In order to combat SPAM on the forums, all users are required to have a minimum of 2 posts before they can submit links in any post or thread.
Discussion in 'UO Spiels N Rants' started by Morgana LeFay (PoV), Jan 9, 2009.
I think once you die, that should be it for that character.
Dead = dead.
As long as that includes deaths caused by PvM...oh, and if a pet dies...it's dead. *poof*...la
Agreed on all counts.
It would help to eliminate all the overpowered characters, pets, and items in the game.
With all the time it takes to build a skill it is not possible to get rid of rezzing. On the other hand for ALL pvp based attacks and possibly PVM instead they could maybe implement a system that takes off 0.1 skill sorta like it does to pets when they die.
Nah...just make it so if you die you die.
That would seperate the whimps and gimps from the real players.
And your house then goes to what character? Then that char dies ... and so on. How long before your have no characters 15 days old to own the house?
Just asking, as younger players die a lot as they train up skills. Older ones do die but just not as often. Then again, when spawns are being worked, how often do you die? Would losing that character hurt your ability to do spawns?
You house is a reward. Dying is the risk.
I think you should go the other way with it. There should be no reason for rezing since you can't die. Your health would be red lined and a message should pop up saying "You almost did it!" Then you should get full health again and you can keep on fighting. Dieing just takes to much time for me to find someone to rez. It should be taken out of the game.
This thread's a joke, right..?
Well...I figured if we were:
- Eliminating Mages
- Eliminating Tamers
- Eliminating Thieves
- Eliminating Dexers
- Eliminating Fishing
- Eliminating Siege
Why not eliminate resurrections?
From absurd to more absurd...
...and the cycle continues.
Just when I thought I'd seen it all...
So you propose then what? Just make a new character each time? Death is eventually...inevitable.
It leads to some more humorous ideas because you wouldn't need to have vendors then. No reason to have weapons, armor, etc.
Making new characters would largely create abuse of the game. Anyone could cheat or do anything they want and not get banned since I mean...I could die 20 times in a day and then well...have 20 different names.
Would you have a cap on how many times a character could be created through an account each day, week, month?
Just food for thought.
Did this really go over that many heads??
Actually I did play an early MMO that had real character death. I hated it, BUT ... UO also has so much more that could be affected by character death, I was curious as to how you might think it could/would be handled.
Your thread is a joke, you must be the clown.
Are you really suprised. Most of the posters here arent that subtle. Or intelligent. I liked it.
this thread is great! haha. my perspective had been slowly altered by about 30 mins of reading the forums. took me totally off guard. muahahaha!!! i love it. good timing morgana. thx
*turns to watch a certain gov. make a complete fool of himself on tv*
*just noticed tha date on the op*
doh! i guess timing is a matter of perspective too.
I always come back to life, why not my character in UO?
Yes it is. Though obviously not a very good one if it has to be explained.
I'm not fond of the idea of no ressing but I think it would be a very unique challenge if on Fel, if a char dies during pvp the char must wait between 1 & 24 hours depending on fame/karma before he/she may be ressed.
That would introduce a whole new risk and adrenaline rush.
Based on my pvp history, I'd probably be playing my guy one or two hours a day at best before I'm stuck waiting for res time but the anticipation, paranoia and excitement would be pretty intense leading to my char's daily demise
Edit: whether the idea was in jest or not, there's actually some potential in it for a whole new play style.
Candyland came in to stop all the people leaving. Course that didnt work in the end but beside the point.
People losing toons completely would no doubt finally bring UO pop down to 1 or 2 (cant believe it isnt already, but guess some stilll cant upgrade that late 90's puter)
Trust me I kinda understand, once in a blue moon I do get the urge to reactivate my account. But after candyland came in and I saw what pvp had become in Fel I knew UO for me was the past. People standing around portals badmouthing each other to get the other to attack first so they wouldnt take a count if they won. (granted it may have changed, but doubt it, been a while since I wasted the 10 bucks for 10 mins of checking).
I could tell a political joke to 4 year old that was hilarious, but I would have to explain it...and he or she still wouldn't get it.
What does that say about those that needed an explanation?
You're assuming that the joke was funny to anyone but you.
But, that's pretty much par for the course, to be honest...
Then I'd be playing UO all by myself
What did I ever do to you?
I laughed, especially when it was first created...shortly after a few of my own "eliminate" threads...la
I'd find a way to kill you if I had to come to your house and unplug your modem in the middle of fighting a mongbat.
Don't sweat it. I've rarely seen Kiminality deign to enter any thread for a purpose other than to insult the OP or paint them as ridiculous, personally. I thought your thread was funny.
Would you be talking about the Game or EA's financial statement?
Another 641 Million lost and dead really will be dead
You obviously haven't seen me enter many threads, then.
Besides, in threads that get moved here, the OPs generally paint themselves as ridiculous.
I've seen quite a few, though I would heartily agree that I don't live on these boards and read -everything-. Nevertheless your response here was randomly hostile... which does characterize most of the times I see you post.
Let go of the hate SKG... just let it go....
It is all he has...
I wouldn't describe many of my posts as hostile...
"Not friendly" perhaps...
But, the thing is, I respond as much to a poster's attitude as I do to the post itself.
Someone says something I disagree with, but presents it well, good job to them. Doesn't mean I agree with them any more than I used to, but when something is subjective, presentation is key.
Someone says something I agree with, but presents it poorly... Again, it's subjective. When there's no right or wrong answer, we come back to presentation.
... is a poor counter.
Implying that the posters that "didn't get" your "joke" can be likened children? Really?
So to make this REALLY long story short... you respond based on whether a particular poster rubs you the right or wrong way, regardless of what they're arguing. Which is pretty consistent with what I've seen and what you're likely to say when you jump in. Although if someone ever rubbed you the right way, I've just never seen that reaction.
My point is... if you thought the OP was serious, OR just have no sense of humor whatsoever.... either reaction could have been made without the nasty comment you made to the OP who is, from all I can see, a very constructive and friendly poster around here.
Allow me to clarify. Say, for example, I thought that Siege was a waste of space (which, incidentally, I don't, but the example came to mind first).
If someone forms a reasonable argument that Siege caters to an alternative playstyle, and since it maintains a playerbase of which many exclusively play it, it justifies its existence. Good show, because it's reasonable and thought out.
If someone rants and screams about how Siege is a wretched hive of scum and villainy, filled to the bring with antisocial griefers. I should think it speaks for itself.
Present an argument well, and it deserves respect, if for that alone.
My "hostile" comment was simply a response to the assumption that the joke made was absolutely funny, and as such that anyone who didn't "get it" is somehow inferior.
The most important thing in debate, or communication really, is to accept the differences of people.
A sense of humour is unique to each person. Some things just aren't entertaining to some people. For example, I don't find escalation of a theme to be a guaranteed formula for mirth.
Y'all are welcome in the "Kimi pissed me off today" club, if my comments really bother you.
Where's the fun in that?
I wouldn't say "inferior", just...slow.
Disclaimer: I am just KIDDING! One of the problems with message forums is that there is no accounting for inflection and tone. Good comic timing and delivery is very dependent upon these things, and since they are absent here, it makes perfect sense why some people missed my attempt at humor at Rico's expense. Luckily, Rico got it, and did not take offense.
I know that my posting style is often, well...over the top, but that is only because about 50-60% of what I post is done under the heavy influence of either hard liquor or fine wine, depending on my mood and availability.
So...to wrap up this disclaimer...If you feel yourself angry because of one of my incredibly hilarious posts, especially the ones filled with misspellings and grammar errors, chalk it up to Morgana being 3 sheets to the wind and not making much sense.
Or, just check your attitude and get over yourself...
Pots and kettles... Oh my!
Can I be the kettle? I am tired of being the pot.