they don't finish they will have to start over and the second is told if they don't finish they will be shot dead -- won't that have a significant impact on almost every emotional and physical facet of the interaction?

But in a permadeath mud, they still just start over. The difference is really not as significant as you claim.

And in some respects, permadeath can make things easier. If you get your character in a really nasty situation, death can be an easy way out. Die, make a new character, and you are totally free of the consequences of your actions. But in a non-permadeath mud, you might have to face the consequences for years to come. So for some RP decisions, the results can be more grave and more serious on a non-permadeath mud. This isn't as cut and dried as some people think it is.

In fact, one could argue that this is actually MORE realistic, since most conflict situations in real life do not boil down to one party murdering the other. If it did, either Hillary or Obama would have been killed months ago. People in real life are generally forced to deal with the consequences of their actions for decades. They cannot just die and start over. But I don't particularly care about this argument, because as I already said, I think realism is usually a bad design goal. Believability and internal consistency are better goals.

But again, this isn't even the point I was arguing (although it is an interesting issue to discuss). I was responding to Delerak's claim that permadeath results in universally better RP, and that non-permadeath muds create "issues staying IC" and people don't "play their characters the way they would be played."

Perma or non-perma death is definitely a significant feature difference. It does indeed create a very different game play experience. It dramatically affects the way you make decisions for your character. Some decisions have to be taken more seriously on a permadeath mud, and some decisions have to be taken more seriously on a non-permadeath mud. But in the end, it is still just another feature, and the direction you go with this feature has no effect (by itself!) on the quality of RP on a game or the potential quality of RP on a game.

[Disillusionist]

<Snip. Hmm my scissors are wearing out... - Xerihae>

'Realistic' RP isn't the penultimate. Quite often, it's the most mundane, and all the elements of what makes for RP that you listed are exactly what I'm talking about when I say... RP. Playing a Role. Making a Role and Playing it. Acting. Staying In Character. You may need this broken down a bit. That includes walking, talking, accent/dialect, biases, faults/flaws, fears, favorites, mannerisms, and something usually lacking in RPIs as far as I'm concerned, the ACTOR's ability to move from one playing clique to another if the character dies, rather than rolling a new perma-death character, and playing with the same people you played with in all your other perma-death creatures, because REALISTICALLY, a character isn't -aware- of the actors behind the scenes (and therefore more predisposed to hang out with them). Characters rolled up knowing you're going to be playing with the same clique already have a built-in weird stat: Compatibility With Former Character's Clique, hereafter abbreviated as CWFCC. The stat may not show up on screen, but it sure shows up in the character generation process.

Subsets or parcels of features may be the crutch you personally need to produce your idea of quality roleplay, and for that, I hope some seasoning improves both your skills and your ability to express them clearly, and the ability to see beyond a narrow point of view. All the things you crave in a MUD are fine and dandy, especially if they help you to do that.

Let me tell you why I am certain you lack the basis for elitism. Roleplaying, acting, hell, having a conversation... is -listening- and responding organically. Your listening, reasoning and responsive skills are underformed. Perfect example, when addressing -me-, you still insert an aside to an imaginary audience of followers, when a person paying attention to the thread would realize that here and elsewhere, your posts largely miss the point, and quite a few people disagree with you, constantly pointing out that you don't listen, or when you do, it's to 'interpret' posts to mean something they don't, trip all over yourself defending careless thoughts/words, and to still pound your chest at the end of the day like you've triumphed over those whom would dare deign to gainsay thee.

You may need all the 'realism' you claim exists in your mud in order to seamlessly and effortlessly stay in character. To that, what can I say? Those are your needs. Those are your opinions, and you are of course entitled to them. Not everyone is thus shackled, and shockingly, some of those people who disagree with you might just be doing it for your edification.
What you're not entitled to is the psuedo-authoritative veneer that is so evident in your posts and videos, particularly the ridiculous one where you're munching a banana, and clearly demonstrating a dishonest intent in exposing an obvious bias to prove a dishonest point. That, and you lied to your parents. Admirable.

I'm a purist. RP is RP. That statement doesn't require your interpretation from English to Derelakian. Realism and believability are not always compatible creatures, and perma-death, one single feature, the topic of this thread, is not a necessary feature to promote the kind of RP that 99% of people would find satisfying. In just as many cases where someone could cite that it promoted quality RP, I can list a dozen where it did precisely the opposite. I can -easily- see, based on your responses and your particularly petty and vindictive video, that interacting with you in a perma-death mud, especially where you might be an admin, would be an exercise in trying to confuse someone with REALITY and FACTS.

Respond eleven times to my post, somewhere in your 2-1 responses to every other post on the thread. It's this kind of limelight-groping center-of-attention-deficit disorder behavior that makes me wonder what you think you know about quality INTERactions at all. I made my point, and some get it. Some don't.
There's no need to belabor it.

I wonder, in your busy day of making this whompin' good mud of yours, how it is that your time is spent making videos to support invalid points, writing posts to defend careless and underformed thoughts and words, that you actually have time to make a mud.

Worse than wasting your time, by far, is the fact that I just wasted mine in the hope your viewpoint might expand a millimeter to accept that your subjective qualifications for what is an RPI is precisely that. Your opinion, and chockful of biases that you seem utterly unaware of.

It won't happen again. What you might try and absorb is how much you've hurt your future business in your posting style and content. I cannot think of even one reason at all, based on what I've read, to even -try- your mud, and decades of RP experience demonstrate I'll try damned near -anything-.

I repeat.
Yeesh.

[Delerak]

<Snip - Xerihae>

Originally Posted by Disillusionist 'Realistic' RP isn't the penultimate. Quite often, it's the most mundane, and all the elements of what makes for RP that you listed are exactly what I'm talking about when I say... RP. Playing a Role. Making a Role and Playing it. Acting. Staying In Character. You may need this broken down a bit. That includes walking, talking, accent/dialect, biases, faults/flaws, fears, favorites, mannerisms, and something usually lacking in RPIs as far as I'm concerned, the ACTOR's ability to move from one playing clique to another if the character dies, rather than rolling a new perma-death character, and playing with the same people you played with in all your other perma-death creatures, because REALISTICALLY, a character isn't -aware- of the actors behind the scenes (and therefore more predisposed to hang out with them). Characters rolled up knowing you're going to be playing with the same clique already have a built-in weird stat: Compatibility With Former Character's Clique, hereafter abbreviated as CWFCC. The stat may not show up on screen, but it sure shows up in the character generation process.

No, I never said it was the penultimate. But to claim that it is mundane is just ignorance. I'm not trying to judge the roleplay at other muds, I speak only from personal preference. The fact that you say mannerisms, fears, flaws/faults, etc, are all LACKING at RPI Muds is the most ignorant statement you can make about an RPI mud. I'm also not even going to go into "cliques" because they don't even really exist on RPI muds, you don't know who you're playing with, because there is no OOC communication. Besides the fact that players will do whatever they want behind the scenes, you can't stop this, but your blatant attack on RPI's in general has no evidence anyway.

Originally Posted by Disillusionist Subsets or parcels of features may be the crutch you personally need to produce your idea of quality roleplay, and for that, I hope some seasoning improves both your skills and your ability to express them clearly, and the ability to see beyond a narrow point of view. All the things you crave in a MUD are fine and dandy, especially if they help you to do that. Let me tell you why I am certain you lack the basis for elitism. Roleplaying, acting, hell, having a conversation... is -listening- and responding organically. Your listening, reasoning and responsive skills are underformed. Perfect example, when addressing -me-, you still insert an aside to an imaginary audience of followers, when a person paying attention to the thread would realize that here and elsewhere, your posts largely miss the point, and quite a few people disagree with you, constantly pointing out that you don't listen, or when you do, it's to 'interpret' posts to mean something they don't, trip all over yourself defending careless thoughts/words, and to still pound your chest at the end of the day like you've triumphed over those whom would dare deign to gainsay thee.

Actually you don't listen on the internet, you read and comprehend, something I elluded to earlier that you obviously have no ability to do.

Originally Posted by Disillusionist You may need all the 'realism' you claim exists in your mud in order to seamlessly and effortlessly stay in character. To that, what can I say? Those are your needs. Those are your opinions, and you are of course entitled to them. Not everyone is thus shackled, and shockingly, some of those people who disagree with you might just be doing it for your edification. What you're not entitled to is the psuedo-authoritative veneer that is so evident in your posts and videos, particularly the ridiculous one where you're munching a banana, and clearly demonstrating a dishonest intent in exposing an obvious bias to prove a dishonest point. That, and you lied to your parents. Admirable.

Shackled? I wouldn't say I'm shackled, I play MANY different types of muds. But when it comes to the quality of roleplaying, I cannot deny in my experiences that permadeath and RPI muds have been at the top of the ladder, period. I'm not even going to respond to your personal attack, you're obviously a simple Threshold player having a hissy fit over my videos, if you want to talk man to man you can easily e-mail me or PM me.

Originally Posted by Disillusionist I'm a purist. RP is RP. That statement doesn't require your interpretation from English to Derelakian. Realism and believability are not always compatible creatures, and perma-death, one single feature, the topic of this thread, is not a necessary feature to promote the kind of RP that 99% of people would find satisfying. In just as many cases where someone could cite that it promoted quality RP, I can list a dozen where it did precisely the opposite. I can -easily- see, based on your responses and your particularly petty and vindictive video, that interacting with you in a perma-death mud, especially where you might be an admin, would be an exercise in trying to confuse someone with REALITY and FACTS.

I would disagree that RP is RP. There are many different types of roleplaying, just like their are many different types of acting. It is not so cut and dry as you make it seem, it not so simple. Perhaps for you simplicity is the key to having fun, so be it. I prefer in-depth plots, characters, and an in-depth world.

Originally Posted by Disillusionist Respond eleven times to my post, somewhere in your 2-1 responses to every other post on the thread. It's this kind of limelight-groping center-of-attention-deficit disorder behavior that makes me wonder what you think you know about quality INTERactions at all. I made my point, and some get it. Some don't. There's no need to belabor it. I wonder, in your busy day of making this whompin' good mud of yours, how it is that your time is spent making videos to support invalid points, writing posts to defend careless and underformed thoughts and words, that you actually have time to make a mud. Worse than wasting your time, by far, is the fact that I just wasted mine in the hope your viewpoint might expand a millimeter to accept that your subjective qualifications for what is an RPI is precisely that. Your opinion, and chockful of biases that you seem utterly unaware of. It won't happen again. What you might try and absorb is how much you've hurt your future business in your posting style and content. I cannot think of even one reason at all, based on what I've read, to even -try- your mud, and decades of RP experience demonstrate I'll try damned near -anything-. I repeat. Yeesh.

Again I'm not going to respond to personal attacks. We're both derailing this thread, as it is about permadeath and how that affects MUDs in general, not about RPI's, even though the both are explicitely linked.

[LoD]

Originally Posted by Threshold But the point is, the direction you go with this feature choice does not inherently make a game better or worse for RP. It does not create more or less "issues staying IC." Perma or non-perma death is not the determining factor.

Yes, it does not inherently make a game better or worse for RP. We agree, therefore I don't believe you need to make this point in future replies, at least not to me.

The choice of system can, however, create more "issues staying IC." than the other. If I were to trick someone into following me into a dangerous part of town for the purposes of mugging and/or murder, and the victim was killed during the process, them returning to the game world as the same entity would cause an issue that would not be present within a permanent death system.

The issue would be that the player knows my character to be a liar and a murderer. I knows his character to have been deceived and murdered by my character. Whether the murdered character would be allowed to retain IC knowledge of the event would be up to the particular system in place, but regardless of that decision, the OOC temptation exists for that murdered character to remember the actions and intent of his murderer.

The issue comes into play when those two characters interact again. Does the murdered victim allow themselves to be duped and murdered anew? Or will they invent some excuse or play on some coincidental distrust of the murderer that wasn't present in the first scenario? Whether the player succumbs to his/her bias is irrelevant to the fact that the OOC obstacle exists now where it would not exist in a permanent death situation.

Originally Posted by Threshold I understand the point you are making, but I think this is a somewhat absurd example. I simply would not gamble my life on an arm wrestling match, and I really wouldn't enjoy a game that forced me to do so. I would find that extremely unbelievable, and I think believability is a more important goal than "realism." Realism is usually a poor goal for game design.

I agree that we aren't after complete realism, but that doesn't mean certain aspects that mimic reality or contain aspects of reality aren't welcome or desired. And if you understand the point I am trying to make, then I don't see any reason to quibble over the absurdity of the example.

Originally Posted by Threshold Furthermore, it isn't even a good analogy for permadeath games. The fact that you are allowed to create new characters means it really isn't at all like real life. You know at all times that you can simply make a new character. In my experience playing permadeath muds, people end up being friends with the same people a lot of the time even after making a new character. So the permanent "death" is really little more than a speed bump. In no time at all, they are pretty much doing the same thing they were doing before the death, which is not very different from a pendeath game.

I would completely disagree with you on this point. It's been my observation in 18 years of playing a permanent death mud that players usually do not end up "doing the same thing they were doing before the death." If this is what you're basing the bulk of your argument upon, which it seems to be, then you might benefit from some more exposure to a game like Armageddon. New characters are -very- new. They aren't simply the same character with a different description and background -- they are often completely different personas with completely different goals. They could have completely different sets of morals, personality traits, likes and dislikes, family relationships, social skills, and values.

Originally Posted by Threshold If you want to use analogies that compare situations in permadeath games to dying in real life, you would have to make a game that once you die you are never allowed to play it again. Otherwise, it is totally invalid to try and compare permadeath to real life death.

I wasn't comparing permadeath games to dying in real life, I was comparing the effect upon one's judgments and actions when they are faced with varied level of consequence. Losing $20 is a consequence. Losing your life is a consequence. How someone reacts to both will result in a completely different range of emotions, decisions, and actions on the part of the participant.

Originally Posted by Threshold But in a permadeath mud, they still just start over. The difference is really not as significant as you claim.

They don't "just start over" -- it's a completely new person. I had a character for 2 RL years on Armageddon somewhat recently, and during that two years they had collected experiences, knowledge of the game's geography, flora, fauna, and political innerworkings, he had amassed a fair amount of martial knowledge and ability, he had a family with children, and he had made many friends and enemies from which he was able to recall memories, both happy and sad, across many IC years of interaction.

The next character had none of these things. None of these experiences. None of these discoveries. None of this information. None of these memories. It's like claiming that after 2 years spent writing a unique novel, it's not much different from just starting over with blank paper. It's -very- different.

Originally Posted by Threshold And in some respects, permadeath can make things easier. If you get your character in a really nasty situation, death can be an easy way out. Die, make a new character, and you are totally free of the consequences of your actions. But in a non-permadeath mud, you might have to face the consequences for years to come. So for some RP decisions, the results can be more grave and more serious on a non-permadeath mud. This isn't as cut and dried as some people think it is.

I agree that there are unique circumstances inherent in a non-permanent death mud; circumstances that might present issues for the character that would not be found in a permanent death mud. And isn't that the whole point that we've been trying to make? There are issues inherent in each system that are both unique and exclusive to that system of game play -- and one of those unique and exclusive features of a permanent death world is that you don't have to deal with the OOC and IC obstacles that come along with a non-permadeath system.

It creates a unique and exclusive situation that is completely different from the experience you receive elsewhere, and that's the entire point people are trying to make. Some people prefer the experience offered within a permadeath system for the many reasons listed in this entire thread.

We don't have to defend whatever game system we enjoy, we just have to agree that there are differences.

-LoD

[Disillusionist]

LoD, good posts. I'm sorry to everyone else on this thread for succumbing to arguing with the lowest common denominator as a 'standard'.

I don't have any issue acknowledging that the systems are different and promote different sorts of RP, and while we might disagree on the significance of the differences, we seem to agree that one feature set over another will not produce 'better' roleplay, but rather different styles.

In a non-perma-death mud, your mugger would of course be a fool to attach his face to a crime. It's inherent in such muds to make sure that those who wish to do such things have the means to do believable dirty deeds, within the context of that world. Perhaps what seems to be missing from your mugging example is support for the RP of the other person. In the scenario you present, basically, the other guy is 'Victim', and one of a string of them, in full knowledge that the player behind the character took time to develop his character, and you're essentially demeaning some of that work by turning him into 'wallet-fodder' like a common mob. Sure, it supports your RP, but it completely negates his, although the scene might make for a good read.

I tend to prefer non-perma-death muds, simply because I've seen enough irresponsible perma-deaths to sate me for a lifetime. Contrary to some experiences, it didn't make me ogle and wow at the complexity and richness of the RP. It made me realize the futility in -some- cases of really pouring time and talent into character development for a character that might not last an hour, and for no better reason than you just happened to be standing in the wrong place at the wrong time, usually athwart some 'superior' roleplayer, who, in whatever mindset, decided he'd be better off if your character wasn't there. I'm definitely not convinced that simply because you're logged into an RPI that somehow all the players/characters are above treating death in almost cartoonish fashions, so long as it happens to someone else.

This is not a broad slam on RPIs. Some I like. Some are populated with players I'd just as soon not have in my neighborhood. I can almost uniformly admit that those people who are convinced they are the best roleplayers are generally just the loudest. True purists don't need nor want to make a big fuss about how well they RP. They just do it, and let all this OOC nonsense slide over their backs as "NOT RP, SO NOT IMPORTANT". Those folks, I love RPing with, and they can be found in -every- feature set.

Thanks for listening.

[Threshold]

Originally Posted by LoD Yes, it does not inherently make a game better or worse for RP. We agree, therefore I don't believe you need to make this point in future replies, at least not to me.

Wonderful. This tells me I am discussing an interesting topic with someone who really wants to dive into the issue and rip it apart together with other equally interested folks. I like that.

Originally Posted by LoD The choice of system can, however, create more "issues staying IC." than the other. If I were to trick someone into following me into a dangerous part of town for the purposes of mugging and/or murder, and the victim was killed during the process, them returning to the game world as the same entity would cause an issue that would not be present within a permanent death system.

Actually, given that example, the permadeath mud will create more "issues staying IC." Because what if that person you mugged and killed is so bitter, they make a new character, build themselves up, and then go kill you. That is HUGELY OOC. At least in a non permadeath mud, their efforts to seek out revenge are still 100% IC.

Originally Posted by LoD I agree that we aren't after complete realism, but that doesn't mean certain aspects that mimic reality or contain aspects of reality aren't welcome or desired.

Mina and Disillusionist have already made this point, but I think it is such a good one I am going to reiterate it. I think relying on realism can actually be a pretty bad crutch. I mean how much of a stretch is it to RP things that are similar to reality? Not that hard, honestly. The more different a game world is from our RL reality just ramps up the challenge, RP wise.

Then there is the fact that reality really isn't that much fun as a game. If I want to play something realistic, I already have that game: its called Real Life. The graphics are awesome and the gameplay feature variety is limitless. Oh, and the sex is tons better.

Originally Posted by LoD I wasn't comparing permadeath games to dying in real life, I was comparing the effect upon one's judgments and actions when they are faced with varied level of consequence. Losing $20 is a consequence. Losing your life is a consequence. How someone reacts to both will result in a completely different range of emotions, decisions, and actions on the part of the participant.

But you did indeed compare permadeath to dying in real life. That is explicitly what you did.

And honestly, the possibility of winning $20 (or 2000 gold, or whatever) on a permadeath mud might actually be worth the risk of just dying and remaking a new character. When everyone dies and just starts over, and the point of the game is just roleplay anyway, dying just isn't as big of a deal anymore.

When the penalty is the same across the board, that pretty much normalizes the penalty. As long as permadeath affects everyone equally, the long term impact is not much greater than a penalty death.

Penalties in hockey are far more "severe" than penalties in (American) football. You actually lose a player for a few minutes! But this doesn't mean getting penalties is more "exciting" in hockey. Penalties affect everyone equally, so in the long run the emotional impact is the pretty much the same in either sport.

Originally Posted by LoD It's been my observation in 18 years of playing a permanent death mud that players usually do not end up "doing the same thing they were doing before the death." If this is what you're basing the bulk of your argument upon, which it seems to be, then you might benefit from some more exposure to a game like Armageddon.

I have played Armaggeddon, and I have had hundreds of friends and customers that played Armaggeddon and other AFS muds. My own experience, and the experiences they share with me, all indicate that most people pretty much hang out with the same friends and the same cliques no matter how many times they die. I can understand this, as it does kinda make sense. You make friends and you enjoy RPing with certain people, so you gravitate together. It is incredibly commonplace on *ALL* RP oriented games for people who like each other OOC, or who respect each other's RP ability, to plan new character concepts together, and design interesting plot lines for their characters so they are able to play together. I actually don't think this is a bad thing. But it is indeed evidence that permadeath really isn't quite as permanent as one might think.

(I have snipped a section here that analyzes what types of games gain the most excitment from permadeath. I am going to make a new thread for that.)

Also, as I already noted in a previous post, permadeath can actually make conflict oriented RP situations EASIER and LESS TENSE on a permadeath mud, because you know one of two things will happen:

1) You win the conflict. Hooray. Your enemies are vanquished and destroyed, and can never seek revenge against you. You don't have to watch your back, because they can never again torment you.

2) You lose the conflict. Oh well! Reroll! And your new character will never have to suffer the consequences of your RP decisions, you won't have to worry about those same enemies harboring a grudge, and you will never be "shamed" by society for any heretical, blasphemous, treasonous, deceitful, or other "bad" things you did.

When victory is absolute, both sides of the conflict come out of it with a far greater condition of safety. The long term impact of their RP decisions is much less.

I am not saying permadeath is always less exciting. I am well aware and acknowledge that there are a lot of situations where permadeath makes a situation more exciting and tense. But I am simply raising the point that there are as many situations where the opposite is true.

Originally Posted by LoD The next character had none of these things. None of these experiences. None of these discoveries. None of this information. None of these memories. It's like claiming that after 2 years spent writing a unique novel, it's not much different from just starting over with blank paper. It's -very- different.

But if the point of the game is to build up those experiences, then it really isn't very different at all. Role play experiences are not linear. As long as you are having role play experiences, you are at the pinnacle of "fun" for that type of game. In a hack-n-slash game, a lot of the fun is linear. If you are bored with the low or mid-level gameplay, then dying permanently or starting over would be a HUGE issue. You would have a lot of grinding ahead of you just to get back to the type of fun you actually want to have (high level or "end game" content). But when the main purpose of the game is role playing, you can get right back to that same type of fun immediately upon re-entry into the game world with a new character. Dying and rerolling is not actually a setback.

Also, that novel writing example actually makes my point. Writing the last chapter of one novel is not terribly different from writing the first chapter of a new one. The discipline is the same. The effort is pretty much the same. You still have to concentrate on word craft and story and characters. This makes me think about the Authors Notes that Piers Anthony puts in the back of a lot of his books. In them, he explains that he generally writes multiple books at the same time. He will be working on the first draft of one book, while also working on the final draft of another, or the beginning of one while finishing the end of another. The different stages of writing the books are not that different. They are the same type of work that require the same type of imagination, creativity, and skill.

I don't write novels, but I do make text games, and that is certainly writing. Building a zone is building a zone. The last room of one zone and the first room of another zone are not significantly different as far as the work experience. I still have to put the same effort, the same thought, and the same creativity into both.

Originally Posted by LoD I agree that there are unique circumstances inherent in a non-permanent death mud; circumstances that might present issues for the character that would not be found in a permanent death mud. And isn't that the whole point that we've been trying to make? There are issues inherent in each system that are both unique and exclusive to that system of game play -- and one of those unique and exclusive features of a permanent death world is that you don't have to deal with the OOC and IC obstacles that come along with a non-permadeath system.

But you have just as many different OOC/IC issues to deal with. Neither system has more or less OOC/IC issues.

Originally Posted by LoD We don't have to defend whatever game system we enjoy, we just have to agree that there are differences.

I wish that were true, but there is a certain segment of the population that INSISTS permadeath is inherently superior from a role play perspective. I suspect you do not subscribe to this belief, and I definitely appreciate that. I think it makes it possible for us to discuss some of the more interesting aspects of permadeath and non-permadeath.

[Delerak]

I give up..

[LoD]

Originally Posted by Disillusionist Perhaps what seems to be missing from your mugging example is support for the RP of the other person. In the scenario you present, basically, the other guy is 'Victim', and one of a string of them, in full knowledge that the player behind the character took time to develop his character, and you're essentially demeaning some of that work by turning him into 'wallet-fodder' like a common mob. Sure, it supports your RP, but it completely negates his, although the scene might make for a good read.

There can certainly be an unbalanced agenda when it comes to violent interaction between PC's on a permanent death system. Disappointment is a frequent emotion that accompanies the death of almost any of your characters, especially when that death was at the hands of someone who treads upon your creative work with reckless feet. That said, there are qualities I appreciate behind the random acts of violence that populate these words. I enjoy the lack of security and potentially breakneck pace at which scenes can sometimes fly. I enjoy both the benefits and consequences of a system supporting the immediacy of free will on your environment and its inhabitants.

I played a Vampire (Masquerade) MUSH for about 6 months many years ago, and while I thoroughly enjoyed the RP that I found there -- I didn't happen to meet a known vampire the whole time -- I highly disliked the almost scripted and horribly sluggish encounters where violence and potential death were possible. Imms would descend from on high to mediate between your character and another as they engaged in combat, one action at a time at a crawling pace. While this granted each character an appropriate amount of time to emote and treated both players with respect, the pace and steps felt unnatural to me.

Armageddon's death may very well come swiftly and unexpectedly, with little or no regard for your wishes, but I don't necessarily see that as a complete negative. There can be negative elements associated with the outcome, but the positive experiences generally outweigh the negative -- for me. I'm well aware that others may appreciate other systems that allow them more time, more respect, and more attention to be placed on the scene at hand.

Originally Posted by Disillusionist