My Thoughts on Hostile Interactions on The Server ATM....

[Francois LeB]

     I want to clarify a few things before I voice my opinions. I am not saying anything bad about the server, I love it here! Furthermore, I am not trying to offend anyone, rather provide constructive criticism. Yes, I am new, my current character only has 10 hours, and I know that some people will try to discredit my opinion because of this. Like I said, I have loved my time here on the server, and I don't want that to end anytime soon. I don't think I'm going to be leaving the community anytime soon, so know that this post comes from an appreciative place. With that, I am playing a long wolf style character, whose weary of strangers, but has good intent. The play styles I mention here are simply for the sake of the example. Oh, and this is a bit of a rant, apologies for that, so buckle in lol. (Skip to the ninth paragraph for a summary)

With that out of the way, here we go...

 

     Concerning one of the rules on the server, I feel one of the major aspects of DayZ and the idea of Apocalypse survival has been either taken away or watered down significantly. I ran into a lovely couple yesterday who nearly stole my car, but I managed to help them out and we went our separate ways. They had begun to take my car when I ran up to them, pistol drawn. I had planned to shoot a warning shot in the air IF they took the car, otherwise I was going to hold them up simply out of my distrust for other survivors, not for loot or other gain. They had a third geared friend who approached us after our initial introduction. I never did shoot, nor did I hold them up, we had a great friendly experience, and that was that. After the fact, I thought to myself "what if I held them up? What would have happened?", and my conclusion kinda concerned me, which is why I am here.

     If I had proceeded to hold the two up, and their friend approached the situation, most likely I would have either had the roles reversed and would have been held up instead, or we would have all gone our separate ways, no harm done. My problem with this situation is this: even if all parties had played as sincere as possible, there would never be any real tension, no one would be afraid of dying. Worst case scenario, one party loses some or all of their stuff, and that's that. 

     One of the main reasons I got into DayZ (and DayZRP) is because of the fear of being able to lose everything, having to start over, and having to make decisions with this in mind. This is a feeling that is relatively unique to DayZ, and when mixed with RP you get something great. However, I have been able to walk through open fields, loot cities, and do just about anything with relatively low risk. I know this is borderline meta-gaming, but I can’t seem to shake the idea that if I die it's because of either the elements, or my failure to provide good RP in a hostage situation. Due to this, I am comfortable when I play, which I have never been on any other server, and I’m not sure that I like this…

     I’m not supporting KOS, I personally hate the idea of just killing for the sake of doing so, you get nothing out of that. However, I feel that there needs to be a more present danger that comes from other players. If the world did collapse and the dead started to rise, not every survivor would be friendly nor would you be guaranteed to make it out of a situation alive. “But the instigator can ask the hostage if they can kill them so it's ok”, well unless the hostage WANTS to die, who is going to give someone permission to kill them? I understand that there are some die hard RPers here who would, but I know that the subconscious meta-gaming in most players will make it almost impossible for other players to get permission to kill hostages or the like. Furthermore, concerning the hardcore RPers, I feel like my argument should resonate with you, after all I’m arguing that we should have this fear in mind, thus making encounters more authentic.

     Furthermore, I think this determinants certain play styles such as a Cannibal, Bandit, or the like. I mentioned this in a previous post, but if I’m playing a Cannibal or evil character, how can I do so without getting a BIG ban? Someone playing as a Cannibal shouldn’t have to scavenge from bodies, I feel that if I was playing as a Cannibal, I should be able to actively search for victims. My point here is, that asking other players if they want to be killed or not adds an extra step into the RP process that kills a lot of interactions / play styles. If I wanna eat someone whose lookin mighty thicc, as long as I provide good RP, and do so even when I’m about to kill my prey, I should be allowed to actually do so, and my hostage should feel the clear and present threat of being in actual danger (in game of course). Same goes for a bandit with a hostage. If I’m being held up, I can act like I value my life to the best of my ability, but if I subconsciously know that my life isn’t in danger, I can’t do my character justice, nor can I provide the best RP possible for the other person.

     I have a background in acting, I have taken drama classes for years and I have even been able to compete in theatrical competitions (for the record, I’m not stating this to brag, just to provide context). In a play / scripted event, you [the actor] know the ending, and you do know that your character’s actions will not impact the outcome. However, this doesn’t hinder the work of the actor, because we have a script that we have to follow. On the other hand, with improv it is a different story. Yes, there are rules to improv, which are in place to keep a scene in check. There are a lot, but here are the main ones… 1) Try to keep the scene realistic (relatively speaking), 2) You can’t force the other character(s) into a situation (essentially power gaming), and 3) you can’t say no to another characters direction (special situations allow this). I don’t think that I’m wrong to say that the majority of DayZ encounters fall under the category of improv. The beauty of improv is that your character’s actions WILL impact the outcome of the scene, your actions can result in a bad ending for your character, and you have to keep this in mind while in a scene. 

     Currently, on the server, regardless of my actions as a hostage, I do not ever have to worry about dying. I *should* be worried that my actions can result in my death, and I feel the same should go for other hostages. I’m arguing for true improv, where the outcome is not ensured, where I don’t know if I’ll end up losing my stuff, or if I’ll even be able to make it out alive. Without this aspect, with the insurance of making it out alive, I can’t RP to the fullest extent of my character: I can’t be true to the character I’m playing.

     The argument against what I’m suggesting is the use of in game emotes. The best way I can relate this, is if actors were to read out their stage directions out loud in the middle of the show, let me show you what a segment from the play “Julius Caesar” (Act 3, Scene 1) would be like if this were the case. The lines in *the asterisks* are stage directions, read them like they are lines an actor is saying…

(after a long segment of Caesar yelling at the others, one of the more important parts of the whole show…)

DECIUS: Great Caesar,--

BRUTUS: *I, BRUTUS, refuse to kneel*

CAESAR: *I am shocked by the actions of BRUTUS*, Doth not Brutus bootless kneel?

CASCA: Speak, hands for me! *Permission for me and the other conspirators to stab you, CAESAR?*

CAESAR: *Yes, you can stab me*

CASCA: *I stab CAESAR in the chest*

BRUTUS: *I also stab CAESAR in the chest*

DECIUS: *I also stab CAESAR in the chest*

CAESAR: Et tu, Brute! Then fall, Caesar! *Now I, CAESAR, am dead. I will now proceed to act dead*

You see how that ruined the show? I know that for the sake of DayZRP, it's the “best” we’ve got, but I believe that we should be able to act in accordance with how our character would actually act. If you read the above segment without the *parts in the asterisks*, you’ll see what the actual segment is like. I do suggest that yall read this part of the show if you want a more in depth explanation. If Brutus and the others simply stab Caesar, the show is a lot more interesting, as opposed to them asking for permission, and then acting as if they actually stabbed him. Yes, I know this isn’t the best example to use, but it's the best I’ve got.

     I will admit, if my ideas were to be implemented, there would be some kinks to work out. For example, it would be a lot more difficult to moderate hostile encounters. Like I said, there is a lot that would have to be done if my ideas were to work well on this server. However, I feel that this is possible.

 

     (Skip to here for the summary) I’d like to reiterate, as long as both parties provide good RP, the threat of death or harm should be a clear and present danger in hostile situations. I believe that if this idea of true improv were to be implemented into the game, everyone would have more tense and more real RP experiences. Once more, I’d like to say that I don’t mean any ill-will towards either the server or the community; I love being a part of both, this is simply meant to be constructive criticism and is my way of asking for the communities thoughts. If I have broken any rules by writing this, know that I did not intend to do so. I feel that with the current rules in place, players can not properly play out their characters. No, I do not want KOS to be allowed, no, I don’t want boring hostage situations, yes, I want to have to consider that my run could come to an end if I make the wrong decisions in a hostage situation or the like. With that, I am not advocating for the idea that other players should be able to permanently kill someone’s character, I like that only the player can end their character. However, I do think other players should be allowed to kill the IN GAME character, not the character the player has created. I strongly believe this would make RP on this server a lot better, and would give everyone a great RP experience.

     With that, I’d like to both thank you for reading all this, sorry that it was so long, and I’d like to apologize if this seemed a little ranty; I didn’t want this to be a “rant”, rather constructive criticism. So what are yall's opinions about all this? I’d ask that this stay civil, so we can be as constructive as possible. Thanks!

Edited February 12, 2020 by Francois LeB

[Ducky]

What exactly is it you would like to achieve?

This massive wall of text covers a lot of different things in terms of hostility, but the only real thing I can make out is that you want looser execution rules to allow for people to kill eachother, and the reason being that it creates better roleplay because you can play your characters in a more realistic way?

I'd like to know if this is the actual thing you would like to achieve before I give my opinion on it.

[rp]

10/10 would read again, you're completely right.

[Francois LeB]

56 minutes ago, Ducky said:

What exactly is it you would like to achieve?

This massive wall of text covers a lot of different things in terms of hostility, but the only real thing I can make out is that you want looser execution rules to allow for people to kill eachother, and the reason being that it creates better roleplay because you can play your characters in a more realistic way?

I'd like to know if this is the actual thing you would like to achieve before I give my opinion on it.

     That’s pretty much it. I think that if we had more loose execution rules, encounters would be a lot more genuine, and would make for a better RP experience.

[Banshee]

13 minutes ago, Francois LeB said:

I think that if we had more loose execution rules, encounters would be a lot more genuine, and would make for a better RP experience.

Execution rules seem fine to me the way they are right now. Killing someone doesn't really make for a better roleplaying experience, as it pretty much puts a stop to any RP that is being had or would have been had. A character that is taken hostage may be executed once for a hostile incident that happened in the past where the hostage was personally responsible for, or participated in a death of your ally. If it makes IC sense to execute someone but you do not have any execution rights, then you can always ask them for permission to do so using '//'.

I see no real need to make any changes to the execution rules as they are. 

[RonnieLR]

This is not a bad pitch. This is definitely an idea that I'd be interested in if this community was perfect. You may be new - But you will soon learn the big problem if kill rights were given some slack in hostage situations; some people here bring IC beef OOC and OOC beef IC.

It doesn't take a genius to know this. Most of us do, I wish it weren't true but most people know someone who may dislike another community member on an OOC level. Because of this; they will fish for any reason to have an IG rivalry with that person's character so that they may initiate on them or have reasons to avoid them. Lets say in a hostage situation should Beefy Boy A cross paths with Beefy Boy B being the hostage; Beefy boy B will have 0 chance of survival as Beefy Boy A has fished for as many reasons as possible to get the free kill. This is because Beefy Boy A has beef with Beefy Boy B as Beefy Boy B called Beefy Boy A a "shitcunt who cant pvp" 2 months ago and holds a grudge for it. I wish it wasn't like this but there have been dozens of examples of people trying to do this in the last couple of years, only difference currently is that they look for loopholes in the rules. Giving them the option to kill as they wish in this scenario would only set them free and imo kill RP even more.

It'd effectively be like beating a dead horse. This would be a pretty good idea if you could trust people to act like adults and remember this is a bloody game.

Edited February 13, 2020 by Ronnie

[Francois LeB]

2 minutes ago, Ronnie said:

 

This is not a bad pitch. This is definitely an idea that I'd be interested in if this community was perfect. You may be new - But you will soon learn the big problem if kill rights were given some slack in hostage situations; some people here bring

IC beef OOC and OOC beef IC.

It doesn't take a genius to know this. Most of us do, I wish it weren't true but most people know someone who may dislike another community member on an OOC level. Because of this; they will fish for any reason to have an IG rivalry with that person's character so that they may initiate on them or have reasons to avoid them. Lets say in a hostage situation should beefy boy A cross paths with beefy boy B being the hostage; beefy boy B will have 0 chance of survival as beefy boy A has fished for as many reasons as possible to get the free kill. I wish it wasn't like this but there have been dozens of examples of people trying to do this in the last couple of years, only difference currently is that they look for loopholes in the rules. Giving them the option to kill as they wish in this scenario would only set them free and imo kill RP even more.

It'd effectively be like beating a dead horse. This would be a pretty good idea if you could trust people to act like adults and remember this is a bloody game.

     I'm guessing that the group of people who take things to seriously make up a minority on the server? Believe me, I get it. "It only takes one person to ruin the fun for everyone", right? Idk, if what I'm suggesting couldn't be implemented b/c of this, I understand. As much as I'd like to say "screw it, there will always be a bad bunch", I can see how this could have negative consequences.

     What if, if this were to hypothetically be implemented, a new clause was added stating that if you feel that you've been hunted or dealt an unfair death b/c the other person can't see the difference between... a video game... and real life, you can take it to a mod or something? Like you said, I'm new, and I haven't been either a hostage OR a bandit yet. 

All in all, I think the pic says it best lol

18 minutes ago, Banshee said:

Execution rules seem fine to me the way they are right now. Killing someone doesn't really make for a better roleplaying experience, as it pretty much puts a stop to any RP that is being had or would have been had. A character that is taken hostage may be executed once for a hostile incident that happened in the past where the hostage was personally responsible for, or participated in a death of your ally. If it makes IC sense to execute someone but you do not have any execution rights, then you can always ask them for permission to do so using '//'.

I see no real need to make any changes to the execution rules as they are. 

    I guess the point I'm trying to make is that having to ask a hostage for permission to "game end" them, allows for the situation to be abused by the hostage. If I were held up, I really don't have to worry about being killed unless I explicitly give permission, all I have to worry about loosing is my stuff, which I can get back with *relative* ease. Idk, on the one hand I'm not saying that the death of one party makes for good rp, but on the other thats sorta what I'm saying lol

     Really, I just think that without the fear of dying and having to start over, the experience of either being the hostage doesn't seem like it can be as genuine as it could be.

[RonnieLR]

2 minutes ago, Francois LeB said:

What if, if this were to hypothetically be implemented, a new clause was added stating that if you feel that you've been hunted or dealt an unfair death b/c the other person can't see the difference between... a video game... and real life, you can take it to a mod or something?

As much as I like this idea - Once again; that is a rule that could be easily abused. You'd need concrete evidence showing that your death was done by OOC consequences to which the person whom killed you I can guaruntee will have 592727374 tricks up their sleeve to say it was an IC reason and get away with it.

[Banshee]

5 minutes ago, Francois LeB said:

If I were held up, I really don't have to worry about being killed unless I explicitly give permission.

That's not true, hostages can be killed if:

• Hostages do not comply with your demands after repeated requests or try to escape.

• Hostages pose a direct threat to you or your group, for example by picking up a weapon when not allowed to.

• Hostages do not value their life, for example they repeatedly talk back or insult you despite being told to stop.

• Approved group of the hostage or their allies refuse to negotiate or open fire on hostage takers.

• Demands from negotiations with approved group of the hostage have not been met after a reasonable time has elapsed

 

6 minutes ago, Francois LeB said:

Like you said, I'm new, and I haven't been either a hostage OR a bandit yet.

I'd recommend spending some more time in-game and getting some experience when it comes to being a hostage.

[Francois LeB]

10 minutes ago, Ronnie said:

As much as I like this idea - Once again; that is a rule that could be easily abused. You'd need concrete evidence showing that your death was done by OOC consequences to which the person whom killed you I can guaruntee will have 592727374 tricks up their sleeve to say it was an IC reason and get away with it.

Fair enough. I get what your saying tho, I remember when I did football and one guy would mess up so the whole team would have to run laps... not fun lol. There's always gonna be THAT guy right?

The only thing evidence wise I can think of would be either a) you've run into them before and can prove that (for whatever reason) the encounter went south for the person in question, hence why the're all pissed off, or b) video evidence. So moral of the story, we all need to become youtubers and document everything?

Idk. If only, right? 

[Faygo]

If we loosen the rules on hostility, we're just going to have more PvPers. 

 

 no thanks

[Gregor]

7 hours ago, Deimos said:

If we loosen the rules on hostility, we're just going to have more PvPers. 

 

 no thanks

-USER HAS BEEN WARNED FOR THIS POST-

[Brayces]

Not sure what you want. The ability to gas people because you feel like it, or the ability to kill a person because you're a cannibal?

How is that fun for the victim? You see, I get that you have a background in Acting or Stage or Drama and you know how pre-planned stuff goes. But that is pre-planned. RP is dynamic and also a two way street. It should never be scripted. That is stale, and boring and adds no excitement or intrigue to the experience.

If you approached me and just shot me, I get NOTHING out of that encounter. I get no character growth, and I get nothing memorable besides some dude who capped me. It's no different from a Pub Server. If you want to have some loose RP and also be allow to shoot someone because "my character doesn't trust strangers!" then go to a public server. They're made for that.

Now, you say you wanna be able to hunt for victims as a cannibal and just simply kill players because "well I'm a cannibal!" that leaves NO room for the other person actively involved in your roleplay to participate or enjoy themselves. If you run up to someone, say "OoOO I'm HUNGRY and I EAT PEOPLE! You look tasty!" and kill them, they get nothing but a YOU'RE DEAD screen and have to forget the encounter. I mean, how are they gonna RP out of that one when they come back to life? "Oh man got attacked by a hungry cannibal but I guess he wasn't hungry... Didn't eat me!" You didn't consider your victims experience in this encounter.

RP is a collaborative effort. I'm here personally to have encounters and to provide encounters that people can use to grow or change their characters. There's positive ones and negative ones which all impact a characters path of progression. But in a "scene" of RP, both parties need to be sure each side is having fun. Whether it's hostile or friendly or neutral. I can tell you right now, unless you're in a FF expecting to get shot or actively engaging in hostilities, no one wants to die randomly for no reason. No one wants to get killed by some random ass cannibal who they have never met and have no storyline with. It adds nothing to their experience and solely, ONLY, benefits YOURS.

You cannot have a mindset of "Oh what do *I* get out of this experience!" that is a selfish mindset. You're not here to solely enjoy YOUR style of RP and force it on others, you're here to give and to receive RP with the people around you. Can the RP be related to more hostile focused stuff? Sure, you will find people who want to engage in that sort of RP with you all over. Raised guns, robbing, raiding, kidnapping, torture, fire fights, etc Feel free! Just make sure you follow the rules and provide GOOD RP for those you interact with. We like to call this "HostileRP" where people play bad characters and go around and do bad things because, surprise, they're bad characters. They do this to provide experiences to the players as well as play a role they enjoy. If you're interested in this style of RP, check out the mentor program and they will show you how to command a RP scene and provide RP while being hostile. Will there be people who are lackluster and provide a less than stellar experience? Sure, it happens. But there are some out here who, and I mean really, make the experience great. That keep you guessing, that make you excited to encounter them because, hell! What ever happens may be hostile, but fuck it will be a enjoyable, heart stopping, mind racing experience. NOTHING beats a great hostile encounter done well where you know the other side is there to provide you with a great time while also enjoying themselves, I'd trade one million campfires sitting around talking about dead wives and crashed planes any ol' day for a experience that I can take and personally apply to my characters growth.

I believe the rules we have now help to weed out people who come from pubs and tend to jump right to shooting people for no reason. Who bandit shuffle side to side and ask about 556 or eye your pretty gear up and down before deciding they want it and shoot you.

TLDR; RP is like banging. If your partner isn't enjoying themselves as much as you are then you're not really good at banging, now are ya?

[CutieNiller]

6 hours ago, Brayces said:

RP is like banging. If your partner isn't enjoying themselves as much as you are then you're not really good at banging, now are ya?

probably the best way i've ever heard RP described.

[AndreyQ]

7 hours ago, Brayces said:

RP is like banging

Exactly. You got to make it count even if it lasts 3 seconds.

Edited February 13, 2020 by AndreyQ

[andysuter]

I like the fact that some people are looking at ways to improve or suggest things. That’s healthy, even if the idea doesn’t go down well. We cant stand still and rules should evolve and improve.

However, the biggest issue is see with the OP suggestion (or rather following posters interpretation of the war and peace) is that it is coming from the view of a trained actor. Someone who by definition is trained to act a role, roleplay, improvise etc. They will be highly effective in coming up with a great piece of roleplay in a hostage situation that is both effective and engaging, while being within the rules. They will be experts in separating IC from OOC. The reality is, most of us arent trained actors so we do the best we can. Some of us are superb and some, like me, try hard but usually fall short of convincing rp.  To then loosen the chains for people who do struggle with RP is extremely risky. Its not hard for someone to panic and things take a wrong turn but the rules we have currently make an attempt to set boundaries to limit that.

However, not sure if this is part of the OP ideals or not but I do think every action should have a real consequence. The fact that our character can never die means  its both exploited in terms of shit talking, NVFL and also some hostile players take advantage of that too by engaging on every person they see as there is no real consequence other than loss of gear. At the very least, and its impossible to police, but if a character is shot dead or killed there should be a cooldown on when they can return. Its crazy we get some people killed yet they appear 30 minutes later as if nothing happened. Most don’t even RP they had been injured, although I have witnessed some excellent medical rp by some where bullets were removed and they rp’d out the injuries very well.

[Player 1]

I feel like hostile groups lack creativity. From what I have seen, they make up nonsense to find an excuse to raid you for.... GEAR, or make up stuff to attack you on sight. Then they keep attacking you until you give them what ever and no longer having fun, or you quit. Hostile RP'ers seem to think this is a game you have to win at instead of creating a story. They can't accept losing. I want to see a group that has legit cause or in some cases, can be seen as the good guys to their own people because they want to survive. Instead, they make up stuff and attack who ever or come and visit with guns out acting disrespectful and rude in hopes you keep them from coming in again so they have a reason to attack you. Lastly, there is no attempt to come and talk out possible stories with other groups. No hostile group reaches out other groups and comes up with ideas to drive a story. They just show up and act "hostile" because that's what they do. No plot, no story, nothing. Just give me your gear, check out your walls, seek out weaknesses, then harass you until you quit or give in. Hell, one group made a cease fire/peace agreement and they broke it themselves the next few days because they got bored. 

I want more creativity for from Hostile RPers and more OOC communication. Not forced tripe. 

[andysuter]

1 hour ago, Tiger-chan said:

I feel like hostile groups lack creativity. From what I have seen, they make up nonsense to find an excuse to raid you for.... GEAR, or make up stuff to attack you on sight. Then they keep attacking you until you give them what ever and no longer having fun, or you quit. Hostile RP'ers seem to think this is a game you have to win at instead of creating a story. They can't accept losing. I want to see a group that has legit cause or in some cases, can be seen as the good guys to their own people because they want to survive. Instead, they make up stuff and attack who ever or come and visit with guns out acting disrespectful and rude in hopes you keep them from coming in again so they have a reason to attack you. Lastly, there is no attempt to come and talk out possible stories with other groups. No hostile group reaches out other groups and comes up with ideas to drive a story. They just show up and act "hostile" because that's what they do. No plot, no story, nothing. Just give me your gear, check out your walls, seek out weaknesses, then harass you until you quit or give in. Hell, one group made a cease fire/peace agreement and they broke it themselves the next few days because they got bored. 

I want more creativity for from Hostile RPers and more OOC communication. Not forced tripe. 

I get that and agree with you to an extent but its also a two way street. There are plenty of examples of hostile RP'rs trying to give good rp but the 'victims' just shut up shop and clearly arent happy to RP back. They would rather continue on their way gathering nails or other pointless crap and not be disturbed by these horrible hostile rprs.

There are some absolutely amazing hostile rprs on the server crying out to give some one a story line given the chance but i agree, there are some that offer very little anything other than gearrp.

I absolutely loved my time as Father David harrassing anarchy over the air waves, while trying to avoid them ingame. When they finally caught up with me it wasnt at all what i was expecting and was actually a little disappointed they didnt tear me apart.

Edited February 13, 2020 by andysuter

[Para]

IMO execution rules are simple and nice. You blast somebody, you can expect to not survive next time you're a hostage. No reason to shake that up a bit. Although @Brayces is right with her analogy. 

[CutieNiller]

On 2/13/2020 at 12:34 PM, Tiger-chan said:

I want to see a group that has legit cause or in some cases, can be seen as the good guys to their own people because they want to survive.

Why are you giving me several ideas for different kinds of groups in those 2 sentences.